IMG_0833One of the things any Chief Compliance Officer (CCO), or indeed any business leader, must manage is team conflict. In a recent Harvard Business Review (HBR) article, entitled “How to Preempt Team Conflict”, Ginka Toegel and Jean-Louis Barsoux reported on their study of team conflict. The article posits that team conflict can erupt not solely from the differences in opinion of disparate corporate disciplines but also from “perceived incompatibility in the way different team members think.” In other words, it is about the process and not about the content. (I am sure about now my process analyst wife is thinking, as I told you many times…) To remedy this problem, the authors promote a five step approach which considers how team members “look, act, speak, think and feel, to immunize the team against unproductive conflict when the pressure is on.”

The authors believe that leaders should allow team members to meet and engage in ‘five conversations’ around these areas. Through these conversations, they believe leaders can identify areas of potential friction, which might arise when the pressure is on the group. By getting these areas out into the open before the pressure hits, they believe the “teams establish a foundation of trust and understanding and are able to set ground rules for effective collaboration.” The five areas can be broken down as follows:

Look: Spotting the Difference

The authors believe that team members often have reactions “triggered by differences in the way people present themselves” so the goal of this discussion is to have “team members reflect on how they intend to come across to others—and how they actually do.” This can be as broad as dressing in a suit where the atmosphere is business casual to a lawyer using literary references in a technical software or engineering meeting.

The authors suggested this conversation could be facilitated with some of the following questions:

In your world…

  • what makes a good first impression? A bad one?
  • what do you notice first about others (dress, speech, demeanor)?
  • what does that make you think about them (rigid, pushy, lazy)?
  • what intangible credentials do you value (education, experience, connections)?
  • how do you perceive status differences?”

Act: Misjudging Behavior

It is almost axiomatic that “on diverse teams, clashing behavioral norms are a common source of trouble.” This prong can include issues as broad as personal space to being punctual and respectful of the group’s time. Equally, it can be such things as keeping the group on a tight schedule or building in flexibility for project direction changes. Here you can simply think of the difference manner in which an American, German, South Korean and Saudi Arabian (and anywhere in between) might act. The authors conclude, “It’s important to establish team norms around all these behaviors up front to avoid unnecessary antagonism.”

The authors suggested this conversation could be facilitated with some of the following questions:

In your world…

  • how important are punctuality and time limits?
  • are there consequences of being late or missing deadlines?
  • what is a comfortable physical distance for interacting in the workplace?
  • should people volunteer for assignments or wait to be nominated?
  • what group behaviors are valued (helping others, not complaining)?”

Speak: Dividing by Language

Unfortunately for Mr. Translations, this section does not mean you need to employ a translation service but it does recognize that different cultures use different communication styles. The authors recognize that even native speakers of the same language can have differences in the way they express themselves. Yet when your team consists of a wide variety of cultures, this effect can be magnified. The authors note that “depending on context, culture, and other factors, “yes” can mean “maybe” or “let’s try it” or even “no way.”” Moreover, “even laudable organizational goals can engender troublesome communication dynamics.”

The authors suggested this conversation could be facilitated with some of the following questions:

In your world…

  • is a promise an aspiration or a guarantee?
  • which is most important: directness or harmony?
  • are irony and sarcasm appreciated?
  • do interruptions signal interest or rudeness?
  • does silence mean reflection or disengagement?
  • should dissenting views be aired in public or discussed off-line?
  • is unsolicited feedback welcome?”

Think: Occupying Different Mindsets

As a recovering lawyer and the son of an engineer, I can certainly appreciate the differences in a legal approach from an engineering perspective. The authors do as well, writing, “Perhaps the biggest source of conflict on teams stems from the way in which members think about the work they’re doing. Their varied personalities and experiences make them alert to varying signals and cause them to take different approaches to problem solving and decision making. This can result in their working at cross-purposes. As one executive with a U.S. apparel company noted: “There is often tension between the ready-fire-aim types on our team and the more analytical colleagues.””

The authors cited to two separate examples of how this gulf was breached. In the first example the leadership of a team was rotated to align with the phase of the project so that “During the more creative and conceptual phases, the free-thinkers would be in charge, while analytical and detail-oriented members would take over evaluation, organization, and implementation activities.” In a second example, involving scientists and executives in a biotech company, “a facilitator used role play to help the two groups better understand each other’s perspective.”

The authors suggested this conversation could be facilitated with some of the following questions:

In your world…

  • is uncertainty viewed as a threat or an opportunity?
  • what’s more important: the big picture or the details?
  • is it better to be reliable or flexible?
  • what is the attitude toward failure?
  • how do people tolerate deviations from the plan?” 

Feel: Charting Emotions

Often there will be a wide variation in the way team members convey emotions and even passion and how they manage these same emotions. This can be true for both positive, including enthusiasm, and negative emotions, such as venting or even keeping thing bottled up for too long. The authors noted, “The tendency to signal irritation or discontent indirectly—through withdrawal, sarcasm, and privately complaining about one another—can be just as destructive as volatile outbursts and intimidation. It’s important to address the causes of disengagement directly, through open inquiry and debate, and come up with ways to disagree productively.”

The authors suggested this conversation could be facilitated with some of the following questions:

In your world…

  • what emotions (positive and negative) are acceptable and unacceptable to display in a business context?
  • how do people express anger or enthusiasm?
  • how would you react if you were annoyed with a teammate (with silence, body language, humor, through a third party)?”

This article provides solid guidance for the CCO or any business leader on not only how to anticipate conflict but concrete steps to head it off. The author’s conclude by noting that a benefit of these five conversations is that, “We’ve found that they include greater participation, improved creativity, and, ultimately, smarter decision making.” If you can achieve this on any project involving any corporate team, you have achieved something significant.

 

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the author. The author is not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The author, his affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. The Author gives his permission to link, post, distribute, or reference this article for any lawful purpose, provided attribution is made to the author. The author can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com.

© Thomas R. Fox, 2016

ARodAlex Rodriguez announced his retirement from baseball, effective Friday, August 12. In a New York Times (NYT) article he said, “Saying goodbye may be the hardest part of the job,” “But that’s what I’m doing today. As far as 700 [home runs], or any of those type of milestones, I would have had an unbelievable, fun time going after them, those are not the cards I was dealt.” So, in other words, the Yankees released a player, who at one time had the richest contract in baseball.

One of the cards with which Rodriguez was dealt was to be one of the greatest natural talents to hit a baseball in the past 50 years. The card he personally added to the mix was the use of performance enhancing drugs, usually claiming that he did not take them but occasionally admitting so on the public stage as well. The real problem for Rodriguez is that at 41 he is washed up as a major league baseball player. He will end his career with 656 home runs and I for one am glad that such a public cheater did not become the fourth person to slam 700 home runs. Not even the New York Yankees, who still owe him $21MM through the end of next season, could put up with his lack of performance any longer. He will be a ‘Special Advisor’ to the club which is the business world equivalent of an unwanted senior executive being moved to ‘Special Projects’. Still on the payroll but released from any real work.

Rodriguez’s sorry exit from baseball forms the basis for today’s blog post and most interestingly the NYT had another article in its Sunday edition from which every Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) and compliance practitioner should draw a valuable lesson. It was found in the Corner Office column where Adam Bryant interviewed Kevin Warren, the Chief Operating Officer (COO) for the Minnesota Vikings, in a piece entitled “Championships Are Won in the Details. In the business (and compliance world) this translates to execution. It does not matter how impressive your paper compliance program might be, if you do not execute the program going forward, you will not be doing compliance. Baker Hughes, Inc. (BHI) CCO puts it more colloquially when he says that execution is where the rubber meets the road.

Yet Warren has some additional insights from his position that I think apply to the CCO or compliance practitioner. When asked about his leadership style, he said that it had evolved. He described this evolution through an interesting analogy saying, “in the first part of my life and my career, I was rolling through stoplights. I was so busy. And now in my position, I stop at a stoplight and really take an opportunity to observe the surroundings. Maybe there’s someone on the side of the road who needs some help. Maybe there’s someone in a rush that needs to go ahead. That’s where I am now. There are more demands on my time, but I’ve become a much better listener. I’ve slowed down my thought process and tried to make sure I’m there for everyone.”

As a compliance leader, you must be available to employees literally from the Boardroom to the shop floor. If a compliance matter comes up, there must be someone there to advise, even if that advise is only to confirm the employee’s understanding of doing business in compliance or that their plan of action is within your company’s anti-corruption risk management parameters. The other observation is that compliance is one of the few corporate disciplines which is literally “there for everyone.” In my podcast series Unfair and Unbalanced, I have debated my co-host Roy Snell on this point but I have come around to Roy’s point of view. In many ways, compliance is becoming the key corporate discipline as it moves into the fabric of an organization. This is because it is the fulcrum by which so many corporate disciplines intersect.

Warren had a couple of additional insights for any compliance practitioner. One was around hiring. As you might expect for someone at his corporate level, by the time a candidate gets to him for an interview, the candidate has been thoroughly vetted in technical competence. So Warren wants to obtain a fuller measure of the candidate. He does so by inquiring into their passion for the position and whether they will give a top effort. These are excellent points for any CCO as well. Most compliance practitioners are passionate about compliance. They view it as more than simply a job. As a leader in compliance, you should inquire into this and if you find it in your employees, not only work to harness that passion but also use it going forward. That is one way to become a great leader.

Conversely, Warren intoned that when it comes to advice for employees “I think the best thing is for people to be really honest with themselves. Step off the treadmill a little bit and be honest with yourself about what you really want to do, what you want your legacy to be, what you want your life to look like. And people should really focus on nirvana. I’ve been blessed to reach nirvana because in my quiet times along this journey, I would sit and dream and write things down that I wanted to do. You most likely can’t reach a goal that you have not already achieved in your head. If, in your mind, the best you focus on is running an eight-minute mile, you will never run a six-minute mile.”

There are many people new to the compliance profession. One of the things that struck me at the recent Compliance Week 2016 was how many first time attendees were present. There are many new faces in compliance. If this is what you want to do, get out there and do it. You can attend conferences and meet others in the compliance profession. You can go the 2016 SCCE Compliance and Ethics Institute this September in Chicago, where there is a specific event designed to provide mentorships. The SCCE has one of, if not the top compliance certification programs going and you can become a certified compliance professional. Not only will such a certification give you personal satisfaction but it also provides a market differentiator when you are interviewing so your own personal brand will profit.

If you remember Rodriguez from the 90s during his tenure with the Mariners, you recall one of the greatest raw talents of all-time. Rodriguez chose to waste all of that by using steroids and ruining his legacy forever. He denied, then admitted, and then denied again that he used performance enhancing drugs. He later filed an appeal for his 2014 season long suspension for such use but when the day came for him to testify in an arbitration proceeding, he literally ran out of the hearing room as he would have been required to testify under oath for the first time in his life about steroid use. That to me will always be his lasting legacy.

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the author. The author is not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The author, his affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. The Author gives his permission to link, post, distribute, or reference this article for any lawful purpose, provided attribution is made to the author. The author can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com.

© Thomas R. Fox, 2016

Moore and ElvisWe recently lost some legendary musicians. Last week two of the biggest from very different genres left us. They were Scotty Moore and Dr. Ralph Stanley. Today I want to pay tribute to Scotty Moore, recognized by Rolling Stone magazine as the 29th greatest guitarist in its Top 100 ranking. As noted in his obituary in the New York Times (NYT), Moore, was “a guitarist whose terse, bluesy licks on Elvis Presley’s early hits virtually created the rockabilly guitar style and established the guitar as a lead instrument in rock ’n’ roll.” He was recording at the legendary Sun Studios, owned by Sam Phillips, in 1954 when Phillips asked him to audition a young singer, who turned out to be Elvis Presley.

While Moore was in many ways the older brother Presley never had, his playing style with Presley was inspired. Quoted in the obituary, Moore said, ““I tried to play around the singer. If Elvis was singing a song a certain way, there was no point in me trying to top him on what he just did. The idea was to play something that went the other way — a counterpoint.”” In its Top 100 ranking Rolling Stone said, “If Moore had done nothing but the 18 Sun recordings — including ‘Mystery Train’ and ‘Good Rockin’ Tonight’ — his place in history would be assured. But he continued to play with Elvis, contributing the scorching solos to ‘Heartbreak Hotel’ and ‘Hound Dog.’” Yet, Keith Richard may have paid Moore the ultimate tribute when he said, “Everyone else wanted to be Elvis, I wanted to be Scotty.”

I thought about Moore and the unique sound he created when I read a recent article in the Corner Office column of the NYT, where Adam Bryant interviewed Drew Houston, Chief executive of Dropbox, in an article entitled “Figure Out Things You Don’t Know”. His thoughts around the topic of not knowing what you don’t know are certainly appropriate for a Chief Compliance Office (CCO) or compliance practitioner.

While it may appear to be inconsistent to state that CCO’s must have subject matter expertise while recognizing they do not know everything; self-awareness mandates that you do not know what you do not know. Indeed Houston believes this is an important first step for any leader. He said that one of his early leadership lessons was, “The first thing is having a healthy paranoia for trying to find out what you don’t know that you don’t know. The question I would ask myself — even in the beginning, and I still do today — is, six months from now, 12 months from now, five years from now, what will I wish I had been doing today or learning today?” I think that the key lesson here is that curiosity did not kill the cat but actually made it into a better leader.

Houston also had some interesting thoughts around corporate culture, its creation and maintenance. As Dropbox was a start up, its culture was “sort of bizarre average of the founders’ personalities.” However, as the company grew, Houston recognized the need to formalize the culture. He noted, “a couple of years ago, we decided to define our values and make our culture explicit.” The company recognized that it needed to consider its priorities and then sustain them in the long run. He said, “There are a lot of ways to think about it, but one of them is, how do you build something that sustains excellence over a long period of time? Or to put it another way, it seems that most companies, most organisms, decay as they get older and bigger, and so how do you inoculate your company from the most common things that tend to go wrong?”

To design the corporate culture, he and his team “approached it as kind of an engineering problem — what is the opposite of each of those things? We came up with five: Be worthy of trust; sweat the details; aim higher; “we,” not “I”; and the fifth is just an image of a smiling cupcake, because we don’t want to take ourselves too seriously.” This point would seem to be the feedback loop on any culture regime.

Most interestingly I found Houston’s advice to the MIT (his alma mater) 2013 graduating class to be appropriate for any person in the compliance profession. He said that every person should have three things to consider going forward; a tennis ball, a circle and the number 30,000.

First, the tennis ball “is about finding the thing you’re obsessed with. The most successful people and successful entrepreneurs I know are all obsessed with solving a problem that really matters to them. I use the tennis ball for that idea because of my dog, who gets this crazy, obsessed look on her face when you throw the ball for her.” Most compliance practitioners I know are passionate about our profession. Clearly some folks are simply passing through but they are in the minority. If you, like me, feel that the compliance profession gives you the best platform for doing the most good in the corporate world, this is a good thing. From the compliance department, you can not only help increase profitability but can do so in a manner that pushes the ball of doing good forward.

I found his second point on the circle enlightening. Houston said, “The circle is really about the idea that you’re the average of your five closest friends, so make sure to put yourself in an environment that pulls the best out of you.” As a leader, you are exponentially better if you have top-notch talent around you because they will make you perform better. In the corporate world, if you hire the best talent into your department, train them up and then turn them loose, the results can be nothing short of amazing. I can think of no better a corporate example of this than the CCO at Baker Hughes Inc. (BHI), Jay Martin, who has utilized this approach in his over ten-year tenure at BHI.

Finally are Houston’s thoughts on “the number 30,000.” He said, “When I was 24, I came across this website that says most people live for about 30,000 days. So you have to make every day count.” Everyday in compliance, do something to make your program a little better. While you are doing that, go ahead and document it so that when a regulator comes knocking you can demonstrate it.

 

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the author. The author is not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The author, his affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. The Author gives his permission to link, post, distribute, or reference this article for any lawful purpose, provided attribution is made to the author. The author can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com.

© Thomas R. Fox, 2016

Cartoon caption bubbleI hope everyone had a great 4th of July. One of the small pleasures I take each week is reading the New Yorker’s Cartoon Caption contest. I have entered most weeks for the past 10 years or so when the spirit moved me with a caption to submit. I won once, in the issue dated February 11 & 18, 2008. So you might imagine my surprise and thrill when I received a call from the section Editor, Bob Mankoff, last week to tell me I am a finalist yet again, for the July 25, 2016 issue. My request is that you go over to the contest and, if the spirit so moves, you will vote for me. You do not have to be a subscriber to vote but you do have to vote by Sunday, July 10th. You can go to the Cartoon Caption contest by clicking this link.

As you see from my entry, I was inspired by the long drought of Cleveland in winning a major sports championship, remedied by the Cavaliers in dramatic fashion in June. Having lived in or near Houston most of my life, I certainly understand futility of sports franchises. Yet I was reminded of my entry, the overcoming futility in a dearth of championship banners and their intersection with compliance in a The Atlantic magazine article by Jerry Useem, entitled “What Was Volkswagen Thinking?” Useem reviews the design and implementation of the VW defeat device that led to its emissions-testing scandal. He pointed to the sociologist Diane Vaughan, who coined the term normalization of deviance to explain the “cultural drift in which circumstances classified as ‘not Okay’ are slowly reclassified as ‘okay’.”

It is this type of corporate culture that leads to not only total disaster, such as currently being experienced by VW, but also allows companies to slip into conduct that violates the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). One step is that management does not model the behavior that it alleges to aspire to for its employees. Yet Vaughn goes further to describe the process as a “script” which develops a definition of the situation, which allows the employees to carry on as if nothing was wrong. It is this script about marching to make your numbers that causes many employees to come to grief. For it does not matter what your Code of Conduct says or even what senior management might say, it means if the focus is on making your numbers, employees will get that message.

Consider the recently concluded Analogic Corporation (Analogic) and BK Medical ApS (BK Medical) FCPA enforcement action. Here there were two separate high-level red flags raises over the BK Medical bribery program and neither the subsidiary, BK Medical, nor the parent, Analogic, followed through with an investigation, discovered the rather obvious (and blatant) conduct and ended it. How could this occur? Useem notes that Vaughan’s theory allows employees to move beyond acting as if nothing is wrong. They come to believe, “bringing to mind Orwell’s concept of doublethink, the method by which a bureaucracy conceals evil from not only the public but itself.”

Contrast the VW and Analogic examples of Useem who further wrote about Johnson & Johnson (J&J) who had one of the greatest corporate scares of all-time when there were cyanide-laced capsules sold in Chicago area stores in 1982. J&J set the gold standard for corporate crisis response when it pulled every bottle of Tylenol nationwide, warned consumers not to take the product and sustained a $100MM loss. Yet it turns out the genesis of this crisis response had occurred three years earlier when the company’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO), James Burke, became concerned that the J&J Credo, which included a duty to protect those who used the company’s products “had become something like the Magna Carta: an important historical document, but hardly a tool for modern decision making.” Burke led a reinvigoration of the company’s core values into its business practices.

This reinvigoration led directly to the company’s response to the Tylenol-cyanide poisoning. Indeed, Useem said the company’s actions “flowed more or less automatically from the signal sent three years earlier. Burke, in fact, was on a plane when the news of the poisoning broke. By the time he landed, employees were already ordering Tylenol off the store shelves.”

Useem’s article points towards why tone at the top is so important. The tone to do business in compliance with the FCPA must be set by senior management and that message must be continually communicated. When those communications stop and the message becomes ‘make your numbers’ then the company’s commitment to doing business the right way will also falter. Even disgraced former Chief Financial Officer (CFO) of Enron, Andy Fastow, recognized this when he was quoted in Useem’s article for the following, “A robust ‘code of conduct’ can be emasculated by one action of the CEO or CFO.”

The setting of unrealistic sales goals individually or even by region can lead to the cutting of corners. Consider the illegal actions of GlaxoSmithKline PLC (GSK) in China, which led to a fine of approximately $497MM for the company’s bribery of Chinese government officials in the health care sector. GSK had set sales growth of 20% annually in China. How were the leaders of the Chinese business unit to hit these numbers? Apparently that was not something senior management in the corporate office was too worried about. The setting of such unrealistic sales goals can be the simple message that over-rides all the statements about doing business in concert with the business ethics expressed in your Code of Conduct.

Tone at the top does matter. But it is more than simply saying the right thing. It is setting your goals in a realistic manner that can allow employees to reach them without engaging in bribery and corruption or, in the case of VW, fraud. Useem ends his piece with the following, “Decisions may be the product of culture. But culture is the product of decisions.”

 

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the author. The author is not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The author, his affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. The Author gives his permission to link, post, distribute, or reference this article for any lawful purpose, provided attribution is made to the author. The author can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com.

© Thomas R. Fox, 2016

 

12 O'Clock HighIt took far too long but it is finally here. I am pleased to announce the premier of a new podcast on leadership. It is called 12 O’Clock High – A podcast on business leadership with Tom Fox. This podcast is hosted by Richard Lummis. I founded this new podcast because I have long been interested in the topic of leadership, a subject that was not, for generations, taught in law school. As a lawyer who worked in the legal department and gravitated to compliance, I saw a real need to bring the specific topic of leadership to those who want to move up to the Chief Compliance Officer (CCO) chair. This is even more relevant for the CCO or compliance practitioner than a corporate legal function because in that position you have to work with and through a wider variety of corporate disciplines than the usual in-house lawyer.

In researching this topic over the years, I have always been struck by the basic question of how one can strive to be a leader in business. Many in businesses think that if you are not born with the right leadership traits you can never successfully lead. The opposite is actually the truth. Leadership skills CAN be learnt, and in each episode we will explore the techniques of leadership, how to incorporate them into your own business strategy and help you become a more powerful leader in business. This podcast will help fill in skills.

Why the name 12 O’Clock High? It is because it is one of the most powerful movies about World War II (WWII), leadership and its effects on men I have ever seen. It starred Gregory Peck and was nominated for four Academy Awards, winning two Oscars. It was one of the first films about the war to focus on the human toll rather than on the military aspects of leadership during combat. I was drawn to the leadership skills demonstrated by the protagonist, General Frank Savage, played by Gregory Peck. Peck demonstrates a range of leadership skills as the Commanding Officer of the fictional 918th Bomber Group. He uses a range of leadership skills, such as tone from the top, influence, persuasion, self-sacrifice, listening and communicating, all to rebuild his unit. I was always fascinated by Peck’s portrayal and have wanted to use it as a guide for today’s leaders and to honor my father’s generation.

This podcast is a bit different from my other podcasts as I am being hosted by Richard Lummis. I asked Lummis to host because he has faced many of these issues in his business career. Like myself, he began his professional career as a lawyer but he later moved into the business side. He has run a series of companies ranging from energy concerns to recording studios. He had to learn many of the same lessons on leadership that I was required to learn in my corporate career. His experiences allow him to bring a unique and differing perspective to leadership and I hope you will enjoy his hosting this new podcast as much as I have in recording the episodes with him.

I begin this new podcast with three episodes up and available for your review. In Episode 1, I discuss the seven steps to greater influence better decision-making within an organization. Here Richard and I explore those steps, provide thinking behind how and what to do, and who is responsible for each. I challenge you to examine your own leadership skills and ask, as a leader, or aspiring leader, how do you compare against these steps?

In Episode 2, I discuss leadership lessons from running a family business. I take as my starting point an interview by Adam Bryant of Brooke Denihan Barrett about leadership lessons. She is the co-chief executive officer of the Denihan Hospitality Group, a 50-year old family business in the hospitality industry who has four key leadership principles. Through our dialogue Richard and I explain why her four lessons are important if you want to build a collaborative team.

In Episode 3, we discuss the psychology of persuasion. We use, as a staring point, the work of Robert Cialdini. In his book, “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion”, he laid out what he believed to be six universal principals of persuasion that can be used to hone your leadership skills. Lummis and I use this work to explore those principals and provide feedback on how you can incorporate them into your leadership style going forward.

I plan to post a new podcast at noon on Tuesday of each subsequent week. Upcoming topics include the lessons that can be drawn from entrepreneurial leadership; how to conduct your first 100 days as a new business leader; the always difficult and tedious tasks of managing both meetings and talent; and we also explore the legacy of former Chesapeake Energy Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Aubrey McClendon who died in a car accident the day after he was indicted by a federal grand jury with conspiring to rig bids for oil and natural gas leases. We explore the allegations around McClendon’s conflicts of interest when he was CEO, the issue of reputation and leadership and what is CEO self-dealing.

As an added benefit I will show notes for each episode that you can use as a reference and benchmark for your own leadership journey. I hope you will go over and check out my newest podcast 12 O’Clock High – A podcast on business leadership with Tom Fox and that you get as much out of it as I have garnered researching, recording and producing it for you. The podcast is also available on iTunes and you can access by clicking here. So please go over to iTunes, take a listen and if you like what you hear rate this podcast in iTunes or better yet, leave a review.

 

This publication contains general information only and is based on the experiences and research of the author. The author is not, by means of this publication, rendering business, legal advice, or other professional advice or services. This publication is not a substitute for such legal advice or services, nor should it be used as a basis for any decision or action that may affect your business. Before making any decision or taking any action that may affect your business, you should consult a qualified legal advisor. The author, his affiliates, and related entities shall not be responsible for any loss sustained by any person or entity that relies on this publication. The Author gives his permission to link, post, distribute, or reference this article for any lawful purpose, provided attribution is made to the author. The author can be reached at tfox@tfoxlaw.com.

© Thomas R. Fox, 2016