Professional Coach & Consultant: Inflate Gate and Leadership

Professional Coach & Consultant: Inflate Gate and Leadership: Inflate Gate and Leadership You may be asking yourself what does Inflate Gate have to do with leadership.  I say it has everything to do...

Inflate Gate and Leadership

Inflate Gate and Leadership

You may be asking yourself what does Inflate Gate have to do with leadership.  I say it has everything to do with leadership.

Leadership is all about accountability.  Leaders choose accountability.  They do not simply accept it or take the responsibility, they want it because they know how important it is.

The current situation

By now, everyone knows about Inflate Gate; the fact the New England Patriots were playing with game balls inflated below the standard set by the NFL.  That the footballs were checked by officials and found to be up to standard prior to the game and at a point later in the game it was determined the game balls the Patriots were using were underinflated. 

What followed was a firestorm of reaction from all sectors.  Everyone (as usual) wanted to know what people knew, when they knew it and who was the most likely guilty party.

This set the stage for a moment of brilliant leadership action.  However, for the many that have seen or read Coach  Bill Bellicheck's public statements know he missed that opportunity.  The fact is, he raised more questions about himself, his team and especially his quarterback.  Leaders do not do this.  Leaders do not cast a shadow on the integrity of their organizations.

Being accountable does not mean confessing to guilt or claiming responsibility for an act.  It is choosing accountability over all else when a crisis hits.  I will not recount the whole of Mr. Bellicheck's responses, but to simply say he did not come even close to stepping up as a leader during this crisis. Think about all the articles and TV hosts that you and others have seen that have played a part in casting a shadow over the Patriots and the all time sporting event the Super Bowl.  None of this had to happen even though the facts of the deflated footballs remain.

Mr. Bellichek is not alone.  Leaders for whatever reason step over huge opportunities to be accountable and incur the consequences that come with it.  There was a moment and it was missed.

How could Mr. Bellicheck have done that you may ask?

Simply by taking accountability. What he did versus taking accountability stand in stark contrast.  Here is an example of what Mr. Bellicheck could have said.  You will quickly notice the difference.

First, I want to apologize to all the fans, the audience and most of all to my players. I have failed you.  I'm accountable for what has happened and will do my utmost to find out what happened, why and when.  That is my promise.  How did I fail?  I failed in allowing the desire to win to destroy the integrity of the game and especially my team that has worked so hard this year to reach the Super Bowl.  I have in some way behaved in such a manner that it has allowed one or more people to think that winning at all costs is acceptable.  This is never acceptable.  Somehow, that must have happened.  I would like to think it did not.  However, as the leader of this team on and off the field and until I discover reasons why not, I am and will remain accountable to the public, the owners and to the NFL.  I regret this happened and as I said before will not stop until I can stand before you with the final analysis of the situation.

This, is leadership.  This is what real leaders do.  They know that doing otherwise destroys confidence in their own integrity and those around them.  It is like a cancer that begins to rot and organization from the inside out.  That, while it destroys the brand that a company has spent years creating.  It only takes one crisis and one failure of leadership to destroy.  Leaders know that integrity is earned over time and one failure to step up to accountability can destroy what was worked for so hard.

Actions for You?

Choose accountability as a leader.  Pay attention to your behaviors and the messages it may be sending to the organization and people around you and take accountability for that.  Look for opportunities to step up and claim your leadership accountability when things go wrong.  People will respect your for that. That and you might even gain a new respect for yourself!

Why start-ups fail, according to their founders

Why startups fail, according to their founders

The top reason? They make products no one wants.

When the founder of a startup company shuts down her or his business, it is customary to pen an essay that tells the rest of the community what went wrong, called a failure post-mortem. Nine out of 10 startups fail, which is why the technique has become so common..  For most these essays are honest, enlightening, and brave when utilizing a third party to interview the founder/owner. This helps the founder to stay on task and nit point fingers or issue backward non-apologies. 

 The proliferation of the failure post-mortem has helped create a body of work where those publicly admitting to failure, and examining it, can take make a contribution. It also distills the narratives to case studies from which other entrepreneurs can learn.

CB Insights recently parsed 101 post-mortem essays by startup founders to pinpoint the reasons they believe their company failed. The company crunched the numbers to reveal that the number-one reason for failure, cited by 42% of polled startups, is the lack of a market need for their product.

That should be self-evident. If no one wants your product, your company isn’t going to succeed. But many startups build things people don’t want with the irrational hope that they’ll convince them otherwise. The confusion often stems from becoming attached to a "great idea" and ignoring market forces.  People must be willing to exchange money for the product or service, period.  End of story.

The most prominent modern example of this phenomenon is the mobile phone. People dismissed it as a novelty in its early days. Obviously, they are no longer a novelty. The late Apple co-founder Steve Jobs famously said, “A lot of times, people don’t know what they want until you show it to them.” The problem is that entrepreneurs have taken that to heart.

The failure to determine if people want your idea is at the core for startup failures.

There are more practical concerns. Polled founders also cited a lack of sufficient capital (29%), the assembly of the wrong team for the project (23%), and superior competition (19%) as top reasons for failure. See the CB insights chart below.

Running out of money has been a known root cause of failure for years.  Performing a proper analysis of cash flow to first dollar of profit is a requisite.   Those that fail to do so, are opening themselves wide open to the second most common reason for failure.

Except for low capital need, low risk small businesses,  product demand, or a lack thereof, is second behind a single founder.  The presence of a co-founder helps avoid many of the reasons cited at the bottom of the CB Insights chart,  including disharmony, poor marketing, and the wrong team.

In many cases, running out of cash does not cause a startup’s failure, it is a symptom of other issues. The most important being the lack of a well thought out business plan.  This does not mean a "budget".  The business plan states in very clear words what must be done to be a market success supported by a budget.  History has shown many times that without a business plan founders/owners find themselves in the open ocean without the tools to navigate.

Can I really start my own business? 10 Signs you’re ready to launch Your Own Business

Can I really start my own business? 10 Signs you’re ready to launch Your Own Business

You probably know that starting a business can be an intimidating process necessitating a great deal of hard work. But the query has been lingering with you night and day. Maybe you are just not happy with your present position. Probably you have always imagined of launching your own consulting firm or shop.

Everyone isn’t equipped to be a business owner, but there is a great number of us who have the skills but do not recognize our own potential. Let’s go over 10 qualities that entrepreneurs typically have. (Hint: Most people have these)

The Creative Type

If you are fed up with having your creative concepts/ideas go to waste, then probably it is time to move out of that 9-5 and work for yourself.  Don’t waste your precious time and creative energy at jobs that wont supply you with the money you need to live the life that you want!

You’re Motivated

You do not need something or someone to get started simply because you have that inner drive to motivate yourself. You’ve vision, direction, and you’re passion about your idea is the only thing you need to get started doing whatever is you are doing(such as duties in your 9-5).

You’re Independent

This implies that you are a problem solver who’ll try to discover most issues on your own and solve them. You do not need anyone guiding you each and every step of the way. You’re smart enough to understand when you require help but independent enough to know not to depend on others to complete the job. These people who are independent can make exceptional business owners.

You are Passionate

If there is one business idea which stays with you that you have absolutely fallen in love with, most likely you can turn it into reality. Business owners and entrepreneurs are really passionate about what they actually do and will do anything possible to make their vision into a service or product for the rest of the planet to enjoy. You have a "Passion for business";  the common thread amongst entrepreneurs.

You’re Organized

Organizational skills are a must for running a business. You’ll need to organize your daily objectives, your finances & your employees(if you get any). You’ll eventually require a financial adviser for your taxes & an attorney for your legal records. Great organizational skills are crucial in building a profitable business and keeping the headaches away.

Helping People Is Your Specialty

Do you want to help others? You are able to design a business which is not just about generating money, it is about offering a service/product that makes someone's life better. Providing support & developing a community with a shared passion is also a great way to help people.

You Are an Expert

You have accumulated thousands of hours working on or with your craft; you’ve gotten to the point where you know more than the average person(it doesn’t take much) on a particular subject. This indicates you have a great level of understanding & experience to know what potential customers want to buy or want to know(you can sell knowledge too!). Operating your own business lets you bring your uniqueness and your interpretation of your craft to the table and give tremendous value to people.

You Are Brave

You aren’t afraid of failure…well we all are but some of us have a higher will to succeed than a fear of failure. You are possibly going to experience a failure at any moment as a business owner. If that does not scare you, then chalk that up as one more sign.

You’re a Born Leader..or at least can act like one

Having an excellent idea is a very important factor, but being capable to lead a profitable business is a real skill. If you’re an excellent leader, motivator, or just a person that can put everyone on the same page as you.. then the world of entrepreneurship is for you.

You Want to Prove Yourself

You have an idea and absolutely nothing drives you more than when individuals inform you that you cannot do that or it will not work. You will need to show them you are right. If establishing your own business from this concept and proving it can be done tickles your fancy..then you need to start your business today!

Do you’ve a business concept/idea that you’d probably enjoy launching & it has the possibilities to be successful or profitable? Do you have some of the above qualities? You don't have to have them all, because you know you are a quick learner. If so, now is the great time to make that start to success!

Kentucky court strikes a blow for business liberty

Kentucky court strikes a blow for business liberty

Last year’s most encouraging development in governance might have occurred in February in a U.S. District Court in Frankfort, Ky. There, a judge did something no federal judge has done since 1932. By striking down a “certificate of necessity” (CON) regulation, he struck a blow for liberty and against crony capitalism.

Raleigh Bruner’s Wildcat Moving company in Lexington faced opposition of companies with which he wished to compete. In 2012, he formed the company, hoping to operate statewide. Kentucky, however, like some other states, requires movers to obtain a CON. Kentucky’s statute says such certificates shall be issued if the applicant is “fit, willing and able properly to perform” moving services – and if he can demonstrate that existing moving services are “inadequate,” and that the proposed service “is or will be required by the present or future public convenience and necessity.”

Applicants must notify their prospective competitors, who can and often do file protests. This frequently requires applicants to hire lawyers for the hearings. There they bear the burden of proving current inadequacies and future necessities. And they usually lose. From 2007 to 2012, 39 Kentucky applications for CONs drew 114 protests – all from moving companies. Only three of the 39 persevered through the hearing gantlet; all three were denied CONs.

Bruner sued, arguing three things: That the CON process violates the Constitution’s equal protection clause because it is a “competitors’ veto” that favors existing companies over prospective rivals; that the statute’s requirements (”inadequate,” “convenience,” “necessity”) are unconstitutionally vague; and that the process violates the 14th Amendment’s protections of Americans’ “privileges or immunities,” including the right to earn a living.

In 1932, the Supreme Court overturned an Oklahoma law requiring any new ice company to prove a “public need” for it, arguing that the law tended to “foster monopoly in the hands of existing establishments”: “The principle is imbedded in our constitutional system that there are certain essentials of liberty with which the state is not entitled to dispense,” including “the opportunity to apply one’s labor and skill in an ordinary occupation.”

Soon, however, judicial progressivism became deferential to the political class’s conceit that it could centrally plan the present and foresee the future. Timothy Sandefur of the Pacific Legal Foundation notes that this involves what Friedrich Hayek called socialism’s knowledge problem: For government to supplant markets in the efficient allocation of wealth and opportunity, governments must have infinite information to make them clairvoyant.

Writing in George Mason University’s Civil Rights Law Journal, Sandefur notes that after World War I, states and cities used CON requirements to cripple taxis, thereby protecting private investments in trolley lines. In many cities today, Uber and other ride-sharing businesses are challenging the mutually remunerative alliances between elected officials and taxi cartels.

Since 1938, courts have – without justification from the Constitution’s text or structure – distinguished between rights deemed “fundamental” and others pertaining to economic life. Courts have permitted any limitations on the latter that could be said to have a “rational basis,” even if courts had to imagine a rationale that legislatures had neglected to enunciate.

This led, unsurprisingly, to cynicism, as when, in 2004, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld an Oklahoma law forcing online casket retailers to have funeral director’s licenses, which involve expensive, time-consuming requirements.

Judicial tolerance of CON laws is a result of judges embracing the “rational basis” excuse for retreating from judging. Such judges are either confessing that they cannot fathom basic political processes, or they are saying that they cannot trust themselves to recognize brazen, unapologetic rent seeking when they see it. It is, however, possible to hope that what happened in Kentucky is a harbinger of judges returning to judging.
George Will is a columnist for the Washington Post. He can be reached at georgewill@washpost.com.

LEADERSHIP'S FIRST COMMANDMENT

LEADERSHIP'S FIRST COMMANDMENT

 Know Thyself

What does 'breakthrough leadership' mean? Why is it personal? And why is it the subject of the first special issue in HBR's 79-year history?

The term 'breakthrough leadership,' as we define it, is multivalent -it points in several directions at once. Certainly, it involves breaking through old habits of thinking to uncover fresh solutions to perennial problems. It also means breaking through the interpersonal barriers that we all erect against genuine human contact. It's leadership that breaks through the cynicism that many people feel about their jobs and helps them find meaning and purpose in what they do. And it breaks through the limits imposed by our doubts and fears to achieve more than we believed possible.

Those who would lead these voyages of inner and outer discovery face extraordinary demands on their time, energy, and intellectual capacities. But the emotional demands are just as daunting, argue Daniel Goleman, Richard Boyatzis, and Annie McKee in “Primal Leadership: The Hidden Driver of Great Performance”.  Goleman, whose concept of emotional intelligence is surely one of the breakthrough ideas of the past decade, and his co-authors synthesize the latest research in psychology, neurobiology, and anthropology to show how the leader's mood can energize or deflate an entire organization. They also offer tools to help leaders gauge their own moods accurately and project the positive energy that inspires people to surpass themselves. But as the authors make clear, no tool can help the leader who lacks self-knowledge. That’s part of what we mean when we say that breakthrough leadership is personal. The personal nature of leadership is also the focus of  “All in a Day's Work”.   The participants in this roundtable discussion bring vast experience and varied perspectives to the everyday business of leadership, but on one central point they agree: Leaders must help their followers discover what they are good at. Leaders enable self-knowledge.

Like the participants in the round- table, historian and Harvard Business School professor Richard Tedlow defines leadership as a personal quest, one that can produce blazing triumphs even as it plunges the leader into the darkest, most mysterious reaches of the self. Tedlow profiles some of history's most accomplished businessmen and probes why, despite their wealth and great achievements, they continually drove themselves and their organizations to achieve even more. His conclusions are as unsettling as they are illuminating by the handful of lessons we can learn from Titans:

·       They didn’t blame others – or the universe - for their problems

·       They didn’t whine that life was unfair.

·       They believed the world was essentially a just place that would reward their effort and ultimately yield to their genius.

·       Any setback was a temporary misunderstanding by the cosmos

Great leadership itself, like the need for it, is timeless.