A leadership crisis has erupted at Barker Foods. Doug Lothian, the national sales director of the chocolates and confections division, was just fired for making some bad marketing choices, engaging in questionable selling behaviors, and, ultimately, losing the confidence of his customers and his staff. As a result, there's a schism in Sales. Senior managers are wondering whether a competency model would help the company replace Doug with the right kind of leader and prevent other leadership problems from cropping up. HR director Anne Baxter thinks Doug's situation is the perfect example of why Barker Foods needs to define exactly what it's looking for from its top people. Colin Anthony, the CEO, has given Anne the go-ahead to work with a special task force on a framework that would not only highlight the critical values, knowledge, and skills necessary to lead any of the company's divisions but also identify the corresponding tasks, behaviors, and measures of success. Colin has asked Anne and her team to present their findings to the executive committee, which has voiced mixed opinions about competency modeling. On the one hand, it makes sense to hire and develop the right people to execute the company's strategy; on the other, it doesn't seem wise to oversimplify the work that senior executives do--and boiling down great leadership to a checklist of qualities could be a step in that direction. Should the executive committee go forward with plans for competency modeling? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0701B and R0701Z are: Reuben Mark, chairman of Colgate-Palmolive; Rebecca Ray, senior vice president for global learning and organizational development at MasterCard Worldwide; George Manderlink, a partner in Heidrick & Struggles Leadership Consulting; and Dave Ulrich, a cofounder of the RBL Group, a leadership consultancy.

Most people acknowledge that networking is an essential activity for an ambitious manager. Indeed, it's a requirement even for those focused simply on doing their current jobs well. For some, this is a distasteful reality. Working through networks, they believe, means relying on "who you know" rather than "what you know"--a hypocritical, possibly unethical, way to get things done. But even people who understand that networking is a legitimate and necessary part of their jobs can be discouraged by the payoff--because they are doing it in too limited a fashion. On the basis of a close study of 30 emerging leaders, the authors outline three distinct forms of networking. Operational networking is geared toward doing one's assigned tasks more effectively. It involves cultivating stronger relationships with colleagues whose membership in the network is clear; their roles define them as stakeholders. Personal networking engages kindred spirits from outside an organization in an individual's efforts to learn and find opportunities for personal advancement. Strategic networking puts the tools of networking in the service of business goals. At this level, a manager creates the kind of network that will help uncover and capitalize on new opportunities for the company. The ability to move to this level of networking turns out to be a key test of leadership. Companies often recognize that networks are valuable, and they create explicit programs to support them. But typically these programs facilitate only operational networking. Likewise, industry associations provide formal contexts for personal networking. The unfortunate effect is to give managers the impression that they know how to network and are doing so sufficiently. A sidebar notes the implication for companies' leadership development initiatives: that teaching strategic networking skills will serve their aspiring leaders and their business goals well.

Even for the most gifted individuals, the process of becoming a leader is an arduous, albeit rewarding, journey of continuous learning and self-development. The initial test along the path is so fundamental that we often overlook it: becoming a boss for the first time. That's a shame, because the trials involved in this rite of passage have serious consequences for both the individual and the organization. For a decade and a half, the author has studied people -- particularly star performers -- making major career transitions to management. As firms have become leaner and more dynamic, new managers have described a transition that gets more difficult all the time. But the transition is often harder than it need be because of managers' misconceptions about their role. Those who can acknowledge their misconceptions have a far greater chance of success. For example, new managers typically assume that their position will give them the authority and freedom to do what they think is best. Instead, they find themselves enmeshed in a web of relationships with subordinates, bosses, peers, and others, all of whom make relentless and often conflicting demands. "You really are not in control of anything," says one new manager. Another misconception is that new managers are responsible only for making sure that their operations run smoothly. But new managers also need to realize they are responsible for recommending and initiating changes--some of them in areas outside their purview--that will enhance their groups' performance. Many new managers are reluctant to ask for help from their bosses. But when they do ask (often because of a looming crisis), they are relieved to find their superiors more tolerant of their questions and mistakes than they had expected.

A division vice president blows the whistle on corruption at the highest levels of his company. A young manager refuses to work on her boss's pet project because she fears it will discredit the organization. A CEO urges his board, despite push back from powerful, hostile members, to invest in environmentally sustainable technology. What is behind such high-risk, often courageous acts? Courage in business, the author has found, seldom resembles the heroic impulsiveness that sometimes surfaces in life-or-death situations. Rather, it is a special kind of calculated risk taking, learned and refined over time. Taking an intelligent gamble requires an understanding of what she calls the "courage calculation": six discrete decision-making processes that make success more likely while averting rash or unproductive behavior. These include setting attainable goals, tipping the power balance in your favor, weighing risks against benefits, and developing contingency plans. Goals may be organizational or personal. Tania Modic had both types in mind when, as a young bank manager, she overstepped her role by traveling to New York -- on vacation time and on her own money -- to revitalize some accounts that her senior colleagues had allowed to languish. Her high-risk maneuver benefited the bank and gained her a promotion. Lieutenant General Claudia J. Kennedy weighed the risks and benefits before deciding to report a fellow officer who had plagiarized a research paper at a professional army school. In her difficult courage calculation, loyalty to army standards proved stronger than the potential discomfort and embarrassment of "snitching" on a fellow officer. When the skills behind courageous decision making align with a personal, organizational, or societal philosophy, managers are empowered to make bold moves that lead to success for their companies and their careers.

When a CEO leaves because of performance problems, the company typically recruits someone thought to be better equipped to fix what the departing executive couldn't--or wouldn't. The board places its confidence in the new person because of the present dilemma's similarity to some previous challenge that he or she dealt with successfully. But familiar problems are inevitably succeeded by less familiar ones, for which the specially selected CEO is not quite so qualified. More often than not, the experiences, skills, and temperament that yielded triumph in Act I turn out to be unequal to Act II's difficulties. In fact, the approaches that worked so brilliantly in Act I may be the very opposite of what is needed in Act II. The CEO has four choices: refuse to change, in which case he or she will be replaced; realize that the next act requires new skills and learn them; downsize or circumscribe his or her role to compensate for deficiencies; or line up a successor who is qualified to fill a role to which the incumbent's skills and interests are no longer suited. Hewlett-Packard's Carly Fiorina exemplifies the first alternative; Merrill Lynch's Stanley O'Neal the second; Google's Sergey Brin and Larry Page the third; and Quest Diagnostics' Ken Freeman the fourth. All but the first option are reasonable responses to the challenges presented in the second acts of most CEOs' tenures. And all but the first require a power of observation, a propensity for introspection, and a strain of humility that are rare in the ranks of the very people who need those qualities most. There are four essential steps executives can take to discern that they have entered new territory and to respond accordingly: recognition that their leadership style and approach are no longer working; acceptance of others' advice on why performance is faltering; analysis and understanding of the nature of the Act II shift; and, finally, decision and action.

Among the tests of a leader, few are more challenging--and more painful--than recovering from a career catastrophe. Most fallen leaders, in fact, don't recover. Still, two decades of consulting experience, scholarly research, and their own personal experiences have convinced the authors that leaders can triumph over tragedy--if they do so deliberately. Great business leaders have much in common with the great heroes of universal myth, and they can learn to overcome profound setbacks by thinking in heroic terms. First, they must decide whether or not to fight back. Either way, they must recruit others into their battle. They must then take steps to recover their heroic status, in the process proving, both to others and to themselves, that they have the mettle necessary to recover their heroic mission. Bernie Marcus exemplifies this process. Devastated after Sandy Sigoloff fired him from Handy Dan, Marcus decided to forgo the distraction of litigation and instead make the marketplace his battleground. Drawing from his network of carefully nurtured relationships with both close and more distant acquaintances, Marcus was able to get funding for a new venture. He proved that he had the mettle, and recovered his heroic status, by building Home Depot, whose entrepreneurial spirit embodied his heroic mission. As Bank One's Jamie Dimon, J.Crew's Mickey Drexler, and even Jimmy Carter, Martha Stewart, and Michael Milken have shown, stunning comebacks are possible in all industries and walks of life. Whatever the cause of your predicament, it makes sense to get your story out. The alternative is likely to be long-lasting unemployment. If the facts of your dismissal cannot be made public because they are damning, then show authentic remorse. The public is often enormously forgiving when it sees genuine contrition and atonement.

Every leader gets off track from time to time. But as leaders rise through the ranks, they have fewer and fewer opportunities for honest and direct feedback. Their bosses are no longer monitoring their actions, and by the time management missteps have a negative impact on business results, it's usually too late to make course corrections that will set things right. Therefore, it is wise to go through a self-assessment, to periodically step back from the bustle of running a business and ask some key questions of yourself. Author Robert S. Kaplan, who during his 22-year career at Goldman Sachs chaired the firm's senior leadership training efforts and cochaired its partnership committee, identifies seven areas for self-reflection: vision and priorities, managing time, feedback, succession planning, evaluation and alignment, leading under pressure, and staying true to yourself. The author sets out a series of questions in each of the areas, illustrating the impact of self-assessment through vivid accounts of real executives. Although the questions sound simple, people are often shocked-even horrified-by their own answers. Executives are aware that they should be focusing on their most important priorities, for instance, but without stepping back to reflect, few actually know where they are allocating their time. Kaplan advocates writing down what you do every working hour for a week and checking how well your actions match up with your intentions. As for feedback, managers should ask themselves whether they're getting truthful evaluations from their subordinates. (In all likelihood, they aren't.) It takes time and discipline to persuade your employees to tell you about your failings.

Businesses hoping to survive over the long term will have to remake themselves into better competitors at least once along the way. These efforts have gone under many banners: total quality management, reengineering, rightsizing, restructuring, cultural change, and turnarounds, to name a few. In almost every case, the goal has been to cope with a new, more challenging market by changing the way business is conducted. A few of these endeavors have been very successful. A few have been utter failures. Most fall somewhere in between, with a distinct tilt toward the lower end of the scale. John P. Kotter is renowned for his work on leading organizational change. In 1995, when this article was first published, he had just completed a ten-year study of more than 100 companies that attempted such a transformation. Here he shares the results of his observations, outlining the eight largest errors that can doom these efforts and explaining the general lessons that encourage success. Unsuccessful transitions almost always founder during at least one of the following phases: generating a sense of urgency, establishing a powerful guiding coalition, developing a vision, communicating the vision clearly and often, removing obstacles, planning for and creating short-term wins, avoiding premature declarations of victory, and embedding changes in the corporate culture. Realizing that change usually takes a long time, says Kotter, can improve the chances of success.

When some managers take over a new job, they hit the ground running. They learn the ropes, get along with their bosses and subordinates, gain credibility, and ultimately master the situation. Others, however, don't do so well. What accounts for the difference? In this article, first published in 1985, Harvard Business School professor John J. Gabarro relates the findings of two sets of field studies he conducted, covering 14 management successions. The first set was a three-year study of four newly assigned division presidents; the second consisted of 10 historical case studies. The project comprised American and European organizations with sales varying from $1.2 million to $3 billion. It included turnarounds, normal situations, failures, and triumphs. According to the author, the taking-charge process follows five predictable stages: taking hold, immersion, reshaping, consolidation, and refinement. These phases are characterized by a series of alternating periods of intense learning (immersion and refinement) and action (taking hold, reshaping, and consolidation). The study's results put to rest the myth of the all-purpose general manager who can be dropped into any situation and emerge triumphant. Understanding a situation and effecting change do not occur overnight, says Gabarro, and human variables such as managerial styles and effective working relationships make a difference.

A leadership crisis has erupted at Barker Foods. Doug Lothian, the national sales director of the chocolates and confections division, was just fired for making some bad marketing choices, engaging in questionable selling behaviors, and, ultimately, losing the confidence of his customers and his staff. As a result, there's a schism in Sales. Senior managers are wondering whether a competency model would help the company replace Doug with the right kind of leader and prevent other leadership problems from cropping up. HR director Anne Baxter thinks Doug's situation is the perfect example of why Barker Foods needs to define exactly what it's looking for from its top people. Colin Anthony, the CEO, has given Anne the go-ahead to work with a special task force on a framework that would not only highlight the critical values, knowledge, and skills necessary to lead any of the company's divisions but also identify the corresponding tasks, behaviors, and measures of success. Colin has asked Anne and her team to present their findings to the executive committee, which has voiced mixed opinions about competency modeling. On the one hand, it makes sense to hire and develop the right people to execute the company's strategy; on the other, it doesn't seem wise to oversimplify the work that senior executives do--and boiling down great leadership to a checklist of qualities could be a step in that direction. Should the executive committee go forward with plans for competency modeling? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0701B and R0701Z are: Reuben Mark, chairman of Colgate-Palmolive; Rebecca Ray, senior vice president for global learning and organizational development at MasterCard Worldwide; George Manderlink, a partner in Heidrick & Struggles Leadership Consulting; and Dave Ulrich, a cofounder of the RBL Group, a leadership consultancy.

A leadership crisis has erupted at Barker Foods. Doug Lothian, the national sales director of the chocolates and confections division, was just fired for making some bad marketing choices, engaging in questionable selling behaviors, and, ultimately, losing the confidence of his customers and his staff. As a result, there's a schism in Sales. Senior managers are wondering whether a competency model would help the company replace Doug with the right kind of leader and prevent other leadership problems from cropping up. HR director Anne Baxter thinks Doug's situation is the perfect example of why Barker Foods needs to define exactly what it's looking for from its top people. Colin Anthony, the CEO, has given Anne the go-ahead to work with a special task force on a framework that would not only highlight the critical values, knowledge, and skills necessary to lead any of the company's divisions but also identify the corresponding tasks, behaviors, and measures of success. Colin has asked Anne and her team to present their findings to the executive committee, which has voiced mixed opinions about competency modeling. On the one hand, it makes sense to hire and develop the right people to execute the company's strategy; on the other, it doesn't seem wise to oversimplify the work that senior executives do-- and boiling down great leadership to a checklist of qualities could be a step in that direction. Should the executive committee go forward with plans for competency modeling? Commenting on this fictional case study in R0701B and R0701Z are: Reuben Mark, chairman of Colgate-Palmolive; Rebecca Ray, senior vice president for global learning and organizational development at MasterCard Worldwide; George Manderlink, a partner in Heidrick & Struggles Leadership Consulting; and Dave Ulrich, a cofounder of the RBL Group, a leadership consultancy.

Two-party term sheet negotiation between a venture capitalist and the founder of an aerospace start-up company in which participants are scored both on their substantive performance and on the other party's perception of the relationship. The venture capital (VC) firm Aerovent Capital is considering a $100 million investment in the startup company Earth Escape. The founder of Earth Escape and the lead partner from Aerovent Capital must negotiate a term sheet outlining eight significant terms of the investment. Both parties are concerned with structuring a deal that protects their substantive investment interests and with creating a positive foundation for their potential collaboration. The simulation introduces the incorporation of process and relationship interests into negotiation strategy.

Two-party term sheet negotiation between a venture capitalist and the founder of an aerospace start-up company in which participants are scored both on their substantive performance and on the other party's perception of the relationship. The venture capital (VC) firm Aerovent Capital is considering a $100 million investment in the startup company Earth Escape. The founder of Earth Escape and the lead partner from Aerovent Capital must negotiate a term sheet outlining eight significant terms of the investment. Both parties are concerned with structuring a deal that protects their substantive investment interests and with creating a positive foundation for their potential collaboration. The simulation introduces the incorporation of process and relationship interests into negotiation strategy.

Two-party term sheet negotiation between a venture capitalist and the founder of an aerospace start-up company in which participants are scored both on their substantive performance and on the other party's perception of the relationship. The venture capital (VC) firm Aerovent Capital is considering a $100 million investment in the startup company Earth Escape. The founder of Earth Escape and the lead partner from Aerovent Capital must negotiate a term sheet outlining eight significant terms of the investment. Both parties are concerned with structuring a deal that protects their substantive investment interests and with creating a positive foundation for their potential collaboration. The simulation introduces the incorporation of process and relationship interests into negotiation strategy.

Bladelogic, a high flier in the large and growing market of data center automation software, had reached a critical juncture. The company, which had already garnered two rounds of venture funding and closed deals with dozens of blue-chip firms, appeared to be headed in the right direction. Revenues, however, were becoming increasingly hard to forecast. As the CEO, Dev Ittycheria's leadership position was entirely based on his ability to execute in a tough, high-stakes environment. Monthly board meetings were becoming increasingly tense; Bladelogic was becoming vulnerable to missing its revenue forecasts unless one or two "big" deals came through at the end of each quarter. With less than twelve months of cash left at the firm's current burn rate, Dev knew that they were going to need another round of capital well ahead of schedule. Current investors were in no mood to put more money in at a higher valuation, so the company was facing the very real prospect of a down round . Dev knew they had to get additional capital fast...but how could he secure a new financing round without the participation of existing investors? At what price would the current investors participate?

Infosys is a highly respected, India-based information technology (IT) software service provider, established in July 1981. The ramp-up of the company has been particularly spectacular during the last several years, starting from 1995. The initial business model related to labor arbitrage and was based upon differential wage rates for IT professionals in India and the developed countries. The boom of the late 1990s, catalyzed by the Y2K-related problems, resulted in opportunities that the company capitalized upon. Today the company serves clients drawn from global 2000 companies. Based upon its strong ethical and principled approach, execution excellence, relentless quest for quality and customer satisfaction, the company had astounding financial success and became a darling of the stock markets both in India and the United States. Notwithstanding its successful track record, Infosys has over the last several years, proactively been applying itself to a fundamental question of identifying the drivers of success for the next 10 years. Infosys has been deeply concerned about leveraging its current strong position, to evolve into a much stronger company, so as to ensure continued growth and success in the long-term. The case presents the challenges that Infosys has been grappling with, and invites participants to come up with creative solutions, going forward.

It is not a crisis - at least not yet - but numerous Canadian SMEs need to get with the lean program before it's too late. The authors visited 18 firms and though they found that lean practices were wanting, they were able to turn their findings into recommendations that manufacturing managers everywhere can implement to make their operations lean.

In December 1999 Thomson Financial (TF) began a radical transformation from forty-one divisions toward a more integrated firm organized around customer segments. This required active, coordinated involvement from business, organization, and technology functions, as well as sustained investment and execution through the crises of the technology market crash and September 11, 2001. By 2005 TF had emerged as one of the top three financial information firms globally (with Bloomberg and Reuters).

Personal computer game maker Blizzard filed a lawsuit in 2002 against the developers of the bnetd project. The bnetd project was a volunteer effort of game enthusiasts and programmers frustrated with difficulties encountered playing Blizzard's personal computer games on its 24-hour Battle.net online gaming service. Via reverse engineering of Blizzard's software, the bnetd developers created and disseminated a free open source software program that mimicked the Battle.net playing experience while improving on some of its deficiencies. Blizzard, one of the world's most successful PC game publishers and a part of international media conglomerate Vivendi Universal, charged the bnetd developers with breach of contract and various counts of intellectual property infringement. The defendants maintained that U.S. law, in an effort to spur innovation in the United States, protected their activities. Describes the events leading up to a court-ordered mediation session between the two parties in October 2003. Students are asked, as business managers, to determine the legal and non-legal alternatives available to Blizzard and the bnetd developers, and to decide which strategy to pursue from each party's perspective.

The Indian electricity sector was opened to the private sector under the IPP policy. The NTPC, India's largest and perhaps most efficient generator had to respond to the changing scenario. It set out to set up the Simhadri project in Andhra Pradesh, going beyond to original mandate. The IPP policy, its perversities, the background of the power sector, the problems there in and the response of NTPC are discussed. Case (B) discusses the issues related to Project Planning and Implementation.