The organization is a US $9 billion
international consumer products company with operations in 80
countries. Publicly-traded, but predominantly family-owned, the
business has two primary divisions, each run by a
newly-appointed President who report to the worldwide Chief
Executive Officer.
After six months in the company, one of the
division Presidents was concerned by the observed inability of
his team to achieve the growth rates of direct competitors in a
number of markets around the world, particularly in the
dynamic, high growth Asian environment. On the surface,
everything appeared in order. That is, the business was
profitable, the individual performance appraisal of each
executive was positive, and the level of engagement and support
for the new go-to-market strategy was high. “Why then,” the
President asked, “is my business growing at 12% and my
competitors’ businesses are growing at 30%?”
Our team conducted a Diagnostic discovery
process with a broad group of company executives, including the
worldwide CEO, the Divisional President, the Global HR Director
and a selection of operating executives in the field. A clear
picture emerged of a corporate culture in which collegiality
and conflict-avoidance was so strong that executives were
unwilling (and even perceived themselves to be unable) to
address problems or identify the important business issues.
Instead, an “I’ll scratch your back if you scratch mine”
mentality was promoted and a culture in which each individual
rated the other highly, and performance issues were routinely
swept under the carpet.Further, although the organization
included a large number of committed and talented executives,
the business’s level of team activation (i.e., the way in which
one executive unleashes - - or blocks! - - the talents and
contributions of his or her colleagues) was very low. In short,
each executive appeared to be doing his or her best to carry
out assigned responsibilities, but in doing so, never achieved
a shared sense of mission or team.
Drawing on our expertise in business
leadership, change management, and executive assessment, we
proposed a Management Team Assessment, which was specifically
designed to evaluate the abilities and attitudes of the current
management team in the context of the company’s chosen business
strategy. We focused on four key attributes:1)Ability: which
provided insight on everything from leadership to core
functional skills as well as developmental needs;2)
Aspiration: which focused on each executive’s desire to advance
and influence his or her “world of work”, including insight
about the importance of financial rewards and other “invisible”
motivators; 3)Engagement: which provided insight into the
beliefs of the executives about the company, their commitment
to stay, and their willingness to contribute above and beyond
the call of duty; and importantly 4)Team Complementarity:
which focused on how individual members of the team “activate”
each other for enhanced individual productivity and achievement
of business outcomes.
Following the Assessment component of the
Diagnostic, our team of experts from Ascentador provided the
client with a detailed set of specific recommendations about
what changes were needed to optimize business performance in
both the medium- and long-term. These insights included
detailed recommendations about both Country and Functional
leaders, as well as about the division’s structure. Our team
highlighted issues that touched, but were not centered in, the
division, and that needed addressing if the company as a whole
were to achieve its goals. Our recommendations regarding the
individuals who participated in the Assessment covered six
basic action bands: 1. Restructure: This individual or team
will deliver enhanced performance under a different
organizational design.2. Redeploy: This individual will
deliver enhanced performance if assigned to (or at least
prepared for) a different role in the company.3. Reinforce:
This individual or team will deliver enhanced performance if
paired with different or additional team members or leaders.4.
Reward: This individual or team will deliver enhanced
performance if provided with a different set of motivators.5.
Replace: This individual or team lacks the necessary
competencies to achieve the Five-Year Business Strategy and
should be exited from the company on performance grounds.6.
Retire: This individual or team lacks the necessary motivation
to achieve the Five-Year Business Strategy and should be exited
from their current roles and perhaps from the company.
Importantly, although our work is always grounded in the data
we collect, the real power of this project lay in our team’s
ability to reason from the data and to develop a set of
concrete, actionable recommendations, including specific
timelines and a suggested process for managing change. These
recommendations provided a tangible roadmap for talent
management and business leadership and allowed the CEO to
address the issues in his business proactively and with
insight. In fact, he ultimately incorporated our
recommendations into the company’s Five Year Strategic Plan.
Two years on from the initial project, the Ascentador
recommendations have been followed carefully, resulting in
several key changes in leadership, and a markedly different
culture in which openness, transparency, and achievement are
valued more than politics, internal alliances and tenure.