Best Practives in Leadership Development & Organization Change 34

Confused, diverse, conflicting, unrealistic, misaligned, uninteresting to members Clear and shared by all, important to all, well aligned, engaging to all Meeting Goals/Focus No agenda o

Confused, diverse, conflicting, unrealistic, misaligned, uninteresting to members

Clear and shared by all, important to all,

well aligned, engaging to all

Meeting Goals/Focus

No agenda or did not follow agenda, poorly planned

Agreed upon agenda, followed in sequence,

no wasteful digressions

Planning/Tracking

A few key members dominating and some members not participating

Everyone contributing and involved in discussion and team process

Meeting participation/Involvement

More than one person talks at a time; repetitions, interruptions, and side conversations; little inquiry and advocacy

One person talks at a time, others clarify and build on ideas; good balance of advocacy

and inquiry

Listening/Communicating

Members distrust each other, keep their thoughts

to themselves, and don't explore others' data/positions

Mutual trust and open exploration of

others' data/positions

Member trust/Openness

Team decision-making process breaks down;

unable to reach decisions, resolve conflicts,

or focus on results

Participate in process to reach consensus decisions; able to surface and resolve issues

to reach results

Productivity/Driving results

Exhibit 12.4 Team Process Check

Exhibit 12.5 Pros and Cons of Data Collection Methods

One-on-one interviews

Focus groups

Surveys

• Opportunity to build relationships with those interviewed

• Direct/indirect nonverbal communication will allow you to pick up additional information

• Details can be clarified when necessary

• You can get a lot of data

in a short time

• Group synergy can lead

to deeper inquiry

• Allows you to obtain several points of view

• You can get a lot of data, inexpensively, from many people

• You can get information from people who may otherwise be

inaccessible

• Anonymous answers promote greater openness

• Can be used to alert the organization as part of

an intervention

• Getting access to the people you need to interview may not be easy

• Telephone interviews some-times catch people off guard and keep them from communicating

• Those not interviewed may feel “discriminated against.”

• Scheduling may be difficult

• There is a risk of “group think” or self-censoring in front of group

• Process may become dominated by strong or vocal leader

• Questions cannot be clarified

• You can’t identify the exact sources of the responses, so they may be difficult to interpret

• You may not receive open and honest answers to all questions

• Require attention to design and implementation

(Continued)

Exhibit 12.5 Pros and Cons of Data Collection Methods (Continued)

Direct observation

Analysis of existing data

• You get first-hand infor-mation from what you personally observe

• There is less chance of misunderstanding from someone else’s observation

• You can redirect your focus as situation changes

• Saves time, money, and resources

• Data may be more respected from primary researcher

• You may get information that you would not otherwise have access to

• What others don’t see as relevant may be vitally important

• You may not have access to the situations that need to

be observed

• Direct observation may alter the situation being observed

• It may difficult to observe enough situations to be able

to make generalizations

• The data may be incom-plete, unreliable, or out

of date

• The data may be difficult and or time consuming to obtain or understand

• Data obtained may be irrelevant to your research

Notes on using worksheet

Identify the force or trend whether it is a positive or negative impact on the project.

Label the force or trend on the appropriate side of the central (neutral impact) axis.

Immediately under the label, draw an arrow whose length reflects the team's perception of the relative amount of impact that force or trend is likely to exert on the project's success—short arrows indicate minor

(Add as many arrows as necessary)

(Describe forces or trend above arrow)

(Draw length of arrow to indicate relative impact)

Opposing or Restraining Forces and Trends

Driving or Supporting Forces and Trends Exhibit 12.6 Force-Field Analysis

Exhibit 12.7 Project Review Checklist

Time Date

What planning needed for the execution of the project:

• Set project review dates at the start

of the project

• Ask project team members

to keep the dates sacrosanct

on their personal calendars

• Create a template so that each member can report progress on his or her part of the project in a standardized way

• Ensure the project sponsor is aware of the dates

Before the review:

• Identify all participants; send announcements

• Specify the goal of the review

• Develop an agenda with times for specific areas if the review is going to last longer than three hours

• Prepare pertinent materials and distribute them well in advance

• If needed, arrange for logistics support (room, coffee, food, audio-visual support, etc.)

During the review:

• Welcome participants and make any introductions

Exhibit 12.7 (Continued)

Time Date

• Ask for someone to act as

a recorder and take notes unless there is a formal secretary

• Set goals for the review

• Review agenda; modify

as needed

• Announce decision-making model

• Describe relevant rules and processes

• Monitor group processes

• Stay focused on the task

• Sum up at the end of discussions

• Ensure the recorder has captured any decisions before moving on

• Watch the logistics and time-keeping If people have effectively finished their contribution, offer

to excuse them if they wish

• Before the end, review decisions reached

• Develop any action plans needed

• Ask participants to evaluate the effectiveness of the review

• Thank participants

• After the review:

• Follow up with minutes as soon

as possible On a fast-moving project they should be issued the same day

• Implement action plan

Exhibit 12.8 Business Improvement Recommendation Process

Background

Achieving McDonald’s business strategies and goals will require that McDonald’s leaders do things differently Although it is important that our leaders are confident

in the company and their own ability, that confidence cannot result in the percep-tion that others can’t and aren’t doing things better than we are In fact, in healthy companies, innovation occurs when every leader has a mindset of continuous improvement and is constantly scanning the external environment for better ways

of doing business

Therefore, we are using the Leadership at McDonald’s Program (LAMP) as a vehicle to support and reinforce a culture of continuous improvement and innova-tion within McDonald’s Each LAMP subteam is charged with leveraging their com-bined LAMP experiences, especially their experience at Thunderbird University, to scan for potential ideas from external sources that, if adopted or adapted appropri-ately, have the potential to have a significant impact on McDonald’s performance

Team Deliverable

Four subteams are to search and discover, from any sources external to McDonald’s, one significant “business improvement opportunity” that they recommend be seri-ously considered by the executive councils for possible adoption within McDonald’s The opportunity should be one that supports or accelerates the achievement of our key business strategies

Each team is to do enough research on their recommendation to be able to pre-sent a business case to the chairman’s and president’s councils and have their pro-posed action plan for taking the recommendation to the next step of feasibility be adopted and funded, should funding be required

Purpose of the Business Improvement Recommendation

• Organizational leadership Reinforce a continuous improvement and innovation

mindset and culture within McDonald’s Put a strong focus on the importance

of leaders to be constantly seeking to “scan and mine” the external environ-ment for ideas that, if adopted within McDonald’s, could have the potential

of positively and significantly affecting business results

• Team leadership Provide each of the four teams a real versus role-play

oppor-tunity to learn more about how to be a part of and lead a high-performing team responsible for delivering an important business recommendation to a high-profile audience of senior leaders of the business

Exhibit 12.8 (Continued)

• Personal leadership Provide every LAMP participant the opportunity for

personal development around innovation, idea development and adaptation, managing change, stakeholder analysis, and executive presentation and influence

Ground Rules

1 The core idea must come from somewhere outside of McDonald’s

2 There must be evidence to confirm that the recommendation has worked successfully in another organization(s)

3 There is no need to get approval from a person or any organization inside McDonald’s before presenting recommendation

4 Each team presentation can go no longer than thirty minutes, leaving fifteen minutes for discussion with the council members

5 Teams have complete freedom within this framework

Evaluation of Recommendation by Council Members

• Assess the quality of the thought process and logic that went into the recommendation

• Evaluate the presentation approach, style, and form in terms of its impact on persuading you toward approving the recommendation

• Rate the degree to which the team effectively handles questions, challenges, and concerns during the discussion

• Assess the feasibility of successfully implementing this recommendation and gaining the benefits for the business

Executive council members will also provide each team with specific, written feedback on what they liked most about the team’s recommendation and one

or two suggestions they have for how the team could have improved their presentation

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTORS

James Intagliata is president and founder of the NorthStar Group, a

manage-ment consulting firm that specializes in senior-level executive assessmanage-ment, indi-vidual leadership coaching, and competency modeling Over the past twenty years he has consulted to a diverse group of clients and senior executives in businesses ranging in size and maturity from venture capital–backed start-ups to Fortune 100 companies dealing with dramatic new challenges in their business and marketplace In addition to his consulting work, he has held faculty posi-tions at the State University of New York at Buffalo and the University of Missouri at Kansas City and taught organizational theory and management at the graduate level He received his Ph.D in clinical psychology in 1976 from the State University of New York at Buffalo His recently published articles include

“Leveraging Leadership Competencies to Produce Leadership Brand: Creating Distinctiveness by Focusing on Strategy and Results” (with co-authors Dave

Ulrich and Norm Smallwood) in Human Resources Planning, Winter, 2000.

David Small is currently senior director, U.S leadership development and

suc-cession planning for McDonald’s Corporation in Oak Brook, Illinois In this role

he is responsible for talent management and leadership development for McDonald’s U.S business David has a master’s degree in industrial and orga-nizational psychology from the University of Colorado, and has worked in the field of employee selection and assessment systems, performance development, succession planning, and leadership development for over fifteen years David’s professional career includes working for U.S West and Ameritech/SBC prior to joining McDonald’s Corporation in 1995.

CHAPTER THIRTEEN

MIT

Developing the higher-level skills to create and sustain a self-perpetuating learning organization through mental models, systems thinking, personal and organizational visioning, and several other best practice organizational learning exercises and tools that achieved significant results.

EXHIBITS Exhibit 13.1: Status of Strategic Plan Action Items,

Exhibit 13.3: Model I: Organizational Learning

Exhibit 13.4: Model II: Competency Model