Schlagwort-Archive: Goals

Where do I want to go?

The longer an enterprise exists, the more with difficult it is to maintain the enthusiasm. An impressive illustration of the direction and the goals produces the necessary energy to keep the momentum during the activity. This is valid for teams and particularly for each person – inclusive oneself. This direction can be more or less extensively prepared as a text, a metaphor or an image. Remember the following visions:

  • … before this decade is out, of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to the Earth? (J.F. Kennedy)
  • … a computer in each household? (Bill Gates)
  • … ideas worth spreading? (Chris Anderson)

These future pictures from the past are already accomplished. In order to make this happen, it needs many people and much time. The direction becomes tangible by defining the strategy (where you want to go) and motivates the involved people to take part during a longer period.

Strategie03Miss

The following parts provide the comprehensive picture of the future.

  • Vision
    Through the easily conceivable picture of the desired future, the vision, the creativity of the involved people becomes stimulated and creates momentum that prevails for a long time. At best it affects, if it is described in a way, as if it already would be reality.
  • Mission
    The general assignment, the mission, includes the expectations of the decision makers. The mission produces a view of target states similar to the vision. Additionally, it contains the expectations of the leadership team with their assumptions and a consistent explanation, including what should be done, for whom, and what it makes special.
  • Influence factors
    The description of the influence factors (i.e. the critical success factors, the favored value discipline as well as the strengths, the weaknesses, opportunities and risks) shows the involved people the external framework that should be expected during the realization.
  • Strategic direction
    The generally targeted trends create focus for the people involved. It enables them to bring in their competencies. For example, the will to grow or shrink explains additionally, what is intended to be reached, see here.
  • Strategic goals
    The strategic goals are the framework for breaking down the aims. At the same time, it shows a compact overview of the intentions. Make sure that the highest level covers the entire topic.
  • Strategic core
    In the future the core competencies, the core processes and core deliverables become more and more important, since overarching cooperation’s take place more frequently in different constellations (e.g. across locations or enterprises). Clarify the substantial abilities for your deliverables. Limit yourself on those aspects that you actually need for your value creation. Last but not least it is important to assign the products and services that have to be produced to each unit or person.

Bottom line: In times, when everything is possible, it is important to determine your own future. The strategy, described as clear as possible, is the pre-requisite for the ever more frequent cooperation in various groupings. It ensures that all people pull the rope in one direction and at the same time that only a few friction losses arise from conflicts or misunderstandings.

Same series:

Who am I?

What do I do?

Real leaders

Even if the society, the economy or the enterprise are blamed for drawbacks, it is always people, who are creating, not necessarily conscious, negative circumstances. Examples are the leaders. The behavior of highly paid superiors is frequently copied by the employees. Since the fish stinks from the head, the negative properties are mainly conveyed.

  • Missing authority of the boss’s results in long-winded decision making.
  • Postponing decisions paralyses progress.
  • Missing goals create contradictory activities.
  • Blindness and deafness to the feedbacks of the employees result in a loss of confidence.

As a consequence, incongruent leadership style undermines the authority and prevents results.

Führungskraft

The employees are asked in the course of the introduction of Entrepreneurship to think and act like an enterpriser. At the same time the leadership positions are reduced to simple steps on the career ladders. The actual task of management goes in this case by the board. Employees have to fill out the role of an ‚executive’ faster than ever before, without being in the position to develop the following characteristics.

  • Power
    The takeover of a team leader position suggests that thereby the necessary power and sufficient resources are automatically available. On the one hand the purely formal transfer of power is not enough in times of increasing employee participation, in order to exert influence as well as to get acceptance and commitment from the employees. On the other hand the higher leadership levels keep the control of the planning and the budgets. Top managers decide nowadays the smallest activities and expenditures personally. For middle management only remains the title.
  • Decisiveness
    An important function of bosses it is to seize the take decisions that cannot be decided on the subordinated level. In the scope of responsibility goals should be specified that fit within the superordinate frameworks. Additionally, alternatives have to be selected, the application of resources controlled, social conflicts dissolved as well as the fundamental structure of the job positions and the procedures defined. In order to fill out the role, the executives need decisiveness. This requires decisions that are made timely and conclusive.
  • Goals
    The published plans are the basis for the staff and the other participants. The goals must fit into the big picture, but they should leave enough flexibility for the activities of the employees. Therefore the executives must make the overview available that shows the direction to the operational activities. Leaders are the specialists for the political aspects, the control of the area, the availability of the relevant information and for the control of cooperation.
  • Attentiveness
    The most important ability of the top management is the attention that is used to observe the occurrences – particularly the observation of the relationships between the employees, between employees and customers as well as between employees and suppliers. They provide the basis for the improvement measures of co-operation. Since these social aspects mostly happen on an unconscious, subliminal level, it needs a lot of instinct based on experience.
  • Style
    There is not the one, right style of leadership, but different approaches that depend on the country-specific culture, the role models of the enterprise and the personality of the leader. This might be authoritarian, democratic or liberal leadership approaches and/or any mixture of the three. It is crucial that the selected style is constantly used. The employees receive thereby an example for their orientation.

You can see in large companies more and more that the executives have promising titles, but do not show in everyday business the above characteristics. This explains the search for trainings concerning charisma, acceptance and commitment. They should enforce the self-confidence of the responsible people. Unfortunately decisiveness does not evolve, if decisions are always made on the superior levels. The ever more evolving micro management results at the same time in the fact that subordinated executives do not reflect any more about strategy, goals and activities in their responsibility. Since guidance in its actual sense does not take place, the question about the personal style of leadership will one day not appear any more, since the high-level executive is lowered to the role of a messenger of the superordinate levels.

Bottom line: The middle management mutate into highly paid employees, who

  • do not have the previous authority,
  • actually don’t need decisiveness,
  • have modest room for acting,
  • distribute only insensitively orders and
  • do not unfold a personal style.

In principle, these are good basic conditions in order to create lean structures. Unfortunately the enterprises undermine these approaches, by proclaiming flat structures. At the same time they create hierarchies that subordinate one executive to another of the same level. Formally, there will be fewer levels, than expected. The resulting ‘kings without land’, who, without budget and power, are not allowed to make their own decisions, turn into shadows of real leaders.