Monthly Archive for April, 2010

Major Issues for Corporate Boards to consider when building a succession plan

Added on April 23, 2010 at 6:31 am

Corporate Boards are now being held increasingly responsible for their succession plans and there is a growing expectation that succession plans will be transparent.  Shareholders are asking for greater clarity on the process, communication plan, potential candidates and selection methods, not to mention effectiveness. If you are a Board member with the responsibility of building a sound succession plan, here are five major issues for you to consider.

Establish a succession planning committee

The first step is to identify a committee that is responsible for succession planning.  This typically includes one or two board members and an outside consultant to design and manage the process.  A common activity at this stage is a readiness diagnosis or a risk assessment to understand the potential issues that could negatively impact implementation and the business risks associated with director turnover.

Identify multiple candidates

Sophisticated boards will not be satisfied with the identification of just one candidate, and risk sensitive boards should not be either.  Ideally, there are three qualified candidates to chose from and these are identified through personal networks and executive search practices which involve proactively identifying potential candidates in the market place and approaching them to gauge their interest.

Clarify Hiring Criteria

An often missed step, the Board needs to clarify the hiring criteria and identify the skill sets that are needed for future successors.  This includes considering the cultural and relationship dynamics on the Board, and the mix of skills required to optimize board functioning.  An ideal Board typically includes someone with finance, business, and legal experience, and more and more, we are seeing seasoned human resources professionals on boards given the pending labour challenges and how critical human capital is to executing on the business strategy.

Plan Communication

One of the tricky parts of implementing a succession plan is establishing an internal communications message.  What makes the messaging challenging is that the Board needs to communicate a fair and credible decision making process, not a final decision.  In addition, protocol must be established for how to have confidential conversations with candidates.  These conversations have the potential to backfire, if the perception of “winners” and “losers” is created or if candidates are not selected and feel that that the process was subjective and more about “who you know” than “what you know.”

Executive Coaching – Vancouver

Added on April 9, 2010 at 6:40 am

If you want to learn about new innovations in the coaching profession and how coaching can contribute to organizational success, it is well worth it to attend the 2010 Prism Awards through the International Coach Federation on May 05, 2010.   The coaching event is at the Vancouver Convention Center at 1055 Canada Place and you can register through the http://www.icfvancouver.org
website. This year, I had the pleasure of nominating a coach that I admire and work with named Alex Wray.  Go Alex, Go!


Want to earn more money? Develop your influence skills.

Added on April 5, 2010 at 7:00 am

I have been doing research on how to develop influence skills, as part of my own executive development and as research for my coaching program on influence.  Over the Easter weekend, I came across a fascinating group of studies that links influence skills to executive performance and income.  The core findings from the research makes complete sense to me – the better you are at influencing others, the greater your earning potential.

What is influence?

Influence is essentially your ability to get people to do something that, without your intervention, they may not otherwise do.

What is your influence style?

Adapted from the work of Kipnis and Schmidt (1988), there are four key influence styles.

  • The Shotgun Influencer – This person is not strategic about how they influence others.  They use influence tactics indiscriminately and rather than influence well, they tend to rely on assertiveness to get things done.
  • Ingratiator – We all know this person.  They influence people by being friendly and nice, but they tend to be average at best when it comes to using other influence tactics.
  • Bystander – This is someone who doesn’t know much about influence, or at least doesn’t use the skills.  Instead of attempting to influence others, they stand by and watch.
  • Tactitician – This is someone who uses a variety of influence tactics to get things done, and they chose which influence tactic they will use depending on the situation.

The link with executive performance, income, and influence skills

Kipnis and Schmidt (1988) found that people who used a Shotgun style, got lower performance ratings and they had the most stress and tension at work.  This makes sense to me, if you rely on assertiveness to get others to do what you want, you won’t be popular and it probably won’t work much of the time.  You will get stuck when you try to influence others, and you will likely get demotivated and frustrated.

The style that was linked to the greatest earning potential and best performance ratings was the tactitian; however, they defined it as someone who tends to rely on rationality as the primary influence tactic.  In later research, it was discovered that the higher up the ranks you are in an organization, the greater the probability that you rely on rationality (writing a memo, using logic, or making a plan) as a primary influence tactic.

Later research shows that the most skilled executives have a range of influence tactics that they use.  This increases their effectiveness and performance ratings because it allows them to adjust their influence style depending on who they are trying to influence, and the context of the situation.   For example, if you want someone to help you, you may use ingratiation and be friendly.  If you are doing a performance evaluation, you may use rationality and assertiveness.  If you are talking to your boss about a new proposal, forming a coalition with others may be a good way to influence someone and reinforce your point.  All of these adjustments in your own behaviour, make you more effective at work, and the better you are getting things done, the more people will want to work with, and for you.

References:

  • Kiplin and Schmidt (1988).  Upward Influence Styles: Relationships with Performance Evaluations, Style and Stress.  Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 33, No. 4 (Dec., 1988), pp. 528-542
  • Porter, L., Angle, H., Allen, R., (Eds) (2003).  Organizational Influence Processes: Second Edition.  ME Sharpe Press: New York.