How advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global growth

Posted in Uncategorized on September 25th, 2015 by admin

Gender inequality is not only a pressing moral and social issue but also a critical economic challenge. If women—who account for half the world’s working-age population—do not achieve their full economic potential, the global economy will suffer. While all types of inequality have economic consequences, in our new McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) report, The power of parity: How advancing women’s equality can add $12 trillion to global growth, we focus on the economic implications of lack of parity between men and women.

A “best in region” scenario in which all countries match the rate of improvement of the fastest-improving country in their region could add as much as $12 trillion, or 11 percent, in annual 2025 GDP. In a “full potential” scenario in which women play an identical role in labor markets to that of men, as much as $28 trillion, or 26 percent, could be added to global annual GDP by 2025. MGI’s full-potential estimate is about double the average estimate of other recent studies, reflecting the fact that MGI has taken a more comprehensive view of gender inequality in work.
McK 1
Even after decades of progress toward making women equal partners with men in the economy and society, the gap between them remains large. We acknowledge that gender parity in economic outcomes (such as participation in the workforce or presence in leadership positions) is not necessarily a normative ideal, as it involves human beings making personal choices about the lives they lead; we also recognize that men can be disadvantaged relative to women in some instances. However, we believe that the world, including the private sector, would benefit by focusing on the large economic opportunity of improving parity between men and women.

A look at some of the highlights from our report:
– MGI has mapped 15 gender-equality indicators for 95 countries and finds that 40 of them have high or extremely high levels of gender inequality on at least half of the indicators. The indicators fall into four categories: equality in work, essential services and enablers of economic opportunity, legal protection and political voice, and physical security and autonomy.

– We consider a “full potential” scenario in which women participate in the economy identically to men and find that it would add up to $28 trillion, or 26 percent, to annual global GDP by 2025 compared with a business-as-usual scenario. This impact is roughly equivalent to the size of the combined Chinese and US economies today. We also analyzed an alternative “best in region” scenario in which all countries match the progress toward gender parity of the fastest-improving country in their region. This would add as much as $12 trillion in annual 2025 GDP, equivalent in size to the current GDP of Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom combined, or twice the likely growth in global GDP contributed by female workers between 2014 and 2025 in a business-as-usual scenario.

– Both advanced and developing countries stand to gain. In 46 of the 95 countries analyzed, the best-in-region outcome could increase annual GDP by 2025 by more than 10 percent over the business-as-usual case, with the highest relative regional boost in India and Latin America.

– MGI’s new Gender Parity Score (GPS) measures the distance each country has traveled toward gender parity, which is set at 1.00. The regional GPS is lowest in South Asia (excluding India) at 0.44 and highest in North America and Oceania at 0.74. Using the GPS, MGI has established a strong link between gender equality in society, attitudes and beliefs about the role of women, and gender equality in work. The latter is not achievable without the former two elements. We found virtually no countries with high gender equality in society but low gender equality in work. Economic development enables countries to close gender gaps, but progress in four areas in particular—education level, financial and digital inclusion, legal protection, and unpaid care work—could help accelerate progress.

– MGI has identified ten “impact zones” (issue–region combinations) where effective action would move more than 75 percent of women affected by gender inequality globally closer to parity. The global impact zones, which are globally pervasive issues, are blocked economic potential, time spent in unpaid care work, fewer legal rights, political underrepresentation, and violence against women. The regional impact zones, concentrated in certain regions of the world, are low labor-force participation in quality jobs, low maternal and reproductive health, unequal education levels, financial and digital exclusion, and vulnerability of female children.

– Six types of intervention are necessary to bridge the gender gap: financial incentives and support; technology and infrastructure; the creation of economic opportunity; capability building; advocacy and shaping attitudes; and laws, policies, and regulations. We identify some 75 potential interventions that could be evaluated and tailored to suit the social and economic context of each impact zone and country. Tackling gender inequality will require change within businesses as well as new coalitions. The private sector will need to play a more active role in concert with governments and nongovernmental organizations, and companies could benefit both directly and indirectly by taking action.

Sourec:, 25 September 2015
Authors: Jonathan Woetzel, James Manyika, and Richard Dobbs
About the authors: Jonathan Woetzel, James Manyika, and Richard Dobbs are directors of the McKinsey Global Institute, where Anu Madgavkar is a senior fellow; Kweilin Ellingrud is a principal in McKinsey’s Minneapolis office; Eric Labaye and Sandrine Devillard are directors in the Paris office; Eric Kutcher is a director in the Silicon Valley office; and Mekala Krishnan is a consultant in the Stamford office.

Do people ever really change?

Posted in Uncategorized on August 24th, 2015 by admin

A year before his death, Steve Jobs told me, with intentional irony, that one of the only things that ever got him to consider a behavior change was facing his own mortality. Chances are you probably know more than one gifted, intelligent pal whose heart attack and bypass led to a radical improvement in behavior—temporarily. Not only did he get better, he annoyed you for months about your bad habits as he set a better example. A year later, he’s obviously gaining weight sneaking off to eat cheeseburgers at the drive-thru on the way home. Even life-threatening illness doesn’t seem to create permanent change.

Why don’t we change even with a proverbial burning platform? Boards of Directors, VC’s and private equity investors call me exasperated by how stubborn even the most gifted leaders can be. It’s no longer enough to manage or ‘embrace’ change. You’ve got to drive it or be run over by disruptive competitors! Here are three primary reasons why leaders fail to cross the chasm, and how to transform those risky habits into continuous improvement:

1. Evidence vs. Support
As losses swelled, newly recruited Ford CEO Alan Mulally challenged his senior executives to deliver performance reports that showed how the company wasn’t hitting the right targets. Sitting in his office overlooking Detroit, he smiled and shook his head as he described how the team showed up with rosy forecasts at the first meeting. Mulally reminded his colleagues that Ford couldn’t be $17 billion in the red if everything was green on their dashboards. And if things seemed okay to those leaders, he warned that he’d find people capable of revealing the brutal truth.

One senior executive did something so rare at a subsequent meeting that it’s hard to imagine it in most companies. He provided a shocking report that showed crimson across the board. You couldn’t blame his peers for wondering whether this honest, but naïve fellow would be shot at the end of the session. He shared the problems openly, and more importantly, he wasn’t ashamed to admit that he did not have all the answers.

The CEO stood up at the conference table for a moment of hushed silence.

What happened next was unprecedented. He gave the fellow a standing ovation and acknowledged that he didn’t have the answers either. He pledged the resources within Ford and around the world to help find and fund the changes necessary for growth. It was a breakthrough that had been prevented by a long tradition in most companies well versed in management science that suggests that we insist our team only bring us solutions. For that reason, we often don’t get the bad news until it’s too late.

Before he retired, Mulally was widely viewed as a rock star among high performance CEOs, and the executive who had the courage to face him with the red dashboard was Mark Fields, who not surprisingly became the next CEO of Ford!

We train our teams to lie to us. Despite all the lip service to the contrary, we have a long, well-established track record in many organizations in which we shoot the messenger, punishing them for having let it occur and browbeating them for disclosing it without a profound answer to the problem.
“Situational leadership is great, but in this one respect it doesn’t go far enough,” says the world’s #1 executive coach Marshall Goldsmith. While it would be ideal to have all the solutions instantly available and obvious to us as leaders in a rapidly changing environment, it’s not realistic. We often unintentionally force our teams to mislead themselves and others, or hesitate too long in sharing the brutal truth. We must encourage our people to provide the evidence AND then they’ll watch our behavior under a microscope: They’ll watch carefully to see if we’re telling truth about providing the support and safety needed to embrace change.

“We’re judged by what we do to confirm the behaviors we’re seeking in others, not just what we say as leaders!” Goldsmith said. “When it comes to embracing change, it’s very easy to see what we don’t like about ourselves in other people. It’s harder to see what we don’t like about ourselves.”

2. The Diet & Exercise Myth
Among the most popular books on Earth are those written about cooking and, separately, the diets necessary to survive that consumption. On a valiant mission to ‘get in shape’ after warnings from your doctor, what better way to be accountable for change than to set a BHAG that is unambiguously clear and gives you bragging rights like running a marathon. It’s a great metaphor for what we must all do in our lives and business, right? Well, maybe. If you also happen to fall in love with distance running, that’s fantastic. The problem is that many people who set that marathon as the ultimate goal often win that battle, but lose the war. The relief that comes with victory means they never run again and promptly return to their prior weight and lack of condition. Diet and exercise are not intrinsically compelling goals. So what works for lasting change?

You can’t manage what you don’t measure. While that should be cliché by now, it’s amazing how temporary we make Steve Jobsmost of the measurements of change that we wish to see. That’s because we set goals for change that don’t really matter to us. In fact, the new exercise plan probably creates real sacrifices and discomfort, and so it’s often doomed unless we give ourselves with something more meaningful to hold onto—or perhaps even more fun.

Set More Meaningful Goals for Long-Term Change. If we must lose weight, then what activity gets you on your feet that keeps you in shape that you might actually enjoy? Can you engage in the new habit with people you want to be with, or is there some way to take the sting out of the sacrifice? These are details worth sweating if we want the new exercise program to stick. It may not seem as heroic as a marathon, but this is a case where finding a passion that really matters to you if you want to have even the most remote possibility of permanent change.

3. Role Modeling vs. Rule Making
The day will come when it’s time for you to leave your job. For the charismatic CEO of Cisco, it was a well planned transition. After 17 years, John Chambers moved to a role as Executive Chairman this summer. Part of his success has been his willingness to ‘be the change’ that he wants to see. When I was invited to keynote Cisco’s largest customer conference, I found Chambers backstage interviewing clients—a never-ending practice I’ve witnessed for two decades. In his patient southern drawl, he’s forever asking questions and listening deeply for ways Cisco can step up to a solution. For a guy who’s so people focused, Chambers’ dyslexia has never made public speaking a picnic for him, but nevertheless he insisted that every speaker at the conference would receive customer feedback scores, and he’d be judged by the audience along with the rest of us. Chambers is forever determined to role model the behaviors he demands from others.

You succeed not only because of your talents, but despite (not because of) your bad habits. Success is not the best teacher when it comes to creating change. It’s all too easy (and ironic) for leaders to ask others to take the big leap toward continuous improvement rather than hold ourselves accountable to the principles that we ourselves evangelize. In fact, a long track record of achievement makes us more resistant to initiate change. It’s also easy to assume that just because we’ve been successful in the past, every habit we have has contributed to that success or is forgivable. The truth is that we’re successful because of some talents and skills, and despite bad habits not because of them. My coaching partner Marshall Goldsmith wrote about this in his bestselling book, What Got You Here Won’t Get You There. What we’ve done in the past often won’t get us where we need to be tomorrow if there is a change of behavior required. It’s common to indulge in wishful thinking and overconfidence about the future prospects of past victories, or fearful that a new path might risk what’s worked so well for so long.

We’re here to learn and to serve,” Chambers whispered to me in the kitchen at my neighbor’s house as he readied himself to receive guests for a cancer charity event in Silicon Valley last weekend. “That’s the only part that never changes.” Never stop asking questions. Never stop being the role model for innovation. If you’re listening carefully, the world will tell you how you can be the change you wish to see.

Source:, August 2015
By: Mark Thompson

Developing and implementing a breakthrough strategy

Posted in Uncategorized on August 11th, 2015 by admin

Do you really need one of the big-name, expensive consulting companies to help you develop and implement a breakthrough strategy? I don’t think so. Our experience suggests that with the right leadership and with the right process, a company can accomplish repeated cycles of business acceleration and breakthrough results. And you can achieve these breakthrough results utilizing the ideas and efforts of the people who know your customers and business best…your own team.

So what does that “right process” for achieving breakthrough look like? Well, here is a high level description of the steps in such a process:

– Pull together a team of cross-functional senior leaders to serve as the core team that will own the initial breakthrough initiative with each member holding themselves personally accountable for the achievement of the desired results. The core team should also include a few “out of the box” thinkers and personnel who work directly with your customers.

– As a team, recognize and honor the past accomplishments of the organization and how the company got to where it is today. But then “let it go.” Also,implement B ensure that everyone on the team shares a common understanding of the current state the business – outlook based on current plans and actions, challenges, issues, etc. It’s also important to understand the current level of employee engagement in the organization. In particular, to what extent do personnel feel they are being given the chance to contribute to the company’s success and are being recognized for their efforts? Now it’s time for the team to turn its attention to the future and its many possibilities.

– The team should then develop a “declaration” of a future state for the company and organization that everyone on the team is willing to personally commit to achieving. It should describe a company that every one feels they will be excited and proud to be working in and one they will be highly motivated to bring into being. That desired future state should represent a true “breakthrough” for the company…one with business results beyond what the group has considered possible based recent performance and historical best performance.

implem A– In order to measure progress in moving toward declared future state, the team should next develop and align on a quantified “breakthrough goal. The metric for this goal should be one that can be measured on an ongoing basis without significant effort, for instance, year-on-year sales growth or gross profit. The specific goal (the number that goes with the metric) should represent a performance level well beyond what has previously been achieved but a level that is clearly not impossible (“pie in the sky”.)

– A characteristic of true breakthrough goal is that initially you have no idea how it will be accomplished. Ensuring the true alignment to a breakthrough goal of the entire team is the most critical and typically the most difficult part of the process. This is done with a “facilitated conversation” led by someone who has been specifically trained in conducting it.

– Having declared the future state that everyone wants to be in (“the what”) and aligned on a breakthrough goal in order to know when you get there, it’s time to “work back” from that future state step-by-step and identify the actions that will bring that future state into existence (“the how”.) In order to develop that action plan to achieve the breakthrough goal, you will tap into the “gold mine” of ideas from everyone on the team. With properly facilitated, rapid-fire brainstorming focused on achieving the breakthrough goal, 300-400 ideas for action can typically be generated by a group of 25-30 team members. After a read-through of all the ideas to ensure full awareness and understanding of the team, the ideas are quickly grouped into 10-20 themes or idea territories.

– Using an anonymous voting approach, the team should then quickly prioritize the idea categories against appropriate criteria. One of the criteria should always be “impact on the breakthrough goal” i.e. the greater the impact on the breakthrough goal, the higher that category of ideas should be scored. The idea categories can then be ranked from highest scoring to lowest scoring. The team can then decide how many of the highest scoring categories of ideas to move forward on taking into consideration the capacity of the organization and the resources available. Typically, the top 3 -4 idea categories are chosen to proceed to the next stage of the process.

– At this point, leaders and initial project team members are assigned to each of the chosen idea categories. Typically, the people who volunteer or implement Care assigned to these “greenhouse” projects are from the breakthrough core team. Other members on each project team can be added as needed. These teams will be responsible for reviewing the ideas that were submitted in their respective categories, develop a project charter, and assess the potential of the proposed project on the breakthrough goal. Assuming the project is “approved” by the steering committee for the breakthrough initiative, the team proceeds with implementation with the full support of the breakthrough initiative leader and steering committee. It is critical that the leaders and team members accept personal accountability for development and implementation of these projects.

With the right planning and process facilitation, all of the above steps can be effectively completed in a two day workshop. It is also critical that the breakthrough initiative leader and core team be competent in a particular set of skills that are critical to breakthrough leadership and working together on accomplishing breakthrough. Some examples are “Generous Listening, Leveraging Context and The Conversation for True Alignment.” With the right support, resourcing and phasing of the breakthrough projects, initial impact on the breakthrough goal is typically seen within 100 days of project start.

Source:, March 2015
By: Sam Monaco

Är du en fegis som chef?

Posted in Uncategorized on July 26th, 2015 by admin

Att arbeta för en feg chef kan både försura vardagen och kedja fast dig i karriären. Affärsmagasinet Forbes har listat fem tecken på att du har en feg chef.

1) Hen protesterar aldrig mot högre chefer
Att följa instruktioner utan att tänka själv och protestera när så är nödvändigt är inte ett tecken på ledarskap. Om din närmsta chef omedelbart implementerar varje idé som någon högre upp i näringskedjan kommer på är hen endast den främste arbetaren och inte en ledare.
2) Hen ber om ursäkt för att inte stå på sig
En feg chef förväntar sig att du ska förstå varför han inte står på sig och protesterar när dåliga saker händer. Det finns alltid ett sätt att rationalisera sitt beteende.

Hen säger endast vad folk vill höra
Ett enkelt sätt att undvika konflikter är att helt enkelt säga vad folk vill höra. Det är dock inte ett särskilt konstruktivt sätt att leda på så försök istället hitta en chef som vågar säga sanningen.

De riskerar aldrig sitt ”politiska kapital” för någon annan
En feg chef vågar aldrig riskera sitt uppbyggda förtroende för något annat än att förstärka sin egen position. Ett sätt att hantera det här är att försöka få din chef att tro att idén var hens redan från början. På så sätt är det i hens intresse att agera och personen kommer också göra det.

Hen tvekar inte inför att offra andra
Det tydligaste tecknet på att chefen är en fegis är att hen är beredd att offra vem som helst för att rädda sitt eget skinn. När personen visar hur lätt hen har att sätta kniven i ryggen på någon är det hög tid att packa väskan och lämna.

Källa:, 25 juli 2015

Are you a burn out risk?

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Executive Coaching, Leadership / Ledarskap, Uncategorized on March 9th, 2015 by admin

Read Pranati Raheja 10 easy tips to burnout at work:

Set impossible standards for yourself and know that good enough is just not acceptable. Try to squeeze out every drop of productivity from daily work. Beat yourself if everything isn’t perfect and sacrifice everything from family time to “me time” to get it “just” right.

Lack belief in your own ability to accomplish goals and tasks (ensuring that you are stressed out even before you start) or do work that you don’t believe in (personal values clash with you companies values or your current job). Let the clash & stress erode you and make you prone to BURNOUT.
BU 1
Treat your body as a machine and work without break. Take your lunch at your desk – after all taking a break might mean the end of the world, collapse of economy or at least the bankruptcy of your company. Forget the fact that giving yourself a break will refresh you and make you more productive.

Going in line with point no 3, I suggest that you should not take any vacations if you wish to burnout fast. As a vacation means enjoyment, fun & relaxation while reconnecting with family, friends and yourself which can ease your stress. A strict no – no if you really wish to burnout.

Unclear job description, routine activities, poor job fit, being micro managed, and no growth prospects can all lead to burnout. So for a faster burnout never discuss these with your boss/ HR to get them resolved.

In line with above never say “No”. Deadline pushed forward – accept, overloaded still more work put on your plate – say yes. Colleague slacking but asking you to do his / her job – be happy. Being pulled in all directions and not having a single minute to yourself will easily stress you out.

Trusting relationship with your colleagues and subordinates would mean “POSITIVE WORK ENVIORONMENT” which is toxic to burnout. Always be scared and believe that people around you are there only to sabotage you and are just waiting to bring out their knives. Be scared and stressed about it J
BU 2
8. DON’T HAVE ANY SOCIAL NETWORK APART FROM WORK COLLEAGUES: Unlike the point above if you are made to suffer and work with a great bunch of people at work. Ensure you do not have any social circle apart from them. Talk shop on weekends (if you are not working or dreaming / thinking of work) or on all your outings. No mental break from work, same people in and out of office will help you to burnout. To burnout even faster don’t have any network at all, as feeling isolated will make you feel more stressed.

Hobbies are detrimental if you really wish to burnout. Stay away from things that you may “Love” to do. A hobby can be therapeutic -will relax you, give you a mental break & make you happy L. This is not desirable as cultivating a hobby will make you better-rounded as your self-worth and identity should be solely based on your work.

10. DON’T TAKE CARE OF YOURSELF: Last but not the least ensure that you do not have fixed hours for anything. You should be sleep deprived, should not eat healthy or exercise.
Following all the tips above will mean that you are on your to be “ Happily Burned out”

Source:, March 2014
By: Pranati Raheja

Change leader, change thyself

Posted in Leadership / Ledarskap, Uncategorized on November 3rd, 2014 by admin

Leo Tolstoy, the Russian novelist, famously wrote, “Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself.”

Tolstoy’s dictum is a useful starting point for any executive engaged in organizational change. After years of collaborating in efforts to advance the practice of leadership and cultural transformation, we’ve become convinced that organizational change is inseparable from individual change. Simply put, change efforts often falter because individuals overlook the need to make fundamental changes in themselves.

Building self-understanding and then translating it into an organizational context is easier said than done, and getting started is often the hardest part. We hope this article helps leaders who are ready to try and will intrigue those curious to learn more.

Organizations don’t change—people do
Many companies move quickly from setting their performance objectives to implementing a suite of change initiatives. Be it a new growth strategy or business-unit structure, the integration of a recent acquisition or the rollout of a new operational-improvement effort, such organizations focus on altering systems and structures and on creating new policies and processes.

change 3To achieve collective change over time, actions like these are necessary but seldom sufficient. A new strategy will fall short of its potential if it fails to address the underlying mind-sets and capabilities of the people who will execute it.

McKinsey research and client experience suggest that half of all efforts to transform organizational performance fail either because senior managers don’t act as role models for change or because people in the organization defend the status quo.

In other words, despite the stated change goals, people on the ground tend to behave as they did before. Equally, the same McKinsey research indicates that if companies can identify and address pervasive mind-sets at the outset, they are four times more likely to succeed in organizational-change efforts than are companies that overlook this stage.

Look both inward and outward

Companies that only look outward in the process of organizational change—marginalizing individual learning and adaptation—tend to make two common mistakes.

The first is to focus solely on business outcomes. That means these companies direct their attention to what Alexander Grashow, Ronald Heifetz, and Marty Linsky call the “technical” aspects of a new solution, while failing to appreciate what they call “the adaptive work” people must do to implement it.

The second common mistake, made even by companies that recognize the need for new learning, is to focus too much on developing skills. Training that only emphasizes new behavior rarely translates into profoundly different performance outside the classroom.

In our work together with organizations undertaking leadership and cultural transformations, we’ve found that the best way to achieve an organization’s aspirations is to combine efforts that look outward with those that look inward. Linking strategic and systemic intervention to genuine self-discovery and self-development by leaders is a far better path to embracing the vision of the organization and to realizing its business goals.

What is looking inward?
Looking inward is a way to examine your own modes of operating to learn what makes you tick. Individuals have their own inner lives, populated by their beliefs, priorities, aspirations, values, and fears. These interior elements vary from one person to the next, directing people to take different actions.

Interestingly, many people aren’t aware that the choices they make are extensions of the reality that operates in their hearts and minds. Indeed, you can live your whole life without understandingchange 2 the inner dynamics that drive what you do and say. Yet it’s crucial that those who seek to lead powerfully and effectively look at their internal experiences, precisely because they direct how you take action, whether you know it or not. Taking accountability as a leader today includes understanding your motivations and other inner drives.

For the purposes of this article, we focus on two dimensions of looking inward that lead to self-understanding: developing profile awareness and developing state awareness.

Profile awareness
An individual’s profile is a combination of his or her habits of thought, emotions, hopes, and behavior in various circumstances. Profile awareness is therefore a recognition of these common tendencies and the impact they have on others.

We often observe a rudimentary level of profile awareness with the executives we advise. They use labels as a shorthand to describe their profile, telling us, “I’m an overachiever” or “I’m a control freak.” Others recognize emotional patterns, like “I always fear the worst,” or limiting beliefs, such as “you can’t trust anyone.” Other executives we’ve counseled divide their identity in half. They end up with a simple liking for their “good” Dr. Jekyll side and a dislike of their “bad” Mr. Hyde.

Finding ways to describe the common internal tendencies that drive behavior is a good start. We now know, however, that successful leaders develop profile awareness at a broader and deeper level.
State awareness

State awareness, meanwhile, is the recognition of what’s driving you at the moment you take action. In common parlance, people use the phrase “state of mind” to describe this, but we’re using “state” to refer to more than the thoughts in your mind. State awareness involves the real-time perception of a wide range of inner experiences and their impact on your behavior. These include your current mind-set and beliefs, fears and hopes, desires and defenses, and impulses to take action.

State awareness is harder to master than profile awareness. While many senior executives recognize their tendency to exhibit negative behavior under pressure, they often don’t realize they’re exhibiting that behavior until well after they’ve started to do so. At that point, the damage is already done.

We believe that in the future, the best leaders will demonstrate both profile awareness and state awareness. These capacities can develop into the ability to shift one’s inner state in real time. That leads to changing behavior when you can still affect the outcome, instead of looking back later with regret. It also means not overreacting to events because they are reminiscent of something in the past or evocative of something that might occur in the future.4

Close the performance gap
When learning to look inward in the process of organizational transformation, individuals accelerate the pace and depth of change dramatically. In the words of one executive we know, who has invested heavily in developing these skills, this kind of learning “expands your capacity to lead human change and deliver true impact by awakening the full leader within you.” In practical terms, individuals learn to align what they intend with what they actually say and do to influence others.

change 1Erica Ariel Fox’s recent book, Winning from Within, calls this phenomenon closing your performance gap. That gap is the disparity between what people know they should say and do to behave successfully and what they actually do in the moment. The performance gap can affect anyone at any time, from the CEO to a summer intern.

This performance gap arises in individuals partly because of the profile that defines them and that they use to define themselves. In the West in particular, various assessments tell you your “type,” essentially the psychological clothing you wear to present yourself to the world.

To help managers and employees understand each other, many corporate-education tools use simplified typing systems to describe each party’s makeup. These tests often classify people relatively quickly, and in easily remembered ways: team members might be red or blue, green or yellow, for example.

There are benefits in this approach, but in our experience it does not go far enough and those using it should understand its limitations. We all possess the full range of qualities these assessments identify. We are not one thing or the other: we are all at once, to varying degrees. As renowned brain researcher Dr. Daniel Siegel explains, “we must accept our multiplicity, the fact that we can show up quite differently in our athletic, intellectual, sexual, spiritual—or many other—states. A heterogeneous collection of states is completely normal in us humans.”

Putting the same point more poetically, Walt Whitman famously wrote, “I am large, I contain multitudes.”

To close performance gaps, and thereby build your individual leadership capacity, you need a more nuanced approach that recognizes your inner complexity. Coming to terms with your full richness is challenging. But the kinds of issues involved—which are highly personal and well beyond the scope of this short management article—include:
•What are the primary parts of my profile, and how are they balanced against each other?
•What resources and capabilities does each part of my profile possess? What strengths and liabilities do those involve?
•When do I tend to call on each member of my inner executive team? What are the benefits and costs of those choices?
•Do I draw on all of the inner sources of power available to me, or do I favor one or two most of the time?
•How can I develop the sweet spots that are currently outside of my active range?

Answering these questions starts with developing profile awareness.

Leading yourself—and the organization
Individuals can improve themselves in many ways and hence drive more effective organizational change. We focus here on a critical few that we’ve found to increase leadership capacity and to have a lasting organizational impact.

1. Develop profile awareness: Map the Big Four

While we all have myriad aspects to our inner lives, in our experience it’s best to focus your reflections on a manageable few as you seek to understand what’s driving you at different times. Fox’s Winning from Within suggests that you can move beyond labels such as “perfectionist” without drowning in unwieldy complexity, by concentrating on your Big Four, which largely govern the way individuals function every day. You can think of your Big Four as an inner leadership team, occupying an internal executive suite: the chief executive officer (CEO), or inspirational Dreamer; the chief financial officer (CFO), or analytical Thinker; the chief people officer (CPO), or emotional Lover; and the chief operating officer (COO), or practical Warrior.
How do these work in practice? Consider the experience of Geoff McDonough, the transformational CEO of Sobi, an emerging pioneer in the treatment of rare diseases. Many credit McDonough’s versatile leadership with successfully integrating two legacy companies and increasing market capitalization from nearly $600 million in 2011 to $3.5 billion today.

From our perspective, his leadership success owes much to his high level of profile awareness. He also displays high profile agility: his skill at calling on the right inner executive at the right time for the right purpose. In other words, he deploys each of his Big Four intentionally and effectively to harness its specific strengths and skills to meet a situation.

McDonough used his inner Dreamer’s imagination to envision the clinical and business impact of Sobi’s biological-development program in neonatology. He saw the possibility of improving the neurodevelopment of tiny, vulnerable newborns and thus of giving them a real chance at a healthy life.

His inner Thinker’s assessment took an unusual perspective at the time. Others didn’t share his evaluation of the viability of integrating one company’s 35-year legacy of biologics development change 4(Kabi Vitrum— the combined group of Swedish pharmaceutical companies Kabi and Vitrum—which merged with Pharmacia and was later acquired, forming Biovitrum in 2001) with another’s 25-year history of commercializing treatments for rare diseases (Swedish Orphan), to lead in a rare-disease market environment with very few independent midsize companies.

Rising to a separate, if related, challenge, McDonough called on his inner Lover to build bridges between the siloed legacy companies. He focused on the people who mattered most to everyone—the patients—and promoted internal talent from both sides, demonstrating his belief that everyone, whatever his or her previous corporate affiliation, could be part of the new “one Sobi.”

Finally, bringing Sobi to its current levels of success required McDonough to tell hard truths and take some painful steps. He called on his inner Warrior to move swiftly, adding key players from the outside to the management team, restructuring the organization, and resolutely promoting an entirely new business model.

2. Develop state awareness: The work of your inner lookout

Profile awareness, as we’ve said, is only the first part of what it takes to look inward when driving organizational change. The next part is state awareness.

Leading yourself means being in tune with what’s happening on the inside, not later but right now. Think about it. People who don’t notice that they are becoming annoyed, judgmental, or defensive in the moment are not making real choices about how to behave. We all need an inner “lookout”—a part of us that notices our inner state—much as all parents are at the ready to watch for threats of harm to their young children.7

For example, a senior executive leading a large-scale transformation remarked that he would like to spend 15 minutes kicking off an important training event for change agents to signal its importance. Objectively speaking, he would probably have the opposite of the intended effect if he said how important the workshop was and then left 15 minutes into it.

What he needed at that moment was the perception of his inner lookout. That perspective would see that he was torn between wanting to endorse the program, on the one hand, and wanting to attend to something else that was also important, on the other. With that clarity, he could make a choice that was sensible and aligned: he might still speak for 15 minutes and then let people know that he wished he could stay longer but had a crucial meeting elsewhere. Equally, he might realize the negative implications of his early departure under any circumstances, decide to postpone the later meeting, and stay another couple of hours. Either way, the inner lookout’s view would lead to more effective leadership behavior.

During a period of organizational change, it’s critical that senior executives collectively adopt the lookout role for the organization as a whole. Yet they often can’t, because they’re wearing rose-tinted glasses that blur the limitations of their leadership style, mask destructive mind-sets at lower levels of the organization, and generally distort what’s going on outside the executive suite. Until we and others confronted one manager we know with the evidence, he had no idea he was interfering with, and undermining, employees through the excessively large number of e-mails he was sending on a daily basis.

Spotting misaligned perceptions requires putting the spotlight on observable behavior and getting enough data to unearth the core issues. Note that traditional satisfaction or employee-engagement surveys—and even 360-degree feedback—often fail to get to the bottom of the problem. A McKinsey diagnostic that reached deep into the workforce—aggregating the responses of 52,240 individuals at 44 companies—demonstrated perception gaps across job levels at 70 percent of the participating organizations. In about two-thirds of them, the top teams were more positive about their own leadership skills than was the rest of the organization. Odds are, in other words, that rigorous organizational introspection will be eye opening for senior leaders.

3. Translate awareness into organizational change
Those open eyes will be better able to spot obstacles to organizational change. Consider the experience of a company that became aware, during a major earnings-improvement effort, that an absence of coaching was stifling progress. On the surface, people said they did not have the time to make coaching a priority. But an investigation of the root causes showed that one reason people weren’t coaching was that they themselves had become successful despite never having been coached. In fact, coaching was associated with serious development needs and seen only as a tool for documenting and firing people. Beneath the surface, managers feared that if they coached someone, others would view that person as a poor performer.

Changing a pervasive element of corporate culture like this depends on a diverse set of interventions that will appeal to different parts of individuals and of the organization. In this case, what followed was a positive internal-communication campaign, achieved with the help of posters positioning star football players alongside their coaches and supported by commentary spelling out the impact of coaching on operating performance at other organizations. At the same time, executives put “the elephant in the room” and acknowledged the negative connotations of coaching, and these confessions helped managers understand and adapt such critical norms. In the end, the actions the executives initiated served to increase the frequency and quality of coaching, with the result that the company was able to move more rapidly toward achieving its performance goals.

4. Start with one change catalyst

While dealing with resistance and fear is often necessary, it’s rarely enough to take an organization to the next level. To go further and initiate collective change, organizations must unleash the full potential of individuals. One person or a small group of trailblazers can provide that catalyst.

change 1For many years, it was widely believed that human beings could not run a mile in less than four minutes. Throughout the 1940s and early 1950s, many runners came close to the four-minute mark, but all fell short. On May 6th, 1954, in Oxford, England, Roger Bannister ran a mile in three minutes and 59 seconds. Only 46 days after Bannister’s historic run, John Landy broke the record again. By 1957, 16 more runners had broken through what once was thought to be an impossible barrier. Today, well over a thousand people have run a mile in less than four minutes, including high-school athletes.

Organizations behave in a similar manner. We often find widely held “four-minute mile” equivalents, like “unattainable growth goals” or “unachievable cost savings” or “unviable strategic changes.” Before the broader organization can start believing that the impossible is possible, one person or a small number of people must embrace a new perspective and set out to disprove the old way of thinking. Bannister, studying to be a doctor, had to overcome physiologists’ claims and popular assumptions that anyone who tried to run faster than 15 miles an hour would die.

Learning to lead yourself requires you to question some core assumptions too, about yourself and the way things work. Like Joseph Campbell’s famous “hero’s journey,” that often means leaving your everyday environment, or going outside your comfort zone, to experience trials and adventures.8

One global company sent its senior leaders to places as far afield as the heart of Communist China and the beaches of Normandy with a view to challenging their internal assumptions about the company’s operating model. The fresh perspectives these leaders gained helped shape their internal values and leadership behavior, allowing them to cascade the lessons through the organization upon their return.

This integration of looking both inward and outward is the most powerful formula we know for creating long-term, high-impact organizational change.

Source: McKinsey Quaterly, 2014
Authors: Net Boaz and Erica Ariel
About the authors: Nate Boaz is a principal in McKinsey’s Atlanta office. Erica Ariel Fox is a founding partner at Mobius Executive Leadership, a lecturer in negotiation at Harvard Law School, and a senior adviser to McKinsey Leadership Development. She is the author of Winning from Within: A Breakthrough Method for Leading, Living, and Lasting Change (HarperBusiness, 2013).

Why implementation matters

Posted in Strategy implementation / Strategiimplementering, Uncategorized on August 7th, 2014 by admin

How important is the way you implement a major change effort? We surveyed more than 2,000 global executives to find out—and to learn from the best.

Implementation matters. That may be no surprise to executives who have lived through the challenges of actually executing strategies and major change programs. But what may surprise you is just how much impact implementation has on a range of measures of corporate health.

iimplemt 1Our global survey on implementation asked executives about seven core implementation capabilities and 21 specific underlying practices identified as the most critical to success by McKinsey’s Implementation Capability Assessment. The results were striking. Good implementers—defined as companies where respondents reported top-quartile scores for their implementation capabilities—are 4.7 times more likely than those at the bottom-quartile companies to say they ran successful change efforts over the past five years. Respondents at the good implementers also score their companies around 30 percent higher on a series of financial-performance indexes.

Perhaps most important, the good-implementer respondents say their companies sustained twice the value from their prioritized opportunities two years after the change efforts ended, compared with those at poor implementers. After all, every company “leaks” value at various stages of the implementation process. Some opportunities that are prioritized will not be implemented. Others will be implemented but will not achieve bottom-line impact. A final set may achieve bottom-line impact, but it will not be sustained. Yet good implementers retain more value at every stage of the process than poor implementers do, and the impact is significant. So what can we learn from them?

Secrets of the world’s best implementers
Almost by definition, good implementers outscore poor implementers by a significant margin on all of the seven core capabilities in our Implementation Capability Assessment—which the survey results confirm. Yet beyond these aggregate results, our extensive work with companies in implementation and the survey itself point to some specific practices common to the world’s best implementers. Let’s look at just three examples:

•Ownership and commitment
Leaders devote appropriate time and energy to support major change, often clearing their diaries to drive efforts in a hands-on manner and inspire their colleagues. They also role model the right behaviors to support the change, commonly by demonstrating the difficult act of making personal behavioral changes.

•Prioritization and planning
Line managers use tools such as value-driver trees to ensure employees spend the majority of their time on the organization’s priorities. They communicate at all levels about which actions and outcomes are most important to the organization’s shareholders, customers, and other stakeholders, and they have set intervals to review individual efforts toward the organization’s priorities.

Line managers eliminate performance variability through tight monitoring and quick responses. This includes effectively using key performance indicators that the organization tracks at the right frequency, conducting regular performance discussions with teams, and regularly assessing employees against individual goals and targets.

Finally, one cross-cutting secret of the world’s best implementers is their belief that implementation is an individual discipline thatimplement 2 can be improved over time. Top-quartile implementers manifest this belief by having a higher proportion of experienced change leaders run their programs relative to other companies. In fact, the survey respondents at good implementers are 1.4 times more likely than those at poor implementers to say they have personally led multiple change efforts.

Executives and line managers around the globe often lament their organizations’ implementation capabilities. Our survey underlines what’s at stake, but it also has good news: there is a clear path to improving implementation capabilities by understanding the practices that matter, prioritizing them in your organization, and building them systematically.

Source:, August 2014
By: Raphael Pustkowski, Jesse Scott, and Joseph Tesvic
About the authors:Raphael Pustkowski is a consultant in McKinsey’s Sydney office, where Jesse Scott is an associate principal and Joseph Tesvic is a principal.
Read more about how 3S helps their clients in successful strategy implementation here.

Så använder vi vår mobil …

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Digitalisering / Internet, Uncategorized on July 9th, 2014 by admin

Svenskarna är flitigast i hela Norden på att använda smarta mobiler, visar en ny undersökning från Google. Men vad är det vi gör när vi stirrar ned i skärmen? Se här.

Hela 75 procent av alla svenskar över 16 år har i dag en smart mobil. Det visar en ny undersökning som sökjätten Google har gjort i samarbete med TNS och YouGov, där 1000 svenskar intervjuats om deras mobilvanor. Därmed är Sverige det smartphone-tätaste landet i Norden. I Finland, exempelvis, är det ”bara” 57 procent som äger en smart mobil.

Först till Framtiden!

Posted in Uncategorized on March 21st, 2014 by admin

I mina föreläsningar (läs mer här) och uppdrag med styrelser och företagsledningar har jag under flera år talat om betydelsen av att:
1. Följa teknikutvecklingen
2. Dra rätt slutsatser av vilka konsekvenser detta får för vårt kundarbete
3. Förankra förståelsen i hela organisationen
4. Mobilisera alla att agera i linje med de nya förutsättningarna

I takt med att allt fler (och i vissa branscher alla) aktörer kan tillgodose kunderna behov av de ”Traditionella konkurrenfaktorerna” (läs mer här) blir konkurrenssituationen en helt annan än för bara några år sedan.

En av de stora förändringar som jag ofta arbetar med mina uppdragsgivare är att dra rätt slutsatser vad gäller den ökande tillgångenMLP-0706   PS till information. Idag är informationsbilden helt transparant. Med en knapptryckning har kunden all den information man behöver och tio gånger mer information än man i bästa fall lyckats skaka fram på en vecka för 15 år sedan. Det ställer helt andra krav på den säljande parten. Och det har skapat en helt ny marknads- och konkurrenssituation. Och den kan vi inte göra mycket åt i sig. Däremot kan vi arbeta för att anpassa vår organisation utifrån dess nya förutsättningar. Och de företagsledningar som lyckas bästa med detta kommer att leda de framgångsrika företagen framöver.
Det första steget är (som i all form av förändring) insikt! Det krävs en genuin förståelse och acceptans för att tillräckligt snabbt (helst snabbare än konkurrenterna) ställa om organisationens beteende utifrån den nya marknads- och konkurrenssituationen. Har ni den insikten? Alltför få företag målsätter och mäter detta!

Hur skapar man då denna förståelse? Ja, många av dagens företagledningar är inte tillräckligt skickliga i att hantera denna utmaning. Man underskattar betydelsen av uthållighet i kombination med tydlighet. Och man har inte system och strukturer för att målsätta, mäta, följa upp och belöna organisationen för ett förändrat beteende. Följaktligen går omställningen för långsamt.
Avslutningsvis – jag talar hela tiden om en förändrad marknads- och konkurrenssituation. Kan jag ge något konkret exempel?
En väsentlig del i den nya marknadssituationen (som i sin tur är en direkt följd av konkurrens-situationen) är att kunderna blir allt mer ”otrogna” för varje år som går. En bidragande orsak är den allt snabbare digitaliseringen. Många företag har inte följt denna utveckling tillräckligt noga. Andra har underskattat dess betydelse. Och vissa har inte haft förmågan att dra rätt slutsatser av dess konsekvenser för deras sätt att vara attraktiva i kundernas ögon. Och så har vi dom som faktiskt lyckats med detta men stupat på mållinjen i form av en oförmåga att mobilisera hela organisationen i form av ett förändrat beteende.

Nu kommer ny fakta som visar att ”kundotroheten” aldrig varit högre. Läs mer om detta, orsakerna och hur framtiden ter sig här nedan:

Kunder allt mer otrogna

Kunder blir allt mer otrogna i takt med att digitaliseringen gör det lättare att byta tjänsteleverantör. Företagen måste bli bättre på kundservice och att tolka beteendemönster, enligt Per Österman på konsultbolaget Accenture.

Sedan nio år tillbaka gör Accenture en årlig global studie över konsumenters attityder i en rad olika branscher, bland annat telefoni, energi, bank och försäkring. Inte oväntat visar den att det digitala skiftet har gjort det enklare att byta leverantör, något som allt fler väljer att göra. Bara i Sverige värderas den totala marknaden som uppstår när kunder byter tjänsteleverantör till 280 miljarder kronor, enligt Accentures beräkningar.
Studien visar att 32 procent av svenskarna bytte leverantör under 2013 eftersom företagets erbjudanden inte var anpassade efter deras behov. Hela 48 procent av de svarande uppger att de bytte på grund av dålig kundservice.

Över tid visar undersökningen att kundernas otrohet stiger eftersom det blir lättare att skapa sig en överblick och hitta företag som bättre motsvarar deras behov.
– Förflyttningarna mellan olika leverantörer ökar via de digitala kanalerna. Anledningen till att man byter är oftast att man inte har fått en tillräckligt bra service, säger Per Österman, affärsområdesansvarig för CRM och analys på Accenture.

Traditionellt sett trögrörliga marknader som bank och försäkring löper större risk att tappa kunder i dag än tidigare. Men det öppnar samtidigt upp stora möjligheter för de som prioriterar kundnyttan och lyckas bemästra all data som de får in.
– Du måste ta vara på all information som kommer in i det egna bolaget och kunna behandla den på rätt sätt. Du kan ta fram algoritmer och modeller utifrån information om hur kundsegment agerar på ett visst erbjudande eller kampanj, och mångdubbelt öka effekten. Du kan också ringa in missnöjda kunder genom prediktiv analys och fånga in dem innan de bestämmer sig för att byta, säger Per Österman.

Jämfört med våra nordiska grannländer är de svenska konsumenterna fortfarande relativt trogna sina varumärken. Men utvecklingen pekar på att beteendet bara befinner sig i början av förändringen.
– De digitala konsumenterna, som inte längre bara är de unga, präglar ett förnyat köpbeteende. Kraven på leverantörerna att gräva djupare i sin kunddata och kombinera det med externa informationskällor kommer att öka.

Undersökningen har besvarats av 12 000 personer i 32 länder, däribland Sverige, om deras attityder kring marknadsföring, försäljning och kundtjänst i 10 olika branscher.

Källa:, 20 mars 2014

Wahlroos biter ifrån …

Posted in Uncategorized on November 7th, 2013 by admin

bjöen wahroos
“Det är ju han som bestämmer och inte jag”
i dagens SvD på frågan: Vad säger du om Anders Borgs hot om många nya regleringar?

Udmjuk som alltid!