change management leadership teams mergers & acquisitions management development

Tools
Managing Change

· Change Mgmt. Model

· Process Re-engineering

Built To Last Exercise

· "Seven S" Model Framework

Services

Resources

How Do You Compare To The Visionary Companies?
Purpose(s) of this Exercise

This exercise can be used in a number of ways with Built to Last. I recommend asking people to either listen to the audiotape of the book, which is about three hours long and excellent, or read the book before the exercise is run. People like the book very much; it is one of the best books on what makes companies successful. To see my review of this book, look under Resources on the main page, then select Book Reviews.

Ways to use the exercise:

In a change effort where the organization is clearly making a strong effort to become highly effective and there is openness to learning about what it takes to be a great organization, the exercise can be used to stimulate discussion at an off-site meeting. It can be used with a small group of high level managers or with a large group of middle managers, as long as there is receptivity to the ideas that will be generated. In a change effort, you can follow up the discussion with a further exercise to think through what areas might be most beneficial for the organization to pursue in its quest for excellence. Obviously, the exercise needs to be wisely tied into the overall change effort.

In management development programs, this is a good exercise to use to get people thinking about what constitutes an excellent organization. The exercise will generate a lot of discussion and is fine as is, if the workshop is an open one with a number of companies present or takes place in a college or university course. However, if this is being used in an in-company management workshop, make sure there is a fit with the company's direction and culture.

Please email me your experiences with using this exercise, and I will update this page accordingly.

Thanks.

How Do You Compare To The Visionary Companies?

Directions: Compare your company on each of the key concepts developed in Built to Last. Individually rate your company and write out key reasons for your ratings. Take 10 minutes for this. Then try to develop a consensus on the ratings and agreement on the reasoning behind the ratings. If you can not reach consensus, then report split ratings and the thinking of the different groups. You have about 50 minutes for this. Come back to the main room prepared to discuss your ratings.

Ratings:
1 = a lot like visionary company
2 = somewhat like visionary company
3 = can't tell what we are like
4 = somewhat like comparison companies
5 = a lot like comparison companies.

Ratings
Visionary Companies 1 2 3 4 5 Comparison Companies
1. "Architects' approach" -Leaders try to build the company, so that the company lasts long beyond the current set of leaders. 1. Founded around a great idea, concept, invention, etc. Top leadership much more focused on the day-to-day activities and developing new ideas themselves.
2. Do not accept that you have to chose between things. They embrace the genius of "the and," finding a way to do both. 2. Much more willing to accept you have to make trade-offs. Don't push the envelope enough in trying to achieve seemingly important but opposed goals.
3. Have a purpose that goes beyond making money. Stands for something and has core values it really believes. 3. Much more likely to focus solely on profitability as the reason for existing. Much less value driven.
4. Preserve the core/stimulate progress. The only thing scared is the philosophy of doing business. Change is stimulated, but everything is aligned to the core. 4. Alignment is less strong. Frequently tolerate strategies, behavior and attitudes that are not in alignment. Complacency with status quo more often tolerated.
5. Use BHAG's (Big Hairy Audacious Goals) to challenge and motivate the company. Building true commitment to the goal. 5. Do very little that is bold, visionary or risky. Tend to be cautious when approaching innovation. Stick to the knitting.
6. Demanding of people for both accomplishment and adherence to core ideology. Indoctrinate people more, greater elitism. 6. Not very strict about adhering to core ideology,
7. Move forward by trying a lot stuff, keeping what works and getting rid of what does not. Manage failure. 7. Do not encourage a lot of experimentation and thinking out the box. Not as good at getting rid of what does not work.
8. Grow their own leaders and managers. Strive for continuity of leadership to preserve core values. 8. Much more likely to go outside for key managers. Not very conscious of core values and ideology in selecting leaders.
9. Very demanding of themselves have very high standards. Stimulate change before external environment demands it. Worry about becoming complacent. 9. Standards tend to be average. Tend to become complacent and unconcerned with complacency. Chance is often driven by problems/pain.

Notes on reasoning for your ratings:

Home

Site maintained by The Training Registry - THE internet source for training, consulting & training administration resources.

		Ratings
Visionary Companies	1	2	3	4	5	Comparison Companies
1. "Architects' approach" -Leaders try to build the company, so that the company lasts long beyond the current set of leaders.						1. Founded around a great idea, concept, invention, etc. Top leadership much more focused on the day-to-day activities and developing new ideas themselves.
2. Do not accept that you have to chose between things. They embrace the genius of "the and," finding a way to do both.						2. Much more willing to accept you have to make trade-offs. Don't push the envelope enough in trying to achieve seemingly important but opposed goals.
3. Have a purpose that goes beyond making money. Stands for something and has core values it really believes.						3. Much more likely to focus solely on profitability as the reason for existing. Much less value driven.
4. Preserve the core/stimulate progress. The only thing scared is the philosophy of doing business. Change is stimulated, but everything is aligned to the core.						4. Alignment is less strong. Frequently tolerate strategies, behavior and attitudes that are not in alignment. Complacency with status quo more often tolerated.
5. Use BHAG's (Big Hairy Audacious Goals) to challenge and motivate the company. Building true commitment to the goal.						5. Do very little that is bold, visionary or risky. Tend to be cautious when approaching innovation. Stick to the knitting.
6. Demanding of people for both accomplishment and adherence to core ideology. Indoctrinate people more, greater elitism.						6. Not very strict about adhering to core ideology,
7. Move forward by trying a lot stuff, keeping what works and getting rid of what does not. Manage failure.						7. Do not encourage a lot of experimentation and thinking out the box. Not as good at getting rid of what does not work.
8. Grow their own leaders and managers. Strive for continuity of leadership to preserve core values.						8. Much more likely to go outside for key managers. Not very conscious of core values and ideology in selecting leaders.
9. Very demanding of themselves have very high standards. Stimulate change before external environment demands it. Worry about becoming complacent.						9. Standards tend to be average. Tend to become complacent and unconcerned with complacency. Chance is often driven by problems/pain.