What is a Strategic Mindset?

Originally published on February 9, 2023.

As leaders grow and evolve from their first supervisory role and look to progress through more responsible and demanding positions, inevitably the question arises as to how they can become more strategic.  But like a variety of leadership concepts, not nearly enough is said, nor is enough support provided to aspiring leaders, as to what strategic actually is or means.  Lacking in a clear understanding of the concept means that individual leaders can be left to figure that reality out on their own and engage in a variety of activities that may or may not enhance their strategic thinking.

What then makes up a strategic mindset?  I suggest that there are several key components that comprise this overarching concept, and by breaking the idea down to these elements we can promote understanding and engage in more targeted and purposeful efforts to enhance our strategic thinking - at both a personal and organizational level.

Interrogating Reality

When setting the stage for future plans and or trying to vision the future, too many managers, leaders and organizations solutions jump. By that I mean that they immediately think about where they would like to be in the future and fail to appreciate what position of strength or weakness they are starting from.  Their future plans – either as an individual or as an organization – are not grounded in current reality.  Jim Collins in “Good to Great” describes this process as confronting the brutal facts.  He noted that the most successful companies – those that moved from good to great and sustained that level of performance year-over-year – were honest and diligent in determining the truth of a situation.  This effort alone, in his estimation, helped leaders and companies identify the right path forward based on decisions that became self-evident. 

A Systems Perspective

A strategic mindset calls upon an individual leader and/or organization to consider a broad range of factors, forces and components that are at play both within the individual organization but also within that organization’s broader sector and environment. In this move from a focus on individual resources/goals and an elevation from unit-specific or department level goals, an effective leader changes their perspective to a higher vantage point.  Certainly we can appreciate that this ability to think at a broader system level for any one individual can be a function of stage of career or level within an organization.  However, to be as effective as possible in a leadership role and provide better direction and rationale for decisions for one’s team, the benefits in understanding how day-to-day tasks fit into the bigger picture can support more effective engagement and execution of job duties.

Intent Focused – The Vision

Earlier we talked about the ability to strongly interrogate the reality facing a leader or an organization.  This relates to both the internal and external factors at play – what are our strengths and weaknesses, and what are the threats and opportunities outside of us.  We suggested that anyone involved in setting a strategic direction forward had to be grounded in the same reality.  What makes this assessment far more effective is also knowing to what end we are directing this investigative effort.  Strategic intent provides a focus that allows individuals within a team or organization to leverage their energy, thinking and capacity to a common cause.  BreakPoint Solutions mirrors this approach by asking our clients to begin with the end in mind or convey to us what success would look like in the timeframe under consideration for a project or initiative. 

The Importance of Timing

A strategic mindset also takes in the consideration of time.  A strategic thinker assesses time from a few different angles – the past, present and the future. Coming back to strategic intent, Dr. Jeanne Liedtka (1998) suggests that effective strategic thinkers ask themselves this core question:

“Having seen the future that we want to create, what must we keep from our past, lose from that past and create in the present to get [to a preferred future state]?”

This question not only frames work within the context of the desired future state, it also takes into account what has been learned from interrogating reality, assessing what the organization may be good at, and what skills or capacities it needs to develop to be successful.  When you think strategically, you are always connecting the past to the present to the future. You learn from the past and use that learning to make predictions. You look at the present to assess the gap between where you are now and where you want to end up.

Intelligent Opportunism

Effective leaders and organizations continue their environmental scans, their assessment of organizational strengths and weaknesses, and evaluation of opportunities and threats on a continuous basis.  They recognize that the assumptions and facts upon which they developed their initial plans are always subject to change.  The concept of intelligent opportunism then should be understood as encompassing factors such as flexibility, adaptability and continuous learning.  This can be where some organizations lose the forest for the trees.  They either question the value of long-term strategic plans (because the environment is always changing) or doggedly follow such plans to the bitter end regardless of changed reality.  

The key to applying the concept of intelligent opportunism within a volatile environment that all organizations operate within is to keep the long-term vision in mind while being flexible on tactics and timing in the short-term.  The balancing act then becomes:

Create, establish, and maintain long-term vision –
where do we want to be in 3, 5 or 10 years?  What are we striving for or to become?

AND

Evaluate the success, necessity and need for adjustment in our short-term goals and tactics every day, week, month and year.  Are we doing the right things to get us where we want to be?

Hypothesis Driven

The final element of a strategic mindset is the ability to vigorously explore a perspective, with an idea in mind, but with a view to testing the validity of that idea and the path towards the goal.  In this case, a strategic mindset and strategic thinking mirrors the scientific method. As strategic thinkers – as curious leadership scientists – we begin with a question or assumption in mind.  That question might start with “What if?” or “Why not?” or “Could it be?”.  One of the keys here is to suspend judgement, a willingness to acknowledge our biases, and vigorously challenge our assumptions. 

Our initial question(s) could then progress into a series of “If this happens…what could happen next?”  This allows us to explore and pursue multiple options either as we interrogate reality, create strategic intent, or evaluate other possibilities as they arise. This personal or organizational willingness to test options can be another strong path forward to balancing between a level of appropriate persistence and pure stubbornness.  One path keeps us aligned to our goals while the second option can take us over a proverbial cliff.

My hope is that this rather long dissertation helps you understand better this concept of strategic thinking and strategic mindset. Developing this capacity is a critical skill throughout your leadership career.  I encourage you to start thinking about you can now move from understanding to purposeful development.  

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Building Organizational Resilience

Originally published on February 2, 2023.

 In my last blog I introduced the concept of organizational resilience and how we might actually assess this capacity in an organization.  Got some powerful feedback especially as it related to the full scope of what resilience, adversity and trauma are.  Suffice it to say that the whole concept of resilience can be - and is - sufficient to exceed the limited space of any one blog to address and has a breadth and depth of opportunity to support any number of graduate and post-graduate courses and degrees!  All that being said, I want to move beyond identifying how one might start to measure organizational resilience to how leaders could take steps to further develop resilience in their organization.

Whether an organization has undertaken a formal and well-developed assessment of current ability to effectively respond to adversity or has taken a much more limited and cursory approach to this evaluation the results may largely be the same - there is room for improvement and strengthening of organizational resilience.  First off, no organization has all the perfect systems or structures in place. I always believer there is room for improvement.  Second, even if those systems and structures were best-in-class when introduced, they likely need ongoing maintenance and attention as times passes.  Complacency and hubris can lead to unpleasant surprises down the road. Finally, resilience in an organization is a function not just of the structures and systems that an organization has in place but also of the individual capacity of each individual employee as well. The reality is that these individuals operate at different levels of capability and resilience on any given day and that this reality shifts daily. Personal and organizational resilience are always in flux. 

A key takeaway from understanding organizational resilience aside from the need to do some form of assessment and appreciating that it is always in flux is that fact that when adversity (or even a major disaster/trauma hits) that whatever we show up to the event with is what our capabilities will be in the moment.  The organization, its leaders, and its staff will not have the luxury of asking the pain point to come back when we are more ready.  An organization needs to be proactive in preparing for eventuality of adversity and worse.  

Some core elements of enhancing, sustaining and building organizational resilience come back to the areas of resilience assessment introduced in the last blog.

Core Values & Purpose - One of the comments I received from a reader on my last blog related to how too many organizations seem to have lost their "why?"  The passion and clarity of purpose was seen as lacking and an explanation as to why we are seeing so much employee disengagement and turnover.  In this reader's view the lack of articulation AND ADHERENCE to core values and purpose was a key driver of the Great Resignation and Quiet Quitting.  

I agree.  An organization would do well to revisit/refresh its Mission, Vision and Values on a regular basis; ensure that all internal stakeholders (at least) are part of that process to support commitment, buy-in and execution: and then vigorously embed these foundational elements into organizational systems and processes.  This latter effort, continues the organization-wide discussion around the "why", the "where" and the "how" - it makes the commitments and promises real.  As one of my coaching colleagues says all the time - "We need to take these statements off the wall and make them walk down the hall!"  

Organizational Decision-Making - A core part of making the purpose and values real and vibrant is ensuring that they are in fact used in organizational decision-making.  A consistent reference and application of these core elements needs to be part of any decision that the Board, senior leadership, middle management and front-line staff use to make large and small decisions.  Alignment of purpose and grounding in common frameworks allows all internal stakeholders to be centred in advance of adversity and provides them with the ability to get recentred when adversity throws individuals and organizations for a loop.

Investment in Leaders and Staff - Hopefully, it is relatively obvious that resilient leaders provide the capacity for organizations as a whole to be resilient.  If leadership is stressed, exhausted, and otherwise fragile (for any number of reasons) the capacity of the organization to respond to adversity is likely to be limited, reactive, late and even counter-productive.  If physical, emotional, mental and spiritual resilience of the leaders is diminished they cannot similarly evaluate, monitor and attend to the capacity of staff.  Leaders ARE a key point of leverage for organizational success and will determine how your organization will respond in the moment of adversity.  This reality speaks to the need for ongoing engagement surveys (not just once every few years), actionable and credible plans to address the results of the engagement surveys, the development of systems that allow leaders and staff to do work effectively and with limited frustration (e.g., suitable IT systems, sufficient supplies, good equipment, etc.), strong communication throughout the organization, and ongoing leadership and staff development.  

Organizational Coping Skills - Every organization should provide its leaders and staff clarity as to how to respond in a moment of adversity.  The time for critical learning is not at the time of a critical event!  This can be as simple as having a well-understood response plan in the event of a fire alarm (don't laugh - I've seen something this basic be taken for granted and experience miserable failure as a result), an IT outage or hack, all the way through to supports available to react to and immediately recover from an episode of violence in the workplace.  If leaders and staff know the commitment and seriousness of the organization's efforts to support them in the moment - and then experience that level of support in the moment - confidence and resilience are maintained and impact is more rapidly recovered from. 

Organizational Self-Care - Beyond the immediate crisis, an organization must similarly invest in a range of longer range and proactive initiatives that lay a strong foundation for building capacity.  This includes investment of serious time and energy - and sometimes dollars - in areas and systems such as business continuity plans, partnerships with suppliers and other service partners, customer service initiatives and relationship building, succession planning efforts, and long-term capital infrastructure maintenance and replacement plans.  The list is certainly not exhaustive but hopefully illustrates the flavor of proactive investments in long-term organizational strategies that can support organizational resilience. 

Culture & Personality - the final element that I propose that an organization attend to on a consistent and proactive basis is the health of its culture.  This takes on many forms - some of which relate to the initiatives we have just covered above.  Overall, an organization that has a strong, consistent and aligned culture has a greater chance of successfully moving through and beyond adversity than an organization that doesn't understand and own its strengths, doesn't promote or practice within a learning environment, and overall believes in its collective capacity and strength.  

When we put forth the concept of alignment this speaks to two aspects.  One, the organization's systems, decisions and actions must be aligned with, support advancement of, and be driven by the organization's Mission, Vision and Values.  Second, all leaders, staff, departments, and functions of the organizations must know and feel that they are moving in the same direction and hopefully with equal passion and commitment.

Overall, this perspective implies a level of investment in organizational self-confidence, recognizing and rewarding individual, team and organization performance and successes.  This implies a level of connectivity and camaraderie within the organization with limited to no barriers for information sharing and collaboration.  This suggests that the organization has both the humility to assess and test itself, is driven to improvement, and is willing to learn from (versus simply punish) mistakes. This suggests that the organization and its staff have the confidence in all circumstances to maintain control over events rather than seeing themselves as victims of external forces. 

Ultimately, organizational resilience - once understood and assessed - can be improved by a series of purposeful and aligned initiatives.  Failure to undertake such efforts puts not only organizational heath and success at risk but may also result in complete failure and demise of the enterprise.  

I suggest that attending to and promoting organizational resilience is neither simple nor easy.  But it is critical.  And ultimately a resilient organization is all about leadership. 

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Assessing Organizational Resilience

Originally posted on January 26, 2023.

The concept of resilience has gained a lot of attention in the past several years most notably because everyone one of us has been tested in countless ways, through several years of the COVID-19 pandemic.  Understandably much of the focus has been on evaluating, building and sustaining personal resilience.  However, the conversation around organizational resilience has also started to gain similar attention the more so, perhaps, as the strain on the capacity of various companies and sectors has become more and more noticeable in the past year.  News stories and the reality of hospitals grappling with significant turnover in staff and resulting vacancies, supply chain issues that continue to plague the automobile industry, and the challenge that almost all organizations have faced in pivoting in response to new demands from both customers and staff.  Organizational disappointments, failures and other shortfalls have become relatively commonplace and even expected in today's environment.

An interesting question was posed to me recently on organizational resilience, "How serious is the conversation and the follow-through on organizational resilience?"  A provocative question.  Unfortunately, my response reflected a reasonable degree of cynicism and view that too many leaders might be paying lip service to the very real need to attend to organizational resilience and to sustain such efforts on a long-term, consistent basis.  In some ways, the issue of organizational resilience might fall into the same category as issues like black lives matter, diversity/equity/inclusion, the me too movement and other such events that gain a lot of traction and attention in the moment but whose momentum fails after a few short months.  We have proven ourselves to have notoriously short attention spans on even critical issues, make large and glorious pronouncements, pat ourselves on the back, and try to get back to business as quickly as possible. 

The consequences of a drive to get back to business as usual in current circumstances, however, is that we only further weaken and exhaust our organizational capacity and resilience.  Paradoxically, if want to improve our business and organizational fortunes, leaders will have to go slow to go fast.  Leaders will have to see assessment, development and sustainment of organizational resilience as a key strategic imperative for many years yet to come.  All this begs some questions though - how does one measure organizational resilience and once a benchmark has been established how do you grow organizational resilience?

For now, let's start on the assessment side of resilience.  There are a myriad of tools available for us as individuals to assess our personal resilience.  These tools benefit from strong grounding in schools of thought informed by psychology and efforts to support individual mental health.  I have yet to find as comprehensive or encompassing a tool that helps to assess organizational resilience.  One option to address this gap is to consider the organization as its own living, breathing entity and extrapolate and modify assessment categories accordingly.  The result might start to then focus on key areas of organizational health:

Core Values & Purpose - how well articulated, integrated and widespread are the organization's Mission, Vision, Values and Strategic Directions?

Organizational Decision-Making - to what extent does the organization consistently respond to adverse events in a proactive and constructive manner (versus reactive/panicked mode)?

Organizational Coping Skills - what is the quality and range of tools and supports the organization has for itself, staff and even key stakeholders to support organizational function in the immediate aftermath of an adverse event?

Organizational Self-Care - what is the quality and range of initiatives the organization has in place to build resilience and capacity in advance of any adverse event?  In contrast to organizational coping skills, organizational self-care represents long-term and sustained investments in building and improving capacity in advance of adversity (e.g., business continuity, learning & development plans, succession planning, etc.).

Organizational Pride & Confidence - this may seem an odd assessment category, but it starts to reflect an investment in organizational culture that rewards and recognizes achievements, strengths and accomplishments of individuals, teams and the entire organization.  The assessment focus can be supported in part through staff engagement surveys but also through evaluation of image/presence in the marketplace.  What is the "personality" or reputation of the organization with its stakeholders?

Organizational Connectivity - this assessment category looks at the degree to which the organization supports not just information sharing but also collaboration and support between teams and different functions/departments within the organization.  A similar effort and lens could be applied to the extent to which an organization is constructively connected and engaged with key external stakeholders (e.g., suppliers, funders, service partners and even competitors).  What is the degree and quality of connection, collaboration and support that the organization can call upon in time of need?

Proactive Worldview - this category can potentially also be assessed through a staff engagement survey or external stakeholder evaluation, and relates to the extent that the organization consistently takes initiative, proactively anticipating changing market conditions, versus constantly or consistently being on the defensive.  This could include an assessment of the strength of the organizations forecasting tools and methods, the ability to strong interrogate reality, and the willingness to support constructive conflict and contrary opinions (i.e., don't shoot the messenger).

Learning Culture - it is suggested that the key to this assessment category is primarily in how the organization handles mistakes, failures, missteps and even significant setbacks.  Can the organization face these issues with some degree of organizational humility and with a focus on appreciating that every challenge has critical feedback and lessons that might have to be sought out and applied for future growth?  

Each of these assessment categories are only as good at assessing organizational resilience as the nature of the questions posed and the degree of honesty and courage in addressing the areas under investigation.  Like individual self-assessments, I recommend that the questions in each area not run to pages and pages but rather focus on the critical few and essential elements.  Similarly, the organizational assessment should err on the side of simplicity so that it can be revisited on a regular basis (and not just annually or every few years).  This ease and simplicity of use will better support the organization to keep its finger on the pulse of the organization and adjust its approach to building and sustaining resilience over time.  

I have not addressed what to do with the results once obtained.  How do you build organizational resilience?  Space and capacity call for that to be addressed in a subsequent blog.  At this point, I welcome you to explore the assessment thoughts posed above, critique them, trial them perhaps, and suggest other options for assessing organizational resilience. 

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Governance Coaching - Why not? What if?

Originally published on January 12, 2023.

Several years ago an organization reached out to me requesting consulting support in respect of both strategic planning and governance. When the request came in I had this tremendous sense of deja vu.  The organization and the issues they presented to me had an air of familiarity that I could not place and yet I sensed that in some way, some how, in some fashion I had heard this story before.  And it wasn't just that the issues they presented were generically common to other such engagements.  As a consultant and executive coach I was certainly well-versed with this organization's stated desires - revitalize and confirm long-term strategic directions; re-establish understanding and commitment to Mission/Vision/Values; and, clarify and confirm governance framework and implementation through agreed upon policies and protocols.  

For several hours (if not days) after having received the request I found myself wracking my brain as to why this seemed so much more tangible in my mind then any other similar request from any organization.  And then it came to me. I hadn't done this kind of work with this organization before - but a colleague of mine had!  This very same organization had engaged my colleague to provide in-depth governance and conflict resolution services that had resulted in the creation and solidification of governance philosophy and framework with particular emphasis on a Board of Directors code of conduct.  This organization had been experiencing significant conflict at the board level up to an including threats of legal action.  They sought and got support from my colleague to navigate them through this minefield. 

The board had done good work with my consulting colleague.  They had tackled hard issues.  They had arrived at short-term resolution and had set up agreements to help them move forward. Yet two or three years later they were knocking on my door looking to centre themselves yet again.  What had happened?  How did things get lost (again)?  

Make no mistake, every one of the board members was very interested in the work of their organization.  Every one of the board members wanted to make a difference or impact in the work that they were doing.  None of them sought a board position merely to put that type of position on their resume.  For the most part, this is true for almost any board especially for those boards that rely on voluntary (versus paid) commitment.  Almost without exception, directors become involved in an organization because they are committed to its mission and want to help it achieve great things. Yet many boards find themselves floundering and seem to reinvent the proverbial governance wheel on a too frequent basis.  

How do we get boards off this groundhog day type process, where there is a need for a major intervention every few years, where external supports are called in, and significant time, energy and $$$'s are expended to get back to stability and base function?  Increasingly I have come to believe that the answer lies in governance coaching.  Over the past several decades leadership and executive coaching has become more mainstream as it relates to support executives and teams at an operational level.  The reasons for utilizing coaching in this way are many as are the documented benefits of utilizing this leadership and team resource.  This resource has been less utilized or even thought of for boards of directors.

The possibilities for utilizing governance coaching are as extensive as they are in the leadership and management realm including:

• Supporting an entire board establish and affirm their governance philosophy including creation and application of a board of directors code of conduct;

• Supporting a new Chair or other officers of the board to understand their leadership approach, their role as Chair/Officer, and establishing goals/plans to succeed in the role;

• Supporting a Chair and their CEO/Executive Director assess and establish the parameters of their working partnership - for some organizations, by design, this kind of work could take place on an annual basis; and,

• Providing a regular, periodic checkpoint (e.g., monthly, quarterly) through engagement of a governance coach to support the board of directors to maintain momentum and traction on its governance role and goals. 

This list above is not exhaustive and there are as many ways to consider supporting and sustaining board function as do exist for the administrative arm of an organization.  Historically, governance coaching has not been as strongly utilized as leadership coaching both for reasons of cost and an assumption that skilled and committed volunteers or paid directors implicitly understood governance.  In my experience, both of those perspectives have been more often proven (egregiously) wrong than right.  Again, this is NOT for lack of desire to deliver quality work for an organization on behalf of the board members.  But like the leaders and staff they will derive benefit from an external sounding board that helps them confirm and clarify goals, build self-awareness, and keep them on track to the benefit of themselves and their organizations.

In my biased opinion (as a governance coach) organizations need to utilize governance coaching to get governance right.  If we can build and sustain effective governance we provide a strong foundation for effective executive leadership and ultimately sustained organizational success.

It's about governance and its about leadership!

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Building Governance - Sustaining Governance

Originally published on January 4, 2023.

2022 is in the rear view mirror!  Looking back if I could identify themes from the past year one of those, unfortunately, would be governance dysfunction.  Or rather, I might say continuing governance dysfunction.  I have either been on boards, reported to boards, counselled boards, or counselled leaders reporting to boards for nearly 40 years now.  Despite the supposed advancements in training and development opportunities for boards of directors, certification programs, the proliferation of books and articles on the subject of governance, and a long line-up of well-intentioned people too many organizations are still struggling mightily to get governance right. 

What does dysfunction at the board level look like?  Here are only some of the examples that I could cite from this past year alone:

• Confusion and even outright disagreement on governance philosophy and framework for the board.  As a result, individual board members operate in different and conflicting ways, seeking to engage on issues at different levels of detail, and send confusing messages and directions to operational leadership.

• Rogue board member(s).  Rogue behavior can manifest in several ways.  Sometimes it is one board member, up to an including the Chair, that dominates the board discussion and decisions. There is no opportunity or allowance for other board members to contribute to board decisions in any meaningful way.  This may even include not sharing information that all board members are entitled to receive.  In other cases, rogue board members may be those who take on a role beyond what they have been authorized to do and/or actively undermine decisions made by the board as a whole.

• Lack of clarity of roles.  This can operate at various levels within the governance structure: (1) what is the role, power and obligations of the Board Chair, (2) what is the role, power and accountabilities of other officers of the board and any board committees that may be in place, (3) what is the relationship between the Board Chair and CEO, and, (4) what is the relationship between the Board as a whole and the CEO.

• Off-the-record or side-bar meetings.  The work of a board of directors should be done through formally established committees or working as the whole board.  To the extent that select board members start to operate in the shadows, aligning interests and positions, and even making decisions outside of the sight of the whole board leads to board member disengagement at best and deep distrust and conflict at worst.  

• Failure to take role seriously.  This dysfunction can take on many forms from something as simple (but impactful) as not being prepared for (or even attending) board or committee meetings, not bringing forth their ideas and expertise to board deliberations, and avoiding hard conversations on real issues.

This is only a small listing of challenges that board's face on a regular basis.  How do we (finally) resolve this reality?  The first thing that I believe is necessary to appreciate on the part of any board is that no matter how successful they might believe themselves to be at a moment in time, ongoing success requires the regular expenditure of time, energy, effort and thought in maintaining governance equilibrium and growth.  I have more than one example of being called in to resolve board conflict or improve function two or three years after they have done similar work with another consultant.  Failure to continuously attend to governance can result in a version of groundhog day.

The next step is to for the board to constructively discuss and vigorously debate what the governance philosophy and model should be for the organization.  In this case, while the discussion and final decision can and should be informed by a variety of governance models that exist and what other organizations are doing, every organization should make sure that their model works for their circumstances and in light of their identified mission, vision and values.  All too often a board can find itself hamstrung by preoccupation with procedural matters, worrying more about parliamentary procedure than the big issues they are supposed to be focused on.  In effect, the board loses the forest for the trees.    

This leads us into ensuring that the board in question even understands the mission, vision and values of the organization on whose behalf they govern.  This may seem obvious but too often these foundational elements can be seen as more relevant to the organization as a whole than to the board.  As a result, too little time is spent by the board understanding how they can or should translate these concepts into action at a governance level and how they should be using the mission, vision and values to evaluate the organization's progress and board function.  Therefore, a deep dive into mission, vision and values is called for and should form part of at least an annual touchpoint for the board.

Once these core elements are better understood, the board should dig into its operational procedures including a deep dive into the roles and responsibilities of the Board Chair, Vice-Chair, other officers and committee chairs.  It is important to have each individual taking on these roles understand what they are committing to do on behalf of the board, but it is also important that there be clear understanding on the part of all board members so that they can support these leadership roles and expectations going forward.  In addition, for the purpose of recruitment and succession planning for the board (yes, there is work to be done here as well) you want to make sure that those pursuing or being considered for board membership or positions on the board know what is expected of them.

This point of discussion naturally leads into the need to create, solidify and hold to a code of conduct for the board.  This can be a follow-up on the values discussion we noted earlier. What do the values look like in practice for the board?  How do board members interact with each other?  How do they interact with the rest of the organization and external stakeholders?  What behaviors are "off-side" and what steps do individual board members, the Board Chair or the board as a whole take to resolve such issues?  This conversation and plan must be grounded in practical examples and specific remedies rather than theoretical or abstract constructs. 

The final thing I want to leave you with is the need to integrate all of these deliberations and outcomes into a set of structures and processes that support and reinforce the approach to governance that a board has decided on. While we have not talked about the relationship with the CEO or Executive Director, the concept of board evaluation, the need and approach to measurement and reporting, and more, it is critical that the board leverage and support the good intentions of its members to stay on track.  In its simplest form this is an agreed-upon annual calendar of board events and responsibilities.  Rather than relying upon memory and goodwill, the organization as a whole is guided by and can anticipate governance work weeks, months and even a year ahead of time.  Rather than responding or reacting in the moment - or even creating crisis in reactive mode - the board is supported and prepared for all aspects of its governance role.

As I have said to some of my clients, I see the role of consultants supporting boards of directors to move them out of reactive and crisis mode to proactive and considered deliberate consideration. In short, I want to help them find and deliver quality through governance.  I want to help them leverage their expertise and good intentions.  I want them to be inspired and to inspire through governance. 

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Lessons in Leadership - from Ukraine

Originally published on August 24, 2022.

Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky seems - or seemed - an unlikely exemplar for leadership at the best of times, much less during the most significant conflict in Europe's history since World War II.  Prior to taking office in May of 2019, his history was as a comedian, actor and producer. His political credentials were (rightly) questioned as was his leadership in general.  He had not proven himself in any leadership capacity, much less in a neighborhood as dangerous and volatile as Eastern Europe has become especially as the Vladimir Putin's reign as Russian leader has evolved over the years.

Against all odds, and despite all prognostications on his leadership and the resilience and capacity of Ukraine itself, here we are, 6 months into a war that was predicted by a variety of experts to last only a few days or a week at the most.  The vision for Russia was a military parade in Kiev, a puppet government installed that would be supportive of imperial Russian designs, and the weakness of western democracy laid bare.

Without question, we can attribute a large part of the current success of Ukraine's war effort to the skill and tenacity of its troops and population at large.  There is even some credit to be given to Western powers who have helped in the training of Ukraine's army prior to this time and the not insubstantial supplies and intelligence being provided to Ukraine since the war started.  However, the leadership skill being demonstrated by President Zelensky cannot be discounted.  So what are the leadership qualities or principles that he has demonstrated and how might these be relevant to other less tumultuous circumstances?

1. Leadership With vs Apart

A sharp contrast in image (and reality) has been evident in terms of how Zelensky and Putin have been portrayed or shown up in media reports.  On the one hand, we have the image of Putin separated from foreign dignitaries and his own military and political leadership by long conference tables in an equally large room.  The image may be intended to convey power and hierarchy but also comes across as arrogant and out-of-touch.  Zelensky on the other hand has been seen on numerous occasions either seated cheek-by-jowl with his closest advisors and fellow leaders or walking the streets of Kiev or other communities in Ukraine.  Putin conveys a distance in a real and metaphorical sense from his people.  Zelensky is with and shares the pain and burdens of his fellow Ukrainians. 

2. Messaging that Matters & Resonates

As the war began so many months ago, and with expectations of imminent defeat for Ukraine so prevalent, Zelensky seemed to mirror Winston Churchill in the darkest days of World War II when he said "The fight is here; I need ammunition, not a ride."  In one simple sentence Zelensky encapsulated the fighting spirit of Ukraine while at the same time sending a message that resonated not only with the people of his own country but all those who shared and supported the cause of freedom and self-determination.  Zelensky touched an emotional cord with many around the world.  

In contrast, Putin has continued to present in a very stolid fashion that mirrors what we have come to expect from decades of Soviet and post-Soviet bureaucracy.  The intent is no doubt to present strength and confidence, but his overly long speeches are hardly engaging, are highly professorial in tone and approach, and laced with resentment and grievance that connect with very few, even within Russia itself.

3. Messaging & Context

One of the clear strengths of Zelensky's messaging to the world comes from the way he is presented and shown up at various world forums - mostly of a virtual nature - from the beginning of the war to the present time.  This starts even with something as simple as how he dresses for the occasion - not in business suit, but rather in common clothing and combat gear.  His presence again conveys powerfully that my country is under siege, times are not normal, and we are determined to prevail regardless of sacrifice.  No power suit - as per Putin - for Zelenzky.

Zelensky has also been very successful in understanding his audience and speaking in experiences and metaphors that resonate with that particular audience.  He has not used concepts that only have meaning for Ukraine.  He has taken time to understand comparative stories that resonate with his audience - whether Canadian, American, German, etc. - and have put those within the context of the war in Ukraine.  By doing so he has built common cause with other using their own history to make the connection.

Finally, he has also been at pains to speak to others, albeit in sound bites, in their own language.  He has not just relied on translators to convey his message.  This is especially true in parts of his message that are the most powerful pieces of what he wishes to convey. 

4. Humility

The contrast between the personality and leadership style of Putin and Zelensky cannot perhaps be seen more starkly than when comparing levels of humility (or arrogance).  No doubt that the relative power positions of the two nations at war put Zelensky in the least favorable position and suggests a need for humility.  This is particularly so when you are literally begging for the means to defend your country and the lives of your citizens (and yourself).  Zelensky's honest presentation and engagement with the world has, however, been a source of strength rather than weakness as he continues to rally support for the cause of Ukrainian independence.  There is no façade, there is no pomp and ceremony in any presentation by Zelensky.  Rather he uses a bare office or the destruction of Ukrainian cities and villages as a backdrop for his work.  

5. A Shared Vision

Despite the odds and expectations, Zelensky has continued to speak of a stronger and better future for Ukraine.  He paints a picture of a free and united Ukraine.  He paints a picture of a Ukraine built back better than before.  He paints a picture of a Ukraine that has weathered a storm and comes back stronger.  He has been consistent in articulating and pushing this vision of hope since the beginning of the conflict.  And it is a SHARED vision. It has encouraged and supported much sacrifice and dogged resistance on the part of the Ukrainian nation. But, combined with the very staying power of Ukrainians themselves, it is also a vision that has inspired action and support from around the world.

This contrasts sharply with what Putin has been able to cobble together.  There is certainly a vision, make no mistake, but one that harkens back to Imperial or Soviet Russia.  Both models have some nostalgic appeal for some Russians, but clearly does drive a level of commitment or support at the levels that Ukraine is experiencing both within and outside of its borders.  Rather, we see strong (although small) dissent within Russia, lack of motivation and performance on the part of the common Russian soldier, and little to no external support that isn't simply driven by cold calculation of what's in it for me (e.g., buying Russian energy at a discount).

This is a very short list of lessons in leadership that I believe we can observe from Ukraine and Zelensky in particular.  Back in January of this year, I further wrote about what I believe defines leadership It's About Leadership: Defining Leadership (breakpointsolutions.blogspot.com).  At least two of those qualities stand out for me as it relates to President Zelensky - Courage and Selflessness. Going back to the earlier quote, Zelensky was made every offer to leave Kyiv.  He has chosen to stay along with his family.  No easy exits for him. No easy choices for him.  In this same regard, he has clearly made the choice to do what is best for his country and not just for his own survival.  

Never has it been made more demonstrably true than through President Zelensky's approach that it is All About Leadership!

Slava Ukraini!

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Toxic Leadership - A Way Forward?

Originally published on April 7, 2022.

Just last week I published a post on toxic leadership, a variety of its forms and some personal experiences of that reality.  The response to that blog was overwhelming.  Thousands of views and many comments - mostly of commiseration!  At the end of that post the question of not just simply identifying a toxic leader but effectively working or managing in such an environment was left open.  The article that I drew from at the time seemed to imply that the only effective strategy in dealing with a toxic boss was to simply cope with that reality.  A less polished way to put it would be "suck it up buttercup."

So I put it to you - the reader of this blog - to ponder alternatives to managing a toxic leader and surviving the personal angst and chaos that ensues.  Unfortunately, even with time and discussion and feedback what came back to me were two relatively harsh alternatives.  The first commonly stated alternative was in fact to merely accept this as an inevitable consequence of a working life.  In this harsh assessment it is clear that those who shared their thoughts (or despair) with me were not alone.  Gallup research seems to consistently bear out a common theme of poor leadership and lack of engagement of staff in literally all industries.  Common terminology used to describe such poor leaders includes - self-absorbed, unaware, stubborn, overly demanding, and impulsive.

The second most common response I received back was that the (best/only) way to manage a toxic leader was to accept defeat and move on to another role in another part of the organization or to leave altogether.  The challenge with that alternative goes directly back to the Gallup research just noted above.  Most industries, sectors, and companies all seem to suffer from poor leaders.  So you might just be moving from the frying pan to the fire in your attempt to escape a bad situation.

I did get some other insights from my readers and I've expanded upon those kernels below.  Perhaps these are more practical then simply resorting to the alternatives of self-suppression and flight noted above.  The first solid piece of advice to provide is to clearly understand yourself.  While that may seem like an odd place to start when trying to think about dealing with a bad boss it's crucial in making sure you know what's important to you and what your boundaries are.  What this understanding of self positions you to do is more effectively pick your battles.  You can then better evaluate whether a "compromise" is morally and ethically defeating versus simply being annoying and inconvenient.  Essentially you can determine which one of the options for coping - management or flight is the best option.

It was also clear from the responses I received that while I might have focused on the more malicious type of leader in my first post, a number of you are dealing with a different varieties of poor leaders.   Hence you have some specific "solutions" to provide in that context.  The broader array of poor leadership included the micro-manager (short on vision, long on telling you how to do "everything"), the grand visionary (long on vision, unable to comprehend or frustrated by the work required to achieve the vision), the "analyst" and risk manager (every contingency and piece of data mapped out), the self-centred leader (it is all about me) and finally the truly incompetent leader.

While these are all very different types of scenarios and leaders there are some common techniques and strategies by which you can perhaps more effectively manage - and perhaps even succeed - in these environments:

• Be prepared.  Unfortunately you are going to have to put in more time into this "relationship" than your boss will.  Regardless of what type of bad boss you have none of them have as much at stake as you do.  Understand yourself and your boundaries, prepare in advance for each meeting, and map a plan/objectives for each meeting or initiative.  As a leader yourself you can manage the relationship.  In some ways it's important to think of your boss as your most important customer.

• Don't assume.  As a corollary to "Be Prepared" don't make the mistake of assuming anything about what your boss will want, knows, expects or will do.  In any of these scenarios you don't have the luxury of not planning for or anticipating a variety of circumstances.  Plan for the worst, hope for the best.

• Don't try to be right.  This is a hard one to swallow but in the "battle" you're in you are going to have to decided whether you want to be right or get the right thing done.  They are not necessarily the same thing.  Be clear about your ultimate goal for the particular project or initiative and be prepared to alter tactics to ensure success.  In addition, be clear and solid on your big picture career goals.  Be prepared to alter your tactics to keep moving forward in your career despite the short-term reality of a toxic boss. 

• Understand your boss.  I found with one of my worst bosses that I really had to make an effort to get into his head.  I certainly would never lead the way he did, but I did try to anticipate what might set him off (e.g., one too many chairs for the Board meeting!) and resigned myself to many agonizing minutes of silence as he "visioned" the next big thing.  This meant being disciplined in my work habits and approach.  I also tried to emulate his language.  Explaining things my way was not as successful as explaining things his way.

• Support your boss.  Several of my readers reflected on a boss who has clearly been promoted too quickly, had an awesome interview that belied a lack of substance, or was the best of a bunch of poor candidates.  Now what?  For most of us, if we are committed to our organization, our staff or our customers, it means we do our level best to deliver great service regardless or in spite of the leadership handicap we labor under.  Our satisfaction comes from succeeding despite that handicap.

• Engage a team.  Most times, despite the strength and validity of your arguments, the strength of your position, or even your own personal credibility and history as a leader you won't be in a position to effectively counter a poor leader one-on-one.  You may need to engage like-minded allies.  I'm not suggesting fostering a mutiny.  That's a dangerous road.  Rather, you need more than one voice offering alternatives, respectfully questioning direction or decisions, and otherwise offering other solutions.  If you become the lone voice within you could soon be the lost voice without.

• Network and Remain Connected - one of the worst things that I have observed in dealing with a toxic leader - particularly one that we would consider abusive - is the tendency to blame self and self-isolate.  We start to believe the narrative being created around us and about us.  We begin to lose confidence in self and trust in others.  This becomes a spiraling downward cycle.  A request I often make of others - having been in this position myself - is to foster relationships inside and outside of work, find a place of support, and find a place of safety that just even allows you to vent and brainstorm with others.  Engage others to ensure you are realistically and objectively evaluating your state of affairs. 

One final and far more risky tactic that one can take when dealing with a toxic leader takes a page from the Me Too movement - exposure and truth telling.  As I know you can well imagine, this is a far more intimidating prospect than just coping or leaving.  In some cases, it can feel like a scorched earth policy and akin to burning all bridges behind you. In many cases, it also may feel like you are similarly burning all bridges in front of you as well.  If the toxic leader in question has been able to deliver results in some form, has a charismatic personality or is well-liked/connected within and outside of the organization how will your grand reveal be perceived by those in positions of power?  If change happens will it simply be in the form of your departure/martyrdom?  

This final option is not an easy choice.  Many of us would far prefer to take what seem to be easier roads.  There are no guarantees of success or survival in this path.  That being said, we have seen examples of change in other circumstances with powerful personalities brought down for their historic transgressions. Successful or not, this path is often long and bruising.  Gird for battle, wounds and a process of recovery. 

It often takes more energy and effort to lead up than it takes to lead a team of subordinates.  Your team has less choice about whether to follow you.  This is also true of a CEO who is trying to work with a Board of Directors, a Board Chair or a group of shareholders.  Leadership is not just about working with those who recognize your authority because you are one or more levels up the ladder from them.  Leadership is also about how you can manage others above you.

Success in managing a poor leader takes a lot more strength, discipline and emotional maturity than feels reasonable but it can be a harsh reality.  I certainly can't say that I've always passed my own personal tests but then continuous learning and growth should always be part of what being an effective leader is all about.

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Toxic Leadership - Hidden (and not so hidden) Reality

Originally published on March 30, 2022.

Four years ago I posted on the subject of toxic leadership.  In fact, I wrote about this sad reality in back-to-back posts.  I was prompted by an article I came across that spoke eloquently on the subject of toxic leaders.  In recent weeks, I have again been motivated by the unfortunate experiences of colleagues and clients with toxic leadership to review what I had written before.  Unfortunately, not much has changed in that time period. One might argue, in fact, that things have gotten worse rather than better.

Why?  Why are we still burdened with a mix of incompetent, self-serving, and even malicious leadership?  Why are some of these leaders recruited, tolerated, enabled, promoted and even lauded?  The recent examples that have put my clients, colleagues and myself to despair include:

• leaders who drift from leadership role to leadership role, staying in place only a couple of years or less - what are organizations not seeing that causes them to overlook such transient commitment or capability?

• leaders who have an incredibly high rate of turnover in their teams and who brush off such turnover, year over year, with reference to work ethic, competitive marketplace, lack of commitment and so on.  Those "arguments" might stand up to scrutiny for a short period of time, however, when that reality persists year-over-year for a decade then one should start to question the leader's skills in hiring, guiding, mentoring and developing their team.  Or questions should be asked about the work environment that they are creating. 

• leaders who actively undermine their subordinates.  This takes many forms - throwing your direct reports under the proverbial bus when the organization fails to perform; failing to take accountability for poor decisions/outcomes that directly trace back to the leader; failure to prioritize initiatives and/or providing staff with tools to succeed - then making them pay the price for inevitable failure; leaders who expect/demand their subordinates take responsibility and accountability for their actions but then impose their own solutions that align with a personal (not organizational) agenda.

• leaders who pay lip service to team development and succession planning, but then either don't invest in capacity building of their teams or even actively diminish the skills, abilities, opportunities - and even confidence - of their direct reports.  Why?  Variety of reasons that I have seen encompassing a full range of motivations from ego boots to complete insecurity and fear on the part of a leader.

• leaders who create an "us versus them" culture.  This can happen at many levels and I have seen this play out where a CEO pits Board against Administration, a leader pits management against staff (or union), department vs department, and so on.  Again, information and withholding of information, restrictions in decision-making power and authority, and other tactics are used to reinforce and support the toxic leader's position of power and personal agenda.

As I said, all of these recent realities brought to mind an article I came across on toxic leaders some years ago.  It was written by Richard Gunderman, Chancellor's Professor of Medicine, Liberal Arts, and Philanthropy at Indiana University-Purdue University.  The author had so many good points that I decided to simply share and comment on his thoughts.  In this case, I've emphasized Gunderman's points in bold lettering and provided supplementary comments based on personal experiences.

Gunderman posits that just as effective bosses can do considerable good for an organization, toxic ones can inflict a great deal of damage.  In my estimation, its also true that the extent of the damage is not fully realized or understood until the toxic leader leaves or is let go.  Oftentimes the organization is left repairing the damage for some time after.  

Sadly, the individual that takes on leadership AFTER a toxic leader departs is often left to clean up a substantial mess.  Worse yet, by discovering or stumbling across the wreckage left behind by the toxic leader it is often the successor that pays a heavy price - including termination - for the damage done.

The author suggests that the first step to coping effectively with a toxic boss is recognizing that you have one.  Here are the 10 indicators that Gunderman provides to help you diagnose that your boss is probably toxic.

One.  When the toxic boss comes on board it feels as thought all fellowship and joy are being sucked out of the organization.  Like Dementors in Harry Potter, toxic bosses drain people of their passion, leaving nothing in their wake but a widespread feeling of despair.  Employees come to resemble mice who have been subjected to random electrical shocks, lapsing into a state that psychologists called learned helplessness.  As another former employee of a toxic boss put it, "It wasn't long before the whole organization took on a soulless feel."

Two.  Within weeks of the toxic boss's arrival, the mercury in the organization's "distrustometer" begins rising precipitously.  People begin eying one another with suspicion.  Lively meetings become deadened, as though no one would dare voice a divergent opinion.  According to one employee, "People stopped saying what they really thought. If they ever spoke their mind, they did so only after glancing over both shoulders to make sure no one was listening, and then they spoke in a whisper. It was like Invasion of the Body Snatchers."

This one really resonated with me from a couple of my past experiences.  I've had a "leader" who has either taken an active approach of "divide and conquer" as it related to their subordinates or actively disengaged from their team leaving agreements or disputes to fester.  If you take a lead from Patrick Lencioni's work, the absence of trust that is created (and fostered) leads to suppression of any constructive conflict, lack of common commitments and so forth.  By design or neglect, a toxic environment is established.  Similarly, if you start to see a rise in sick time, stress leave, and turnover amongst staff, the organization needs to dig deeper and not settle for simplistic answers/excuses.

Three.  Power becomes consolidated in the hands of a few people who report directly to the toxic boss.  People who question this process are moved aside or completely out of the organization.  In many cases, the toxic boss achieves these ends not by direct confrontation, but like a subtle poisoner, delivering the lethal dose in tiny amounts that build up over time.

Four.  Toxic bosses quickly seize control of the pathways along which knowledge is shared.  Organization charts and reporting hierarchies are rearranged so that everything flows through one central hub, with few if any alternatives.  Without admitting to it, toxic bosses feel threatened by more open patterns of information flow.  As the former colleague of a toxic boss put it, "He sensed that if others knew what was really going on, his position, power and prestige would be undermined."

I've experienced these realities directly and seen too many of my clients/colleagues share this reality.  Some leaders become incredibly adept at this and even leave a subtle suggestion that the one-on-one discussions - versus team-based engagement - represent a privileged reality between leader and subordinate.  I trust you more than the others.  You are more capable than the others. Sometimes the approach is much more direct - thou shall not speak with your peers!  The whole goal is to ensure that a complete picture of reality is only held by the toxic leader.  Even appropriate collaboration for the benefit of the organization is seen as a threat to leadership power. 

Five.  With a toxic boss, employees may have a hard time remembering why they came to work for the organization in the first place.  The true mission of the organization is obscured.  The toxic boss shifts everyone's attention to crasser metrics, such as revenue and rankings, and the organization's mission is treated as a mere tool for boosting results.

Sad but true.  I've been in one too many large organizations where the stated values seemed very remote from the actions that the "leader" or leadership team took on a regular basis.  The substantial disconnect led to more than just a bit of disengagement on the part of employees and seemingly intractable morale issues.

Six.  Toxic bosses leave others feeling manipulated and used.  Some are simply so insensitive that they do not appreciate the toll that their modus operandi takes on their colleagues, but others seem positively to revel in it.  Said an employee, "She seemed to believe that the only way to make herself bigger was to make the people around her feel progressively smaller."

Seven.  Soon after the toxic boss arrives, people begin disappearing.  Almost invariably, such departures go unannounced, completely devoid of fanfare or explanation.  One day they are there, and the next day they are gone, and only later do people learn that former colleagues were abruptly told one day to pack up their offices and hit the pavement.  The toxic boss will never express gratitude to their service, publicly or personally.

The other way that I've seen this reality play out is not in letting people go or marginalizing those with contradictory perspectives but rather in hiring individuals who will be more malleable to the toxic leader's directives.  This sometimes simply plays out with a feeling of personal obligation that a new hire has to the person who has hired them.  Alternatively, I have seen toxic leaders ensure that new hires ARE simply weaker or less experienced and, therefore, can pose no credible contrary points of view.  Overall, a great means to ensure the toxic leader remains unchallenged but hardly a tactic to build organizational strength and success.

Eight.  The toxic boss has no interest in what others have to say.  Some savvy operators appear to listen to other perspectives, but when it comes to action, their in-boxes are black holes.  They seem to believe that being an effective leader means being the center of attention.  Before long, their behavior at meetings begins to reveal their true stripes.  Said one former employee of a toxic boss, "She kept cutting other people off, belittling their contributions, and ended up listening to nothing but her own voice."

Nine.  The toxic boss starts to act like a playground bully.  People are treated not as sources of insight but as tools of implementation.  When they diverge from this path, the toxic boss reminds them how easily they could be replaced.  In short, the tools of persuasion give way to the instruments of coercion.  And such techniques are powerfully augmented by the enhanced sense of vulnerability that accompanies the swelling ranks of the disappeared.

I have vivid memories of getting a phone call "pep talk" from a toxic leader of mine that was a couple of rungs higher up the ladder than I.  Her relative distance from me didn't dissuade her from giving me a shout and probably reflected as much her lack of confidence in my direct supervisor as in myself.  At the time, my organization was going through significant - and noisy - change.  The essence of the pep talk was summed up in her parting words to me - "There are going to be casualties in this time frame, don't be one of them."  I understood my role and standing quite clearly.  I understood that I was quite an expendable and replaceable tool.

Ten.  Do you feel like your every move is being watched by unseen eyes?  Like you are in some kind of jail?  Do you feel like your boss is taking leadership lessons from Jeremy Bentham?  His creation, The Panopticon is a building with a watchman sitting at the center, looking out on all the inmates, who are arrayed around the periphery, each in a separate cell.  The inmates cannot see the jailer, generating a sense of constant surveillance.

For me this goes back to the feelings of mistrust created by the toxic leader ala Lencioni.  In those environments where a toxic leader's impact has been particularly "impressive", it becomes the unfortunate reality that no member of the team believes they can trust any other member of the team - peers or subordinates.  The environment becomes marked by extraordinary caution and guardedness.  The environment becomes risk averse and lacking in a desire for innovation and creativity.

At the end of this article - and my supplementary comments - we have been provided with one set of variables that describe what toxic leadership looks like.  What is lacking is how to effectively tackle it.  In fact, Gunderman seems to suggest that the best one can do is to COPE effectively with toxic leader.  Is this really all that we are left with as a tactic when dealing with a toxic leader despite the very real damage being done to an organization?

So I ask you, what's been your experience in dealing with toxic leadership?  More importantly, what steps did you and others take to effectively DEAL with a toxic leader?  I'm looking forward to your answers, supplemented by my thoughts, as a means to creating a response or tactics that might be useful to us all!

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Maybe it's not them...

Originally published on February 9, 2022.

Some themes seem timeless even if the circumstances that gave rise to certain scenarios varies over time and place. I first wrote much of this post in November 2013.  Different time, different place, and different person than who I am today. That being said, what goes around comes around and the subject matter appears equally relevant to me as it did many years ago.

A lament that I've often heard from many leaders is "Why doesn't my staff perform at the level I need them to?" The context for this can relate to many things: a focus on developing new products or service offerings, a desire to enhance customer service capability, a shift in emphasis in strategic direction, or any number of other "big-ticket" ventures that a leader believes their organization needs to undertake and achieve. Regardless, the long and short of the story is things are not going right and certainly not as well as the leader expected. In fact, rather than succeeding, there is a feeling of losing momentum, of being stalled, failing, and even of going backwards.

The leader's frustration - and mystification - at the lack of success arises because in his/her mind, the initiative should be moving forward rapidly, smoothly, and with a minimum of bumps along the way. From the leader's perspective, the reasons for moving forward assertively and confidently are self-evident. There should be no reason for confusion or lack of action. From the leader's perspective, the importance of the initiative is clear. From the leader's perspective, implementation and execution should now be a foregone conclusion. Barriers? Challenges? Problems? Hardly worthy of consideration. We shall overcome.

Yet, success is not forthcoming. And maybe that means it's time for a change in perspective. Maybe it's not about them. Maybe it's about you.

It's often far easier to blame others for a lack of success or progress in moving an organization forward than in taking a hard look at what we are doing or not doing as the leader. It's personally challenging to start asking some hard questions about what role I as a leader played in not setting the organization up for success. What steps did I not take? What warning signs did I ignore?

So maybe your leadership is getting in the way. First off, like anyone else, leaders can develop tunnel vision. We may have become so engaged with our day-to-day work that we start to lose perspective. Despite the fact that we are specifically tasked with maintaining that 50,000 foot view - or maybe as a result of it - we can lose a sense of what else might be happening in and around the rest of the organization. In essence, we have become trapped by our own mental box and simply can't conceive of factors or issues that might impact successful implementation of our ideas. The facts may even be staring you right in the face but you simply are no longer able to see them. Here's where developing a true climate of trust and confidence in your team can pay huge dividends. The more objective eyes on the ball the better.

Related to the tunnel vision is a phenomenon I'll describe as the speed trap. As leaders we can easily get caught up in the desire to move forward as fast as possible. Time is money, we have to get out ahead of an issue, we have to be first to market, we have to move, move, and move faster. This driving sense of urgency, however, can cause us to plan in a superficial fashion and gloss over challenges. More importantly, as we try to solve a problem, the anxiety we feel to get on with things can actually prevent us from understanding the issue before us. As a result, we may not be tackling the real problem but only dealing with its most obvious symptoms. The adage of pay now or pay later bears listening to. Only in this regard, the currency in question is time. Slow down to move faster and more effectively.

Leaders can also be confounded by an overconfidence in their ability to communicate. Effective communication is never simply about getting the memo(s), emails, or newsletters out, or about having a grand launch event. For any significant initiative, the leader has already spent a considerable amount of time coming to grips with the whys and wherefores of the initiative. The leader believes they understand the importance of the effort at an intellectual and gut level. Leaders are therefore surprised and amazed that the rest of the organization doesn't have the same level of understanding and commitment. The reality is nobody else has been able to spend as much time on this idea as the leader already has. They truly don't yet "get it" because they have not yet been given the time to understand the rationale for the effort. A leader must communicate and allow time for the idea to be digested. In addition, effective communication will ensure and incorporate a feedback loop that allows a check on understanding of key messages and expectations.

Paradoxically, I have also observed that leaders can similarly be confounded by their own lack of confidence or sense of self. There may, in fact, be a lot of exceedingly strong-minded contrarians among your leadership team or other significant stakeholders. I have observed too many conscientious and "nice" leaders failing to follow through on their core values when faced with well-stated or vociferous opinions. They hesitate, change their mind, or never achieve the full potential of what they envisioned for the team or their larger organization. Ultimately, they find themselves challenged by not owning their own values and hopes for the organization strongly enough. Or they hold out false hope that eventually consensus will win out. Unfortunately, many leaders - effective or ineffective - discover eggs have to be broken to make an omelette.

Success in implementing past initiatives may also cloud judgment on a go-forward basis. A lack of planning, preparation, and good communication may not have confounded success in the past. A leader may have succeeded in spite of himself for a whole variety of reasons. A fact-based analysis may not have been undertaken to help identify key learnings. Perhaps we were saved by even worse planning and preparation of a competitor. Perhaps we were saved by the extraordinary efforts of our staff. The truth is, we don't really know what factors supported success or what that success actually cost us. The result is that a leader is unduly confident in their own ability or is otherwise complacent relative to what the next effort is really going to take.

Finally, the ability to move an initiative forward may be most fatally confounded by the organization's assessment of the leader and his/her motivations. Ultimately, I believe words and actions of a leader must line up over the long run. Staff and stakeholders will commit more strongly to something if they believe it serves the achievement of the organization's stated mission, vision, and values. They will commit if they can see benefit for themselves as individuals, and for the organization as a whole. If, however, past experience has informed them that the leader is first and foremost concerned about his/her personal gain, an integrity gap will develop and grow. In these circumstances, the leader may gain compliance but they will not gain true commitment to future plans. Staff and stakeholders will ultimately see through the motivations of a self-absorbed leader. It may take some time, but eventually organizational performance will suffer.

There could probably be a few more warnings posted here about not rushing to judgment on one's staff. The cautionary tale is one of making sure to look at yourself in the mirror first before casting aspersions on the skills, abilities, and motivations of your followers. Have you done enough to set the stage for success? Have you provided the right tools to support effective implementation? Have you looked at the issue from all perspectives?

In the end, it may be that it's not them that failed you. Maybe you failed them.

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

What is Culture...and Why Does it Matter?

Originally published on February 3, 2022.

The subject of culture continues to be one that I grapple with and encounter on a regular basis in my coaching and consulting practice. The reality and challenge of culture comes forward from a number of different angles - leaders not appreciating how their actions or inaction foster a dysfunctional or low-performing culture; lack of consensus throughout an organization on what the culture is or should be resulting in a whole series of competing subcultures; a need for an organization's culture to adapt to changing external realities; a lack of appreciation for how legacy systems confound an imperative for change that is being communicated by a leader. The examples are myriad of how culture needs to change, but how unprepared or unaware we might be about what culture is and how we impact effective shifts in culture to support goal achievement.

In my career as a leader, learner, executive coach, and consultant, I've gathered a few gems of knowledge (if not wisdom) along the way related to culture change. Included among those insights or lessons are included a need to persevere through adversity with optimism and energy, a commitment to celebrate milestones and achievements even in tough times, a need to continuously develop one's own leadership and the leadership skills of your team, and the necessity to balance work with one's whole life.

So much food for thought, but for this blog, I choose to focus on one key question: Is there really a recipe for culture change, particularly at an organizational level? So being either bold or foolish I'll take a crack at the question.

First, I believe there is some value in defining what we might mean by the term culture. Being a creature of our time, I googled the term and came up with the following (amongst a variety of definitions): "...the total of the inherited ideas, beliefs, values and knowledge which constitute the shared bases of...action..." and "...the total range of activities and ideas of a group of people with shared traditions, which are transmitted and reinforced by members of the group." I've highlighted what I think are some key elements of the definition and upon which I will touch in this blog.

The phrase Culture Eats Strategy for Breakfast is probably familiar to most of us and reflects the very real challenge in moving an organization forward or changing its direction. As many an executive will attest to, you can have spent countless hours and money on developing a world class strategy, putting together and delivering a slick internal marketing campaign, and engaging all manner of expertise and external resources, and yet find that after a year (or less), you have made no progress on your lofty goals - and may actually have taken your organization a step or two backward. The culture of the organization - its inherited ideas, beliefs, values and knowledge - can be a very effective barrier or block to your plans.

So instead of developing the glitzy strategy, or restructuring the organization, or implementing new processes or systems, why don't executives focus on organizational culture? My perspective is it often appears easier to tackle structure and process than culture. One can implement structural and process changes in a far shorter timeframe. Quick or easy, however, doesn't equate to effective. Such initiatives can certainly disrupt the organization and give the appearance of action, especially to those looking at the organization from an external perspective (e.g., shareholders, community leaders). Cultural changes take a much longer period of time to realize a more intense and sustained effort. Unfortunately, too many leaders (and too often a variety of stakeholders) don't have the patience for these types of efforts. We want instant solutions and instant results.

The term inherited also implies something that is built or created over a long period of time. And it will take just as long to mold, alter, or modify this reality, as it took to create. Moreover, it's critical to understand that, for the most part, this set of shared ideas, beliefs, and values have worked for the organization or key stakeholder segments. It doesn't mean life has been easy or great. But the organization has survived, it has accomplished something, some element of progress has been experienced, and the organization's staff believe it works and/or is good enough. If it ain't broke don't fix it. If it ain't broke why change it? So suggesting there is need for change or trying to initiate big cultural change will not come easily or without effort.

One of the first key steps in changing culture is to define the characteristics of the new culture and why it is important to shift to this new set of beliefs, behaviours, and practices. This is the leader's role. The leader has to achieve clarity for self as to the where, what, and why of culture change. If the leader doesn't have a clear idea about this preferred future and the necessity of this new path, a change in culture will be a non-starter. Clarity of vision is critical to to overcome resistance and inertia.

Just as important as defining the new desired culture will be the concrete actions that a leader and the organization as a whole must take to reinforce and support the shift. This includes steps such as recruiting, hiring, retaining, rewarding, and promoting individuals who will, by their behaviours and actions, develop and reinforce the tenets of the new culture. People build culture. Focus on cultivating the right people. Make a long-term commitment to them. They become the proverbial stones thrown into the water, with ripples emanating out from them and influencing the behaviour of others.

Communicate, communicate, communicate. Along with that comes the importance of leadership visibility and reinforcement - by word AND action - of key organizational values and expectations. As a leader you are being watched all the time and people will rapidly determine whether you hold the values of the new culture sincerely or merely as another fad of the moment. Your energy, your perseverance, and your consistency is going to be critical to success.

Make sure all processes and systems of the organization are aligned and supportive of the culture you are trying to create. If you are marketing the organization as one that prides itself on innovation but have an incentive system that rewards everyone at the same level regardless of performance, then creativity is not likely to be sustained. If you are asking for daring and bold initiatives but your performance management systems actually reward a risk management mentality, you may make stuttering steps forward. If you are touting yourself as an organization that fosters empowerment and employee participation but have a human resource system that tolerates old-style management practices, you will quickly short-circuit your efforts.

As leaders you also have to ensure your own personal words and actions are aligned with the corporate culture you say you are trying to build. If you set yourself apart from what you are expecting of your staff - do as I say, not as I do - you will have compromised your leadership credibility. You won't be able to retain your best leaders or get the kind of change you were expecting or hoping for. In addition, you have to have patience for this effort; you have to be in it for the long haul. Culture happens through long-term, consistent behaviour and effort. The best and most successful organizations build from within and stay true to their core for years.

Rome wasn't built in a day. Neither is the culture of your organization created or changed in a fiscal year. And building a new temple to the gods won't keep the barbarians away from the front gates. Only strong and vibrant citizens/staff working from the same page will ensure long-term success.

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Defining Leadership

Originally published on January 19, 2022.

The beginning of 2022 finds me on the cusp of more opportunity and creativity.  I am working on a series of leadership development modules for several organizations.  The topics to be covered will range from a coach-approach to leadership, to the foundations of strong teams, through to performance management.  One other subject near and dear to my heart will be the foundations of personal leadership.  For many years now, and prior to becoming an executive coach and management consultant, I have devoted considerable study, time, effort, and thought to leadership, what makes a leader, and how to further hone leadership.

I have seen other authors or pundits put together their top list of what qualities or strengths great leaders possess. The listing I offer below has some similarity to that approach but perhaps goes a bit more off road.  I am interested in leadership qualities to be sure, but hope that I have gone a bit deeper in distinguishing the core of what leadership is - from my point of view - as compared to the notion of management, for example. 

Leadership requires self-awareness. What does that mean?  In my view, this relates to the understanding of one's own strength and weaknesses and having a regular practice of evaluating growing edges. This appreciation and drive to self-evaluate requires a healthy dose of humility and a willingness to explore personal bias and blind spots. If a leader is not prepared to face and understand themselves, they will be less effective in understanding the capacities of the teams and organizations they lead.

Leadership is visionary. Leaders know what needs to get done. And they experience this vision and future state both for themselves and for their organizations. Leaders can read the tea leaves, appreciate potential and possibility, see a new or better way, and feel passionate about what lies before them.  Moreover, this vision isn't abstract in conception. This vision is understood at a visceral level. This vision is not created in a series of spreadsheets or models. While those might be useful tools or supports, leaders are far more apt to tap into the emotional and even spiritual aspects of a vision - they can literally see, feel, hear, taste and smell the future!

Leadership is, and must be, expressive. A vision that is unexpressed, poorly articulated, or not understood by others, doesn't lead to action. If others cannot be brought on board or do not appreciate the power and possibility the leader feels for the future, we have a dream of one that is likely to go unfulfilled.  So leadership – good leadership – means being able to take a vision out of one’s head and articulate it to others in a way that they can understand and powerfully engage with. 

At this point, I want to make sure there is no confusion about being articulate, passionate, and committed to a cause and the notion or quality of charisma or being charismatic. Charisma for me too often equates to superficiality and insincerity. Effective long-term leadership success can use charisma (personality, charm, presence) as a tool, but it doesn’t long stand without supporting substance. 

Leadership sees the big picture and plays the long game. The comparison to a chess grand master may hold true here. A key distinguishing variable between leadership and management is how expansive the view is for each. Management is more often focused on a select number of variables within a defined period of time; e.g., I know what tasks I have to accomplish today, which staff I have available to me, and what problems I might encounter.

Leadership has a more expansive view. A good leader contemplates execution and realization of their vision considering a host of factors and variables, how those variables might interact to support or confound each other, and is often looking to a future laid out months and years ahead. Like a chess player, they see the whole board, see how each move might impact the next, and anticipate several moves ahead.  They have a long-term systems view.

Leadership is about change. Leaders are good at anticipating change as might be expected from a chess master. More importantly, they also are often (or always) initiating change as they evaluate and make sense of the big picture view they have been forming for themselves on behalf of their organization. They have a view on challenges and opportunities, initiating change to mitigate one and realize the other. This change effort can manifest in any number of ways – creating a sense of urgency, seemingly tireless energy and passion, and a dynamic and flexible mindset. Creativity, innovation and out-of-the-box thinking can also characterize this leadership change mentality.

Leadership is about capacity building.  Because leaders see potential, understand or perceive the shifting environment around them, and appreciate that change will be necessary to both survive and thrive, they are constantly looking to develop new skills and capacities in their organizations. They believe a couple of things about capacity building. First, the strengths that helped you achieve success in the past will be insufficient, if not irrelevant, to survive and thrive in a new future state.

Second, they have a commitment to leaving the organization in a better position then when they found it.  This includes building bigger and better capacity in their followers, investing in training and development, succession planning, and building new leaders. This has short-term benefit in supporting voluntary and committed engagement amongst staff. More importantly, it builds resilience and capability in the organization to overcome adversity and reach new performance heights.

Leadership is about discipline. Author Jim Collins (Good to Great) has dissected organizations trying to distil what separates good companies from great companies, and what allows great companies to continue on that path. More than one of his concepts applies to effective leadership as well. Discipline – in thought and action – is one of those concepts.

Leadership is able to pull all of the variables noted above together, sort the wheat from the chaff, keep in mind (while still challenging) their capabilities, and stay focused on their preferred vision. Good leadership is able to stay focused in the face of distraction that too often masquerades as opportunity.  Leadership is not distracted by the next shiny bauble. Leadership understands its core competencies and/or is prepared to undertake the necessary investment to do different. In short, leadership knows that success is based on making sound choices, sticking to its core values and strategies, and setting up supports and systems to drive success.

Leadership is about courage. None of what we describe above comes without a very strong dose of courage. Leadership requires developing a comfort level with ambiguity and a near daily confrontation with doubt and fear. 

You might consider a comparison between leadership and being a weather forecaster. Rare is the day when anyone gives us 100% certainty on any weather-related fact. We lament but prepare for the possibility that a 60% chance of partly cloudy skies might turn into drizzle or a momentary downpour. Leadership operates within similar shades of grey. Leadership must interpret, with imperfect data and imperfect lenses, what the future may hold and try to prepare accordingly. There is always the real and tangible risk that they may decide incorrectly.

Leaders must have the courage to act despite this uncertainty. Seeing what needs to be done, understanding the forces at play, anticipating the chess moves of organizational life and the business environment are all well and good. However, if this knowledge or intuition are not put into action, then this insight is worse than useless. Inaction is action where no decision becomes a decision. The environment or others will choose a path for you.

Leadership is selflessness. Finally, I come to a personal philosophical belief that all good leadership is fundamentally about being selfless. I appreciate the challenge that might come from others on this point!  However, I believe that truly impactful leaders are NOT solely or primarily focused on their own success.  Rather, they are ambitious for the success of their teams, organizations, or businesses. Make no mistake, they are competitive and they want to win. Will they accept or appreciate personal accolades or glory should it come? In many cases, yes. But that personal recognition or reward is NOT THE motivating factor for their efforts. They want to win for the benefit of the bigger cause. They want to build capacity and realize potential for their organization. They want to see foundations built and a legacy for success established that lives beyond their leadership tenure.  

There you have my perspective on leadership. There you have some insights and snippets into what is starting to coalesce into various leadership development modules for 2022 and beyond.  

For me it really is all about leadership!

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

The Great Return?

August 24, 2021. At this point in much of North America, we are seemingly resetting for the umpteenth time as we continue to navigate the ongoing saga and impact of COVID-19. The desire and longing for a return to normalcy - the pre-COVID times - is heavy on all of us. Levels of exhaustion, frustration, anxiety, and anger ebb and flow with the fall and rise again of COVID cases. Businesses in all shapes and sizes and in every sector have been similarly been trying to pivot, reconfigure, respond, and stay afloat through all of this.

At the beginning of this saga back in early 2020, many of us probably operated under an assumption that we could batten down the hatches, stiff upper lip, and ramp up our reserves for a few days, weeks, and maybe even a month or two. But as each successive wave has come and gone and come again, we are increasingly pushing our personal and organizational resilience beyond all reasonable expectation. And maybe that is the key word after all to explain some of our more challenging behaviors and responses since this all started - expectation.  

Regardless of who we are - pro or anti-vax, pro or anti-mask, pro or anti-lockdown - our expectations of what should or should not happen have continuously been confounded.  

Earlier this summer, as I worked with a number of my clients, there were a variety of plans in place to resume on-site operations, meaning that there were expectations that staff were going to return to their normal places of business, offices, or workstations. Some of this was going to coincide with the start of the school year or the start of the next business quarter, all around or about September 1, 2021. Even before the fourth wave of COVID was starting to ramp up in Alberta and Canada, staff in some businesses were pushing back on coming back to their former work environments. A variety of reasons were offered to justify the hesitancy (or even outright refusal) to return to the office - immuno-compromised, child care issues, fear of public transit and potential to acquire COVID, cramped office space, cramped common areas including elevators, etc. Some client organizations have since allowed for voluntary or graduated returns as of September 1. Others have postponed re-launch to October 1 or even into the new year.  Others have been adamant that the return plans remain on schedule. 

Certainly some of the motivation behind a drive to get back to the "office" comes from a desire to return to normal. For some, there almost seems to be a perspective that we shall just force normal back on COVID; we will compel normalcy through force of will and determined leadership. If we think positive thoughts, positive things will happen. In other circumstances, there is a strong belief that those who work at home are really not working.

What I believe is missing from these assessments, plans, and actions is a much more thoughtful, purposeful, and considered evaluation of the organization's strategy, goals, and culture. There are too many organizations that seem to have a blind belief that bums in seats = success or productivity. Against what metrics? I will certainly grant that the challenge of maintaining organizational culture and team cohesion are manifold in a virtual, Zoom-based environment. Beyond that, some leaders seem to be operating from a standpoint that if I cannot lay eyes on my people at any point in time, I can't TRUST them to be giving me their all.

I would suggest that, as a leader, if you can't trust your staff in their remote work environments, you probably did not have trust in them when they were around the corner from you in the office. I would suggest that, as a leader, using presence in the office as a proxy for productivity was a failure to measure such adequately (if at all) in the past.

I'm not suggesting that a return of an office or work environment is wrong. Rather, I am suggesting that there should be a much more thoughtful, considered, and intelligent evaluation of that option as it relates to the overall strategy of the organization. What will the presence - or absence - from the workplace gain or lose the business? Do we need all or some staff back? Do we need all of our work space as it was in pre-COVID times? If we don't really understand productivity of staff at this point, how do we get a better handle on it now? If you really want to be so bold, ask these leadership questions of yourself - how important are our staff to the achievement of our goals and what am I doing to support their ability to deliver on those goals?

True leadership is not simply about ensuring control over other people. True leadership, in my estimation, is generating and responding to change (planned and unplanned), understanding all the forces at play, having a big picture view, playing the long game, and supporting/influencing others to contribute their best efforts to understandable and shared goals.  

Physical presence in an office cannot and should not be confused with commitment and productivity on the part of your people. I have worked with far too many people who simply put in time at the office while dutifully maintaining a 9-to-5 schedule. In too many other ways they had already retired on the job.  

My recommendation for this present time and moving forward through the continued challenge of COVID is to then get well-grounded in your organizational strategy and objectives, truly understand what it is going to take to succeed despite COVID, and perhaps engage your valued staff as allies in getting there - regardless of or despite where they work.  

A productive return to work is not going to come from simply calling out the troops (or prisoners?) on to the parade ground on September 1. A productive return to work - COVID or no COVID - is going to come from understanding your strategy, understanding productivity and effectiveness, and creating an organizational environment that supports your valued staff committing their time and energy to the cause. 

It's not simply about eyeballing your staff across the hall. It's About Leadership!

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Resurrecting Deming - Again!

Over the life of my career - 25+ years as a public sector leader followed by another nine years (so far) of executive coaching and management consulting - I have had the privilege to work with a multitude of organizations and leaders in a variety of sectors. What is somewhat surprising in that leadership journey is how many lessons stand the test of time despite how much we believe the world has changed. What is far more disappointing, however, is too many of us continue to make the same wrong assumptions, arrive at the wrong conclusions, look to the same tired solutions, and experience the same level of frustration that things don't magically get better.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again...
and expecting a different result.

I'm certain the quote above is one you have heard many times before and perhaps even used yourself when trying to make your own compelling point. And it's been around for as many years as I can remember. So why doesn't remain true and compelling? What are we failing to learn from our mistakes or, more importantly, why are we failing to learn from our mistakes as leaders and as organizations?

One of the things I have come to believe is you cannot discover these lessons, learn from those experiences and do anything differently if you lack some form of humility and courage.

As leaders, it can be far easier on our person or egos to blame others around us or for a mistake, failure, or even disaster, than to admit we missed the signs, signals, and harbingers of doom.

Beyond that, we have to recognize and own our larger responsibility as owners, creators, and keepers of the systems and processes our staff have to work with (more on that below).

And finally, we have to demonstrate a commitment to ongoing learning and model a sincere willingness to really hear what others have to say about what is - and what is not - happening as it should, or what we expect for the organization. An unwillingness to be that open or honest can at best reflect naivety, maybe insecurity, and at worst pure arrogance.

From 1991 to 1993, I had a formative experience while completing my master's degree. Through my studies and an internship, I had the opportunity to learn implementing total quality management from two organizations. Through that I became exposed to the work of Dr. W. E. Deming and I further explored his teachings through my thesis on total quality management. It was eye-opening and his principles really struck a chord with me at the time. Over the succeeding years I have come back to his basic principles more than once. I have learned from other leadership gurus as well, but Deming's perspective has had continued value for me. I want to touch on only a few of his 14 Points with the belief that these have much to inspire those in leadership positions - or those looking for good leadership.

Point Seven - Institute Leadership

Dr. Deming calls on management to lead rather than to manage. It’s a simple statement but what does it really mean for us as leaders? Well, I'm pretty confident that if you were to talk to many frontline staff and management personnel outside of the executive suite, they would provide you with countless examples of where they felt they were being managed and not led. This bias towards "management" is without doubt enhanced by the pressure on organizations to perform and achieve better results. A typical management response is to exercise greater control and oversight to make sure results get better. More often than not, efforts of this nature only seem to put more barriers in the way of getting good work done - more reports to generate, more signatures to get, more unreasonable timelines to meet, multiple and conflicting demands, and failure to hear and act on input and recommendations from staff.

Point Eight - Drive Out Fear

My past leadership experience is certainly laced with a belief that fear might be an effective leadership tool. And maybe it can be in the short-term, but not if you are trying to create a high-performing organization for the long-term. With fear in an organization, there cannot be open communication, innovation, and teamwork - and these are all required for an organization to achieve the full measure of its potential. To my now evolved mind (😀), leadership of any organization - and at all levels of the organization - must actively model open communication, encourage appropriate risk taking and innovation, and promote teamwork at all levels, from the executive suite through to the front lines of operations. With fear in place, an organization shall continue to squander the full potential of its people and the organization to the detriment of those it purports to serve.

Point Ten - Eliminate Slogans, Exhortations, and Targets for the Workforce

Everybody needs to measure performance. Deming did not intend, nor do I suggest, that system performance not be evaluated on an ongoing basis. Rather, what Point Ten addresses is the notion of trying to assess an individual's performance without reference to an understanding of the system in which that individual works. If an individual is prevented from achieving higher levels of performance by a system (that management has created or allowed to be created), then performance managing an employee, setting new targets for them to achieve, and giving them "motivational" speeches will have little impact on performance. It is far more likely that such efforts will actually cause frustration, demoralization, and reduced performance.

Deming's red bead experiment is a great illustration of this principle - given an equal number of red and white beads, an employee is tasked with collecting only white beads with an employer-provided scoop or paddle. Inevitably, the employee collects some red beads in their assigned task. As a result of "failing" in their assigned task, the employee may be given further direction by their supervisor, there may be encouragement to do better, they may be applauded if their red bead count has gone down, or they may be chastised if their red bead count goes up. Regardless, their individual effort and various interventions at the personal level will have no impact on actual outcome. It's like expecting employee engagement scores in an organization to go up simply by saying that the target should be 10 out of 10 on the next engagement survey. Only by leadership changing the system will the organizational environment be better, more consistent results be achieved. I see a strong correlation between Point Ten and the need to Drive Out Fear from an organization as noted earlier. In fact, I believe that what leaders often create by exhortations to do better is an environment in which results and information are hidden through fear rather than discovered. And only by discovery can we improve.

Point Twelve - Remove Barriers to Pride of Workmanship

In this Point, Deming was referring to unclear expectations, lack of timely feedback (or any feedback), lack of training and support, and systems that focused on short-term results rather than long-term goals. Staff and front-line managers are often frustrated by multiple tasks or changing priorities (see Point Seven) as leaders change focus or react to external stimuli without, it seems, giving due regard to long-term objectives or stated core values. And unfortunately, more than one of us can relate to the fear that the performance evaluation process creates in us - either as provider or receiver of the experience. Too often this is because we establish the evaluation process as a one-time event, not as a continual process of discussion, engagement, and opportunity. There is a need too to ensure the evaluation process becomes an opportunity for leaders and staff alike to identify and invest in skills and intellect. It is also a great opportunity for leaders to model desired behaviours and reinforce common goals. On this latter point, I firmly believe there must be a high degree of visibility and sincere engagement with internal audiences on par with leadership visibility and engagement with external audiences. Without the kind of internal alignment that comes from such effort, the ability to deliver on commitments to external audiences and customers stands on shaky ground.

There certainly is more gold in Deming than I have covered here. In addition, what this hopefully reinforces, is we don't need to go looking for new ideas on leadership. There already exists a lot of knowledge - and common sense - upon which to enhance our leadership. Make it so!

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Don't Drink the Sand

In much of my leadership career - and maybe my life in general - no small part of me hoped and dreamed about achieving formal recognition for the quality of my work. And along the way I did, in fact, achieve awards in my chosen profession. In that regard, I'm probably not that different from many of you. In reality, this desire for recognition is probably a function of our upbringing and our educational system. We were all graded. We all knew where we stood in our class academically or athletically. If we excelled we were given ribbons, medals, and even money in the form of bursaries and scholarships. And that recognition felt good.

As a society we continue to translate this award function into our leadership and business environments in the form of our nation's or province's top employers, most ethical companies, top leaders in [pick the profession] and almost any other category that you can think up. These awards are often pursued with incredible vigor by individual leaders and companies. I've even since seen individual leaders suggest, cajole, and coerce their staff or colleagues for that coveted nomination. If and once achieved, those accolades are then heavily marketed as a competitive advantage or even simply as a point of pride.  

And because we are busy people, we place heavy emphasis on the validity and credibility of these ratings or rewards and make decisions as potential customers or staff of these organizations. If such and such experts say he/she/they are best in class, that should be good enough for me should it not?  

Unfortunately this pursuit of awards and accolades comes with its own problems and opportunity to twist our personal behavior and organizational culture. Based on personal experience, I will suggest that in far too many cases, the emperor is, in fact, wearing no clothes.  

I would encourage all of us to dig a bit deeper into what goes into these "achievements".  I for one have had the misfortune of peeking behind the proverbial curtain and have come away more than a bit disillusioned with what I have discovered. In personal scenarios impacting me, I have discovered that competitors in my profession were not necessarily identified as best in class for their professional skill but rather on the quality of their website! Form over substance! In some cases, my so-called competitors were no longer in practice! 

That's one small example, but there are even more egregious examples. This goes as far as something as prestigious as the Order of Canada. Aside from those who have been officially stripped of such recognition (e.g., Alan Eagleson, Steven Fonyo), I have my own impressions of others who have been so honored. In at least one case I joked - facetiously at the time - that I'd have to be rescinding my Canadian citizenship because of who had obtained this honour.

These examples of personal leadership failures also operate at an organizational level and we simply cannot place blind faith in the view of experts and awards achieved. We have seen far too many examples of spectacular corporate failures that followed on years of being media and business darlings. Example?  In 2001, an American company achieved $90 billion in market capitalization making it the seventh largest company in the USA at the time. For six years running, this same company was ranked by Fortune magazine as America's most innovative company.  

In December 3, 2001, this same company - Enron - filed for bankruptcy.  

Of the many reasons cited for Enron's demise, two stand out for me within the context of my blog topic:  (1) stakeholders/watchdogs overlooked bad behavior as long as they were profiting, and (2) looking to others believing that those others had done their due diligence. Clearly, these reasons were abetted by willful fraud, but for me, the long story short is don't believe everything you see or read on the internet, in newspaper clippings or promotional materials.  

Unfortunately, too many award programs are based on an application process alone. There is limited to no on-site visitation or verification in play. There is no deeper dive into evaluating the veracity of claims made. In some cases, an organization or leader can present documentation on the existence of a policy or program but it is not required to provide information as to the quality of its implementation or effectiveness. In addition, staff, customers, and other key stakeholders may, or may not, be part of validating the leader's or organization's claims. The application might, in fact, only be as good as the paper it is written on.   

And the motivations of the applicant to win are enormous - prestige, business opportunity, ego. Marketing acumen and writing skill then become more important to success then fact. Form runs the risk of trumping substance. Many of us are already familiar with this reality in other circumstances, most notably the recruitment and selection process. How many times have you seen others - or yourself - won over by a glorious CV and a charismatic presence in an interview, only to have buyers remorse later? Presentation and pizzazz can only cover up so many sins for so long.  

As I penned this blog I was reminded of an exchange between two characters from the 1995 movie "The American President", which for me encapsulates the challenges we face in sorting the wheat from the chaff and seeing beyond formal awards and what might actually lie beneath:

People want leadership, Mr. President, and in the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone. They want leadership. They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand.

Lewis, we've had presidents who were beloved, who couldn't find a coherent sentence with two hands and a flashlight. People don't drink the sand because they're thirsty. They drink the sand because they don't know the difference.

My request of you? Dig deeper. Don't be fooled by the pleasant mirage that might be before you. Put in the effort to find out if there really is a glass of water or a glass of sand before you.

Don't drink the sand.

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Home - Greg Hadubiak Cops for Cancer Ironteam (akaraisin.com)

The Power of Vision, Commitment, and Legacy

Several years ago I found myself in Warsaw, Poland, representing the Edmonton Charter Chapter of the International Coach Federation at the annual Global Leadership Forum. Coaching leadership from over 68 countries were there to collaborate to support the growth of the coaching profession, our chapters, and our clients.

What the trip also afforded me, albeit in a very limited fashion, was the ability to get to know the history of Warsaw and Poland to a greater degree than what I previously possessed. Most particularly, I had a chance to visit the Warsaw Uprising Museum and the Royal Castle. In both cases, I had the opportunity to fully appreciate the utter and complete devastation that Warsaw experienced as a result of World War II and the challenges it faced under Nazi, Soviet, and Communist rule. Warsaw – a thriving and artistic metropolis of over one million people – was reduced to a pile of rubble occupied by no more than a few thousand at the war’s end.

The journey back for Warsaw actually started at the commencement of hostilities in September 1939 and, in some respects, continues to this day. When Nazi planes started bombing the city, many of its cultural icons and buildings were immediately put at risk with the Royal Palace being severely damaged at the outset. Many brave Poles began the effort to save the artifacts within the building even to the point of losing their lives in doing so. Throughout those early days of desperation and ultimate defeat, they continued the effort to preserve as much of the art and the architecture of their buildings. They showed as much determination in the process of preserving their heritage as the Nazi’s did in destroying and looting it.

No reprieve came to the residents of Warsaw and Poland as the war drew to a close. Quite the contrary. As Nazi Germany went through its death throes, Hitler and his cronies were more determined than ever to destroy what they could not own or control, while at the same time making Warsaw a devastating battleground with the Soviet war machine. The result was that literally all of Warsaw was laid waste and the Royal Castle was purposely destroyed by the Nazis before withdrawing from the area.

As you might imagine, the Soviet Union and its Communist-installed regime were in no rush to support the reconstruction of glories of the past or anything that might detract from unswerving allegiance to a new world order. As a result, reconstruction of the Royal Castle was not started until 1971 – fully 25 years after the end of World War II – and was not fully restored until 1988.

What does any of have this to with my usual focus on leadership? Simply this: consider the vision and the commitment to preserving a cultural heritage taken up by a few key leaders and likely hundreds if not thousands of other ordinary citizens from 1939 through to 1988. As I noted earlier, those who took steps to preserve the arts and architecture of the Royal Castle at the start, and for the duration of World War II, often paid for that effort with their lives. This meant not only removing art and furnishings from the Royal Castle, but it also sometimes meant removing pieces of the building itself – frescoes, statues, decorative paneling – all to be carried away and hidden until the war was over.

Regardless of whether these same individuals survived the war or not, many of them must have realized that they weren't likely going to be around for the restoration of the Royal Palace or any other edifice in Warsaw. And yet they not only undertook the immediate effort and risk, but they persevered in their commitment for the two plus decades that followed. They had to have known that their vision would not be realized in their lifetime. They faced a multitude of challenges, including barriers put in place by authorities of the day and the very real issues facing a rebuilding nation and economy. But they persevered and sacrificed in support of their vision anyway.

Just as importantly, these visionaries were able to convince the populace of Warsaw, Poland and others to contribute to the rebuilding and restoration of the Royal Castle. By 1975, over $500 million zloty had been raised through voluntary contribution, including from Polish citizens, who in many ways had so little to give at the time, as they continued to work to restore the basic necessities of life. Art and artifacts hidden during the war were recovered and returned for inclusion in the new structure. And new significant pieces of art were donated from other countries around the world.

How many of us struggle to create a vision for ourselves or for the businesses we lead that goes much beyond two to three years?

How many of us aspire to create and sustain a vision with the power to impact well beyond ourselves, operating with the realization that its achievement will be beyond our physical ability to see it realized?

In today’s world, how many of us would even entertain such prospects if there were not something of immediate gain in such a venture for us?

I hope you can take from this short post a sense of the inspiration and awe I felt for those with the commitment to build for more than just themselves. To be inspired by the selfless sacrifices that others were prepared to make for future generations and that we have seen in other similar circumstances - in business, in charitable causes, and in nation-building - and to challenge ourselves to a higher level of performance and goal setting.

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Home - Greg Hadubiak Cops for Cancer Ironteam (akaraisin.com)

Ebbs and Flows - Chapter II?

In my last post I talked about some challenging news my wife and family received about her health: a breast cancer diagnosis. This came just in advance of our 12th wedding anniversary and, of course, in the throes of my latest and continuing Ironman preparations.

So the latest? After celebrating our anniversary with a stay in an Edmonton hotel - as adventurous as celebrations can get in the middle of a pandemic - we met with her oncoplastic surgeon to get further interpretation of what her diagnosis, treatment plan and prognosis was likely to be.  I have to say it is sobering to be in a room - staying largely silent - as a physician and your wife discuss surgical options ranging from lumpectomy to mastectomy, survival and satisfaction rates post-surgical intervention, how radiation and/or chemotherapy come into play and so on. It's more than surreal.  

However, what we arrived at was the intervention required was not only not life-threatening, but it was also (at this point) not life-altering either. It seems strange to say this given the short but challenging journey we were on up to that point, but the surgical and medical intervention required is quite limited and contained. That being said, we are still months away from conclusion, with surgery taking place in late May, followed by recovery, followed by a course of radiation. So still much for my wife to endure and still more worry for the family to navigate. Regardless, these are far better outcomes than could have occurred. And certainly a far better reality than that facing so many others who have faced - and lost - a battle with cancer.  

So much more different than the reality that faced Ronan Smyth and his family.  

For several weeks I could start to feel the real powerlessness and fear that Ronan's family must have faced when they got his cancer diagnosis. For them it was clear relatively soon that there was no potential for a positive outcome.  Rather, they knew from the outset that time was limited. I held on to that fear for only a few weeks. It was enough.  

My wife and I have had some pretty deep discussions in the past several weeks. All the what-if scenarios.  How long this journey to health might take her. What that might mean for the whole family during that time. What we would do to prepare if, should it happen, that she wouldn't be in our lives sometime in the future.  How would I manage as a single parent - again. A lot of future surfing and most of it not of the positive kind.

Ronan and his family faced the same situation.  While Ronan got the cancer diagnosis, his family carried the hit, the burden, the worry, and the anxiety of losing a son and a brother. And there was to be no miracle cure. There was every reason to ponder the future to come after Ronan's passing.  

Ronan didn't give into despair - or at least not entirely. I am absolutely certain that denial, anger, sadness, anxiety, and a host of other emotions turned up for Ronan and his family on a regular basis.  But he also adopted a mantra of Why Not? After being told of his diagnosis, he started - as his parents would call it - a crazy list. He was intent on living life to the fullest during the time left to him and pursued the completion of his list with vengeance. In that he was supported not only by his family, but also by a larger community, including people he had never met. This commitment to living led him to meet his hockey hero Carey Price, flip the coin at the beginning of an Eskimos game, and leap out of plane for not one but two skydiving adventures! More courage and bravado than I!  

On Ronan's first jump, I was told he feared nothing. He asked his tandem partner for barrel rolls and anything that could be thrown at him. On the next jump he wanted to take the leap going backward! And he was accommodated!  

Ronan's mother tells me he rarely complained about his fate.  Make no mistake, there were discussions about why me, but this perspective was significantly overshadowed by his determination to see what he could accomplish in the time remaining to him. He decided to challenge his food with all kinds of different foods. He spent his savings enjoying the life left to him and looking to experience all that he could. He became a fearless adrenaline junky, riding in fast cars and motorcycles. And not only did he do this for himself, he was also able to convince other family and friends to join him in his adventures. He convinced them to share in his Why Not adventures! Ronan's journey served as a reminder that life is precious and needs to be cherished every day.  

Ronan's journey continues to inspire my own Why Not and What If fundraising and Ironman challenge.  As does my wife's more hopeful and optimistic cancer journey.  

Ironman Canada is now four months away.  My fundraising goal is $90,000 away from completion.  

F#ck cancer.  

Home - Greg Hadubiak Cops for Cancer Ironteam (akaraisin.com)

Are you with me?

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Ebbs and Flows

I often - or I should say always? - watch videos of past Ironman Kona championships while I do my indoor bike training. This obviously takes place primarily during my winter training schedule. Aside from being a very fair-weather athlete, it affords me the opportunity to be inspired by the stories that play out on this canvas both for the professional and age-group athletes, showcasing their talents and determination for all to see.   

One comment or phrase that sticks with me at these times is something along the lines of how much has to go right for an athlete on the day of any particular event. You can never guarantee perfect health on race day, or that you won't have some mechanical malfunction to contend with, or that you won't experience adverse weather conditions to cope with. All of these and more can come at you and test your reserves and mental fortitude. I can attest to several such circumstances in my time in competition, including torrential downpours and hailstorms, a slipped bike chain while climbing a hill, and getting kicked in the head during the swim.  

The same reality of ebbs and flows come at you in training and in the life leading up to any given race.  What has been demonstrated to me since I started in this Ironman world in 2008 is there is no perfect path in training, no year when there has not been bumps along the way. For age-groupers like myself, this means juggling the demands of life outside of Ironman. Most of us have to work to live into a chance to participate in an Ironman or to afford the cost of equipment and registration fees. Work and family obligations will come first for us non-professionals. Regardless of effort or desire, Ironman performance is not our primary or sole commitment.  

This year and last - 2020 and 2021 - have tested this balancing act like never before and have reminded me of the realities and challenges of keeping focused on a goal. When I restarted this journey to Ironman in late 2019 and early 2020, no one would have imagined the impact a global pandemic would have on the plans of mice and men. In February 2020, I made a commitment to raise funds and awareness in support of the Kids With Cancer Society, DIPG and Ronan Smyth. And even as COVID continued to take hold of our lives in 2020, I remained focused on my goals and was probably in my best shape since my 20s.  Then, of course, Ironman Canada 2020 was cancelled and my focus shifted to 2021.

These past few weeks have continued to throw curveballs at me, both good and bad, as I recommit to my goals. We've had a reasonable start to spring here in Edmonton that has allowed me to get outside on my bike earlier than I have done in many years prior - up until this weekend when we were hit by a crazy blizzard. That reality will have me back on the wind trainer again for at least a few more days.  Run training has similarly being going along well and I was pleased with the volume of running that I was getting in - up until I broke one of my toes in a simple household accident! So moving a bit more gingerly in the short-term. I was also quite pleased with my progress and stamina in the pool - up until the COVID resurgence in our third wave caused our facility to close yet again. So back to doing some strength and core training to stimulate those swim muscles.

On the bigger stage of life, I was extraordinarily happy to see my oldest daughter get her first COVID vaccine (access given due to underlying chronic health condition)! This follows on my wife's successful vaccination - with full two doses - earlier in March because of her healthcare role. Others in my extended family are also getting or are scheduled for doses, and I am scheduled for the end of April. Relief is starting to cross my furrowed brow.

But life has decided to throw another curveball at me, laced with irony. Being a member of the Cops for Cancer Ironteam since 2008 and now strongly committed to raising $100,000 for the Kids With Cancer Society since last year, my family finds that cancer has decided to make things even more personal.  Earlier this month, my wife received a diagnosis of breast cancer. She is in the very early days of this journey and we are both grateful the cancer was caught early. We are only now beginning to understand the choices before us and won't have anything close to clarity on treatment plan for several more weeks.  As you can imagine, the emotional and mental stress for her - and for her family - has been very much been about ebbs and flows. Trying to not future surf, presume the worst, remain optimistic, and yet also having those moments of anxiety and fear that test our energy.

In many respects, I believe this reality will also bring me closer to appreciating what Ronan's family had to experience and endure as they navigated through a much harsher reality for their son - having inoperable brain cancer, with no hope of recovery, simply looking for ways to make the most of the time remaining to them. And they did just that. They lived life to the fullest possible with the mantra that Ronan came to take on - and which I share - of Why Not!  There is no doubt that Ronan and his family experienced many ebbs and flows with what cancer threw at him and at them.  

The reality is we have no say in what life throws at us - broken toe, weather, COVID, cancer diagnosis.  We continue to have a choice as to how we will respond to these ebbs and flows.  We can still live with determination and purpose.  

Ironman Canada is just over four months away.  My fundraising goal is $90,000 away from completion.  My life and my commitment will be challenged by my wife's cancer diagnosis but it shall not define us.  

F#ck cancer.  

Home - Greg Hadubiak Cops for Cancer Ironteam (akaraisin.com)

Are you with me?

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

The Power of our Values

BreakPoint Solutions formally began operations in September 2017.  The motivation behind the creation of the company, however, had its genesis well before that. One could argue that BreakPoint Solutions was decades in the making given the past experiences of its founders and partners. While some of the players have changed over time, the basic premise of what we do has not. This past winter - working virtually through COVID-19 restrictions - we discussed and cemented foundational elements for us.  

We first concluded as a company, a group of like-minded professionals, that our mission and vision were one and the same:

To awaken and unleash the potential in leaders, teams, and organizations

As a mission, this statement represents our purpose, what motivates us to do what we do. It inspires us to boldly put ourselves out in the world as coaches, consultants, leaders, mentors, and advisors. This is our why; this is why we do what we do. As a vision, it helps guide us to where we want to go, what we want to be known for, and what we want to achieve. It also defines what we hope to help our clients create for themselves and for others. We are motivated and inspired by our clients - by their unrealized or unknown potential; by their commitment, by their journey, by their struggles, and by their incredible successes. Through our work we expect to help them achieve more than they ever imagined possible. And they do.

The why and where are only part of the story. For us the how is just as important. Our how is represented by the values we have revisited in each year of our existence. Each year we have come back to further explore how we want to work with our clients, how we want to be known and remembered by those we work with, and - quite honestly - to attract the types of clients that value what we value. We put our values out there, with our definitions, our interpretation, seeking to convey our personality and our team culture.  If our values resonate with you, your team, or your organization we believe we can do great things together.

In every single case, we have debated the meaning and relevance of these values for us as individual professionals and as a team working together. They powerfully guide our actions and where we choose to work. Our values are:

Integrity

We hold ourselves accountable to our values, principles and commitments. We are authentic and transparent in our work, which leads to strong, trust-based relationships.

Long story short, we strive to walk our talk. We deliver on our promises. And we want more than just a contract with our clients. We actively strive to create strong relationships even to the point where it might actually be forgotten that we are not full-fledged members of a team or an organization. We know each other so well and our mutual respect is so strong that we can act in almost unconscious tandem, while at the same time having the ability to (respectfully) challenge each other in the best spirit of partnership to drive success.

Courage

We believe in the power of human potential. We challenge boundaries by building on our strengths, always experimenting with what is possible, learning and growing through the journey.

We appreciate and understand that the first steps, or the next steps, on any journey can be daunting. Even if the current reality and environment are challenging, it is the evil we know and perhaps what we have become comfortable with. We work with our clients to own their strengths as much as their uncertainty, to push the boundaries of what they perceive might be possible/impossible, and to challenge themselves with "what if?" and "why not?"  Doing is learning. Learning is growing. Growing is achieving. We believe in the power of human potential - your potential.

Collaboration

We are committed to a philosophy of co-creation, understanding there is greater power and possibility in partnerships. United in shared purpose, we move beyond the power of one.

BreakPoint Solutions comes together in the spirit of team and yet is so much more than just a team. We deeply believe we are far more capable, effective, and powerful when we learn from and lean on each other. The same perspective applies in terms of how we believe we work best with our clients. We bring expertise, skills, abilities, and strengths to any engagement, but so too do our clients. We must co-create.  Why? Because our clients have to own, implement, potentially modify, and live with the solutions they've developed. We don't want to be back a year or two from now helping the same person, the same team, or the same organization solve a problem or leveraging an opportunity that should have been attended to in the past. 

Creativity

We challenge ourselves to remain curious. Unique situations call for unique thinking. We believe in the power of innovation, agility, and adaptability. We challenge convention in the pursuit of pragmatic solutions.

Many of us at BreakPoint Solutions are certified executive coaches (CEC). Foundational to a coaching practice is the art of curiosity. We are challenged to be judgment free, to support ourselves and others to challenge assumption and bias, and to dig beneath the surface realities. If 2020 and the beginning of 2021 have taught us nothing, it has it has taught us not just the desirability, but the necessity, of being innovative, agile, and adaptable. This is also where our varied client experiences and environments prove so valuable. They are a live learning lab. As unique as we all believe ourselves to be - and we are - there is much that can be learned and adapted to a range of circumstances. Critically important is all these creative ideas have to be translated into meaningful action. Innovation must be applied to be useful. Deploy or die.

Fun

We seek to balance productivity and enjoyment knowing they work together to increase personal and organizational effectiveness.

This value is very near and dear to our hearts and souls. Without exception, the coaches and consultants of BreakPoint Solutions bring to the table years of senior level leadership experience gained in large, complex, challenging work environments. And we don't take ourselves too seriously. Our experience is tempered with humility. We know from personal experience how much impact a joyful work environment - or the lack thereof - has on our personal productivity. We spend more time in our work, with each other, and with our clients, than in anything else we do. It had better be fun, it had better allow our passions to shine through, otherwise we can't and won't deliver our best work. It's inevitable. If you are working with us, expect humility, self-deprecating humour, and maybe even a bit of irreverence. We are going to do great work together while making it enjoyable too!

So that is who and what BreakPoint Solutions is all about. We are more than just a name or a sum of our parts. We are an intentional stopping point, a place to pause, an opportunity to help you derive new knowledge, and establish a commitment to a new path or direction. We are a place to help you evaluate what's working, what needs to change, and what you need to do to reset for the future you want.

We are BreakPoint Solutions. And for us It's About Leadership in all its forms.

Want to work with us? Check here to get in touch to find out how we can work together to get you to where you, or your organization, want to be.

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Good Leadership Requires Good Governance

It's often been said, in one form or another, as goes the leader so goes the company. Rest assured this is not going to be another blog/commentary about Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Justin Trudeau, Jason Kenney, or any other potentially polarizing public figure. My focus continues to be on the impact that leadership - for good or for bad - has on the culture and success of an organization. But there is probably not a day, and certainly not a week, that goes by when we don't hear about some (inexplicable? disappointing?) organizational failure that seems to directly link to a leadership failure. 

I would suggest there is something to be said or explored in how these leadership and organizational failures might connect back to the quality and effectiveness of oversight provided by a board of directors.  They begin to set the tone from the top in a variety of ways, in what they do, and what they fail to do. 

I'm not sure how many of us appreciate the role that a board of directors plays in setting direction for large organizations and in helping it achieve those objectives. In most circumstances, public and media focus falls on a leader - a president, a CEO, or another top executive. Ultimately, however, a well functioning board is fundamental to the success of an organization through their decisions, not the least of which is their selection of THE senior operational leader. The quality of their decision making and their commitment to their governance task can have wide-ranging impact.

I have worked with a variety of boards in my 25-year career. I have worked with good boards and not so good boards. I have seen them lose their way in a variety of circumstances, including being burdened with an ineffective Chair, a disruptive board member, uncommitted board members, boards that get too involved in operations, and boards that simply perform a rubber stamp role for what senior leadership wants to get done. Ineffective governance can severely compromise and inhibit the ability of an organization to succeed and fulfill its mandate.

Sometimes boards don't even understand what their key responsibilities are. This lack of understanding or confusion can often arise from how a person is recruited to the board, or the quality of the orientation they receive upon becoming a member. Those boards that function on the basis of being elected have an additional potential challenge of individual platforms (e.g., axes to grind) entering into the equation.

Too often board members can be selected on criteria that may have nothing to do with the kinds of skills that a board requires to fulfill its functions. Instead, they selected because they are part of the same personal network as existing board members, they are prominent community members, they are politically connected, they are major donors, and so on and so forth. None of these factors necessarily make for a good board member. A poor selection process can then be compounded by inadequate orientation to the role of the board. In that circumstance, an individual board member has to either rely on the skills they bring to the table from their life outside of the boardroom, the examples set by their fellow board members (for good or for bad), or they may be left to take what orientation or guidance they might get from senior leadership of the organization. Not the ideal recipe for success.

So what's the starting point for good governance? The first task is to clearly understand the roles of the board. First and foremost, a board needs to focus on setting direction - making clear choices on an organization's vision, mission, values, and strategic directions. Failure to fully engage in this first set of major responsibilities means an organization can easily drift from its fundamental purpose. Failure to develop cohesion around these fundamental building blocks also, and inevitably, leads to conflict between board members that impacts organizational performance and public confidence. Moreover, if there is no consensus among the Board as to vision, mission, values, and strategic directions, how can senior operational leadership be effectively guided or held accountable for performance?

Second, a board is required to exercise oversight on organizational performance. It is important here to distinguish oversight for organizational performance from managing the organization. Neither the board as a whole nor individual board members (including the Chair) should get involved in managing the organization. The temptation to direct operations is intense, especially for those board members who lead and manage significant entities outside of the organization for which they are a board member. The board needs to remember the organization has engaged operational leaders - the CEO in particular - to manage operational matters. Ostensibly, they have used a robust process for recruitment and selection, have followed up with appropriate performance reviews and feedback, and have trust in the CEO and other management personnel to achieve the board-established strategic directions. If the board lacks such confidence then it has erred in selection, has erred in communicating expectations, or perhaps has not been engaged in managing performance at all. Ultimately, if that confidence erodes, the choice of the board is to more clearly communicate its expectations or remove the CEO. The choices available to the board should not include becoming more engaged in operational decision-making.

That being said, a board must exercise appropriate oversight. It must be clear on its expectations and establish robust and objective mechanisms by which to evaluate CEO performance on achievement of the organization's vision and strategic directions. Moreover, a board would do well to evaluate outcomes and also - at a high level - how those outcomes were achieved. The board has a key role to ensure the values of the organization are fostered and upheld. Every effort should be made to ensure that objective, quantifiable reports on performance are made available to the board on a regular basis. In this regard, the board should avail itself of a variety of forms of feedback to evaluate performance and success in achieving objectives.

Finally, a board manages its direction setting accountability, its oversight responsibility, and its own functions by establishing policy. These policies must clearly distinguish board function from management function. Just as important, they must describe and detail how the board itself shall function - the role of the Chair and other officers of the board, how decisions will be made, what committee structures, if any, will be utilized, and so forth. This is one distinct way to ensure role clarity and to diminish and manage potential conflicts.

As can be imagined, it is easy for boards to become involved in non-board activities and tasks. Board members can easily neglect the very real work required to ensure proper board functioning. If this high-level, strategic work is not done, or is done poorly, there will be little or no foundation for success for the organization as a whole.

Boards have very real responsibilities. The tasks they are engaged in cannot be minimized or trivialized. We have seen too many organizational failures in recent years that can be traced back to governance failures. Complacency about board performance is not an option. However, effective governance does not mean becoming more engaged in operational leadership. Nor is it to establish ever more controls and bureaucracy. Boards need to do very real work to understand their roles and responsibilities, establish proper structures to do their work, recruit and retain good members, and set the tone for the values and ethics that will guide the organization.

To achieve operational excellence there must be a foundation of governance excellence. Good leadership requires good governance.

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543

Governance Minefields

Leadership at a governance level is often written about and there are more than enough courses and programs out there that purport to certify competent and qualified directors. And yet we still see - and I get up close and personal with - how governance success remains elusive. Significant organizational failures, whether in the public or private sector, are often attributed to a failure in operational leadership, character flaws of the CEO, and a host of other reasons. I suggest, however, that those failures can too often just as easily be traced back to inadequate governance process and even understanding about what governance is or should be.

I'm going to give you my experience on what I see as some of the most common minefields that boards and individual directors should watch out for to reduce the chances of governance, leadership, and organizational setbacks and failure.

One: Governance Philosophy and Framework. Boards need to spend significant time and energy on clarifying what governance means for them and what it entails in terms of their interactions with the CEO and operations. Too often boards and incoming directors operate under the assumption that the skills, abilities, and experiences they have acquired in other environments somehow magically imparts to them the skill to become effective board members. Too often this also means you have as many perspectives on what the board's role is as there are board members. The board needs to engage in a deep and engaged discussion about how they will fulfill their collective responsibilities as a board. The implicit understandings and the potential differences of opinion have to be surfaced, debated, and solidified.  

Two: Recruit and Select with Purpose and Intent. One of the challenges that boards increasingly face in the modern era is the challenge of diversity and inclusion. While many boards have developed skills matrices and other processes to fill out their ranks as vacancies arise, there are still unseen biases in place that perpetuate a homogeneity in board composition. Boards must increasingly challenge their own paradigms, challenge their assumptions, and confront their biases as they recruit and select new board members with an eye to the future challenges their organization may face. More of the same might support harmony, but is likely inadequate to support change in a dynamic environment.

Three: Wear the Right Hat. Boards need to pay attention in their recruitment, selection, and orientation efforts to the perspectives and mentality of wanna be board members. Are these new board members animated by a singular issue?  Do they have an axe to grind? Are they at risk for conflict-of-interest scenarios?  Can they identify potential blind spots or biases?  In my experience, these types of conflicts and biases move well beyond direct and personal financial benefit as so many might assume. Individuals might be trying to right some perceived wrong from past experience with the organization (e.g., a family member's bad experience), a desire to change the values and culture of the organization to align with personal values, or even believing  they are more qualified to be the CEO so they will "dig deep" into operations to get things right.

Four: Do Your Work. Aspiring to be on a board - or at least to being an effective board member on an effective board - means you have work to do. I still encounter too many board members who view their simple membership on a board or attendance at board meetings as service enough. They believe their presence is contribution enough, or that a trite - and maybe even the odd relevant comment - once a board meeting fulfills their obligations as a board member. This is no more than check-box governance or social club participation. Regardless of the size of organization, board work should be seen and undertaken as a significant responsibility. Stand up or stand aside. Read your agenda materials before the board meeting, participate in board committee meetings as designated, and bring forward your unique perspective to the benefit of the organization. 

Five: Evaluate Board Performance. While many board members might be quite prepared and excited to evaluate CEO and organizational performance, they can become quite twitchy when the subject of board evaluation is broached. As a group of peers - and perhaps accomplished professionals in their other lives - they fear the challenge or consequences of evaluating each other and/or being evaluated themselves. But, in my view, they have a responsibility to model a commitment to evaluation, self-improvement, and growth that I expect they have for the rest of the organization. What can help boards carry out this function are a number of things: a) a transparent and authentic discussion of the purpose of such an evaluation; b) an agreed-upon and relevant structure and process for the evaluation; and c) objective, third-party support for supporting the assessment. These elements can take a lot of the fear and mystery out of the evaluation while at the same time making the process and results credible.

Six: Sustaining the Board. One could argue that this minefield could be considered an outcome or offshoot of several of the items noted above. The point to be made here is the board, not the CEO or operations, has to sustain, grow, and cultivate the governance philosophy, framework, and its culture in a very intentional fashion. To me this process takes several forms: a) reviewing and affirming the governance philosophy and framework on a regular (and not less than annual) basis; b) a structured approach to review board policies and procedures; c) engaging in professional and personal growth and development activities; c) onboarding new board members (and not simply handing incoming board members the orientation manual...); and d) being available as mentors to new board members.  

Seven: Manage the CEO Partnership. The single most important relationship a board has to manage is the partnership it should have with its operational leader. I like to talk about this through the use of a visual that shows two overlapping circles. In the middle, there are the shades of grey to be actively managed. So I don't view the the roles of board and CEO as being completely and utterly distinct and separate. They have a shared responsibility to protect and advance the organization. And they do have to fulfill this obligation in a trust-based partnership. Too often boards or individual board members gravitate to polar extremes. On one hand they can default to a far too personal a relationship with their operational leader, blindly trusting the CEO and not keeping their eyes on real performance of the organization.  On the other hand, other board members see their role as one of forensic auditor in every board meeting or even requiring on-site, random, operational visits to interrogate staff and clients alike about organizational performance. Neither approach is appropriate, nor will it create an environment conducive to operational excellence.

Being on a board or pursuing a board appointment represents a significant commitment and responsibility.  The small listing of landmines above is not intended to dissuade anyone from pursuing a board appointment. The work is both critically necessary for organizations large and small, in the private and public sectors, and can be incredibly rewarding and informative. Just appreciate it is a critical role and it requires significant effort to do the role justice.

It's About Governance and It's About Leadership!

———————————————————————————————————

Greg Hadubiak, MHSA, FACHE, CEC, PCC
President & Founder - BreakPoint Solutions
gregh@breakpoint.solutions 
www.breakpoint.solutions 
780-250-2543