Results2Match

A lot of analysis has been done and many books have been written on the topic of why certain organizations outperform compared to their competition or peer group. But although the concept of High Performance Organizations (HPO) is well documented and some good checklists are available for (self) assessment, its seems difficult to achieve excellence. I‘ve been talking to many companies over the last three years, big and small, old and new.

Maybe the problem lies in the definition of a HPO. In literature an HPO is:

• An organization showing consistent out-performance for at least 5 to 10 years financial and non-financial compared with competition;
• A yearly revenue growth on average 10% above the competition‘s growth;
• A profit on average 29% above competition; An ROI 20% better;
• Shareholders value 23% better;
• And substantial better product quality, higher customer satisfaction, customer loyalty and employee loyalty.

I would say no wonder that very few companies match these criteria! But using these criteria also automatically disqualifies especially “young” companies that show many elements of a HPO but in a shorter time span. Still if we leave the duration element out of the equation, very few companies do qualify.

In my observation this almost always stems from the High Quality of Management factor, one of the five factors by which HPO are recognized. The other factors (high quality of employees term focus, continuous improvement & innovation, open communication and action focused), though undoubtedly having their own importance and challenges, only can flourish when the high quality of management aspect is met.

Aspects through which this quality is measured, range from trust and integrity to decision speed and effectiveness of the management. The most important aspect I find strong leadership. Lead by people with true leadership capabilities, divide the good from the mediocre companies. Not the managers, nor the entrepreneurs and the brilliant whiz-kid influence the consistent out-performance of an organization. Yes, they are needed to deliver their valuable contribution to an organization but they don‘t make the difference.

And her lies the problem for many companies: they don‘t have strong leadership. They are lead and sometimes even owned by managers. But a manager is hardly ever also a leader. And most people in management positions are even bad managers, showing a behavior focusing on clouding and hiding their bad performance.

But what does a strong leader look like? Based on personal observations for over 30 years I have distilled my own template on how a true leader is recognized.

But I‘m curious about your thoughts on this and would like to mirror this in a next blog. So let me know what your definition of leadership is.

hans.van.nes@results2match.com