Increasing untapped talent and stress: A disaster waiting to happen ...?

Almost one million jobs could be lost in the UK because of government cuts in public spending, a report suggests.  The knock on effect of public sector cuts upon private sector firms is rarely mentioned or taken into account, but this report does attempt to do so.

Accountancy firm PwC said that about 500,000 of those job losses may be in the private sector due to the impact on firms supplying the public sector, with business services and construction would be among the industries hardest hit.

The impact of this is in fact already starting to be seen, with contracts not being renewed, renegotiated or withdrawn altogether (e.g. the building schools for the future programme), and the PwC report puts the total number of job losses arising from the public sector spending cuts - including the knock-on effects in the private sector - at about 943,000.

It also suggests the output of private firms may well fall by £46bn per year by 2014-15.  PwC chief economist John Hawksworth said the predicted levels of job losses would be a drag on the pace of the economic recovery "but should not derail it altogether".

The report said that in absolute terms, the areas worst hit would be the south east of England, the north west and Scotland.  But PwC added that in percentage terms, Northern Ireland would suffer most with one in every 20 jobs set to go.

A Treasury spokesman said "a decisive plan" was needed to "reduce the UK's unprecedented deficit and restore confidence in the UK economy ... and not taking action to tackle this problem would put the economic recovery at risk," they added, saying this was a view shared by many organisations including the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the Bank of England.

The question that's never asked (or answered) is where new jobs are going to come from for the economy to start to recover.  For a more prosperous and sustainable future, levels of untapped talent  need to reduce (not increase), and creativity needs to increase to create growth, reduce the deficit and pay back the debt ... and releasing staff without any plan of action for this could make matters worse, not better, with more people without any work and wholly dependent on the state.

The application of a simple, effective and more holistic 'economic' test (of overall 'well-being'), known as "BUTS" test, where:

B = Borrowing

U = Untapped talent

T = Trade deficit

S = Stress

rapidly highlights how well-being in the UK in the future is likely to get much worse, with any reduction in borrowing likely to be at the expense of increased taxes and reduced public services ... as well as growing levels of untapped talent (e.g. unemployment) and increasing levels of stress.

There is growing concern about unemployment, not just from a financial perspective, but from an individual point of view too, as more people lose self-confidence, belief and self-worth. People's natural ability/desire to help others, add value, and make a difference to other people's lives reduces ... reducing the overall well-being of the community, as well as the nation's economy too. There is also the risk of growing frustration & anger, particularly from younger generations, as youth unemployment rates are much higher, they have been saddled further with debt (e.g. due to tuition fees) and given little prospect of a job, house prices still being expensive to rent/buy and they are also the ones who'll have to pay most of the Government current borrowing back (through future tax rises).

Shockingly, the official figures of 2.4 million unemployed are a gross underestimate, as there are in fact over 8 million people of working age able to work but classified as 'economically inactive' ... and even this figures represents just the tip of the iceberg, as levels of untapped talent within the workplace lies at around 90%, due to outdated management practices failing to harness the talents of those in work too!  No economy will ever be successful with such shockingly poor foundations, and outdated leadership and management practices are also generating further unnecessary stress too.  

Outdated leadership and management practices (19th/20th century) primarily rely upon extrinsic motivation, self interest and personal gain ... where management primarily involves managing budgets, telling staff what to do and ensuring they meet internal/arbitrary targets ... rather than going to the front line, listening to customers actually want and supporting front-line staff in their quest to continually improve how value can be provided to customers (nb this is what 21st century leadership and management practice is all about - take a look at my book for instance) ...

The former systematically generates frustration and stress, for customers and front line staff alike. It also drives people to manipulate 'the system' in order to meet their targets & goals; deflecting people away from the real purpose of the enterprise (i.e. to create value for customers) which destroys teamwork, morale, and the future of the enterprise too. Such practices have also been shown to systematically generate between 40-90% waste in terms of both time and resources as well - i.e. traditional enterprises spend most of their time (and resources) wasting time, effort and money, for their customers ... whilst stressing them out in the process too ...

... and the traditional response to this ... "it's just the way work is" ... and "let's send everyone on a 'stress management' course - to help them to process stress" (and to also reduce the risk of being sued!) ...

The problem with the traditional management statements above is that they are both wrong - and flawed. 21st century management practices do not involve helping people to 'process stress' - they focus on systematically 'eliminating stress'! ... so there is no need for stress management courses at all ... (i.e. such courses are a 'cost of failure', and they do not reduce the risk of leaders/managers being sued either).

Enterprises applying 21st century leadership and management practices do not just transform the performance of the enterprise, they transform the lives of people - forever, and for the better. Most enterprises applying such practices quickly transform their capability (e.g. improvements of between 40-1000%) and change out of all recognition. Staff moral is positively transformed and stress is systematically reduced. People are naturally motivated to innovate, to add value and to help others. They are also more than capable of finding new ways to improve current products/services and to find new products/services that would allow even more value to be created too (given the opportunity). All they need is clear direction, as well as trustworthy leaders & managers who support them on the front line, who listen, learn, and help them to systematically improve how value is provided. Again not rocket science - just rarely practiced in traditional enterprises.

Stress, and the impact of stress, on people is heavily responsible for the 'eighth waste' in 21st century management practice ('untapped talent') - as it destroys people's desire/ability to contribute, to be creative or to think rationally (e.g. take a look at Ch. 8 of my book). It also impacts on people's overall well-being, as well as the well-being of those around them ... which impacts on communities/nations as a whole too (NB hence it's inclusion in the 'BUTS' test).

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has said the cost of work related mental illness was £28bn - a quarter of the UK's total sick bill, and it also made clear that the stress created as a result of bad management/managers was the single biggest cause of problem. The 'economic loss' of stress goes way beyond the £28bn referred to here too ... this is literally just the tip of the iceberg, with actual figures more likely to be around 80-90% (and growing).  

Those leaders who believe stress management courses will 'protect them' from 'being sued' are I'm afraid also sadly wrong ... as 'ignorance' is 'not bliss' (or a defence - nb landmark cases are already occurring - but are mostly settled out of court to avoid publicity). The writing is on the wall now that 21st century leaders & managers have demonstrated the capability/outcomes created from applying 21st century practices ... which highlight the way forward, as well as the fundamental flaws in traditional practices ...

21st century leadership/management practice and examples will no doubt be used in evidence against those continuing to apply outdated traditional 19th/20th century practices ... and as millions of law suits start to get filed, yet more traditional private enterprises will go bankrupt ... and yet more taxpayers money will be diverted away from providing front line services (to pay for millions of out-of-court settlements) ... joining all the taxpayers money already being diverted to service Government debt, as well as the colossal (and unfunded) civil service pension liability ...

A 'Double Dip" is on the way I'm afraid ... and a 'triple dip', and a 'quadruple dip', may well follow too I'm afraid ... unless current leaders/managers change course quickly ... as it's also the adoption of 21st Century leadership/management practices that will harness and unleash the untapped potential within our society, and systematically uncover the plethora of world-class solutions people around the globe are looking for and more than willing to pay a premium for ...

A 'political response' which goes ahead and slashes millions of jobs, without any clear understanding or robust plan to harness untapped talent/potential to systematically provide the future product/services the world needs, is in fact not a 'solution' at all, but a short-sighted and flawed act, which will have a huge, negative and corrosive impact on individual/community well-being ... and will not provide any robust foundation for reducing borrowing (or reversing the massive trade-deficit) in any sustainable way either.  It is a systematic change the UK now requires, not a political one.

Squeezing budgets - a Leanomics (and Economystic) view

On Stephanie Flanders recent blog I was asked a question about the squeezing of budgets, and some of the challenges ahead, and in response I wrote:

'IMHO your questions/insights are good. The government (and politicians of all colours) are void of ideas and/or unprepared to take on the challenges ahead in any robust way (nb the main things in Gordon’s toolbox seem to be QE, inflation and spin). IMHO the fundamental problem we actually face is one of outdated leadership & management practices (e.g. in terms of politics, economics, service and enterprise).

There are lots of ways companies & nations will ‘grow’ in the future, but outdated leadership / management practices mean most ‘leaders’ haven’t got a clue how to do it, and the majority of ‘leaders/managers’ will have to ‘unlearn what they have learnt’ in order to access the ‘world of opportunity’ of opportunity that actually exists. The idea of somehow hoping/relying upon a immediate/massive resurgence in manufacturing is also flawed, as is the concept of considering products and services in isolation of each other.

In terms of public sector cuts, IMHO given the level of crisis now faced the only robust solution (both in the short term and the long term) is to rapidly introduce 21st century lean management practice … to continuously, and systematically, remove all non-value adding activities and divert all of our taxes/resources to value adding activities. When enterprises start to do this, most initially find between 40-90% of all time / resources are actually being wasted (and as you can probably imagine with public sector services this tends to be at the higher end of the scale!).

Leaders/managers need to learn how to support front line staff to continuously improve the way the work works (and how to systematically challenge/remove all the barriers to providing value in more effective ways). This process invariably releases resources (a lot of resources!), but the ‘key’ thing is what you do with the resources released. Front line resources released need to be re-invested into improving / increasing the services provided. Managers supporting front line staff to continuously improve how value can be provided are also kept, but the remaining ‘leadership’ and ‘management’ (i.e. who don’t understand the work, create barriers instead of removing them, frustrate front line staff and prefer to ‘manage’ targets / league tables / people rather help/support people) need to find something else to do (e.g. work out how to add value!)

Resources released from front-line services are used to continuously improving the level of value provided and to identify/provide more effective services too (yes – more services – hence the term ‘more for less’). Meanwhile management has to change fundamentally (i.e. to lean management), with far fewer managers carrying out very different work – e.g. supporting front line staff continuously improving the work and systemically removing every barrier in their way of doing this (e.g. the plethora of bureaucracy and flawed policies – nb top line figures for the number of pen-pushers/bureaucrats is just the tip of the iceberg and most current policies are designed to generate waste, not remove it). You can think of this as a systematic ‘bureaucracy stripper’.

Lean management also needs to be applied to Government policies too (nb the bottom up continuous improvement described above would drive this anyway) … for instance changing the vast array of complex tax structures/credits which has resulted in a culture of dependency and armies of paper pushers to ‘check/process’ them all. It would also introduce robust, fairer, and much simpler taxes such as a Land Value Tax (referred to earlier). It was also remove the flawed and outdated targets/league table culture introduced by this Government … for instance take a look at my recent post here.

Lean management is already starting to be applied by forward thinking police forces/hospitals (with dramatic and positive outcomes – 30/40% improved outcomes in terms of time, resources, service quality, staff moral…). Change is coming, but it has been held back/stifled by all the policies/barriers put in place by this Government (e.g. league table/target culture).

Millions of jobs are going to be lost in the short term whether we like it or not … given this we need to make sure we lose the non-value adding ones and reinvest time/resources released from front line services to provide more and better services, so we can start to get back on track and avoid ‘cutting/slashing’ the actual services provided (like countries such as Singapore have done) … we also need to offer the majority of ‘managers’ released training in 21st century leadership and management practice! IMHO the youth of today should also be given the opportunity to separately learn about 21st century leadership & management practice too (e.g. within school), as it would expose them to the actual world of opportunity still out there, and expand their leadership and entrepreneurial qualities too.

Based on Deming’s work, I successfully decoded 21st century leadership and management two years ago, as well as the system diagrams describing the above (P219-223) … for those interested in learning more about this you can always read my book online (via Google books) here …

NB the ‘losers’ – the leeches/managers who add no value, fail to listen/learn, have no interest in helping/supporting anyone (eg like to please their boss, rather than customers / front line staff) and have no interest in learning/applying 21st century leadership & management. The other losers will be those who like to ‘obtain lots more wealth’ but by ‘adding no value’ ...'

Traditional education is failing ...

On Stephanie Flanders blog yesterday a great discussion began ... which headed in many different directions and resulted in lots of informed/insightful comments. I supported the view that traditional 'economics' is dead, and published this post to say so too ... and a number of people started to question to role of 'education' too - 'economic education' ... for instance take a look at the comment made in Post 52 (random_thought) below:

"... perhaps for 30 years now we have had an academic system that teaches students the knowledge that is required to make money out of the flaws in the economic system - not how to design a better economic system that doesn't have those flaws. How many students have studied economics in the hope of getting a well paid job in the City? And how many have been driven by the desire to fix the system and make the world a better place?..."

I thought this comment potentially offered some profound insight, and a great question too ... so I responded in the following way (Post 55) ...

"...Good points and well made ... The existing education system has arguably been re-enforcing levels of 'incompetence' / 'greed' for some time - and this is exactly the same in leadership / management ( and political science ? ) too ... the education system is also probably 20-30 years out of date now too ( I know for certain most MBA's are - as they are often referred to as 'Maybe Best Avoided' now, and I believe posts 13 and 51 probably give us an idea where we are with politics at the moment too ) ... I believe we are beginning to get to the 'roots' of the problem now - and starting to see just a few of the challenges ahead e.g. changing this, as well as evaluating / re-addressing our nations 'fundamental philosophies' and 'value systems' ...!"

Another commentator then asked ...

"... If you "know for certain" then you can supply the evidence for your claim. I'm sure that the staff and students of our Business Schools would be very interested to see it ..."

So I obliged, (see post 67 below), though there's obviously lots more evidence available too ...

"... Anyone who has bothered to study 'lean', 'lean management', 'lean management systems' (and Dr. W. Edwards Deming's work - nb quoted earlier) know that business schools are 1-2 generations out of date - in fact most people with an MBA have to unfortunately unlearn a lot of what they have learnt at a business school before they can start to learn what they really need to know (e.g. to scrap, rather than re-enforce, arbitrary targets, league tables, bonuses, management by numbers ...etc etc etc) ...

All you have to do is ask a few questions (e.g. what are the above?), look at current business school MBA syllabuses, and understand the differences between 21st century leadership / management and traditional leadership and management [e.g. take a quick look at table 2.39, P139, in the book below for instance] ... you'll find they are completely opposite, and you'll also find most business schools struggle to answer the basic questions above in any meaningful way (and find they are just as out of date as Wikipedia!).

I'm afraid 21st century leadership/management is mostly common sense, and very different to what we're accustomed to, and it's been mostly decoded now too (e.g. just take a look at "Lean World" ... it's available to read worldwide on Google Books*) ... all the Deans of Business Schools I've met and spoke to have read it and loved it, and the business students I lecture love it too ... it's a shame that business schools (all around the world) never properly researched it (or Deming's work for that matter - as they would have found they're inextricably linked) ... and/or never thought to tell students about it/write about it, as most people point out it's both profound ... and applies a lots of common sense ... which is arguably something we need a lot more of right now ...

... but the challenge today is not just one of education, but of politics and power (and the 'misuse' of 'power') too ... and that's yet another story again ... just take a look at http://poweromics.blogspot.com (and some of my posts here too e.g. P13 above) for instance ... but this will be eventually changing too, powered by the internet ..."

* http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=-8xAIgkewOUC&printsec=frontcover

Honesty, Honestly II

Taking a look at Nick Robinson's latest blog today, entitled "Honesty - the New Battleground", takes me back to a post I wrote last month ("Honesty, Honestly") which referred to the Seven Principles of Public Life and the clear failure of Politicians to apply them ... well, this is clearly coming to the fore now (with a little bit of nudging perhaps), and the net is also widening to the Civil Service (e.g. the Cabinet Secretary) too. 

It's should start getting very interesting now.  The Cabinet Secretary, who earns over £280,000 per year, has not responded about his reasoning behind delaying and declining the opposition request for Government financial data, but has been very quick (and the first) to publish his last three months of expenses today (which includes a £19,408 car bill)!  He can obviously see what's coming ... and there are many more questions that need to be asked too (e.g. "The Targets era is over" from last months blog) ...

Take a look at my post (and others) added to Nick Robinson's blog below too:

–––––––––––––––

Leanomist (281)

Trust, Honor, Responsibility, Respect - Don't hold your breath waiting for any politician to show us any of these. They have all been 'tested, measured and found wanting'.  

The net is also (quite rightly) being cast out wider now - e.g. to the Cabinet Secretary (head of the Civil Service) ... a man who has knowingly allowed 20th century management practices (e.g. command and control, target driven cultures set up by Government) to be used to systematically generate wasteful/inefficient practice, consume massive amounts of our money and create massive public debts. e.g. take a look at http://poweromics.blogspot.com/2009/06/targets-era-is-over.html for instance

The cabinet secretary also made it clear that he was fully aware and understood the lack of 21st century leadership and management practices in the Civil Service (and the Government), but failed to do anything about it ... so I think we are probably safe to assume that these kind of values will be difficult to find at the top of the Civil Service too!  Perhaps we need a bigger broom to sweep the decks ...

–––––––––––––––

Massive executive pay is not justified, or needed !

For the global collective of corporate executives, Jeroen van der Veer has just uttered the worst possible heresy.

The chief executive of Shell has said - according to a report in today's Financial Times - that the way he performed for his colossal oil company was neither improved or worsened by the substantial sums of money he is paid.

Most hard-working people already know this, but top executives will be very angry today for someone braking ranks and saying it ...

Take a look at Robert Peston's blog for more detail ... as well as my comments below ...

––––––––––––––––––––

Comment 11 (leanomist)

I think most people on the front line realise this already - it's simply another corrupt & cosy "Gentlemen's club", that apply Poweromics* ... which is being exposed now for all to see ...

Non-executive renumeration committees are part of the same cosy club - and get the favors paid back to them in return ... the fund managers are part of the same game too (and will also join the firing line) ... The losers are the vast majority of people, who work hard, pay their tax and now live in fear of their job ... whilst others 'gamble' away (and profit from) their pensions (and avoid paying as much tax as possible too) !

Most people in these clubs are 'not entrepreneurs' and normally from the finance community. They are also rarely innovative and tend to systematically destroy long-term value, prosperity and growth (e.g. by failing to innovative and applying simple cost cutting exercises) to obtain a large bonus for achieving short-term financial targets and goals**... people we should challenge, stop and/or retrain in 'value management' ... (not reward them with ridiculous salaries, pensions, bonuses, and pay-offs for failure!) ...

Massive corporate pay settlements and rewarding failure have had their day ... and clear self interest, poor moral values and greed have also had their day too ... the application of Poweromics* is being challenged in Government and it's going to be challenged in business too ... 

More people can see it now and it's not going to go away ... for instance I'm writing a Poweromics* blog with more examples to make sure it doesn't ... and to make sure its addressed once and for all ... and anyone who is doing the same will be linked from it too ...

Poor management** and Poweromics have had their day - and with the help of the internet they will soon change forever, and for the better ... because hard-working people will keep the pressure on until it does ... they will vote with their 'voice', their 'feet' and their 'wallet' ... and when the latter two start to occur let's see what happens ...


David Clift, a Future 500 Leader



* Poweromics = People using position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed ... take a look at my previous comments and at http://poweromics.blogspot.com for instance.

** 21st century leadership and management are completely different to traditional leadership and management, and focus on continuously improving the long-term value of an enterprise and the lives of people ... not creating fear and sacking them.

––––––––––––––––––––

The 'Targets era' is over ...

... says one of Britain’s most senior police officers ... Peter Fahy, Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police (GMP), circulated a damning memo among senior officers attacking  the Home Office’s statistics-driven approach. He has criticised the Government’s obsession with performance targets and called for a return to old-fashioned policing. 

Take a look at the news report here, as well as my additional comments below:

The 'target era' is openly being challenged now ... thank goodness .... and hopefully outdated 20th century management practices (eg command & control approaches and target driven cultures) have finally had their day ... the UK desperately needs 'leaders' who understand & apply 21st century management practices now, and some police forces have been 'battling' to apply it despite the 'system' & the way the whole Criminal Justice System 'works'

I wrote all about this 2 years ago in my book, which decoded 21st century leadership & management practices and how a New Criminal Justice System might work*. I've discussed it with people like Sir Ken Jones (ex ACPO president, pictured above) & senior representatives of the Justice Department too ... and they have a signed copy of my book too ... as well as Sir Gus O'Donnell (pictured right), Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Civil Service, who understands the 'big void' that needs to be filled ... but who has unfortunately done very little about it ... 

Bringing in 'spin', and bringing in 'celebrity'

To hold onto 'power', Gordon Brown has rapidly 're-shuffled his cabinet' and decided to rely on 'spin' & 'celebrity' too ... but it's creativity, innovation, jobs & sustainable enterprise we really need ...

Lord Jones (Sir Digby) demonstrated passion, ability and credibility - he stood up for enterprise, but resigned in frustration and openly condemned the Civil Service ... and was replaced by 'spin' (Lord Mandelson).  But as we all know, it takes more than 'spin' ... so what else does it need? 21st century leadership & management practices or more 'celebrity'?

I guess the answer to this is whether you want to improve the 'economy' & reduce the 'trade deficit', or to become 'more popular and win votes' ... and I think Gordon's effectively given us his answer ...

Sir Alan Sugar is 'brilliant to watch' (I love watching "The Apprentice") and he's become a real 'celebrity', but it's very clear that Sir Alan does not appreciate 21st century leadership and management practices - which is what the UK desperately needs right now! Most of his wealth/success has been from the 'property' market (not an 'entrepreneurial' empire*) which plummeted last year - so with the opportunity from the BBC to 'profit' from TV, and with Gordon offering him a potential place in the Lords, I guess he'll be looking to recover some of his 'losses' from there ...

But the UK now needs 21st century leadership & management (which is the complete opposite to 20th century leadership & management!) and I'm afraid Gordon has once again gone for 'celebrity' and 'votes' - rather than giving the 'country' what it needs ...

*  Sir Alan Sugar in his early years dismissed Microsoft out of hand, saying all the value's in the 'hardware'! 

With mutiny abound, are we bound to get Democracy?

Minister resignations are abound ... but 21st century leadership and management is really what we need ... changing the 'captain', the 'song', or the 'band' will not stop this ship from sinking ... it'll just change who's first to the life-rafts ...

 

... and the time for more fundamental change is now ... but we want a 21st century democracy and a proper say ... 

"Democracy should happen every day, not just on election day"

Take a look at Nick Robinson's blog and my comments below:

––––––––––––––––––

Post 162 (leanomist)

A re-shuffle just after an election is a well known political move by the 'leader' to say - "you were not happy ... but we've changed things ..."

What rubbish ... the only thing that's not changing is the one person in the country who believes he's the only man for the job - ie. Gordon Brown himself!

He can no longer hide behind a moral facade ... it's not what you say, it's what you do (and don't do) that counts ... that's what we're bothered about and that's what all politicians should be judged on ... the age of 'spin' has gone ... and attempting 'moral' spin (referring to their upbringing rather than what they're doing now*) is arguably the most disgraceful form of all ...

However, there are probably few people in his party now that people will believe, or trust (except Frank Field perhaps?) ... do people really trust Hazel Blears as a Minister, or Ed Balls as Chancellor of the Exchequer? If they did, there wouldn't be so much talk of Gordon Brown asking Vince Cable to do it ... !

Ed has built a reputation - but for 'Spin' ... and 'Spin' has had it's day!

We need real 'leaders' who can actually 'lead' ... eg listen, learn, care & support, and show respect, sound knowledge, good judgement, responsibility & an ability to take effective action ... rather than focusing on 'celebrity', 'rewarding failure' and 'making sure they'll be ok'. The Government have wrongly got wrapped up in 'celebrity' ... people do like celebrities, but politicians want a bit of it to rub off on them ... and they also love the fact that it diverts people's attention away from what they are/aren't up to too ... at least most of the time (eg. when Joanna Lumley etc get involved with the Gurkas)!

We need 21st century leaders and 21st century management (not 'spin-doctors' or 'celebrities') and at the moment we have neither ... and the scary thing is they do not seem to be visible in whatever 'color of party' you look towards ... which is probably why so many people are currently so disaffected/frustrated ... and perhaps considering voting for 'more extreme' parties to make a point !

... Given this perhaps we need an intermediate stage, where we vote for those who will truly (and rapidly!) give us a 21st century democracy, which may then start to attract more honorable, respectable and capable people into these roles ... but who can we trust ?!?

Whatever happens, if we don't change radically soon, moral & financial bankruptcy will continue to accelerate (and feed off one another) ... and bring the UK to it's knees... 

We need to make sure we stop the 'rot', ensure everyone can have proper say and are effectively represented (every day, not just on election day).

David Clift, a Future 500 leader and Poweromics** blogger

* Why did Gordon Brown allow himself to represent us at the D-Day remembrance (instead of the Queen - our Head of State) as soon as he found Barack Obama was attending? Rubbing next to 'celebrity' again perhaps? Why has he been trying to ring Susan Boyle (from Britain's got talent) too? Care, respect or more 'celebrity chasing' ?

** Poweromics = People using position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed. Take a look at http://poweromics.blogspot.com for more info.

––––––––––––––––––

Traditional 'leaders' hope people have short memories

Robert Peston has again highlighted and challenged 'executive' pay in traditional corporations ... they are clearly still trying to feed from the 'trough' ... and hope hard-working peoples' memories will be short. Robert clearly reads the comments added to his blog (and takes some of them on board) too ... take a look at my previous postings on this subject ...  I have re-iterated the point again ... but also making it clear that hard-working people will not forget, nor will they let them get away with it ...

Traditional 'leaders' need to realise times have really changed, and they need to change, start to 'lead', or get out !

––––––––––––––––––––

Comment 24 (leanomist)

Rewarding Failure (and Poweromics) are starting to be challenged in Business but it's till going on ... ! 

... I think they are hoping people's memory spans will be short (which I can assure you on this occasion they will not). As you quite rightly point out, most corporate leaders are neither "owner-managers" nor "entrepreneurs" ... and take very little risk .. with their corporate careers, personal bank balances & pay/rewards that is ...

1. True entrepreneurs are innovative leaders who create long-term value, prosperity and growth (e.g. James Dyson) ... people we should nurture, support and reward ... (rather than hinder!)

2. Traditional executives, normally from the finance community, are rarely innovative and tend to systematically destroy long-term value, prosperity and growth (e.g. by failing to innovative and applying simple cost cutting exercises) to obtain a large bonus for achieving short-term financial targets and goals*... people we should challenge, stop and/or retrain in 'value management' ... (not reward with massive salaries, pensions, bonuses, and pay-offs for failure!) ...

Rewarding failure has had it's day ... and clear self interest, poor moral values and greed have also had their day too ... the application of Poweromics** is being challenged in Government and it's going to be challenged in business too ... 

More people can see it now and it's not going to go away ... for instance I'm writing a Poweromics** blog with more examples to make sure it doesn't ... and to make sure its addressed once and for all ... and anyone who is doing the same will be linked from it too ...

Poor management and Poweromics** have had their day - and with the help of the internet they will soon change forever, and for the better ... because hard-working people will keep the pressure on until it does.

David Clift, a Future 500 Leader

* 21st century leadership and management are completely different to traditional leadership and management, and focus on continuously improving the long-term value of an enterprise and the lives of people ... not creating fear and sacking them.

** Poweromics = People using position and power for their own personal gain, based on poor moral values, self interest and greed ... take a look at my previous comments and at http://poweromics.blogspot.com for instance.

––––––––––––––––––––