A Lesson in Career Regeneration

How many of us have gone through a phase where we feel as if our career has reached a dead end? When you feel that your career has either gone through a slump, or you have experienced a career-threatening setback. In these moments, you would not be alone in thinking that the best thing to do is to find another job, and forget everything you have done. Like many, I always wonder if ever there is a career after the fall. Time and time again we hear of entrepreneurs who set up business, see them fail, and they lift themselves again. How often do we hear of those who regenerate their careers this way?

This week I was jolted to remember someone who experienced a spectacular fall, and in fact is seen as having the worst record on the most important job he had reached. This was triggered by conversations with a friend who is experiencing career uplift after a big disappointment, and he is going through one of the best professional experiences of his life. We compared his current experiences to what happened to former US President Jimmy Carter. I thought to tell his story will encourage many who think a disappointment, even a big one, is a permanent blemish.

Jimmy Carter became President of the United States in 1977. The US was still reeling from the oil shock of 1973, and had just been through the tumultuous events that led to the disgraceful exit of Richard Nixon from the White House. Whilst Jimmy Carter was not a well-known name, he ran a good campaign and many were hopeful that he would lift a demoralised nation after his election. As he came to power, the US was battling inflation, low growth and high unemployment. He achieved some success with the Camp David Accords that led to a peace agreement between Egypt and Israel. With an act that in hindsight many now appreciate, he established two Cabinet level departments, Energy and Education, which have proved to be strategic for the US in the current period, more than 30 years after he left office. However, he is remembered as the one who was President when, after the Islamic Revolution in Iran, US citizens were held hostage at the American Embassy in Tehran for 444 days. He suffered one of the heaviest defeats of a sitting President in the 1980 elections, and when he left office, nothing was expected of him in public life. Literally and figuratively, he was regarded as a spent force.

Jimmy Carter, however, felt that his mission for humanity was not done. He refused to see the disappointments, or even failures, of his term of office as being the most defining of his character. He realised that the job of US President gave him a particular experience and world-view, and through it he had established networks that went beyond the key issues that defined his Presidency. His work on Middle East peace whilst he was US President had given him a certain level of recognition globally. Paradoxically, he had to become a non-President to realise the value of having been a President, and thus become one of the most successful ex-Presidents in history. And this is how he regenerated his career.

In 1982, together with his wife Rosalynn, he set up the Carter Centre. The Carter Centre is a non-profit organisation which seeks to prevent and resolve conflicts, enhance freedom and democracy, and improve health. Some of its notable achievements include having been an observer of 81 elections in 33 countries since 1989, and mediating various conflicts globally based on it being a trusted broker for peace, in countries as diverse as North Korea, Colombia, Ecuador and Sudan. This conflict mediation role was building on the experience President Carter had gained in negotiating the Camp David Accords. In 2002, he became the first US President, in or out of office, to visit Cuba since the 1959 revolution. President Carter received the Nobel Peace Prize in 2002 for his contribution to global peace, and is unique in being the only US President or ex-President to receive the award for actions after he left office. During this time, he also has found time to write 21 books. It is testimony to someone who built on his personality and experience to create a new career that has made him more appreciated than when he occupied high office. The four years as US President pale into insignificance to the more than 30 years of success since he left office.

I have used Jimmy Carter’s example as a way to illustrate that we need to look at life and careers through a different time and contextual prism than we tend to. Any experience we gain, combined with our character, creates a platform for the next generation of work that we will do. Whilst we may experience failure and disappointment, and also some may seek to derail our progress, we have this foundation to use to build for the next career experience (click here on the previous article I wrote about how to deal with those who can seek to derail your progress).

How many of us, when faced with these difficult career moments in the organisations we work for, we think they are the final arbiters of what happens to our lives? I hope many of us can learn from people such as Jimmy Carter than one’s current office or job can provide an experience and value network that can be a springboard for future success. He never let the failures and disappointments of office to prevent him from pursuing his life’s passion, and has thus achieved success, and regained the respect he might have lost when he left office. It is a very easy example to follow.

Perspective on Talent and Leadership Responsibility – Part 1

In the previous articles I have spent a lot of time talking about what they can do for their own growth and success. The limitation with this focus, whilst good enabling the individual to develop self, is that it may ignore the role of the leadership. The reason I focus on that aspect here is to share what I think is one of the most critical leadership, not management, responsibilities: developing talent. It will also enable us to think questions to ask in order to see if an organisation has the culture and leaders with an affinity for this aspect.

One of the major flaws with the creation of layers of management in organisations is that a lot of managers start to believe that they “own” the people who are in the units or divisions. Through this thinking, they see themselves as having the ultimate responsibility for these people’s careers and growth. Negatively, they also think, when they may not work well with someone, they have the right to stunt their growth. In an era where organisations rely so much on the talent of individuals, I see these behaviours as some that have such a negative impact on the life of an organisation and its ability to compete. In many organisations’ architecture, this problem gets super-reinforced by the general reliance of HR Talent-management specialists on the feedback of the line manager. This thinking is so flawed also because an organisation thinks it promotes people into being managers on the basis of their ability to do so.  Although many organisations profess to use  360⁰ feedback, often it is infused with such levels of subjectivity as to be no worth the paper it is written on. What most organisations tend to suffers from is no different from what they tend to with their own customers, which is not being able to analyse and connect the multiplicity of data that they may have about their customer. This often results in a customer being framed in such a way that the organisations’ solutions never address the core issues the customer faces.

To illustrate the challenge and responsibility, I use football, which is a matter very close to my heart. Most successful football clubs will have a coach or manager with the ultimate responsibility of selecting the team, and designing tactical and strategic approaches for games and tournaments as relevant. This manager will have assistants, who, because of their specific skills and experience, will play a particular role to enable the manager to arrive at the best strategic and tactical decisions. This manager will also rely on a system of talent scouts that the club will have, to identify talent that may be coming from the club’s development structures, or to analyse potential players from other teams that could add value to the club’s objectives. It never is the case that they will rely on only one person to be able to that, and they also put in place the infrastructure that will enable them to have this continuous flow of talent. Whilst the manager would have been appointed by such a club for his / her competence and ability, the said club would not simply place reliance on this one person to deliver talent in such a competitive environment. If they get this wrong, it may years later come back to bite them with such talent being used by competing clubs against them.

To illustrate this, I will use a recent case that involves a manager, who is renowned for his talent identification and nurturing skills, Arsene Wenger of Arsenal Football Club.  In 2003, he had the opportunity to sign the midfielder Yaya Toure together with his brother Kolo, who was already at the club. Due to administrative delays with his work permit, Arsenal was not able to convince him to wait and he went on to play for other clubs before joining Manchester City. Ten years from the time Wenger nearly signed him, Yaya participated in a game that led to one of Arsenal’s heaviest defeats ever. Wenger has admitted that missing out on signing Yaya was one of his biggest regrets in football. And the competition has now used Yaya against Arsenal, denying them the opportunity of being title contenders ten years after a fateful administrative delay.

The example used is unfortunate, as Wenger is one manager whose heart is generally in the right place on this issue, and he was not entirely responsible for it. But I think it illustrates more than anything that organisations have to think beyond the narrow view of the manager, and become very jealous about their people. It is not unusual that managers will participate in a deliberate process of destroying someone’s career if they feel that person is a threat or potentially may overtake them in the organisation that they work for. It is funny how people can frame their thinking and decision on the basis of the narrow world they see, and never have a broader view which enables them to give up talent that they do not have a use for.

It is here that the responsibility of leaders becomes more critical. And they will only be effective by being able to do a combination of the following things: 1) Being in touch with the most junior person in their areas of responsibility; 2) Having a cynical view when they receive feedback that one of their employees’ ‘wants too much”, “is ambitious”, “does not behave like others”; 3) Related to the above, seek to understand whether these employees may not need to be placed in different environments and given a different set of challenges. They must ask themselves what is wrong with an employee that wants to do more for his / her employer, if that leads to better returns for the shareholders; 4) Think about how they would feel with a particular employee being on the opposite side. How would it affect their competitive position and would they have an Wenger-type regret years later; 5) Reflect on the managers’ own ability to deal with talent, and maybe focus solutions on the manager being better at this, as many other employees will work with this manager in future; 6) Focus on the organisational culture, and whether it enables these hungry employees to have a voice without being judged; 7) Continuously assert the organisation’s “ownership’ of every employee, and that the manager only has a “custodial” responsibility whilst those employees are working for them.

After all, if people are some of the best assets for organisations, they cannot afford to leave focus on them only to managers who may be unable to enhance talent. The leadership responsibility is to go beyond the management layer and continuously find the diamonds that will make the organisation shine in future. Those organisations who do this well are set for a successful and sustainable future.

No One Should Have the Power to Derail Your Progress

A new year is already in full swing and many of us are looking at how we will realise our goals. We know there will be obstacles along the way. Sometimes these may just be challenges in the environment. But, as you find so often in corporate life, these obstacles may be created by those who dislike your individuality, are jealous of your progress, or even threatened by it. We live in a world where some define their existence only by the narrow spaces they occupy, whether it is positions of authority, or some kind of managerial responsibility. The history of organisations is writ large with individuals who take it upon themselves to destroy or limit the progress of talented and promising individuals.

This past month I have had to confront this when dealing with two individuals who came to have career conversations. One is quite senior in his organisation, and has the kind of experience, qualifications and character that you would expect to be highly valued. The other is an upcoming manager who has made investments in her own development, whilst being a model and performing employee. I found it interesting that these individuals, who do not know each other, and are on different career paths, had on the same week called to discuss similar problems.

They both found colleagues and managers who were actively seeking to destroy their credibility. Both were prepared to quit their jobs as they were finding the environment so demoralising. They were hurt and angry. At the same time I noticed in both of them a great yearning for a solution in their current environment; an opportunity to disprove those they saw as derailing their progress by succeeding against the odds that were being stacked against them; and by not depending on the benevolence of those who, whilst having been placed in a position where they could assist them, were actively seeking to destroy their careers. Both of them were posing a similar challenge: how do you deal with a situation like this?

The first thing I resolved to do was to disprove the notion that all was lost. Yes the challenges seemed complex, but I thought that both had the solution, they just did not know they did. And the framework I used in helping them find a way to deal with this is a simple six-step process that I have found useful through experience.

The first step is self-reflection. It is always important to ask whether one has done everything possible to prevent the situation being what it is. Paradoxically, when we own up to any mistake or fault, it tends to disarm others and minimises conflict. It was this process of self-reflection that also made both of them realise the resolve they had to deal with the matters before them. At this point, the individuals were also able to deal with the demons of fear and self-hatred. Honest self-reflection is the first step I use in these processes.

The second step is the importance of understanding the opposition. This is important for two reasons: the first is based on the classic saying that, in order to be understood, you must first seek to understand. Maybe by understanding the motivation, fear and interests of those who were seeking to derail their progress, they could use this to their advantage, and make the opposition less threatened by them. Idealistic, yes, but it provides an avenue for a solution. The second, to ensure that, if ever they have to confront them, they should know the kind of people they are dealing with, as well as their network. And I emphasised this to them, that a lot of people make mistakes by underestimating those they may be in conflict or disagreement with. And that often happens because we never sought to understand them in the first place.

The third step is to ensure they have a sense of their own value. This value would be as seen by the organisation they work for, and not necessarily the individuals who were creating problems for them. How many times have we seen a company’s management act in interests that were not the same as those of its shareholders? Thus, I told them, there was a possibility that the actions of these individuals would not necessarily be seen, by a different arbiter, to be in the interest of their organisations. Who in the organisations would be concerned by what was happening to them, and would provide support that was unexpected but would be of assistance? Through this process, they could identify potential allies as well as weaken the position of their opposition.

The fourth step was to tap into a trusted and value network. I emphasised that they should only see me as the first of that network, and that tapping onto it with focused conversations would enable them to build allies, as they were dealing with seemingly connected individuals in their organisations. They would also get the benefit of different perspectives and wise counsel before they move into action, where real conflict would arise.

The fifth step they would go to is confrontation. This is less about fighting than bringing up the issues to what they have determined is the relevant forum or individual. This is to ensure that the individuals who are causing the problem for them are now forced to deal with the reality of being questioned by a different authority. In this instance, there will be defensiveness, and some vindictiveness. But I emphasised that they should remember that their ultimate goal was to get the situation to be better than the one they found themselves in. When they reached this stage, they would have lost all sense of fear.

The last, and no less important, was that they should seek to own the solution. This did not mean that the solution was theirs alone. It is only that, through the preceding steps, they would have ensured that the organisation feels an obligation for a solution that is credible to them as the concerned parties. In the conversation, I was focused on the steps in the process rather than the tools. The tools could be a complaint, a discussion or a facilitated session. Whatever it would be, it would need to be seen to be acceptable to them. And the important thing is that by the time they reached the solution stage, through the previous steps, they would have had the benefit of a wider perspective to the problem.

Even after they did this, it is possible that the individuals could still decide that the current environment would not be better for them. The only difference from quitting without trying to do anything would be that they would have allowed individuals to destroy their careers, and not confront the organisation in which those individuals are also employed. In a subtle way, they would have reasserted an organisation’s principles over the actions of a few individuals who may abuse power. And through this, they would have ensured that no individual would have thought they had power over them. They would have overcome the fear and anger with which they started, and become masters of their destiny.

I kept repeating to each of them, separately, that they should not allow any individual to think they had the power to destroy them, no matter what position and authority they had. And they both have come to believe this to be the case.

I am sure they will find a solution that is good for their careers and lives.

Mandela: How he personally touched me and my family

On Thursday 5 December 2013, the world lost a global icon who was born in the rural hinterland of the Eastern Cape in South Africa. Many things since then have been written about him and how he has touched the world differently. Today, he will be honoured in a memorial which, by all accounts, will be of a truly historic nature, with the biggest number of leaders in an event outside the United Nations. It is a testimony to the impact of the leader that the African National Congress produced. I have chosen to celebrate his leadership by reflecting on how he personally touched me and my family.

Even though there will be all these leaders and royalty at his memorial, it should never be forgotten that the great Mandela touched people because he displayed those rare combinations of leadership qualities: respect, integrity, humility, caring, courageous and honesty. In applying them, he showed that he would give as much respect to the most downtrodden as to royalty. He showed respect and honour for people that he did not know a lot.

Madiba touched my family through something he had in common with my late brother. Mandela was the first Commander-In –Chief of Umkhonto Wesizwe (MK), and it was through his actions with MK that he went to prison. My late brother, who was also born in Pondoland in the rural hinterland of the Eastern Cape, became a member of MK in the mid-1980’s. He was killed in January 1991, as we were looking forward to a future with him after years in exile and also being arrested for his activities in MK.

On the evening before the funeral, Madiba arrived at our simple rural home with a delegation of ANC leaders to pay his respects. He called for us as siblings and cousins so he could talk to us. He had personally met my brother a number of times when he visited the region, as my brother was in the core group that would be given the responsibility of looking after the ANC leaders when they visited the region at the time. Madiba told us how personally touched he was by our brother’s death, and that he had come that evening as he would be unable to attend the funeral the next day. He had requested that he be driven to our home after an engagement in a town some 150kms away which had only ended after 6pm. Rather than go to rest, once he had heard the news, he felt that his task would not have been complete if he did not come to pay his respects to our family.

In front of my parents, he told all of us that the only way we could honour our brother was to focus on education and develop ourselves. We were all touched by how this leader humbled himself to come to a family that he personally did not know, and had no status besides the simple working lives of my parents. To him, the passing of a fellow soldier in the struggle transcended status. And he thought it was his duty to comfort those in need, and perhaps it was his way of wanting to express his gratitude for the manner in which my brother had performed his tasks whenever they met.

There is a photograph of my brother, displayed at the Mandela Museum in Mthatha, of my brother walking behind Madiba after Madiba had visited the grave of the former Thembu King Sabata Dalindyebo. I always love looking at it. Mandela never forgot those who worked with him. His example of leadership left an indelible mark in my heart, and in my brother’s memory I will always honour and cherish him.

The Fruits of Perseverance: Dr Iqbal Survé and the Sekunjalo Consortium

Esihleliyo sidl’ukuhlala kwaso; esiphilayo sesithwethwayo

                                (The one that sits will eat nothing; the one that lives is the one that moves)

Earlier this month, the Sekunjalo Consortium received final confirmation that their intent to acquire Independent News SA from its Irish owners was approved by the competition authorities. It is a significant transaction that will have an impact on an industry that has historically been dominated by a minority. It is also indicative of further progress to transform the South African economy from the white domination that is the legacy of apartheid.

For me, however, the biggest lesson from this transaction was the determination and perseverance of this consortium, led by Dr Iqbal Survé. This was in the face of opposition to it by historically dominant voices in the mass media.

The editor of the country’s biggest business newspaper spared no efforts in criticising this attempt by the historically disadvantaged to buy the largest newspaper group in the country. A former newspaper editor and now university professor wrote a column that was so personally insulting to Dr Survé he had to write a subsequent apology. This former editor wrote the column in his blog as well as an op-ed on the business newspaper I refer to. The owners of both the newspapers played their part in either objecting to this deal or seeking to negotiate with Sekunjalo in private to buy some of the newspaper titles from them. The forum of editors weighed in and took the side of established media owners. It was sickening to watch.

Throughout this process I can imagine that Dr Survé and his partners could have thought that it was not worth it. They could have given up because the attacks on them had become very personal, questioning their integrity, intellect and business acumen. They could have whittled under the undisguised undertones of racism that permeated throughout the commentary. And they would have felt that it was better to compromise with those seeking to reverse their victory, by agreeing to sell some of the newspapers to the competitors who were attacking them. It would have been more comfortable and also they would have less criticism to deal with.

Dr Survé and team never took their eye off the ball. They never forgot what their objective was when they decided to buy this newspaper group. They knew that in order to succeed in business and life, it is not always the case that you must seek popularity. They just decided to go ahead and follow their dream, and use all resources they could muster to succeed in this objective. In doing so, they have inspired so many others, especially in my country, who want to achieve against all odds.

Their courage, determination, business acumen, intellect, humility and sense of responsibility have been beautiful to watch. Their sense of integrity compared to those who sought to bring them down has been encouraging. And the fruits of their efforts are inspirational.

Ekunyamezeleni kukho umvuzo

(There are fruits from perseverance)

Ethics and Professional Independence

On 24 June 2013, the Competition Commission (South Africa) reached a settlement with 15 construction firms that had contravened the Competition Act. These firms had colluded on projects with an estimated value of R47bn, and were penalised collectively for R1.46bn. Most, if not all, of these projects were for the public sector (http://www.compcom.co.za/assets/Agreement-and-Affidavits/Appendix-1-Background-to-the-media-statement-.pdf).

What interested me in the story are the lessons on the ethical and professional issues. This story has triggered other investigations by law enforcement agencies. There have also been calls for these companies to be deregistered or sanctioned by the Construction Industry Development Board. Some have proposed that they should be blacklisted from public tenders by the National Treasury as what they have done is no different to public theft.

Executives and employees of these companies probably benefited from the proceeds of these inappropriate and fraudulent practices. Some of them were qualified professionals but were prepared to abandon their credo for short-term gain. Interviews with some CEO’s of the companies revealed that some of those involved did not want to co-operate during the investigation. It is possible that some will be charged for fraud and corruption. I wonder why those who could see that this was not right decided to keep quiet.

This reinforces what I think is one of the critical challenges for professionals today. This is being able to balance technical competence with what I call administrative competence. Administrative competence would encompass all the other elements that are not part of the “technical” skills for a job. These would include ethical conduct and governance.

There are many people whose careers have faltered because of paying little attention to this aspect. I always emphasise to the people I mentor that they should know the one thing they have is their professionalism. If your professionalism is the one thing you sell, then it is clear that once you lose this, you will have nothing left. It is simply an unsustainable approach to career development.

Arthur Levitt, the former Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), made a profound speech on the subject (http://www.sec.gov/news/speech/spch410.htm), entitled "The Public’s Profession". This was in an address to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants on 24 October 2000. It was a time when the SEC was dealing with countless scandals involving audit companies.  Firms such as Arthur Anderson lost their reputation during this period.

He traced the beginning of the accounting profession in the USA 150 years before. These are some of the things he said:

“What was true then is no less true today: the timeless value of credibility, objectivity, and independence; the enduring significance of integrity….

From them [his parents], my passion for independence, both in thought and action, was born…

Today, we have within our collective grasp an opportunity to embrace a renewed commitment to the public trust…

…every public accountant in America has been handed the same precious franchise, granted its special privileges, and charged with its care…

But it's a franchise that demands you defend and protect, above all else, the public trust; a franchise that asks you to stand firm -- even under the weight of management's pressure to "see things their way.”…

…we are dealing with subtle but timeless principles that must sustain a heritage of trust, without burdening the private sector with regulation that may dampen innovation or the creative spirit that is the hallmark of this great nation.”

He ended with these words, which I think every professional should always remember, whether working in private, in the public sector, for a small business or a large corporation:

“You have been handed a precious legacy. What you do with it will determine the future of this profession. It is a heavy burden but an awesome privilege. … lift the light far and wide not just as a profession -- but as individuals -- committed, passionate and resolute to a fidelity that is as much about the profession's past as it is about the profession's future.”

I am convinced one will not have a sustainable career without such independence of thought and a commitment to doing things right. It is something that we should always seek to get right, imperfect as we are.

Discrimination and Professional Development

I write this week on something with a very specific South African flavour.

On Thursday 18 April 2013, the Commission for Employment Equity Annual Report for 2012-13 was issued. I will just cite just one statistic: whilst white people constitute 11.3% of the Economically Active Population, they occupy 72.6% of top management positions. For a country that is almost 20 years from the date of its first democratic election to create a non-racial society, this report is a graphic reminder of both the legacy of apartheid as well as the patent refusal of South African business in particular to embrace diversity at all levels, and implement their own policies which were meant to transform the workplace. This promotion of diversity would not just be for the benefit of those historically disadvantaged, but would contribute to social cohesion and decrease the racial inequality that can be a source of instability. It is to this workplace environment that a lot of young Black and female aspirant professionals enter, and is the focus of what we write about today.

Over the past few months I have interacted with a number of these young people who have to deal with challenges of discrimination and lack of progress in the workplace. For many of these young people, who were really hopeful that their corporate experience would be much better than the previous generations, their current experience leads them to despair, powerlessness, anger, despondency and, tragically, hopelessness. Having only schooled and joined the workplace after the formal end of apartheid, they have to deal with situations of discrimination that they never anticipated and their education and training did not prepare them for. How does one realise their potential in such circumstances?

Like anything in life, the easy route is one of giving up, feeling that the world is not fair and simply too powerful. However, it is during such moments of great difficulty that the human mind can be very creative. Their predecessors successfully fought a powerful state that used detention and assassination to silence those fighting for their rights. They faced something worse than what these young people currently experience. Those people would have had the courage to fight, knowing the fruits of freedom would be worth the risks that had to be taken. And they did.

But courage was not the only thing that mattered. It was the use of appropriate strategies and tactics to realise what was a just victory. Drawing on these very useful lessons, we can say that both as individuals and as a group of professionals there is something that they can do about this situation.  

The first and most basis lesson for me is that you must never suffer in silence. When one begins to verbalise their concern, they find many willing supporters, discover the existence of change agents, and also may find ways in which to influence the direction of their companies. Through being vocal in a disciplined way, people can create moral dilemmas for companies to start practicing what they preach.  Realising the strength and potential one has to cause change, there could begin a series of steps that can cause the situation to be better, not just for those who are currently experiencing such challenges, but indeed for future generations.  And lastly, the individuals should continue to invest in developing further their knowledge and experience.  Competitive factors in the market will make those companies who embrace diversity attract the best people, and the ones that are maintaining the status quo will find it difficult to complete for talent. Despite some seeking to discriminate against you because of race or gender, there are some who will value you for your knowledge and diversity.

My real message is that unless one faces such discrimination head on, there is no possibility of showing your potential. Display how special you are because of what you know and how you execute your work. Without being reckless, one needs to show the necessary tactical skills to help influence change.  

It is a difficult world, but one that needs to be challenged for it to change for the better. Not just for us, but generations to come.