Showing posts with label 360 degree interview. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 360 degree interview. Show all posts

Saturday, 23 March 2013

Forbes: The Thinker Interview: Marshall Goldsmith, by Neelima Mahajan, CKGSB









by Neelima Mahajan | CKGSB | Oct 22, 2012

Marshall Goldsmiths brand of leadership appeals to everyone from corporate CEOs to the lay man. What makes him so popular?

At first glance, Marshall Goldsmith, a bald, sprightly man with icy blue eyes, a fringe of white hair and ears that stick out, looks like a pixie. He darts around the room with the energy of a two-year-old. It’s fun to watch him walk – not an easy walk to imitate. When he teaches, he bounces from one end of the room to another, while his head stays stiffly in place and his arms straight. On most days, you’ll find him wearing a green Polo shirt and khaki pants, his trademark attire somewhat akin to Steve Jobs’ black turtleneck and blue jeans. His face breaks into an easy smile as he talks about his favorite subject, leadership and executive coaching. The words ‘no’, ‘but’ and ‘however’ do not exist in his vocabulary and if you make the grave mistake of mentioning any of these words in front of him, he’ll probably grab your hand mid-sentence and reprimand you for that.

When you meet him the first time, it’s hard to take him seriously–and easy to dismiss his teachings as cloying, and him as just another self-help guru. But when you look deeper, you’ll realize there is more to him than meets the eye. Goldsmith has the CEOs of many Fortune 500 companies eating out of his hands. People like Ford CEO Alan Mulally swear by him and pay through their nose to have some face time with him. He has worked as a consultant for companies like 3M, IBM, Philips and American Express. Over the years, Goldsmith, one of the world’s foremost executive coaches and a “philosophical and psychological Buddhist” by his own admission, has built a stellar reputation in the leadership firmament and rubs shoulders with the likes of superstar coaches like Ram Charan and Gary Ranker. He was ranked among the top five executive coaches according to Forbes magazine, and has consistently featured in the Thinkers 50, a ranking of business and management thought leaders.

More here: http://knowledge.ckgsb.edu.cn/2012/10/01/management/the-thinker-interview-marshall-goldsmith/

Thursday, 17 January 2013

What Is Executive Presence?

An important factor for us Executive Coaches to keep in mind, and for professionals to stay on top of, in any interaction... Scott Eblin, Leadership Coach, offers his take on lessons in the news and his advice on your pressing leadership questions.







By Scott Eblin








  • During the past couple of months, I’ve been in four or five conversations with leadership development professionals who are looking for a way to build executive presence in their organization’s high potential managers. Most of them have tried different programs and approaches and they’re not happy with the results they’ve gotten.
I have a theory about why that’s the case. Executive presence is one of those terms that’s often used but rarely clearly defined. If you do a Google search on the term you’ll find articles that talk about confidence, communications, personal appearance, body language and other factors that don’t get a lot more specific than that. It’s a great case of what the French would call je ne sais quoi – something that can’t be adequately described.
That, of course, makes executive presence hard to teach to people. If you can’t describe it, you can’t teach it.
Based on the research I did for my book, The Next Level, and more than a decade of coaching senior executives and high potential managers, I’d like to offer a two part definition of executive presence. First, it’s about your ability to get results, especially when the expectations around results are continually changing. Second, it’s about the behaviors you exhibit at the personal, team and organizational levels. When your behaviors align with the expected results, you have executive presence.
Let me break it down in a little more detail.
In today’s world, the results that were good enough last year aren’t good enough this year. This year’s results won’t be good enough next year. For leaders, then, it’s a continual state of getting different results. As Einstein would likely tell us, different results require different actions. That means that leaders need to be aware of when they need to pick up and let go of skills, behaviors and mindsets even if they’ve worked for them in the past.
A leader’s executive presence, then, changes over time. In working with my clients, I break the behaviors of executive presence down into three categories and nine distinctions about what leaders need to pick up and let go of get different results.
Here’s the breakdown:
Personal Presence
  • Pick up confidence in your presence; Let go of doubt in how you contribute
  • Pick up regular renewal of your energy and perspective; Let go of running flat out until you crash
  • Pick up custom-fit communications; Let go of one size fits all communications
Team Presence
  • Pick up team reliance; Let go of self reliance
  • Pick up defining what to do; Let go of telling how to do it
  • Pick up accountability for many results; Let go of responsibility for a few results
Organizational Presence
  • Pick up looking left, right and diagonally as you lead; Let go of primarily looking up and down as you lead
  • Pick up an outside-in view of the entire organization; Let go of an inside-out view of your function
  • Pick up a big footprint view of your role; Let go of a small footprint view of your role

As President Obama's Executive Coach...

Had posted another post on what an Executive Coach will advise President Obama. Here's another good one - contentious, but interesting....





John MattonePresident, JohnMattonePartners, Inc.


As I travel the globe, meeting with senior executive teams, coaching CEOs and senior executives, and speaking to various management groups, it is clear to me that the world of business has very few outstanding leaders. Sadly, as I have observed President Obama and House Speaker John Boehner go "back and forth" in an apparent attempt to avoid the "fiscal cliff," I am left with the inescapable conclusion that the U.S. government likewise has fewoutstanding leaders.
Things always start with the chief executive. And, in this case, it starts with President Obama. In the world of politics and business, there are many very good leaders, as well as a vast supply of good leaders. The distribution of outstanding leadership, like anything else, follows the shape of a bell-shaped curve. I have always known this. Everyone has always known this. But, few of us really cared because being a good leader generally has been accepted as "sufficient" to keep a position -- or win reelection. Things are changing quickly, however -- very quickly. The bell-shaped curve representing the even distribution of leadership talent in any organization no longer can be accepted as "sufficient." It is mandatory that we -- as voters, employees, stakeholders, customers -- expect nothing short of consistent leadership greatness from our elected officials, including the President of the United States, CEOs and all leaders.
I had suspected the need for this critical distribution shift for a couple of years, but it became very clear in 2011 as I was interviewing CEOs as part of our Trends in Executive Development Research Study (Pearson, 2011). Beyond the actual research, an interesting qualitative note emerged. When I asked executives to identify a great leader in their lives -- someone who had a positive impact on them and helped shape their values and character -- roughly nine times out of 10, they mentioned a former teacher, coach, parent, grandparent, or friend, as opposed to a political or business leader. Unfortunately, the fact is that most of us whether we work in government or business, can identify the poor managers we have had much more quickly than we can the great ones. Why is this?
There is no clear answer; however, it is pretty clear that many people are promoted or elected into leadership roles before they are ready. They lack the experience or they have not been adequately coached, mentored or trained. More than anything else, I believe the speed and pace of change in business and the world, mounting financial pressure, rising debt, technology shifts, demographic shifts, and a more demanding operating environment -- not the least of which includes working successfully with a variety of constituent groups -- represent daunting challenges for most leaders, including President Obama. Frankly, only the very, very "best of the best" leaders in the world of politics or business possess the Leadership Intelligence (LI) required to drive true sustained greatness in their organizations. Leaders who possess a strong LI:
  • Possess a strong "inner-core" capability (i.e., character, values, empowering thoughts and beliefs, emotions, maturity, and learning agility to adapt and adjust to an ever increasing complexity and variety of people and situations);
  • Possess a strong "outer-core" capability (i.e., critical thinking, strategic thinking, decision-making, emotional intelligence, communication skills, team leadership, talent leadership, change leadership and drive for results; and
  • They continuously execute their "inner-core" and "outer-core" capabilities while being vigilant to the impact they have on individuals, constituent groups, and their organizations; they also possess a passionate and diligent focus on continuous improvement through course correction.


Identifying CEOs and Executives who Possess Leadership Intelligence

Boards often ask me what they should look for in identifying their next CEO. My answer is always clear: They need to look for people who possess both a strong "inner-core" and "outer-core" capability. They need to identify people with strong Leadership Intelligence. The most critical thing to look for and measure, however, is character.
The essence of character is undoubtedly multifaceted and complex. When working with organizations to help them identify their next CEO, I look for evidence that they are, at a minimum, courageous. I look for leaders who have the guts to make the tough but ethical decision. I look for their willingness to sometimes stand alone, in the teeth of pressure (possibly even from their own managers) from others who may want to go in a counter, sometimes less ethical direction. I look for leaders who also have the guts to collaborate, concede, compromise, and who possess the humility to submit at times if it is in the best interest of the whole. This is one area that President Obama and I would explore in depth as it appears to be an area he needs to strengthen. When coaching CEOs, I explain that saying no to the easiest and most rewarding route, when that decision doesn't align with what you know is the correct one, may seem difficult. However, as soon as you begin flirting with such a decision -- that may yield better operating results, greater revenue, greater profits, greater support from constituents but clearly compromises the very essence of your ethical and moral identity -- you enter a world of agony and stress. Making such choices will lead you into a world of painful long-term consequences, not the least of which is an increased probability you will say yes to more insidious acts in time. This is exactly what happened to Dennis Kozlowski, years ago as CEO of TYCO. Great leaders -- truly great leaders -- have the courage to make the right decision every time.
Great leaders also possess the character elements of diligence, gratitude, honesty, modesty, and loyalty.
Now, with this background, as President's Obama's executive coach, this is what I would have done at the beginning of his first term:
  • I would have assessed the strength and vibrancy of his "inner-core" and "outer-core" capabilities. I would have used a combination of in-depth interviews and objective assessments, including my own executive maturity assessment.
  • I would have supplemented these assessments with 360-degree interviews involving key stakeholders and constituents. We would have identified from these assessments, President Obama's leadership strengths and development needs.
  • We would have then prepared an initial leadership development plan and I would have encouraged President Obama to then get input from his stakeholder and constituent groups to help him finalize his leadership development plan.
  • I would have then had President Obama meet with his stakeholders and constituent groups individually and collectively to share his drive and passion to become the best leader he can be and that he cannot achieve this goal without the input, support and guidance from them (this step is often the most challenging for CEOs).
  • We would have then started executing this plan and I would have his stakeholders and constituents provide quarterly feedback to President Obama on the progress he is making on his leadership development plan.
  • I would have worked with President Obama on implementing powerful change strategies that would have leveraged his considerable leadership capability while also strengthening his considerable leadership development opportunities--coaching him on first strengthening his "inner-core" as a foundation to strengthening his "outer-core" leadership skills.
You get the picture, right? If President Obama had been coached years ago using these steps and strategies, I am confident we would have avoided the "fiscal cliff" and been much further along as a nation. This is not a political comment; rather this is a comment on President's Obama's need, as our nation's CEO, to strengthen his Leadership Intelligence (LI).