Selecting A Leader: Do We Know What We Want?

Selecting A Leader: Do We Know What We Want?
If you read many articles or books on the desired qualities of a CEO or a managing partner, you can get very confused. The list of desirable character traits, attitudes, skills and philosophies seems endless.

You can get the same impression looking at the job descriptions that many firms put together when searching for a new leader. There is often a long list, including both “qualifying” characteristics (such as “integrity”) that most realistic candidates are likely to possess, as well as a number of factors that will truly distinguish the best candidates .

Very frequently, the desired characteristics that are listed are in conflict with each other. For example, firms often say that they want their leaders to be both decisive and consultative. These are both virtues, but there is a risk that they can neutralize each other as a guide to choosing the best candidate

Similarly, it is not uncommon to find firms who say they want leaders who are especially adept at being active externally (dealing with clients, shareholders, the media, the community) and also be active internally: motivating people, readily available, and managing the firm’s affairs. These two skill-sets are not the same. Taken together, the message can be confused, if not completely contradictory.

The situation can be made even more difficult. Many firms make lists of generally desirable characteristics of a leader, failing to recognize that the best set of attitudes, skills and behaviors depend on the individual firm, the specific opportunities and needs that the organization faces, and (for example) how ready the organization is to make changes.

After all, there’s no point selecting an Olympic-level coach for a team of people who don’t want to play that game. There’s no point appointing a skilled cost-cutter if the primary strategic need is to grow revenues in new markets!

For professional firms run on “partnership” principles, the bar is raised even higher. Unlike a corporation, which can (and usually does) select its leaders according to the views of a relatively small Board, the choice of a new leader in a professional firm usually requires taking into account the preferences, desires and ambitions of a broad group of partners, shareholders or senior vice-presidents

The need for this is not driven (just) by ideals of democracy, participation or consultation. It’s about ensuring the organization’s understanding and acceptance of the CEO’s (or managing partner’s) mandate

All too often, I have seen CEOs and managing partners criticized, resented and made relatively ineffective by being judged (both by their Board and those they manage) on aspects of the role they were not chosen to perform.

It is hard to hold a leader accountable if there is not a clear, unambiguous understanding of the role. Many leaders prefer it this way: they like the freedom of action that comes from an unambiguous role. However, as my co-author Patrick McKenna points out, leaders are, inevitably, going to be judged: wouldn’t it be better for all concerned to know, in advance, and with clarity, what the true, real expectations are?

This seemingly obvious principle is widely neglected in practice. In many firms, in many industries, in many countries, I have learned, people are appointed to managerial positions without detailed consideration of the requirements of the role

Many firms go directly to a discussion of the merits of individual candidates, based on a very general job description, without priorities established among the characteristics listed for the “CEO search.”

If, however, you (first) have an in-depth discussion of what you seek in a leader, the weighting given to competing virtues can be discussed dispassionately, and not be excessively influenced only by the specific candidates involved.

A Diagnostic Tool
In order to assist with this process, I have designed a simple diagnostic tool that can be used to facilitate your firms’ discussions of the characteristics it seeks in a leader.
In the questions that follow, there are a series of “paired” qualities that a good leader might possess. In each case, either quality in the pair might be desirable, and (perhaps) an equal balance desirable.

However, the point of pairing these qualities is to ask: if there HAD to be a choice between the two items in the pair, which would each respondent really prefer in a leader?
A simple way to “force” people to think through their preferences (and also to provide a simple way to aggregate the views) is to ask them to allocate 100 points between each of the paired items. Thus, if the respondent thinks the CEO should be mostly focused on the external community rather than inside the firm, he or she could allocate 90-10 or 80-20 to the “outside / inside” pair.

So, what are the “either / or” choices you might present to your firm? As you scan the alternatives below, bear in mind that either side of the pair is (or can be) a virtue in a leader. The issue here is to set priorities, avoid ambiguities and conflicting messages and force some clarity.
Do you want your CEO / Managing Partner to be someone who…

Focuses on working inside firm versus focuses on a high profile with clients and marketplace
Is good with numbers versus good with people
Leads in accordance with a strong personal ideology of his or her own, versus be the kind of person who tolerates different views, values and approaches
Has a track record of generating business, versus a track record of managing people well
Is the type of person who thinks we need to make big strategic moves, even if they involve bigger risks, versus someone who thinks we should make small, incremental changes
Has strategic acumen personally, versus the ability to facilitate and let others innovate and make strategic choices .

Has the best business qualifications, versus has the best character qualifications
Prefers to confront problems early, even if this can be disruptive, versus the kind who avoids conflict until it’s necessary to tackle it

Focuses on preserving the firm’s historical culture versus changing the culture to adapt to meet new challenges of the marketplace
Moves fast versus someone who acts deliberatively
Emphasizes ambition and growth, versus someone who emphasizes caution and risk management

Emphasizes reasoning and logic versus someone who emphasizes emotion and excitement
Acts a peer, a first among equals, versus someone who is clearly a leader and will manage that way

Is primarily a “businessperson” versus being “ideology-driven”
Acts as the firm’s “face” or “identity” in the media, versus someone who facilitates others achieving a high profile
Is a fresh face versus a known quantity
Is very self-confident, versus someone who acts with humility
Already has a clear view of where we need to go and what we need to do, versus someone who will develop that with us after appointment
Is a pragmatist, versus a visionary
Primarily has a “hard head” versus a “soft heart”
Focuses on getting things done (i.e. a “driver”) versus someone who focuses on getting it right (i.e. an “analytical”)

Has an introverted style, versus someone with an extroverted style
Focuses on capitalizing on short-term opportunities, versus someone who focuses on long-term wealth creation
Makes changes through dramatic, big moves, versus someone who makes changes through continuous, insistent pressure
Sets the example of hard work, versus someone who lives a balanced personal / work lifestyle
Is diplomatic, versus someone who is “straight-talking.”
Is usually sympathetic to people’s personal problems, versus is unwilling to allow sustained underperformance.
Has a track record of personal professional success, versus has a track record of building an organization

Is usually trusting of others, versus not easily fooled
Prefers to manage people directly, versus prefers to work through others
Is decisive versus consultative
Is hands-on, involved in the details, versus hands-off, sets the direction and then holds people accountable

Naturally, it is possible to adapt this questionnaire to your own firm, inserting key trade-offs that I have omitted and deleting ones you think are less critical to your firm.
The key is to make the choices difficult, so that people are forced to reflect on what characteristics a CEO or managing partner really requires.
Mechanistically, I have also used other ways to “force” people to indicate preferences. Instead of allocating 100 points, respondents could be asked, for each pair of virtues, to choose one point on a four-point scale:

1 = the leader should possess the first quality MUCH more than the second quality;
2 = the leader should possess the first quality a LITTLE more than the second quality;
3 = the leader should possess the second quality a LITTLE more than the first quality;
4 = the leader should possess the second quality MUCH more than the first quality.
Because we are trying to ask what people would choose if it really came to a choice between the two qualities, there would be no “middle ? equal balance” option in this version. In this way, true priorities are more likely to be revealed.

Using the Tool
Begin by circulating the questionnaire among the relevant participants (partners, shareholders or senior vice-presidents.) When everyone has contributed their views, charts should be prepared showing both the weighted average view and (this is important) the distribution of views, so that it is clear where the shareholders, partners or senior executives are of similar minds, and where they have divided views.
The results thus obtained should then be used for an open debate which tries to reconcile the differing views, and thus can serve an important educational, bonding and strategy-setting function.

The point of the polling is not to suppress debate, but to identify the subjects most worthy of debate. Areas of consensus can be quickly noted, and discussion focused on topics where there is a disparity of views.

For example, some participants may enter the process thinking that the CEO or managing partner should be a primary business-getter, while others think differently. Through debate, a better, healthier consensus may be forged about what the priorities are, not only for the CEO, but for the firm.
There are built-in flaws in any discussion of desirable leadership characteristics. For example, when asking people for their views about what they look for in a leader, (using this approach or any other) there always exists a tendency for “regression toward the mean.” People tend to express preferences in comparison to the existing (or recently departed) leader, rather than absolute ones.

For example, if a previous leader has been noted for tilting the balance toward decisiveness rather than extensive consultation, there will be a tendency for people to vote for the new leader to be more consultative. And, of course, vice versa.
Once you have completed a first-round survey using these “paired characteristics,” you will probably still have a lengthy, multi-item list of desired traits. It will usually be necessary to conduct a second round of the survey by creating new “either / or” choices from the surviving criteria.

Repeated rounds of “forced choices” may sound onerous, but eventually you will emerge with a clearer focus on what kind of leader is desired, and more support for any new leader chosen in line with the carefully debated, unambiguous, non-contradictory criteria.
To facilitate the ability to hone in on the few key descriptors that summarize the group’s preferences, I often run meetings on this topic using “audience response systems” where each person has a (wireless, electronic) keypad and can quickly vote (anonymously) with the group results being shown instantaneously on a screen in front of the whole group.
The virtues of this system are many, but three stand out. First, there is no requirement to pre-program the questions, and the time from phrasing the question to seeing the views of the group is only a few seconds. Because of this, if a vote is ambiguous, or seen to be poorly phrased, a re-vote is possible immediately.

Second, the ability to conduct sequential “rounds” of voting enables the group to really test its key criteria. For example, if a list of ten criteria “survive” as the most desirable (or consensus) characteristics, it is easy to reduce the list to the most important five or six by repeating the pairing process instantaneously, asking “If you could only have one of these, which would it be?”
Finally, the fact that audience response systems are based on computers means that the group is able to “capture” the expressions of views that were made, and use them in future deliberations and decisions. What used to be called “a paper trail” is automatically created, which can be referred to long after to remind people of views expressed at the meeting

Summary
If you are like other firms with whom I have used this exercise, you will find that it will force many participants to really reflect in depth (many of them for the first time) what kind of leader they truly think is best for the firm and, perhaps more importantly, what kind of leader they are prepared to accept and be guided by.

By the way, even if you do not have a broad group with whom you are required to be consultative, the “forced-choice” questionnaire can still be a helpful tool. I have used it with relatively small corporate Boards of Directors where there can also be a need for clarification and choice among competing criteria when appointing top corporate officers.
You may be surprised that, when faced with competing virtues, some of your colleagues will make surprising choices. You may also be surprised by the amount of unanimity that often exists in what people seek in a leader.

Your firm will then be in a good position to examine your candidates, and choose the right leader, at the right time, for where your firm is today and where your organization is prepared to go.
If you can clarify your criteria, it will be easier to recognize the best leader for you. If your criteria are confused, it will be very hard to make a sensible choice. The effort described here is as nothing compared to the benefits of making a better leadership choice

Lehman's crisis : Learning..Article by Yogesh Chhabria.

It's an interesting article by Yogesh Chhabria.

LATELY, I have been thinking a lot about the Lehman crisis . Spending money

that they didn't have and going beyond their means is one of the main reasons for

their situation today. In fact that is the cause for the current economic crisis in the US.

When I see all this happening, I can only remember the good old days. Then,

karz was bad. People looked down upon those who took loans. Parents would

not give their daughter's hand in marriage to a man with loans.

But of course, the times have changed now. Everyone I know has a loan. The

buzz word is EMI (equated monthly installment). Today, you can buy

everything on EMI - a house, a television, an i-Pod. In fact I know of

someone who just bought a fancy BMW 3 series on EMI, instead of buying a

cheaper car outright with cash. I mostly prefer to take public transport,

but then I am an old man with old thoughts!

Anyway, coming back to what caused the crisis. Imagine having Rs 2 lakh in

your bank account, no regular income, yet buying a house worth Rs 65 lakh,

in the hope of selling it for a higher price. Even if the price of the

house fell by just 5 per cent (that is Rs 3 lakh), you will go bankrupt.

This is what Lehman Brothers did; with around USD 20 billion they went and

bought assets worth over USD 600 billion. Isn't it suicidal and simply

foolish?

I am sure things would have been different, had I been the head of Lehman

brothers. But who wants an old conservative man like me to head a complex

financial institution.

But there are a few lessons that we can learn:

1.Live a balanced life and avoid overspending.

2.Don't buy things we don't need.

3.Don't buy Branded good's.

4.Don't buy excess Food, Cloths, Cosmetics, Footwear, electronics and

Fashion accuracies

just think before you buy.

Tip: World still has a lot of growth ahead and the future holds immense

opportunities for us. Let us make the most of it and save and invest

it wisely instead of wasting our precious little on things we don't

need.

5.Try to balance life with work (No one is happy to work in there

profession's).

6. Don't stress out your-self, after work try to do some extra activities

like swimming,

yoga, walking, running where you can divert your mind from stress.

A thumb rule: Health is more important than money.

7.Try to understand each other (Wife and Husband) in financial matter's and

help each

other.

Tip: As soon as you get your monthly salary, set aside a fixed amount,

usually 35 per cent, for insurance, savings and investments. You can then

spend the rest.

8. Not all loans are bad. Loans that are 'need based' (home loans,

education loans) can always find a place in your finances against those

that are largely 'want based' (Credit cards, personal loans, car loans).

9. Borrow only if repayment is financially comfortable.

A thumb rule: Keep EMIs within 35 to 45 per cent of your monthly income

In that respect, there is one American who I really respect - Warren

Buffet. He has lived in the same ordinary house for over three decades,

drives his own medium sized car and leads an extremely regular 'middle

class' life. If that's all it takes for the richest person on earth to be

happy, why do all of us need to take extra stress just so that we can get

things which aren't even essential?

An Inspirational Person, madhur chakravarthy

In our lifetime, we meet many types of people. The ones that stand out for me are the ones who overcome challenges and have a positive outlook on life.

Most recently, I have had the pleasure of communicating with Madhur chakravarthy , or as he goes by, madhu. He writes poetry, and has sent me poems for the site. Through emails, I have had the pleasure of getting to know Madhu, and his story is an inspiring one.

You see, Madhu became ill at the age of 10. He had a rheumatoid condition that left him disabled. He was only able to walk with the use of crutches. Madhu is now 60 years old. He retired in 1991, and to quote Madhu, "I retired in 1991 when my health crashed very badly and my arms, on which I had, literally, 'walked' with crutches for the best part of 40 years finally decided they'd had enough! Most unsporting of them!!!"

Madhu talks about life and, as you will read in the paragraph quoted below he has a great outlook on life:

"Life, though, is full of compensations and I have been well blessed throughout my 'Life Journey' with good friends met and made along the way. Life is a kind of swings and roundabouts situation; if you can't kick a football you turn to other pursuits. So I read and learned and learned and read, endlessly curious about the World and its mysteries. I loved and love music and movies, good drama, good quality TV, anything scientific, anything, which makes me think about those things, which lie just beyond understanding. I am also a radio-ham holding a full Class A transmitting license since 1979. So while disability imposes its physical restrictions I am able to go out and meet the world via the air-waves. I speak to other 'Hams' all over the world."

We all face challenges in our lives. But how we handle these challenges, how we look at life is truly what matters. We can all look at life one of two ways: 1. we can focus on the good and move forward, or, 2. we can focus on the negative and wallow in self pity.

My Favooooooooooooooooooorite .Digital cam

Nikon D80 - 10.2 MP Digital SLR camera is my favooooooooooorite camera . i love to take the snaps with this . when my dream comes true to purchase ........

About the Product : Nikon D80 - 10.2 MP Digital SLR Camera
Nikon D80

Features:
10.2 effective megapixel Nikon DX Format CCD image sensor
High-speed continuous shooting: 3 frames per second (fps) in bursts of up to 100 consecutive JPEG (FINE M-size or smaller) or 6 RAW (NEF) images
Advanced high-precision, high-performance imaging processing engine with color-independent pre-conditioning
3D-Color Matrix Metering II with 420-pixel RGB sensor delivers consistent and dependable automatic exposure for ideal results in most lighting conditions
Refined 11-area AF system with new Auto-area AF mode and center sensor that can be switched to wide-frame operation for broader coverage
ISO AUTO mode automatically adjusts sensitivity between ISO 100 to 1600, maximizing available light to help achieve optimal exposure
Seven automated Digital Vari-Programs (Auto, Portrait, Landscape, Close Up, Sports, Night Landscape and Night Portrait) optimize white balance, sharpening, tone, color, saturation and hue to match the scene.

User-selectable choice of Normal, Softer, Vivid, More vivid, Portrait, Custom and Black-and-white image optimization options

Near-instant response with 0.18 sec. power-up and approx. 80-millisecond shutter release time lag promotes fast handling

Top shutter speed of 1/4,000 second and flash sync speeds up to 1/200 second
Fast image transfer via USB 2.0 Hi-Speed interface and SD memory card
Creative in-camera effects and editing functions consolidated under the new Retouch menu, including D-Lighting, Red-eye correction, Trim, Image Overlay, Monochrome settings (Black-and-white, Sepia, Cyanotype) and Filter Effects (Skylight, Warm filter, Color balance)
Multiple Exposure shooting option automatically produces an effect that resembles multiple exposure techniques used with film

Large 2.5-inch LCD monitor with ultra-wide 170-degree viewing angle for clear image preview and easy access to settings and information, including RGB Histograms
Selectable Slideshow function (Standard or Pictmotion)

SD memory card storage, SDHC compatible
Lightweight, compact body

High-energy EN-EL3e rechargeable lithium-ion battery delivers the power to shoot up to 2,700 pictures on a single charge and provides detailed battery status information. (Battery life figure determined by in-house test parameters)

Built-in Flash with I-TTL flash control and full support for Nikon's Creative Lighting System
The D80 supports more than 43 AF Nikkor lenses in addition to the growing family of DX Nikkor lenses

Includes Nikon’s Picture Project software for easy control over image adjustment and management

Support for Nikon's new Capture NX software, which provides easier access to powerful and visually intuitive enhancement tools that help tap the full potential of NEF images

Specifications:
Effective pixels
10.2 million

Image sensor
RGB CCD, 23.6 x 15.8 mm, 10.75 million total pixels

Image size
L (3,872 x 2,592) / M (2,896 x 1,944) / S (1,936 x 1,296)

Sensitivity
100 to 1600 (ISO equivalent) in steps of 1/3 EV, plus HI-0.3, HI-0.7 and HI-1

Storage media
SD memory card, SDHC compatible

LCD monitor
2.5-in., 230,000-dot, low-temp. polysilicon TFT LCD with brightness adjustment

Exposure metering
3D Color Matrix Metering II, Center-Weighted and Spot Metering

Exposure modes
Digital Vari-Program (Auto, Portrait, Landscape, Macro Close up, Sports, Night Landscape, Night Portrait), Programmed Auto [P] with flexible program; Shutter-Priority Auto [S]; Aperture Priority Auto [A]; Manual [M]

Interface
USB 2.0 (Hi-speed) (mini-B connector); SD card slot

Power sources
Rechargeable Li-ion Battery EN-EL3e, MB-D80 battery pack (optional), AC Adapter EH-5 (optional)

Dimensions (W x H x D)

Approx. 132 x 103 x 77mm (5.2 x 4.1 x 3.0 in.)

Weight

Approx. 585g (1lb 5oz) without battery, memory card, or body cap or monitor cover


finally the price is :
Rs. 45595.00 / USD 925.22