22 dicembre 2014 § Lascia un commento
di seguito un articolo, presa HBR, che rispecchia molto il mio modo di vivere e si pensare (al contrario);
spesso non si accettano gli errori, sopratutto quando si parla di noi stessi, ma si deve mettere in conto che può accadere, e che dagli stessi si può imparare molto
The value of failure has become a mantra in Silicon Valley, with the rise of events likeFailCon, a conference “for startup founders to study their own and others’ failures and prepare for success.” Failure, the thinking goes, is an intense form of hands-on education that — when done right — enables you to learn quickly and grow.
Despite the startup world’s enthusiasm, however, there’s often a lingering stigma: it’s less that you’ve tried and failed, and more that you are “a failure.” On a recent book tour supporting the French translation of my book, I met dozens of professionals who bemoaned what they viewed as their country’s particularly acute “one strike and you’re out” attitude toward failure. Of course, it’s not just in Europe; failure is still generally taboo almost everywhere in the world.
But the truth is that failure isn’t a rarity experienced by the unlucky few; if we’re honest, it’s a constant — albeit rarely lethal — state of affairs. In fact, it’s likely that you’ve already failed, or will soon (perhaps you launched a product that didn’t sell, were passed over for a promotion, flubbed a presentation, or any of a million other varieties). Here’s how to leverage that setback into even greater success.
Recognize that innovation requires failure. In a world where competitive advantage is increasingly short-lived, as Columbia Business School professor Rita Gunther McGrath has described, successful companies have to bake innovation into their standard processes. But innovation of any sort entails risk and trying new things — and that mandates failure. A 100% success rate implies you’re not doing anything new at all. The goal, says Eric Ries ofThe Lean Startup fame, is to create a minimum viable product that you’ll fully expect to iterate over time. In some ways, it’s a reframing: it’s not so much that you’re creating something (such as a product or service) that failed; it’s that you’re steadily improving a series of drafts.
Own your failure narrative. When I wrote an article a while back about someone involved in the U.S. financial markets and mentioned his indictment — and subsequent exoneration — during the crisis, I received an angry note from his wife: why did you have to include that? Of course, since he’d written about the experience in his own book (providing the most thoughtful and gripping part of the narrative), it hadn’t occurred to me they’d still be trying to keep it quiet. But habits, including the need to appear perfect, are hard to break.
That’s why talking about failure commands so much attention — it’s still shocking in a world that expects a triumphalist narrative. Blogger James Altucher has built a passionate following by writing in almost gory detail about his failures in business and life, including making millions and then losing it all, twice. In his book, The Education of a Value Investor, money manager Guy Spier tells his story of accepting a job soon out of business school at what turns out to be an ethically-challenged investment bank that soon goes down. Even though he didn’t participate in the malfeasance, he was humiliated by the stain on his resume, and grapples with his own naiveté. People might judge him and Altucher for their mistakes. But because they’re the ones telling the story, we’re able to see the world through their eyes, and grasp the full force of their redemption. (Altucher is now more successful than ever as a writer, and since 1997, Spier has run his own investment fund based on cautious, Warren Buffett-inspired principles.)
Understand that failure is an ongoing process. It’s important to recognize that failure is not a “one and done” phenomenon, where you climb the mountain and stay on top. Rather, it’s an ongoing process. On the same day this spring, I was turned down for two different fellowships I had applied for. That doesn’t mean I’m not successful; by other metrics — writing books, speaking, consulting, and teaching for business schools — I’m doing fine. But stretch goals are just that: things outside your wheelhouse that may work out, or not. The goal, as research shows, should be to make “new and different mistakes.” And if we want to make it safer for others to try, we have to be willing to talk about failure in the present tense — not just something that happened to us once, long ago.
We all love irresistible, come-from-behind success stories about “failed” entrepreneurs likeKevin Systrom, who folded his unsuccessful check-in app Burbn and pivoted it into the billion-dollar Instagram, or Ben Silbermann of Pinterest, which began life as a struggling mobile shopping site called Tote. Failure makes success possible, but not because of the eventual possibility for lucrative exits. Rather, failure opens the dialogue to show that we don’t have to be perfect; in fact, we can’t be. We need to speak honestly and openly — to let ourselves be known, so that failure and mistakes are put in their proper context. We can’t be afraid to acknowledge that, if we’re growing, failure isn’t an anomaly. It happens every day.
2 febbraio 2012 § Lascia un commento
Perchè le aziende anche quando hanno degli ottimi talenti non sanno valutarli o rivalutarli, e quindi nel tempo tendono a perderli?
inoltre i punti sotto indicati possono essere utili per effettuare un check Aziendale
Buona lettura, attendo commenti
Top Ten Reasons Why Large Companies Fail To Keep Their Best Talent
Whether it’s a high-profile tech company like Yahoo!, or a more established conglomerate like GE or Home Depot, large companies have a hard time keeping their best and brightest in house. Recently, GigaOM discussed the troubles at Yahoo! with a flat stock price, vested options for some of their best people, and the apparent free flow of VC dollars luring away some of their best people to do the start-up thing again.
Yet, Yahoo!, GE, Home Depot, and other large established companies have a tremendous advantage in retaining their top talent and don’t. I’ve seen the good and the bad things that large companies do in relation to talent management. Here’s my Top Ten list of what large companies do to lose their top talent :
- Big Company Bureaucracy. This is probably the #1 reason we hear after the fact from disenchanted employees. However, it’s usually a reason that masks the real reason. No one likes rules that make no sense. But, when top talent is complaining along these lines, it’s usually a sign that they didn’t feel as if they had a say in these rules. They were simply told to follow along and get with the program. No voice in the process and really talented people say “check please.”
- Failing to Find a Project for the Talent that Ignites Their Passion. Big companies have many moving parts — by definition. Therefore, they usually don’t have people going around to their best and brightest asking them if they’re enjoying their current projects or if they want to work on something new that they’re really interested in which would help the company. HR people are usually too busy keeping up with other things to get into this. The bosses are also usually tapped out on time and this becomes a “nice to have” rather than “must have” conversation. However, unless you see it as a “must have,” say adios to some of your best people. Top talent isn’t driven by money and power, but by the opportunity to be a part of something huge, that will change the world, and for which they are really passionate. Big companies usually never spend the time to figure this out with those people.
- Poor Annual Performance Reviews. You would be amazed at how many companies do not do a very effective job at annual performance reviews. Or, if they have them, they are rushed through, with a form quickly filled out and sent off to HR, and back to real work. The impression this leaves with the employee is that my boss — and, therefore, the company — isn’t really interested in my long-term future here. If you’re talented enough, why stay? This one leads into #4….
- No Discussion around Career Development. Here’s a secret for most bosses: most employees don’t know what they’ll be doing in 5 years. In our experience, about less than 5% of people could tell you if you asked. However, everyone wants to have a discussion with you about their future. Most bosses never engage with their employees about where they want to go in their careers — even the top talent. This represents a huge opportunity for you and your organization if you do bring it up. Our best clients have separate annual discussions with their employees — apart from their annual or bi-annual performance review meetings — to discuss succession planning or career development. If your best people know that you think there’s a path for them going forward, they’ll be more likely to hang around.
- Shifting Whims/Strategic Priorities. I applaud companies trying to build an incubator or “brickhouse” around their talent, by giving them new exciting projects to work on. The challenge for most organizations is not setting up a strategic priority, like establishing an incubator, but sticking with it a year or two from now. Top talent hates to be “jerked around.” If you commit to a project that they will be heading up, you’ve got to give them enough opportunity to deliver what they’ve promised.
- Lack of Accountability and/or telling them how to do their Jobs. Although you can’t “jerk around” top talent, it’s a mistake to treat top talent leading a project as “untouchable.” We’re not saying that you need to get into anyone’s business or telling them what to do. However, top talent demands accountability from others and doesn’t mind being held accountable for their projects. Therefore, have regular touch points with your best people as they work through their projects. They’ll appreciate your insights/observations/suggestions — as long as they don’t spillover into preaching.
- Top Talent likes other Top Talent. What are the rest of the people around your top talent like? Many organizations keep some people on the payroll that rationally shouldn’t be there. You’ll get a litany of rationales explaining why when you ask. “It’s too hard to find a replacement for him/her….” “Now’s not the time….” However, doing exit interviews with the best people leaving big companies you often hear how they were turned off by some of their former “team mates.” If you want to keep your best people, make sure they’re surrounded by other great people.
- The Missing Vision Thing. This might sound obvious, but is the future of your organization exciting? What strategy are you executing? What is the vision you want this talented person to fulfill? Did they have a say/input into this vision? If the answer is no, there’s work to do — and fast.
- Lack of Open-Mindedness. The best people want to share their ideas and have them listened to. However, a lot of companies have a vision/strategy which they are trying to execute against — and, often find opposing voices to this strategy as an annoyance and a sign that someone’s not a “team player.” If all the best people are leaving and disagreeing with the strategy, you’re left with a bunch of “yes” people saying the same things to each other. You’ve got to be able to listen to others’ points of view — always incorporating the best parts of these new suggestions.
- Who’s the Boss? If a few people have recently quit at your company who report to the same boss, it’s likely not a coincidence. We’ll often get asked to come in and “fix” someone who’s a great sales person, engineer, or is a founder, but who is driving everyone around them “nuts.” We can try, but unfortunately, executive coaching usually only works 33% of the time in these cases. You’re better off trying to find another spot for them in the organization — or, at the very least, not overseeing your high-potential talent that you want to keep.
It’s never a one-way street. Top talent has to assume some responsibility as much as the organization. However, with the scarcity of talent — which will only increase in the next 5 years — Smart Organizations are ones who get out in front of these ten things, rather than wait for their people to come to them, asking to implement this list.