The importance of good communication is deeply ingrained in modern management practice. It is generally accepted that within a well-run business, information will flow smoothly in every direction – up, down and sideways. But if this goal is so clearly in sight, why do many businesses suffer from bad communication dynamics? What enables the free movement of knowledge and opinions across organizational boundaries in some companies, while others are plagued by a creepy mix of rampant rumors and information suppression? In my experience, it has less to do with formal communication plans than with the underlying behavioral principles of the organization’s leaders. This blog post concerns one high-impact area of conduct: navigating the chain of command.
This issue is fraught for a number of reasons. At a fundamental level, our standard hierarchical management structures create a paradox where communication is concerned. On one hand, the chain of command is integral Continue reading ‘The Chain of Command’
I have participated in a lot of different kinds of staff meetings over the years, ranging from a structure based on a formal McKinsey management model to an agenda that consisted exclusively of the senior person talking about himself. Far and away the most common, however, has been the go-around-the-table model, in which each person reports on key activities in his or her function or business unit. 
Seasoned operating executives will generally agree that a well-run business needs to have a set of metrics, above and beyond bare-bones financial results, that are used to guide decision-making and measure progress. Without metrics we would be flying blind. Unfortunately, operating metrics can also look like a panacea to the uninitiated, thereby lending themselves to fad-surfing. When boards, investors, and far-removed executives are at a loss about how to improve business results, demanding that metrics be put in place has a certain simplistic appeal. A metrics initiative can create the illusion of taking action, it sounds easy enough, and it might actually fix the business. Plus, metrics can provide a means of avoiding the need to assess people and strategies via more time-consuming and uncomfortably subjective means. What’s not to love? 
A COO is often described as the person in the organization who makes the trains run on time. This was also Mussolini’s claim to fame – and he was a Fascist. Does this mean that a COO, or anyone else tasked with driving operational efficiency, is condemned to play the role of killjoy authoritarian if he or she is to be effective? 
A time management tune-up in the leadership ranks is an easy first step in tightening up operational performance. Simply starting meetings on time will free up some cycles for productive work, and it will help establish the framework of disciplined behavior and professional courtesy necessary to support an execution-focused culture. 
It is fairly self-evident that one of the keys to achieving operational focus is to undertake fewer projects – but in practice it isn’t easy to cross things off the list. It doesn’t feel right to eliminate intrinsically worthwhile activities, and crossed-off items have a tendency to creep back on the list if you aren’t vigilant. Here are some things to consider. 
It is interesting to note that the symptoms of operational crisis are often remarkably similar, regardless of the underlying cause or the type of company. The often-used hamster wheel analogy of running around in circles and getting nowhere really does fit very well. 
Chick Operating Officer 
