How Do You Compare to Visionary Companies?

How Do You Compare to Visionary Companies?   Exercise  In a change effort, the exercise can be used to stimulate discussion. In management development programs, this is a good exercise to use to get people thinking about what constitutes organizational excellence. Compare your company on each of the key concepts developed in the all time classic diagnostic tool Built to Last.  How Do You Compare To The Visionary Companies?  Directions: 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.     Exercise Compiled by:   O2ibm Visit this Open Forum