"Rounding Third Leadership Series #18: Board Giving - Is 100% Enough?"

Conventional wisdom dictates that all trustees of non-profit organizations contribute annually.  Trustees are told often that this is what grant-making foundations expect.  Similarly, trustees are often expected to make their organizations one of the top three charities to which they contribute.  These two commitments are, for sure, important indicia of board engagement that foundations look to for assurance that their grants are well-placed.  

But, are they enough?  Afterall, “100%-Top 3” board giving won’t guarantee that grantee organizations will steward foundation largess well.  Nor will grant criteria, outcome measures, grantee reports and other mechanisms foundations typically use.

In looking at governing board financial contributions as one important factor, what other elements of trustee giving can foundations address in assessing a board’s organizational commitment? Here are some questions to consider:

• Does the grantee organization have a written board policy mandating board giving or at least a set of discretionary guidelines?

• Are trustees “required”, or at least “encouraged”, to give a minimum annual amount, and/or give according to their means?

• What is the trend?  Has trustee giving been increasing, static or decreasing?  

• Are trustees asked to identify the other top two charities to which they contribute because doing so may indicate either opportunities for collaboration or even conflicts?

• How long have the policy or guidelines been in place and how frequently are they reviewed, modified and confirmed by the board?

• Do the policy or guidelines apply to capital campaigns?  Planned giving?

• Are trustees expected to (and do they) not only give but also “get”; i.e., do they approach their contacts to give them an opportunity to contribute?

• In meeting a board policy or guidelines, must trustees give individually only or are they also credited for matching gifts and contributions from family members and family foundations?

• Do grantee organizations budget annually for a realistic level of board contributions?

• How are trustees held accountable for their commitments?  There are various ways; e.g., performance dashboards shared throughout the year with the board; inclusion of board giving in annual written commitments trustees are asked to sign; and board chair and advancement committee reminders and follow-up calls.

• Are prospective trustees recruited with an expectation that they will meet the board’s policy or guidelines?

• Does the grantee recognize the importance of other factors in addition to board giving as also critically important to organizational viability (e.g., subject matter expertise, time commitment and influence)?

Foundations may address all or some of these questions informally through prospective grantee discussions or more formally through the application process and on-going reporting on multi-year grants.  Provider boards will differ widely in the degree to which they address these questions, and foundations may want to remain flexible in their inquiries depending upon the nature and level of grants. However, the common thread these questions address is whether the grantee organization has developed, or is in the process of taking tangible steps to develop, a culture of giving, a culture that reflects the individual and collective trustee devotion – even passion - to meet the organization’s charitable mission on a sustained basis.

"Rounding Third Leadership Series #17: We Can't Give Them Both Offers"

During my first year as a law firm associate (1972), we had two female summer associates for the first time. By summer’s end it was clear that the women had out- performed the other two men law students. And, the word was out: the firm would make only two offers of permanent employment. I naturally assumed the two women, being more qualified, would get those offers.

When I pointed this out to one of our corporate partners, he responded, matter-of-factly, “We can’t give them both offers.”

Checking my rising anger, I countered. “I don’t understand. We had only a few women in my law school class, but the number is going up fast and will be half of incoming classes in no time. What if our competing law firms hire the best law students regardless of whether they are women? Wouldn’t our quality suffer and we’ll fall behind?”

I had him.

As he paused, I drove home another point. “And, what about your three daughters? If they go to law school, do you want them to lose out on getting law firm jobs just because they are women?”

Almost thirty years later, I returned to the firm – interrupting my business career – to manage the business department. That corporate partner, now in his late 60’s and contemplating retirement, confided that he was transitioning some of his biggest clients to one of the firm’s best younger partners, a woman whom he had mentored.

As my story illustrates, discrimination may be countered by economic and personal arguments. Educating people to discrimination’s negative societal effects is important too. In many cases, it’s against the law. Most important, as Lyndon Johnson argued when engineering passage of the Voting Rights Act, it is morally wrong.

Leaders must make the case for diversity and inclusion, use their influence to make it a priority and persuade others to back a plan of action to achieve it. Incentives to spur action, enlisting champions and spreading the initiative to all organizational levels help too.

Inspired leaders lead by personal example. A retired executive friend ran a $1 billion nonprofit health system. In discussions with minority vendors in the surrounding community, he discovered they couldn’t meet the system’s purchasing conditions because the financing they needed to invest in new resources to meet the system’s demand was not available to them. Unwilling to let that be a roadblock, he persuaded the system’s principal bank to lend money to the minority vendors with the system’s backing. The vendors invested the funds as planned, they got the contracts and they performed well.

"Rounding Third" Leadership Series #16: Developing Leaders: A Strategic Priority

(Part 2)

My last “Rounding Third” invites inquiry into what should be covered in a leadership development program.  The following elements come to mind.  I believe that, taken together, teaching these elements will equip leaders to create organizational value.

Organizational Elements

First, managers need to understand the very essence of their organization.  I used to carry my employer’s mission statement in my wallet.  Managers should know what the mission is, how it originated, why it is important and how it integrates into the organization’s business model.  They should understand that missions change over time for many reasons (e.g., transformative technology advances, changes in government funding priorities).  The IBM of today is far different from the IBM of yesteryear.  

Values were written right below the mission statement on my wallet card.  Organizational values link to mission.  Example: “we honor the dignity of our patients”.  

The business purpose of a for-profit company is to acquire, grow and retain customers at a profit.  This purpose supports its mission, and the mission in turn informs the organization’s purpose.  Strategic plans, product and service offerings, customers and how the organization goes about making a profit may change over time as the business environment changes.  Sometimes, the environment changes so radically that the company’s mission itself is altered.  However, the underlying purpose is unchanging: it’s always about getting, retaining and growing a customer base in a way that makes money.  

The business purpose of a non-profit organization has a different spin, but it too doesn’t change.  The people served by a non-profit (referred to as “clients”, “patients” or some other term usually preferred over “customers”) and how they come to the organization (how they are “acquired”) may change over time (e.g., the needs may change, the needs may be met in new ways or the government changes the way it covers needed services). Again, the changes may be so significant that the organization’s very mission must be revised.  But, the unchanging organizational purpose of a non-profit is to offer services which meet client needs, serve as many clients with those needs as is feasible and grow those services (or refer the clients to other organizations) if their needs aren’t being met.  Instead of doing this to turn a profit, non-profits strive to do this on a sustained basis.  It’s the old adage:  no money, no mission. 

A consultant friend used to say that an organization’s vision (sometimes confused with its mission) is that one big goal “you can recite at gunpoint”.  JFK’s classic space vision 50 years ago was to “put a man on the moon by the end of the decade”.  A vision, once achieved, will give rise to a new vision as the organization’s strategic plan changes over time.  

Good leaders translate mission, values, purpose and vision into value-creating action.  They deploy best practices for strategic and operational planning, implementation and organizational effectiveness. And, they create a motivating culture of success.  

Leaders keep things simple. Whatever one may think of his politics, Ronald Reagan was known for consistently and effectively championing and communicating a few simple themes.  He didn’t get lost in the details.  

Relational Elements

Leaders master the art of relating well to others to create organizational value.  

They manage effectively up (to senior executives), laterally (to peer managers), down (to their direct reports) and outside (to business partners).

They know how to build and run teams and design workable processes for teams to get things done. 

As influencers and negotiators, they put themselves in the shoes of other people to understand their motivations and expectations.  

Leaders look for win-win relationships where both parties create value together and compromise for the greater good.  Compromise involves giving something up.  In win-lose relationships, one side must always win.  That may pay off in the short run, but the loser is left hurt with a bitter memory that come back to haunt. 

Personal Elements

Effective leaders are “all about” the organization rather than themselves.

Strong leaders demonstrate by word and actions genuine personal values of humility, fairness and caring for others in their dealings with employees, board members and business partners.  

They have a value creation mindset fueled by life-long learning and curiosity.  

I remember a United Way leadership seminar called “Leaders Lead”.  I took it to mean that leaders are decisive.  They take prudent risks.  They tackle the tough issues others ignore at their jeopardy.  

One of my favorite football slogans is “when the going gets tough, the tough get going”.  Today we say leaders have grit and resilience.  

Finally, leaders are healthy.  They take care of their personal selves.  

"Rounding Third" Leadership Series #15: Developing Leaders: A Strategic Priority

(Part 1)

Many organizations I’ve worked for or advised have had fine performance evaluation processes for senior and mid-level employees.  They had subjective performance reviews conducted by supervisors, usually coupled with employee self-evaluations.  Some tied performance reviews to financial incentives, measuring performance by success in meeting predetermined, objective personal work and organizational goals.  In some cases, the incentives were triggered (or not) by meeting an organizational profitability goal beyond the employee’s individual ability to influence directly.  

One organization used the performance reviews as the basis for senior management to plot their managers’ relative potential to advance in the organization.  Occasionally, I also saw managers tested for personality types (Myers Briggs) or to determine how people inside and outside of the organization perceived their leadership strengths and weaknesses (360 Degree Leadership).  

These well-intended practices were only indirectly and episodically aimed at helping senior and mid-level managers gain leadership skills.  Yes, most organizations encouraged and some required managers to select from, and take, a variety of educational courses and reimbursed managers for continuing education essential to maintaining professional licensure.  But, leadership development was simply not a strategic organizational priority that translated to an organized, well-resourced program with a goal of helping managers become first-rate leaders.  

This has baffled me.  What could be more important than developing a cadre of strong future leaders?  After all, leaders create new organizational value.  Developing a bench of leaders in waiting is essential to senior leadership succession planning.  And, what a great morale builder for managers who are made to feel valued by a caring organization willing to help them build leadership skills.  

Of course, some managers who develop into leaders will be recruited elsewhere.  However, grateful leaders who go elsewhere may end up repaying the organization that invested in their leadership development as future business partners, promoters, board members, investors or donors. 

The next “Rounding Third” (#16) addresses what to cover in a leadership program.  

"Rounding Third" Leadership Series #14: Power Brushes

You never know when a life-altering moment is going to happen.  A former law partner of mine loved to tell about an acquaintance, John Filo, who snapped the iconic picture of the Kent State shooting in 1970.  Filo, a junior, drove the picture to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette instead of waiting to publish it in his college paper.  He talked them into running it, and he won the Pulitzer Prize.

I spent Spring 1968, my junior year in college, in the Washington Semester Program at American University in Washington, D.C. with students from across the country.  It was a heady time to be there given the Vietnam War, Gene McCarthy’s Presidential candidacy and the prospect that Bobby Kennedy might also challenge the President in ’68.  

I was primed for my own life-altering moment, and for good reason.  We had almost daily seminars with Supreme Court Justices, Senators, Congressmen, agency heads, journalists and the like. 

My semester project was a study of Robert Kennedy’s staff.  I interviewed 25 or more of his staff, the largest on the Hill, working my way up to Joe Dolan who ran the operation.  I wanted to hear from him and interview Kennedy’s highly publicized legislative assistants, Peter Edelman and Adam Walinsky.  Dolan got wind of my project and invited me on the spur of the moment into the Senator’s office.  There I was, google-eying his children’s drawings on the wall, imagining I might even get a chance to interview RFK.  But, then, instead of answering my questions, Dolan cut off further staff contact, fearing I would release my findings to the press. He didn’t buy my “I’m just a student doing a term paper” argument.  He called me at the end of the semester, asking for a copy.  I refused.  

Back at Wesleyan in the fall I was chagrined to learn from government professor David Adamany (later President of Temple University) that he knew Dolan, Edelman and Walinsky and could have helped me get those interviews.  The “B” I was lucky to get on my incomplete paper could have been an “A+”.  

Called Strike One!

Half-way through a seminar with Joseph Califano at the White House he abruptly invited us to join him on the South Portico to greet Vice President Humphrey who was arriving by helicopter to report to President Johnson on his trip to Europe.  There I was again, in the midst of power, surrounded by the entire cabinet and Congressional leadership.  The President marched out to the portico, reached out his hand and … somehow missed mine in favor of Hubert’s.  

Foul tip, Strike Two!!

I became fast friends with another Washington Semester student who lived in Cincinnati.  We both worked part-time for our home town Congressmen.  Mine was Peter Rodino who later ran the Judiciary Committee’s Watergate hearings.  As a reward, Rodino invited me to join him on the floor of Congress to hear General Westmoreland, home from Vietnam, address a joint session of Congress.  I wore the only sports jacket I had with me, a red silk one my mother had imported from the Orient.  When we arrived at our seats, Rodino introduced me to Wright Patman, powerful Chairman of the House Banking Committee.  Before I could say anything, Patman barked, “that coat sticks out like a sore thumb” and banished me from the floor to sit “back with the ambassadors”.  

Swing and a miss, Strike Three!!!

My friend Dick fared better.  He and I drove to Charlottesville on a Friday afternoon to visit another friend of mine for “Easters”, the party weekend at the University of Virginia.  Early that evening as we were walking from frat house to frat house, beers in hand, Dick’s Congressman’s staff somehow tracked him down.  If Dick could get back to D.C. in time, the Congressman – Robert Taft, Jr. of Ohio, President Taft’s grandson – wanted Dick to accompany him to breakfast on Saturday morning with President Johnson. 

Well, we did what all red-blooded college students would do:  we continued to party.  I drove Dick back to Washington in the middle of the night, just in time to change and meet Congressman Taft for The Breakfast.  

When he walked in with Taft to see the President, Johnson sized up Dick, poked his face towards him, paused and said, “Son, you look like shit!” 

                                                                       __________  

What have I learned from this story?  

Stay Cool: When Joe Dolan called me asking for a copy of my paper, why did I tell him to “pound sand”?  I lost a great opportunity to ask him for a personal meeting to deliver the paper and discuss my findings.  That would have shown my good intentions.  Who knows, it might have led to a summer internship working with Edelman and Walinsky.  

Think Critically:  It never occurred to me to touch base with my professors back at Wesleyan to see if any of them knew the Senator or high-level members of his staff.  Instead, I had networked through a family member on the Hill who had low level contacts.  And, I never thought about asking another student to borrow a sport coat appropriate to sitting among Senators and Congressmen at the august seat of our nation’s government.  

Fact Check:  I emailed Dick, managing partner of a big law firm in Cincinnati, a few years ago to fact check this story, thinking it would be a good yarn to write someday.  His reply: “I have no recollection of that”.  It’s highly unlikely that my friend blocked the incident out of his mind.  I have no idea how I made up the story or came to believe it.  Once it got laughs, I retold it and then kept telling it.  People believed it.  Fortunately, the story hurt no one.  It just made me feel good.  Now, when I tell it, I add Dick’s denial.  

"Round Third" Leadership Series #13: When Things Go Bad

CEO’s project confidence and command for good reason:  they get to the top by achieving success along the way, and they have access to resources their subordinates don’t.  Yet, some admit it’s a lonely job. By voicing concerns to, or seeking advice from, their board chair or senior staff they risk being viewed as indecisive, vulnerable and weak.  So, they don’t and remain isolated.

This can be especially problematic when the organization is in extremis.  People won’t risk association with and may even abandon a leader struggling to save an organization.  Their own careers come first just when the leader needs loyalty and assistance.

How can a leader protect against this?   

• Be Prepared:  Executives love to grow businesses.  But, not actively managing risks inherent in core operations and expansion can be fatal.  Building a management mindset which identifies and manages risk, has back-up plans ready and is prepared to cut losing operations can help avoid crises.  

• Confront Tough Questions:  An obnoxious executive everyone tolerates, a legacy operation that just breaks even, an overly aggressive big donor no one wants to aggravate: these types of tough problems go unanswered too often.  They undermine leadership and can corrode an organization. Deal with them.

• Cultivate Ideas From Within:  Traditional top-down management assumes all wisdom resides at the executive level.  This wastes the potential of a workforce to contribute new ideas. An open culture which promotes, cultivates, harvests, implements and rewards new ideas which are respected by senior management promotes innovation and hedges against business downturns.

• Develop An Enlightened Board: The best executives work hand-in-hand with board leadership to create a diverse group of engaged and independent board members vested in the organization’s success.  They collaborate with Board leadership to educate board members, provide material information transparently and encourage Board members to participate and think critically, strategically and, when necessary, surgically.  An enlightened board reduces the risk of, and will serve the leader well if, a crisis develops.  

• Check Your Ego:  The best leaders exhibit genuine humility.  They admit that they don’t have all the answers and sometimes make mistakes.  They seek advice from their senior leaders, actively listen to them and carefully weigh advice when given.  With such openness, the executive suite won’t be so lonely if the business turns south.  

• Have An Objective Counselor:  A no-nonsense counselor who knows the leader well, can think critically and quickly and has no financial or personal agenda with the leader can be invaluable.  The value comes from helping the leader to be physically, mentally and emotionally healthy and making sure the leader is thinking clearly, engages in excellent processes with stakeholders, is disciplined in approach and acts decisively and ethically.  

These measures won’t guarantee less lonely isolation if a crisis comes.  But, why risk it?

"Rounding Third" #12: "My Black Playmate Next Door"

In 4th grade, my family moved to Glen Ridge, New Jersey, an all-white NYC suburb.  In my senior year, Glen Ridge voted 90% for Goldwater. My house backed up on an all-black neighborhood in the town next-door, Montclair.  Our rear fence literally demarcated segregation.

When I began playing in my back yard with the black child from Montclair whose home abutted ours, our next door neighbor called my dad.  It was not appropriate, he asserted, for me to be playing with that black “so and so” in our neighborhood.  My father told him to “pound sand”.  

That began my social justice journey.  In college, I led the movement to integrate my fraternity, I was inspired by Martin Luther King who spoke on campus and I marched with our black community when he was assassinated.  While in law school, I worked for both Newark and Camden Legal Services and read a great deal of black literature during down time in the Army Reserves. I admired Muhammad Ali’s stand against the draft.  As a young associate in a corporate law firm, I regularly staffed the firm’s poverty law office in West Philadelphia. I advocated to our partners that integrating women and blacks into our law firm was not only right but made economic sense.  I was proud when assigned to mentor our first black lawyer, now a college president. I have supported diversity on governing boards I’ve joined, and in organizations where I worked; and I have volunteered for 40 years with a social service agency serving minorities.  

I patted myself on the back.  

Then, a few years ago, I attended a racism conference which included self-awareness exercises.  I later read a book about white privilege.* I began to understand – for the first time – just how much  deep-seated institutional racism, poverty and white privilege have negatively impacted our fellow black citizens.  On a personal level, I recognized my own buried biases and realized how often white privilege had benefited me over my life at the expense of minorities.  I began to wonder what this revelation meant for organizational leadership.

I concluded that the calls of well-intentioned leaders for board, executive and employee diversity are not enough.  Neither is hiring a minority person to a top HR position. Recruiting people of color (and other minorities) to board and executive positions isn’t either.  White leaders must first learn about and appreciate the underlying causes and effects of racism, poverty and white privilege in this country, and they must honestly identify and confront their own subliminal biases.  Without these foundational understandings, there will be no personal leadership commitment to, or basis for, transforming organizations to eliminate discrimination and capture the full value that comes from a diverse board, executive team and creative workforce.  

That transformation will require an organization-wide culture change, one that will take commitment, understanding and persistence.    

* Debby Irving, Waking Up White, and Finding Myself in the Story of Race (2014)

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #11: The Element of Surprise

The executives around the table early that Monday morning bent in, listening intently to the CEO.  He was recounting a horrible mistake over the weekend which cost a patient’s life. When he finished, one-by-one his administrative team went into damage control:  what and how to report to regulatory authorities, how to handle the press when the word got out, how could such a thing happen, who was to blame, has the insurance carrier been notified, what did legal counsel say, how should this be communicated to the board, how to deal with fall-out from the patient’s family.  Everyone had clicked automatically into a liability mitigation mindset.

Everyone, that is, except the CEO.  Suddenly, he exclaimed “Stop!” After a pause, pregnant with anticipation, he added calmly and with emphasis, “Forget liability.  Our liability will take care of itself. Right now we have to talk to the family, tell them we screwed up and let them know we care.”  And, they did.

Another hospital CEO realized early on that he had inherited years of negative baggage when he assumed his new role.  He gathered his employees in the auditorium and asked them to write down on note cards their fears, regrets and complaints.  He collected the notes in a box and led the employees in a silent procession outside where he conducted a burial. Into the ground went the box and, symbolically, the baggage.  Now they were ready to build together a new, positive culture.

To make a similar point, another CEO led his employees out the door one morning after they had punched in on the time clock.  Under his arm was the time clock. He threw the clock into the pond in front of the hospital. He was effectively telling his employees that he trusted them to do their important jobs and that was more important than micro-managing their comings and goings.  

These stories have common elements.  The leaders used the element of surprise for an impactful purpose to help their employees and thus the organization.  They used the tactic rarely, thereby increasing the likelihood that their employees would remember the experience and act on it.  They thought through use of the tactic in advance and executed in a serious manner to project authenticity so that no one could misinterpret it as a silly exercise.  Finally, the exercise did not embarrass, demean or intimidate anyone.
 

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #10: Sixty One and Counting

This is the final of three blogs looking at lifetime leadership lessons.

Ages 61 to 70:  I went to Italy without my computer when I was 60.  I could get emails, texts and calls on my phone, but didn’t.  My wife and I were on the go and having too much fun to be bothered.  When I returned, business had gotten on just fine without me.

This got me to thinking that I wasn’t actually indispensable.  I had just thought I was. I had impressed myself, rationalizing that my work (and, by implication, I) was needed and, therefore, important. Outstanding performance reviews and worthy results were not my exclusive province.  Most of my superiors and peers also worked hard and smart. People moved laterally to other organizations, took new positions elsewhere and retired. Yes, some even died. Healthy organizations had survived, even thrived, without them as new talent moved in.  The best leaders, understanding they were replaceable, served as enlightened caretakers entrusted by their organizations as stewards during their tenures until well-groomed successors took over in smooth transitions. Those leaders were defined not by their positions, but by their character.  

71 and Beyond:  If your life is defined by your job, recognizing that you can be replaced can be deflating, even depressing.    Fortunately for me, recognition that I was replaceable in my early 60’s was liberating. It was as if I had lifted my head at daybreak from my keyboard, switched off my phone, looked out my window and saw a bright new sunrise of opportunity.  Rather than hide my plans to leave my employer as I neared age 65, I let everyone know.

Some executives who have been defined by their jobs enter “retirement” without a plan.  But, with nothing else to do, golf can get old fast.  Instead, I recommend what my mentor friend John calls “re-fire-ment” ; i.e., getting fired up to take advantage of your new found personal freedom.  

Before committing to anything new, spend a “sabbatical” year of discovery.  Read and reflect on subjects of intellectual interest. Try new professional and leisure activities.  Identify new endeavors that will capitalize on your best leadership skills. Challenge yourself in new ways.  Resolve to achieve a meaningful personal purpose. Enjoy life on your own terms.

Seize the lifetime opportunity to become truly indispensable to yourself and your loved ones.

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #9: Thirty-One to Sixty

This is the second of three blogs looking at leadership lessons learned over my career.

Ages 31 to 40:  These were the formative years of legal practice when I chose health care over securities as a practice specialty and built my firm’s health care practice.  I learned how to: develop a business strategy (I wrote a business plan - unheard of for lawyers at the time!); develop and market a practice differentiated from our competition; recruit and manage  talented support staff; establish a reputation for client service and trust; and capture administrative efficiencies. Looking back, it all came down to value creation for clients and my law firm. Value creation for customers became a theme essential to leadership.   

Ages 41 to 50:  During these years my health practice grew and I then joined a large university hospital in a business capacity to help develop a regional health system.  Recruiting talent to support this initiative was crucial. I found that identifying smart future stars with great personalities and strong values, selling them on partnering to achieve a dynamic vision of growth and excellence and then cultivating their personal development and careers was a winning formula.  Great people are often destined for great things. So, when they were promoted or left for better jobs, it became an occasion for celebration rather than protestations of disloyalty or cause for regret.

Ages 51 to 60:  The CEO of our health system, which was growing in a very competitive market, told our senior team that “we don’t need to become the biggest, we just need to be big enough to be the best.”  As I helped executed the growth strategy, in a kind of on-the-job MBA mode, I realized that growth for growth sake, without a focused purpose and plan, is a formula for failure. Having the best product or service, top talent, best management, superb strategy execution, phenomenal customer impact and strict accountability are more important than volume or growth increases.   Scale is important, but only if it yields profitability. Over-expansion is folly.

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #8: Zero to Thirty

As I look to new beginnings at age seventy, this is the first of three blogs looking at leadership lessons learned over the decades of my life.

Ages 0 to 10:  I was, essentially, an only child.  I had loving parents and friends, but my siblings, much older, were in high school and college during my formative years.  I spent a lot of time alone but wasn’t lonely. I engaged in a wide range of creative play, building baseball stadiums with plastic bricks, pitching nine inning games against the barn door and conducting Olympic track and field and swimming events on my vibrating electric football field.  Later, I enjoyed using games, some I invented, for ice breaking, morale boosting, stress relief and team building for my leadership teams. They were effective in building camaraderie and a common sense of purpose.

Ages 11 to 20:  When my dad died early in my second decade I escaped into a hardworking, competitive mode, striving to be tops in Boy Scouts, athletics and academics.  By age twenty, I knew that hard work can produce excellence. I also realized that: competition for the sake of self-winning only, rather than achieving a higher purpose, can be self-destructive; and competition, which gets stiffer as life goes on, is also about losing. Learning how to deal emotionally with loss and minimizing the chance of loss while taking risk are important leadership skills.

Ages 21-30:  My third decade was spent in formalized and on-the-job learning in law school and a law firm and trying hard to balance achievement in those environments with a new wife and first child.  Focus, discipline and critical thinking became valuable assets achieved too often at the expense of my family, meaningful leisure, spirituality and other intangibles which make life truly joyful.  Looking back, I can’t believe I paid that price. While focus, discipline and critical thinking are, indeed, crucial leadership traits, great leaders apply them in all aspects of life, not just their business lives.  Doing so yields emotional intelligence and empathy and sets an example for people they lead.

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #7: Is 'Busy-ness' Good Business?

We called him “Busy Timmy” growing up.  Our second son always had something to do, catching frogs, batting practice, playing his guitar, reading books.  

Many executives are the same.  They bounce from meeting to meeting, one-on-one sessions with subordinates, check-ins with higher-ups, lunches with key stakeholders, speaking engagements, confidential calls scheduled weeks in advance, cell-phone calls from the sidelines of a daughter’s lacrosse game.   I know. I regularly dictated memos to my assistant from my car on the way to work at 6:30 a.m. and finished calls with business associates at 9 p.m. in front of my garage door.

If you are busy, it’s because what you do is important, right?  Or, is it that you are important?   And, I suggest you ask, is this “busy-ness” really effective?

In between bites of a hotdog at a ball game I asked my friend, Ed, a 50-year-old, rising executive at a large health system, what he thought was the single most important leadership trait.  He answered immediately, “Life/work balance”. I was skeptical, having heard that bromide often. So, I pressed him.

“Well,” he offered, “If you spend more time with your wife and family and pursue personal interests, it forces you to keep it simple at work.  You can’t over-process matters and you make crisp decisions. I can’t tell you how many people I observe who are busy from early to the end of the day and accomplish little.  Keeping it simple also sends a positive message to your staff about the importance of life/work balance and being efficient. And, it keeps you healthy.”

I would add to this wise counsel that planning un-busy time at work gives you time to think and plan.  And, time to listen and keep in touch with your organization, if your door is open to others and you walk the floors.  

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #6: Getting Great Ideas Done

There’s nothing more frustrating for a leader than to see a great strategic idea die.  

Great ideas frequently fail.  No one follows up. Layers of approvals delay implementation.  The cost is too high. Attention is diverted to other priorities.  Everybody is already too busy. The list goes on.

When ideas fail, nothing happens.  Perhaps inattention forced the idea into oblivion.  Or, people conveniently forgot about it, retreating to their “day jobs”.  Reasons (read: “excuses”) for the failure are conveniently conjured. There is no post mortem to figure out what really happened.  

It doesn’t have to be that way.  Insightful leaders avoid those pitfalls by taking four critical steps to bring their ideas forward.

They cultivate up front Critical Thinking.  The leader and senior staff, sometimes with outside help, take time off from normal distractions to evaluate the idea from all angles, identifying and evaluating its most critical aspects, both positive and negative.  The leader encourages and is open to honest debate. Early passion and excitement about the idea’s potential are tempered with cold, objective, realistic analysis.

Next, if the idea holds water, a Good Process is designed.  This is an end-to-end set of steps that will translate the idea into action, through to fruition, on an expedited basis.  My mantra on this is simple: “Good Process Yields Good Results; Bad Process … well, you finish the phrase”.  

Then, the leader finds someone to “Own” the Process, along with the leader, and get the job done.  This person is well-respected, knows the organization, has the right skill sets for the project and has ready access to the leader.  The leader empowers the process owner with the people, technology and funding to succeed.

The final ingredient is Accountability to the organization through the board, executive and senior leadership.  The key question to ask throughout is whether the new initiative is likely to create value with desired positive outcomes on a sustained basis for the organization’s customers, the people it serves and other stakeholders.  If not, drop it.

But, if the answer is still a “yes” at the end of the process, then you have an idea worth pursuing.  It might just be a great one.

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #5: Cornering the Dog

“It’s none of your business.”  “Let’s get down to business.”  “That’s enough of your funny business.”  “The dog did his business in the corner.”  We use “business” loosely in many ways.  Pause and think: Can you recite the definition of business?  …Don’t’ worry. No one I’ve asked can.

Two companies I once worked with had it down pat.  For them, the unchangeable purpose of business was to acquire, grow and retain customers at a profit.  (For non-profits, just change “at a profit” to “on a sustained basis” and you’ve got it.) They went further, breaking the definition down to five inter-related factors they used in real time, all the time, to effectively run their businesses, from strategy development through operations.  

The first, offer a service or product matching what your customer needs (or thinks he does).  Second, acquire your customers. Next, retain your customers and grow that customer base. Fourth, manage the key elements that drive profitability.   If you think about it, your organization won’t ultimately survive unless all four of those cylinders are pumping smoothly.

It was the fifth that surprised me:  Continually manage the constraints on your organization.  Constraints are internal (the aging founder who is losing touch, the disruptive board chair who donates a lot) and external (new regulations, delayed government funding, changing political environment, down economy).  Constraints are, by definition, often outside of your control to influence. But, failure to identify them, project their impact, minimize their effect and/or turn them to your advantage can jeopardize your organization’s very existence.  Sometimes, managing the constraints may even mean managing the other four core elements in ways which will change your organization’s mission, who it serves and whether it needs to partner with others.

So, keep Fido in his corner and, by all means, don’t step in the “business” he does there.  

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #4: Lawyer Jokes

I sat at the end of the table next to the CEO at my first hospital board meeting as an outside general counsel.  The medical staff president walked into the nearly-full board room, and upon eyeing me, immediately asked the assembled group, “Do you know the difference between a dead dog and dead lawyer at the side of a road?”  After a pregnant pause, he answered, “there are skid marks in front of the dog”.

I took the barrage of lawyer jokes in stride.  But, lawyers are no laughing matter.

Many years later, a colleague who, like me, had transitioned from lawyering to the business side of health care, told me about a lunch he had with Jack Welch, the former CEO of General Electric, on the eve of being named president of a national health insurer.  “You only have to remember one thing about leadership,” Jack advised him. “Have a great lawyer and a great CFO you can trust.”

I remember a call from the CEO of a major health care organization asking me to handle a novel transaction with a large physician group.  His words were telling, “Getting this deal done is ‘mission critical’. I understand there are compliance issues. You can take us up to the edge, but don’t let us go over the line.”  

It’s simple, really.  A leader cannot risk the mission, reputation and financial well-being of the organization - no matter what.  Having a trusted lawyer who knows the business, knows how to lawyer and has the courage to exercise independent judgment is essential.  

Much the same is true for the CFO.  Having strong financial reporting and accounting controls and solid analytics to support decision-making are essential.  The CEO needs a CFO who, armed with those tools, has the gumption to tell the bad news, the grace to qualify good news with evidence-based warnings about future contingencies and the relationship skills to collaboratively problem-solve with management.  

April 2016

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #3: Star

“Stop -> Think -> Act -> Review” (STAR) is a best practice, borrowed from other industries, which some hospitals use to transform organizational culture to promote safety.  It applies equally well to writing.

Excellent communications are essential to organizational success.  Why, then, are so many executives and managers such poor writers? It may be our fast-paced world of email, texting and tweeting that places a premium on quick responses with abbreviations, incomplete sentences and lack of attention to detail.  Perhaps we aren’t educating our young people to write well.

The secret to writing well is thinking.  Critical thinking and organizing your thoughts before hitting the keyboard is the first step.  After your message is composed, rereading and editing it (sometimes more than once) for accuracy and conciseness is the next.  The STAR practice for writing would be: Stop -> Think -> Act (Write) -> Review (and Edit). Only when satisfied, press “Send”.

Likewise, when responding.  Read the received message deliberately, think about your substantive and emotional reactions, formulate your response, read and edit it, then send.  If your time is limited or your emotions are still at play, wait. You don’t want to say something that doesn’t represent your best thinking or your will later regret.  

Writing well is important:  poor communications create misunderstandings, ambiguities, inefficiencies and hurt feelings.  A clear message avoids follow up questions. An unintentional misstatement or unqualified assumption can result in a wrong follow-up action.  A poor choice of words can damage a reputation.

Reading and life-long learning are key indicators of writing competence.  Asking prospective new hires (and existing staff) about what and how often they read and whether and how they self-educate should tell you something about their writing quality.  If they read works by superb writers and are self-motivated learners, chances are they already write well or will be open to instruction.

Unfortunately, many leaders don’t recognize the importance of writing well to organizational success and tolerate poor writing despite the dislocation it causes.  Writing well should be an organizational competency with as much priority as others. It should be embedded in personnel recruitment and employee training. The benefit will be executives and managers who think critically.  

May 2016

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #2: The Listening

Dan Rather, CBS anchor, once asked Mother Teresa what she said during her prayers. She answered, "I listen." So Dan turned the question and asked, "Well then, what does God say?"  Mother Teresa smiled with confidence and answered, "He listens." Sermon Central Newsletter, Max Lucado, p. 71 (October 13, 2008).

Many business leaders have a hard time listening.  After all, they are the “Boss”. They already know what’s best for the organization.  It doesn’t even occur to them to listen. Or, they don’t want to waste their time doing so.  They don’t solicit advice from underlings often. When they do, it’s so their subordinates will think they are “involved” (read: important), not for their insights.  Often domineering, they do most of the talking. They suffer from the “I’m the smartest guy in the room” complex, bolstered by their perceived superior access to information and executive level contacts.  

Effective leaders take time to listen.  They pop into offices, walk hospital and factory floors, ask questions of the “troops” and hear what they have to say.  They do so with genuineness, humility and empathy, engendering trust. They seek information and perspectives from all organizational levels precisely because they don’t pretend to have all of the answers.  They value the democracy of new ideas generated by their employees in bold contrast to the traditional top-down management style.

Leaders who listen avoid the perils of isolation, bolster their colleague’s morale and loyalty and gain intelligence and innovative thought to inform their decision-making.  In the process, listening leaders create opportunities for informed dialogue with their employees, helping them gain a deeper understanding and appreciation of the organization’s mission, values, strategies and initiatives.  They stay in touch with reality.

Listening won’t qualify you for sainthood, but it will benefit the organization and people you have been appointed to serve.  

June 2016

“Rounding Third” Leadership Series #1: The Elephant

Yesterday, May 1st, Ringling Brothers and Barnum and Bailey Circus retired its elephant act, bowing to complaints from animal activists.  My guess is that its use of bullhooks had for years been the “elephant in the room” no one at Ringling wanted to address.  Its long-standing elephant acts were just too popular.

The big “elephants” in your organization will come in a variety of shapes.  You may see all white faces around your leadership table despite your mission to serve minorities.  Everyone may be tolerating an abusive leader’s behavior because he gets results. You may be renewing a leadership incentive system which has failed to reward excellence for a decade.   But, no one is speaking up.

The “elephants” often involve sensitive personal nuances.  This is especially true when another leader’s performance or behavior is the issue or the leader is vested in the program or process at issue.  No one wants to risk his own job security by calling the question. The head of human resources, no matter how qualified, may be reluctant to intervene for just that reason. It’s just too easy to keep “kicking the can down the road.”

There is no cookie cutter approach.  Gathering consensus behind the scenes with trusted colleagues who understand the issue and will support you and picking the right time, place and manner to raise the issue with other leaders will help.  But, as a leader or leadership group member, it takes sensitivity and finesse – and, above all, courage - to meaningfully address the elephant in the room. But, if the matter is truly crucial to organizational success, you will be serving your organization – and yourself – well by doing what Ringling finally did, retiring that elephant.

May 2016