Water and Food of a Relationship: Goals

Posted by James Massa on November 26, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment

Achievement of Short Term Goals and Long Term Goals is the water and food, respectively, that nourishes a Relationship so that it can grow.

Water is essential to sustain life.  A person going without water for more than 3 days will die.  Such is the case of a Relationship without Short Term Goals.

Food is needed for growth and nourishment, but more time can be taken to gather, grow, or hunt food.  Having water leads to the ability to have food.

A person needs both to survive, to be nourished, and to thrive.  Such is the case of a Relationship in regards to Short Term Goals and Long Term Goals.  A Relationship needs both Short Term Goals and Long Term Goals to survive, be nourished and to thrive.

Balance of Goals:

Organizations tend to be oriented towards Short Term Goals or Long Term Goals.  However, many do not have and maintain the balance of both.  Both are essential.  Many organizations will list off very lofty, very large, Long Term Goals.  “Save the World” or what I refer to as “Boil the Ocean” are the type of Long Term Goals that are often set forth.   Yet, without Short Term Goals, the Relationship is unable to survive long enough to achieve the Long Term Goals.

Other organizations have many Short Term Goals.  Their focus is on their shoe laces and not on the horizon.  They are frantically handling a myriad of Short Term Goals leading to…well, that’s just the point.  It is unclear often to where these Short Term Goals are leading when there are no Long Term Goals.  Without the Long Term Goals, the Relationship may start off quickly, but will fade or drift off track before achieving the Vision.

Regardless of whether it is a Short Term Goal or a Long Term Goal, the goal needs to be a SMART goal.  My book “Six Strand Weave” has a chapter describing the InFocus ™ wheel and SMART goals.  SMART goals are Specific, Measurable, Accomplishment Driven, Relevant, and Time Bound.  This acronym works nicely in English and does not translate readily to other languages.  However, the concepts are still the same.  The first letter of each concept when stated in English gives the word that describes these concepts.

What I will do in the blogs after Thanksgiving is share the underlying principles for each type of goal, Short Term Goals and Long Term Goals.  I will give some illustrations of each, provide some tips on common problems,  and also share ways to avoid or resolve them.

Summary of Timeless Principle #2: Without Vision the Relationship Will Fail

Posted by James Massa on November 25, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Leave a comment

There are 6 areas that are key to the success of any Relationship.  There are 6 Timeless Principles that impact each of those areas.  The Second is Vision.  The Timeless Principle is this:

“Without Vision the Relationship will fail.”

Relationship Wheel Vision

Vision is one of the 4 key quadrants to the Relationship Wheel.  It is the first after the essential Executive Sponsorship.  Executive Sponsors must Cast Vision.   Below is a summary of some of the key concepts the previous blogs have discussed:

  • Vision differences:
    • Partnership/Alliance require a Shared Vision
    • Merger/Acquisition/Joint Venture require One Vision

Shared Vision CirclesOne Vision Circle

  • Create a Vision statement
    • Use only one sentence or phrase.
    • Do not compounded the Vision with words such as “and”, “or”, etc.
  • There are 3 common Vision Casting      problems
    • Secret Visions  (solve by involving team to take notes and having follow up calls)
    • Different Visions (solve by simulcasting vision and writing down vision)
    • Blinded Visions or “White Hot” Executive Sponsorship- (solve by involving the operating team early on)

For more detailed information on the Relationship Wheel and the 6 Timeless Principles, I have provided an e-book that can be purchased at this site.  The book is titled “The Six Strand Weave…Transformational Relationships for Business and Non-Profits”

Three Barriers to Casting Vision: Barrier #3 – Blinded Vision

Posted by James Massa on November 22, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

The third common barrier to casting vision is what I call “white hot” executive sponsorship.  This is when the Executive Sponsors of two organizations are so intent, so excited, so certain of the Relationship, that they are blind to concerns in other areas of the Relationship due to their enthusiasm and position.  Again, this happens many times with Executive Sponsors who already know each other, like each other, and want to do something with each other.  Let me start with a story of such:

Blinded Vision:

Three business associates who were also close friends decided to form a business Relationship.  Harry was the CEO of Elite Financial Services, Inc.  This was his second successful venture.  He had sold his stake in another general financial services organization and established a new one focused on a specific profile of clientele.  Jane was an investment banker.  She had worked with many of Harry’s clients in the past taking the recommendations his company’s advisors made to their clients and implementing them into various financial vehicles that benefited the clients.  John, another associate and friend, brought a unique value to the Relationship, which was his network of contacts.  He was the CEO of CEOs Unlimited, a training organization who provided executive coaching for CEOs of various organizations.  The CEOs tended to be affluent and ideal clients for Harry and, subsequently, Jane.  Everyone benefited when the there were plenty of clients and when the client’s financial interests were advanced.

All three of these people were also personal friends.  John and Harry attended the same church.  Jane and John’s children were in the same private school.  Harry’s wife and Jane were close personal friends.  In support of each other, Harry had his organization put on a financial planning seminar which featured Jane as one of the speakers.  John attended the seminar.  At lunch afterwards, the three met to discuss the day.  The energy was high.  The day had been a success.  The lunch was a mixture of rapid conversation, laughter, and insight.  They all agreed to work closer together in a Relationship and sealed the decision with a toast.  The obvious benefit of the organizations working together was only surpassed by the enjoyment the 3 CEOs anticipation in working with each other.

When each returned to their respective offices they announced to their operating teams that they had decided to form a Relationship with the other two organizations.  Each gave a very quick overview of the obvious benefits.  Each cast effectively the same Vision to their teams that their friends did.  Each shared their overflowing excitement to their teams.

The teams responded by quickly trying to engage their peers at the other organizations.  Meetings were set up.  Discussions were far ranging.  However, there was little traction in the Relationship.  The Shared Vision statement became a long rambling sentence which attempted to take into consideration the 3 Visions described by each CEO.  The teams struggled to come up with Short and Long Term Goals that met their needs and fit into the rambling Vision.  Each was working hard and with great sincerity to make the Relationship work.  However, with each meeting, frustrations grew as the achievement of goals became more elusive.

The CEOs did not understand why their teams simply could not implement what was obviously a great fit among the 3 organizations.  They decided to have a monthly oversight meeting in which they would meet to discuss the Relationship.  At these meetings the CEOs would get together over lunch.  Each of their meetings was a renewal of the first luncheon.  The Relationship synergy was obvious.  Everyone got along well.  Each assured the other that they would speak to their operating teams and ensure that they worked on the Relationship in earnest.

Eighteen months into the Relationship, there was still no traction in the Relationship.  Short term goals had yet to be achieved in any meaningful way.  In addition, an animosity was growing among the operating team members.  When I was called and asked to help get the Relationship on track, the primary question was “what happened”?

The situation among Harry, Jane, and John was one in which their strong friendships and the nature of their personalities combined to cause what I call a “white hot” Executive Sponsorship.  Love is blind.  This type of very strong, very enthusiastic Executive Sponsorship is often akin to looking at the sun or trying to view the work of a welder without proper eye protection.  It blinds the Executive Sponsors from seeing the Red and Yellow areas of the rest of the Relationship, the areas of the Relationship Wheel that are showing transitions or serious problems.  Each of those areas may have been able to be corrected, but due to the blindness they tend to continue on without being recognized or addressed until the abrasion within the organization becomes often irreparable.

Avoiding the problem of Blinded Vision:

The best way to avoid the problem of a blinded vision by white hot executive sponsorship is to involve the operating teams early.   When I accepted the opportunity to help Harry, Jane, and John, the first step I took was to ask the CEOs and their operating team leaders to meet with me to have a working session.  The goal was to walk through a Relationship Wheel using the InSight Circle tools  (See Book “Six Strand Weave”).

The teams literally sit together and I’d prompt them through the Relationship Exam and scribe onto a white board their initial feedback.  As we gathered before the meeting, one of the operating team leaders came up and expressed his appreciation for getting the operating teams together with the Executive Sponsors.  I asked when the last time was that this had occurred.  His response was that it had never occurred!

Never had the operating teams had the opportunity to be together to hear from the CEOs what they each had in mind for the Relationship.  Nothing was ever put in writing from the luncheons that the CEOs had. He went on to say that the CEOs would invite one or two of them to a portion of their monthly meeting, but never had the operating team leaders all hear from the CEOs at the same time.  Given that all the companies were located in the same city, this clearly was a missed opportunity.

When we did get together, within 30 minutes it was clear that without the operating teams’ involvement, the CEOs were not aware of several fundamental operational conflicts that existed among the organizations.  For example, the sharing of contact names was an issue.  Part of the contractual commitment to the CEOs who participated in CEOs Unlimited was that under no circumstances would there be solicitation to the CEOs through CEO’s Unlimited, even for financial services.

Another aspect of CEOs Unlimited was that the relationship developed between the John’s executive coaches and the CEOs was very closely held.   John’s team members would not hand over access to a CEO to anyone else unless they were personally satisfied that the person to whom they were handing the relationship had only the CEO’s best interest in mind.  Knowing that their CEOs would be potential clients to Harry and Jane’s made the executive coaches of CEOs Unlimited wary of the Relationship.  They viewed  it as a conflict of interests.  Harry, Jane, and John may trust each other; however, “in the field” the relationships were among unknowns.

Finally, there had been a struggle to have one organization be the lead in engagement with the CEOs.  John’s organization felt they were the natural lead.  Harry’s organization wanted to take that lead role.

The Relationship Wheel™ that we created together that day had been color coded “green” for executive sponsorship because the Executive Sponsors were known and had cast a vision.  Actually it was white hot and glowing nuclear green.  However, in the 4 quadrants, there were 2 red areas and 2 yellow areas.  The white hot executive sponsors had been blind to the series of conflicts that indicated the probability of success of the Relationship was well below 10%.  To their dismay I indicated that they really did not need my services.  The Relationship was doomed to fail.  They should disband amicably and look for other Relationships, possibly among the organizations present, but not necessarily with all parties involved.  There was silence.  After some uncomfortable “Thank You’s” we ended the meeting.  I drove away wondering if there is ever a good way to give such terminal information.  My only solace was that I knew it to be true and I knew that the health of 4 organizations depended on them not continuing in the Relationship as it had been structured.

Rest of the Story:

Ultimately what came of this Relationship was that the nature of the Relationship and the joint venture structure in which it was cast was dissolved.  A new Relationship with a clear Shared Vision was formed in the structure of an Alliance.  The Shared Vision was created with high involvement from the operating teams.  Executive Sponsorship still existed, but there was now the ability to see the other areas of the Relationship.  The conflicts of leadership which were so abrasive in the joint venture structure were now able to be respected and synergistic in the alliance structure.  The comfort of the field organizations with each other was able to grow at its own pace and without conflicts of interest.  From that point forward, some 24 months after the initial ill-fated Relationship was formed, the Relationship which had ended was reborn and began to grow steadily.

Three Common Barriers to Casting Vision: Barrier #2 – Casting Different Visions

Posted by James Massa on November 21, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Have you ever seen when people are trying to walk together and one turns right and the other turns left.  Either they pull apart or bump into each other.  Both outcomes do not make for easy walking.  The same is true with a Relationship in which the Vision that has been cast is just not quite the same.  The organizations begin to move in different directions and there is either a pulling apart or a bumping around that occurs in the Relationship.  Let me start with a story that illustrates the problem and then give you ways to avoid such.

Casting Different Visions:

Lisa is the Vice President of Human Resource Development for LiveTeach, Inc., a very successful training organization.   They specialize in providing seminar format teaching events to companies on all sorts of topics.  They have highly skilled instructors who work with various subject matter experts to develop materials that are then sold as training modules to corporations for their executive training programs.  Randy is the CEO of LiveTeach, Inc.

Jill is the CEO of Imperial Value, Inc, an organization that specializes in the management of cash flow for organizations, including the training of people throughout an organization on budgetary and cash flow considerations.  Companies who have  undergone their training have seen a positive impact to their bottom line of over 12% in the first year through better expense management and operational efficiencies.  Charles is the Senior VP of Strategic Accounts for Imperial Value.

Randy and Jill have known each other for some time.  At Randy’s request, Jill has spoken at several corporate functions at LiveTeach.   After one such event, Randy and Jill discussed how uniquely effective the materials of Imperial Value were for those that used them.   Randy and Jill decided that they would form a Relationship and that LiveTeach would use Imperial Value’s materials as the resource sold to corporations in search of training modules on expense management and cash flow.  LiveTeach would private label the materials as all their materials are sold under the same brand.

Jill returned to Imperial Value and informed Charles of the decision to form a Relationship with LiveTeach.  Randy returned to LiveTeach and informed Lisa of the decision to form a relationship with Imperial Value.  As the operating teams lead by Charles and Lisa worked together, it was more and more clear that LiveTeach had no intention of private labeling the materials from Imperial Value.  They were going to use parts of them and develop their own private offering using the materials from Imperial Value as an unnamed source and one that was not paid a license or royalty.

Jill and Randy had conveyed the vision to Charles and Lisa, respectively.  However, Randy had not effectively conveyed the same vision to Lisa that Jill had to Charles and her organization.  The visions were similar, but not the same.

Some of the issue was that the culture within LiveTeach was to always modify the materials from the subject matter experts.  Furthermore, Lisa happened to have a background in finance and was quite adept at cash flow analysis.  She felt that her own knowledge, combined with several other experts would be a good mix with the Imperial Value resources.  Lisa wasn’t going directly against Randy.    The exclusive, licensed, and paid for full use nature of the relationship had not been understood by Lisa.  After 6 months of meetings that ended with strain on the part of all parties, the disconnect in Vision became known.

Avoiding the problem of “different visions”:

There are 2 steps that can be taken to avoid the issue of the operating teams of the organization receiving different visions or different versions of the same vision.

First, is to have the Executive Sponsor simulcast the Vision.  What I mean by “simulcast” is to have them either physically or virtually present the Vision at the same time to their organizations or leaders of their operating teams.  This is particularly difficult to accomplish in larger organizations or in organizations which have a low Geographic Proximity to each other.  We’ll discuss this “Geographic Proximity” in more detail in future blogs.

Second, which should always be done even if the Executive Sponsors simulcast the Vision, is to write down the Vision.  Writing a Vision statement was mentioned in earlier blogs.  However, let me emphasize, it is in the process of committing a Vision to paper that allows it to become clear.    This written vision can then be provided to the organizations for initial understanding and later reference.   Sending out a copy of the written Vision under the signature of both Executive Sponsors is a good way to tie a bow around the Vision.

There are many ways that a Vision can be misinterpreted.  However, starting with the same Vision, written down and cast to the organizations at the same time, is one of the best ways to ensure the same Vision is cast and that it is also understood.

Three Common Barriers to casting a Vision: Barrier #1: Secret Vision

Posted by James Massa on November 20, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

There are 3 most common Vision problems which occur in Relationships do not have to do with a lack of Vision.  Rather they all include a lack of effectively casting that vision from the Executive Sponsor to each of the organizations.  Let me give a story which depicts a very common scenario.

Secret Vision:

Howard and Rick are both well noted for their success in industry.  Howard developed commercial properties successfully throughout all the major metropolitan cities and was noted for restoration and reuse of older, downtown and industrial areas.  Rick  developed multi-use, residential properties and had most recently grown to some degree of acclaim through his implementation of “green”, environmentally friendly, construction and utilities technologies.   At a recent convention in Las Vegas on community development, both were featured speakers.  They concluded the keynote day by participating in a panel discussion.

As the moderator asked questions, it became apparent that the rapport and synergy between these two leaders was enormous.  They respected each other.  They had similar experiences in somewhat complementary areas of the industry.  As they talked back and forth, the role of the moderator fell silent due to the frank and energized interaction between them.

They stepped down from the dias and spoke behind the stage, shook hands and said almost in unison, “We need to work together.  Anything you need, just let me know. It’s yours.”  With that they strode off having a great sense of new opportunity ahead.

Upon their return to their offices they told their operating team leaders of the positive interaction and commitment they had made to the other to work toogether.  They each repeated, “Anything you need….it’s yours”.  Both had in mind the use of Rick’s green technology initiatives being incorporated into Howard’s next commercial venture.  However, neither had cast this vision to their respective teams.

Soon afterwards, the operating team leaders contacted each other.  As they tried to interpret the cryptic guidance from a meeting in which none of the operating team members participated, they came upon the concept of developing a residential community in a downtrodden industrial area of a city in the northeast using green technologies.  This was actually relatively close to what was intended by Howard and Rick.  Then Howard’s team asked that they receive the patented construction materials and techniques developed by Rick’s organization at no charge with the intention to brand them under a new marketing initiative from Howard’s organization.  Rick’s team pushed back saying that the intent was to sell them the materials and be a sub-contractor for the work itself.  Howard’s team repeated the statement “Anything you need….its yours.”   Rick’s team knowing that their patented techniques were a key differentiator for them in the market refused to give away such corporate treasures so freely.  Six months later, Howard and Rick were shocked to find that nothing had begun and that the teams were not only not working well, but nearly opposed to each other.  How did it get to this?

The issue was not that there was no vision, but that the fullness of the vision had not been conveyed effectively to the rest of the organizations.  This occurs quite often.  There are two steps that can be taken to help avoid this Vision problem.

 Avoiding the problem of “secret vision”:

First, when Executive Sponsors get together, if at all possible, they should not have Vision discussions and make commitments associated with that Vision by themselves.  They do not need other’s participation, but will benefit from other’s observations.  In short, someone needs to keep notes on what was committed so that the operating teams can execute the vision.

Second, whenever possible, there should be a follow up meeting or phone call to summarize that to which was agreed.  This follow up call should occur before the Vision is cast to the respective organizations.  This allows for refinement and clarity of the Vision before the Executive Sponsors attempt to cast such to their organizations.

The first is not always feasible or always easy to arranged.  The nature of visionary leaders who are dealing with other visionary leaders is often a derivative of what I just described in the case Howard and Rick walking off the dias and speaking behind the stage.  It happens spontaneously.  The Executive Sponsors recognize the synergy between themselves and another person or organization and seize the opportunity to engage them.  It happens in phone calls in the office, at conferences, even in planes.  They connect.  They see the vision.  They act on their instincts that have made them successful.  The operating teams are simply caught in the rip tide of the newly formed relationship trying to swim upstream and get a glimpse of what was said and committed when they were not present.

If others are not present when these initial conversations occur between Executive Sponsors, the value of the second step is all that much greater.  A follow up call or engagement before casting the Vision allows for the ramifications of some implications of the Relationship to be considered by the Executive Sponsors.   Statements from Executive Sponsors such as “Whatever it takes, we’ll do.” or “We partner for life.” are very assuring.  However, they are often not well considered and the details of what such statements mean are not well communicated.  The operating teams try to fulfill such commitments.  Yet, when the Vision is not known or not cast fully, it is an impossible task to fulfill.

Avoid “Secret Visions”.  They will occur spontaneously.  The way to avoid them is to have someone present when the vision is explored.  Regardless of whether that occurs, there needs to be a follow up call between the Executive Sponsors, again with someone present to take notes, after the initial Vision has been conceptualized and before the Vision is cast to each of the organizations.

Timeless Principle #2: Vision – Without Vision the Relationship will Fail.

Posted by James Massa on November 15, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

Executive Sponsorship is at the center of the Relationship Wheel™ because having such is a requirement in order for a Relationship to succeed.  As you can see in the Relationship Wheel™ there are 4 quadrants that surround the center of Executive Sponsorship.  So, why am I starting with Vision?  One of the two functions of the Executive Sponsor is to “cast vision”.  A Relationship begins with leaders who sees the synergistic value of forming the Relationship.   However, once sponsored, the vision must be cast.  In order to cast a Vision one must understand several things about a Vision for a Relationship.

Relationship Wheel Vision

Noted author, Steven Covey, in his book “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People” would summarize this with the statement that one must “Begin with the end in mind”.  The timeless principle on which this is based is that without vision, the people perish.  Applying this to Relationships we have the principle that “Without Vision, the Relationship will fail”.  Organizations, and the people that comprise them, must know where they are going as they form a Relationship.  Later I will explain why the structure of the Relationship is dependent on the Culture within and the Chemistry between the organizations.  For now, let me focus on the Vision itself.

Shared Vision vs. One Vision:

There is a slightly different characteristic of a Vision depending on whether the Relationship is a Partnership/Alliance or a Merger/Acquisition/Joint Venture.  The Vision  for a Partnership/Alliance must be a Shared Vision.  It is shared among those in the Relationship.  Yet, it cannot be mutually exclusive of any one of the organizations’ individual Visions.  Accomplishing the Shared Vision cannot have a negative result for any of the organizations involved in the Relationship achieving their individual Visions.  Rather, the Shared Vision should help enhance the achievement of the individual Visions. The Shared Vision must be complementary to each organization’s individual Vision.  By achieving the Shared Vision, the individual organization’s Visions must be moved closer to achievement.  It is as if two circles represent each organizations vision.  Those circles overlap.  The area of overlap is the “Shared Vision”

Shared Vision CirclesOne Vision Circle

In the circumstance of a Merger/Acquisition/Joint Venture, the Vision must be a single Vision.  To distinguish it from the Shared Vision of a Partnership/Alliance, I will use the phrase “One Vision” in regards to the Vision for a Merger/Acquisition/Joint Venture.   By the nature of merging, acquiring, or entering into a joint venture, the organizations entering into the Relationship are indicating they are eliminating their separateness and becoming one.  The first indicator of this is to have a single Vision, to have One Vision.

The next several blogs will discuss casting a Vision and keys to defining One Vision or a Shared Vision that can be achieved by a Relationship between and among organizations.

Summary of Timeless Principle #1: Without Executive Sponsorship there can be no Relationship

Posted by James Massa on November 14, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

There are 6 areas that are key to the success of any Relationship.  There are 6 Timeless Principles that impact each of those areas.  The first and foremost is Executive Sponsorship.  The Timeless Principle is this:

“Without Executive Sponsorship there can be no Relationship.”

Executive Sponsorship has a binary impact on the success of the Relationship.  With it the Relationship can succeed, it can achieve the “Vision”.  Without it, the Relationship is doomed to fail.  That is why Executive Sponsorship is at the center of the Relationship Wheel(TM)

Without Executive Sponsorship there can be no relationship

Without Executive Sponsorship there can be no relationship

Following is a bulletized summary of some of the key concepts around the Executive Sponsor.

  • Executive Sponsor’s function is:
    • To Cast Vision
    • To Lift organization “over the speed bumps”
  • Items regarding Executive Sponsor:
    • Only 1 Executive Sponsor, but 1 in each organization
    • The head of an organization cannot form Relationship on its own.  It needs a body as well.
  • Common Problems regarding the Executive Sponsor:
    • Not knowing who is the Executive Sponsor
      • Solution:  Identify who can say “yes” without having to go further up in the organization
    • Over functioning Executive Sponsor
      • Solution:  Operating team must commit to involve Executive Sponsor when necessary
    • Under functioning Executive Sponsor
      • Solution:  Executive Sponsor must participate in scheduled, periodic, structured reviews

For more detailed information on the Relationship Wheel and the 6 Timeless Principles, I have provided an e-book that can be purchased at this site.  The book is titled “The Six Strand Weave…Transformational Relationships for Business and Non-Profits”

Two Biggest Problems for Executive Sponsor: Under-functioning Executive

Posted by James Massa on November 13, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

As has been stated in earlier blogs, the Executive Sponsor is the only one who can fulfill the actions of their role.

  • cast the vision and
  • overcome the atypical barriers.

However, a Relationship runs the majority of the time within the operational boundaries which have been established and the operating teams must be the ones to implement the Relationship on a daily basis.

The biggest challenge for an Executive Sponsor is to do ONLY their 2 functions and to do those 2 functions consistently.

As mentioned in an earlier blog many times Executive Sponsor is so emotionally drawn to the fulfillment of their vision that they do not let go of the operational aspect of the Relationship.   When this occurs they are “over functioning”.

However, there are times that the Executive Sponsor is actually under-functioning and unwilling to pay close attention to the Relationship.   There are two common causes for this:

  1. The Executive Sponsor trusts the operating team so completely, that the Executive Sponsor is
    fails to recognize their critical role and its 2 function.
  2. The Executive Sponsor feels restricted, burdened, or fatigued by the discipline required to be an Executive
    Sponsor of too many Relationships.   A certain tediousness begins to occur due to too many similar meetings.

Problem example : Under Functioning Executive Sponsors:

John is the founder and CEO of SolGen Energy, Inc., a company which specializes in ultra small high power solar patches.  This is a new technology which reduces the size of heritage solar panels to squares varying in size from a postage stamp to a post card.

There is one great exception to John’s behavior and it has to do with Tampa Touch, a company owned by one of John’s long time business associates, James. John and James were real estate developers in the same booming Florida market.  They each set aside their real estate careers in pursuit of a great idea.  John’s was the solar technology idea that led to SolGen Energy.  James’ was a vision to market building materials in atypical manners much like the pharmaceutical company’s marketing directly to the consumer to drive demand through to the medical professionals.  James’ vision was the seed corn of what is now Tampa Touch, one of the largest brand management companies specializing in not only building materials, but other related technologies as well. SolGen Energy and Tampa Touch have formed a Relationship.  However, despite Rick, one of John’s key executives, constant effort to involve John in the Relationship, he is never available and dismissive of the need to be involved.  His long time friend and associate, James, is leading the other organization.  John is certain all will work out well.  John feels he can concentrate on other opportunities and needs of SolGen Energy.

Rick’s operating team is highly concerned.  Tampa Touch has missed several important deadlines.   Their first short term goal was achieved, but the cost was 10 times what was projected due to inaccurate forecasts from Tampa Touch.  There is a high degree of abrasion and a lack of cooperation on the part of the marketing communications team within Tampa Touch.  The administrative support has been downright rude even to John’s executive assistant.  James, John’s friend, is constantly traveling and never returns phone calls.  The only communication received is from a woman who travels with James.  Nobody understands if she is an executive assistant, an investor, or all the above.  There is suspicion that she is even more on the personal level.  Her communication is always requests for SolGen Energy to do more.  There is never the “give” portion of the give-and-take required to make Relationships work.

Recently she has begun to ask for SolGen Energy proprietary customer information which has raised concerns throughout SolGen Energy in marketing, IT, and legal.  John, SolGen Energy’s CEO and the Executive Sponsor of the Relationship with Tampa Touch, continues to put off his team’s request to have a Relationship Review because he trusts James.   SolGen Energy’s policy is not to share proprietary or customer information without a signed NDA or other agreement covering confidentiality.

John trusts James, but John’s operating team is concerned.  One red flag waving in the wind is that James refuses to sign the Relationship agreement document which states what each other’s responsibilities are in the Relationship.  From the perspective of John’s operating team, the Relationship with Tampa Touch is the highest cost, most difficult Relationship they have and it also has the lowest return.

Analysis and Avoiding the problem of the under functioning Executive Sponsor:

The key to ensure that the operating team has adequate time with their Executive Sponsor to receive his input on a Relationship is for all Relationships to have a regularly scheduled, tightly structured presentation (not written reports) on the status of the Relationship to the Executive Sponsor.  This needs to be mandatory for all Relationships.  Such a meeting draws the Executive Sponsor into the Relationship for an appropriate amount of time to ensure his sponsorship responsibilities are fulfilled.  The Relationship Wheel™ and the Relationship Review process, which are discussed in detail in my book “Six Strand Weave”, are the most effective and efficient way to accomplish this.  Please note that the Relationship Reviews are done with all Executive Sponsors present at the same time. It is one Relationship and the Executive Sponsors need to  have the opportunity to engage not only their teams, but also each other, in order to be able to fulfill their sponsorship responsibilities.

Unlike the single overt event in which the operating teams commit to involve the Executive Sponsor, the Relationship Review process must occur at least twice a year with the Executive Sponsor.  If an organization has the same Executive Sponsor for 3 relationships, which is often the case due to the CEO often being the Executive Sponsor, then the Executive Sponsor will soon find himself involved in nearly monthly reviews.  If an organization has 12 Relationships, then the Executive Sponsor could find themselves meeting every other week on a different, bi-annual Relationship Review.

This need to have Relationship Reviews with the Executive Sponsor and the degree of discipline the Executive Sponsor is willing to have in regards to the Relationship Reviews is one factor which sets the limit for the number of Relationships one Executive Sponsor (and often one organization) can handle.  It is better to have a few excellent Relationships than to have too many Relationships which go without Executive Sponsorship.

Remember, without Executive Sponsorship there can be no Relationship.

Two Biggest Problems for Executive Sponsors: Overfunctioning Executive

Posted by James Massa on November 12, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

The Executive Sponsor is the only one who can fulfill the actions of their role.

  • cast the vision and
  • overcome the atypical barriers.

However, a Relationship runs the majority of the time within the operational boundaries which have been established and the operating teams must be the ones to implement the Relationship on a daily basis.

Not casting vision is normally not the problem in the Executive Sponsor fulfilling their role.  The Executive Sponsor being unwilling to overcome speed bumps that arise that the operating team cannot overcome is often not the problem in the Executive Sponsor fulfilling their role.   The biggest challenge for an Executive Sponsor is to do ONLY those 2 functions and to do those 2 functions consistently.

Very often an Executive Sponsor is so emotionally drawn to the fulfillment of their vision that they do not let go of the operational aspect of the Relationship.   When this occurs they are “over functioning”.

Problem example : Over Functioning Executive Sponsors:

John is the founder and CEO of SolGen Energy, Inc., a company which specializes in ultra small high power solar patches.  This is a new technology which reduces the size of heritage solar panels to squares varying in size from a postage stamp to a post card.  These very small solar panels are able to provide enormous electrical energy.  Applications for the technology are endless.  Manufacturing volume, distribution channel coordination, and patent and research work needed to keep ahead of the competition are all large and complex areas demanding attention.  John has assembled a team of seasoned executive veterans of high growth companies.  They have each taken on the responsibility of their area of focus.  One of these executives is Rick.  Rick is responsible for Strategic Relationships.

Recently, Rick and the VP of Marketing, Alice, have brought forward an opportunity to form a Relationship with several alternative usage companies.  One was the second largest toy manufacturer who had interest in use of the energy “swatches” for their line of electronic games.  The other was an automotive manufacturer with creative ideas for usage of the technology.   John’s heritage is in real estate development where he saw the need for alternative energy applications.  John developed the technology in his garage.  John sold his business, formed Solgen Energy, and has never looked back.

For each relationship, John has cast vision with his executive sponsor peer from the other company of how the energy will expand both organizations offering, increase profits, and do so in an environmentally friend manner.  The operating teams of SolGen Energy have embraced the Relationships and run forward implementing short term goals, tracking on Long Term Goals, understanding each other’s cultures, and generally making things happen.

It seems that as they move forward faster and faster, John has begun to hold the teams back.  He insists on being involved in the weekly marketing meetings.  John visits procurement and asks to review the vendor choices.   He has started to want to overhaul the quality control processes of manufacturing.  Even in the area of IT, he wants to choose the format of the reports that various managers need to run their portion of the business.  On several occasions he has completely reversed the very mature programs that have been put into place with the other 2 organizations and has held onto time critical decisions wanting to “sleep on it” for what turns out to be endless weeks.

The operating teams respect John.  However, they are very frustrated with John.  They have yet to have their first Relationship Review in fear that if John is as involved as he is now in every detail, he will be even moreso once they tell him what is really going on.  The Relationship with the toy manufacturer is now at risk because normal operating decisions associated with the ramping up of production for the Christmas season are not being made.

Analysis and Avoiding the problem of the over functioning Executive Sponsor:

John is over functioning.   The rapid growth is taking the technology into areas well beyond what he ever imagined.   Although he has personally assembled the executive leadership who form his operating team, he is unwilling to completely trust the future of his vision with them.  They are all doing the excellent work he has hired them to do, work that he personally is not qualified to do, and they are all moving forward so fast.  John is afraid to let go of the details in fear that his operating team will not come to him with the big issues that he really should be involved.  SolGen Energy is stifled under the ceiling of its CEO.  The Relationships which are dependent on John casting vision and overcoming barriers outside the capacity of his operating teams are getting neither of these roles fulfilled.  Both Relationships are in jeopardy.

Solutions to how to get the Executive Sponsor to “let go” will be blogged after I describe the Under-functioning Executive tomorrow.

Roles of Executive Sponsor

Posted by James Massa on November 11, 2013
Posted in: Uncategorized. Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Leave a comment

The Executive Sponsor has 2 primary functions.

  1. To cast vision.
  2. To help overcome barriers that normal policies and budgets of the operating teams cannot overcome.  I call this “lifting the organization over the speed bumps”.

Casting Vision made simple:

I will say one thing that is imperative about the casting of vision.  It must be short.  If “the Vision” cannot be repeated by those to whom it is cast, then the vision has not been effectively cast.  It’s that simple.

In a Relationship between 2 organizations, if the “Shared Vision” cannot be stated exactly the same by each Executive Sponsor, then the vision is not shared.  It’s that simple.

Therefore, develop and use short Vision Statements.  Short Vision statements typically have no conjunctions.  Conjunctions are connecting words such as “and”, “but,” “or,” “nor,” “for,” “so,”  or “yet”.  It is a single vision, not a list of visions.  Therefore, no conjunctions.

Comment on Vision and Mission Statements:

Visions must also be repeated over and over again.  The Executive Sponsor must be “on message” at all times, tying back all that is said to the vision that is cast.   Many of the largest companies today state their Vision Statements inadvertently in preface to their Mission Statement.  Vision Statements are long term, generally broad, and rarely changed.  Mission Statements often speak of several areas that must be accomplished in the next 5 years to advance the Vision.  Mission Statements are then often broken down to yearly goals.  A good example is Ford Motor Company.

Ford:  “To be relevant and profitable for the future” (Vision)    “One Team, One Plan, One Goal” (Mission)  Then it breaks down into goals.  http://retailindustry.about.com/od/retailbestpractices/ig/Company-Mission-Statements/Ford-Motor-Mission-Statement.htm

An example of too many conjunctions is Google, Inc.  http://www.google.com/about/company/

Google:  “To organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful”  Really?  It takes 3 “ands” to cast Google’s vision?  Three “ands” are as hard to remember as a Google search hit on the second page.

GE:  “A relentless drive to invent and build things that matter” (Vision)  This unofficial vision statement has a conjunction but is well-stated, broad and enduring vision statement.  However, being engineering driven all-inclusive culture, GE not only tinkers with the Vision statement but puts it into an equation that is sure to not be able to be repeated called The GE Works Equation

“We look at what the world needs. X[times]  (A belief in a better way + A relentless drive to invent and build things that matter.) = a world that works better. ”    Maybe this complexity of vision is why GE’s performance so far down from its early 2000’s highs.

Lifting over Speed Bumps:

The second function of the Executive Sponsor is to lift the organization over speed bumps.  Speed bumps include limitations due to finite resources, such as finances or manpower, or policy limitation.  Examples of Speed Bumps are the following:

  • The decision to invest in a particular marketing or manufacturing initiative in a Relationship may be sound, yet the spending authority limit of the executive responsible for such may be below what is required to participate in the initiative.
  • The history of the organization is to always have its annual meeting at a particular location.  However, if the meeting is going to allow for inclusion of team members from the other party to the Relationship, then it will have to be moved to a different location.  Sometimes even such an unwritten policy as “we always meet here” needs the Executive Sponsor to lift the organization over the speed bump.
  • A company may have a policy not to private label its product.  An opportunity exists within a Relationship to do so and it will go a long way towards achieving a Long Term Goal.  However, since the company has never private labeled its products before and has a policy against such, the Executive Sponsor will need to be involved in this decision.

An Executive Sponsor is the person who can decide to allocate resources outside of budget or can override a standard policy decision allowing the right thing to be done in a timely way to advance the goals of the Relationship.

Keeping the Executive Sponsor within their role and not impeding the progress of the Relationship is the topic of the next blog posting.