Insurance Leaders

Are You Learning as Fast as the World Is Changing? - HBR Blog Network

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Fri, 27 Jan 2012 05:37:34 PST

by Bill Taylor

12:00 PM Thursday January 26, 2012
Comments (12)

2012 M&A Activity in 2012 - The Conference Board

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 05:33:24 PST

Jan 25 2012

2012 M&A Activity in 2012

While we are in a contemplative mood with respect to what may happen in 2012, I turned to the topic of mergers and acquisitions. Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP recently published an advisory about what boards of directors may face in 2012, and one of the major topics was 2012 mergers and acquisition activity. Below is an excerpt from the advisory.

M&A in 2012 – Significant Opportunities … and Risks

While the first half of 2011 continued 2010’s M&A growth trends, growth stalled in the second half leading to only a very modest uptick for the full year. Spin-offs were the one type of transaction that attracted substantial interest last year, as companies decided (sometimes on their own, but sometimes with prompting from activists or other investors) that their businesses would generate better returns and have better prospects if split into two or more companies.

There is reason to expect growth in deal activity in 2012, despite current market and economic challenges. Prospective acquirers have substantial cash resources and reasonable or even strong stock prices, banks are willing to lend for at least some acquisitions, private equity firms have significant unused investor commitments, and hedge funds are actively seeking positive results. In this environment, directors should be mindful of whether the company’s current condition presents opportunities for it and its stakeholders.

Seller’s market. Interest rates remain low, potential strategic partners looking for synergistic mergers may have significant cash reserves, and financial sponsors are eager for deals. All this suggests that advantageous pricing may be achievable for companies considering a sale of control or selected divestitures. Firms considering strategic sell-side transactions must review the current financial state of the firm, markets, likely bidders and antitrust or other regulatory uncertainties. Careful planning for any transaction process in light of legal requirements is also important. Among other things, boards pursuing these transactions should be sensitive to, and take steps to prevent or limit, potential conflicts of interest on the part of their financial advisors. Recent developments also confirm that antitrust considerations are not solely a buy-side concern.

Acquisition risks. For companies considering acquisitions, directors must do their homework to understand the business being acquired; integration challenges and plans, including anticipated positive and negative synergies; antitrust or other regulatory risks, both in the United States and overseas; and financing, litigation and other consummation and post-closing risks. For example, acquiring a company that turns out not to be compliant with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or similar foreign statutes or regulations (whether or not it was subject to those provisions prior to being acquired), can result in expenses to investigate and fix the problem, loss in income from possible changes in the target’s business model and the payment of fines. In the aggregate, these costs can dwarf the purchase price of the acquisition.

LBO activity. With financial sponsors on the prowl for opportunities, management teams across a variety of industries may be approached about potential leveraged buyouts. Also on the prowl, however, are plaintiffs’ law firms, which are well aware that a flawed LBO process will create significant legal pitfalls for the target’s board and give rise to potential claims. If a board believes its CEO is likely to be approached by a financial sponsor, the CEO should be instructed to advise the lead independent director immediately of any approach. Appropriate protocols should then be put in place to assure that any process is actively supervised by the independent directors.

Defense review. The past two years have witnessed a modest but meaningful amount of hostile deal activity and shareholder insurgency, as well as negotiated deals disrupted by interlopers. Given this activity, directors of potential targets should consider a review of their defenses to understand vulnerabilities and be prepared to move quickly to fulfill their fiduciary obligations. One difficult decision faced by some boards this year relates to the renewal or non-renewal of a shareholder rights plan scheduled to expire. In reviewing these plans, boards should take into account potential threats to shareholder interests that may justify such defenses, as well as the policy of ISS to recommend “no” or “withhold” on director nominees who have voted to extend a right plan and the policies of other relevant institutions. Some companies have rights plans “on the shelf” that a board can consider adopting quickly if appropriate when faced with actual hostile activity. But the “on the shelf” approach is not entirely satisfactory for many smaller companies or even for some larger companies, given the expanded use of derivatives by some investors to establish a large economic position that can effectively be converted (after regulatory clearance) into a large ownership position. Nevertheless, given the ISS policy and similar positions of some institutions, it is not surprising that almost 80% of companies with rights plans scheduled to expire in 2011 allowed them to expire, and a majority of the extensions were for periods of two to five years rather than the once-standard ten years.

The vision. In any contest for control, a company’s strategic plan will take center stage and may very well prove to be the determinative factor. In order to mount an adequate defense against any unsolicited offer or proxy contest – and for more basic reasons of oversight – the board should ensure that the company’s strategic plan is current, has adequate support in company and market data and reflects the best judgment of management.

Balance Sheet Management and Vulnerability to Insurgency

The ratio of liquid assets to total assets of non-financial institutions in the United States is the highest in over 50 years. Feeding this fattening of the balance sheets are a historically low level of business investment relative to pre-tax corporate profits and, in some cases, issuances of debt at low cost without any near-term plans for use of proceeds. While the financial crisis of 2008-09 and subsequent economic uncertainties may have led to this situation, directors should now be asking how much longer their companies can justify retaining significant excess capital on the balance sheet. Indeed, directors should be asking how much longer investors will tolerate this trend. A common misconception is that hedge fund insurgents target only underperforming or distressed companies. In fact, one recent study concluded that the boards and managements that are most frequently attacked in activist filings on Schedule 13D are those overseeing companies characterized by steady cash flows and healthy balance sheets.[1] Directors should be carefully considering:

Whether to invest more in the business;

Whether to engage in more strategic acquisitions or similar transactions;

Whether to return more value to shareholders through share buybacks and dividends; and

Whether to incur more leverage to have additional flexibility to do any or all of the above.

Studies have shown hedge fund activists to be highly effective at inducing increases in leverage, share buybacks and dividends.[2] The same studies have shown that, despite the frequent adoption by hedge fund insurgents of the moniker “operational activist,” very few of them have proven to be particularly adept at causing improvements to the operating performance of companies. But when a board is perceived to be “standing still” on top of a healthy and growing balance sheet, activists will not hesitate to enter the scene to advocate changes to the board, management and strategic plan. Boards should explore, and push outside advisors and management to help them understand, whether more aggressive uses of excess capital may be appropriate and communicate their conclusions and reasoning to investors. This effort may do more than traditional anti-takeover mechanics to protect a company from interference by an activist who purports to know more than the incumbent directors and management about how to run the business and who, in the face of a seemingly passive board, may generate enough momentum to steer the company in radical directions that are not prudent. Despite the challenges of macroeconomic and industry uncertainties, by focusing appropriately on these issues in advance, boards may be able to reduce the likelihood of activist campaigns or have more credibility with investors if a campaign is launched.

Click here to read the full advisory. http://www.cgsh.com/files/News/8fcd6bc3-12bb-48ca-8da0-f949000c6133/Presentation/NewsAttachment/d77f88f2-1e9d-4fc8-bdaa-ff1c8f151d32/CGSH%20Alert%20Memo%20-%20Board%20Focus%202012.pdf

Other M&A Predictions

Other resources regarding M&A activity in 2012 include:

Citing steadier stock and credit markets steadier, cheap financing and the large amounts of cash on corporate balance sheets, Evelyn M. Rusili writing for the NY Times, notes that companies may need to make acquisitions to drive growth in 2012 in the face of a tepid economy. These factors, together with pent-up demand among buyout shops may fuel M&A in 2012. Tempering these forces in 2012 is uncertainty regarding the European financial system and the uncertainty inherent in a U.S. presidential election.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/01/02/on-wall-street-a-renewed-optimism-for-deals/

According to Ernst & Young LLP’s Transaction Advisory Services, strong fundamentals, which include robust cash positions, strengthening balance sheets and improved credit markets, combined with a mounting pressure for growth in a low organic growth environment, should generate an uptick in deal flow in 2012.

http://www.ey.com/US/en/Newsroom/News-releases/Ernst-and-Young-says-fundamentals-will-finally-prevail-over-uncertainty-to-get-deals-rolling-in-2012

Financialtimes.com contains a section dedicated to analysis of M&A activity in 2011 and trends in 2012.

http://www.ft.com/intl/indepth/m&a

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1] April Klein & Emanuel Zur, Entrepreneurial Activism: Hedge Funds and Other Private Investors, 64 J. Fin. 187 (2009) (“Klein & Zur”).

[2] See, e.g., Klein & Zur.

- Barbara Blackford
Posted by Barbara Blackford at 10:38 AM

Access Source And Its Great Content: Permalink: M&A Activity in 2012: http://tcbblogs.org/governance/2012/01/25/ma-activity-in-2012/

Strategy Time to think creatively about worker engagement - Financial Post

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 17:48:27 PST

Strategy Time to think creatively about worker engagement

Mitchell Osak
Jan 24, 2012 – 8:52 AM ET

EXCERPTS:

Companies need to more deeply consider the important role of peer comparison when designing compensation and measurement plans.

You don’t have to be a psychologist to know that people instinctively measure their own standing, satisfaction and performance relative to others. In a variety of studies, Harvard Business School professor Ian Larkin found this trait is the most powerful workplace motivator.

According to Prof. Larkin, when it comes to “deciding how hard we work and how well we think we’re performing, social comparisons matter just as much [as financial incentives].”

Comparing themselves with their peers incites employees to work harder in order to be recognized or to maintain prestige. Absolute compensation does matter, but only to a point.

This research has significant ramifications for talent management. Companies need to more deeply consider the important role of peer comparison – now supercharged thanks to social networking – when designing compensation and measurement plans.

Mitchell Osak is managing director of Quanta Consulting Inc. and can be reached at mosak@quantaconsulting.com.

.Access Article, Source And Its Great Content: http://business.financialpost.com/2012/01/24/time-to-think-creatively-about-worker-engagement/

Survival’s Ick Factor - New York Times

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 06:18:33 PST

By JAMES GORMAN
Published: January 23, 2012

EXCERPTS

Disgust is having its moment in the light as researchers find that it does more than cause that sick feeling in the stomach. It protects human beings from disease and parasites, and affects almost every aspect of human relations, from romance to politics.

...scientists are exploring the evolution of disgust and its role in attitudes toward food, sexuality and other people.

“It’s in our everyday life. It determines our hygiene behaviors. It determines how close we get to people. It determines who we’re going to kiss, who we’re going to mate with, who we’re going to sit next to. It determines the people that we shun, and that is something that we do a lot of.”

“It is becoming a model emotion,” said Jonathan Haidt of the University of Virginia, a disgust pioneer with Dr. Rozin.

Dr. Haidt, Dr. Rozin and Clark McCauley of Bryn Mawr College claim nine different domains of disgust for North Americans. Dr. Curtis proposes seven categories. Joshua Tybur of VU University in Amsterdam proposed three domains of disgust, three separate psychological programs, for disease avoidance, mate choice and moral judgment.

Whatever the fine points of disgust, its power to affect behavior is unquestioned, and that power ought to be put to good use

Access Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/24/science/disgusts-evolutionary-role-is-irresistible-to-researchers.html?pagewanted=2&ref=todayspaper

What's Your Influencing Style? - Harvard Business Review

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Mon, 23 Jan 2012 15:12:50 PST

HBR Blog Network

Chris Musselwhite and Tammie Plouffe

2:45 PM Friday January 13, 2012

by Chris Musselwhite and Tammie Plouffe
Comments (27)

HBR FEATURED PRODUCTS

Betterness: Economics for Humans

by Umair Haque $2.99 Buy it now »

Aravind Eye Hospital, Madurai, India: In Service for Sight

by V. Rangan $6.95 Buy it now »

Effective leadership today relies more than ever on influencing others — impacting their ideas, opinions, and actions. While influence has always been a valuable managerial skill, today's highly collaborative organizations make it essential. Consider how often you have to influence people who don't even report to you in order to accomplish your objectives. Success depends on your ability to effectively influence both your direct reports and the people over whom you have no direct authority.

Have you ever thought about how you influence others? The tactics you use? We are all aware that people use different influencing tactics, but did you realize that we each naturally default to the same tactics every time? Or that the tactics we default to are also the ones to which we are most receptive when being influenced?

It is these preferred tactics that define our influencing style. Analyzing the different influencing tactics, researchers have identified up to nine primary influencing tactics. In our quest to further understand personal influencing styles, we did additional research to build on the existing knowledge base. From our research, we've identified five distinct influencing styles: rationalizing, asserting, negotiating, inspiring, and bridging.

You may have an idea what your style is just from hearing these labels, but the most accurate way to identify your style is with an influence style indicator — a self-scoring assessment that classifies your style based on answers to questions about preferred influencing tactics. But even without the indicator, here are some questions you can ask yourself to begin to understand your style:

•Rationalizing: Do you use logic, facts, and reasoning to present your ideas? Do you leverage your facts, logic, expertise, and experience to persuade others?

•Asserting: Do you rely on your personal confidence, rules, law, and authority to influence others? Do you insist that your ideas are heard and considered, even when others disagree? Do you challenge the ideas of others when they don't agree with yours? Do you debate with or pressure others to get them to see your point of view?

•Negotiating: Do you look for compromises and make concessions in order to reach an outcome that satisfies your greater interest? Do you make tradeoffs and exchanges in order to meet your larger interests? If necessary, will you delay the discussion until a more opportune time?

•Inspiring: Do you encourage others toward your position by communicating a sense of shared mission and exciting possibility? Do you use inspirational appeals, stories, and metaphors to encourage a shared sense of purpose?

•Bridging: Do you attempt to influence outcomes by uniting or connecting with others? Do you rely on reciprocity, engaging superior support, consultation, building coalitions, and using personal relationships to get people to agree with your position?

While answering these questions, take your style a step further. How often does it work for you? Are you more successful with certain types of people? Have you ever wondered why? Since there are five different influencing styles, using only your preferred style has the potential to undermine your influence with as many as four out of five people.

Gaining awareness about our own influencing style and those of others is especially critical in light of today's fast-paced and stressful work environments, and here's why: When we are operating unconsciously out of a preference (our style) and not seeing the results we expect, we actually have the tendency to intensify our preferred behavior — even when it's not working!

If your individual success depends on gaining the cooperation of people over whom you have no direct authority, this should concern you. The way to begin to increase your odds of influencing more people is to learn to recognize and use each of the five styles.

Becoming aware that there are influencing styles other than yours is a good start. To further increase your influence, you must learn what each style sounds like when it's being used effectively and ineffectively. Gaining this awareness will help you recognize when the style you're using isn't working and how to determine one that will.

What's your influencing style? And what are you going to do about it?

Chris Musselwhite is president and CEO of Discovery Learning Inc. and Tammie Plouffe is the managing partner of Innovative Pathways.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/01/whats_your_influencing_style.html

2012 Separation of Chair/CEO Roles - Governance Challenges and Priorities for 2012 - The Conference Board

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Sat, 21 Jan 2012 06:15:22 PST

Governance Center Blog

Governance Challenges and Priorities for 2012 Jan 20

2012 Separation of Chair/CEO Roles

The decision of whether or not to separate the chair and chief executive roles remains a hot governance topic for public companies, boards, and shareholders. While the number of companies separating the roles of board chair and CEO has grown significantly over the past five years, it is not yet a majority practice in the US. According to The Conference Board’s 2011 Director Compensation and Board Practices Report, approximately 50% of nonfinancial services companies in the US separated these roles, with less than 65% of those companies having an independent board chair.

The Chairmen’s Forum, a group of prominent current and former chairs of corporate boards from the United States and Canada, recently issued a model statement regarding the separation of chair and chief executive roles. Under this model, boards are urged to adopt a policy requiring a separation, independent board chair. In its release, the chairman of the Chairman’s Forum, Bill McCracken, noted that “Corporate directors should prepare now for next-generation leadership, which involves building companies through strong and constructive boards led by independent chairs. . . . The Chairmen’s Forum sees succession as the inflection point in moving to a fresh model of board leadership. This policy language offers a clear way for directors to put this fresh model into practice and reflects an emerging standard.”

Shareholder representatives, including AFSCME (American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees) and New York City Comptroller John Liu, who oversees NYC pension funds, are raising the profile of this issue by submitting shareholder proposals to require separation of the chair and CEO roles at companies like JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs. Despite AFSCME’s failure to garner majority shareholder support for a separation proposal last year at Exxon Mobil, ISS reports that the proposals for independent chairmen last year averaged 33 percent support at Russell 3000 companies, up from 28 percent the year before. AFSCME has announced the filing of 21 such proposals in 2012.

The issue of separation of board chair and CEO will continue to be subject of debate in the US. For more information about the debate and the rationale for separating these roles, check out The Conference Board’s Director Note, August 2011.

- Barbara Blackford

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://tcbblogs.org/governance/2012/01/20/separation-of-chairceo-roles/

Train Your Brain to Focus - HBR

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 05:51:53 PST

HBR Blog Network.

1:32 PM Wednesday January 18, 2012

by Paul Hammerness, MD, and Margaret Moore

HBR FEATURED PRODUCTS

Nine Things Successful People Do Differently

by Heidi Halvorson $3.99 Buy it now »

Overloaded Circuits: Why Smart People Underperform

by Edward Hallowell $6.95 Buy it now »

Next time you are sitting in a meeting, take a look around. The odds are high that you will see your colleagues checking screens, texting, and emailing while someone is talking or making a presentation. Many of us are proud of our prowess in multitasking, and wear it like a badge of honor.

Multitasking may help us check off more things on our to-do lists. But it also makes us more prone to making mistakes, more likely to miss important information and cues, and less likely to retain information in working memory, which impairs problem solving and creativity.

Over the past decade, advances in neuroimaging have been revealing more and more about how the brain works. Studies of adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) using the latest neuroimaging and cognitive testing [PDF] are showing us how the brain focuses, what impairs focus — and how easily the brain is distracted. This research comes at a time when attention deficits have spread far beyond those with ADHD to the rest of us working in an always-on world. The good news is that the brain can learn to ignore distractions, making you more focused, creative, and productive.

Here are three ways you can start to improve your focus.

Tame your frenzy.

Frenzy is an emotional state, a feeling of being a little (or a lot) out of control. It is often underpinned by anxiety, sadness, anger, and related emotions. Emotions are processed by the amygdala, a small, almond-shaped brain structure. It responds powerfully to negative emotions, which are regarded as signals of threat. Functional brain imaging has shown that activation of the amygdala by negative emotions interferes with the brain's ability to solve problems or do other cognitive work. Positive emotions and thoughts do the opposite — they improve the brain's executive function, and so help open the door to creative and strategic thinking.

What can you do? Try to improve your balance of positive and negative emotions over the course of a day. Barbara Fredrickson, a noted psychology researcher at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, recommends a 3:1 balance of positive and negative emotions, based upon mathematical modeling of ideal team dynamics by her collaborator Marcial Losada, and confirmed by research on individual flourishing and successful marriages. (Calculate your "positivity ratio" at www.positivityratio.com). You can tame negative emotional frenzy by exercising, meditating, and sleeping well. It also helps to notice your negative emotional patterns. Perhaps a coworker often annoys you with some minor habit or quirk, which triggers a downward spiral. Appreciate that such automatic responses may be overdone, take a few breaths, and let go of the irritation.

What can your team do? Start meetings on positive topics and some humor. The positive emotions this generates can improve everyone's brain function, leading to better teamwork and problem solving.

Apply the brakes.

Your brain continuously scans your internal and external environment, even when you are focused on a particular task. Distractions are always lurking: wayward thoughts, emotions, sounds, or interruptions. Fortunately, the brain is designed to instantly stop a random thought, an unnecessary action, and even an instinctive emotion from derailing you and getting you off track.

What can you do? To prevent distractions from hijacking your focus, use the ABC method as your brain's brake pedal. Become Aware of your options: you can stop what you are doing and address the distraction, or you can let it go. Breathe deeply and consider your options. Then Choose thoughtfully: Stop? or Go?

What can your team do? Try setting up one-hour distraction-free meetings. Everyone is expected to contribute and offer thoughtful and creative input, and no distractions (like laptops, tablets, cell phones, and other gadgets) are allowed.

Shift Sets.

While it's great to be focused, sometimes you need to turn your attention to a new problem. Set-shifting refers to shifting all of your focus to a new task, and not leaving any behind on the last one. Sometimes it's helpful to do this in order to give the brain a break and allow it to take on a new task.

What can you do? Before you turn your attention to a new task, shift your focus from your mind to your body. Go for a walk, climb stairs, do some deep breathing or stretches. Even if you aren't aware of it, when you are doing this your brain continues working on your past tasks. Sometimes new ideas emerge during such physical breaks.
What can your team do? Schedule a five-minute break for every hour of meeting time, and encourage everyone to do something physical rather than run out to check email. By restoring the brain's executive function, such breaks can lead to more and better ideas when you reconvene.

Organizing your mind, and your team members' minds, will yield a solid payoff in the year ahead. Adding "high-quality focus" is a great place to start. Try holding a no-multitasking meeting and see what happens when everyone in the room gives their undivided attention. Have you ever tried this in your organization? If not, do you think it would fly?

Paul Hammerness, MD, and Margaret Moore are the authors of Organize Your Life, Organize Your Mind (Harlequin). Hammerness is an assistant professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School. Moore is the founder and CEO of Wellcoaches Corporation and co-director of the Institute of Coaching at McLean Hospital.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/01/train_your_brain_to_focus.html?referral=00563&cm_mmc=email-_-newsletter-_-daily_alert-_-alert_date&utm_source=newsletter_daily_alert&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=alert_date

Employers Share Most Outrageous Excuses Employees Gave for Coming in Late in CareerBuilder's Annual Survey - CareerBuilder

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 05:32:55 PST

Employers Share Most Outrageous Excuses Employees Gave for Coming in Late in CareerBuilder's Annual Survey

Study Points to the Importance of Punctuality in the New Year
CHICAGO, Jan. 12, 2012 /PRNewswire/ -- Cat hiccups, a disgruntled roommate and a governor's phone call are among this year's most unusual excuses employees gave for being tardy, according to a new CareerBuilder study. Sixteen percent of workers reported they arrive late to work once a week or more, up from 15 percent last year. Twenty-seven percent of workers arrive late to work at least once a month, up from 26 percent last year. The nationwide survey was conducted between November 9 and December 5, 2011 by Harris Interactive© among more than 7,000 U.S. workers and 3,000 employers across industries and company sizes.

While employers are more flexible about work schedules and start times today, excessive tardiness can have serious consequences. Over one-third (34 percent) of employers said they have terminated an employee for being late.

"Punctuality – or lack thereof - can impact how your commitment, reliability and performance are perceived by your employer," said Rosemary Haefner, vice president of Human Resources at CareerBuilder. "One of the best ways to make sure you get to work on time is to get organized and plan ahead. Lay out whatever you'll need for the workday the night before, plan to be at the office early, account for expected commute delays and eliminate distractions in your morning routine."

Traffic, sleep schedules and weather conditions are the top three causes for late arrivals to the office, according to workers:

•Traffic – 31 percent of workers

•Lack of sleep – 18 percent

•Bad weather – 11 percent

•Getting kids to school or daycare – 8 percent

Other common reasons for tardiness included public transportation delays, pets, spouses, watching TV and Internet usage.

When asked for examples of the most outrageous excuses employees provided for being late, hiring managers shared the following:
1.Employee's cat had the hiccups.

2.Employee thought she had won the lottery (she didn't).

3.Employee got distracted watching the TODAY Show.

4.Employee's angry roommate cut the cord to his phone charger, so it didn't charge and his alarm didn't go off.

5.Employee believed his commute time should count toward his work hours.

6.Employee claimed a fox stole her car keys.

7.Employee's leg was trapped between the subway car and the platform (turned out to be true).

8.Employee said he wasn't late because he had no intention of getting to work before 9:00 a.m. (his start time was 8:00 a.m.)

9.Employee was late because of a job interview with another firm.

10.Employee had to take a personal call from the state governor (turned out to be true).
Survey Methodology

This survey was conducted online within the U.S. by Harris Interactive© on behalf of CareerBuilder among 3,023 hiring managers and human resource professionals and 7,780 U.S. workers (employed full-time, not self-employed, non-government) between November 9 and December 5, 2011 (percentages for some questions are based on a subset, based on their responses to certain questions). With pure probability samples of 3,023 and 7,780, one could say with a 95 percent probability that the overall results have a sampling error of +/- 1.78 and +/- 1.11 percentage points, respectively. Sampling error for data from sub-samples is higher and varies.

About CareerBuilder

CareerBuilder is the global leader in human capital solutions, helping companies target and attract their most important asset - their people. Its online career site, CareerBuilder.com®, is the largest in the United States with more than 24 million unique visitors, 1 million jobs and 40 million resumes. CareerBuilder works with the world's top employers, providing resources for everything from employment branding and talent intelligence to recruitment support. More than 9,000 websites, including 140 newspapers and broadband portals such as MSN and AOL, feature CareerBuilder's proprietary job search technology on their career sites. Owned by Gannett Co., Inc. (NYSE: GCI), Tribune Company and The McClatchy Company (NYSE: MNI), CareerBuilder and its subsidiaries operate in the United States, Europe, Canada and Asia. For more information, visit www.careerbuilder.com.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/employers-share-most-outrageous-excuses-employees-gave-for-coming-in-late-in-careerbuilders-annual-survey-137166598.html

Tensions with the Board Not the Norm, Say 98% of CEOs - WorldatWork News Line

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Tue, 17 Jan 2012 18:04:14 PST

Jan. 11, 2012 — Despite the prominence of headline-making Fortune 500 boardroom clashes in 2011, 98% of U.S. CEOs report having good relationships with their boards of directors, and 95% say they believe their board supports them in the majority of decisions they make, according to a just-released survey from RHR International, a global executive talent development firm.
Though these middle-market CEOs represent companies that make up a wide swath of the American economy, their perspectives have seldom been examined. The CEO Snapshot Survey, based on responses from 83 CEOs at public and private companies, delves into their perceptions on board relationships, succession issues, their own leadership effectiveness, and the resources they need to improve their performance.

Key Findings

Boards Provide Positive Support

Boards are a fruitful source of feedback and support for CEOs, with 96% saying they can speak honestly with certain directors about their performance and the impact of their decisions, and 59% citing the board as their most helpful source of feedback. Fifty percent of CEOs say the lead director serves as this key board confidant, indicating the growing importance of finding the right person for this board position.

Succession Planning Causes Breakdowns

From the CEO's perspective, board relationships and communications begin to break down during the succession planning process. Seventy-six percent of CEOs believe they should be more involved in planning their own succession, and many CEOs report that miscommunication with the board about selection decisions and responsibilities is the most difficult part of this process. "Succession planning is full of complex psychological nuances, such as the incumbent CEO's readiness to step down, that can make it a very difficult process," said RHR International Chairman and CEO Dr. Thomas J. Saporito. "Earlier RHR research also shows CEOs need more clarity from and alignment with boards during transitions into and out of the C-Suite."

Complexity of the Job Surprises CEOs

There is a disconnect between CEOs' self-proclaimed preparedness for the job and what they experience when they assume the role. Eighty-seven percent of all CEOs felt prepared for the job, yet of that group, 54% say it was different from what they originally expected. When looking at first-time CEOs only, both percentages rise: 91% felt ready for the job and 72% report it was different from their original expectations. "This is not uncommon," said Dr. Saporito. "Stress, pressure, and loneliness all combine to create a job unlike any other they have previously had."

Isolation Hinders Performance

The intensity of the CEO's job, coupled with the scarcity of peers to confide in, creates potentially dangerous feelings of isolation among chief executives. Fifty percent of all CEOs report experiencing loneliness in the role, and of this group, 61% believe that the isolation hinders their performance. First-time CEOs are particularly susceptible to this isolation, with nearly 70% of those who experience loneliness saying it negatively affects their ability to do their jobs. Nearly half of all CEOs estimate that most other leaders experience similar feelings of loneliness.

Contents © 2012 WorldatWork. For more information, contact the Copyright Department at WorldatWork.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://www.worldatwork.org/waw/adimComment?id=58100&from=wwnew_editorial_0312

Maybe You Can Just Visualize Becoming a Better Leader…Maybe You Can Just Visualize Becoming a Better Leader - Envisia Learning - Ken Nowack

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 05:19:23 PST

January 15, 2012
by Ken Nowack

“I visualize things in my mind before I have to do them. It’s like having a mental workshop”

Jack Youngblood

As a kid, I played baseball and probably made over 1,000 double plays successfully–at least in my mind. I used to visualize every moment of receiving the ball from the shortstop to avoiding the slide from the base runner to get the runner out. In games, I actually did a great job of quickly turning the pivot and getting both runners out.

I’ve always wondered if my mental practice made a difference and now it seems I might actually be “wired” in my brain to be more successful than many people (hear that Brian Saebean?).

We have known for many years that mental rehearsal is almost equivalent to physical rehearsal in terms of enhancing skills and performance.

In 1995, a Harvard neuroscientist named Alvaro Pascual-Leone conducted an incredible study1. He divided volunteers into two groups with the first practicing a five-finger piano exercise for five days for two hours. At the end of each session they measured neural activation using transcranial-magnetic-stimulation (TMS) and they noticed that even after one week of practice, a stretch of the motor cortex in the brain related to finger movements took over surrounding areas demonstrating new neural circuits being established.

Pascual-Leone also asked a second group to only imagine playing the same piano piece mentally and again his research team found that the mere mental rehearsal of doing something like playing the piano altered the physical structure and function of our brain. Performance between the two groups was almost identical when both groups were tested after the two week period demonstrating for the first time the real power of mental practice.

Additional research has also demonstrated how meditation over time actually causes a significant reduction of brain activity in an area of the brain associated with sensations of pain. In a new study, researchers took 15 healthy volunteers who had never meditated and had them practice a 20 minute class just four times. The participants in the study reported a 40 percent reduction in pain intensityand 57 percent reduction in pain unpleasantness in response to a pain inducing heat device was placed on their legs. Mental practice in the form of meditation produced a greater reduction in pain than even morphine which typically reduces pain by 25 percent2.

In another widely reported study, eight weeks of 27 minutes per day mental rehearsal of mindfulness meditation results in measurable changes in brain regions associated wtih empathy and stress3. None of these changes were seen in the control group, indicating that they had not resulted merely from the passage of time.

Visualize Becoming a More Effective Leader

Each day you can mentally rehearse being more effective as a leader by:

1.See yourself allowing others to complete their thoughts and ideas before you share your recommendations, suggestions and ideas.

2.Visualize yourself speaking to a group and commanding a high degree of attention, respect and agreement with your message.

3.Rehearse and visualize yourself maintaining emotional control and being poised under interpersonal pressure and conflict (being non-defensive and open minded).

4.See yourself in a positive mood that rubs off on other talent and results in enhanced engagement and commitment to their job and tasks.

5.Mentally practice soliciting and seeking feedback from others and welcoming this as a gift to continuously improve.

6.Imagine using more participative leadership styles and involving more of your talent in problem solving, decision making and planning processes.

7.Focus on your peers saying to each other about how they would like to “follow” someone like you, believe you are always candid and direct with them and work in a collaborative, rather than, competitive manner.

So, maybe you can actually practice becoming a better leader just by deliberately practicing it in your mind. As Robert Collier said, “See things as you would have them be instead of as they are”….Be well….

1.Pascual-Leone, A. Nguyet, D.,Cohen, L., Brasil-Neto, J.,Cammarota, A.; & Hallett. M. (1995). Modulation of muscle responses evoked by transcranial magnetic stimulation during the acquisition of new fine motor skills. Journal of Neurophysiology, 74, 1037-1045 [↩]

2.1.F. Zeidan, K. T. Martucci, R. A. Kraft, N. S. Gordon, J. G. McHaffie, R. C. Coghill. Brain Mechanisms Supporting the Modulation of Pain by Mindfulness Meditation. Journal of Neuroscience, 2011; 31 (14): 5540 DOI: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5791-10.2011 [↩]

3.Britta K. Hölzel, James Carmody, Mark Vangel, Christina Congleton, Sita M. Yerramsetti, Tim Gard, Sara W. Lazar. Mindfulness practice leads to increases in regional brain graymatter density. Psychiatry Research: Neuroimaging, 2011; 191 (1): 36 DOI: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2010.08.006 [↩]

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://www.blogger.com/post-create.g?blogID=6561886212125248416

Insurance CIOs Vary in Value Proposition Views

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 06:13:06 PST

What they need, how they get it and how they deliver varies widely, notes Novarica.

Insurance Networking News, January 12, 2012

Pat Speer

Insurance CIOs view many of their contributions to the organizations they serve as one of supporting new strategic initiatives, while the most important factor in CIOs’ ability to deliver on this value proposition is their relationship with business leaders. Such are the results of a new report, “Creating Enterprise Value as CIO,” issued today by New York-based research and consulting firm Novarica. The report targeted 111 members of its more than 300-member Novarica Insurance Technology Research Council, a moderated membership group of senior insurance IT executives from both the property/casualty and life/annuity sectors.

Of the 111 who took Novarica’s online survey during December 2010, approximately 33 percent represented large (more than $1 billion in premiums) companies, while 50 percent represented midsize carriers (between $100 million and $1 billion in premiums). Small carriers (less than $100 million in premium) comprised 17 percent of the total.

Approximately one-half (45 percent) of respondents across organizations of all sizes noted supporting new strategic initiatives as the CIOs’ most meaningful contribution.

“These CIOs are being judged (or are judging themselves) not by how much they can save, but by how much more than can help the company achieve,” says Matthew Josefowicz, partner in the insurance practice at Novarica and author of the report.

Approximately one-third noted that their impact on the organization was most obvious in creating efficiency and effectiveness (cutting operational costs), which, according to the report, means that these CIOs are functioning in a traditional role of helping their companies perform better and more cheaply.

Just more than a fifth of respondents reported seeing their value primarily in terms of driving innovation (operations, products/services). CIOs from mid- to small-sized carriers were more likely to choose “driving innovation in products/services” as a contributing factor to creating value. And an average of only two percent of respondents noted “identifying growth opportunities” as a primary source of creating value for their organizations.

“These CIOs have transitioned from being primarily oriented toward execution to focusing more on effecting change for their companies,” says Josefowicz.

Perhaps most noteworthy is the difference between those who cited their primary value as innovating in either product or process and the total group of CIO respondents was in their self perception. Those “innovators” are more likely to ascribe their ability to deliver innovation to their technology knowledge/skills and project/team management rather than their ability to align with the business side.

Josefowicz admits that the sample size is small, but says “it’s interesting that the innovators are not necessarily those who ‘play well with others’ – they are slightly more likely to be those with a high level of confidence in their own knowledge and ability to deliver.”

More than 40 percent of insurer CIOs think their business leaders have a poor understanding of enterprise IT issues, but only 24 percent see that as a problem. Further, only 11 percent rated their business leaders’ knowledge as “high” yet more than half said that business leaders’ knowledge served to help them obtain resources.

“So, according to our group, even a decent understanding of enterprise systems on the part of business leaders can be beneficial in securing resources,” notes Josefowicz.

Finally, while CIOs are most likely to look to their own IT staffs and other insurer’s IT staffs for future leaders, the innovators are much more likely than others to consider cross-pollinating with the business organization, according to the report.

For more information on related topics, visit the following channels:

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://www.insurancenetworking.com/news/novarica-cio-proposition-values-29718-1.html

National Study Reveals Customer Satisfaction Ratings for Insurers - Insurance News Net

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 06:55:59 PST

Foster City, CA (PRWEB) January 11, 2012

A new national study of satisfaction ratings conducted by Insure.com provides a comprehensive view of how consumers feel about the largest auto, home, health and life insurance companies in the U.S.

In addition to the survey results, Insure.com has released a Best Insurance Companies tool which allows consumers to see how their insurer measures up against the competition when it comes to customer satisfaction. The tool breaks out five measurements of satisfaction:

1.Customer service

2.Claims experience

3.Value for the price paid

4.Percent who plan to renew their policies

5.Percent who would recommend their companies

“This is an in-depth resource for consumers who are considering their insurance options,” said Amy Danise, Insure.com’s Editorial Director. “Our analysis lets consumers gain valuable insight into how the major companies are performing on five important levels of customer satisfaction.”

Insure.com also awarded its “People’s Choice Award” to the three highest-scoring insurers in each line of business included in its study.

Best car insurance companies

1.USAA

2.Auto-Owners Insurance

3.The Hartford

Best home insurance companies

1.USAA

2.Amica Mutual

3.Chubb

Best life insurance companies

1.Ameriprise Financial

2.TIAA-CREF

3.Transamerica

Best health insurance companies

1.Blue Cross Blue Shield of Illinois

2.Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey

3.Kaiser Permanente

Insure.com’s analysis of the customer ratings revealed that insurance consumers are generally satisfied with their companies:

• Most consumers are “completely” or “somewhat” satisfied with their auto insurers’ customer service.

•73 percent are satisfied with home insurance customer service.

•63 percent are satisfied with their life insurers’ customer service.

•61 percent are satisfied with their health insurance customer service.

•70 percent say they have recommended or would recommend their auto insurance company. In other categories, people who have recommended or would recommend their insurers totaled 67 percent for home insurance, 58 percent for health insurance and 50 percent for health insurance.

For complete details and to use Insure.com’s Best Insurance Companies tool to explore customer satisfaction ratings, visit http://www.insure.com/best-insurance-companies.html.

The rankings

Rank – Insurance Company – Overall Score out of 100

Auto insurance companies

1. USAA* 98.00

2. Auto-Owners Insurance* 85.82

3. Hartford Financial Services* 83.31

4. State Farm 80.50

5. 21st Century 79.28

6. Farmers 79.01

7. AAA 78.95

8. GMAC Insurance 78.56

9. Allstate 78.10

10. Travelers 77.57

11. GEICO 77.46

12. Erie Insurance 76.90

13. Liberty Mutual 76.14

14. Country Insurance 75.89

15. Nationwide 74.68

16. American Family 74.05

17. Progressive 73.69

18. Mercury General 72.05

19. MetLife 72.01

20. Esurance 71.19

Home insurance companies

1. USAA* 98.11

2. Amica Mutual* 97.67

3. Chubb* 92.19

4. Erie Insurance 88.72

5. Country Insurance 85.75

6. AAA 84.66

7. Nationwide 83.53

8. State Farm 82.34

9. MetLife 81.68

10. 21st Century 80.79

11. The Hartford 80.44

12. Travelers 79.79

13. Liberty Mutual 79.03

14. Farmers 78.71

15. Allstate 78.55

16. Auto-Owners Insurance 78.48

17. American Family 77.10

18. Universal Property & Casualty 75.05

19. Fireman's Fund 73.66

20. Citizens Property Insurance 64.15

Life insurance companies

1. Ameriprise Financial* 90.90

2. TIAA-CREF Life Insurance* 88.58

3. Transamerica* 81.28

4. Northwestern Mutual 81.23

5. New York Life 80.36

6. Pacific Life 79.99

7. Massachusetts Mutual 79.62

8. MetLife 79.39

9. Allstate 78.94

10. Prudential Financial 78.64

11. Principal 77.59

12. John Hancock 77.02

13. Hartford Life 73.75

14. AXA Equitble 73.58

15. Great-West Life 73.05

16. Jackson National 71.80

17. American General 70.86

18. ING Life Insurance 69.32

19. Lincoln National 68.12

20. Aviva Life Insurance 59.94

Health insurance companies

1. BCBS of Illinois* 84.74

2. Horizon BCBS of NJ* 84.52

3. Kaiser Permanente* 84.45

4. Highmark BCBS 82.27

5. Regence BCBS 82.17

6. Humana 81.87

7. BCBS of Massachusetts 81.46

8. Independence BCBS 81.33

9. CareFirst BCBS 80.24

10. UnitedHealthcare 79.23

11. BCBS of Florida 78.70

12. Anthem BCBS 78.29

13. Aetna 77.78

14. CIGNA 76.17

15. Coventry Health Care 73.19

16. Aetna Life (Dental, Etc.) 72.48

17. Health Net 71.91

18. Assurant 60.85

19. Blue Shield of California 59.20

• Indicates the company is an Insure.com "People's Choice Award" winner.

Methodology

Insure.com surveyed more than 4,500 insurance customers between February and August 2011 for customer service ratings and reviews. The survey included the top companies by market share, but not all large companies may be represented due to lack of data. The top three companies in each category earned Insure.com’s “People’s Choice Award.”

Insure.com makes reviews freely available via this site. The views and opinions expressed by users do not reflect the views and opinions of Insure.com. Insure.com expressly disclaims any and all liability in connection with the content of any reviews.

About Insure.com Insure.com is a comprehensive resource of consumer insurance information and data. The website features articles, news and tools on auto, home, health and life insurance topics, life insurance quotes, and car insurance comparison tools. Consumers have access to free car insurance quotes and guidance on finding the right insurance policy, saving money and solving claims problems. Insure.com is owned and operated by QuinStreet, Inc. (NASDAQ: QNST), one of the largest Internet marketing and media companies in the world. QuinStreet is committed to providing consumers and businesses with the information they need to research, find and select the products, services and brands that best meet their needs. The company is a leader in visitor-friendly marketing practices. For more information, please visit QuinStreet.com.

Press contact:
Amy Danise
860-386-6446
adanise(at)insure(dot)com

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://insurancenewsnet.com/article.aspx?id=325643&type=lifehealth&inl=1

Why You Need A Leadership Coach - Inc - John Baldoni

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Thu, 12 Jan 2012 06:28:03 PST

Your reports are not your friends. To get the truth about how you're running your company, you'll need someone with an outside perspective.

By John Baldoni
@johnbaldoni
Jan 11, 2012

Among the reasons that companies hire executive coaches is to provide senior leaders with a sounding board.

While this is something I have long suspected, I was pleased to see it confirmed by the results of a small survey of veteran executive coaches conducted by Alexcel Group, a coaching network to which I belong. Two thirds of the coaches surveyed said their engagements involved being a trusted advisor able to provide much needed objectivity.

A reason for serving as a sounding board is rooted in trust. Not too long ago I did a seminar for CEOs of small businesses. In the course of my talk I mentioned that none of the attendees had any real friends inside the companies they owned and operated. That comment provoked a strong negative reaction.

I held my ground and challenged the group to consider that each of them had the power to hire, reward, and terminate any employee in their organization. Then one CEO looked to his colleagues and said something like, "He's right! We may not have as many friends as we think we do!" I don't think that I won over any converts but at least they allowed me to continue speaking.

Many CEOs with whom I speak talk about it being lonely at the top. They are not asking for pity—when you have access to the corporate jet, life is not all bad. But the wise executives I know realize that being in charge means you are always making decisions that have big consequences for others.

Most executives love the impact their decisions have, but at times, they know that decisions they make about opening or closing facilities, promoting this executive over another, or deciding which business to pursue or which to pass on, has real impact on people's lives. As Shakespeare wrote in Henry IV, Part 2, "Uneasy lies the head that wears the crown."

To paraphrase the Bard, I would say senior executives do not readily surrender their crowns but from time to time like to take them off. Enter the executive coach. His or her role is to encourage the executive to look less royal. That is, take a frank look at themselves and their roles in the company.

Good coaches I know do not pull punches with feedback they deliver. They seek to be honest brokers with ideas, opinions, and suggestions they gather from stakeholders. Coaches also listen and learn from what an executive says, and seek to share expertise in helpful ways, especially to challenge assumptions.

The obstacle for the senior leader is the desire for straight talk beyond the coach.

The man or woman at the top of the pyramid must work hard to enable people to speak truth to power. That is not easy. None of us likes push-back, especially when we are working hard to get things done right. But for those who report to a senior executive telling them the truth may be what's most important.

And so let me close with a story that General Omar Bradley recalled about his former boss, General George C. Marshall, who served as U.S. Army Chief of Staff during the Second World War. In 1939, as America began to mobilize for the eventuality of war, Marshall chastised his junior officers for their failure to disagree with him about his planning strategies. Marshall made it clear that he did not want yes men on his staff; he wanted officers who were not afraid to question his decisions.

That's a good lesson for every leader to keep in mind.

Read more:

Lead Like College Football Coach Hayden Fry

How To Lead with Empathy (and When Not To)

Free Time Ain't Free Unless You Use It

John Baldoni is the president of Baldoni Consulting, a full service executive coaching and leadership development firm. John speaks widely on leadership and is the author of 10 books on leadership including his newest Lead With Purpose: Giving Your Organization a Reason to Believe in Itself.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://www.inc.com/john-baldoni/why-you-need-an-executive-coach.html

SEC Issues Implementation Schedule for Dodd-Frank Act - Best's News Service

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 06:36:09 PST

Best's News Service - January 09, 2012 04:09 PM

By Jeff Jeffrey, Washington Correspondent
WASHINGTON - The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has released its 2012 schedule for the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act, laying out its six-month goals for developing new rules and public reporting requirements.

During the first six months of the year, the SEC expects to address rules for corporate governance, risk retention requirements for asset-backed securities, derivatives and other issues covered by the law.

On the corporate governance front, the SEC said it would adopt rules dealing with compensation committee independence and rules regarding compensation consultant conflicts; rules for the disclosure of pay-for-performance, pay ratios and hedging by employees and directors; and rules regarding the recovery of executive compensation.

The schedule said the agency plans to report to Congress on standardization within certain elements of the credit rating process.

The SEC said it also expects to develop definitions for a number of derivatives-related terms, including intermediaries and securities-based swaps.

The SEC's full schedule for the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act can be found on the agency's website.

The insurance industry has been closely watching the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act, pushing lawmakers and administration officials to avoid lumping insurance companies in with banks. The industry has argued that insurance companies and banks are inherently different businesses, emphasizing the small number of insurance companies that failed during the financial crisis as opposed to the much larger number of banks that suffered (Best's News Service, Oct. 12, 2011).

(By Jeff Jeffrey, Washington Correspondent: jeff.jeffrey@ambest.com)BN-NJ-01-09-2012 1609 ET #

Are Kodak's Outside Directors Wrong to Desert a Sinking Ship? - HBR

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 06:08:37 PST

HBR Blog Network.
11:00 AM Thursday January 5, 2012
by Simon C.Y. Wong
Comments (10)

HBR FEATURED PRODUCTS

Betterness: Economics for Humans

by Umair Haque $2.99

Buy it now »

The Four Things a Service Business Must Get Right

by Frances Frei $6.95

Buy it now »

Eastman Kodak lost three outside directors in a single week prompted me to consider the extent to which non-executive directors flee their companies in times of trouble and why. Evidence that this is not an uncommon phenomenon and that many directors depart for flimsy reasons — such as an increasing board workload — suggest that measures are required to ensure these stewards remain committed to their firms in good times and bad.

Fundamentally, it is extremely problematic for directors to resign when their companies are in crisis because effective board stewardship — particularly from outside directors — is most needed at such junctures. Moreover, struggling firms can ill-afford the added disruptions caused by the sudden departure of board members. For directors in these situations, the University of Pennsylvania's Michael Useem maintains, "the leadership dictum is that you need to stay the course, stay in the game, face the problem, and solve the problem."

A 2008 Wall Street Journal analysis of boards in the troubled financial services, retail, and home construction sectors revealed that nearly 50 non-executive directors who were full-time CEOs or CFOs elsewhere resigned their posts that year. These directors departed mainly because they lacked the time to devote to board duties, which grew heavier during the global financial crisis. It is worth noting that this explanation is also used by directors with different principal occupations. When a respected business school professor resigned from the board of Indian IT services firm Satyam Computers soon after an accounting scandal was uncovered in late 2008, he declared that he did so because he could not devote the requisite time to "get the company back on its feet."

Furthermore, a recent academic study found that it is not unusual for directors to leave "in anticipation of adverse events to protect their reputation or to avoid an increased workload."

However, it should not be surprising to non-executive directors that board responsibilities will expand in times of crisis, whether the prospect of imminent bankruptcy, discovery of serious management misdeeds, arrival of shareholder activists, or other significant stresses. Similarly, while all directors understandably want to be associated with successful companies, it is highly disconcerting — and raises questions about their character — when they bolt during a period of turmoil principally out of a desire to preserve their own reputation.

Of course, director resignation in times of crisis is sometimes warranted and perhaps even necessary. For example, the chairman of troubled British restaurant and pubs operator Mitchells & Butlers stepped down last July because, as reported in the media, he felt the firm's major shareholders were obstructing his efforts to rebuild the board.

Drawing on my experience with boards, below are several suggestions to help protect them from disruptive director departures in tumultuous periods.

When recruiting directors, boards should focus on three things:

1.The nominations committee should carefully gauge a candidate's inherent interest in the firm and its industry. Individuals who do not exhibit strong interest in a company's business and its long-term success (but who nevertheless join the board in order to, say, advance their careers or "add a feather to their caps") may not stick around when the firm encounters severe turbulence.

2.For the same reason as above, boards need to probe the attitude of prospective members toward their director roles. Despite recent reforms, some directors continue to view board memberships as sinecures. At a large financial institution, the lead director went on a three-week mountain-trekking holiday (and let it be known that he was not contactable) during a growing controversy about the suitability of the bank's leadership team, governance structure, and strategy.

3.The nominations committee should ensure that non-executive directors have sufficient time to dedicate to board activities. The need to be available during times of crisis should be emphasized when interviewing potential candidates and reinforced in the appointment letter. A mining company's institutional shareholders became increasingly agitated when they were forced to wait nearly a month to discuss with the lead director — the CEO of a large firm who was unwilling to free up his diary — swirling rumors that the board was in discord due to disagreements on how capital should be raised to help the company weather the global financial crisis.

Once they become directors, the board should endeavor to strengthen their members' commitment to the firm — for instance, by involving them in substantive activities. A U.K. board advisor told me, "Doing real work, both collectively and individually, can help increase the commitment of non-executive directors." At the same time, emotional attachment can be deepened through social interactions, such as group visits to facilities abroad, dinners with management members, and other informal social gatherings. Passion for the company can also be bolstered by facilitating interactions between different generations of directors, including through overlapping tenures.

Boards should be pragmatic when apportioning responsibilities and organizing their activities. For example, directors who are currently full-time senior executives elsewhere could be exempted from certain board committee work or leadership roles. Similarly, directors who live far away — say, on a different continent — should be permitted to participate in some board meetings by teleconference.
Keeping the board together in times of crisis will not only bring much-needed stability and leadership to the company but may also improve its own functioning in the long-term. At an Asian conglomerate where a small group of directors successfully guided the company out of a near-death situation, the board members exhibited strong camaraderie and the boardroom environment was vibrant and challenging yet warm and friendly.

While one can never be certain whether, and which, outside directors will depart when a crisis erupts, these suggestions may increase the likelihood that boards will be able to continue to rely on incumbent non-executive directors during stressful periods.

Simon C.Y. Wong is a partner at the investment firm Governance for Owners, an adjunct professor of law at Northwestern University, and a visiting fellow at the London School of Economics and Political Science. He can be found on Twitter at @SimonCYWong.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/01/protecting_boards_from_disrupt.html

Building the new leader - Leadership challenges of the future revealed - The Hay Group

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 05:21:20 PST

Excerpts:

According to Hay Group’s Leadership 2030 research the leaders of the future will need a host of new skills and competencies if they are to succeed

Leaders of the future will need to be adept conceptual and strategic thinkers, have deep integrity and intellectual openness, find new ways to create loyalty, lead increasingly diverse and independent teams over which they may not always have direct authority, and relinquish their own power in favor of collaborative approaches inside and outside the organization.

The six megatrends Hay Group singled out are:

1 Accelerating globalization (‘globalization 2.0’)
2 Climate change, its environmental impact and scarcity of resources
3 Demographic change
4 Individualization and values pluralism
5 Increasingly digital lifestyles 6 Technology convergence.

The war for talent rages on

New leadership competencies

The new business world order will challenge leaders on three levels: cognitive, emotional and behavioral.

Cognitive
- Leaders need new forms of contextual awareness, based on strong conceptual and strategic thinking capabilities.

- They need to be able to conceptualize change in an unprecedented way, again based on conceptual and strategic thinking.

- Leaders need to exhibit new forms of intellectual openness and curiosity.
Emotional

- Overall, leaders will need to be much more sensitive to different cultures, generations and genders.

- They will need to demonstrate higher levels of integrity and sincerity and adopt a more ethical approach to doing business.

- They must also tolerate far higher levels of ambiguity.
Behavioral

- Leaders must create a culture of trust and openness.

- As post-heroic leaders they must rethink old concepts such as loyalty and retention and personally create loyalty.

- Collaboration – cross-generational, cross-functional and cross-company – will be their watchword.

- They must lead increasingly diverse teams.

Conclusion

Organizations and their leaders face a tough, but not insurmountable, challenge, as those companies already adapting or preparing to adapt to the new world order demonstrate. And, as ever, the ‘Best Companies for Leadership’ are in the vanguard of post-heroic leadership approaches.

Access Report: http://www.haygroup.com/Leadership2030/downloads/Hay_Group_Leadership_2030_whitepaper.pdf

The Performance and Potential Matrix (9 Box Grid) - Great Leadership - Dan McCarthy

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 09:48:37 PST

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

The Performance and Potential Matrix (9 Box Grid) – an Update

Note: this is an update to one of the very first posts I wrote in November 2007 and continues to be one of my most popular. I thought it was time for an update.

The performance and potential matrix (9 box grid) is one of the most widely used tools in succession planning and development. It can be a valuable tool for anyone who works in talent management, or for any manager.

For some reason, however, it seems to be covered in a veil of secrecy, leaving those that want to learn how to use it with little guidance. You’ve probably found this post from an internet search – I hope it helps answer your questions and you’ll find Great Leadership to be a valuable resource for all things leadership development.

What is it and where did it come from?

The performance and potential matrix, commonly referred to as “the nine box”, is a simple yet effective tool used to assess talent in organizations. It assesses individuals on two dimensions – their past performance and their future potential.

The X axis (horizontal line) of 3 boxes assesses leadership performance and the Y axis of 3 boxes (vertical line) assesses leadership potential. A combination of Y and X axis makes up the box within the grid that the leader is placed. 1A - High Performance/High Potential, 3C - Low Performance/Low Potential, etc...

See example:

No one seems to know for sure who invented it, although I’ve heard Al Gore once took credit for it. Others say it may have been first used at GE, under Jack Welch’s leadership. I first started using it in 1997, and have since used it to facilitate hundreds of talent review meetings (and lived to tell about it). I’ve also used it as a manager as a way to assess and develop my own team.

Thanks to the power of Google, I’ve been invited to give presentations at HR conferences on the 9 box, was interviewed in SHRM’s HR Magazine (8/2011 issue, “On the Grid”), and walked a lot of anxious beginners through the process, including a very grateful HR team from India and a few non-profits that couldn’t afford to hire a consultant.

I’m thinking it might be time for a bestselling book? Something catchy like “Let’s Get Rid of the Nine-box”, or “2B or not 2B, that is The Question”.

What are the benefits? Why’s it so popular?

1. It’s simple and it works (95% of the time).

The beauty of the tool is in its simplicity and ease of use. With a little explanation and initial facilitation, managers usually can catch on pretty quickly. It helps overcome many of the common pitfalls when it comes to talent assessment, including:

- Overemphasis on current performance

- Overreliance on a single opinion

- A lack of assessment criteria, or inconsistent criteria

I’ve had teams (often engineers) try to overcomplicate it, by adding more boxes, definitions for each box, and all kinds of bells and whistles. It hardly ever improves the process and often distracts from the overall purpose.

When I say it works 95% of the time, it’s from my own experience. I’ve only had one senior team where it just blew up, and that’s because there was such a lack of trust and dysfunction.

2. It’s cost-effective.

Actually, other than people’s time, or a paid facilitator, it’s free. There are other ways to assess potential – instruments and assessment centers are great – yet they are also expensive. If you can afford to send every manager through a $10,000 assessment center, then good for you. For the rest, this is the next best thing.

3. A catalyst for robust dialog.

It’s not about filling out the grid – it’s all about the discussion. It’s critical to keep that in front of you. Managers, in general, are not very skilled when it comes to assessing talent, and are very hesitant to discuss other manager’s employees, or hear feedback about their own. This tool helps provide a structured way to have those conversations in a professional, productive way.

4. Helps calibrate criteria and expectations.

Even if you don’t have clear, consistent, definitions of performance and potential going into a talent review, by using this tool, you will by the time you are done. If fact, for a lot of managers in the room, it’s the first time they’ve heard their own bosses’ expectations, so you’ll see them discreetly jotting down notes and assessing themselves.

5. It’s more accurate than one person’s opinion.

The accuracy of assessing performance and potential improves with multiple data points. Manager’s often have blind spots with their own employees, and are unaware of how they are perceived by others. These discussions can help shine a light on superstars and poor performers.

6. Facilitates shared ownership, teamwork.

This is a ground rule for any talent management meeting and discussion: “We all, as a team, are collectively are responsible for building a stronger organization. We need to be candid, listen to each other, and help develop each other’s employees.”

In a functional or segmented organization, talent development is often one of the few things a management team can actually work on together.

7. A diagnostic tool for development.

A talent review meeting uncovers both individual and organizational strengths and weaknesses. The grid serves as a needs assessment for development actions that need to be taken.

How to use it:

1. Don’t do it alone for the first time.

The tool is best if used by a team and facilitated by someone who has experience with the process. This could be an HR person, OD consultant, or someone responsible for leadership development or succession planning. Once a team has used a couple times, they can usually do it themselves, but it still helps to have someone facilitate the dialog, take notes, etc…. If you are a talent management practitioner, try to shadow someone with expertise, hire someone to guide you through your first one, or at least work with someone to prepare you.

2. Have a pre-meeting.

You should present the tool and process to the team to make sure they all understand and buy in to the purpose and process. Don’t underestimate the amount of anxiety if a team has never done anything like this before (a ranking exercise). It’s best to decide ahead of time how performance will be assessed (use a leadership competency model if you have one) and how potential will be assessed (again, best to decide ahead of time – I use specific potential criteria). This is the time to establish ground rules as well, especially around meeting behaviors and confidentiality.

3. Preparation.

Have each manager fill in a grid for their own employees and have the facilitator collect and consolidate them. You could also ask for any other relevant information, such as years in current position, diversity status, retention risk, or relocatability. I usually have each manager plot their direct report managers (one level at a time, so we’re comparing apples to apples). I then consolidate all of the names, by level, on an organizational grid.

You can start with a 2-4 hour meeting, but it will usually take 1-2 follow-up meetings to finish. Bring copies of the consolidated grid for each participant.

5. Getting started.

It’s easier picking someone in the 1A box (highest performance and potential) where you think there may be little disagreement. Ask the sponsor manager to explain the rationale for the assessment. Ask lots of why’s, then invite all others to comment. Don’t rush it, the benefit of this process is in the discussion.

6. Establish your “benchmarks”.

After all have been heard from, if there is agreement, then you have a 1A benchmark, or poster child, for all others to compare against. If disagreement in perception, ask the sponsor manager if they want to change their mind based on the feedback – usually they do – but if not, leave it. Pick another name until you establish the benchmark.

7. Discuss as many names as time allows.

You can then discuss rest of the names in the 1A box, then move to the bordering boxes (1B and 2A). Then move to the 3C box, and again, facilitate a dialog to establish another benchmark. Continue the discussion for each person, or as many as time permits.

8. Move to development.

If time, or most likely at a follow-up meeting, the team can then discuss development plans for each leader. For succession planning, the focus should be on the upper right hand corner boxes (1A, 1B, and 2A) – this is your high potential pool.

9. Follow-up on a quarterly basis to monitor development plans. Repeat the assessment process at least once a year.

More posts on the using the performance and potential matrix:

- Nine Leadership Development Strategies for a Performance and Potential Matrix

- Reader Question: Nine Box Performance and Potential Matrix Best Practices

- How to “Score” Leadership Potential When Using the Performance and Potential Matrix

Posted by Dan McCarthy at 1/04/2012

About Dan McCarthy: Dan is the Director of Executive Development Programs (EDP) at the Whittemore School of Business and Economics. He is responsible for all administrative, fiscal, operational, and policy matters associated with the development, delivery, and marketing of Executive Development Programs at the Whittemore School.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://www.greatleadershipbydan.com/2012/01/performance-and-potential-matrix-9-box.html

The Power of Declarations: Winston Churchill and Leaders Today - ThoughLeaders LLC

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 07:13:31 PST

January 4, 2012

Today’s guest post is by Lyn Boyer . You can read more about Lyn and her new book at the end of the post.

In the darkest days of World War II, families in England huddled around their radios to listen to the inspiring words of Winston Churchill. Britain stood virtually alone against the powerful Luftwaffe that dropped thousands of bombs during the night raids of the Blitz. On June 4, 1940 after the Dunkirk Evacuation, which removed over 338,000 British, French and Belgian soldiers from the threat of the German army, Churchill delivered perhaps his most famous and stirring speech.

“We shall go on to the end, we shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender…”

These are perhaps the most famous words of his most famous speech. They represent a powerful declaration that provided hope and encouragement during a time of overwhelming fear and hardship.

Leaders today can learn much from Churchill. Many credit him with providing the hope that England could survive in spite of tremendous odds. Churchill appealed to the hearts of the British people. He frequently referred to heroes, both past and present, who represented the values necessary to prevail. He spoke to his listeners as if they were intelligent human beings, and he frankly discussed the dangers. His use of words was inspiring. His craggy, determined voice, his confident presence, direct manner and frequent use of the “V” for victory sign supported his words.

I could discuss many attributes of Churchill’s leadership, but I believe one of his most telling characteristics was his use of powerful declarations—formal announcements of expectations or future conditions.

Yet, it is often the absence of declarations that leaves leaders and their followers adrift. In coaching conversations and professional discussions, I frequently find that leaders do not understand the power of declarations or they are often reluctant to declare their expectations.

Whatever the cause of their reluctance, it is important for leaders and their coaches to assess the need for and the presentation of powerful and meaningful declarations. A few examples of declarations leaders may use today include:

- All of us will work together to meet this challenge.

- We are capable and we will complete this project on time and under budget.

- I expect to see the following behavior when each of you greets a client.

- Our efforts will produce the success we expect to achieve.

However, these statements alone will have no impact. Declarations that have the potential to change the future must include the following:

- They must be lofty but realistic.

- They must be delivered with the right degree of confidence. This includes body, emotion and language.

- They must be accompanied by emotional appeals that capture the spirit.

- Powerful declarations should include specific actions that will lead to the expected outcomes.

- The leader must have both the real and perceived authority to make a declaration. Without that authority, the declaration has no meaning.

Churchill was not blessed with natural speaking ability. He overcame a speech impediment, and he spent many hours working on his “impromptu” speeches. However, he came to be one of the strongest wartime leaders in history.

Like Churchill, leaders today can and must spur their groups and organizations to greater success by accepting the responsibility, and sometimes the risk, of making powerful declarations about what can be.

- Lyn Boyer is an author, coach and presenter on topics related to Affective Leadership. Her recently published book, Connect: Affective Leadership for Effective Results, contains valuable information on methods successful leaders use to make personal connections that change the future. These include use of language, emotional intelligence, leadership presence, trust-building, mental models and lightness. It is now available online in paperback and e-book (Kindle and Nook). Visit her blog at www.lynboyer.net or her company website at www.LeadershipOptions.com.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://www.thoughtleadersllc.com/2012/01/the-power-of-declarations-winston-churchill-and-leaders-today/

Developing Mindful Leaders - Harvard Business Review - Polly LaBarre

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Thu, 05 Jan 2012 05:56:58 PST

HBR Blog Network.

3:32 PM Friday December 30, 2011

by Polly LaBarre
Comments (32)

HBR FEATURED PRODUCTS

Betterness: Economics for Humans

by Umair Haque $2.99 Buy it now »

Stop Making Plans; Start Making Decisions

by Michael Mankins, Richard Steele $6.95 Buy it now »

Organizations invest billions annually on a success curriculum known as "leadership development," which ends up leaving so much on the table. Training and development programs almost universally focus factory-like on inputs and outputs — absorb curriculum, check a box; learn a skill, advance a rung; submit to assessment, fix a problem. Likewise, they leave too many people behind with an elite selection process that fast-tracks "hi-pos" and essentially discards the rest. And they leave most people cold with flavor of the month remedies, off sites, immersions, and excursions — which produce little more than a grim legacy of fat binders gathering dust on shelves.

What if, instead of stuffing people with curricula, models, and competencies, we focused on deepening their sense of purpose, expanding their capability to navigate difficulty and complexity, and enriching their emotional resilience? What if, instead of trying to fix people, we assumed that they were already full of potential and created an environment that promoted their long-term well-being?

In other words, what if cultivating a successful inner life was front and center on the leadership agenda?

That was the question Todd Pierce asked himself in 2006 after years of experimenting with the full menu of trainings, meetings, and competency models in his capacity as CIO of biotechnology giant Genentech. He had just scoured the development reports of some 700 individuals in the IT department and found that "not one of them had an ounce of inspiration. I remember sitting there and saying, 'There's got to be a another way.'"

At the time, Pierce was benefiting personally from work with a personal coach and had recently woken up to the power of the practice of mindfulness. He called in a kindred soul, Pamela Weiss, a long-time executive coach and meditation teacher, to help design an experiment that would cast out the traditional approach to leadership development to focus instead on helping people grow.

"If you want to transform an organization it's not about changing systems and processes so much as it's about changing the hearts and minds of people," says Weiss. "Mindfulness is one of the all-time most brilliant technologies for helping to alleviate human suffering and for bringing out our extraordinary potential as human beings."

Pierce and Weiss distilled a set of principles that form the basis of what became the "Personal Excellence Program" (PEP), now heading into its sixth year inside Genentech (Pierce left the company this fall after 11 years to join salesforce.com). Together, these pillars offer up a short course in unleashing human capability, resilience, compassion, and well-being (and they're unpacked in even more detail in Weiss and Pierce's entry).

1. Developing people is a process — not an event. "Development is all too often considered a one-time event," says Weiss. She and Pierce designed PEP as a ten-month-long journey that unfolds in three phases, with big group meetings, regular small group sessions, individual coaching, peer coaching, and structured solo practice.

2. People don't grow from the neck up. Too much training focuses on the the mind — it's about transferring content. "We talk about the head, the heart, and the body," says Weiss. In fact, they do more than talk about it — they enact it every day at the start of every meeting. The "3-center check in" is the gateway drug to mindfulness. As Weiss describes it: "You close your eyes for a moment and you notice, 'What am I thinking — what's happening in my head center,' then you notice, 'What am I feeling — what's happening in my heart center.' then, 'What am I feeling — what's happening in my body.' It's a way in which people start paying attention and practicing mindfulness without ever practicing meditation."

3. Put mindfulness at the center (but don't call it that!). Weiss and her team were careful to keep the language of specific belief systems and religions out of PEP. The program revolves around three phases: reflection on and selection of a specific quality or capacity you want to work on (patience, decisiveness, courage); three months of cultivating the capacity for self-observation; and the hard work of turning insight into deliberate, dedicated, daily practice.

4. It's hard to grow alone. "People grow best in community," says Weiss. "People don't grow as well just reading a book, getting an online training, or just taking in information. There's an exponential impact in having people grow and learn together." That's why the PEP "pod" (small 6-8 person group) is the main vehicle throughout the year.

5. Everybody deserves to grow. Pierce felt strongly that PEP should be available to people across the board — not just the usual "stars" — and that it should be voluntary. "The program is by application and not declaration," he says.

As PEP heads into its sixth year at Genentech, some 800 people have participated in the program. (Weiss added a graduate curriculum and a student training program to create "PEPtators" as few people want the journey to end.) The impact has been nothing short of transformative for individuals and organization alike. When Pierce took over the IT department in 2002, its employee satisfaction scores were at rock bottom; four years into the program, the department ranked second in the company and is now consistently ranked among the best places to work in IT In the world (even in the wake of Genentech's 2009 merger with Roche Group — always a turbulent and dispiriting experience).

Pierce attributes that to "the emotional intelligence of people and the capacity to change" developed in PEP. But don't take his word for it. The data-obsessed Pierce commissioned a third path impact report on PEP. It came in glowing: 10-20% increase in employee satisfaction, 50% increase in employee collaboration, conflict management, and communication; 12% increase in customer satisfaction; and nearly three times the normal business impact.

"Through PEP we have created a smarter, more agile, and more responsive organization," says Pierce. "The reduction of suffering, the capacity to deal with difficulties, the level of engagement — these things are very powerful and you can't call a meeting to get them or give people stock options and have them. These are skills and qualities you have to cultivate and practice."

So how's this for a new year's resolution for hard-charging leaders: turn every ringing, pinging, tweeting, and blinking thing off — especially your mind — and just breathe.

Polly LaBarre is the Editorial Director of the Management Innovation eXchange.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2011/12/developing_mindful_leaders.html

Three Issues That Loom Large for CFO's in 2012 - Business Finance Magazine

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Wed, 04 Jan 2012 05:42:10 PST

Published on Business Finance (http://businessfinancemag.com)

A Look Ahead to the Coming Year

by Joanne Sammer

01/03/2012 - 12:22

Excerpts:

For CFOs, the coming year is full of critical HR-related issues that will demand their attention... three key issues loom particularly large for many companies.

1. Health care reform's witching hour.. With less than 24 months before the law's key provisions take hold—mandated individual coverage, the advent of the state health insurance exchanges, and, most importantly, the all-important “play-or-pay” decision of whether to continue offering employees health insurance (play) or accept the financial penalties under the law (pay)

2. Productivity and incentives. Coming out of a difficult economic environment, companies are still getting their bearings when it comes to employee pay and maximizing productivity. With less money to go around, companies have faced the difficult challenge of allocating enough money to keep their stars happy without alienating the rest of the workforce.
3. Finding and keeping talent. Companies are worried about keeping their current roster of stars and promising employees with critical skills happy, while also burnishing their reputation as a good place to work for new talent.

Access Article: http://businessfinancemag.com/article/look-ahead-coming-year-0103

Commitment to Happiness - John S. Tamerin, M.D.

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 07:01:39 PST

Happiness Club

January 1, 2012

John S. Tamerin, M.D.
Clinical Associate Professor of Psychiatry
Weill Cornell School of Medicine
Board of Scholars, Vail Leadership Institute

When we think deeply about the concept of commitment, we are soon aware that commitment requires perseverance, tenacity and conviction. When we then make a commitment, we discover that commitment is not easy, that setbacks are inevitable, and that accountability is essential. Commitment is heavy. Commitment is not discovered in our words-it is observed in our actions.

Having said that, what does it mean to make a commitment to happiness? Isn't that ridiculous? It seems rather like a devoted skier saying "I will make a commitment to ski fresh powder."

But stop for a moment....

The commitment to happiness is not an issue when we are faced with the "fresh powder" in our lives. The challenge for all of us is honoring the commitment to remain happy when we have broken a leg or the lifts are closed. The commitment to happiness starts to have meaning when things do not go well for us.

When we are faced with bad news, unpleasant surprises, ill-health, job loss, broken relationships or simply a broken promise, can we still maintain that commitment to happiness? How about when we are fired, receive an unexpected audit from the IRS or your spouse leaves you for someone else? Are you getting the point? Now this gets challenging. Now your "commitment" to happiness is being tested.

How do you commit to happiness under these circumstances? How do you stay centered, calm and focused - all of which are central ingredients of happiness? How do you avoid worrying, obsessing, and getting angry, all of which can ultimately lead to clinical depression? As a psychiatrist I have a few ideas. I hope that you or perhaps someone you love will find what I have to say helpful for the Holidays and in the New Year.

Happiness is not something that you can suddenly put on like a smiley face when bad things happen. It is something which must become part of you so that when challenges in your life occur, you are prepared. It all starts with making a commitment.

I hope that I am not being disrespectful to the Old Testament when I organize my suggestions as the "Ten Commitments."

1. Commit to "welcoming" criticism.

Instinctively, few of us welcome criticism. Most of us hate it and prefer to be complimented and praised. Yet the ancient sages describe this as one of the most admirable traits of character because if we have the courage to welcome criticism, it offers us an opportunity for unlimited growth throughout our lives.

Criticism does not always mean the other person doesn't care. Sometimes it demonstrates how much they do care and how much they want us to succeed. The same can be said of God. When we see difficult situations not as unfair or unfortunate, but as learning opportunities which our loving "father" has placed before us for our benefit, it will help us to accept and face these situations rather than avoid them.

2. Commit to focusing on the solution, not on the problem.

Unhappy people focus on their problems. Happy people focus on finding solutions. If you are already focusing on finding a solution when you have a problem, you are moving in the right direction. When you focus on problem solving, you are less likely to worry, obsess, blame yourself, blame others or get caught in the emotionality or "drama" of the situation. Instead of being agitated or irritated, you will be more inclined to stay calm and cool, strategic and creative.

Stay rational instead of worrying. Solutions to your problems will come as you calmly use your mind. The best weapon to protect your happiness and to fight against fear is calm, rational, strategic thinking.

3. Commit to recognizing the value of "no."

When people are asked what is the most important word in human relationships, they generally say "love." Most psychologists would disagree. The most important word is "no." "No" is the word that helps us to define our identity and delineate relationships. We tend to equate happiness with "yes". The truth is there can be little or no happiness without the word "no." "No" is the basis of responsibility, restraint and reliability. Without the word "no", we are unpredictable and so are all of our relationships. In order to be happy, we must be able to say "no" first to ourselves and then to others.

4. Commit to honoring your whimsy and your sense of humor.

Being happy is serious, not frivolous. Happiness is the greatest gift that you can give yourself. However, all work and no play does not lead to happiness. The ability to laugh at oneself in difficult or challenging situations provides unique perspective and objectivity. True happiness also involves a willingness to play and to forget your fears of being judged. Happiness depends on your inner sense of joy, which has a lot to do with your whimsy and your humor. Your happiness cannot depend on the opinions of others. If you do that, you are giving someone else control of your greatest possession-happiness. Would you give a stranger unlimited access to your credit card?

5. Commit to what you believe in.

To discover what you believe in, you first need to determine what your core values are. You need to recognize those values and ideals that have the greatest meaning for you. Then you need to commit to taking a stand and being willing to make sacrifices for the values and ideals you believe in. Commitment is living your convictions.

If you know what you believe in, you are on solid ground. When you are on solid ground you are stable. If you don't know what you believe in, you are unstable and can expect to experience a lot of anxiety. Anxiety is the opposite of happiness. It is almost impossible to be anxious and happy at the same time. Knowing what you believe in and having the courage to act on your beliefs will give your life meaning, purpose and solidity.

6. Commit to believing that you DESERVE to be happy.

Many people do not believe that they "deserve" to be happy. They feel that making a commitment to be happy is selfish and shallow, hardly something to be the central focus of a meaningful life. I disagree.

In fact, I believe that everything in life is better when we are happy. We think more clearly, we act with greater balance. We are slower to anger, quicker to forgive and we care more for ourselves and for others. In effect, when we are happy we are able to see not only with our eyes but with our brains and with our hearts.

The issue of guilt is central to our ability to commit to our inalienable right to the pursuit of happiness. Certainly, our happiness should not be at the expense of others. On the other hand, unhappy people often put the needs and even the demands of others above their own happiness. This is generally a poor choice which results in much unnecessary unhappiness and suffering. Pain may be inevitable but suffering, believe it or not, is our choice

7. Commit to not wasting time.

Time is our most precious commodity. Sadly, unhappy people waste or squander a great deal of time. Happy people are well organized, plan ahead and are usually well prepared, even for emergencies. They are punctual. Conversely, unhappy people may say that they value time, but they act as if they don't.
They are often late in paying bills and end up facing interest and penalties. They frequently wonder where time went. They tend to spend more time in bed but sleep less well than happy people. Unhappy people often carry around a lot of worry and guilt on a regular basis.

This negatively impacts not only their days, but also their nights. It has been said that the best pillow is a clear conscience. A clear conscience is an indication that we are comfortable in our own skin. Unhappy people rarely feel this way about themselves. Perhaps this is why the problem is circular. People who feel good about themselves tend to value their time and consider it precious. This adds to their happiness. Conversely, people who are unhappy tend to not value themselves or their time and as a result compound their unhappiness by wasting time and then feeling badly about it.

8. Commit to dialogue not debate.

Happy people tend to have dialogues rather than debates when they talk with others in their lives, whether at home or at work. They commit to listening more and talking less. Often, people need to feel heard before they are willing to listen to you. It has been said that the greatest gift we can give another person is our rapt attention.

Dialogue is not trying to "fix" the other person. That is not your responsibility and will be perceived as annoying, insulting or intrusive. This invariably breeds resentment, not happiness.

When happy people speak, they try to be thoughtful and not merely reactive. They ask themselves what they wish to accomplish before they open their mouths.

9. Commit to being in control of your thoughts, feelings and behavior.

Happy people do not spend a great deal of time feeling anxious, irritable or bitter. They do not blame themselves and/or others when bad things happen. They do not feel sorry for themselves and they do not spend a lot of time ruminating over things which they cannot control. Happy people focus instead on what they can control, which is their attitude about what happens in their lives.

Most unhappy people believe that preventing these painful thoughts and feelings from entering their heads is impossible. They are wrong. Happy people know that they have considerable control in this area. They know that misery is passive whereas happiness is active. Happiness requires energy, flexibility, imagination and creativity. Like any skill, happiness must be learned and practiced. Happy people know that happiness is the greatest gift anyone could give themselves.

10. Commit to Integrity.

Happy people know that a central aspect of their happiness is being honest with themselves and with others. Unhappy people often do not make this firm commitment to integrity. They often do not tell the truth to themselves or to others. As a result, they frequently live in shame, not wanting others to know who they really are.

Integrity means not rationalizing, not lying, not walking away. Integrity means keeping your oath. An oath is sacred. People who live this way tend to be happy. People who do not live this way tend to be unhappy and/or make others in their lives unhappy. The New Testament has said "you shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free." Honesty is where the physical and the metaphysical meet. This is a core ingredient of happiness.

Access Source And Its Great Content: http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=svx5mvcab&v=001QYDB14zrJ4_t35BPkuUajzxevteVIdG4pRmWuP8tFUguMMuAUurDA4zCZCZs6RL0fTukCsmvWQ8p6c3gST51LCWQxGb9t_1JZbOOyBhFBOQK70o517Izbw%3D%3D

The Seven Habits of Spectacularly Unsuccessful Executives - Forbes

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 06:13:24 PST

Forbes
Investing
1/02/2012 @ 10:47AM

Eric Jackson, Contributor

Excerpts:

Habit #1: They see themselves and their companies as dominating their environment. Warning Sign for #1: A lack of respect
Habit #2: They identify so completely with the company that there is no clear boundary between their personal interests and their corporation’s interests. Warning Sign for #2: A question of character
Habit #3: They think they have all the answers. Warning Sign for #3: A leader without followers
Habit #4: They ruthlessly eliminate anyone who isn’t completely behind them. Warning Sign for #4: Executive departures
Habit #5: They are consummate spokespersons, obsessed with the company image. Warning Sign of #5: Blatant attention-seeking
Habit #6: They underestimate obstacles. Warning Sign of #6: Excessive hype
Habit #7: They stubbornly rely on what worked for them in the past. Warning Sign of #7: Constantly referring to what worked in the past

Eric Jackson
Location: Naples, FL
About Me: Eric Jackson is Founder and Managing Member of Ironfire Capital LLC. He completed his Ph.D. in the Management Department at the Columbia University Graduate School of Business in New York, with a specialization in Strategic Management. You can follow Jackson on Twitter at @ericjackson or on Sina Weibo at weibo.com/ericjackson Email: dr.eric.jackson@gmail.com

Access Article: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ericjackson/2012/01/02/the-seven-habits-of-spectacularly-unsuccessful-executives/

Some employers offer quirky perks to workers – USATODAY.com

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Tue, 03 Jan 2012 05:52:50 PST

By Laura Petrecca, USA TODAY
12/31/2011

Excerpts

Pet insurance
At-your-desk meditation services
Jewelry discounts
Funeral planning
Reduced-price computers
Free tickets to theme parks
Cellphone plan discounts
At-work massages
Adoption assistance
Auto insurance discounts
Free concierge service for workers to acquire theater tickets, drop off laundry and get restaurant reservations

Access Article: http://www.usatoday.com/money/workplace/story/2011-12-29/unique-workplace-benefits/52276938/1

How Long Can You Keep a New Year’s Resolution?How Long Can You Keep a New Year’s Resolution? - Envisia Learning

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 06:21:26 PST

.January 1, 2012
by Ken Nowack

“People don’t resist change, they resist being changed.”

Peter Scholtes

Did you make a New Year’s resolution?

Nearly four out of 10 adults will make one or more resolutions for the new year, according to a study done by the University of Scranton1.

After the first week of carrying out the goal, about 75 percent of people maintain their goal.

After week two, nearly 70 percent of people will maintain their goal.

After one month, about 64 percent will stick with their resolution.

After six months, about 46 percent of people are still on track with their goal.

Rehab is for Quitters

Old habits are indeed very tough to break and relapse seems greatest when we are under stress. Starting new behaviors is indeed more challenging than sustaining them over time. Quitting is indeed something that some of us are pretty consistent in doing well.

According to new research, quitting may actually be better for your health. Psychologist’s Gregory Miller and Carsten Wroshch have found that people who are able to feel comfortable quitting when faced with unattainable goals may actually have better mental and physical health than those who persevere and push themselves to succeed2.

This study was based on their previous research which found that those persistent individuals experienced higher levels of an inflammatory protein called C-reactive protein (an indicator of stress) as well as increased cortisol. They also reported lower psychological well-being. On the surface, this might not seem like a big deal but inflammation appears to be an independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease and other stress related conditions.

Contrary to what we might have been taught, it appears that it might be in our best interests to “cut our losses” in the face of unattainable goals and life challenges and actually disengage from the goal to ensure optimum well-being and potentially long-term health. This appears to be true whether we are in unsatisfying long-term relationships, working for leaders who are toxic or targeting a goal that is beyond our skill and ability “set points.”

So, any good things for those who persist? In other research Carsten and colleagues found that in the face of life challenge and disengaging from unattainable goals, those who redefined and set new goals were more likely to be able to buffer the negative emotions associated with failure. Maybe “rebound” relationships and new entrepreneurial goals might actually serve to help us find closure to the past and re-engage us for future journeys3.

Want Help to Facilitate Successful Behavior Change in Clients?

Our new book Clueless: Coaching People Who Just Dont’ Get it is based on a new three stage individual behavior change model. These stages include:

1.Enlighten

2.Encourage

3.Enable

We have developed over 80 free coaching exercises to help your clients translate awareness from coaching and feedback into deliberate practice. Over time, these new behaviors become automatic requiring less cognitive load (concentration) and rehearsal and greater effectiveness.

Have a look at our book and free exercises to see what might be useful for some of your challenging (and easy) coaching assignments….Be well…..

1.Norcross, J., Mrykalo, S., & Blagys, M. (2002). Auld Lang Syne: Success predictors, change processes, and self-reported outcomes of New Year’s resolvers and nonresolvers. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58, 397-405 [↩]

2.Miller, G. & Wrosch, C. (2007). You’ve Gotta Know When to Fold ‘Em: Goal Disengagement and Systemic Inflammation in Adolescence. Psychological Science, 18 [↩]

3.Wrosch, C., Miller, G. E., Scheier, M. F., & Brun de Pontet, S. (2007). Giving up on unattainable goals: Benefits for health? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 251-265 [↩]

Michigan's Lake Superior State University 2012 List of Banished Words

noreply@blogger.com (Jim Jacobs) — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 06:04:31 PST

AMAZING

BABY BUMP

SHARED SACRIFICE

OCCUPY

BLOWBACK

MAN CAVE

THE NEW NORMAL

PET PARENT

WIN THE FUTURE

TRICKERATION

GINORMOUS

THANK YOU IN ADVANCE

Access Article: http://www.lssu.edu/banished/current.php