A634.1.6.RB - The Buck Stops and Starts With You

The MBA curriculum has remained almost standard for decades, but, ethics curriculum has been added as a new topic. Ethics is institutionalized as an academic requirement and not elective at leading business schools including Harvard, Wharton (Pennsylvania)  and Darden (Virginia). With the criminal convictions of insider traders in the 1980s, business schools identified a new opportunity and started focusing on ethics in the 1990s. The business and leadership collapses of Enron, WorldCom, Arthur Andersen, etc. have kept ethics a hot and important issue. Ethical case study scenarios usually make for engaged classroom discussions including research, casework, re-enactments and role-playing for future workplace applications. The top business schools train their future champions of business and industry to deal with any challenge. The focus of  ethics in the MBA curriculum is not to make students role model citizens but to make students and future business leaders aware of the ethical implications of business decisions including: anti-trust actions, predatory pricing, insider trading, environmental issues, corporate restructuring, employee privacy issues, diversity issues, sexual harassment and conduct of multinational corporations. (Silbiger, 2012)

Discussions and curriculum about ethics rests on the foundation that businesses should adhere to a socially responsible approach to decision making called the social responsibility approach. Proponents of this approach believe that companies have societal obligations that go beyond making profits. Business schools teach students to adopt this "politically correct" philosophy. It is argued that because companies are so powerful with impacts on society, they have an obligation to assume social responsibilities. Companies should be managed for the benefit of their stakeholders: customers, suppliers, employees, communities and owners (stockholders). Company leaders bear a fiduciary responsibility to all stakeholders. (Silbiger, 2012)

Just opposite of  the "politically correct" philosophy espoused at mist institutions is a competing school of thought led by Milton Friedman at the University of Chicago. Friedman's philosophy is that business's sole duty is to make profits. "Businesses are in the business of maximizing shareholders' value by a prudent use of scarce organizational resources, as long as the activities of the businesses are within the letter of the law." Friedman believes it is up to government to determine what the laws should be. A profitable business benefits society by creating jobs, improving the standard of living of its owners and employees. Corporations pay taxes that support government's social action. Friedman's theory and philosophy is regarded as one of the proponents of capitalism in economics courses (Silbiger, 2012)  

What is the feedback from business school students? Students give several responses to whether ethics can be taught. "If it can't be taught, why am I taking this class?" "Look at the behavior of certain corporate executives who have been found guilty of criminal conduct. They surely haven't learned proper ethical values." Students summarize the learning lesson is this: "although certain ideals or types of knowledge can be taught, ethical behavior (actions) cannot because it is a matter of individual choice." (MacKinnon and Fiala, 2015)

Even several leadership, management and business books, e.g., The Guerilla Marketing Handbook, and Sun Tsu: The Art of War for Managers use the common theme that surprise attacks, guerilla warfare, and other warlike tactics are necessary to win the battle for American consumer and sales. Unfortunately, this business-as-war reasoning and philosophy fosters the idea that honesty is unnecessary in business. Boeing and European Airbus is the biggest business rivalry and competition in the world. Several books document this including The Sporty Game and Boeing versus Airbus: The Inside Story of the Greatest International Competition in Business by John Newhouse. (Ferrell, Fraedrich, and Ferrell, 2015)

In addition, The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement (Theory of Constraints) business novel by Eli Goldratt emphasizes that the goal of any business is to make money. The theory, philosophy and novel is used by many companies and business schools. (Goldratt, 2012)

Podolny suggests that business focus is too much quantitative (numbers) and needs more focus and emphasis on qualitative (soft skills) including ethics and corporate social responsibility. This includes a holistic approach to business problems and case studies. Faculty from both the "hard" and "soft" disciplines must discuss material in the same classroom, e.g., teaching teams. When business schools teach leadership, emphasis is on the big picture and not the hands-on practical details. Podolny recommends business schools adopt a code of ethics similar to the medical (doctors) and bar (lawyers attorneys) associations to develop codes of conduct for MBAs and to withdraw the degrees of those who break the manager's code including conduct, behavior and actions. (Podolny, 2009)

References

Ferrell, O.C., Fraedrich, John, and Ferrell, Linda (2015). Business Ethics: Ethical Decision Making and Cases (10th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

Goldratt, Eliyahu M. (2012). The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement. Great Barrington, Massachusetts: The North River Press Publishing Corporation.

MacKinnon, Barbara and Fiala, Andrew (2015). Ethics: Theory and Contemporary Issues (8th ed.). Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

Podolny, Joel M. (2009). The Buck Stops (and Starts) at Business School. Harvard Business Review (June 2009). Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Silbiger, Steven (2012).  The Ten Day MBA: A Step-By-Step Guide To Mastering The Skills Taught In America's Top Business Schools (4th ed.). New York, NY: HarperCollins Publishers.  

 

A630.9.4.RB - Hiring and Recruiting

Does Schmidt's description of the Google Culture make sense to you? Is this a reasonable way to view the work that most people are doing in your workplace? As a leader, does it take courage to have and to implement this point of view? Could this approach backfire?

 

For a manager, the right answer to the question "What is the single most important thing you do at work?" is hiring. This is similar to sports coaches or general managers. Yes, they go to meetings all day too, yet the single most important thing do is draft, recruit, or trade for the best players they can. Smart coaches know that no amount of strategy can substitute for talent, and that is as true in business as it is on the field. From the outset, Google's founders understood that to consistently hire the best people possible, the model to follow wasn't that of corporate America, but that of academia. Universities usually don't lay professors off and invest a lot of time in getting faculty hiring and promotion right usually with committees and not hierarchical. "Our people are our most important asset" is a well known cliche, however, you need to change how the members of the team are hired. The nice thing is that anyone can make them. (Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)

 

A workforce of great people not only does great work, but it attracts more great followers. The best workers are like a herd: they tend to follow each other. Most people came to Google because they wanted to work with the best smart creatives. This is known as the "herd effect." Passionate people don't wear passion on their sleeves, they wear it in their hearts and includes: persistence, grit, seriousness, drive and all-encompassing absorption. (Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)

 

You usually hear people say they only want to work with someone they would want to have a beer with. However, truth be told, some of the most effective colleagues are people we most definitely would not want to have a beer with. And in some cases they are people we would rather pour a beer on. You must work with people you don't like, because a workforce comprised of people who are all "best office buddies" can be homogeneous, and homogeneity in an organization breeds failure. Multiple viewpoints and ideas, aka diversity, is the best defense against myopia. (Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)

 

Interviewing is the most important thing you can do. Review resumes and perform Google search. Check LinkedIn profile. The goal of the interview is to form and opinion of him/her. A strong opinion. A yes or no. Find the limits of his/her capabilities. The best interviews feel like intellectual discussions between friends ("What books are you reading right now?"). Google looks at four categories: leadership, role-related knowledge, general cognitive ability and Googleyness (uniqueness, creativity and collaboration). (Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)

 

Another part of the interviewing process that most companies screw up is letting the hiring manager make the hiring decision. The problem with this is that the hiring manager will probably be the new employee's manager that after a few months or a year. Besides, in most organizations, who you work for matters a lot less than who you work with. Google uses hiring committees whose decisions are based on data, not relationships or opinions.  (Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)

Google's "20 Percent Solution" encourages all employees, in addition to working their regular projects, to spend 20 percent of their time experimenting on what they think will benefit, develop and grow Google. This is a great example of empowerment, creativity and innovation. Most of Google's growth and advancements have happened because of this. For example, both AdSense and Google News were prototyped in "20 percent time." High risk projects usually are removed from consideration and provide lessons learned. However, many succeed and become important businesses which in turn can create additional opportunities. (Beahm, 2014)

I have worked for several companies that used the "buddy system" in hiring. This created "pyramids" competing with each other and promoting rivalry within the organizations. In addition to this, there were golf tournaments, parties etc only with the select few. And guess what, this was the downfall of the organizations (along with other culture and strategy issues) and those organizations aren't around anymore. And I have worked for several organizations that use hiring committees and these organizations are successful and still in business. In addition, these companies hire the best talent, aka A's, and use similar criteria to Google: leadership, role-related knowledge, general cognitive ability and Googleyness (uniqueness, creativity and collaboration). In addition, the talent includes academia qualifications and above all passion.          

 

What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

 

Apply "Google's Hiring Dos and Don'ts":

 

·         Hire people who are smarter and more knowledgeable than you are.

·         Don't hire people you can't learn from or be challenged by.

·         Hire people who will add value to the product and our culture.

·         Don't hire people who won't contribute well to both.

·         Hire people who will get things done.

·         Don't hire people who just think about problems.

·         Hire people who are enthusiastic, self-motivated, and passionate. 

·         Don't hire people who just want a job.

·         Hire people who inspire and work well with others.

·         Don't hire people who prefer to work alone.

·         Hire people who will grow with your team and with the company.

·         Don't hire people with narrow skill sets or interests.

·         Hire people who are well rounded, with unique interests and talents.

·         Don't hire people who only live to work.

·         Hire people who are ethical and who communicate openly.

·         Don't hire people who are political or manipulative.

·         Hire only when you've found a great candidate.

·         Don't settle for anything less.

 

(Schmidt and Rosenberg, 2014)

 

References

Beahm, George (2014). The Google Boys: Sergey Brin and Larry Page In Their Own Words. Agate Publishing: Chicago.         

Eric Schmidt on business culture, technology, and social issues (2011). Retrieved from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/strategy/eric_schmidt_on_business_culture_technology_and_social_issues

Schmidt, Eric and Rosenberg, Jonathan (2014). How Google Works. New York: Grand Central Publishing. 

A630.8.4.RB - Build a Tower, Build a Team

The Marshmallow Challenge is a fun and instructive design exercise that encourages teams to experience simple and profound lessons in collaboration, innovation and creativity. The task is simple  and takes only eighteen minutes. Teams must build the tallest freestanding structure out of 20 sticks of spaghetti, one yard of tape, one yard of string, and one marshmallow. The marshmallow need to be on top.

 

Do you agree with Tom Wujec's analysis of why kindergarteners perform better on the Spaghetti Challenge than MBA students? Can you think of any other reasons why kids might perform better?

 

Yes, I agree with Tom's analysis on kindergartners versus MBA students. Why? Business students talk about it, they figure out what it's going to look like, they jockey for power and position. They spend time planning, organizing and controlling as they sketch out the spaghetti ideas. They spend the majority of their time assembling the sticks into ever-growing structures. And then, just as they are running out of time, someone takes the marshmallow and puts in on top. They stand back and say "wow" and they admire their work. Then the weight of the marshmallow causes the structure to buckle and collapse. Business students are usually trained in their graduate curriculum to develop and implement the single right plan. Then the execution and implementation stage begins. So sometimes MBA students get distracted and "bogged down in the details" such as "paralysis by analysis" which is time consuming and not usually value added. This is what happens, they run out of time after putting the marshmallow on the top and the crisis starts. Sound familiar in business?

 

What kindergartners do differently is that they start with the marshmallow and they build successive prototypes always keeping the marshmallow on top so they will have multiple opportunities to fix when they build prototypes along the way. Designers recognize this type of collaboration as the foundation of the iterative process. And with each prototype version, kids get instant feedback input about what works and what doesn't work. Kids are usually more creative and innovative as far as ideas and implementation along with experimenting and freewheeling. Failure is not on their mind or in their plan. They want to have fun and succeed. Children are artists.      

 

In your view, why do CEOs with an executive assistant perform better than a group of CEOs alone?

 

Executive assistants usually have good organizational skills along with being creative, innovative with new ideas and approaches. They coach and communicate with CEOs on these along with providing closed-loop communication. They get the players involved and engaged in the process. They are the go to person to get things done. 

 

If you were asked to facilitate a process intervention workshop, how could you relate the video to process intervention skills?

 

The Marshmallow is a great opportunity as a icebreaker activity, get a team into a creative frame of mind, and encourage your organization to think about what it takes to improve creativity, innovation and problem-solving. In addition, it is a powerful technique to improve a team's capacity to generate new ideas, build rapport and incorporate prototyping - all of which are at the heart of creative innovation.

 

Lessons emerge when comparing teams' performance. Who tends to do the worst? Why? Who tends to do the best? Why? What improves performance? What destroys it?

 

What can you take away from this exercise to immediately use in your career?

 

First is the importance of icebreaker activities as learning exercises. Second is the importance of creativity, innovation and problem-solving for new ideas and approaches. I have had the opportunity to work for several aerospace companies that are big on this along with "experimenting." Lockheed Martin has the "Skunk Works" and Boeing has the "Phantom Works" for creative collaboration in advanced research development and applications for aerospace. Lockheed developed the SR-71 Blackbird, U-2 Dragon Lady and F-117 Nighthawk. In addition, lean manufacturing and the Toyota Production System (TPS) promote "moonshining" and "trystorming" to experiment with new ideas prior to implementation. These are usually included in continuous improvement activities, e.g., kaizen, value stream mapping (VSM) etc. It all starts with an idea, sketch, build a prototype mock-up, try it out and see if it works, change modify it, try it out again. Then proceed with full design and implementation. Another great example is the "Post It Note" that was developed by experimenting at 3M.   

References

Tom Wujec: Build a tower, build a team (TED Talks) (2010). Retrieved from  http://www.ted.com/talks/tom_wujec_build_a_tower