Fall 2013 - Simmons College

Transcription

ManageMent
Lessons in principled leadership from the Simmons School of Management
Winter 2014
Magazine
Reflecting on the
women-only MBA
Driving employee
engagement
Management Magazine l Winter 2014
Managing the double
bind of visibility
Fostering a genderinclusive leadership team
1
Leadership development
programs that have a lasting
impact on women leaders
and their organizations.
Join us September 15–19, 2014 for
Strategic Leadership for Women
simmons.edu/SOM/ExecEd
Dean’s Note
Management Magazine
VOLUME 2 \ NUMBER 2 \ WINTER 2013–14
Simmons School of Management
COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
DIRECTOR & EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Richard L. Cravatts
FACULTY DESIGN DIRECTOR
Jane N. Hayward
EDITORIAL STAFF
Sondos Alireza
Megan Chamberlin
Allyson Lewis
Nicole Mace
Administration
DEAN
Cathy E. Minehan
ASSOCIATE DEANS
Patricia Deyton
Mary Dutkiewicz
John M. Lowe, III
MANAGEMENT magazine is published semiannually by students in the Communications
Management Program in the School of
Management at Simmons College. No portion
of this publication may be reproduced in
any form without prior permission from the
publisher. All rights reserved.
[email protected]
300 The Fenway
Boston, MA 02115
(617) 521-3806
Cathy E. Minehan
Dean, School of Management
Simmons College
Cover illustration: balein/Shutterstock.com
29th and 30th Gold Circle Awards winner
Columbia Scholastic Press Association
T
he School of Management’s Management
Magazine typically has focused on the many
aspects of the new SOM—its new programs
and students. This edition takes us back to our
roots over 40 years ago—educating women to be
business leaders.
This is an old issue. When I started working in
1968 at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston I believed the barriers to women’s progress in general,
and my own in particular, had been addressed.
We had good educations, we could control our reproductive futures, and the sky was the limit. For
some of us, yes; for too many others the road was
difficult, to say the least.
This remains a current issue—but with a major difference. Now the “guys”
get it. The advancement of women’s careers has become a business issue. Business leaders confess frustration; they hire well qualified women (women make
up the majority of most undergraduate and graduate programs), they spend
money training them, but they do not progress in the numbers expected. Some
of this lies in the choices that women make, and in how they approach the business world—as Sheryl Sandberg would say, they do not “Lean In”; some of the
problem lies in the environment, which is often lacking in child care options,
affordable housing and good transportation; but some of it also is subtle, often
unintended bias in the workplace. Educating women to cope with this aspect
of the business environment and providing them with the resources to succeed
is one area in which the School of Management distinguishes itself, and one
reason why it was founded four decades ago.
One of the founding Deans of the SOM, Anne Jardim, and I have written
about the fact that while things have changed dramatically over 40 years, in
this area they have stayed the same, and you will see this opinion piece in this
edition of the magazine. In addition, the new Deloitte Ellen Gabriel chair of
Women’s Leadership, Dr. Susan Vinnicombe, has provided her thoughts on
the issues faced in getting more women promoted to leadership positions. And
also mentioned is the work of the Boston Women’s Workforce Council, which I
chair, in developing a new Boston Compact. Fifty Boston area businesses, large
and small, have signed the Compact and are committed to making Boston the
best place in the U.S. for working women by closing the wage gap.
So for us at the SOM this is an exciting time of challenge, and a time in which
the importance of what we uniquely offer to women both in undergraduate and
graduate business education, and in strategic leadership training is ever more
valued. There is no better way to start a new year.
All the best for a terrific 2014,
1
Contents
Features
12
Getting engaged
18
A classroom of
her own
Adopting a leadership style that drives
employee engagement
by Bonita Betters-Reed & Alexandra Fuller
Reflecting on the women-only MBA
18
by Anne Jardim & Cathy Minehan
20
Now you see me,
now you don’t
Managing the double bind of visibility for
minorities in the workplace
by Stacy Blake-Beard & Laura Morgan Roberts
2
24
20
Team players
Best practices for holding team members
accountable
by Mary Shapiro
27
7
9
5
7
24
Departments
On Board
Board seats held by women
Off the Cuff
A balanced approach for fostering a genderinclusive leadership team
by Susan Vinnicombe
Bookshelf
Global Girlfriends: How one mom made it her
business to help women in poverty worldwide
12
29
32
10
27
Managing People
A prescription for wage parity
Branding
How personal branding can drive
performance and profit
by Susan Hodgkinson
Gender diversity of nonprofit boards and
chief executive positions
Breaking the Glass
Ceiling
9
How one manager navigated her career
by Naomi Wilsey
Briefcase
3
Contributors
Bonnie Betters-Reed, professor emeritus,
became a member of the Simmons faculty
in 1986 and taught courses in principled
leadership, organizational behavior, change,
negotiations and diversity. Her early research focused on diversity among women
managers and entrepreneurs challenging
the racial/ethnic and socially constructed
hierarchy of the glass ceiling. She is a former
president and a current fellow of the Eastern
Academy of Management, and continues to
provide leadership in several professional
organizations.
Stacy Blake-Beard has been teaching
organizational behavior at the Simmons
College School of Management as a tenured
associate professor of management since
2002. Before she joined Simmons, she was
a professor at Harvard University’s Graduate
School of Education, where she lectured on
organizational behavior, cultural diversity in
organizations, and mentoring relationships
at work.
Halani C. Foulsham has dedicated her
career to understanding the relationship
between cultural belief models and best
business practices. She has nine years of experience as a Boston-based entrepreneur in
the floral retail business. She has worked in
human resources and organizational development in Boston- and New York City-based
organizations, as well as at an international
level with educational projects based in
Japan and the United Kingdom. Foulsham
graduated from the Simmons SOM program
in December, 2013.
4
For more than 25 years, Mary Shapiro, professor of practice, has taught organizational
behavior to undergraduates, MBA students,
and executives at the Simmons School of
Management. She specializes in three areas:
team building and leadership, influential
communication across diverse stakeholders,
and strategic career management. Shapiro
has consulted with Fortune 500 companies,
private institutions, and non-profits to create
strategic plans, launch teams, and intervene
in teams in crises.
Naomi Y. Wilsey is the senior director of
account-based marketing with Optum, an
information and technology-enabled health
services business. Previously, she served as
a senior marketing manager with IBM. She
holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Colorado and a master’s degree from
Simmons College.
On Board
The global picture
Europe 15.3%
board seats held by women
Across the globe, the percentage of women on corporate
boards varies widely. While Europe has the largest average percentage at 15.3%, the U.S. on its own is higher at
16.6%, and ranks ninth among all countries. n
Norway
40.9%
Ireland
8.7%
Sweden
27.0%
Spain
9.5%
Finland
26.8%
Greece
7.0%
Netherlands
17.0%
Switzerland
10.0%
Denmark
17.2%
Belgium
9.2%
France
18.3%
Austria
11.3%
U.K.
17.3%
Italy
8.2%
Germany
14.1%
Portugal
3.7%
Poland
13.6%
Asia-Pacific 6.5%
7.5%
Hong Kong
9.4%
Thailand
9.7%
China
8.1%
Australia
12.3%
Singapore
7.3%
Malaysia
7.8%
Taiwan
4.4%
Russia
4.8%
U.S.
16.6%
India
4.7%
Canada
10.3%
Indonesia
6.0%
Mexico
5.8%
South Korea
1.9%
Brazil
7.7%
Japan
1.1%
Chile
2.8%
Source: Catalyst 2013; data contributed by Gary Gaumer
Middle East 5.7%
South Africa
17.1%
Bahrain
1.7%
Israel
15.0%
UAE
1.2%
Turkey
12.7%
Qatar
0.3%
Saudi Arabia
0.1 %
Kuwait
1.7%
Oman
1.8%
Americas 8.6%
New Zealand
5
6
Off the Cuff
The push and pull of leaning-in
A balanced approach for fostering a gender-inclusive
leadership team
by Susan Vinnicombe
S
heryl Sandberg has an enviable pedigree.
She is chief operating officer at Facebook and is
ranked on Fortune’s list of the “50 Most Powerful
Women in Business.” She has strong views on why so
few women make it to the top—but is she right?
In 2010 Sandberg gave an impassioned TED Talk in
which she encouraged women “to sit at the table,” to
be ambitious, and to step up to leadership. Sandberg’s
now infamous book, Lean In: Women, Work and the
Will to Lead, is the culmination of her personal career
reflections and a call to action to professional women.
involves being visible, ensuring you have a good reputation with those who make the promotion decisions
and being hungry for leadership (threatening to leave
seems to be a popular strategy here). It is not surprising that many of our leaders are egotistical, manipulative, and arrogant and find it difficult to be collegial
and inclusive. I am purposely painting the dark side
of leadership here of course; these same leaders can be
charismatic, inspiring, enthusiastic, and decisive. The
point I am making is that everyone should not have to
push their way to the top and that strategy promotes
Of course, women must be prepared to put themselves forward
for leadership positions but this is only a small part of a
much bigger, more complicated situation.
Feng Yu/Shutterstock.com
only certain facets of leadership.
I teach women impression management skills—how
to self-promote, to take risks, and to network strategically—but many tell me that they feel uncomfortable
engaging in such behavior. I believe the tension stems
from many women’s belief that good leaders identify
highly talented employees, provide constructive feedback to them, develop them, and “pull them” through
to the top. This is a core task of good leadership. It
guarantees the future well-being of the organization.
Such a task should not be heavily dependent on in-
I have just returned from the U.S. where I witnessed
that many organizations, including Visa, have already
established “Lean In Circles.” But is this the solution?
As a scholar in the field of women’s leadership for over
thirty years, I think not. Of course, women must be
prepared to put themselves forward for leadership positions, but this is only a small part of a much bigger,
more complicated situation that explains the continued lack of women in leadership.
In my experience of working with organizations, the
tried and tested way to get to the top is “to push.” This
7
Susan Vinnicombe
Susan Vinnicombe, the Deloitte Ellen Gabriel Endowed Chair in Women’s Leadership at Simmons College, and Professor of Women and Leadership at the School of Management, Cranfield University, U.K., focuses her research interests in gender diversity on corporate boards,
women’s leadership styles, and the issues involved in women developing their managerial
careers. She is also Director of the International Centre for Women Leaders at Cranfield, an organization unique in Europe with its focus on women leaders. Its annual Female FTSE Report
is regarded as the premier research resource on women directors in the U.K.. Vinnicombe has
consulted for organizations in over 20 countries including the UAE, the Philippines, Trinidad,
Nigeria and Malaysia on how best to attract, retain, and develop women executives. She
has advised governments in the U.K., New Zealand, Australia, Finland, and Spain on how to
increase the number of women on their corporate boards. Vinnicombe has been elected as
Fellow of the British Academy of Management and has been honored by The International
Alliance of Women (TIAW) with the TIAW World of Difference 100 Award 2013, recognizing
those who have made a significant contribution to the economic empowerment of women.
8
dividuals’ own efforts at self-promotion. If organizations applied “pull” as well as “push” talent management strategies then maybe we would see many more
women (and different men) getting to the top.
A delegate who attended a recent customized women in leadership program that I ran, wrote to me afterwards to say that before the program she had felt she
was “circling the drain” at work. After the course, she
discovered that she was not only valued by her organization but was seen as a high-potential individual they
wanted to promote to partner. She was advised how
she could take responsibility for her next steps and
having been given constructive feedback, went back to
work with a structured plan. Her view of herself was
transformed. Before we all dash to create “Lean In Circles” can we begin by having honest, developmental
conversations with our female team members?
According to our experience at Cranfield, too many
female professionals are either given no feedback or
fobbed off with such advice as “Don’t be impatient,”
“You are doing fine,” or worse still “You need to have
more gravitas.”
Organizations need to take a hard look at the lack
of women in their leadership roles. If women are disproportionately under-rated, why is this? How many
women appear in the succession plans for the top
jobs? At each level what proportion of women are internally promoted compared to men? This year our research uncovered that 62% of male directors on FTSE
100 executive committees were internally promoted
compared to 48% of the female directors—a significant difference and perhaps symptomatic of the ways
women are continually disadvantaged at work.
A female colleague of mine at the Harvard Business School told me how she was invited by a law firm
to design and run an in-house women in leadership
program. Her team of Harvard researchers first wisely
carried out interviews and collected great amounts of
data from the law firm’s human resources department
to understand their work context. In the end, she and
her team of researchers concluded that the challenges
facing women lawyers at the firm emanated from how
the law firm organized, measured, and rewarded the
way work was carried out. These findings were given
to the senior partners who rejected them. It was much
easier for them to label the issue “a woman’s problem.”
The biggest obstacle to women’s advancement into
leadership is not women’s failure to lean in, but top
management’s reluctance to accept their own critical
role in fostering a gender-inclusive leadership team. n
Reprinted with permission from Management Focus Magazine
– Cranfield School of Management, 2013.
Bookshelf
Global Girlfriends
How one mom made it her
business to help women in
poverty worldwide
By Stacey Edgar
F
rom a woman in the
Congo who carried her
disabled daughter on
her back and into a secluded
trench each day to protect
her from armed men, to a
woman in India who escaped
the dark world of sex trafficking and went on to fair trade
employment, Stacey Edgar recounts the remarkable stories
of women with unbreakable
spirit living in poverty around
the world.
Global Girlfriends is an inspirational story of how
Edgar created a fair trade fashion apparel and accessories business to facilitate financial security for women
across continents. Edgar’s mission originated when
her mother-in-law, who was actively involved with the
United Nations World Food Program, returned from
her trips with beautiful hand-crafted goods made by
women in developing countries. These souvenirs elicited the thought of mothers, such as herself, struggling
to provide for their families. She felt compelled to take
action, and yearned for a deeper connection with the
women who created the crafts. Armed with good intentions and a $2,000 tax return, Edgar traveled to
Africa to begin her journey to help these talented artisans fight poverty. In 2003, she bought her first order of handcrafted
goods from a small group of women artisans in Ethiopia. Edgar was thrilled when her entire order was sold,
and this prompted her to purchase several more to
sell at living room parties. Guests were eager to band
together to help women they had never met. Edgar
reflects, “This is what I love about women. There is
an unspoken sisterhood that is unstoppable.” While
the products gained popularity at house gatherings,
Edgar recognized the importance of teaching the artisans current market trends and standards in order
to ensure the fair trade products could succeed on a
larger scale in the United States. Edgar implemented
a hands-on approach, visiting shops and inspecting
goods herself for quality control.
During her travels it was difficult for her to witness the conditions in which these women were raising families. Edgar learned as much from the women
as the women learned from her through their stories
about hardship and triumph. It was important to her
to share her lessons with other women upon her return to the U.S., and she established transparent communication between cultures as a primary principle of
her business model.
During her time at home she grew her business
from trade shows, to catalogue and online sales. The
Global Girlfriends company partnered with several
organizations that contributed to its growth, including
Whole Foods, where its products are presently sold. In
addition to assisting women with their financial security in the present, Edgar is determined to set them up
for success in the future. Global Girlfriends allocates a
portion of its profits to a $100 micro-grant program so
young women who want to start their own business can
have access to the means to do so without becoming
indebted. Edgar also partners with nonprofit organizations to provide African women with educational
opportunities.
As the organization grows, Edgar manages to remain connected with many of the women with whom
she has come into contact. She frequently exchanges
e-mails with women she has assisted and befriended,
attends lunch meetings with leaders from the nonprofit organizations with whom she has partnered,
and personally visits artisan groups from which she
has purchased goods. Global Girlfriends is an excellent
example of how one woman can make a global impact
by capitalizing on one of the greatest assets we have as
women: our network. — Nicole Mace
9
Managing People
Closing the gap
A prescription for wage parity
Excerpted from
“BOSTON: Closing
the Wage Gap,” a
report produced by
The Women’s Workforce Council that
provides recommendations by which
employers, across all
sectors, can close the
wage gap in their
workforce.
The report, overseen
by Cathy Minehan,
Dean of the Simmons School of Management, examines
the existing gender
wage gap in the City
of Boston and offers
thirty-three interventions employers
can implement to
reduce it.
10
N
ationwide, women working full time earn 77
cents for every dollar earned by a man. Some
of this gap can be explained by differences in
career and life choices made by working men and
women. Women tend to concentrate in lower wage
jobs. They are also less likely than men to major in
or pursue more lucrative careers, like those offered
by science, technology, engineering or mathematics
(STEM) fields. And women are more likely to take
time off when they have children or work part-time,
which may contribute to fewer years of work experience. However, these “human capital” factors tend to
account for only a portion of the gap in pay.
If working women had exactly the same characteristics and experiences as working men, they would still
be earning 91 cents for every dollar earned by a man.
A 2007 study of wages nationwide found that some
of the wage gap could be explained by differences in
human capital, including occupation, industry, work
experience, union status, and educational attainment.
But even after accounting for these factors, 41% of the
wage gap remained. Why?
Women continue to encounter implicit bias and discrimination in the workplace. Women are less likely
than comparable male candidates to be granted interviews, particularly in fields where they are underrepresented, and women who violate gender norms—
whether by pursuing male dominated professions or
negotiating for a salary—may experience bias from
hiring managers. Yet male-dominated fields continue
to be some of the most financially rewarding.
In areas where they continue to be underrepresented, such as STEM, women and girls are perceived as
having less aptitude. This false perception creates “stereotype threat.” Females avoid certain fields—whether
in high school, college or as a career—because they
fear failing and reinforcing a negative stereotype.
Women continue to serve as primary caregivers at
home, but face a “motherhood penalty” in the workplace. Mothers are less likely to be hired, considered
less competent and paid less than non-mothers. Most
mothers who leave the workforce to care for children
wish their employer had offered more flexible options
to help them manage family and work.
Women continue to be underrepresented in senior
executive and tenured positions. The shortage of women at senior levels—whether in academia, nonprofits
or private employment—contributes to the aggregate
wage gap, but may also adversely impact the pipeline
of female talent. The absence of role models may serve
as a signal that certain industries are unreceptive to
women, while contributing to the belief that women
have fewer leadership qualities. The number of senior
women is also positively correlated with the retention
of junior women. Too few women leaders today beget
too few leaders tomorrow. n
interventions for employers,
higher education, and investors
The following interventions have been shown to help close critical gaps in human capital or mitigate bias toward women.
While no one intervention is a panacea, the broad array of remedies provides a flexible tool-kit for employers to leverage,
based on suitability and relevance to their own work environment.
Potential solutions
College Major
1. Support initiatives that expose young girls to the STEM fields, as well as
finance and law
2. Expose young women to female role models in fields where they are
underrepresented
3. Expand STEM introductory college courses
4. Recruit female faculty into tenure track positions in fields where they are
underrepresented
5. Train faculty to be aware of unconscious gender bias and stereotype threat
Career Path
6. Evaluate female student perceptions of your industry
7. Create recruiting initiatives for women in underrepresented fields
8. Support training programs for women in the trades
Entrepreneurship
9. Seek gender diversity among investment partners
10. Showcase successful women entrepreneurs
11. Design incubators and co-working spaces to support entrepreneurs
with families
Hiring
12. Create an initial applicant screening that is gender-blind
13. Seek diversity in the applicant pool and evaluate candidates as a pool
14. Enlist diverse evaluators in hiring
15. Help evaluators and hiring managers overcome bias
16. Evaluate starting salaries for new hires
Negotiations
17. Sponsor negotiations training for high school students, college women
and female professionals
18. Conduct regular compensation evaluations for employees of all levels
Wage
Transparencies
19. Publish salary ranges by level in accessible formats
20. Standardize compensation, particularly discretionary compensation
such as bonuses
Performance
Evaluation
21. Conduct comparative professional reviews and promotions
22. Publish and gain commitment for employee performance criteria
Workplace
Flexibility
23. Evaluate causes of attrition among women, including mothers and
non-mothers
24. Offer on-site or subsidized child care
25. Offer child care referral or back-up child care services
26. Offer paid family leave
27. Create and generate awareness of programs that confer employee
schedule control, including flex programs
28. Train managers to manage a flexible workforce
29. Reorient workplace culture to emphasize results
Senior
Representation
30. Provide structural supports to move women up the talent pipeline
31. Actively recruit women to executive level and board positions
32. Include women on senior search committees
33. Achieve equitable gender representation on compensation committees
Attracting, retaining & promoting
Feeding the pipeline
Opportunities
11
Getting engaged
Adopting a leadership style that drives employee engagement
by Bonita Betters-Reed and Alexandra Fuller
E
mployee engagement has been proven as a
critical determinant of employee productivity,
with astounding implications on overall organizational efficiency and profitability. Gallup Consulting asserts that engaged employees are “more profitable, more customer-focused, [meticulous], and more
likely to withstand temptations to leave the organization.” In order to curb productivity losses due to disengagement and to enhance company performance,
managers must adopt a leadership style that enables
key drivers of employee engagement in high-performing organizations to flourish. These drivers are:
• An organizational culture of trust and respect between managers and colleagues, in which the employee’s voice is welcomed and they feel genuinely
appreciated
• Opportunities for professional development and
growth
• A collective vision and commitment to the organization’s mission
• Work that is challenging and inspiring, and motivates employees to do their best every day
12
These drivers manifest a key commonality: the vitality of stewarding relationships and company culture.
Gallup argues that the “best performing companies”
deliberately steward both, as they acknowledge that
“developing an employee engagement strategy and
linking it to the achievement of corporate goals will
help them win in the marketplace.”
EILEEN FISHER, Inc., illustrates the best practices
of how to foster this principle through its leadership
system and organizational processes, which have allowed it to weather even the most difficult of times.
Teams at EILEEN FISHER, Inc., operate with dynamic
webs of inclusion and connected thinking that builds
on strong relationships. This collaborative and organic
leadership model is a notable EILEEN FISHER, Inc.,
strength that supports cross-company connections,
leader growth, and rich idea-sharing.
Two key frameworks that foster employee engagement are enveloped in the very heart of the EILEEN
Engaged employees are more profitable, more customer-focused,
and more likely to withstand temptations to leave
the organization.
FISHER, Inc., leadership system: “appreciative inquiry” and “relational practice.” By studying the organization’s approach in incorporating these principles,
managers may come closer to cultivating inspired,
productive, and engaged employees. The following
discussion identifies three significant ways the comingling of these two frameworks is witnessed at EILEEN FISHER, Inc.
Build on passion and strengths
At EILEEN FISHER, Inc., leaders intentionally recognize and unleash the strengths of employees to foster
passion for the work and organization. They empower
employees by adopting the principles held by appreciative inquiry, which recognizes the distinctive assets
of each individual. Appreciative inquiry’s strengthbased philosophy is enacted through exploration of
the best in individuals in order to uncover the positive core (or “heart”) of the organization. EILEEN
FISHER, Inc., leaders simultaneously adopt relational
practice, which places value on mutuality, interdependence, and sensitivity to emotional context. The intermingling of appreciative inquiry and relational practice harnesses the collective strengths and passions of
employees to enrich company culture.
Focus on learning
Infuse diverse voices
Intentionally welcoming a diverse range of employees,
suppliers, buyers, and customers requires a significant
degree of external orientation and relational prowess. Connecting with others different from ourselves
means that we must widen our circle of inclusion. At
Mikael Damkier/Shutterstock.com
A culture of inquiry uncovers the strengths of individuals and teams at EILEEN FISHER, Inc. From an
appreciative inquiry perspective, this is the discovery
process that identifies and maps common themes or
stories that capture the strengths of the organization.
At EILEEN FISHER, Inc., asking questions is the norm
and it is commonly understood that active listening is
a critical skill for everyone. As themes emerge during
this exchange, employees are able to observe commonalities and differences of thought and build upon them
together. This process highlights the organization’s
proactive focus on learning. Drawing on elements of
relational practice, EILEEN FISHER, Inc., values the
process of interaction, rather than just the content
of interaction, while emphasizing self-awareness and
personal growth. By doing so, the company creates a
culture of mutual learning that enhances trust among
employees and managers.
13
EILEEN FISHER, Inc., fluid teams and open forums
combine with the passion of inquiry and the focus on
learning to infuse diverse voices.
Moving forward: implications for your company
While EILEEN FISHER, Inc., embeds the frameworks
of appreciative inquiry and relational practice into its
formal structure and processes, leaders of other organizations can transfer the essence of building on passion and strengths, focusing on learning, and infusing
diverse voices by creating space in existing structures
to address questions of values, process, and outcomes.
For example, organizations can use existing departmental, committee, or team meetings to begin conversations about how to best approach a significant
agenda item. They can raise questions about satisfaction with current ways of operating and the results
achieved with standard approaches. Generally, creating opportunities for mutual discovery will be more
effective than providing management’s answers or solutions. A facilitative leadership style that guides team
members rather than directs them is recommended
for moving in a direction to truly engage employees.
A high-performing organization is distinguished
by effectively stewarding relationships between employees and managers. EILEEN FISHER, Inc., envelops appreciative inquiry and relationship practice
by building on passion and strengths, encompassing
a focus on learning, and encouraging a diversity of
voices. Each of these principles can be incorporated in
a company that strives to be a great place to work. Indeed, the cost of not doing so will not only be reflected
in employee engagement and satisfaction, but on the
bottom line, as well. n
Raising the bar on business: A personal journey through
the EILEEN FISHER, Inc., Summer Practicum
by Halani C. Foulsham
T
14
he “triple bottom line,” a term first coined in 1994
by British sustainability consultant John Elkington,
has become increasingly woven into the fabric of company practices, whereby positive impact on people,
planet, and profit are all considered a measurement of
success. A perfect example of this is New York-based
women’s apparel company EILEEN FISHER, Inc.
As a Simmons Fellow who spent the past summer
in New York City working directly with both the human resources and leadership, learning, and development teams, I had a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to
combine business best-practices learned at Simmons
School of Management and apply it directly to a company whose dedication to the triple bottom line permeates every aspect of its operations.
At EILEEN FISHER, Inc., I was exposed to, and engaged in, a decision-making process clearly predicated
on the basis of value creation for the greatest good to
impact the company at large as well as the many communities EILEEN FISHER, Inc., serves. Whether one
team tested product development ideas for a new season of sustainable apparel or another team engaged
in the deliberate review of financial performance to
ensure that operating cash flow and future forecasting
could support the broader social mission of the company, clear collaboration about how to manifest the
highest return for the triple bottom line remained at
the heart of all business discussions.
Unique to EILEEN FISHER, Inc., is an established
precedent about the process of how matters are discussed and how decisions are made. It was my experience with this company that led me to understand
a precedent comprising of two key factors: first, indepth, values-based discussions whereby all voices
and core values are heard, and, second, the chance to
spend time operating in the gray.
“Operating in the gray” is a phrase I learned the first
day at EILEEN FISHER, Inc., that describes one’s purposeful existence within a state of the unknown. Although this was counter-intuitive as an MBA student
wherein clearly defined targets and strategies drive
performance, I learned very quickly that I had to suspend judgment in order to fully immerse myself in
this unique business practice. This is the core spirit of
operating in gray: the ability to not only suspend judgment, but also give yourself permission to suspend the
state of response in order to further explore the state
of questioning—questioning ideas, opportunities, and
Improving organizational commitment and performance
The following small steps might open the door for innovative thinking and a potential change
in organizational commitment and performance:
Check-in as a norm
Techniques and practices
Devote the first 10 minutes of a meeting to “check in” with employees,
allowing them to share how their day
or week is going on a personal and/or
professional level. Although employees
may share frustrations, the facilitator
should also encourage participants to
focus on relevant or impactful events
that are going on in their lives and
what aspects of their work that they are
excited or passionate about.
Facilitate increased connection and
collaboration through the use of various small group discussion techniques,
such as World Café, Dotting, Open
Space, and the Art of Hosting. One
such technique that EILEEN FISHER,
Inc., employs is called The Circle Way:
A Leader in Every Chair, developed
by consultants Christina Baldwin and
Anne Linnea. Their book by the same
name endorses meetings in the round
and shared leadership techniques.
Provide opportunities for people to
grow and develop outside of their
normal areas of expertise. Regularly
placing employees out of their comfort
zones will ultimately embed a passion
for learning in the very heart of the
organization. Encourage employees
to be actively involved in formulating
departmental or team goals. This will
empower employees to voice their
perspectives about the organization
as whole, enabling them to shape
its work, advance its mission, and
ultimately serve to inspire their loyalty,
rendering them fully engaged.
Similar to the community at the Simmons School of
Management, the EILEEN FISHER, Inc., community
believes it has an obligation to use business as a tool
to make a positive impact on the many lives it touches. This was the primary reason I came to the Simmons SOM and pursued the opportunity at EILEEN
FISHER, Inc. Both possess a brand ethos and social
practice grounded in meaningful collaborations that
result in socially responsible best business practices.
This approach is woven into the very fabric of both
communities.
The EILEEN FISHER, Inc., Summer Practicum has
proven to me that collaborative, principled practices
within teams and inter-departmental shared goals are
contagious and highly influential. By modeling the
way and bringing others into the practice, as we did at
EILEEN FISHER, Inc., we not only experience more
socially responsible behaviors within our own teams,
we also inspire it in others. At each and every point
within this journey an inter-woven pattern emerges
revealing the increasing collective passion of individuals within the world of enterprise, and our collective
efforts and belief models become as much a part of the
brand value as the very products we create. n
the different paths that likely lead to the same goal.
The ability to explore the power and possibilities of
business appears to have led the company to the influential practice of “business as a movement.” As a wellestablished brand, EILEEN FISHER, Inc., has taken on
responsibility for raising the bar in business through
careful examination of its entire supply chain. Managers constantly ask themselves: how can we continue
to improve our processes and leverage our influence
so as to encourage better practices from our partners
throughout every stage? For example, the social consciousness team at EILEEN FISHER, Inc., carefully examines and works to increase its influence on whether
cotton is sourced ethically and responsibly, especially
in light of child labor controversies surrounding cotton originating from Uzbekistan. Another example is
how its clothing is dyed in its factories in China. The
company has worked with Bluesign Technologies, a
Swiss-based company specializing in the reduction of
environmental impact throughout the textile supply
chain. EILEEN FISHER, Inc., has become the first U.S.
apparel company to be Bluesign-certified as a result of
its measurable reduction in chemical, water, and energy use in manufacturing processes.
Engagement in new arenas
where passion can flourish
15
A classroom
of her own
Reflecting on the women-only mba
by Anne Jardim and Cathy Minehan
16
A
s the founding and current Deans of the School of Management at Simmons College, we have both been asked many times
why the only MBA program designed for women in the U.S.
(and we suspect, the world) was at all important. Don’t women have
to work with men in organizations? Doesn’t it make sense for men and
women to learn management skills together?
Andrey_Popov/Shutterstock.com; modified by Megan Chamberlin
en were not particularly welcome at many business
schools. The idea of a school that would allow women
to master critical management skills while simultaneously learning how to navigate difficult organizational
waters was not just new: it was to become a continuing
challenge.
Anne Jardim:
The idea of a women’s graduate school of management
occurred to Margaret Hennig and me a little over 40
years ago. She and I were two of the first four women
formally admitted in 1964 to the Harvard Business
School’s Doctoral Program and we had both returned
to teach there in the 1972–73 academic year. I was
teaching a course on the psychology of leadership and
Margaret was on sabbatical leave from Simmons College to teach a seminar on women in management. We
became a magnetic north of sorts for HBS women students, of whom there were 60 or 70 at the time.
Women had been trickling in to HBS from the
Our faculty, our students, our alumnae, and some
enlightened corporations understand what makes the
SOM programs so important, but it is usually more
difficult to translate that understanding to people who
believe that women’s success at work is just a matter of
working harder.
So when we read the New York Times on a recent
Sunday, we realized that the author of “Harvard Case
Study: Gender Equity” had effectively made our case.
If Harvard Business School (HBS), with all of its incredible resources and its very talented students, has
such a hard time creating an atmosphere that will
bring out the best in its students, particularly its women students, then what can be expected to change in
the everyday business environment into which these
students graduate?
Appreciation for the challenges faced by women at
HBS was one of the reasons that the Simmons School
of Management was founded in 1973 by Anne Jardim
and Margaret Hennig. This was a time when wom-
17
We wanted classrooms in which women wouldn’t have to compete against
a slew of obvious and obscure agendas in order to be heard.
Dr. Anne Jardim is a
pivotal figure in the
history of women’s
management education,
especially as it relates
to Simmons College.
A former lecturer at
Harvard Business School,
Dr. Jardim was one of
the founding deans of
the Simmons College
School of Management.
Dr. Jardim is perhaps
best known for the
significant contributions
she has made to
the development of
successful women
managers and for coauthoring the seminal
book on women in
business, The
Managerial Woman.
18
mid-’60s and they were starting to make some simple requests: bathrooms closer to the classrooms so
they didn’t lose five times more time than men during exams; changes in the depiction of women in the
teaching cases used throughout the curriculum so that
women did not appear to be always part of the problem; perhaps one new case showing a woman actually
succeeding at what she was doing? We raised these issues with the Dean and met with enormous resistance.
We were just as unsuccessful in trying to deal with the
behavioral difficulties the HBS women faced: the painful, often sexualized, put-downs in the classroom; having their contribution to a discussion ignored only to
hear it repeated later by a male student and built on by
his friends; being left out of discussion groups outside
class, having been told the wrong time or place. To
women trying to make sense of a difficult curriculum
with grades dependent on group work, this experience
was doubly bitter.
In our frustration we began talking about developing an MBA program for women with a small group of
other HBS faculty. One of them, Professor C. Roland
Christensen, had been a member of my thesis committee and he provided irreplaceable help to us in developing the MBA curriculum. Then, we went to see
the Simmons College President. Aside from a lack of
available funding, we found him very interested.
We set out to raise the money and over the next few
years MS Magazine, the Business and Professional
Women’s Association, the CBS Foundation, the Donner Foundation, the Sloan Foundation and individual
women gave us $500,000—in mid-’70s dollars. Our
salaries, to provide perspective, were $18,000 a year!
From the beginning, we wanted an MBA that would
give women the functional knowledge and skill to get
out of dead-end jobs and into middle management,
where their 1970’s numbers were under 5%. We wanted a behavioral curriculum that would give women the
ability to compete equally in a corporate culture that
is masculine but has never been taught as masculine.
And we wanted classrooms in which women wouldn’t
have to compete against a slew of obvious and obscure
agendas in order to be heard. We wanted women to
learn rather than simply survive.
We used our own research in corporations to identify the mind-set differences that men and women
brought with them to organizations. For example,
more than 3,000 women and over 1,000 men in management jobs had completed a questionnaire we developed that asked them to give first, immediate responses to its questions without pausing for thought.
A key question: what was the job they wanted to hold
in five years and what would be important in getting it.
Men’s answers singled out superiors, the competition they would face, subordinates who would back
them up, the boss in the new job and sometimes even
his boss. Women’s answers directly emphasized critical
personal factors: self-confidence, experience and ability, determination, education, acquiring specific skills.
We used cases to show how these differences—which
no one had ever had any reason to think through—
played out in reality.
To give just one example, consider the case of a
woman in her thirties who was recruited from a fastpaced Wall Street firm to become investment relations
director in a very traditional, old line publishing com-
We wanted women to learn how to anticipate, recognize, second-guess,
and act effectively in the organizations men build.
pany. Her appointment was a company first. She reported to the finance vice president who told her that
he was relying on her to define the job. She went all
out, worked day and night, talked to everybody she
could, called divisional presidents to ask for staff cooperation, turned out brochures, gave speeches. She
read hints from her colleagues as timidity and her
boss’s diminishing enthusiasm as something her results would ultimately change. Within a year she was
fired. She had dealt directly with the problems she saw
in front of her, but she had given little time to considering her relationship to her boss and what she owed
him as his subordinate. She also failed to recognize his
relationship with his own peers and superiors: how
he wanted and needed to be seen by them and why it
mattered.
It doesn’t take much time for intelligent women
to think these issues through. On the other hand, to
be able to respond to them immediately and automatically, with no need for thought in the day-to-day
course of organizational life, takes continuing insight
and awareness. Our goal was to make the Simmons
MBA experience include more than business administration; we wanted women to learn how to anticipate,
recognize, second-guess, and act effectively in the organizations men build.
Cathy Minehan:
Cathy E. Minehan is
the dean of the School
of Management at
Simmons College.
Minehan retired from the
Federal Reserve Bank of
Boston in July 2007 after
39 years with the Federal
Reserve System, having
served as the president
and chief executive of
the Boston Bank and a
member of the Federal
Open Market Committee
from July 1994 on. She
has an MBA from NYU.
She is on the corporate
boards of VISA and
MassMutual as well as
numerous non-profit
boards in the areas of
health care, education,
and public broadcasting.
Over the years, the combination of the SOM’s innovative curriculum and faculty, and the research done at
the School’s Center for Gender and Organization have
shaped thinking about how pervasive the inherent bias
against women is in the workplace, and how difficult
it is to address. We have a track record of turning out
graduates who believe that the experience at Simmons
has been literally transformational—but clearly what
we have done is not enough in engaging the corporate
world in the issues we know are real. The numbers of
women in senior management in corporate America
are proof of that.
Certainly, most businesses would not go to the
lengths that HBS, to its credit, has to create a better learning environment; yet the problems in many
workplaces are just as pervasive and insidious as those
at HBS. Our students tell us this, as do the women
in our successful executive education programs in
women’s leadership. Talented women who have been
recruited with great signing bonuses fill the pipelines
of many companies, but far too few make it beyond
middle management and almost none to top management. It is not lifestyle decisions alone that prevent
their progress; the attitudes so well documented in the
Times article, whether conscious or unconscious, create an environment that is demeaning, demoralizing,
and ultimately defeating.
In our view, this is a problem in the business world
that needs to be addressed now more than ever if this
country is to continue to be the competitive innovator
that it has been. The U.S. needs a workforce that uses
every ounce of its brainpower, and wastes none. This
is the only way to effectively address the fiscal, demographic and global challenges facing us and threatening this country’s position in the world. n
19
Now you see me,
now you don’t
Managing the Double Bind of visibility for
minorities in the workplace
by Stacy Blake-Beard and Laura Morgan Roberts
20
T
here are two frequently employed visibility
strategies and implications for minorities who
choose to use them in organizational settings.
The first strategy is to know how to stand out from
the crowd, and the second strategy is to know how to
blend in and slip under the radar. There are challenges and dynamics that accompany each as minorities
adopt these visibility strategies. In particular, there is
a focus on the double bind that minorities face in becoming more visible at work. A double bind is a situ-
dence. For minorities, these self-promoting behaviors
are particularly important because of the many stereotypes that people associate with their identities. Minorities must ensure that stereotypes about their lack
of competence, initiative, social skills, and integrity do
not cloud others’ perceptions of their strengths and
capabilities. Minorities might believe that standing
out from the crowd is necessary for others to see what
they have to offer, and appreciate and respect what
they can bring to the table.
The most effective means for managing visibility is to adopt
a combination of knowing how to stand out in critical moments
and slip under the radar when needed.
Strategy one: standing out from the crowd
In strategy one, being a leader is associated with being in the spotlight. Leaders differentiate themselves
from their colleagues through exhibiting traits such as
intelligence, autonomy, aggressiveness, and self-confi-
Atypeek Design/Shutterstock.com
Risk factor: hypervisibility
Despite its benefits, the strategy of “standing out” can
be hazardous for minorities in the workplace. Already,
minorities frequently experience more visibility than
their colleagues in majority groups because of their
actual and perceived differences. In fact, their colleagues might overemphasize the cultural differences,
and under recognize their professional contributions.
In addition, minority professionals who are subject to
heightened visibility can face a variety of workplace
pressures, i.e., small errors might be presented as
proof as incompetence rather than accepted as valuable learning experiences. In our society, the preconceived notion of what a leader looks like (i.e., white,
masculine, heterosexual, well-educated, etc.) shapes
the manner in which individuals in the workplace
ation in which an individual is faced with the contradictory demands that represent equally unsatisfactory
alternatives. In laymen’s terms, the person is “damned
if they do, damned if they don’t.” An exploration of the
strategies’ benefits and risks, as well as an introduction
to a nuanced approach to the visibility issue, will provide minorities with a strategic approach to maximize
the benefits and minimize the consequences of being
noticed in their organizations.
21
Leaders who employ tempered visibility are valuable and
productive members of their organizations who act as
sources of change and transformation.
respond to those who take initiative. When an individual possessing these traits acts as a leader it is often
rewarded; however, when one lacking these traits acts
as a leader it is often seen as a threat. Unfortunately,
minorities’ own responses to this scrutiny might be far
more damaging than the criticism received from coworkers. In this scenario, minorities could deliberately
distance themselves from others in the workplace, and
become defensive and distrustful of their colleagues—
even those who might be potential allies.
Strategy two: slipping under the radar
22
With the second strategy, rather than standing out,
minorities remain in the game while interacting in a
manner that does not draw attention. With this strategy, it is essential to learn how to move among the
crowd and to build trust across dimensions of difference. In the workplace, many minorities must counter
stereotypes and misconceptions that have been inculcated in our society. With this strategy, minorities become adept at being perceived as non-threatening and
operating behind the scenes. For example, one might
offer praise and share triumphs with other members of
their team, and socialize with white colleagues on the
weekends. This strategy of slipping under the radar
also corresponds well with recent models of leadership
that call for more cooperative practices. New leaders
are concerned with harmonious group interactions,
and facilitating a calm work environment in order for
operations to evolve smoothly. This leadership style is
particularly effective in times when increased flexibility and collaboration are crucial to effectively manage
rapidly changing conditions.
Risk factor: invisibility
Despite the benefits linked to “slipping under the radar,” there are challenges that minorities who adopt
this strategy may face. While there is talk of the new
leadership model being the mode du jour and collaboration as the style that is the most beneficial in
today’s climate, some of this talk may be rhetoric. We
still tend to fall back on our old definition of a leader
as the person who takes a stance, stepping forcefully
out in front to rise to the occasion in times of stress.
In fact, if someone appears to be unwilling to take
a stand on important issues or is unable to create a
sense of urgency in critical times, their leadership potential is called into question. Winners in our society
are still defined as those who step forward and employ
“…killer strategies for trouncing on the competition . . . ,” as an article from the Harvard Business Review
suggests. In the cutthroat world of business leadership,
“emotional intelligence” skills such as delegation and
coaching are dismissed as impediments to winning.
We have all seen someone rendered as invisible; their
suggestions are ignored or dismissed until offered by
someone else. The invisible person is not introduced
to key decision makers and power brokers as he or she
might not represent the organization as well as others.
This individual is not offered leadership opportunities,
yet he or she is criticized for not being a leader.
A nuanced approach: tempering your visibility
There is a more nuanced approach to manage visibility
that encourages the user to follow her internal compass
to determine what is right and what is wrong: tempered
visibility. This strategy represents the best aspects of the
two options of “standing out” and “blending in,” as noted
above. Leaders who engage in tempered visibility know
how to pick their battles and when to concede in order
to win the war. These individuals have a well-developed
repertoire of strategies to ensure others pay attention to
the right things; namely, their competence and character rather than racial stereotypes. They know how
to speak eloquently on a position and how to translate
what matters to multiple constituents, so that their mes-
Keeping your balance with
tempered visibility
sage can be conveyed to
mean minorities have
If you choose to temper your visibility, there are several
tried and true tactics you can adopt to help mitigate the
a vast audience. They
to hide some parts of
risks inherent in this approach.
know how to be visible
themselves in order to
enough such that their
avoid threatening oth1. Keep track of your internal compass.
As
you
gain
visibility
and
a
more
prominent
profile
in
views are respected and
ers. In addition, minoryour organization, it is critical that you always keep sight
heard, yet not so visible
ities might resent that
of your own “true north,” especially at critical junctures.
that they are discounted
they do not have the
Don’t stand out just for the sake of standing out; inas “whining,” “angry,”
same freedom as their
stead, be clear about what you stand for and know what
or someone with a
colleagues to publicize
you absolutely refuse to condone.
“chip on their shoultheir accomplishments
2. Establish your network of allies.
der.” These individuals
and claim responsibility
An important factor will be the relationships that you
are turned to as people
for their organizational
build—you need to have allies in all quarters of your
organization.
who can note systematic
contributions. There is a
inequities and injustices
tremendous amount of
3. Take ownership of your identity.
in an organization, and
emotional work associYou get to decide when you “show up” to the table, how
you show up, and what rules you will follow as you play
who can work construcated with using the temthe
game.
It
is
crucial
to
be
strategic
about
when
and
tively to address them.
pered visibility strategy.
how you present yourself.
Leaders who employ
Minorities could expetempered visibility are
rience feelings of doubt
valuable and productive
and anger as they deal
members of their organizations who act as sources of
with the micro-inequities visited upon them in their
change and transformation.
everyday journeys in organizations. Their status as an
“outsider within” can wear away at their self-esteem
Risk factor: falling from the tightrope
and general well-being. It can also be challenging to
Although tempered visibility might be a good middle
negotiate and find a comfortable space in the various
ground for minorities in the workplace, its practice
contexts found at the workplace.
could lead to some costly consequences. For instance,
The two frequently employed strategies for managbeing tempered might mean staying inside an organizaing visibility, standing out and blending in, each come
tion where in some critical ways one does not necessarwith risks. The danger of the first strategy is that it can
ily fit. Professor Patricia Hills Collins of the University
quickly lead to hypervisibility, where people are payof Maryland suggests that African American women
ing attention to the wrong things, while the second can
live in two different worlds, engaging in a series of nelead to invisibility, where people are not paying attengotiations to reconcile the contradictions between their
tion to you at all. Through the use of tempered visibilself-images and their marginalized status in organizaity, minority leaders who wish to assume a proactive
tion. Hills Collins describes these women as “outsiders
stance in managing their visibility can ensure that their
within.” In other words, even though they have access
favorable qualities and characteristics will have greater
to the processes and power of the inner group, they will
exposure in their work places. n
never totally belong. The “outsider within” status might
23
Team players
Best practices for Holding Team members accountable
by Mary Shapiro
W
orking in teams can be either extremely challenging or exhilarating. Teams bring out deep issues for
people around control, trust, diversity, power, and fundamental differences in life priorities and risk
taking. A key component for an effective team is that team members hold each other mutually accountable. Holding team members accountable while preserving the relationships is a two-way responsibility between
the feedback giver and the receiver of the feedback. The best practices below can help both giver and receiver of
feedback to hear the message, view it as part of a continuous improvement process, and act on it.
Celebrate the successes. Never let a good task,
24
should decide rules that govern meeting management,
decision making, interaction, feedback, conflict resoproject, or goal accomplishment go by without cellution, and facilitator and member roles.
ebrating it with the team. Give out silly awards, bring
The value to mutual accountability in setting these
in food, acknowledge how each member contributed
rules in the beginning are two-fold. First, it enables
to the success. It is also critical that the team analyzes
each person to monitor their own behavior. By knowwhat they did that creing what is expected of
ated the success so you
them, each team member
make sure those become
A general process for feedback is to:
can choose to follow the
“best practices” for fu• State the observed behavior
rules and be in compliture successes.
• State the impact that behavior had on you (feelings) or
ance. Second, pre-agreed
the task
upon rules allow subDebrief the fail• Invite discussion regarding what they see as the probsequent feedback to be
ures. Take time to exlem, and what are possible solutions
linked back to noncomamine them, not to as• Suggest more helpful behavior and its positive impact
pliance with the rules. If
sign blame (which may
a person’s behavior is disinitially take a lot of
ruptive, feedback can be
reminding to deal with
objective, made on the grounds that their behavior is
defensiveness), but to learn for the future. What do we
not in line with norms.
need to do differently next time?
Set up ground rules or norms up front. Be- Give feedback to each other one-on-one
on an “as I see it” basis. All team members
fore tasks begin, teams should set up norms on how to
should agree on several key points on feedback:
operate, and norms for acceptable behavior. The team
cmgirl/Shutterstock.com
• It is always appropriate to give positive feedback!
• It is better to handle disruptive behavior when it is a
“mole hill” versus allowing it to grow into a mountain.
Conduct feedback in a group setting when
appropriate. While feedback is typically given one-
on-one privately, as a way of allowing the receiver to
“save face,” team leaders need to know what situations
require feedback to be handled in a group setting.
These discussions will most likely be successful in
changing the person’s behavior if they are conducted
as a problem solving situation: agree what the problem
is, explore some options, select the option that moves
the team closest to its goals.
Excerpted from
Best Practices of
High Performing
Teams, a handbook
that offers strategies for leading
teams in successfully generating
high-quality output
through high-quality relationships.
Evaluate team performance after each
meeting. At the end of each meeting, spend the last
five to 10 minutes discussing “what did we do well today?” and “what do we need to change?” This should
be part of the team’s continual improvement process.
Imbed “continuous improvement” meetings in your project plan. Just as a team moni-
tors its work towards its task goals with scheduled
“check ins,” teams also need to have regular appraisals on their process goals and norms. Teams should
schedule periodic “review” meetings where the team
members can discuss how the group is function-
Not all disruptive behavior merits a discussion. In general, a team member should only give feedback when:
• The behavior prevents them from doing their job at
all or according to team compliance metrics.
• The behavior is beyond just personal preference.
You should not give feedback when you are actually
just trying to get the other person to do things your
way.
• There are some instances when team members
should involve the team leader versus trying to handle them on their own. The team needs to agree on
what those instances are in advance.
Team members should also be given some clear guidelines for giving feedback. These should be discussed
up front during infrastructure-building and become
norms, such as:
• Describe the behavior not the personality (“You are
late” versus “You are discourteous”).
• Don’t evaluate the behavior or judge as to whether
the person is good or bad, right or wrong.
• Don’t interpret why the behavior occurred (“You
have been late three times” versus “It’s obvious you
aren’t committed to this project”).
• Focus on the impact on you and your part of the
task (“I get very frustrated when you . . .” versus “You
get me so mad”).
• Be specific versus general (“I like the way you got
your numbers to me three days early” versus “You
did a good job”).
25
5 tenets of effective teams:
1.It is essential to build an infrastructure for a team up front
to facilitate a more efficient and successful implementation of the task.
2.Team building is not exotic or ephemeral. It is a series
of intentional conversations that build the elements of
infrastructure, namely team goals, norms, and roles.
3.The challenge of team building is getting individual
members with diverse needs, behaviors and goals all “on
the same page.” But it is that alignment that preempts
conflict down the road when members operate under
different assumptions, and facilitates smooth task implementation.
ing as a team. The goal of the discussion is to identify behaviors and processes that are contributing to
achieving team goals and those that are hindering
that achievement.
26
4.When setting up infrastructure and then managing themselves, teams must focus on both behaviors that facilitate
actual task work, and behaviors that enable people to
work well together. Good task outcomes require good
relationships. Teams must take care of both aspects of
teamwork.
5.Team members must hold each other accountable for
both contributing to the task and for contributing to
productive relationships. Feedback, an essential part of
the continuous improvement process, must be done
throughout the project timeline (not just at the end) as
it permits individuals and the team to adjust behaviors,
team norms, and task activities in real-time as needed to
move forward.
input into) the performance appraisal of a team member. If the team member does not report to that team
leader, the member’s organizational supervisor may
do their appraisal. Consequently, each member may
be annually reviewed by someone who only marginResolve conflict constructively. All team ally is aware of their performance on the team.
There is a great reluctance on the part of the team
members need training in effective conflict resolumembers to hold each other accountable. Why? One
tion techniques. The team’s process for conflict resoreason is we
lution
should
aren’t
accusalso be clearly
Sequence of Project Management
tomed to doing
mapped out in
so. While growthe norms/opering up we’ve
ating procedures
been taught to
at the beginning
Ongoing
Final Review
Project Plan
progress report,
evaluate against plan
set goals,
bounce
comof the team’s time
Task
problem solve
& institutionalize
identify tasks,
plaints, injustogether. Each
& adjust plan
best practices
create timeline
tices, or rule
member needs
violations up to
to know when
our parents or
to escalate a conFinal Review
Ongoing
identify best
Create
our teachers or
flict to the team
what to stop/start/
practices to take
Infrastructure
continue into
Process
bosses. So few of
leader or team,
forward, at both
set goals, norms,
next phase
individual
&
&
roles
us have had exhow to bring an
of work
team level
perience, for exissue to the table,
ample, in sitting
and what are the
down with a peer
norms when disand explaining
cussing conflict.
how their lateness in getting a task done negatively
impacted your own work.
Include team skills in performance apThere are clear benefits of setting up mutual accountpraisals. Team members must be evaluated not only
ability in team dynamics. Not only does it prevent the
for their functional contribution to the team’s output,
burden of accounting from being carried solely by the
but also for their team skills and interpersonal contrileader, but compliance with the team goals and operbution to the team’s process.
ating norms is more likely to occur in the face of peer
Most companies today do not have team skills as
accountability than superior accountability. n
part of the appraisal process. Additionally, often it is
not even the team leader who conducts (or even has
Branding
Creating a leadership brand
how PERSONAL BRANDING can DRIVE PERFORMANCE AND PROFIT
by Susan Hodgkinson
T
sparkstudio/Shutterstock.com
precedented competition, consumer demand for highest quality, fastest response times and lowest price,
off-shoring in pursuit of cost control—these and so
many others are forces the world’s strong brands must
deal with every day. The owners of strong personal
and leadership brands
are tackling these same
challenges as they continuously build their
own strong brands.
And how about you?
Your key to success is
to take charge—to see
yourself as a brand in
a marketplace and to
work continuously to
manage your brand successfully. When you do
this, you will become
known for consistently
delivering distinctive
quality and value. Providing compelling value
ensures that there will
always be a satisfying
role for you in your organization’s future. Using the 5 P’s will help
you achieve this success.
hink about the strongest brands you know.
What are they? You perhaps thought of Coca
Cola, IBM, Sony, or others. Now, think about
people in your organization who have brands just as
strong as Coke, IBM, and Sony. Who are the people
who come to mind?
Did you list your own
name in that group? If
you didn’t, why didn’t
you?
Having and owning a
strong brand—a brand
so powerful that it towers above other “also
rans” in its market—is
a choice. It’s 100 percent controllable. It’s
the reflection of a decision of the part of its
owner and a commitment to use the necessary levels of rigor and
discipline to achieve
and sustain the market
leader status.
The old employment-for-life contact is
gone. The forces thriving in today’s business
and marketplace—un-
27
Susan Hodgkinson
Susan Hodgkinson is principal of The Personal Brand CompanySM which she founded in 1994.
She is a leadership development expert, award-winning executive coach, and professional
speaker. Ms. Hodgkinson is the creator of the proprietary Leadership Brand ManagementSM and
Personal Brand ManagementSM methodologies. She works with thousands of professionals in
a diverse array of businesses who know they must strategically manage their own professional
learning, leadership development, and personal brand to succeed—for their company and
themselves.
Susan Hodgkinson’s work has most recently been featured in The New York Times, Detroit Free
Press, Essence Magazine, The Boston Globe, Fox News, WCVB Channel 5’s “Chronicle,” and other
major electronic media and syndicated business columns throughout the U.S. She holds her
MBA from Simmons School of Management and is a member of the executive education faculty there. She is the author of The Leader’s Edge: Using Personal Branding to Drive Performance
and Profit (iUniverse, 2005).
The 5 P’s of Leadership Brand®
The 5 P’s of Leadership Brand® are persona, product, packaging, promotion, and permission. These 5
P’s may sound familiar. This model is rooted in the
classic marketing and brand management practices
that the best companies have employed consistently
and relentlessly for decades to remain market leaders.
The 5 P’s are the foundation of all strong personal and
leadership brands.
Persona is the emotional connection and reaction
you elicit from other people as a result of your personal energy and style. It’s the outward manifestation
of your vision, values, attitude, and worldview. Knowing how your style affects others, and modulating that
style to ensure positive and productive exchanges, is
essential to your success.
Product is the sum of your qualifications, experi-
ence, technical and/or functional expertise, ideas, and
results you’ve delivered over time.
28
Packaging is the wrapping you place around your
product. It includes your personal appearance and
your surroundings, such as your office. It also includes
how you package your work—the presentation of your
ideas in reports or other written materials.
Promotion concerns how you inform your market
about your value and impact (the sum of your persona
and product). If you are in a leadership role, it also
includes how you will promote the accomplishments
of your team.
Permission is your sense of legitimacy, your internal confidence and core belief that you have important contributions to make, and therefore don’t need
to wait for anyone else to invite you to do so.
The 5 P’s represent the elements in a comprehensive
brand management system that, when implemented
and managed correctly, help you define, develop and
control your value exchange within your organization
(your marketplace).
Your brand is rooted in your core values. It comes
from deep within you, and is based on your beliefs. It
is not something you develop because you think it is
the way others want you to be. Only you know what
your core values are and what you believe in deeply,
just as you know best what your differentiated capabilities are and how to deploy them in a way that brings
you great fulfillment and affords you major impact
where you work. Thus, only you can know what kind
of brand you want to have.
You are in charge of your own outcomes, the impact
you have on your business, and your future choices
and opportunities. You control the quality of your
brand because you control the experience and impact
of you. n
Briefcase
Nonprofits come to their census
gender diversity of nonprofit boards
and chief executive positions
S
immons College, working as the research arm
in a project with The Boston Club, produced a
first-ever look at the number of women in governance of the largest nonprofit organizations in Massachusetts, and the good news is that their number is
considerable. According to the 2013 Census of Women
Directors and Chief Executives of Massachusetts’ Largest Nonprofit Organizations, women hold significantly
more board seats in nonprofit organizations, both in
total numbers and percentages, than in the for-profit
sector, and they serve as chief executives for a larger
percentage of the organizations. But as strong as the
employment represented 10% of total employment in
the United States in 2010, with total employees numbering 10.7 million. The nonprofit workforce is the
third largest of all industries behind retail trade and
manufacturing. The economic strength of public charities constitutes nearly three-quarters of all nonprofit
sector revenue, reporting $1.5 trillion in revenue and
$2.7 trillion in assets in 2010.
Today, when compared state by state, Massachusetts
ranks 17th in the number of all nonprofits registered
and 12th in the number of public charities (24,195).
Many large nonprofit organizations in Massachusetts
As strong as the numbers are currently, “considerable” is not parity, and
“significantly more” is not equality.
were founded as private institutions in the 18th and
19th centuries and became nonprofits early in the 20th
century when the laws and regulations creating taxexempt status came into effect.
The nonprofit sector in Massachusetts continues
to grow steadily, almost doubling between 1989 and
2011. During the Great Recession from 2007 to 2009,
the nonprofit sector continued to gain jobs at an average rate of 1.9% per year, while the private sector lost
jobs at a rate of 3.7% per year. Nonprofit employment
by sector is approximately 57% in health services, 15%
in education, 13% in social services, 3% in arts and
culture, and 12% in other categories.
continued u
numbers are currently, “considerable” is not parity,
and “significantly more” is not equality.
Why is this information important? Nonprofit organizations play a major role in the economies of many
towns and cities in the state, generating $234 billion in
revenues in 2010. In 2010, nonprofit jobs represented
16.7% of the total employment in Massachusetts. We
are known worldwide for our universities, hospitals,
and cultural institutions, most of which are nonprofit
organizations. Fifty-seven percent of women in Massachusetts are in the workforce.
According to a 2012 report by the Center for Civil
Society Studies at Johns Hopkins University, nonprofit
Patricia H. Deyton,
associate dean and
director, Center for
Gender in Organizations at the
Simmons School of
Management, conducted the research
and analysis for this
report.
29
the census results
Women hold 1,090, or 35%, of the 3,149 board seats of the 142 largest nonprofit organizations
in Massachusetts for which information was available. The chief executives of 20% of these
nonprofits are women. These statistics place the nonprofit sector well ahead of the for-profit
sector. The revenues of the nonprofit organizations included ranged from $8.9 billion to $56.6
million, indicating that organizational size, scope and complexity are not barriers to achieving
leadership and full participation by women. All but one of the organizations in the census have
at least one woman director, 124 organizations have three or more women on their boards, and
21 boards contain 50% or more women members.
Percent of nonprofits with women chief executives by company revenue
Average percent women: 20% Number of organizations: 148
26%
14%
$1 Billion & above
13%
8%
$500 Million to < $1 Billion
$100 Million to < $500 Million
Below $100 Million
Gender Diversity Based on Sector
30
Sector
Arts, Culture, Humanities
Education
Health
Human Services
Other
# of
Average
Organizations
size of
in Sector
2010 Sector Revenues Board
5
48
54
11
24
$571,026,665
$18,712,525,553
$31,907,672,890
$1,010,769,803
$5,405,256,631
38
27
19
20
19
% of
Women
on Boards
% of
Sector
Women Chief Representation
Executives
in Census
35%
37%
30%
50%
85%
20%
27%
20%
9%
4%
3%
32%
36%
7%
16%
This table includes 142 nonprofit organizations; 8 nonprofits included in the census do not report names or gender of board
members and are not included in this table.
Number & percent of women on nonprofit governing boards
by company revenue
34%
97/286 Seats
$1 Billion & above
27%
96/350 Seats
$500 Million to < $1 Billion
36%
14%
36%
545/1526 Seats
352/987 Seats
Below $100 Million
infographics and layout: Megan Chamberlin
$100 Million to < $500 Million
Average board size: 23
Average % women: 35%
Number of seats: 3,149
31
Breaking the Glass Ceiling
Journey of one-thousand miles
How one manager navigated her career
by Naomi Wilsey
W
hether you are at the beginning of your
professional journey or further along, you
may have encountered similar opportunities
and challenges to those I have experienced. Allow me
to share my lessons learned and a few bumps in the
road that are all part of getting to a destination.
Crossing borders
Management Magazine l Winter 2013–14
If you’ve been on the road for work or play and the
unforeseen happens, you have probably come up with
creative problem solving out of necessity. A start-up
program I led required a suitcase full of solutions since
account-based marketing didn’t previously exist in the
company. Success meant gaining acceptance from the
all-male sales team which had a long history together
in supporting a male-dominated client base. My approach was to first demonstrate credibility as the marketing leader, making my gender a non-issue. Once
my colleagues knew that we were headed toward the
same goals, I was well-positioned to gain trust.
32
Opening pathways
Early in my marketing career, I needed help navigating
a new job and environment. It was a different culture
with unfamiliar rules to follow and a language full of
acronyms to learn. Networking helped me to identify
pivotal stakeholders, acclimate rapidly, and become
engaged with a new team. A primary objective was
to gain media coverage via the target audience of editors, who, at the time, were mostly males. Networking opened introductions to those editors, which resulted in the launch of an innovative campaign. The
campaign’s release was accomplished in record time,
received endorsements from our clients, and attracted
major media coverage. The support system provided
advice and road maps—networking put me on the
right track.
Leaping
As a leader, you are expected to be a change agent and,
correspondingly, we need to be able to make changes for
ourselves. I had a job within my comfort zone but was
offered the chance to help start an integrated marketing
communications function. It meant taking a leap, but
what a great opportunity. Healthy risk-taking can take
you places you may not have visited on your own.
Seeking directions
There’s an art to asking for directions when you need
them. A mentor helps you decide where you want to
go next and introduces you to new destinations. I have
sought out female executive mentors who have served
as role models for their leadership styles and how they
balanced work with their personal lives. I’ve most valued mentors who shared objective insights about how
I was doing, provided introductions to key contacts,
and encouraged me to explore new career paths or
coached me not to stay in the same job too long. To
pay it forward, try serving as a mentor so you can lend
your experience and expertise to others who may want
to follow you through the glass ceiling and beyond.
Take some chances to find meaningful work and enjoy the scenery along the way. Remember that there
can be multiple right answers. Create a network to extend your reach and depend on those who have been
there before you. n
This is the one conference
that EVERY woman should
attend!
–2013 Conference Attendee
Denise Morrison
President and CEO
Campbell Soup Company
Rita Moreno
Award-Winning
Actress and Author
Jumping
the
Curve
Zainab Salbi
Founder
Women for Women International
Dr. Mae Jeminson
Physician and Astronaut
April 23, 2014
Seaport World Trade Center,
Boston, Massachusetts
simmons.edu/leadership
Keynote speaker:
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Former First Lady and
Secretary of State
Just announced!
33
300 The Fenway
Boston, MA 02115
Non Profit
U.S. Postage
PAID
Boston MA
Permit
No 57589

Fall 2013 - Simmons College

Transcription

Similar documents

EILEEN FISHER Business as a Movement

eileen fisher - American Sustainable Business Council

Media Back - Arabisk London

IT`S TIME TO PROVE

CCR-2016 TREM SERVICES.indd

View Fitch Catalyst Power Point

Newsprint Mag. Spring 2015 - The UK Sprint 15 Association

DIY compressed air BB machine gun

5 - Storrington Public School

“Evergreen” “Save Your Magazine Subscriptions”