Change leader, change thyself

Posted in Aktuellt, Leadership / Ledarskap on mars 31st, 2014 by admin

Anyone who pulls the organization in new directions must look inward as well as outward.

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

tolstoy 1Tolstoy’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.

To 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 understanding 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.

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.

Erica 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 highlytolstoy 2 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 (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.

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.

For 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.

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 & Company, march 2014
By: Nate Boaz and Erica Ariel Fox
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).

Ledarskapets betydelse för sjukfrånvaron

Posted in Aktuellt, Leadership / Ledarskap on mars 30th, 2014 by admin

“Ledarskapet är helt avgörande för hur medarbetarna mår, vilket i sin tur påverkar sjukfrånvaron. Människor som blir sedda och tagna i anspråk håller sig friskare”

Peter Munck af Rosenschöld
HR-chef, ICA
Mars 2014
Vet du hur ledarskapet upplevs i just din organisation? Eller tror du att du vet? Kontakta oss gärna ( för mer information om hur vi hjälper svenskt och internationellt näringsliv att bli mer faktabaserade i sitt ledarskap och härigenom säkerställa en ökad produktivitet. Låter det intressant? Jag ser fram mot en förutsättningslös kontakt.

Moderator och föreläsare

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Lectures / Föreläsningar on mars 29th, 2014 by admin

Torsdagen den 27 mars hade jag förmånen att få agera både moderator och föreläsare på det årliga Risk Management Forum i Stockholm.
Det var både intressant, spännande och utvecklande att få ta del av mängd intressanta infallsvinklar inom området Risk Management och att få träffa andra intressanta föreläsare som Elaine Eksvärd och Marcus Murray. Tack alla för en mycket givande dag!

Därför struntar Google i topptalangerna

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt on mars 29th, 2014 by admin

I flera år rekryterade Google bara studenter med höga betyg från de mest prestigefyllda universiteten. Nu har de vänt och gör helt annorlunda.

Google har lärt sig en läxa. Höga betyg är inte längre en avgörande faktor när de ska hitta medarbetare som passar deras verksamhet.
google b
Andelen Google-medarbetare som helt saknar akademisk utbildning har ökat de senaste åren. I stället för att leta efter talanger med höga betyg, söker man personer med en stark ”kognitiv förmåga”, som är snabblärda och kan sammanfoga information från många olika håll.

Anledning? Google tycker att amerikanska universitet brister på tre områden:
1.De fungerar bara som en förlängning av tonårstiden. De förbereder inte studenterna på yrkeslivet.
2.De lyckas inte fostra framtidens ledare, utan har fastnat i en traditionell syn på ledarskap.
3.De skapar inte personer som är “intellektuellt ödmjuka” och erkänner när de har tänkt fel.

Google letar framför allt efter personer som har en flexibel inlärningsstil, är anpassningsbara och löser problem genom att samarbeta. Det innebär att man lär av sina misstag och ödmjukt kan ta ett steg tillbaka när man ser att någon annan har en bättre idé.

Källa: Proffice, mars 2014

Successful organizations need leaders at all levels

Posted in Aktuellt, Leadership / Ledarskap on mars 27th, 2014 by admin

Anybody who has ever watched interviews with managers or coaches of professional sports teams will have heard plenty of discussion of the need for leaders throughout the team. The same thinking is also increasingly a preoccupation of business people. Indeed, the need for “leaders at all levels” is one of the 12 critical issues identified in the Global Human Capital Trends 2014 survey published earlier this month by Deloitte University Press, the publishing arm of the professional services firm’s leadership center.

In a paper examining the findings, Adam Canwell, Vishalli Dongrie, Neil Neveras and Heather Stockton – who work for Deloitte in a range of locations – point out that leadership “remains the No. 1 talent issue facing organizations around the world”, with 86% of respondents to the survey rating it “urgent” or “important”. However, the fact that only 13% say they do an excellent job of developing leaders at all levels means that this area has the largest “readiness gap” in the survey.
Leader 1
Finding good leaders has, of course, always been a crucial issue for all sorts of organizations. This is why the armed forces, for instance, put so much effort into training their officers and why business schools and other providers of executive development have thrived. But the Deloitte team argues that “21st-century leadership is different”. Canwell and his colleagues write: “Companies face new leadership challenges, including developing Millenials and multiple generations of leaders, meeting the demand for leaders with global fluency and flexibility, building the ability to innovate and inspire others to perform, and acquiring new levels of understanding of rapidly changing technologies and new disciplines and fields.” No wonder organizations are coming up short.

Almost inevitably, the problem is felt to be especially acute today. This is a result of the strengthening of the global recovery, the desire on the part of the companies to expand in new markets and the growing numbers of older leaders choosing to retire.

A key part of the solution identified by the Deloitte team is for organizations to develop leadership pipelines at every level. At present, it says, companies are not only not developing enough leaders, they are also not equipping those they are creating with the critical capabilities and skills they need to succeed. “Today’s market environment places a premium on speed, flexibility and the ability to lead in uncertain situations. At the same time, the flattening of organizations has created an explosion in demand for leadership skills at every level.”

It appears that there is no avoiding spending money when it comes to dealing with this situation. The best performing companies already spend thousands of dollars each year developing each would-be leader on their staff, with the figure for senior leaders in the tens of thousands of dollars. Creating strong leadership programs for leaders at all levels – as advocated – requires sustained and substantial investment. At the early stages in the leadership pipeline, potential leaders need to acquire core skills in supervision and management, with frequent assignments to build on this base. Later on, they need to understand all the business functions before becoming executives, when business and product strategy will be central, along with experience of driving change within large teams. Companies need to understand that there are no shortcuts to building broad and deep leadership teams. New leaders typically need 18 months before feeling fully comfortable in a new role, while for those in the mid-level the period is more likely to be two to three years.

The paper also calls for companies to be more flexible in terms of leadership paths. Some leaders will move into senior roles relatively quickly because of a particular situation, while others will develop more slowly.

Above all, though, organizations need to realize that developing leaders amounts to more than having a selection of training programs. “Senior executives should create a culture that broadens the opportunity for leaders to develop in new ways,” writes the Deloitte team. “This means putting potential leaders in positions that stretch them beyond their current skill sets, and continuously coaching and supporting leaders so they can build their capabilities as rapidly as possible.” This is increasingly well recognised, say the authors, but it is “simply not widely adopted and practiced”.

Where should companies begin? A few starting points include:
•Engaging top executives to develop leadership strategy and actively govern leadership development.
•Aligning leadership strategies and development with evolving business goals
•Focusing on three aspects of developing leaders – developing leaders at all levels, developing global leaders locally and developing a succession mindset
•Implementing an effective – and unique – leadership program.

But there is no time to delay. The best-performing organizations are already on their way.

Source:, March 2014
By: Roger Trapp
Find out about the leadership status in your organization here.

Googles nya samarbete

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Digitalisering / Internet on mars 25th, 2014 by admin

Sökmotorjätten Google och glasögontillverkaren Luxottica har inlett ett samarbete.

Målet är att skapa så kallade smarta glasögon för den amerikanska marknaden, där Google väntas debutera på allvar senare i år.
Glasögonen innehåller en dator och kan styras både med rösten och knappar. Bilder och videor som kan postas direkt på internet är några användningsområden, enligt Google som döpt sin produkt till Glass.

Luxottica har i dag varumärken som Ray-Ban, Oakley, Alain Mikli och Vogue-Eyewear.

Källa: TT och, 25 mars 2014

”Vi människor behöver avkoppling”

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Digitalisering / Internet on mars 25th, 2014 by admin

Den som ofta sitter framför datorn och är en flitig mobil­användare bör se till att ta ordentliga pauser, träna sin fysik, träffa vänner på ”riktigt” – och kanske sjunga i kör. Det är bra sätt att undvika digital stress, menar hjärnforskaren Michael Nilsson.
– Våra hjärnor är beroende av mycket stimulans för att utvecklas. Men ibland kan det bli för mycket och för ensidigt, för mycket ”on”. Vi människor behöver avkoppling och sömn. Själv är jag en sådan där forskare som kollar mejlen det sista jag gör på kvällen och den första jag gör på morgonen, säger han.

Michael Nilsson är professor i medicinsk vetenskap och chef för Hunter Medical research institute (HMRI) i Newcastle i AustralienBrain 1 samt gästprofessor i neurologisk rehabilitering vid Sahlgrenska Akademin vid Göteborgs universitet. Han har bland annat intresserat sig för läkningsprocesser i hjärnan under till exempel inverkan av musik, rytm och dans.

Under senare år har debatten om hur den ständiga uppkopplingen påverkar vårt fysiska och psykiska välbefinnande tagit fart. En del talar till och med om att stora grupper riskerar att drabbas av ”digital demens”, att hjärnan blir så överhettad att till med ungdomar glömmer bort koden till den smarta telefon eller porttelefonen.
– Det låter i mina öron överdrivet. Men jag märker att den här typen av frågor allt oftare förekommer när hjärnforskare träffas på konferenser runt om i världen. Än så länge handlar det mest om hypoteser och forskningsresultat från relativt små material, säger Michael Nilsson.

Han påpekar att all långvarig stress riskerar att påverka olika celltyper i hjärnan, både deras funktion och struktur. Det kan leda till minnesproblem, sömnstörningar och koncentrationssvårigheter.
– Uppkoppling utan avbrott med tecken till stress kan leda till långvariga förändringar i hjärnans nätverk i stället för till normal aktivering. Detta i sin tur kan medföra påverkan på en individs personlighet. Jag vill dock understryka att det är först under de allra senaste åren som vi kunnat förstå delar av de kemiska processerna i olika delar av den mänskliga hjärnan, säger Michael Nilsson.

Forskare har under senare år kunnat visa att ungas hjärnor förändras mycket under tonåren och även i tjugoårsåldern.

Området i pannloben, hjärnans ”beslutsfattarcentrum”, blir klart allra sist. Det innebär i sin tur att möjligheten till framtidsplanering inte är utvecklad hos unga människor – inte heller förmågan till överblick och till att sålla intryck och bedöma risker.
– Mycket tyder på att den växande hjärnan behöver rörelse, fysisk aktvitet, för att utvecklas. Annars påverkas den främre delen, det som alltså ska bli ”vuxenhjärnan”, negativt. Att sitta still framför en dator eller bara knappa på sin mobil erbjuder inte den mångfacetterade stimulans som hjärnan behöver.

Från sitt arbete med neurologisk rehabilitering bär Michael Nilsson med sig erfarenheten att medveten minnesträning, med ett stort inflöde av intryck, kan ge goda effekter. Hjärnans form, struktur och funktion påverkas positivt.

Men lika negativ kan alltså en överstimulering vara. Michael Nilsson menar att vi måste respektera och förstå att hjärnan behöver sin vila och regelbundna avbrott. Fysiska aktiviteter och socialt umgänge är också viktiga.
– Även sömn är viktigt. Under sömnen försvinner av allt att döma avfallsmaterial från hjärnan. För lite sömn innebär att dessa restprodukter kan ackumuleras, ansamlas, i hjärnan. Det kan bidra till att allvarliga störningar av hjärnans funktioner utvecklas såsom tecken på tidigt åldrande, demens och andra problem.

Källa:, 24 february 2014
Av: Thomas Lerner (
Mer på detta tema här (Micke darmell – Uppkopplad eller avkopplad)

The seven habits of bad bosses

Posted in Aktuellt, Leadership / Ledarskap on mars 21st, 2014 by admin

Think of the worst supervisor or boss you ever had. Chances are someone comes immediately to mind. Why do you consider this person “the worst?” How did he or she act? How did this bad boss’s approach affect your attitude and work effort? Did this person influence you to do your best?

Now, think of a situation where you had the best boss ever. (For most people, it’s harder to identify a boss who shines, isn’t it?)Bad boss 1 What was this person like, and what did he or she do differently? How did this person affect you and your work effort?

Did you do a better job for the good boss or the bad boss? Most people say the good boss. Regrettably, it’s far more likely that the majority of your work life has been spent reporting to bad bosses. Bad bosses continue to dominate the landscape of business today. Despite the research on effective leadership, bad bosses are an epidemic killing off employee productivity, creativity and company profit potential.

Bad boss 2In big companies, poor bosses stand on every step of the corporate ladder. In smaller organizations, the owners or key executives are often the culprits. In fact, evidence suggests that there are many bad bosses out there, according to studies only 30% of employees are fully engaged today. In other words, 7 out of 10 employees aren’t motivated to do their best work.

Have you ever thought-what about those awful bosses who get good results? Yes, it does seem that some managers succeed who have pitiful leadership coaching skills. The success is most often short-lived. Lack of respect and poor relationships are weak fuel, leaving poor bosses with nothing to drive sustainable results. Employees’ who are sapped of their commitment and positive emotion don’t invest in their best on the job. In other words, bad bosses’ behavior does eventually catch up with them (or their organizations), but unfortunately for their victims, it doesn’t seem to happen fast enough.

So how do you know where your stand? First, here are seven habits of bad bosses to benchmark your effectiveness.
1.Poor communication skills
2.Bad judgment
3.Inability to lead teams
4.Problems in relationships
5.Poor conflict resolutions skills
6.Inability to manage themselves
7.Inability to learn from their mistakes

Second, look at your results. The number one reason employees say they quit is because of unhappiness with their boss. Employees with bad bosses are four times more likely to leave than employees who believe they have a good boss. Interviews in seven hundred bad boss 3companies of 2 million employees suggest that the productivity of employees depends on their relationship to their boss. The worst bosses contribute to poor morale and bad attitudes, which lead to poor productivity, indifferent customer service, lower sales, reduced quality, and poorer overall financial results. Bad bosses have employee turnover problems and often have to coerce or bribe employees to do things. Employees perform because they have to, not because they want to. They are like mercenary soldiers being paid to do the job. They aren’t the spirited patriots fighting to protect their homes.

It makes sense doesn’t it? Think of it; would you wake up in the morning and get all excited about giving it your all for a bad boss? What’s the matter with bad bosses, anyway? Haven’t they ever attended a management seminar or read a leadership book? Why do they act the way they do? For some, it’s the opportunity to flex their position power. Others are imitators-just mimicking what was done to them. And yet, others simply have poor people skills. Some are just lazy and don’t care. On average, according to leadership derailment studies 50 percent of managers fail in their positions. Don’t be one of them.

Source:, March 2014
By: Rick Conlow
Read more about leadership here
Read more about how you can develop your leadership skills

Först till Framtiden!

Posted in Uncategorized on mars 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

Do you need a conntected home?

Posted in Aktuellt, Allmänt, Digitalisering / Internet on mars 20th, 2014 by admin

Well, then check this out: