Tuesday 27 December 2011

The Biggest CEO Screw ups of 2011

http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2011/12/22/the-biggest-ceo-screw-ups-of-2011/


The Biggest CEO Screwups Of 2011

A man-made disaster triggered the worst of last year’s Forbes CEO screwups list, when BP chief Tony Hayward committed a series of public gaffes in the wake of the April 2010 Gulf oil spill, and then resigned the following  October. This year, forces of nature created the backdrop for the boss behavior we deem the worst: Masataka Shimizu, head of the Tokyo Electric Power Co., known as Tepco, largely disappeared from public view after the devastating March 11 earthquake and tsunami set off the worst radiation release since Chernobyl. Subsequently, reports surfaced that senior Tepco engineers had known for years that five of the company’s ten nuclear reactors in Fukushima prefecture had a dangerous design flaw. But the company failed to make upgrades, dooming the reactors to a series of meltdowns and explosions when the 45-foot tsunami hit. Following the disaster, Shimizu made few public appearances, checking himself into a hospital for a week. He resigned in May.
To put together our list, we consulted two professors at Kellogg School of Management, Daniel Diermeier and Harry Kraemer; Yale School of Management professor Jeffrey Sonnenfeld; a list provided by Sydney Finkelstein, who teaches management at the Tuck School of Business at Dartmouth; and Richard Levick, who runs Levick Strategic Communications, a crisis communications firm in Washington, D.C.
Finkelstein calls William Weldon, the CEO of Johnson & Johnson, the “Tony Hayward of 2011,” for presiding over a two-year string of product recalls which Finkelstein maintains are “a direct result of Weldon’s emphasis on cost-cutting.” International consumer and environmental groups have been pressing J&J to remove two potentially cancer-causing chemicals from baby products, including Johnson’s Baby Shampoo. Though the chemicals have been eliminated from products in several other countries, including the U.K and South Africa, J&J has yet to alter its baby products in the U.S., saying it would reduce or remove the chemicals over the next two years. “[Weldon] seems to talk the talk, but what can he make actionable?” asks Finkelstein.
Rupert Murdoch also makes the list, for his regrettable handling of the phone-hacking scandal at his News of the World British tabloid. Finkelstein calls Murdoch’s style “management by hubris.” After the scandal broke last summer, Murdoch dragged his feet on accepting responsibility for employees who hired a private investigator to hack into the voicemail of missing 13-year-old Milly Dowler. The investigator deleted messages, giving the murdered girl’s family false hope that she was alive and checking messages. As the ensuing investigation revealed widespread hacking and involvement by police and politicians, Murdoch preserved the job of Rebekah Brooks, head of his British operations and News of the World editor when the hacking took place, even as he shut down the paper and hundreds of employees lost their jobs. (Brooks finally resigned in July, two days before her arrest). Murdoch failed to get ahead of the scandal, instead allowing news reports to surface in competing papers. “The strategy was one of containment rather than one of correction and cleansing,” notes Sonnenfeld.
Finkelstein says Michael Lazaridis and Jim Balsillie, co-CEOs of BlackBerry maker Research in Motion, were “unable to do anything right in 2011.” While facing relentless competition from Apple’s iPhone and iPad and Google’s Android devices, RIM’s PlayBook tablet sold poorly, as did its many handset models. In October, RIM endured a three-day network outage. Shares in the Waterloo, Ontario company have tumbled more than 70% this year. Most recently, RIM announced it would delay an eagerly awaited product revamp until late 2012. “Balsillie and Lazaridis seemed paralyzed all year long,” says Finkelstein. “Their entire model is in question,” adds Diermeier.
Many CEO watchers say Reed Hastings’s flip-flop decisions at video rental company Netflix, deserve a spot on our list. In July, Hastings told the company’s 24.6 million subscribers they would be hit with a 60% price hike. Then in September, he abruptly announced that he would split the company in two, and customers would have to sign up separately for each, with the DVD mail-in service flowing through a new company called Qwikster and streaming video coming through Netflix. “Result,” says Finkelstein, “the company image shifted from beloved small rebel to ripping off its customers.”  In November, Netflix abandoned the plan to split, but kept the price hike and said it would continue to emphasize streaming.  Netflix lost some 800,000 subscribers and its stock tumbled to a recent $71 from a high of $304 in July. “It was a completely bungled affair,” says Kraemer of Kellogg. Not everyone thinks Hastings’s move was disastrous however. Crisis communications specialist Levick believes that Hastings may have communicated his strategy poorly, but he made the right move in upping the price and focusing on streaming. “He realized he had to jump into the future,” says Levick.
Few management specialists defend Léo Apotheker’s 11-month tenure as CEO of Hewlett Packard. The former  head of German software maker SAP made a series of decisions that drew fire from analysts and drove HP’s stock down 47%, including an $11.7 billion purchase of a British software company, cancellation of the TouchPad tablet just months after it was introduced and a proposed sale of the company’s core PC business.  As Finkelstein puts it, “basically a laundry list of mistakes and incompetence.” Finkelstein says that the hiring of new boss, former eBay CEO Meg Whitman, “may or may not turn out to be a wise move.”
One CEO scandal that’s still unfolding: Jon Corzine’s disastrous stewardship of bankrupt brokerage firm MF Global. A former U.S. Senator, former Democratic governor of New Jersey and ex-head of Goldman Sachs, Corzine directed the firm to make a $11.5 billion bet on European debt, and then failed to recognize the bonds on its balance sheets, instead burying them deep in financial statements or excluding them entirely. Regulatory agencies and Congress are investigating what happened to $1.2 billion in customers’ money, and former workers, who were compensated in part with now-worthless stock, have filed a class action against Corzine and other firm directors and executives. Corzine resigned as CEO shortly after MF Global declared bankruptcy in late October.
Brian Moynihan of Bank of America also deserves to be on our list. In late September, the bank announced it would charge many customers a $5 monthly fee to use their debit cards. Already a target of the Occupy Wall Street movement, the bank was pilloried by consumers still angry that it got a government bail-out. An online anti-Bank of America petition started by a 22-year-old got 300,000 signatures. President Obama called the fee “not good business practice.” In early November, the bank said it would cancel the fee. According to Levick, the company is woefully out of touch with its customers, failing to weave social media into its communications strategy. If it had, it would never have considered the fee. The company’s stock has fallen from a high of $15 last January to $5.

Interesting Forbes Article - Why Large companies fail to keep their best talent

Forbes.com - Top ten reasons why large companies fail to keep their best talent


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 :
1. Big Company Bureaucracy. This is probably the #1 reason we hear after the fact fromdisenchanted 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.”
2. 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.
3. 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….
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.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
[At the time of writing, Jackson was long YHOO]