Let's Improve Employee Onboarding

The March 24th issue of Time.com posted an article by Martha C. White titled, "Too Many New Hires Quit for This Really Dumb Reason."  Here's a quick summary:

• One in six employees quits a new job within six months.
• First impressions are lasting impressions when it comes to fitting in on the job.
• On-boarding is the problem.
• "Your new boss or HR department does a horrible job orienting you and getting you up to speed." (direct quote)
• There's only a 90-day window for settling in. Don't mess that up.
• Inform new employees without overwhelming them.
• Perks are nice, but what new employees really want is better training.

The article when on to suggest some steps new employees can personally take to alleviate this situation.

1  Start before you get there.

2. Don't be afraid to ask.

3. Seek out a mentor.

4. Be friendly.

5. Approach people the right way.

6. Say thanks.

These are all good suggestions, but they treat the symptom and not the problem.  The problem is that organizations take a "sink or swim" attitude toward new employees.  On-boarding programs vary considerably.  Few address this issue.  A new employee's integration into the organization should not be a self-directed process. There is a better way.

When I was an officer in the U.S. Army, we had a great system for orienting new officers.  Each incoming officer was assigned a "sponsor."  It was that person's job to not only provide you a detailed orientation into your new organization, but to even assist you in getting your family settled.  It was a great program. For the most part, sponsors took their job seriously.  They knew that they, too, needed a sponsor when they were newly assigned.  In short, the process worked for the most part, and new leaders were up to speed in a short amount of time.

Here's a suggestion for how organizations can turbo-charge their on-boarding programs.  Assign a sponsor to each new employee for that employee's first 90 days.  Have a detailed checklist of what is to be covered by the sponsor.  This is an "additional duty," so to provide a proper incentive, give that individual a "sponsor bonus" for that 90-day period. Make it substantial.  Evaluate the effectiveness of each new employee's on-boarding.  Adjust the program accordingly.  If your organization does performance appraisals, evaluate each sponsor's effectiveness during their annual review. Identify and reward your best sponsors in other ways besides the bonus (e.g., recognition, extra bump come raise time, etc.).  While there are direct costs associated with this program, the costs of employee turnover are MUCH higher.

For more information about integrating new leaders, in particular, my book, BEFORE ONBOARDING: How to Integrate New Leaders for Quick and Sustained Results, is a great place to start. You can get it on Amazon and Kindle.  Link to Before Onboarding on Amazon

Interview in CEOWORLD Magazine

Recently, I was interviewed by "CEOWORLD Magazine" on the topic of "Integrating New Executives into Your Organization."  In this interview I lay out the rationale for a structured integration process as well as some of the steps in the process described in my book, Before Onboarding:  How to Integrate New Leaders for Quick and Sustained Results (Amazon...five stars).  A link to the interview is attached.CEOWORLD Magazine

Anatomy of a Lost Opportunity

It is a sad thing to see.  A promising leader who anticipates getting an offer for a job for which he is well qualified, doesn't get hired.  There are many reasons why this happens.  Here is one example:

Situation:  The candidate has completed three interviews.  It is for a key member of a start-up team in a greenfield operation.  None of the team members will be building and managing a team of people for at least a year.  There is much work to be done and almost all of it is very hands on.  The future of that organization is bright.  The hiring manager makes it perfectly clear in the interview process that this is a hands on role and that the new leader will be flying solo until the plant is up and running.

The hiring manager, who trusts his newly hired HR person, asks him to call the candidate and get his compensation requirements.  The recruiter is completely unaware that this conversation is taking place. In the candidate presentation process the individual's compensation history and expectations were clearly spelled out to the hiring manager by the recruiter.  The candidate is surprised by the call and quickly gives his current total compensation breakdown, including 401K match, car allowance, etc. He tells the HR person that he has a few questions. 1).  What will my title be? and 2) How many people will I be managing?

The HR person reports the total compensation number to the hiring manager who assumes that this number is his base salary requirements.  The base salary for the job is significantly less than this total amount.  The HR person neglected to explain the breakdown.  He also shares the candidate's questions with the hiring manager.  The hiring manager says he is no longer interested in the candidate.  The HR person calls the candidate and says, with no explanations, that they will be passing on him as a candidate.  The candidate reports all of this to the recruiter who is surprised to say the least and attempts to do damage control. Result: A total communication breakdown occurs and an offer is withheld.

What went wrong?

1.  The hiring manager neglected to keep the recruiter involved in the closing process.
2.  The HR person was not experienced in the offer process for executives.
3.  The candidate did not tell the HR person that he would get back to him soon with the info.
4.  The candidate did not immediately call the recruiter and report the situation.
5.  The candidate asked two questions to which he already knew the answers.
6.  The hiring manager is turned off based on the candidate's questions.
7.  The hiring manager was inflexible in his decision.
8.  The recruiter was unable to resolve the situation.

Lessons that should have been learned:

1.  Keep the recruiter involved to the end of the process.
2.  Use the recruiter as the intermediary in the closing process (company and candidate)..
3.  If you're a candidate, delay with information and questions until you can speak with the recruiter.

Speaking at the World Business of Leadership Summit (WBOLS)

I am pleased to be one of the 25 featured presenters at this year's World Business of Leadership Summit (WBOLS).  My topic is "Executive Integration and Assimilation Strategies."  The Summit lasts from 17 to 28  June.  Other presenters include Marshall Goldsmith, renowned executive coach.

WBOLS is a virtual conference.  From one to three presenters will be doing web-based presentations each day throughout the Summit.  My presentation is on Wednesday, June 19th at 11:30 Eastern time.  You can go on-line at http://summit.wbols.com to see the list of presenters, their schedules and to register.

Transitioning New Leaders in the 21st Century

I recently came across an excellent article on the Deloitte Consulting website entitled, "Human Capital Trends for 2013."  Its authors were Deloitte consultants, Bill Pelster and Geoffrey Helt.  Within that article is a section called, "Debunking the Superman Myth" in which the authors assert that organizations still committed to "...trying to identify and clone the mythical perfect leader..." need to face the facts that the world is simply moving too fast for organizations to think they can continue to train leaders to fit a standardized corporate leadership profile.  They suggest that what is driving this need is: Jagged Markets, Perpetual Uncertainty and Instant Obsolescence.  Moreover, yesterday's leadership theories struggle to keep pace with the velocity of today's disruptive marketplace. They conclude that "...many companies continue to pursue a singular vision of the ideal leadership style..." but that "...the humbling truth is that tomorrow's leaders should be able to thrive across multiple complex environments..."

Years ago I saw a chart that talked about the styles of leadership needed for each of the growth stages of an organization: Form, Storm, Norm and Perform.  It made perfect sense to me (and still does). Anyone with diverse leadership experience in the marketplace knows that a start-up company's leader exhibits far different traits than does a leader running an organization in the "norm and perform" stages.

As a veteran executive recruiter, I have seen this situation played out many times.  I have often been asked to recruit a special leader that is right for the circumstances of an organization at a particular time.  For example, if an organization has been operating on cruise control for several years and the market just unhinged them, what my clients have asked me to recruit is a leader with relevant, successful experience turning around or even re-inventing organizations. There is a very high likelihood that such a leader is not the right fit for an organization that is on cruise control. This is one reason why so many organizations decline.  Long after the entrepreneur who created the organization has moved on (often due to an inability or unwillingness to lead an organization that has reached the "Norm" stage), the leadership team evolved into a group of maintainers who are good at making steady, incremental improvements through sound management practices rather than making radical changes that require entirely new ways of thinking.  I have both worked for, and recruited for organizations whose leaders fitting that maintenance description are simply incapable of taking their companies through a reinvention process. .

What I have learned is that it is folly to think that leadership development programs can prepare leaders to function in the volatile market environments of today.  One company the authors cite has managed to categorize its leaders based on their innate talents within specific organizational situations.  Their talent managers and succession planners then plot careers for them where their talents can best be utilized (and where they will be happiest) rather than trying to make them all things to all people.

There will continue to be a need for organizations to recruit new leaders from the outside.  So long as they are committed to supporting new leaders brought in to deal with drastic change, this is often a better approach than trying to grow such talent from within (This assumes of course, that leaders without the necessary attributes do not currently reside within the organization's management ranks.).

New Leader Attrition

One hard fact that is being discussed a lot these days is the staggering attrition rates of new leaders hired from the outside.  The number most tossed about is 40%.  And most of these leaders who ultimately fail do so within two years.  One prominent consultant told me that 18 months is a good target.  If a new leader has managed to succeed for that length of time, there is a high likelihood that success will last longer.  The key lesson that many studies are communicating is that what happens within the first 90 days of a new leader's tenure will often determine if they are still around in two years.  Yet, the vast majority of organizations do nothing to structure an integration period for their new leaders.  This can be an expensive mistake.

This is a situation that has got to change.  If new leaders are brought in to do more than maintain an organization, there is an even higher likelihood that failure will occur.  Change agents are in a risky position. So it is even more important that they be properly integrated into their new roles.

These studies determined that while internally promoted new leaders succeed at a higher rate than outside hires, the success differential is marginal.  The lesson is that internally promoted or transferred leaders also need to be formally integrated into their new roles, not just outside hires.

How does an organization do this?  They must commit to creating and implementing a structured new leader integration process that ALL new leaders (regardless of the level or the source of the candidate) go through. It is best that this process begin in advance of the start date (i.e.. "pre-boarding" versus "on-boarding") and continue through the first 90 days a new leader is on board--sometimes longer.

In addition to being the author of a "five star" rated book on this subject (Amazon), Before Onboarding:  How to Integrate New Leaders for Quick and Sustained Results, I have spent many months researching what a variety of organizations are doing to solve this problem.  In addition to the proven model that I lay out in my book, I have turned these numerous case studies into an on-site, two-day, hands-on workshop that I provide to HR management teams on a global basis.  After this workshop, they will have seen and analyzed a dozen case studies and will be able to take from them the best parts that are applicable to their own organization's unique leader integration requirements. For more information on this workshop, contact me at mburroughs@segueconsultingllc.com or call 314-341-1139.

Executive Integration Network

I am pleased to announce that I have formed a new LinkedIn group called the Executive Integration Network.  The target members for this group are HR, talent management, talent acquisition and organization development executives and consultants who are seeking a forum in which to exchange ideas and best practices for integrating newly recruited or promoted leaders into organizations.

This new group is already up on LinkedIn.  I will be better organizing this group in the days ahead.  Should you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me at mike@michaelkburroughs.com.  Look for future posts on this topic.

A Worthy On-Line Job Search Resource

We have surely come a long way in the realm of advice to job seekers.  I wish I had access to the myriad of tools currently available when I was in a job transition back in 1988.  I was fortunate to be provided a comprehensive outplacement program with a major firm.  That was the good news.  The bad news was that I had nine weeks of severance pay...well, not actually...I had five weeks of severance, two weeks notice and two weeks of vacation to cash in.  That abundance of cash came at a good time.  I only had two in college, a new mortgage and two car payments.

I recall being interviewed by the firm's psychologist, an individual who has remained a good friend for over two decades.  He had a series of assessments for me to do, some of which I had taken in a previous career.  I thanked him for his concern and efforts and then said I didn't have time for all of that because I had nine weeks to find a job.  He laughed.  I didn't.  But I can say this for the situation I was in:  I did not lack focus.

The facilities were decent and there was a library (yes...a library) of reference material.  There were several copies of leading newspapers available to us, as well.  We each had a cubicle with a phone. That was it.  Laptops with wireless communications networks were unheard of then.  We had yellow legal pads on which to write our resumes and cover letters.  We handed these drafts to one of two perpetually stressed out administrative folks whose job it was to do the impossible, fast.  There were many executives in need of letters and resumes.  We were not accustomed to having to wait for things.

There is a happy ending.  I had a job within nine weeks.  Someday I will write a book about it (not).

So now we are in 2011 and once again, there is an abundance of executives in transition.  I feel for these people, but there is one significant difference between their situation and mine back in 1988--technology, and lots of it.  The Internet and social networking in general are godsends to executives who know how to find the right resources and use them (and trust them).  I am always on the lookout for good resources to share.

My latest find is a website at http://jobsearch.about.com .  It ranks up there with the very best career transition advice sites.  They cover a wide array of job search tips and the quality of their advice is pretty good.  I judge everything of this nature on how much I would have benefited from it in 1988.  This would have been a jewel of a resource to me back then and it is today. If you're in a career transition, check it out.

Wasted Interview Questions: The Hypothetical 90-Day Action Plan

There is an abundance of advice for executive job seekers these days that is driven in part by the large numbers of people in the hunt for new positions.  The value of this advice is in the eye of the beholder.  As one of those "beholders," and a veteran executive recruiter, I have some insights and opinions as to what works and does not work for me in interview situations.  One technique being touted lately involves urging candidates to come to the interview with a "90-day plan" that would be implemented if they were to be hired. Proponents of this approach acknowledge that a candidate has to stretch a bit due to a lack of information. Yet, somehow, this is deemed appropriate. I place this question in the same vein as the ubiquitous "Tell me about yourself."

There is another school of thought in the art of interviewing that goes by such names as behavior-based interviewing, targeted selection, etc.  This school of thought is based on the premise that one's past behavior and actions are the best indicators of future behaviors and actions.  One cardinal rule in this approach is that the interviewer is never to ask a candidate what he or she would do in a given situation.  Those types of answers can be rehearsed in such a way as to give the "school solution" to the question.

There are several ways to ask a behavior based question.  The scenario goes something like this:  "Tell me about a time when you were faced with ___circumstances requiring you to act.  What was the situation?  What did you do to solve the problem?  What was the outcome?  (And my favorite and most enlightening addition...) What did you learn from the experience?   It is easy to see that the trendy prospective, ill-informed 90-day action plan question can be turned instead to a request to hear about a past example of what a candidate did in the first 90 days with a previous employer.(and follow the above flow of  follow-on questions). Interviewers will learn much more about the viability of the candidates being interviewed if they take this historical approach.

I learned early in my career as an executive recruiter that a powerful tool to give to my client is a questionnaire that the candidate completes on-line that addresses several required competencies and experiences.  Most questions are asked from this historical perspective.  My clients' testimonials attest to the value of this questionnaire. Whether asked these questions in person, via a questionnaire, or both, there is much value to be gained from this historical, experiential approach.

If you are unfortunate to be asked  this "What would you do in the first 90 days?" question in a future interview, turn the question around and instead share what you have done in the past to ensure that you made the most out of your first three months in a previous job.  Use the flow outlined above and also share what you learned from the experience.

That said, there are ways you can give thought to your first 90 days that are prospective versus retrospective.  In my new book, Before Onboarding:  How to Integrate New Leaders for Quick and Sustained Results, I provide a framework for action in the first 90 days.  There are other books that are more self-directed.  Two that come to mind are The First 90 Days, by Michael Watkins, and The New Leader's 100-Day Action Plan, by Bradt, Check and Pedraza.  None of these three books suggests the appropriateness of a hypothetical action plan.  Be prepared to tell what you have done versus what you would do.  Smart employers will appreciate self-reflective responses and be able to project your past into a future that could involve them.  Executive recruiters will too.

Global Reach for Leading Edge Memo's

Since launching Leading Edge Memo's in January, 2011, readers from all over the world have accessed this blog.  I encourage my readers to send me comments or specific questions you would like for me to address on this blog.  I will take your career-oriented questions and convert them to blog entries (anonymous) so that others can benefit from both your questions and my responses.

As of January 20, 2012, Leading Edge Memos' readers have come from these countries:

Argentina
Australia
Austria
Bangladesh
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Cambodia
Canada
Chile
China
Costa Rica
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Egypt
Estonia
Ethiopia
France
Gambia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Hungary
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Japan
Kenya
Latvia
Lesotho
Malaysia
Maldives
Monaco
Moldova
Netherlands
New Zealand
Panama
Philippines
Romania
Russia
Saudi Arabia
Singapore
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States
Venezuela
Vietnam

Thank you for your growing support and I look forward to hearing from you in the future.

Recent Stats on the Best Job Search Strategy

As I give presentations to groups of executives in the midst if career transitions, many believe that their best path to a new job is through gaining the good graces of a recruiter.  Even those who are actively participating in outplacement programs often believe that their first strategy should be via executive search firms. I routinely counsel them away from this often preferred path through discussions of how recruiters work and what the statistics show.

A recent study by Right Management, perhaps the largest outplacement firm in business, supports the advice I give.  During 2010 they kept track of the almost 60,000 of their clients who found new jobs.  Once again the studies clearly show that getting that next job will more often occur through networking.  The exact statistics were as follows:

Networking:                  41%
Internet Job Boards:      25%
Search Firms:                11%
Direct Approach:            8%
Online Network:             4%
Advertisements:              2%
Other:                           10%

According to Carly McVey, Right Management's VP of Career Management, "...technology plays a role. But online social networking may not always be separate from traditional networking since one often leads to the other  A job seeker uses the Internet to track down former associates or acquaintances and then reaches out to them in person." She went on to say that "...successful candidates use a mix of approaches..."  The direct approach (i.e., cold calling) still plays a role in a successful job search strategy, and on-line job boards are also gaining ground.

While executive recruiters should be a part of your job search strategy, the numbers continue to support that networking, in its various forms, and reaching out directly to potential employers carries the day (49% combined).  As the folks at Right Management say, "People still land most jobs person to person."

Before Onboarding: How to Integrate New Leaders for Quick and Sustained Results

My new book, Before Onboarding: How to Integrate New Leaders to Quick and Sustained Results, was recently published.  It is available on Amazon (with a growing body of reviews) and can now be ordered directly from the publisher via this link:  https://www.createspace.com/3578473.  Contact me at mburroughs@dhrinternational.com if you are interested in an organizational discount code for bulk purchases from the publisher (e.g., companies, graduate schools, governmental agencies, healthcare organizations, etc.).

The book provides a detailed template for how organizations can ensure new leaders at all levels arrive fully prepared to achieve early wins; avoid costly, preventable mistakes; and sustain their early successes over the long term.  The process is as applicable to outside hires as it is to internal promotions.

Attrition rates for new senior leaders are high.  Studies range from 30 to 50%.  Many are gone within two years.  What occurs in the first 90 days often determines the ultimate success or failure of new leaders. The emphasis in organizations is on selection and hiring new leaders, but little is done to ensure their new investment is successful either in the short or long term.  That is most often left to hope and chance.  There are solutions to this problem.  This book is one of them and is a proven practice. "Before Onboarding" helps organizations ensure the right things are accomplished in the right order during those first three months, and also compresses the time it takes for new leaders to return value to their organizations. New leaders arrive with a "Blueprint for Success" in hand that was developed through a series of interviews with key stakeholders by a process consultant.  It begins when an offer is accepted and culminates 90 days after the start date with a series of follow-up conversations involving the hiring manager, the new leader and the consultant.

It's a short book--120 pages, and is a succinct, informative read.  See the reviews at Amazon.com.

When to Part Company with a Poor Performer

In the current economy, many are thinking twice about letting marginal or poor performers go.  The main comments we hear pertain to the difficulty in finding a job these days.  That is a noble concept, but there are times when it is best for the organization if leaders make the difficult decision.  The question becomes:  How long do we wait?  There are certain employees who have great talent and their performance does not match their capabilities.  There are others who have great talent and are solid performers but who "break glass" around the organization, keeping everyone on edge.

One way to evaluate how to deal with these situations comes from Kansas City Chiefs coach, Herm Edwards.  It is the mental process he puts himself through when evaluating his players.  He has a simple formula:  T + P > D. T is talent, P is production, and D is the drama associated with an employee's presence.  It Talent + Production are greater than the Drama associated with an individual's presence in the organization, the coach advises working to improve the individual's performance.  If the math ceases to work, and the calculation changes, it is time to part company with that individual.

I had a great boss years ago who was a tough lady when necessary.  We were discussing whether to keep or fire a particular professional on our staff.  He was a recurring problem to the organization and ate up a lot of her time.  I had suggested we wait for a while longer (for no valid reason, really) and her remark has stayed with me to this day.  She said, "Mike. Better and end with terror than a terror without end."

So if T + P is > D, stay the course. Invest the time and effort to help that individual improve. If not?  Don't.

How Should Hiring Organizations View Third Party Management Assessments?

Recently, I have been engaged in a LinkedIn group discussion on the topic of management assessment tools such as the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and DISC in the realm of executive coaching.   I have used MBTI to some extent and DISC with literally hundreds of people who have participated in my leadership development programs and coaching engagements over the past two decades.  This is a global discussion group, and it is the general consensus from around the world that these tools are indeed very useful.  One person in the discussion sent an Ezine article to all of us stressing the importance of using the tools but not labeling people who take these profiling instruments.  This hit home with me.

I was very instrumental in implementing DISC throughout a three division company years ago and we were most concerned that certain managers would use the behavioral profiles of DISC to determine who should be in which jobs.   I recall one group of middle and senior managers were mostly "High D's (Dominant)" with one "High I (Influencer) and one "High S (Steady)."   It was not long after this group became aware of their collective profiles that the High S asked to step down from management and to go back into a more functional role.  He determined from his profile why he felt he did not fit in with the other managers.  He labeled himself right out of a job.  I should point out that he was a successful manager.  What was more troublesome to me were the High D's who took that designation as a badge of honor, as though their profile validated their positions of control.  It took a lot of work to shift this way of thinking, but we eventually made some significant headway.

This discussion reminded me of another assessment process that I occasionally encounter as an executive recruiter, and that is the insistence by some of my clients that any candidate they want to hire must first go through a day long battery of tests and psychological interviews prior to being extended an offer.  I have seen  a few solid candidates make it to the finish line but not be able to cross it due to the results of their assessment.  What bothers me about this is that the client is rejecting a candidate who had made it to the top of a very tall pyramid.  It is not unusual for the top candidate to have risen above 100+ others in the search process to reach the offer stage.  Many clients interview five or more top candidates to get to the one they want to hire. These candidates would have been thoroughly vetted by me and my team and would have interviewed more than once with a group of their potential employers.  Also, by that point, references would have been conducted.

If the assessment organization gives the candidate a "thumbs down," it is a similar situation to me of organizations labeling managers due to their behavioral profile.  My feeling in these situations is: Why don't you just test these people first and then let the test tell you whom to hire?  Of course I don't really mean that, but my point is that it bothers me that so much effort goes into the hiring process and yet a single organizational psychologist in these situations can sometimes torpedo an executive hire with ease.  Granted, there are times when something significant will surface from these assessments.  I'm not suggesting that these assessments are a waste of time and money; far from it. They clearly have value as another set of eyes so to speak. The really good assessors make it clear to their clients that their findings are merely a data point to consider, yet many of my clients take their input as gospel and will reject a candidate outright sometimes based on a marginal assessment result.

So what am I suggesting?  When assessment results send up a red flag or two, savvy organizations should take that as a cue to probe deeper rather than a cue to drop the candidate like a hot potato.  On several occasions when this has happened, I have suggested to my clients that we revisit the references we had contacted earlier in the process and target the issue(s) that arose during the assessment. For example, it may be that the position requires a high degree of conflict management competency and the assessment discloses that the individual shirks from confrontations.  A simple matter would be to go back to the references (and even get a few more) and ask them direct questions about, in this case, demonstrated conflict management skills.  It may very well be that the assessment uncovered a real problem, but it is worth the effort to have former bosses, colleagues and direct reports address the potential problem and give actual examples to support their comments--one way or the other.  The client can then take ALL of this information into consideration prior to extending or declining to extend an offer.  Moreover, an organization committed to executive development could take that information and begin immediately to fold it into a developmental strategy for the new executive once hired. Why wait a year or more for a talent mapping exercise to determine what developmental needs the individual has?  We ALL have developmental needs.  I have found that when a newly hired executive knows there is a clearly identified developmental need regarding a particular behavioral tendency (or aptitude deficit), he or she will work very hard to resolve this deficiency.  That is a proper use of leadership developers and executive coaches to me.  It is also a common executive coaching practice to help really talented people with great track records get better.

In short, rejecting excellent candidates outright who showed up weak in an area or two of a third party assessment, should not happen until other more direct verification steps have been taken.

www.MichaelKBurroughs.com

Announcement to My Readers

I am pleased to announce that I have re-joined the "top five" retained executive recruiting firm, DHR International, and will be based in the firm's St. Louis, Missouri office.  Previously, I had spent 10 years with the firm and served as managing director in St. Louis. My new position at DHR is Global Practice Leader for Executive Integration and Development.  We are now offering as a value added service my proven New Leader Integration ("Pre-boarding") process at the conclusion of a senior executive search.  We will also provide executive coaching to senior executives.  I will be the primary leader integrator and coach for the firm and will be recruiting internally and externally for search consultants with a talent for, and interest in, providing this innovative leader integration process, as well as executive coaching to DHR's search clients.  We will be providing these services on a global basis.  As before, I will continue to serve as an executive recruiter for senior executives and focus my search work in these areas:

• Healthcare
• Nonprofit
• Aerospace & Defense
• Manufacturing and Other Industrial
• Life Sciences
• Universities

My contact information at DHR is mburroughs@dhrinternational.com and 314-727-2000 ext. 3002.

You can follow my developments at DHR via my personal website, http://www.michaelkburroughs.com.  DHR's website is at http://www.dhrinternational.com. 

The Four Functions of Leadership

In the early 1980s the Army was investing much time and attention to the development and teaching of a new leadership doctrine.  It was a blend of the best that the private sector had to offer along with tried and true military leadership principles.  I was fortunate then to be a leadership instructor at a school for mid-career officers and had previously been a company commander on two occasions.

The curriculum separated "management" from "leadership" while emphasizing that both were critical for military officers to understand and practice.  There were two private sector leadership guru's at the time who were freely quoted and taught.  They were, Blake and Mouton (The Managerial Grid) and Hersey and Blanchard (Situational Leadership).  Warren Bennis was also mentioned, especially his tome that "managers focus on doing things right; leaders focus on doing the right things."  That principle hit home with Army officers, as it was clear that to succeed as an officer one had to balance both, equally.  In other words, management and leadership were of equal importance.  That said, it was also the opinion of most students in our program that leadership was the skill that was most important to commanding troops.

We blended some purely military leadership principles with the best the private sector had to offer.  We taught that a military leader must exhibit four traits:  Courage, Competence, Candor and Commitment.  Courage was clearly aimed at behavior under fire, but it also pertained to moral courage, i.e., being willing to say what needed to be said, regardless of personal consequences.  Then there were the four functions of leadership.  They were that a leader is a Teacher, Counselor, Manager and Coach.  These functions were real eye openers for our students.  Until introduced to this concept, most military leaders focused on management. We taught that an officer manages resources and leads people; that leadership is an influencing process and management is a control process.  They understood the "control" principle, and appreciated the "influence" principle, but it was clear from their experience that the teaching points needed to focus on those other leadership principles.  The addition of teaching, counseling and coaching to the leadership equation drove home the teaching point that leadership is an influencing process.  Teachers, counselors and coaches are all about influencing.   The best of our students "got it."  They knew that the secret to their success to that point in their careers had been their leadership strengths.  Most had already served as unit commanders at the platoon and company level prior to attending our six-month course and understood that commanders do not inspire their soldiers through management; they inspire them through leadership.

When I left the military to join the private sector as a director of staff and organization development for a division of a Fortune 100 company, I brought these principles with me.  It came as a complete surprise to me that these values were not reinforced in the corporate world.  Management was (and remains) by far the greater emphasized function of leadership.  Yet when we examine what motivates and demotivates people, it often zeros in on workers' relationships with their bosses.  The majority of those being managed and led today look for authenticity and transparency in their bosses.  In short, most people want to be led; few people relish being managed. This has a bearing on employee retention and productivity (among other things).

I am encouraged that the better MBA programs are putting a renewed emphasis on leadership.  Its about time.

http:www.michaelkburroughs.com

Writing a Book on Leader Transitions

I have a friend and colleague who once said to me: "Mike. There is a book in every man.  What's yours?"  It was a very simple statement and question and I was never the same afterwards.  The fact is, that I did indeed have a book in me.  It drove me to act.  If you have read some of my earlier postings or read some of my articles at EzineArticles.com, or seen my personal website lately (http://www.michaelkburroughs.com/), you are aware that I have developed a niche in the past two decades of transitioning new leaders into their positions.   My book addresses in detail how to do a leader transition process.

The process is called, New Leader Integration.  I call it "pre-boarding" in order to distinguish it from a common practice in organizations called, "on-boarding."  On-boarding ensures minimal downtime when a new employ starts work.  All administrative tasks are done quickly and efficiently and every effort is made to orient the new employee to the organization as well.  Pre-boarding is all about results.  Why is that important?

The statistics surrounding the transition of new leaders are dire.  There are several recent studies that suggest anywhere from 30 to 50% of outside hired new leaders will fail within two years.  The statistics are a bit better for inside promotions, but not by much.  Another finding is that the first 90 days a new leader is on the job will more often than not determine ultimate success or failure. I have seen this happen, repeatedly.  So the logical conclusion is that everything must be done as quickly as possible to ensure that new leaders arrive with a blueprint in hand for what needs to be accomplished and avoided.  That is what my process does.  It begins when an offer is accepted (for outside hires) or when the decision has been made to promote an individual from within the organization, and reaches critical mass the morning of the first day when I facilitate a kick-off meeting with the new leader and direct reports.  It tapers off over the first 90 days with a series of meetings I facilitate with the new leader and his/her boss.

I developed this process while an organization development executive and introduced it into the executive recruiting field while at DHR International, a "top five" search firm.  On April 1, 2011, I will be returning to DHR to serve as Global Practice Leader for Executive Integration and Development.  We will be offering pre-boarding as an optional feature for clients to consider as searches are conducted around the world.

The book is called, Before On-boarding:  How to Integrate New Leaders for Quick and Sustained Results. It is a step-by-step process for how organizations can implement New Leader Integration into the way they do business.  It requires an experienced Organization Development consultant (internal or external) or an equally experienced executive recruiter to conduct this process.  It is my hope that by providing the world with this book, savvy change management specialists will put it to good use.  It is my goal to significantly minimize failure on the part of new leaders.  The potential cost savings to organizations, which I will outline in a future posting, would be substantial.

We are still working on its release date, and I am told that it will be sometime in May. You will be able to order the book through Amazon.  It will also be available as an e-book for downloading to Kindle.  I would welcome your feedback once you have read it.

What Do Executive Recruiters Look For In a Client Relationship?

Much is said by clients about executive recruiters.  A common topic is, how to select and manage them.  There is a flip side of that coin.  There is an assumption that recruiters are circling around potential clients like hungry fish.  Perhaps in our current economic crisis, that may appear to be accurate.  I suggest in this posting that the best executive recruiters choose their clients wisely.  What may appear to be a win in gaining a new client, may turn into a catastrophe down the road, if all the recruiter was thinking about was quick access to a fee.  Those of us who wear the hats of executive recruiters all have our stories to tell.

If you are a senior manager who occasionally retains executive recruiters, here is what we are looking for in our relationship with you.

• An open line of communication at all times
• Access to all stakeholders in the specification development stage
• Read and be thoroughly familiar with the contract
• Pay a reasonable fee for our services (and in a timely manner)
• Look for value in the process.  Don't treat your recruiters as a commodity.
• Maintain a collaborative relationship throughout the process
• Keep in mind that half of the search is selling your organization. It's not all about sourcing.
• Know that we have to believe in your organization and culture to sell you accurately and honestly
• Avoid putting recruiters in a position where they begin to doubt the value of the opportunity
• Have a realistic attitude as to how long a good executive search project will last
• Keep in mind that the timeliness of project completion is more often tied to client responsiveness
• Demonstrate a sense of urgency when candidates have been presented
• Timely scheduling of interviews and in short succession once candidates have been presented
• Timely and detailed feedback to the recruiter regarding the candidates interviewed
• Honesty at all times with candidates (don't keep candidates in the dark)
• Don't put the recruiter in a tough spot with candidates 
• Provide details regarding extra selection process criteria such as management assessments
• Commit not to drag out the process (good candidates don't get better with age)
• Prompt payment of candidate and recruiter expenses
• Keep a realistic view that there is no such thing as the perfect candidate
• A collaborative relationship with the recruiter (listen to our advice)
• Involve the recruiter in closing the deal (e.g., negotiations).  We have a relationship with the candidate.
• Invest in a viable new leader integration process for all hired executives (not just on-boarding)
• Encourage the recruiter to stay in touch with the hired executive for at least three months
• Be willing to listen and respond positively to feedback from the recruiter "post hire"

We value our relationships with our clients and strive to do a good job for you.  While it is you who are paying us, we do have an obligation with our candidates to be open and honest with them at all times. Don't put us in a position with our candidates that can compromise our integrity.

Advice for the Executive Recruiter Interview: What to Bring

When recruiters meet face-to-face with potential candidates for the first time, we have an agenda: to determine whether to continue with this candidate or part friends and move on.   It is a get to know you meeting where we have already had the benefit of reviewing your resume and in most cases,  having benefited from a telephone conversation with you prior to our first meeting.  We will already have reviewed your resume and made notes, to include notes from our phone conversation.  In general, we will have an hour in which to accomplish much.  The first few minutes are spent getting acquainted.  Next we will briefly recap the search and what we are looking for and why.  We will then dive in to your resume and our notes from our phone conversation and probe areas pertinent to the job.

Honestly, in a face-to-face interview we are also assessing your "executive presence."  That is really the number one objective of that meeting.  Most savvy candidates fully understand this.  We then take full advantage of the time to take our phone interview to the next level and will be probing deeply on certain topics.

What would we like for you to do during that initial meeting?  For me it is simply to be yourself, be candid, and participate in a discussion.  An interview should never be an interrogation, but sometimes it can seem like one, I know.  I've been on both sides of that table.  You will have been presented a detailed position specification and if you are a candidate for one of my searches, you will have completed an in-depth questionnaire asking for specific examples of your accomplishments.  So for this meeting it is critical for me to ask you about the areas that are the "must have's" for my client.  That is why it can seem like an interrogation at times, but it is really that I have less time to interview you than I would like (in most cases). 

Given that we do not have a great deal of time, during this meeting I simply want to have this discussion.  The only prop I need is your resume (and in my case your questionnaire).  If you have a more current version of your resume please have one handy to give me (and email me that latest version after our meeting).

What I am NOT looking for in this initial meeting is a sample of your work.   I have had candidates bring large three-ring binders to these meetings that they want to flip through with me page by page.  I have to admit that candidates who do that drop several notches.  In fact, if they enter the room with their samples in hand I put up barriers.  Don't get me wrong.  There are times when it might be very appropriate to share this information with a recruiter.   Keep in mind, though, that time is not on our side and that this meeting is our initial face-to-face meeting.  If there is a need for me to see some material you could provide, and if it is possible for you to share some of it later via email, I may ask you to do that.

There is the rare occasion when our clients may want us to actually review some such sample material.  I have had clients want to see some "balanced score card" information in order for me to verify that the candidate has implemented such a program.   Other clients have suggested that I review portfolios of samples for searches pertaining to marketing or promotions.  In those situations where it is requested that I do some sort of a verification, I will ask the candidate to bring some samples along to that initial interview.

For your initial interview with an executive recruiter, bring yourself and an updated copy of your resume (if there is one) and prepare to have a discussion, an in-depth one, yes, but not an interrogation.  Leave everything else behind unless we have requested in advance that you bring extra information along.  If we need it, rest assured, we will ask.  

Status Report for Leading Edge Memos

If you are a regular reader of this blog, or a newcomer, I thought you would like to know what the response has been to the variety of postings I have written so far on Leading Edge Memo's and where throughout the world LEM readers are distributed.

I opened the blog on January 13, 2011.  While the majority of my readers are in the United States, here is the composite list of where the hundreds of Leading Edge Memo's readers live and work:

United States
Germany
United Kingdom
India
Canada
New Zealand
Singapore
Spain
Iraq
Netherlands

Thank you to all readers who have joined me to date.  If there are topics you would like for me to cover, email me at mike@michaelkburroughs.com or respond via a comment to this posting and I will honor your request quickly. 

I also encourage you to review the list of articles found on the widget attached to this blog.  Topics are in some cases are expansions of my blog postings. 

I also encourage you to visit my website is at http://www.michaelkburroughs.com/ .

The Importance of Executive Networking and Branding

I have seen this look in the eyes of  many executives who have found themselves for the first time in their lives, "in between jobs."  I say, "for the first time" because once an individual has been in this situation, the advice in this posting is generally moot.  This is hard-won knowledge that you won't want to learn and practice from the start a second time.

What is that look?   Deer in the headlights is a good description. 

Throughout my years as an executive recruiter I have been asked (and honored requests) to speak with with executives who are in transition.   While it is not a common practice for executive recruiters to do that,  the main reason I do it is that I have walked a mile or two in their shoes.  I have had two executive positions disappear due to reasons beyond my control, and had another position relocate with the company headquarters to another state and I opted not to follow my job. These are character building experiences that change the way you look at the world.

It took me a long time to get the message that executives should be networking at all times.  Consider it the cornerstone of your personal career management strategy.  Always be reaching out to other executives and lending support and advice to them in any way possible.  With the advent of social networking, namely, LinkedIn, there is no longer an excuse for not staying connected with other executives.  Building your list of connections should be part of your week, every week.  Do it on your own time at home, but do it.

It is a sad thing for me to see that look on the faces of executives in transition when they have to admit that they have been, "...too busy over the past ten years to network."  They almost always follow this comment with a statement of regret.  One thing is for sure: this realization is life altering.  It is emotionally charged.  Psychologists say that our values do not change until we experience a "significant emotional event." An executive job loss for most is, indeed, a significant emotional event. They begin in earnest to reach out to everyone they know.  Often that is a short list.

There are a variety of ways to build a solid network.  Joining associations and attending meetings are among them.  Offer to give presentations covering areas that are in your area of specialization.  Open a LinkedIn account if you haven't already.  Ask everyone who would be a good business contact to join you on LinkedIn.  Keep your LinkedIn account current. Post your activities and thought pieces there. Increasingly, recruiters find you via LinkedIn.  Join LinkedIn groups that pertain to your area of expertise and interests and participate.  Become a "thought leader."  Post your thought pieces and activities on LinkedIn.  You can also attach PowerPoint presentations on LinkedIn. 

You can become a thought leader in several ways.  Writing for publication is one approach. You can get the hang of it quickly through Ezine Articles (http://www.ezinearticles.com/) which is the most recognized Internet publishing platform in existence.   In this day and age of Internet marketing, social networking, shopping, etc., there are many interested readers who will seek out your work through search engines.  Start a blog that showcases your expertise. Give your best advice away.  Write your postings in such a way that people will return to your blog for more.  Two of the most common blogging tools are WordPress and Blogspot.  Blogspot is the easier of the two to use but in my opinion is not as feature rich.  Offer to make presentations at association meetings.  Build a personal website. Mine is http://www.michaelkburroughs.com/ . I built and maintain this simple website myself through Network Solutions.   Trust me, if I can do it, anybody can do it.  You can tailor a personal website for any purpose, even using it as your blog if you prefer that route.  You can put a widget on your website that lists your most recent articles and also links your readers to your Ezine Articles profile and body of work.  You can see this widget and link on this blog as well as on my personal website.

If you are in between jobs, now is the perfect time to establish your personal brand and start building a robust network.  Do it even if you are not in between jobs.  If you are gainfully employed you will likely have to do your blogging, article writing, website maintenance and LinkedIn updates,etc, during evening hours and on weekends.  That should not be a problem.  You have already most likely grown accustomed to burning the midnight oil.  Just be sure to burn some of that oil for yourself this time around.

Do some "backward planning."  Look into the future a year from now.  Mark that date on your calendar.  Commit to yourself and others that by that date you will be well-established as a networker and that your personal brand will be recognized.  Make time to do this (rather than finding time to do it).  If you wait until you find time you never will.

And once you have established yourself in this way, keep it alive.   Encourage others to do the same.  That's what this blog posting is all about. 

If you would like for me to post blog entries or write articles on topics that support your networking and branding initiatives, contact me by email through my website or write a comment on this blog posting with your request and I will do this as soon as possible.