個案總覽

If your new COO will eventually succeed your CEO, says consultant Anne Lim O'Brien, be clear about which role you're seeking to fill.

Companies and leaders don't succeed or fail in a vacuum. When it comes to long-term success, the ability to understand and adapt to changing business conditions is at least as important as any particular personality trait or competency. A clear picture of how powerful the Zeitgeist can be emerges from the authors' comprehensive study of the way the business landscape in the United States evolved, decade by decade, throughout the 20th century. Six contextual factors in particular, they found, most affected the prospects for business: the level of government intervention in business, global events, demographics, shifts in social mores, developments in technology, and the strength or weakness of the labor movement. A lack of contextual sensitivity can trip up even the most brilliant executive. No less a luminary than Alfred P. Sloan was relieved of General Motor's day-to-day management in the 1930s because he was unwilling to meet with the new UAW. Conversely, an understanding of the Zeitgeist can play a crucial but unheralded role in business performance. To understand better this connection between business performance and context, the authors studied 1,000 great U.S. business leaders of the 20th century and identified three distinct archetypes: Entrepreneurs, often ahead of their time, overcame dire challenges to build something new. Managers excelled at reading and exploiting the existing Zeitgeist to grow their businesses. Leaders defied context to identify latent potential in businesses others considered mature, stagnant, or in decline. In every decade, all three archetypes were vital. It is the ongoing regeneration of this pattern in the business life cycle that ultimately sustains development and progress.

Traditionally, corporate boards have left leadership planning and development very much up to their CEOs and human resources departments--primarily because they don't perceive that a lack of leadership development in their companies poses the same kind of threat that accounting blunders or missed earnings do. That's a shortsighted view, the authors argue. Companies whose boards and senior executives fail to prioritize succession planning and leadership development end up experiencing a steady attrition in talent and becoming extremely vulnerable when they have to cope with inevitable upheavals--integrating an acquired company with a different operating style and culture, for instance, or reexamining basic operating assumptions when a competitor with a leaner cost structure emerges. Firms that haven't focused on their systems for building their bench strength will probably make wrong decisions in these situations. In this article, the authors explain what makes a successful leadership development program, based on their research over the past few years with companies in a range of industries. They describe how several forward-thinking companies (Tyson Foods, Starbucks, and Mellon Financial, in particular) are implementing smart, integrated, talent development initiatives. A leadership development program should not comprise stand-alone, ad hoc activities coordinated by the human resources department, the authors say. A company's leadership development processes should align with strategic priorities. From the board of directors on down, senior executives should be deeply involved in finding and growing talent, and line managers should be evaluated and promoted expressly for their contributions to the organizationwide effort. HR should be allowed to create development tools and facilitate their use, but the business units should take responsibility for development activities, and the board should ultimately oversee the whole system.

Passive-aggressive organizations are friendly places to work: People are congenial, conflict is rare, and consensus is easy to reach. But, at the end of the day, even the best proposals fail to gain traction, and a company can go nowhere so imperturbably that it's easy to pretend everything is fine. Such companies are not necessarily saddled with mulishly passive-aggressive employees. Rather, they are filled with mostly well-intentioned people who are the victims of flawed processes and policies. Commonly, a growing company's halfhearted or poorly thought-out attempts to decentralize give rise to multiple layers of managers, whose authority for making decisions becomes increasingly unclear. Some managers, as a result, hang back, while others won't own up to the calls they've made, inviting colleagues to second-guess or overturn the decisions. In such organizations, information does not circulate freely, and that makes it difficult for workers to understand the impact of their actions on company performance and for managers to appraise employees' value to the organization correctly. A failure to match incentives to performance accurately stifles initiative, and people do just enough to get by. Breaking free from this pattern is hard; a long history of seeing corporate initiatives ignored and then fade away tends to make people cynical. Often it's best to bring in an outsider to signal that this time things will be different. He or she will need to address every obstacle all at once: clarify decision rights; see to it that decisions stick; and reward people for sharing information and adding value, not for successfully negotiating corporate politics. If those steps are not taken, it's only a matter of time before the diseased elements of a passive-aggressive organization overwhelm the remaining healthy ones and drive the company into financial distress.

When you head up a big construction project for your organization, coming in on time and on budget isn't enough. If you want to avoid squandering what is probably your company's largest capital investment, it's important to create a building that reflects your company's mission and produces a truly energizing work environment, says David Thurm, CIO of the New York Times Co. and head of the team responsible for designing and building the Times' new corporate headquarters in Manhattan. The only way to get this kind of package--great design and innovative features that together further your business goals--is to take an active role. Assemble the right team, and then stay involved, asking hard questions about things that are generally taken as givens. Articulate a vision of your future work space, and drive the search for ways to realize this vision. In short, be a builder, not merely an owner. It's easy to understand why this approach is the exception rather than the rule. To most companies, design and construction seem foreign and forbidding, rife with pitfalls. Because of the murkiness of the field and a lack of experience and confidence, most companies play a relatively minor role in their construction projects. But it's a giant mistake to be a passive consumer when it comes to one of your most important assets. At best, you'll get well-intentioned guesses by others as to what you want; at worst, you'll end up with a building that's at odds with your identity. The author shares a series of lessons learned. Implicit in all of them: You have to push yourself as hard as you push your contractors.

In 2005, Martha Goldberg Aronson must decide whether to accept an overseas posting in a functional role with Medtronic Corp. The move would be a professional stretch, but would entail leaving a position with a plan half completed and moving her young family overseas. Profiles the youth, career, family life, aspirations, and motivations of the rising executive. Provides information about the practical, personal, and business challenges of an international assignment. Raises questions regarding work-life balance and the opportunities of the proposed stretch assignment in balance with the desire to see an existing process through to completion.

In the spring of 2005, an exhausted Philip McCrea, president and CEO of software development company VitesseLearning, reflects on the demands of his successful start-up and his desire to be closer to his growing family. Profiles the youth, career, family life, aspirations, and motivations of the founder and CEO. Provides information about the business' comparative advantages and strategic opportunities. Raises questions regarding work-life balance and the entrepreneurial satisfaction of running a successful service industry, IT-based start-up.

Describes the change process Whitbread employed in transforming its organization and culture from a single underperforming business operating in a relatively stable environment to a multibusiness, high-commitment, and high-performance corporation operating in more competitive markets. Describes how CEO David Thomas employed the Strategic Fitness Process (SFP), a strategic leadership process for organizational and cultural change, to create commitment to change within his leadership team and among 100 key executives in all parts of the company. Allowing a senior team to reinvent the corporation, SFP guides the senior team in developing a statement of strategic and organizational direction. SFP then guides the senior team through a systematic diagnosis as well as through change development and execution.

Supplements the (A) case.

Here's how you can decide on the right size and composition of your corporate staff.

In late 2001, the consultancy Bain must decide whether to launch information technology as a practice area within the firm. The senior executives who are Bain's clients have been asking more and more IT-related questions of the firm's partners, who find themselves without good answers. Launching an IT practice, however, will mean acquiring significant amounts of new expertise and incorporating many new partners.

An abstract is not available for this product.

An abstract is not available for this product.

When Chris Sullivan and three friends opened the first Outback Steakhouse in March 1988, in Tampa, Florida, they were hoping it would be successful enough to spawn a few more and maybe some other kinds of restaurants as well. Since then, their chain of Australia-themed restaurants has grown to some 900 locations and counting--plus another 300 or so "concept" restaurants that operate from under Outback's corporate umbrella. Growth like that doesn't happen accidentally, Sullivan says, but it certainly wasn't part of the original plan. In this first-person account, Outback's chairman describes the organization's formula for growth and development, which is consciously rooted in the founders' belief in putting people first. They've created an organizational model in which field managers make most of the decisions, garner the rewards, and live with the consequences. Specifically, the founders believe that the most effective way to make customers happy is first to take care of the people who cook for them, serve them, and supervise operations at the restaurants. Outback servers have fewer tables to worry about than those at other restaurant chains; the cooks have bigger, cooler, better-equipped kitchens; and the supervisors work their way up the ranks toward an equity stake in the restaurant or region they run. There are no administrative layers between field managers and the executives at headquarters. Giving employees good working conditions and the chance to become owners has proved to be good business: Turnover among hourly employees is low, and Outback and its subsidiaries opened 120 restaurants last year, increasing sales by 20.1%. The company must grow to keep offering career opportunities to its workers; in turn, those opportunities ensure that Outbackers remain committed to making customers happy and the company successful.

Advising CEOs sounds like a dream job, but doing so can be perplexing and perilous. At times, the questions you must ask yourself--about your own motivations and loyalty--can be thornier than the organizational problems that clients face. David Nadler knows, because he has been asking himself such questions for a quarter century while advising the chiefs of more than two dozen corporations. If you're an adviser to CEOs, recognizing the pitfalls of your role may help you sidestep them. And understanding a problem's nuances and implications may help you uncover a solution. The challenges facing consultants include: The loyalty dilemma: Is my ultimate responsibility to the CEO, who pays for my services, or to the institution, which pays for his? Today's shorter CEO tenures and greater board oversight have diminished the top leader's power and autonomy; it's now routine for a CEO adviser to have conversations with directors about the CEO's performance. To defuse loyalty issues, the adviser should raise them with the executive at the outset of the relationship. The overidentification dilemma: How do I immerse myself in the CEO's worldview without making it my own? CEOs can be enormously persuasive, but if you don't push back, you're not doing your job. The trick is to ask probing questions without shaking the CEO's confidence that you fully comprehend the forces that shape her views. The friendship dilemma: If the CEO and I like each other, can we--should we--become friends? A successful, long-term advisory relationship with a CEO requires a strong personal connection; in some cases, that becomes a friendship. But the best relationships are characterized by the participants' clear-eyed recognition of each other's frailties--tempered, of course, by genuine affection and easy rapport.

In many walks of life--and business is no exception--there are high achievers who believe that they are complete fakes. To the outside observer, these individuals appear to be remarkably accomplished; often, they are extremely successful leaders with staggering lists of achievements. These neurotic impostors--as psychologists call them--are not guilty of false humility. The sense of being a fraud is the flip side of giftedness and causes a great many talented, hardworking, and capable leaders to believe that they don't deserve their success. "Bluffing" their way through life (as they see it), they are haunted by the constant fear of exposure. With every success, they think, "I was lucky this time, fooling everyone, but will my luck hold? When will people discover that I'm not up to the job?" In his career as a management professor, consultant, leadership coach, and psychoanalyst, Manfred F. R. Kets de Vries has found neurotic impostors at all levels of organizations. In this article, he explores the subject of neurotic imposture and outlines its classic symptoms: fear of failure, fear of success, perfectionism, procrastination, and workaholism. He then describes how perfectionist overachievers can damage their careers, their colleagues' morale, and the bottom line by allowing anxiety to trigger self-handicapping behavior and cripple the very organizations they're trying so hard to please. Finally, Kets de Vries offers advice on how to limit the incidence of neurotic imposture and mitigate its damage through discreet vigilance, appropriate intervention, and constructive support.

This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article. In a recent survey, 72% of board directors indicated that their performance ought to be evaluated. Yet only 21% of the boards of public companies actually conduct such assessments. Part of the problem is that organizations often don't know how best to implement a board self-evaluation procedure, so many simply avoid the practice. Others have implemented the process only to become frustrated because it took so much time and produced so few results. To investigate the different self-evaluation practices used, the authors studied eight boards that have engaged in the process for at least two annual cycles. They found two high-level variables in the protocol for self-evaluations: the structure of the data collection methodology (low vs. high) and the confidentiality of data (unimportant vs. important). These dimensions define quadrants of four different approaches to self-evaluation: informal, legalistic, trusting, and systematic. Each approach has important implications for a company's board rating, directors, and officers insurance and various other issues.

As the Montgomery Bus Boycott starts, the young Martin Luther King Jr. faces challenges to his leadership goals, strategic vision, and personal and family safety. Makes extensive use of King's own words and writings and builds a portrait of a young, talented, and ambitious leader about to embark on a risky and new endeavor. Traces the development of King's professional goals, his theological and political education, his young family, and his nascent professional career. Raises questions about the role of fear and uncertainty, support networks, deeply held beliefs, and professional goals in leadership decision making.

Supplements the (A) case.

Successful college basketball coach Bob Knight was fired from his long-time role as basketball coach at Indiana University and hired in the same role at Texas Tech. Considers these events in the context of his long career and provides a context for discussing various styles of power, influence, and persuasion in his leadership role as coach and educator.