Leading for Competitive Advantage
Historically, the lower ranks of leaders were charged with purely tactical tasks: get the work done. However, this is changing to support the broader goals of an organization. Leading for competitive advantage means that the leader takes responsibility not just for the immediate task at hand, but for ensuring the sustained and ongoing success of the organization as a whole.
The author defines four roles for the "strategic" first-level leader:
- Champion - To be an advocate of new ideas and approaches
- Synthesizer - To bring together key information and frame it in a way that enables higher-level leaders to make sound decisions
- Facilitator - Working with members of a team to accomplish tasks and develop new ideas for solutions
- Implementer - Ensuring that the tasks managed remain in line with the organization's goals and strategic plans.
The author notes that teams can be very good at what they do: they can set aggressive goals and be highly effective in achieving them. However, if the projects accomplished by the team are not in line with the organization's objectives, the organization as a whole may falter in spite of the success of the teams.
The first-level leader cannot leave it to management to align activities with goals. Though its' their job to do so, they are often so removed from the action that they do not often see the connection (or lack thereof). It is therefore the responsibility of the first-level leader to provide information up the line: asses the strategic impact of a plan, report on the effectiveness of the outcome.
To define good projects, or to assess the soundness of one that has been defined, there is a three-step process:
- Examinee the products and services the company provides, assessing which are important and what is important about them
- Identify the core processes involved in producing or providing those products or services
- Identify opportunities for improvement
- Determine the relative importance and impact of improvements to determine which are most critical
In other instances, a project may be related not to the products or services provided, but to the productivity, efficiency, and speed of execution in the business units that provide it.
EN: The author switches channels here to the topic of customer satisfaction. No clear transition is made, so I'm not sure what she's barking about, but I'll document it nonetheless.
Customers generally don't complain about minor problems, but they remember them, and may not express dissatisfaction (or will even claim to be satisfied) when they are disappointed or upset. In many cases, its' possible to meet their basic needs, but in a sloppy manner (things are not quite as expected, but serviceable, and there are a lot of small problems that have to be corrected).
To involved the customer in improving products and services, let the customer (rather than the team or corporate management) define what is important to them, align goals accordingly, and use customer feedback to rate success.
Customer satisfaction is not once-and-done, but must be re-evaluated as customer requirements/expectations change, or as competitors make changes that alter expectations.