Lasting Power - It is time to reflect on what makes a truly powerful and influential Leader (July 1)

article online

With the release of our Power 100 list coinciding with the finals of the 2012 European Football tournament, much time has been spent this week reflecting on what it is to have power and influence and what makes a good leader.

Lyndon B. Johnson once commented succinctly that “the only real power available to a leader is the power of persuasion.

In this region, where we are acting in a multi-cultural environment, persuasion is particularly complicated; understanding power structures, whose interests to appeal to, even what these interests are exactly.

On top of that, language barriers can exacerbate the breakdown in communication, particularly if you are unable to access the right audience and communicate clearly.

Many of the most influential in the Middle East, though never mentioned on any power lists, wield considerable power in terms of the ability to indirectly determine courses of action by having the ears and trust of decision makers.

When it comes to having the power to get your will through, there is much to be said about empathy, understanding and humility.

We talk a lot about learning from our mistakes even though we repeat them over and over again.

Not because we do not know any better, but because many do not want to lose face by admitting a mistake the first time around. Pride can get the best of us, and can break down relationships for no good reason; whether between nations, business partners or co-workers.

Interviewed in 2004, the secretary of defense under JFK, Robert McNamara said: “In the case of Vietnam, we did not know them well enough to empathise.

They believed that we had simply replaced the French as a colonial power, and we were seeking to subject South and North Vietnam to our colonial interests, which was absolutely absurd.

And we, we saw Vietnam as an element of the Cold War. Not what they saw it as: a civil war.”

It is harrowing to hear this man, responsible for the war at the height of its intensity, now admitting, or seemingly coming to the ultimate realisation that it was fundamentally a matter of a simple misunderstanding.

When misconceptions from history’s greatest leaders can lead to devastation on this scale, it is somehow a consolation when hearing about joint ventures faltering due to incorrect assumptions about the incentives and motives of people and organisations.

A key component of business is the ability to align interests and maintain stable relations between partners and not let pride become a factor. There is an irony in how success, especially if it comes quickly and unexpectedly, can be the cause of downfall.

When profits and organisations grow, egos tend to follow along the same kind of path, with interests on status and recognition becoming narrower. I think we have all seen organisations becoming handicapped by a culture of self-promotion due to taking undue credit, shifting blame or finding scapegoats. It is easy to give in to the temptation of attributing too much of a company’s success to one’s own input and start feeling entitled to an unreasonable amount of credit.

Many philosophies of management, like Taylorism, even seem to encourage a paternalistic approach that overestimates the ability to command and control outcomes. Being able to maintain a work atmosphere where he or she who takes credit is perceived as secondary to the task at hand.

Making team members feel that their mutual interests are aligned, and also that they are part of a greater cause and purpose, is far larger than mere self-interest.

Being able to achieve that balance is the real mettle of leadership and lasting power. It is with these thoughts in mind that we hope you enjoy this year’s Power 100 list, which we are sure will generate much debate as to the true qualities of leadership, and the values attached to these.

Communication and Management: Knowing where to set the balance between good cop, bad cop is a difficult balance for a manager to get right

 

Knowing where to set the balance between good cop, bad cop is a difficult balance for a manager to get right

 Defining an outline of standards of which the organisation’s members are to live up to is what the art of management is often understood to consist of. That, and using the right balance of carrot and stick to get the desired results from employees. In practice, however the ambition level that you define for others to live up will tend to have a limited impact on their actual performance. Particularly in multicultural work environments, it often risks belittling people if they are held out to feel insufficient in the light of targets they can’t achieve. This is even in cases where they have actually performed at the very top of their potential. The consequence is that instead of maximising potential it stunts and demoralises team members. 

Unquestionably, pushing the limits by setting high expectations is a must. Knowing how to be inspirational and optimistic is pitted against the need for being critical and realistic to an organisation’s weaknesses. To be effective as a leader, it is imperative to have a very accurate estimation of what the actual potential really is. That can be very tricky. Having enough empathy to inspire the confidence that allows the lines of communication throughout a company to offer an undistorted reflection of what the key factors and issues are that determine performance. This skill is not so much about being the most intelligent with superior analytical abilities. It is more valuable to be in touch with and have the trust of the organisation to get the relevant information to analyse. 

On the one hand I see the diagnosis of this problem being a matter of interpersonal skills. One needs understanding and empathy to both see and be told of the real situation being faced by those on the frontlines. While it is very easy for anyone to relate to the concept of a person born with exceptional talent and motivation, we are very reluctant to see any person as having inherent constraints to his abilities. We rather excuse any/every shortcoming with a blanket explanation of being a matter of education. While many like to see this is an expression of tolerance, it is rather the reason for miscommunication and severe miscalculations of expected outcomes from mismatching the required competencies with the task at hand.

 On the other hand, I see these types of disconnects in organisations as the consequence of an ingrained legacy from colonial times. The common idea is that any manager needs to uphold an image of superior knowledge compared to the others in his team. This quickly becomes a handicap in that communication is stilted in fear of revealing uncertainty and doubt. I see this mindset as probably stemming from the entrenched ways of how colonies were managed. Organisational structures were impeccably designed to monitor and micro-manage labour that carried out minutely standardised tasks. A consequence and requisite for these multilayered hierarchies was distancing between those in power from those carrying out the work. 

Today, this kind of approach is rarely beneficial to any activity besides the possible exception of assembly lines. Yet, the same thinking is seen all over the world. Standards are still being mistaken for standardisation.

 The reality of the marketplace today is that companies are more dependent than ever on a diversity of talents if they are to compete. And for talents to flourish, a degree of trust is required to shift from an environment shackled in conformity to one of freedom that makes creativity possible. Power, as with mastery of any art, is revealed in the control one has without having to resort to frameworks and monitoring. 

A good sign of organisational health is where being fault and blame-free is deemed as lacking initiative and not as a virtue. 

Oscar Wendel is the conference manager of Construction Week.

The Spectre of Corruption - From top to bottom, from the West to the East

Article Online

The Spectre of Corruption - From top to bottom, from the West to the East

The globalised economy has done wonders in decreasing market distortions that obstruct the laws of free enterprise. Trade barriers and State-run monopolies are easy to spot, and therefore easy to adapt to. Rarely are they the reason for a company deciding against doing business with, or setting up operations in, a country.

The major market distortion today is due to corruption, an issue that seems to be increasingly complicated, causing greater unpredictability in markets. For India and China, possibly the most recurring and important question is how corruption may hold them back from reaching their potential, and how it can be alleviated.

Corruption is, by its nature, a sensitive subject, and difficult to measure, as few are honest about participating in it.  Even the definition of corruption is dependent on cultural perspectives. In some instances, particularly in developing nations, the practice of incentivising those in a position to expedite requests can possibly have the effect of increasing efficiency and seen to be a form of tipping.  

While the West prides itself on appearing to have eliminated corrupt practices, I see the continuing slide in their competitiveness as simply being another form of corruption.

I was following the news of the new leadership in China being installed, interspersed with reports of the CIA director David Petraeus stepping down. An intricate marital affair had been uncovered. The story also included the top commander for Afghanistan, John Allen. With the expansive email correspondence that the FBI found, it left me with the impression that these leaders must be incredible at multi-tasking, or they really literally have no time or focus for getting any work done at all. Which, granted, explains a lot.

The problem is not that the men in leadership positions are repeatedly abusing the trust and power placed in them. Rather, we have been made to accept these behaviours, and that there are different sets of moral codes that apply. Or, rather, that do not apply to those in positions of power.

The escalation of what I am describing has been extreme in the last five years alone. The banks and rating agencies that conspired and profited from junk debt being given Triple-A ratings and sold to gullible investors is not too different from the former IMF chairman taking too many liberties with a New York chamber maid.

One would almost think that egregious displays of recklessness and hedonism are the traits of any male leader, whether it is in politics, business, military, the Catholic Church or in entertainment. They are becoming ever more difficult to tell apart! The acts of transgressions themselves are not so frowned upon anymore. It is when our leaders lack the skill to avoid getting exposed that we feel let down.

The failure to live up to a certain moral standard is not the problem in itself for the economies in the West. It is the corruption it breeds in how the most crucial individuals whom we count on to give direction are left unchecked for having even basic competencies, judgment or even accountability as opposed to the expectations that we have from every functioning member in society.

We have got it the wrong way around when prosecuting even minor infractions of a minimum wage labourer becomes a bigger priority than monitoring those in positions of power to see that they even do any work at all.

Whether an emerging economy or a member of the G8, how corruption is dealt with will unquestionably influences the ability to inspire confidence and attract investment.

As a yard stick, it is wise to apply the same scrutiny to oneself before laying claim to any moral superiority over anyone else. To recall the famous quote by Pogo: “We have met the enemy, and he is us”.

Oscar Wendel is the conference manager of Construction Week.

Two Sides of the Coin - Battle for Euro’s survival is a modern Greek Tragedy

Two Sides of the Coin - Battle for Euro’s survival is a modern Greek Tragedy

The continuing fight for survival of the Euro is a kind of a modern Greek tragedy, due largely to our hubris in conceiving the most ambitious financial and political endeavour in history, while being completely blind to our own weaknesses to long-term commitments and goals.

It was in 2002 that the Euro came into circulation. In 2011, talk of its imminent collapse emerged, and extraordinary measures to salvage the currency began with various emergency loans being made. However, compare the Euro’s decade-long track record to that of the Bank of England and its over 300-year-old Sterling Pound notes.

The EU launching the Euro now comes across as a kid that has grown up on super-hero comics and action movies like Rocky, Rambo and Die Hard. He is convinced he can finish a marathon without training. Just set your sights high enough, He is then surprised to collapse after sprinting the first kilometre.

If I am to carry out a psychological evaluation on the EU as if it were an individual person, its issues and skewed perception of itself, which is obstructing it from dealing with reality, seem strikingly similar to the average European citizen. Both appear to be victims of outlandish ambitions and expectations to receive phenomenal results and compensation for very little effort.
There seems in general a lack of understanding that there is a connection between the values created by a person or a nation where their contribution is reflected as to what they can exchange these values for in the marketplace.

Instead, a naïve kind of belief has set in, a thinking that success is largely a matter of randomness. It is more about being at the right time, right place and having the right contacts, oftentimes by being at the right party. 

We have been seduced into believing that quick and radical results are going to come from sudden flashes of inspiration and willpower.

In hindsight, it may seem and be conveniently portrayed that individual inventors and leaders brought us forward in giant leaps. For instance, the idea of sole inventors spawning ideas from scratch in ‘eureka’ moments is a misperception. Even Graham Bell’s telephone and Thomas Edison’s lightbulb were the results of broad incremental improvements in an era where innovation over long periods enabled such paradigm shifts. 

The truth is that individual willpower is very limited in a larger perspective. How an individual performs in a society, and how society fares as a whole, is almost completely dictated by societal structure and its established norms, expectations and accepted behaviours. Though many like to identify themselves as rebels, humans are, by nature, hardwired to be flock animals. We simply do not dare to deviate that far from the group we are in. 

However, what separates us from animals is not any willpower to go against our environment; with enough time, almost all of us give in. What enables one civilisation to develop and outperform others is how we, as humans, are able to consciously and purposefully design, influence and set the norms of accepted behaviours for the group.

To paraphrase Confucius, all men are created equal; it is their habits that distinguish them. This is worth keeping in mind when contemplating the path forward for Europe. Societies that encourage or accept the behavioural norm of a semi-passive state of Facebook hypnosis and consumption of light entertainment, soft drinks and fast food may not lead to the desired type of long-term growth. 

Building Legacy - Construction provides an opportunity for achievers to leave their mark

link to article 

Like most of our readers, I have also had an overdose of experts revealing their recipe for recovery. The panacea for all economies is that growth will come from entrepreneurs starting up new businesses. These saviours will make wealth appear magically from out of nowhere. Facebook and its $100bn IPO is often held up as the prime example of the way forward.

With the masses of unemployed youth across the world, the promise of becoming an entrepreneur and “creating the next Facebook” is not very different from the carrot dangled in front of every man in the African-American community. I am referring to how young black men have been fed the idea that the only desirable and realistic opportunity they have of succeeding is to become either a basketball player in the NBA or a Platinum-selling rap artist.

Needless to say, planting these stereotypes and encouraging faith in the infinitesimally small probability of succeeding has not exactly helped the African-American community as a whole. Instead, it ironically tends to be the case that those who merely focused on consistently being above average inevitably landed at the top of the pile.

There is a lot to learn from this as a cautionary tale, as we all seem to be closely emulating the exact same attitude of misdirected over-ambition, with the inevitable shortcomings that follow. And, with each failure, it is seemingly everyone’s fault but our own.

As with rap stars, petrified by their mediocrity and lack of any real musical talent, there is too much focus on living in alternate realities. To pose credibly as being wealthy and admirable is the main objective, achievement and reward. The bestseller lists have serious management and self-help books to teach us how to actively fool ourselves to sell convincingly to others.

Along the way we have lost our need for integrity, compassion or to act with any real solidarity with a group, unless it is for our personal gain and recognition. It is every man for himself in the race of creating illusions as to where you stand on the social totem pole. As a result, many societies are struggling as the younger generations lack the core values needed to gather around a shared purpose and move in any meaningful direction.

It is not reasonable to promote the ideals and narrow definition of a successful life as having to focus on being exceptional and exuberant, with as little resemblance or association as possible to the average person. Rarely will this equation add up to a net surplus for a society. The future will belong to those societies that can resist propagating these self-destructive images of success. Instead, what is needed is replacing this mindset and re-establishing a sense of purpose and achievement of an ordinary life, dedicated to being a part of, and serving, a community. They are likely to win out over the others who are trying to find their next Mark Zuckerberg.

There is no doubt that we will always need pioneers to lead the way in innovation of science as in business. Yet, granted that there is a free market and equal opportunity, these individuals will likely rise to the top regardless. True greatness is usually inspired by a drive that is far stronger than the need for wealth or fame.

What I see as a greater risk is that societies as a whole will no longer be able to reap the potential of future innovators and their best ideas because there is no one left to play the necessary supporting roles. It is like a symphony orchestra with only first violinists and no cellists, or a soccer team with only strikers and no goalie. In so many ways, the extraordinary needs the ordinary to exist at all.

I think it is worthwhile reflecting on how trends shift in the desires of people in different times to help predict behaviours and thus outcomes. A common ground for us all seems to be an instinctual desire to leave a mark, or at least to be remembered after we die. For all focus we put on achieving glory in our professional lives, preciously little and few of us will be remembered for anything due to that. Yet, there is consolation in knowing that, even with the most successful of industrialists, the only real lasting monuments anyone leaves behind are in our personal relationships.

But, as such, the construction sector is probably a good place to be. There are few more effective and longer-lasting ways to leave a mark or a legacy than being part of building a city.

Healthy growth - bridging government bureaucracy with the private sector in healthcare

http://www.constructionweekonline.com/article-17810-healthy-growth/

July 28th, 2012

With the increasing numbers of citizens going into retirement, and lifestyle-related diseases on the rise, the healthcare sector is bound for continued growth, both here in the Gulf and in the US … though for different reasons, how healthcare will be provided is possibly the most complex societal challenge in both places.

As with education, healthcare is an area where it is more a matter about how resources are used rather than how much. If you are not careful, you can find yourself spending vast amounts and seeing very little in return. Despite this, I often find it hard to argue publically against dedicating more resources to healthcare.

Take the US, which spends 19% of its GDP on healthcare, a mind-boggling figure that amounts to $7,538 a person. Compare that to Japan, which spends just $2,729 a person, and has a population that is among the healthiest in the world.

Yet rarely do I hear anyone framing the US healthcare problem as being a matter of too much money being spent. From every corner, you only hear calls for more. The debate is only ever about who should foot the bill, or how to divvy it up.

Earlier this month, the drug giant GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) paid a $3bn fine in the largest healthcare fraud settlement in US history. Reported by Time, besides suppressing data of dangerous side-effects, prosecutors said GSK sales consultants received bonuses for successfully giving doctors kickbacks to prescribe medicines for unapproved uses. Employees who failed to do so were put on involuntary leave.

The story does not surprise me. Neither does it surprise me to hear that Mitt Romney’s Bain Capital has stakes in numerous fastfood chains, while also involved in healthcare.
It would make a lot of business sense to invest heavily in ‘addictive’ foods with high fat and sugar content, while concurrently investing in providing health treatment.

With heavy investments in healthcare being made around the Gulf, there are many who stand to benefit greatly, from the design of hospitals to the choice of approach for delivering treatment. In this critical juncture, it is vital that the right decisions are made with the right partners to avoid long-term failure. With this in mind, it is worth stopping to consider any hidden agendas.

Often you hear the future depicted in bright colours with fluffy, feel-good buzzwords and catchphrases that go something like: “Sustainable knowledge economies tied in with academic cities that will inspire new sectors with hi-tech start-up firms led by the hardworking and innovative youth being educated today.”

If this phrasing is perceived in context of large contracts at stake, there is a risk that it is a large-scale version of the car salesman trying to up-sell you to buy a high-end sports car.
On credit, no less! It may be worth questioning if he really has your best interests at heart, or thinks as highly of you as it would appear. As a rule of thumb, instead of listening to what values people claim to have, look at who and what benefits their paycheck, in order to best predict their motives and actions.

There is no easy fix for the dilemma of government bureaucracies running and funding healthcare systems while serviced by the private sector, with starkly different incentives and management structures. However, awareness is a big first step.

It is difficult to set guidelines and targets to ensure quality of service when dealing in something that is largely based on human interaction between individuals. In the bigger picture, social infrastructure comprises the entire eco-system that enables care, education and providing safe and hospitable living environments for citizens.

What models and modes of healthcare delivery will work best, whether here or in the US, is almost impossible to predict. However, my guess is that pharmaceutical corporations, fastfood chains and healthcare providers will all continue to jointly share in a very healthy growth of their respective fields of business.