• Published on

    ECMLG'13: Opening keynote address

    The 9th European Conference on Management Leadership and Governance was held at Alpin-Adria University, Klagenfurt, Austria.

    The opening address, by Julia Sloan of the USA, explored the topic of learning to think strategically, and the importance of such thinking to sustainable business performance. Sloan drew a clear demarcation between strategic thinking, strategic planning and strategic implementation. She asserted that most organisational leaders have reasonably well-developed planning and implementation skills, but poorly developed thinking skills.

    Whereas strategic planning tends to be linear, tidy, convergent, clean and aims to solve problems, strategic thinking tends to be non-linear, iterative, messy and aims to suspend problem solving while the nature of the problem is more clearly understood. Sloan suggested that leaders need to become skilled in strategic thinking and strategic planning. Otherwise, if leaders can only but plan in detail—without asking questions of context—and, as a result, expose their organisations to the very real chance of getting it wrong.

    Sloan's thesis is as compelling as it is self-evident—which begs the question: Why do so many leaders ignore the strategic thinking element? Is it too hard, too complex, or is it simply a case of leaders not knowing what they don't know? Perhaps more importantly, how can this gap be bridged? Our business schools probably have an important responsibility in addressing these questions. They need to take stock of Sloan's thesis, with a view to adjusting their curricula, to emphasise the cognitive skills that are so obviously missing from the graduates emerging from their programmes.

    Readers wanting to more should read Sloan's book "Learning to think strategically", the second edition of which has just been published.
  • Published on

    ECMLG'13: Observations and insights

    Later this week—on Thu 14 and Fri 15 November—I will be speaking at the 9th European Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance in Klagenfurt, Austria. I'm looking forward to renewing acquaintances and making some new connections; to presenting a paper to an international audience which will include some of the world's leading governance scholars; to testing some emergent ideas; and, to learning from others throughout the two days. 

    I plan to post reflections here during the conference, so check back if you'd like to hear about the latest developments in management, leadership and governance research and practice.
  • Published on

    My "re-conceptualisation" paper has been accepted for ICMLG

    Great news—in the form of two emails—awaited my arrival at the desk this morning.

    The first was from the organisers of the 2nd International Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance, to be held at Babson University, Mass, USA, in March 2014, advising that my paper entitled Towards a re-conceptualisation of governance, via strategic decision-making and performance has been accepted onto the conference programme. That this paper has been accepted is a significant milestone on my doctoral journey, for it signals that the ideas and conclusions that are starting to emerge from my work are of interest to others.

    The second was from the family that I lived with during my AFS student exchange to northern Minnesota in 1979–80. Somewhat presumptuously, to wrote to them last week to mention the possibility of the conference, and to ask whether I could visit if the trip went ahead. My host parents are now well into their 80s, and I have not seen them since 1990, so I was hoping they'd be agreeable. The reply was amazing, for not only are they happy for me to visit, but they have already organised a function, and arranged for my host siblings to travel from various points on the compass to be there as well.

    News like this really lift one's spirit and makes the long—and at times arduous—doctoral journey so very worthwhile.
  • Published on

    Three-weeks of busy-ness...

    I'm working my way through a busy three-week period in my PhD programme: a period of gathering data, attending meetings, writing papers, preparing speeches and testing ideas. Having successfully navigated a travel-heavy programme last week, this week is a little more orderly, with another round of interviews and meetings in (just!) two cities. However, the travel kicks in again on Saturday, with a flight to Klagenfurt Austria, via London and Vienna, to attend and speak at the 9th European Conference on Management, Leadership and Governance (13–15 Nov). The programme looks very interesting, with a wide variety of peer-reviewed papers to be presented by some very capable scholars. One of my papers will be presented on Thursday morning, and the other later the same day.

    Despite the busy-ness of the period, the opportunity to meet some of the world's leading governance scholars, to further test the ideas that are starting to emerge from my research, is one I am very much looking forward to. For readers interested in the ECMLG conference, do pop back next week, because I intend to share my thoughts and insights here, as I did at the ICMLG conference in Bangkok earlier this year. 
  • Published on

    Swimming in data...but some clarity is starting to emerge

    I'm sitting at my desk looking at a fantail flitting between the branches of the tree just outside the window. It's a great distraction from what I should be doing: cataloguing the pile of data gathered in the last week, including 900MB of sound recordings and 28 pages of handwritten notes, from two board meeting observations and three interviews. The insights from this latest data need to be compared with insights from data gathered earlier. While this process is akin to swimming in data, there is some good news: five "causal powers" (that may explain how boards influence business performance) are starting to emerge. However, I keep reminding myself not to jump to conclusions, for there is more data to gather and more analysis to conduct. The ideas forming in my mind could be significant, or they could be a mirage. Time will tell. The fantail has gone now, so it's back to work. I'll keep you informed.
  • Published on

    Who should drive the development of corporate strategy?

    The selection and implementation of strategies that enable a company to compete effectively appears to be crucial to value maximisation. Given this, who should drive the development of corporate strategy? The value that boards can contribute appears to lie in their active and ongoing involvement in the strategic management process—through the consideration of strategic options; the development of strategy; the making of strategic decisions; and, the adequate monitoring of strategy implementation and subsequent performance. It seems to improve the quality of environment scanning; minimise the chance of selecting poor strategies; and, improve decision-making. Assertiveness and knowledge about the business also appears to be important, even though many CEOs believe their boards do not fully understand the strategic drivers to their company's success. The question of who should drive the strategy development process is less clear however.

    My recent research suggests there is a fine line between the board having an active involvement in strategic matters (seen as desirable), and the board being seen to impinge on management's delegated responsibility to implement strategy. While the development of strategy is now widely recognised as a major task of the board, all of the CEOs that I interviewed claimed to control the process of strategy development, whether their board was actively involved or not. Also, company performance appeared to be enhanced when the division of labour between board and management was clearly defined and efficiently implemented. Further, the boards of successful companies appear to enjoy strong relations with management; they seek to make consensus decisions together in order to achieve strategic goals; and, the amount of political interplay between individuals appears to be low. The key point is that the board and management work together in a positive manner, and that they are both actively involved in the process of defining and deciding where and how the company should be headed.