I coached someone today who has a personally very important
speech to deliver and wanted to get it as right as possible.
As I listened to him speak I was struck by the demonstration of leadership that he was embodying in both what he said and how he said it. For me, it also was a brilliant example of how to solve the strategy/execution conundrum that is the source of so much leadership scholarship.
It is the day of the 10th anniversary of the WOW! Awards gala at the Tower of London. I thought it would salve my anger to write about the train “service” my local train operating company, Greater Anglia, “provides”. As a corporate entity it has about as much chance of winning an award as a chocolate remaining in a solid state in a furnace.
Today also saw the annual announcement of the increase in rail fares, 3.1% in January 2019.
It’s been a while but today I am gladly resuming my publications. Today I will share something about feedback and how the selection of our words is important.
I once read somewhere that around 250k people die in the US every year as result of medical mistakes. Investigations found that more than a third of these fatalities could have been avoided if doctor’s assistants had spoken when noticing that something in the procedure was incorrect. The fact, apparently, was that most of these assistants don’t speak because of the negative reaction (even aggressive) from doctors.
Have you ever experience a situation in which you were in doubt whether you should speak or remain quiet afraid of being shut by someone who believe to ‘know-it-better’?
There are a great many awards schemes that businesses and organisations can enter nowadays. But which ones are worth winning? My experience as a judge highlights two schemes that are genuine and represent a true accolade of excellence.
What does success in these awards say about the organisation, its leadership and the team and/or individual who has won? And what should critics of business and our public sector organisations take heed of?
It is somewhat disquieting to read that the “Peter principle”, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle, continues to thrive in UK business. Our poor productivity performance arises because too many people gain promotion into managerial roles beyond their level of natural competence. However, in the firm featured in the FT article performance is improving.
It strikes me, however, that simply hanging up figures of Superman (is this unconscious bias by the firm’s leaders?), and doling out pork pies are rather superficial practices. The only likely outcome of this epicurean approach is hardened arteries.