+ All Categories
Home > Business > Score 2011

Score 2011

Date post: 03-Jul-2015
Category:
Upload: chadweinstein
View: 531 times
Download: 1 times
Share this document with a friend
Description:
ELA's presentation to Saint Paul SCORE, the Service Corps of Retired Executives. Focus on building trust to improve stakeholder relationships.
20
Ethical Leadership Saint Paul SCORE August 9, 2011
Transcript
Page 1: Score 2011

Ethical Leadership

Saint Paul SCORE

August 9, 2011

Page 2: Score 2011

“Business ethics is so…negative.”

Page 3: Score 2011

Empower others to improve the world

Page 4: Score 2011

Ethical Leaders in ActionLeadership Development Model

Leading

Self

Leading

Others

Leading

in Context

Page 5: Score 2011

Learning across contexts

Page 6: Score 2011

Among my teachers…

Page 7: Score 2011

Thinking about stakeholders

Investors

Employees

Vendors Customers

Partners

Competitors

Environment Communities

Arms-Length

Contractual

Fiduciary

Page 8: Score 2011

Relationships

may be

harder to

graph

than to

improve!

A More Realistic View of Stakeholder Diagrams

Page 9: Score 2011

The Old Employment Model:“Master-Slave”

Minimally constrained by human rights.

Employment at Will is a logical evolution from this view.

Eugene Genovese’s economic conclusion: slavery didn’t pay!

(The Political Economy of Slavery: Studies in the Economy

and the Society of the Slave South, 1965).

Not all

slavery

structures

were/are

the same.

The same

Is true for

employment

terms

Page 10: Score 2011

Measuring Engagement

• Retention

• Safety

• Customer Service

• Productivity

• Profitability

Source: Gallup Q12 Summary

Page 11: Score 2011

• Clear expectations for

performance

• Adequate materials

and equipment

• Ability to succeed

in assigned roles

• A supervisor who cares about subordinates

• Co-workers committed to quality work

• Opportunities to learn and grow

Source: Gallup Q12 Summary

Employee Engagement Drivers

Page 12: Score 2011

We are most likely to trust and

co-operate with individuals and

systems - whether we win or

lose - when we experience fair

process.

“Process”

includes

anything

from

giving

feedback to

a single FF

to setting

departmental

strategy

Kim & Mauborgne, Harvard Business Review, July – August 1997

Why think about “Fair Process?”

Page 13: Score 2011

• Engagement– Stakeholders invited to participate

– Participants have an opportunity to be heard

• Explanation– Process and rationale are clearly explained, along with

decisions and outcomes.

– Explanation is respectful – it is also often educational.

• Expectation Clarity– When decisions are made, implications for all

stakeholders are clearly articulated.

– Everyone knows what to expect, and what is expected

of them.

Fair

Process is

working

WITH

others

The Three Elements of Fair Process

Page 14: Score 2011

Fair Process does not mean:

• Democracy

• Consensus

• Happiness or Contentment

• Accommodation of individual wishes

or whims

• Command relinquishing legitimate

decision authority or accountability

• Just being nice

A good indication of a fair process is when people who do not

“get their way” understand why and how a decision was made,

and acknowledge that the process was fair.

Page 15: Score 2011

• Maintain control by keeping

employee’s at arms length.

• Substitute memos and forms

for direct, two-way

communication.

• Avoid challenges to their ideas

and authority.

• Believe that knowledge is

power and retain power by

keeping what they know to

themselves.

• Deliberately leave the rules for

success and failure vague.

The Misuse of Power

Page 16: Score 2011

Customer Expectations and Commitments

• What should our

customers expect from

us?

• Do we communicate

about those

expectations?

• How do we hold

ourselves accountable?

• How do we respond

when problems arise?

“Even if two customers are buying the same

product, they may want totally different

services wrapped around it.”

– VP, Customer Service,

semiconductor firm

Page 17: Score 2011

Challenge: engaging vendors

• What should your clients expect from their vendors?

• What should vendors expect of them?

• What do basic, healthy relationships look like?

• What about shared-destiny, strategic relationships?

Page 18: Score 2011

Ethical Dimensions of Competitors

• Ethical Duties:

– Comply with laws

– Refrain from manipulating legal/regulatory processes

• Competition can expand markets and validate

customer desire

• Competition can drive innovation, discipline, and

efficiency.

• Defeating competitors is an easy surrogate for the

pursuit of excellence.

Page 19: Score 2011

The oldest leadership seminar

• Safety and comfort

• Tactical information

• Problem-solving

• Strategic decisions

• Who are we???

If we

aren’t

telling

stories,

others

surely

are!

Page 20: Score 2011

Thank you for your attention!

Chad Weinstein

Ethical Leaders in Action, LLC

[email protected]

651-646-1512

“We enable ethical leaders to achieve

extraordinary results”


Recommended