How to Differentiate Great Leaders from Good Leaders

Recently, I attended a memorial service for Dennis Dammerman, a retired GE executive and one of the very first people I interviewed with at GE 30 years ago. He was a mentor and friend to me and a great leader for GE.

Dennis was proof of the power of GE’s meritocracy. He started at the bottom and worked his way to the top, ultimately becoming CFO and a vice chairman. He was tough-minded but fair; a great coach. He had excellent judgment and displayed calmness during crisis. He was loyal, and he loved his work. Simply put, he was representative of the best from GE.

GE is a company that takes great pride in developing leaders, like Dennis; and it is something I’m asked about often. People want to not only know about our philosophy for cultivating the next generation of leaders but also sometimes the more difficult question of how we differentiate among senior executives. How do you evaluate the talent at the very top of GE, or any other organization?

I always ask five questions about our top leaders:

1) Is the leader self-aware?

Everyone has strengths and weaknesses. We can all improve, and we should embrace cultures of continuous learning. But top leaders cannot allow weak spots to be blind spots. We all need an accurate perspective of what we do well and where we need work. You can’t lead credibly without it.

2) Is the leader committed to the company/organization; do they drive change?

Senior leadership positions are tough jobs and we live in hyper-competitive times. Success requires real effort, and at the senior levels of a company like GE the ability to drive change distinguishes you. It’s not easy and you have to be stubborn; you have to be resilient. After all, every idea begins with a constituency of one. There’s probably one or two times a year that I turn to our very top leaders and say, “we’re going to do it my way.” Do that too often and good people will leave. But if you never do it, nothing ever happens. Trust your instinct (and make sure you have the right instincts).

3) Is the leader a "giver or a taker?"

Just as the best leaders need to go with their gut, they must also be responsive to those around them. They realize that open, respectful, transparent conflict is a hallmark of great companies. Top leaders must also give back to the culture to make it meaningful and lasting. Build a WE not a ME organization. You have to inspire people. An idea or initiative may start with that constituency of one, but eventually you need buy-in from a company of many (about 300,000, in fact, at GE).

4) Is the leader a critical thinker?

It is easy to follow the crowd and allow the status quo. It is also the way companies and organizations get in trouble. The very best leaders avoid “group think.” Instead, they look at challenges through different lenses and from different perspectives. They understand context and have a strategic sense of how to put things where they fit both within the organization and in the world. As a matter of imperative, the top leaders know how to simplify. This might be the most important leadership trait of our time. The very best leaders cut through the complexity. Every process drives speed and accountability. They get results.

5) Lastly, does the leader have a dream for themselves and the company?

Good leaders have passion. They have a vision. They think and dream big.

At GE, we view leadership development as integral to our culture and our future. We try to create global leaders, people who can navigate the complexity of our times with clarity, courage and integrity. I believe we have a pretty good track record. Dennis Dammerman was proof of that. But I also know we don’t have all the answers.

What attributes do you look for in a top leader?

Jeff Immelt

Chairman and CEO at GE

Read More

How to Think Like an Entrepreneur

If you’re seeking wisdom on the nature of entrepreneurship, look to art, literature, and popular culture. For example, in my experience the best guide to the nature of vision and leadership is that seminal fictional character Don Quixote. His story epitomizes how courage and clarity of vision can win the hearts and minds of others. And who hasn’t learned the brass tacks of power and influence by watching Tony Soprano in action?

If you’re open to it, there’s a wealth of inspiration and insight to be had out in the world, like thisenlightening video profile of entrepreneur and racer Dave Marcis. Whether or not you're interested in racing, if you want to know what it’s like to think like an entrepreneur, it's well worth its seven minutes of run time.

I particularly love the segment that starts at the 3:28 mark, where Marcis talks about how running a small business on a shoestring budget taught him to be scrappier than scrappy. What caught my eye was this slogan hanging on the wall of his shop, pictured above:

“We have done so much, with so little, for so long, that we can now do anything 
with nothing.”

This deceptively simple phrase captures the essence of entrepreneurship—that with enough persistence, optimism, and confidence, no challenge is too big. It reminded me of my favorite quote by Professor Howard Stevenson of Harvard Business School:

“Entrepreneurship is the pursuit of opportunity without regard to resources 
currently controlled.”

When Dave Marcis talks about what he’s accomplished and how he’s done it, it becomes clear that his frame of mind was key to his success. Likewise, mindset is what enabled Elon Musk to go build rockets and cars, or Richard Turere to make peace with lions. It’s not about being in high tech, or living in Silicon Valley, or having access to a network of venture capitalists. It’s about what you tell yourself in your head: that you can build something new for the world, no matter what seems possible or reasonable.

Entrepreneurship is a mindset, one that allows you to do anything with nothing. When you decide to relentlessly pursue a dream no matter how little you’ve got, you’ve already taken the biggest step on that journey.

Author: Diego Rodriguez, Partner at IDEO

Read More

If You Want to Be an Entrepreneur, Don’t Go to Harvard

My greatest disappointment after joining academia was to see my most promising students accept jobs at Goldman Sachs or McKinsey. Engineering students with ambitions to save the world would instead become financial analysts—who used their skills to “engineer” our financial system. Or they would take grunt jobs in management consulting—another waste of valuable talent.

Why would they sell their souls? Because they had no choice, the burden of debt they amassed while getting their degrees was just too great. They had six-figure student loans to repay and couldn’t take the risk of joining a startup or founding their own business.

These students were at the Masters of Engineering Management program at Duke University. But it is the same for students I mentor at Harvard and Stanford. Unless they have a full scholarship or very rich parents, they usually have to trade their idealism for financial security. The Wall Street Journal recently brought this issue to life in an article titled Student-Loan Load Kills Startup Dreams.

I can’t blame the students. I would probably do the same if I was in their shoes.

Student loan debt is the reason I don’t advise students who want to become entrepreneurs to apply to elite, expensive colleges. They can be as successful if they go to a relatively inexpensive public college. It is the same in India and China as it is in the U.S. I have done three research projects which reached the same surprising conclusions.

In the first project, we looked at the background of 317 immigrants who started tech companies in the U.S. We expected the vast majority to be from the most prestigious institutions in their home countries such as the Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT) and China’s Fudan and Tsinghua Universities. We were surprised to learn that a public college, Delhi University, graduated twice as many Silicon Valley company founders as did IIT-Delhi. And that two other public colleges, Osmania and Bombay University, trumped nearly all of the other IITs. China’s Tianjin and Shanghai Jiao Tong Universities graduated more Silicon Valley founders than did Fudan and Tsinghua.

These study subjects were immigrants, and we weren’t sure if this would be the same with American graduates. So we looked into the educational background of successful American tech company founders. We found that the 628 U.S.-born tech founders we surveyed received their education from 287 unique universities. Almost every major U.S. university was represented. The top ten institutions in this group accounted for only 19% of the entire sample. To be fair, this shows that top-tier universities are overrepresented in the ranks of entrepreneurs. We also found that Ivy League schools, which graduate 1.6% of American students, were 8% of our sample. The point is that 81% of the tech company founders came from “regular” schools—and don’t bear the same financial burden as the elite.

In a third research project, we looked into the backgrounds of the founders of 549 successful businesses across a number of high-growth industries. The proportion of Ivy-Leaguers was even smaller (about 6% of the sample). We also found that MBAs tended to start companies sooner after graduation (13 years after) than bachelor’s degree holders (17 years after). And both these groups were quicker to found startups than PhDs – who typically waited 21 years from the time they graduated to start their ventures. Computer Science/IT grads became entrepreneurs sooner than MBAs (13 years vs. 15 years) and applied science majors (20 years).

The most interesting findings however were the differences between those who had college degrees and those who never completed a bachelor’s degree. The average sales revenue of all startups in one of our samples was around $5.7 million, and these companies employed an average of 42 workers. Startups established by tech founders with Ivy League degrees had average sales and employment of $6.7 million and 55 workers, respectively. The success of these two groups markedly contrasted with startups established by tech founders with only a high school degree. Those founders had average revenues and employees of $2.2 million and 18, respectively. In other words, it didn’t matter so much if you graduated from an Ivy; what made the greatest difference was having a higher degree.

Entrepreneurs also told us that they really value their education: 70.3% said their university education was important. Ivy League graduates valued their education even more, with 85.7% indicating that it was important. Surprisingly only 18.8% believed that university or alumni networks were important. Of the Ivy graduates, 28.6% ranked these networks as important.

My message to students is that if you want to become an entrepreneur and save the world, definitely don’t skip college. But go to a school that you can afford. You’ll be freed from the chains of debt and succeed on your own ambition and merit.

By Vivek Wadhwa --- Fellow, Arthur & Toni Rembe Rock Center for Corporate Governance at Stanford University

Read More

How Your Perspective Affects Your Attitude

Did you know that the difference between success and failure is often determined by the way you look at it? Take for instance a product or service that never got off the ground. A failed idea could be considered an investment failure from the standpoint of a new product launch. Or it could be considered a great opportunity from the perspective that a better and more marketable version can be created. It all depends on how you look at it.

In fact, many times personal tragedies and failed ideas have become the launch pad for new focus and determination vs. a reason for depression and defeat. Again, perspective is the determining factor. This is because perspective is the lens through which you see life. It's how you view your experiences as they are occurring.

Given all of the input you're receiving, the attitude that you have while you're receiving this input makes a difference.

When faced with a challenge, do you...
Choose to view it negatively and allow yourself to be sidelined (even temporarily)?
See it as an opportunity to change your focus or way of doing things?
It's important to understand that attitude and perspective go hand-in-hand.

Your perspective is something that you decide. But your attitude is also something that you can decide. And both of these can be adjusted and even changed by you at any time. You can decide whether or not your current perspective is serving you well or not. Basically, your perspective is your opinion of what you're experiencing.

The reason it's important that you understand this is because your perspective will affect or even determine the attitude you have; and your attitude will drive your behavior.

For instance, say you're in a "fear of the unknown" perspective. You can either have the attitude that you're too uncomfortable with the fear, therefore won't go outside of your comfort zone in order to try something out. (In this case, your perspective and attitude are keeping you from taking a risk and going for it.) OR you can remain in fear of the unknown perspective but have an attitude of excitement, determination, and going for it anyway.

As an entrepreneur, it's vital that you realize that you can DECIDE whether to remain in the perspective you're in or change it. When you realize that you have the power to control your perspective about something and your attitude toward it, you will shift your energy in a positive way and it will ultimately affect how you show up in your business and in your life.

So, take a moment to evaluate the perspective you're in and the attitude that's resulting from your current perspective. Determine if your perspective is helpful or not, and what it is that your perspective is trying to tell you. From this vantage point, you can take control and make the decision to stick with your current perspective or change it.

This is 100% your decision and the sooner you identify your perspective, the sooner you can shift your attitude and decide on the behavior that will best serve you and those around you.

Author: Angelina Campos is the founder of Own Your Ambition, formerly Campos Coaching. Known for her amazing insight and natural knack for understanding, she has the unique ability to help others discover and focus on their untapped potential to create otherwise unimaginable success in business. Visit http://www.ownyourambition.com to schedule an appointment with Angelina.

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/7938497

Read More

Warren Buffett adjusts portfolio

Famed investor Warren Buffett is the latest celebrity investor to reveal major trades in the market Thursday, giving another glimpse at how the big money is playing the rally.

The CEO of conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway, disclosed some tweaks in his portfolio as of June 30 including a new 547,312 share stake in satellite TV operator Dish Network and a 17.8 million shares position in gas producer Suncor.

Buffett is best known for making a few, concentrated bets on companies that he plans to hold for a long period of time. Unlike other large investors and hedge funds releasing their quarterly positions, who look for short-term opportunities, Buffett bets big on companies he thinks are adequately undervalued to allow for big profit over time.

But Berkshire wasn't just adding new positions, as it scaled back a few, too. The investors dramatically cut its holdings in Kraft Foods and food producer Mondelez International while it completely exited its holding in USA TODAY parent company, Gannett. Berkshire also trimmed its position in drugmaker GlaxoSmithKline and credit rating agency Moody's.

Berkshire's largest positions as of June were Wells Fargo, Coca-Cola, International Business Machines and American Express. Many of Berkshire's top holdings have been lagging the market this year, says Bespoke Investments. So far during the third quarter, half of Berkshire's top 10 holdings are down. These largest 10 investments are up 0.7% so far this quarter Through Wednesday's close, trailing the 4.9% gain of the Standard & Poor's 500 during for the same period, Bespoke says.

Read More