LEADERSHIP: FUTURE-FIGHTING, NOT FIRE-FIGHTING

Published: 2010-03-29   please add a comment below

This Potshot was prompted by:

"How to Pick a Good Fight"
by Saj-Nicole A. Joni and Damon Beyer
Harvard Business Review - December 2009

URL: http://hbr.org/product/how-to-pick-a-good-fight/an/R0912D-PDF-ENG?Ntt=how+to+pick+a+good+fight

(Please note: pages linked here may require a subscription with the publisher to view the full page)

You can change the positioning and performance of your business if you pick the right fights
and avoid wasting time, effort or reputation battling things that don't make a real difference

"Harmony has tremendous appeal. Yet a good leader still asks how the business can do better. And, a great leader fights for what he or she believes in." This edited quote from a recent HBR article* urges us all to strive for what's game-defining, not what's marginal. Where do you and your team spend time: on operational fights with few serious implications; or, strategic challenges that can transform the business? The authors offer three checks of fight-worthiness - outlined below.

But let me start with an example. Marvin Bower, the man who really formed McKinsey & Co., was relentless in pursuit of what was central to creating a great firm. He was quietly spoken but willing to fight. When some colleagues wanted the firm to go into venture capital, he fought for the integrity of the firm's role as a professional firm advising clients. He won - as so often in arguments defining the firm's purpose and reputation.

Here are the three tests our authors suggest applying:

  • Calculate if the fight is material - involving outcomes that can deliver quantum changes in one or more of the business' key metrics: revenue, costs, capital, etc.
  • Ensure the fight is future-focused - leading to a different looking business with improved competitive positioning, reputation or other key descriptors.
  • Check if the fight has a noble purpose - supporting a larger cause or speaking to more than making money, as it did for Marvin Bower.

The authors also provide three pointers re running a worthwhile fight. Make it a sport, not a war - serious and competitive but not brutal or lethal. Set up a formal structure but also engage informal ones (networks and professional connections) so evidence is gathered effectively. Turn pain into gain, ensuring those who lose have the chance for learning and continuing to play.

To keep us from choosing the soft option of harmonious alignment, the authors evidence its risks including complacency: the "greatest predictor of poor company performance". They also explain that "within acceptable levels of competition and tension, science shows, dissent will fire up more of an individual's brain ... stimulating more pathways and creative centres". If so, over the next 12 months, which "worthwhile fights" do you have to run?



Dr. Timothy Pascoe AM
PhD (Cambridge), MBA (Harvard), BE & BEc (Adelaide)
Creator, V|E|C|T|O|R Leadership®



Name
*will be displayed beside your comment
Email address
*won't be displayed
Comment
Conditions of posting: please feel free to post your views, but note that any post that is defamatory, contains bad language, or is spam will be blocked and deleted.
*
Email me when other comments are posted

Fields marked with * are required

This Potshot has no comments yet


Would you like to reproduce this Potshot?

We encourage people to republish this Potshot online, or in print. However, please take the time to read our License Terms and so that you can properly attribute the republished Potshot