Strategy or Execution: Which Is More Important?

Many business leaders think they’d rather have great execution than superior strategies, but you can’t have the first without the second.

http://ow.ly/bqHGU  by Ken Favaro, with Evan Hirsh and Kasturi Rangan

I once heard a business leader say, “Strategy is results.” He meant that strategy doesn’t matter as long as you are producing results. Many other business leaders feel the same way. Often, this is because they associate strategy with analysis and execution with getting things done, and they attribute more value to doing than to analyzing. From that perspective, a strategy is a lofty, self-evident statement such as “Our strategy is to maximize customer value” or “Our strategy is to become the market leader.” Such “strategies” don’t contribute much to producing results. Possibly, they motivate the troops, although even that is highly debatable.

On its surface, this view that strategy is less important than execution is hard to refute. If that’s all strategy is, execution is clearly more important.

But any seasoned strategist knows that strategy is not just sloganeering. It is the series of choices you make on where to play and how to win to maximize long-term value. Execution is producing results in the context of those choices. Therefore, you cannot have good execution without having good strategy.

Most everyone would agree that you cannot achieve good results without having good execution; similarly, most would agree that having a good strategy alone is no surefire formula for success. But too many jump to the wrong conclusion that this makes execution more important than strategy.

Consider the Toyota Motor Corporation and General Motors Company. Yes, Toyota produced better results than GM for many years because it executed better than GM. But it was able to out-execute GM because it made much clearer and more coherent choices about where it would play and how it would compete. This included sharper choices about its target customers; its value proposition in terms of products, features, and price points; and the superior capabilities it needed to deliver that proposition to those customers. In other words, Toyota out-executed GM primarily because it had a clearer, better strategy than GM. The fact that Toyota faltered in 2010 and 2011 reinforces the point that good strategy alone isn’t enough; you have to have good execution too. But this shouldn’t be confused with the point that the quality of your execution depends a lot on the quality of your strategy.

The airlines industry provides another example. Southwest Airlines Company has outperformed American Airlines Inc. for decades. Is this because Southwest has executed better than American? Absolutely. But it’s no coincidence that Southwest also has a better strategy. It has a more sharply defined target market (the point-to-point economy traveler), a more compelling value proposition (lowest price, most convenient, and most passenger friendly), and a more coherent set of capabilities to deliver that proposition (maintaining a simpler fleet, running a point-to-point operation). Having a better strategy has made it possible for Southwest to consistently out-execute American.

In fact, no matter how much American Airlines improves its execution, it will never be enough to overcome the lousy economics of the airline industry and make it a big value creator. The company would have to find a more distinctive strategy. Likewise, no matter how much GM improves its decision-making culture, product development processes, or dealer operations, that effort won’t be enough to produce superior results without a coherent strategy. Fortunately, bankruptcy has given both companies breathing space to find distinctive and coherent strategies.

To be sure, both American and GM face challenging industry conditions in which earning an attractive level of profitability is reserved for only the most advantaged players. But even when industry economics are attractive, standout results do not come from standout execution alone.

Another example is retail banking. A typical retail bank doesn’t really need a distinctive strategy to produce an attractive return on capital as long as it executes well. Most retail banks have strategies that are virtually indistinguishable from one another. Their leaders all talk about targeting the same customers; having intimacy with those customers; and being the best at service, relationship management, product development, and risk management. However, the ones that truly excel have created distinctive, coherent strategies that enable them to have superior execution. Think of Wells Fargo in the U.S., Standard Chartered in Asia, and Lloyds Bank in the U.K. when Sir Brian Pitman was its chief executive.

So the next time you hear statements like these —

• “I’d rather have great execution with a mediocre strategy than the other way around.”
• “You don’t win by having a better strategy; you win through superior execution.”
• “We don’t need a new strategy to fix our performance; we just need to execute the one we have.”

— remember this: You need a good strategy to have good execution. Yes, having a good strategy alone isn’t enough to win, but your ability to execute well depends on how good your strategy is and how well it’s understood by everyone who makes major decisions for your business. When your business or company is not executing well, take a look at your strategy. Improving it — and your most important stakeholders’ understanding of it — may hold the key to unlocking better execution.

Kevin Brown www.kbsinsight@blogspot.com

Why the “F” Bomb Shouldn’t Be Dropped

May 25, 2012 By Mike Myatt, Chief Strategy Officer, N2growth

I read an interesting article on The Wall Street Journal today discussing the use of colorful language in business settings. It prompted me to re-post an earlier piece I authored on the same subject. While both perspectives cover some of the same ground, the article in The Journal hedges a bit too much for my taste. You’ll find my piece a bit more direct and firm in expressing there is NEVER a good time to drop the F-bomb.

Okay, I know business is far less formal today than in times past. I understand many people are more tolerant of colorful language than they used to be. In fact, some even encourage the use of profanity as a means of being true to ones authentic self. Case in point – The Journal article stated: “Deployed at the right moment and in the right setting, a well-chosen curse word can motivate a team, dissolve tension or win over an audience.” If you can’t motivate a team, dissolve tension or win over an audience without cursing, then I would suggest your toolbox might be a bit light. Call me old school if you will, but I don’t buy any of the aforementioned arguments as legitimate in supporting the use of indiscreet, inappropriate, and unprofessional language.

Before I go any further, let me state for the record that I’m not a prude, nor am I a mama’s boy. I’ve traveled the world (23 countries and counting), spent years in athletic locker rooms, served in the military, and have been in my fair share of interesting places. I’m also not going to come at this topic by presenting a religious argument, or from the perspective of academic elitism. That said, I am going to tell you what I think of the value of possessing a great vocabulary. Moreover, I will comment on what I believe to be appropriate and inappropriate use of speech, and I’ll do it all without pulling any punches.

While today’s rant has been brewing for quite some time, the following thoughts spawned from the regretfully sad reality there is virtually no public place you can venture into without being subjected to someone’s total lack of verbal courtesy. If that isn’t bad enough, the use of vulgarity has pervaded the business world to the extent you’re hard pressed to get through the day without having to deal with it in some form or fashion. As a leader, is this acceptable to you? It is not to me.

I recently viewed a YouTube video of a very highly regarded speaker, and simply could not believe the presentation was so heavily laced with profanity. The powerful message being espoused was only weakened by the sloppy and offensive language that was so unnecessarily inserted. It’s been my experience the best leaders and professionals have no need for the use of profanity. Here’s a thought…a leader should strive to inspire, motivate and challenge others to a better and greater end, but never should a leader dilute their message to the lowest common denominator.

Stop for a moment and consider this – even if you don’t feel the use of profanity is offensive, I guarantee you someone within earshot definitely does. So my question is this: is it more important to you to exercise your personal discretion (indiscretion??), or to exercise consideration for others? Here’s the cold hard truth – if you think your profanity isn’t offending anyone, you’re just plain wrong. It’s not a matter of whether or not I can handle it, because trust me when I tell you I’ve heard it all before, but why should my wife, daughter, mother, etc. have to endure it?

Does profanity even bother you in the slightest, or have you become so desensitized you don’t even notice what I’ve just described as being true? In this author’s humble opinion, there is absolutely no value whatsoever in coloring your verbal communications with expletives. As noted above I’ve seen a lot in my life, and experience has shown me the use of profanity typically boils down to an individual being guilty of having one or more of the following flaws:

1. Lack of Intelligence: The English language offers us the choice of so many wonderful adjectives, analogies, abilities to paint word pictures and to use a variety of other descriptors, such that there is no need to substitute with expletives. The insertion of a four letter word for “emphasis” usually only points out the speaker lacks command of his/her vocabulary. Nothing flashes “stupid” like the use of profanity. Don’t make the mistake of appearing to be uneducated if you’re not.
2. Laziness: We have all met bright people who swear. This usually means they either think they’re smarter than everyone else so people will put up with their use of profanity, or they have just fallen into a rut and are too lazy to work on improving their verbal communication skills. Either scenario is a negative label professionals should not desire to be tagged with.
3. Poor Anger Management: People who are not quick on their feet, or do not possess adequate conflict resolution skills, often revert to profanity as a safety net of sorts. If all else fails, people who fall into this category resort to attempting to intimidate the other party with the use of profanity (see # 4 below). People identified as having anger management issues typically don’t reach their full potential without learning better skills. If you would rather spend your career advancing in the ranks, as opposed to spending time in counseling or coaching sessions, lose the profanity.
4. Insecurity: People who lack confidence in themselves and/or their abilities often try to bolster other people’s perception of them by using off-color language as an attempt to feign strength and power. Here’s a tip…it doesn’t work. Profanity won’t intimidate anyone (at least not any worthy opponent), and will likely only lessen your image with the audience you are so desperately trying to impress.
5. Socially Inappropriate Behavior: The show off, ego-maniac, substance abuser, the female trying to be “one of the boys” or the wannabe comedian are all examples of socially inappropriate behavior, which often times results in the use of profanity. Nobody likes a show-off, substance abuse is never a good thing, most people don’t find it appealing to associate with women who curse like the proverbial drunken sailor, and inappropriate jokes are more likely to get you a sexual harassment charge than a laugh. Even if you do elicit a brief chortle from your audience, they will likely not be left with the impression you were hoping for. Here’s a Myattism for you: “when in doubt, remember vulgarity doesn’t add value.”

Bottom line…few things make an impact, or lack thereof, like the words you allow to flow from your lips. Regardless of your station in life, vocabulary absolutely matters…It matters to an even greater degree for those in positions of leadership. I welcome your comments below, but remember that I’ll only publish those comments written without the use of expletives…

Kevin Brown  www.kbsinsight.blogspot.com 

Core Beliefs of Extraordinary Bosses

 Inc.com http://ow.ly/asIrx

SALES SOURCE | Geoffrey James Apr 23, 2012 -Inc.com http://ow.ly/asIrx

The best managers have a fundamentally different understanding of workplace, company, and team dynamics. See what they get right.

A few years back, I interviewed some of the most successful CEOs in the world in order to discover their management secrets. I learned that the "best of the best" tend to share the following eight core beliefs.

1. Business is an ecosystem, not a battlefield.

Average bosses see business as a conflict between companies, departments and groups. They build huge armies of "troops" to order about, demonize competitors as "enemies," and treat customers as "territory" to be conquered.

Extraordinary bosses see business as a symbiosis where the most diverse firm is most likely to survive and thrive. They naturally create teams that adapt easily to new markets and can quickly form partnerships with other companies, customers ... and even competitors.

2. A company is a community, not a machine.

Average bosses consider their company to be a machine with employees as cogs. They create rigid structures with rigid rules and then try to maintain control by "pulling levers" and "steering the ship."

Extraordinary bosses see their company as a collection of individual hopes and dreams, all connected to a higher purpose. They inspire employees to dedicate themselves to the success of their peers and therefore to the community–and company–at large.

3. Management is service, not control.

Average bosses want employees to do exactly what they're told. They're hyper-aware of anything that smacks of insubordination and create environments where individual initiative is squelched by the "wait and see what the boss says" mentality.

Extraordinary bosses set a general direction and then commit themselves to obtaining the resources that their employees need to get the job done. They push decision making downward, allowing teams form their own rules and intervening only in emergencies.

4. My employees are my peers, not my children.

Average bosses see employees as inferior, immature beings who simply can't be trusted if not overseen by a patriarchal management. Employees take their cues from this attitude, expend energy on looking busy and covering their behinds.

Extraordinary bosses treat every employee as if he or she were the most important person in the firm. Excellence is expected everywhere, from the loading dock to the boardroom. As a result, employees at all levels take charge of their own destinies.

5. Motivation comes from vision, not from fear.

Average bosses see fear--of getting fired, of ridicule, of loss of privilege--as a crucial way to motivate people.  As a result, employees and managers alike become paralyzed and unable to make risky decisions.

Extraordinary bosses inspire people to see a better future and how they'll be a part of it.  As a result, employees work harder because they believe in the organization's goals, truly enjoy what they're doing and (of course) know they'll share in the rewards.

6. Change equals growth, not pain.

Average bosses see change as both complicated and threatening, something to be endured only when a firm is in desperate shape. They subconsciously torpedo change ... until it's too late.

Extraordinary bosses see change as an inevitable part of life. While they don't value change for its own sake, they know that success is only possible if employees and organization embrace new ideas and new ways of doing business.

7. Technology offers empowerment, not automation.

Average bosses adhere to the old IT-centric view that technology is primarily a way to strengthen management control and increase predictability. They install centralized computer systems that dehumanize and antagonize employees.

Extraordinary bosses see technology as a way to free human beings to be creative and to build better relationships. They adapt their back-office systems to the tools, like smartphones and tablets, that people actually want to use.

8. Work should be fun, not mere toil.

Average bosses buy into the notion that work is, at best, a necessary evil. They fully expect employees to resent having to work, and therefore tend to subconsciously define themselves as oppressors and their employees as victims. Everyone then behaves accordingly.

Extraordinary bosses see work as something that should be inherently enjoyable–and believe therefore that the most important job of manager is, as far as possible, to put people in jobs that can and will make them truly happy.

3 Reasons Why You Need to Conduct Win/Loss Analysis on a Regular Basis

3 Reasons Why You Need to Conduct Win/Loss Analysis on a Regular Basis

Posted by Tony Albachiara on Mon, Apr 02, 2012

Tonight, over 20 million crazy fans will watch a basketball game that pits Kansas vs. Kentucky.  March Madness will come to an end, and the NCAA will crown a new champion.  Saturday also marked the end of the 1^st Quarter for 73% of corporate American businesses. If you missed Ryan’s post about “Conducting Your Q1 Sales Compensation Performance Assessment,” it’s a must-read. Tons of great advice on how to properly wrap up Q1.

I know for sure that each of the teams playing tonight has spent countless hours looking at their opponents’ performance, in games they won, as well as games they lost.  Why? Because no matter how good you are, there are always ways to get better, and ways to continue boosting that winning percentage until you’re finally crowned a champion.  Whether it’s sports or business, it’s all about wining consistently – nobody remembers the runner-up!

You might be saying, “That’s a waste of time and energy. We’ve made the number and we’ve got it figured out.  Our performance speaks loud enough.” Congrats on making the number this Quarter – best of luck repeating this performance consistently without doing the proper analysis.

How Can I Keep Making my Number?

The answer will be right in front of you on your TV screen tonight. You need to consistently perform the proper performance analysis in order to make it to the title game. A Win/Loss/No Decision Analysis.

There are many misconceptions about what a Win/Loss/No Decision Analysis is, so let’s start there. More information about it may prove to you why it’s so necessary to improving your overall sales strategy.

What is a Win/Loss/No Decision Analysis?

• An Assessment through the eyes of your customer that provides transparency and explanations into the reasons why given sales opportunities are won, lost, or receive no decision.

What does a Win/Loss/No Decision do?

• A Win/Loss/No Decision Analysis reveals the strengths and weaknesses of your organization, providing actionable data to modify processes and improve win rates.

What does it mean to use a Win/Loss/No Decision Analysis?

• It means you have a consistent improvement process put into place, which will utilize the customer voice to increase win rates. (And who doesn’t love increasing win rates?)

So why should I invest in a Win/Loss/No Decision Analysis?

• Your sales team often makes the first impression, represents the company, and provides revenue to sustain development, operations, and growth. This is a key insight every sales leader must have.
• A finely tuned sales organization operating at maximum efficiency provides a powerful competitive advantage
• When trying to optimize go-to-market strategies, executives often ask, “What is the most productive use of my company resources (people, product, dollars)?” Proper Assessment’s can answer these questions.
• Sales intelligence is necessary to the proper function of the sales team and a Win-Loss Analysis provides the raw material for such strategic assessments (Good Data = Good Decisions).

What Can a Win/Loss/No Decision Analysis Do for Me?

What if you could eliminate wasted effort on things that don’t matter – things that do nothing to improve your win rates? What if you could get the entire executive team to agree on a single definition of sales success – and how you arrive there? Think about all the efficiencies that you could find, and the improvement that you would see in your sales force and overall sales strategy. A Win/Loss/No Decision Analysis can help to achieve all of these things. Click the image on the right to download the Win/Loss/No Decision Analysis Calculator to simply see the revenue impact to changes.

9 Ways to See Change Coming (Before it Kills Your Business)

THE STRATEGIC DECISION | Paul J. H. Schoemaker

To get a business going, you need entrepreneurial vision. To keep it performing at a high level day to day, you need intense operational focus. But to survive for the long run, you need a different kind of skill, one that I consider a core attribute of true strategic leaders. In my book with George Day, we call it peripheral vision. 

Sad to say, most companies aren’t very good at this. When new threats or opportunities emerge on the periphery of their usual business environment, they fail to notice them or misinterpret their import. Most leaders have a hard time with the weak and ambiguous signals that are often the only earning warning signs of impending change.

What Lego failed to see coming

There are many examples: Coors failed to see the trend toward low carb beer until it was too late. Michelin overlooked the crucial role of service stations for their new Flat Run tire.  Mattell's Barbie was blindsided by the popularity of the Bratz doll. Another notable case is Lego, which responded poorly to the electronic revolution in toys and gaming, and then went on to underestimate the squeeze that Wal-Mart and China would put on its pricing power.

As a business owner, you always face the temptation to focus on managing your current offering in the immediate business environment. Someone has to do this, to be sure, and giving unwavering attention to operations will often pay off in short-term performance. But by zeroing in on what’s in front of you, you naturally lose peripheral vision—and that can threaten your company’s long-term survival. 

Having peripheral vision means that you monitor what is happening around the edges of your business: You keep tabs on other industries, distant markets, new research, emerging business models, and remote demographic data that may seem to have little relevance to your portfolio. But strategic peripheral vision is about much more than simply anticipating change.  It is about sensing where to look more carefully for clues, understanding how to interpret weak signals, and having the courage to act when the signals are still ambiguous.

Mastering the art of anticipation

How do you master the art of anticipation? Our study of over 160 senior executives found that a vigilant attitude is the most important trait of strategic leaders who are good at anticipating and exploiting change. To break that down into a set of practices, we’ve found that such leaders do nine things well. They:

• Look for game changing information at the periphery of their business
• Search beyond the boundaries of current, prevailing views
• Recognize potential changes before the competition does
• Connect the dots of incipient trends by triangulating weak signals
• Entertain multiple hypotheses about causes of change
• Encourage mavericks in their company to say what they really think
• Organize “paranoia sessions” to tap wisdom inside their company
• Build wide networks inside and outside the organization
• Remain vigilant and curious about signals from many spheres

It’s important to note that there are two ways you need to look at your periphery. One way, just described, is to “mind” the periphery. This requires divergent attention and means that you pay attention to actions across many areas and connect the dots of trends that may present approaching threats or opportunities.

Don't just "mind" the periphery. "Mine" it, too.

But there are other sources of threat and opportunity you need to watch. Sometimes they originate in a well-defined part of the periphery, such as pending regulations or a specific technology. In such cases, you want to thoroughly “mine” for knowledge.  In other words, only a very close examination reveals the key insights, usually after triangulating multiple sources of information. This requires a strong convergent focus on a specific part of the periphery and rapidly developing the capacity to respond to it. 

The good news is, failures of strategic anticipation aren’t always fatal. After Lego experienced a deep crisis in the early part of last decade, the company changed its approach.  It improved communications with retailers and customers, viewing them as strategic radar and sources of new ideas.  Lego teamed up with outside inventors to create new products.  Other outside parties helped it create T-shirts, movies, books, toys and games.  Lego also developed robotic kits to replace its 1998 product, emphasizing intelligent bricks, a new programming language, motors and sensors, starter models and teaching materials for schools.

It was a happy ending, as it turned out. But it would have been much better, wouldn't it, had the company anticipated the changes before they nearly did it in. And if you’re serious about being a strategic thinker at your company, that's your job.

6 Habits of True Strategic Thinkers

THE STRATEGIC DECISION | Paul J. H. Schoemaker -Inc.com http://ow.ly/a7zxw

You're the boss, but you still spend too much time on the day-to-day. Here's how to become the strategic leader your company needs.

In the beginning, there was just you and your partners. You did every job. You coded, you met with investors, you emptied the trash and phoned in the midnight pizza. Now you have others to do all that and it's time for you to "be strategic." 

Whatever that means.

If you find yourself resisting "being strategic," because it sounds like a fast track to irrelevance, or vaguely like an excuse to slack off, you're not alone. Every leader's temptation is to deal with what's directly in front, because it always seems more urgent and concrete. Unfortunately, if you do that, you put your company at risk. While you concentrate on steering around potholes, you'll miss windfall opportunities, not to mention any signals that the road you're on is leading off a cliff.

This is a tough job, make no mistake. "We need strategic leaders!” is a pretty constant refrain at every company, large and small. One reason the job is so tough: no one really understands what it entails. It's hard to be a strategic leader if you don't know what strategic leaders are supposed to do.

After two decades of advising organizations large and small, my colleagues and I have formed a clear idea of what's required of you in this role. Adaptive strategic leaders — the kind who thrive in today’s uncertain environment – do six things well:

Anticipate 

Most of the focus at most companies is on what’s directly ahead. The leaders lack “peripheral vision.” This can leave your company vulnerable to rivals who detect and act on ambiguous signals. To anticipate well, you must:

• Look for game-changing information at the periphery of your industry
• Search beyond the current boundaries of your business
• Build wide external networks to help you scan the horizon better

Think Critically

“Conventional wisdom” opens you to fewer raised eyebrows and second guessing. But if you swallow every management fad, herdlike belief, and safe opinion at face value, your company loses all competitive advantage. Critical thinkers question everything. To master this skill you must force yourself to:

• Reframe problems to get to the bottom of things, in terms of root causes
• Challenge current beliefs and mindsets, including your own
• Uncover hypocrisy, manipulation, and bias in organizational decisions

Interpret 

Ambiguity is unsettling. Faced with it, the temptation is to reach for a fast (and potentially wrongheaded) solution.  A good strategic leader holds steady, synthesizing information from many sources before developing a viewpoint. To get good at this, you have to:

• Seek patterns in multiple sources of data
• Encourage others to do the same
• Question prevailing assumptions and test multiple hypotheses simultaneously

Decide

Many leaders fall prey to “analysis paralysis.” You have to develop processes and enforce them, so that you arrive at a “good enough” position. To do that well, you have to:

• Carefully frame the decision to get to the crux of the matter
• Balance speed, rigor, quality and agility. Leave perfection to higher powers
• Take a stand even with incomplete information and amid diverse views

 Align

Total consensus is rare. A strategic leader must foster open dialogue, build trust and engage key stakeholders, especially when views diverge.  To pull that off, you need to:

• Understand what drives other people's agendas, including what remains hidden
• Bring tough issues to the surface, even when it's uncomfortable
• Assess risk tolerance and follow through to build the necessary support

Learn

As your company grows, honest feedback is harder and harder to come by.  You have to do what you can to keep it coming. This is crucial because success and failure--especially failure--are valuable sources of organizational learning.  Here's what you need to do:

• Encourage and exemplify honest, rigorous debriefs to extract lessons
• Shift course quickly if you realize you're off track
• Celebrate both success and (well-intentioned) failures that provide insight

Do you have what it takes?

Obviously, this is a daunting list of tasks, and frankly, no one is born a black belt in all these different skills. But they can be taught and whatever gaps exist in your skill set can be filled in. I'll cover each of the aspects of strategic leadership in more detail in future columns. But for now, test your own strategic aptitude (or your company's) with the survey at www.decisionstrat.com. In the comments below, let me know what you learned from it.

LEADERSHIP

 

How to Manage Difficult but Talented Employees 

Forbes http://ow.ly/a2nYX

 Photo credit: Wikipedia

Notice I included “talented” in the title, since an employee who’s just plain difficult without being talented should probably be managed out of an organization.   Many employees who are very difficult, however, can also be exceptional contributors.  Sometimes the same keen intelligence that makes them talented also makes them challenging.   Think Steve Jobs andBill Gates would have been easy to manage?  Sure, piece of cake…

I sometimes felt this aspect of management was a variant of the 80-20 rule.  But rather than 80 percent of business coming from 20 percent of your customers, it seemed as a manager that 80 percent of my time was spent on 20 percent of my employees.

Personalities being unique, there are no simple one-size-fits-all-solutions.  That said, after several decades in  management, here are seven suggestions to help navigate these choppy waters.

1) Be thoughtful about assignments. To the extent possible (and naturally this isn’t always controllable), provide some especially substantive, challenging assignments that will fully utilize and stretch their considerable skills.  “We give our best people the worst assignments,” was a how a former colleague of mine used to jokingly put it.  Such assignments can also engage them and bring out their best.

2)  Make HR an ally. Despite Hollywood’s tendencies to humorously stereotype the overly bureaucratic Human Resources manager (and I enjoy “The Office” as much as anyone) the fact is, when dealing with delicate personnel matters I found HR invaluable.  They provided additional perspective and (no small matter!) kept me and the company out of trouble.

3)  Be 100% clear about articulating pain points. Don’t dance around problems – articulate the issues as precisely as possible.   If there’s difficulty, for example, collaborating with other team members as a member of the XYZ team, state it.  If there are problems delivering projects on deadline, state it.  If a manager is so demanding he or she is burning out staff and causing too much turnover, state it.  Then work with the individual to build problems into clear and mutually agreed upon performance objectives.

4)  Give ample feedback in both directions. Don’t wait until mid-year or end-of-year evaluations for feedback.   Provide feedback often and in both directions – positive reinforcement when things are going well and corrective guidance when they’re not.  There’s no way to course-correct if it’s not clear correction is needed… and naturally there’s a difference between insightful feedback and pesky micromanagement.

5) No drama. When conflicts arise, as they inevitably do, stay calm.  Some challenging employees even enjoy being provocateurs.  Don’t allow yourself to be drawn into the fray and pull rank and lose your temper, however tempting that might be.  (To use a saying from another realm of experience, it might feel great at the moment but you’ll hate yourself in the morning.)  Prepare for a potentially volatile meeting by gaining tight control of your emotions going in.   As the manager, you’re the voice of authority and reason – maintain the moral high ground.

6) Document clearly. Thorough documentation is always necessary for clear fact-based evaluations, assessing objectively whether goals are achieved or not.  Solid documentation is also essential should you need to build a case for termination.

7)  Know when to say when. When you know beyond a doubt that a situation is destructive and unsalvageable, work closely with HR to follow all proper termination procedures, and then (as Nike would say) just do it.  Make the move and move on.  Indecision erodes authority when action is needed.  A few quick words about terminations:  If a termination is capricious, it sends chills throughout an organization.  (“This could happen to anyone, or worse yet, me!”)   But if a termination is truly deserved, a manager will likely be respected for doing what needed to be done.  Other employees usually know better than managers what’s going on in the trenches, and problem employees disturb more than just their manager.   Since firing and re-hiring are long processes, however, with very real human and economic costs, I always felt it best to try to make a situation work – if it genuinely can.