The global leader of the future will be faced with new business challenges for which there is no established model of leadership. Although executive management models of the past provide some guidance for the leadership models of the future, in today's complex and ever-changing worldwide business environment, no specific, established model will fit the broad range of situations that global leaders will encounter.
Throughout this book you have considered traits that the global leader must have to some degree. Future leaders must excel in each of these areas, or they must be able to draw upon the collective expertise of those around them if they are to be successful in the future global marketplace. Some of these attributes, such as anticipating opportunities, creating a shared vision, and maintaining competitive advantage, are based on management models of the past. Those qualities that are becoming increasingly important are in the areas of building partnerships, encouraging constructive dialogue, sharing leadership, empowering people, thinking globally, appreciating diversity, and developing technologically savvy. It is in these arenas that global leaders will be looked upon to direct and guide their organizations through uncharted and often unanticipated global shifts, to bring value to their investors, employees, partners, and customers.
Throughout most of corporate history, executives have derived power largely from their position and authority in the organization. Power was, and in many cases still is, vested in the job and formalized in an organization chart. Individuals have authority over those below them in the pyramid. This design works well as long as companies need workers to perform narrowly defined jobs under close supervision.
We are very specialized today. There are leaders who have people skills, leaders who have management skills, leaders who have financial skills, et cetera. The future leader will need to be a well-rounded leader and master all of these skills.[1]
As the business environment changes, the complexity, speed, and scale demanded by global business make it more difficult for companies to go it alone with the traditional, vertically integrated structure. As a result, alliances, partnerships, virtual companies, joint ventures, strategic sourcing, and outsourcing are all growing fast as companies strive for access to the full range of skills, capabilities, and resources they need.
Global leaders of the future don't fear change. They cope with change and view it as a positive.[2]
This new environment demands greater speed and dynamism. Next-generation companies derive the necessary fluidity and flexibility from organizations that are less structured and with fewer established lines of authority. Traditional functional boundaries are dissolving with the advent of process-oriented management operating in networks rather than hierarchies. Information flows in all directions, and people work in teams that form and reform with considerable autonomy.
The working environment will change. There will be tremendous growth in our company that we've never gone through before. I will not be able to ask older leaders for help, because they have not experienced what we will be experiencing. I will have to lead in the growth and rely on innovation.[3]
The greatest constraint in creating a networked organization of specialized yet interdependent units is the shortage of executives with experience, skills, knowledge, and finesse to operate in a more tightly linked but less classically hierarchical global network, and herein lies a great opportunity for the global leader of the future.
The leader of the international division of an international hotel chain struggled to create such a network in order to build an American hotel name outside of the United States. His challenge was not due to a lack of talented leaders on whom to rely; his challenge came from his personal leadership style. This controlling leader had a great history of success in managing the franchise network and building relationships; however, he wanted to handle nearly every situation personally. The pace was too much, and the leader was forced to let go of some of his duties. Although it was a struggle, the leader has slowly changed his leadership style from telling to coordinating, from hierarchical to devolved leadership. He has hired local leaders whom he is comfortable with to make and implement decisions, rather than taking these decisions on as part of his own workload, and he has found leaders around the world whom he trusts to be part of his interdependent leadership network.
As the pace and scale of change increases, the difference in the real world between a manager and a global leader becomes clearer. A manager is an organizer and problem solver. While this is an important business function, the reactionary skill sets of the traditional manager cannot be expected to solve the challenges brought about by such forces as technology and globalization.
The stereotype of the corporate leader as a middle-aged white male with a secretary and high blood pressure is obviously changing.[4]
Traditionally, managers have been rewarded for being "on time and on budget" and for always having the answer. A national service entity in Canada takes this notion to the extreme. Each morning the top 30 executives of the 250,000-person company meet for one to two hours to discuss any problems of a consumer nature that may have arisen in the previous 24 hours and to answer questions posed regarding problems in each executive's area. Executives enter the meeting fully apprised and able to explain the "reasons why" there may have been a problem; not to do so would mean personal embarrassment in this goldfish bowl environment. Although the attention top management pays to customer satisfaction is laudable, the way in which issues are addressed is questionable. With modern technology, companies have the ability to record, analyze, categorize, and trend-analyze customer problem instances on a daily basis. The information can then be reviewed by employees in lower level positions. There does not need to be such high involvement by the senior management team. The cultural style driving the company, which is based on leaders' attention to the smallest of details, perpetuates leadership in which the manager is a reactionary organizer and the problem solver rather than an empowering and entrusting leader of change and anticipator of trends.
On the other hand, the proactive qualities of a global leader, such as sharing leadership, anticipating opportunities, and building partnerships, are absolutely critical to success in the future.
The future global leaders will need to be much more creative. They will have to take risks and use new models for success. They will not always be able to do what past role models have done in order to be successful.[5]
Warren Bennis, one of the authorities on leadership, acknowledged in the second edition of his book, On Becoming a Leader,[6] "I didn't put as much emphasis [in the first edition] on the distinction between 'leading' and 'managing' as I should have, because I did not fully anticipate the seismic shakes and quakes that would unhinge our world. Staying with the status quo is no longer acceptable," he says, so "followers need from people three basic qualities: they want direction; they want trust; and they want hope. That's what leaders must provide, whether we're talking about General Motors, a nation-state, or a nonprofit organization."
Tomorrow's global leaders are part of a new generation. We will be breaking free from stereotypes and from the traditional way of doing work.[7] Strategic opportunities will undoubtedly arise unexpectedly and often amidst seeming failure brought about by adherence to the status quo, and the global leaders of the future will view failure [their own and that of others] as an opportunity for change.[8]
This can be quite a difficult philosophy for leaders to incorporate into their leadership styles. For instance, even an R&D team, whose professional focus is change, risk, and experimentation, is likely to find it difficult to move away from the traditional management style of "always having the answer," as the authors found in their recent work with a pharmaceutical company. The R&D team of this company, while very comfortable with change and risk taking of an intra-human nature, such as experimentation to produce change of a drug-development nature, was very uncomfortable with change of an inter-human nature, such as changing relationships with each other as scientists or between the functional areas of the R&D system. Leaders need to be able to experiment and make mistakes; however, even groups that experiment and make mistakes as a profession will likely find it difficult to incorporate the value of failure into their leadership style.
Global leaders will be ready to quickly shift gears to pursue new goals. In such a turbulent and unexplored environment, there needs to be plenty of growing room so that global leaders can experiment and make mistakes and learn from them.[9] IBM is a benchmark organization that has demonstrated the ability to successfully shift gears and enter a very different type of business. The IBM move into services can be a role model for other organizations with maturing technology.
As discussed earlier, developing and operating efficiently under new, complex, and shifting social architectures means that tomorrow's leaders will function inside of alliances, partnerships, and ventures like never before. Leadership in the future will require teams of collaborative leaders, each possessing many of those skills required for effective global leadership. As such, a bias toward the status quo is an unaffordable luxury. Global leaders of the future cannot stick to the old way of doing things.[10] They will need to be less controlling, more emotionally astute, culturally attuned, and most important, willing to share authority and decision making. Extensive research on leadership effectiveness by the Alliance for Strategic Leadership has shown that leaders who are willing to change and are open to employee input will be consistently viewed as more effective than those who are not.[11]
The global leader of the future will have to have a lot of flexibility and be very self-confident in order to create a 'win-win' solution.[12] Flexibility is an admittedly broad term, but in the context of tomorrow's leadership, it has two distinct meanings:
In terms of cultural flexibility, leaders will have to transcend cultural boundaries and embrace the wide variety of business approaches and social customs that are inherent to conducting business globally. They will have to understand that no single style of leadership will work in all cultures. As such, global leaders will have to modify their behaviors to suit their audience. For instance, Yo Miyoshi of the HB Fuller Company in Tokyo relayed that when he discusses an issue with leaders of the U.S. office, he tries to be "Western." However, when he deals with people at the Japanese office, he is Japanese. In other words, he alters his personal leadership style to handle the two cultures.[13] Being different things to different people so that people can understand where the leader is coming from is a behavior that must be learned, by educating its leaders to understand and deal with a great diversity of people, is imparting to them just this lesson.
In some countries, the forging of personal relationships will be critical, while in others the ability to create contractual relationships will be of key importance; in some countries, fast action will be respected, while in others, deliberation and consensus-building will be needed.
For instance, in Latin America relationships are very important. Thus, the ability to make deals and negotiate terms is heavily predicated on an individual's ability to build trust with others, often very quickly, through paying attention to developing the relationship. This is counterpointed with the cultural styles of Germany and the UK, wherein relationships fall secondary to the high emphasis on getting to the facts. An important point to note is that in these more fact-oriented cultures, the greatest leaders are those who recognize what others need in a relationship sense. These leaders are very much aware of which relationship buttons they might press to influence others. This ability to influence better as a result of assessing and reacting to individual relationships and communication needs is called "self-monitoring." In other words, the leader orchestrates his or her own behavior in order to have the maximum influence on another individual.
For instance, in Churchill: A Biography, Roy Jenkins discusses Winston Churchill's lack of academic success but avid interest in the sensitivities, hot buttons, and personalities of others. Jenkins relays that Churchill, as a student of people, learned to be what he needed to be in order to establish the relationships necessary for "success" and in order to influence other leaders, such as George Patton, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Josef Stalin.[14]
In terms of being flexible in the face of change, global leaders will have to adopt a different mindset toward planning. Instead of planning and executing in successive steps, the global leader will have to be prepared to plan and then adjust the plan as it is executed—or even to plan and execute simultaneously. In order to be successful, leaders will have to adapt quickly to changes in the environment—faster than the competition.[15] An unfortunate example of rigid adherence to plan involved the space shuttle Challenger, which ultimately exploded after takeoff on January 28, 1986. Rather than being open to new ideas and willing to change, leaders let adherence to plan override ability to listen to new input and respond. The result was a devastating tragedy and the loss of seven lives.
In today's rapid-paced business world, the global leader will not always have sufficient time to analyze and strategize. Decisions will have to be made sometimes without benefit of the supporting facts and analysis that make the leader feel absolutely comfortable. However, decisions have to be made—and made quickly. For this reason, the global leader of the future should be change-oriented, move quicker, and more flexible.[16]
By being flexible about plans—and new ideas from new quarters—leaders are less likely to become complacent based on past success and are more likely to learn from and take advantage of the changes taking place in the world today.
This is especially difficult for leaders of family-run businesses, who often have the most difficulty creating change and avoiding complacency, because family pride is associated with company success. For instance, leaders of a Latin American business and a major hotel chain, both family owned, experienced difficulty making changes and getting past family politics and relationships. The leadership teams of both companies spent considerable time discussing the key business and leadership elements of their cultures. First, they explored what had made the companies successful, and a conscious effort was made to ensure that the companies kept the exceptional qualities they had demonstrated up to this point. Second, the teams looked at what might be added to these core elements to help deal with new market situations and to move forward into a successful future. Thus, both leadership teams demonstrated that while they had much pride in their successes to date, they were flexible enough to grow into the future.
It's important for companies not only to plan for future success, but also to take time to consider past successes. For example, if a company is highly successful, changing the core structure or modus operandi of the company is probably not going to work, and it will waste time and energy. Instead, the team leaders may choose to keep the operational foundation of the company as it is, because this is the basis upon which the company's success has been built and the reason for which the company has a presence in the industry. But, rather than be complacent in the company's success, the team leaders may opt to add onto, rather than reengineer, that structure in order to further the organization.
The global leader of the future who maintains the status quo will be easily defeated by competitors who are willing to try new ideas, to seek out new opportunities, and who are ready for change—within both the corporation and the industry. McDonald's has shown that even unquestioned industry leaders can lose market share to innovative, creative competitors who are willing to give consumers new products that meet changing needs. Creativity and innovation are key to the continued success of any organization, and using this key depends on global leaders who encourage and embrace the innovation and creativity of others.[17]
Successful leaders will be known by how well we get people energized to do the job, ...how quickly change is coming, and how quickly we adjust to it.[18]
Andy Grove, former chairman of Intel, once revealed that the company's most significant strategic decision was made by those managers on the frontlines who were actively involved in the corporation's marketing and investment activities rather than as a result of the corporate vision. To Harvard Business School's Christopher Bartlett and Sumantra Ghoshal, who quoted Grove approvingly, he is typical of the more successful, progressive leaders they have encountered who are striving to articulate a clear vision and letting individuals creatively interpret the company's objectives.
That may be a trifle idealized, but studies of such leaders' schedules show that they spend up to 90 percent of their time in face-to-face discussions with colleagues, contacts, and members of their teams. They are picking up the vital implicit knowledge, impressions, and ideas that no reporting system can reveal, but they also are winning support for their vision and purpose, which their followers will interpret and implement.
Global leaders need to be flexible enough to allow lots of different "how's" to get to the same "what." These leaders need to let go of the more superficial trappings of organizations, such as dress codes and office codes, and focus more on the outcomes.[19]
Global leaders need to structure their companies so that they facilitate creativity from the lower ranks. The restructuring of many organizations reflects this need. As the traditional hierarchical pyramid, with layer upon layer of carefully delineated management to turn the central strategy into detailed action plans, gives way to flatter, broader shapes based on processes rather than functions, it becomes apparent that the trend is to streamline companies in order for individuals to make an impact in their organizations.[20] Karen Garrison, a key executive at Pitney Bowes has created an environment where every level of employee knows they have an open invitation to express their opinions to her. This leadership style leads to both commitment and personal ownership on the part of all employees.
However, although it is widely believed that global companies should decrease the layers between the CEO and entry-level workers, because entry-level workers are the frontline employees who directly affect the business,[21] the vertical dimension is still significant, but with expansion and with internal organizations now resembling networks more than chains of command, the qualities of empowerment, encouragement, and understanding are at a premium. In short, networked leadership is required at an all-time high. For instance, in the healthcare industry, drugs are no longer developed by scientists working with other scientists in laboratories. They are developed by comprehensive teams of scientists and business leaders who represent the entire spectrum of the corporation.
There is little doubt that the networked, outsourced, allied company is the pattern of the future. However large the leading oil and motor corporations, or the pharmaceutical, software, finance, and telecommunications groups may become, their internal structures and external links make the task of leadership different in kind than in the past. The Northrop Grumman Corporation, in recognition of the key role of network relationships with suppliers, has made commitment to suppliers one of its key corporate values.
The future leaders need to have a scope of vision that is broad enough to see what's available to them. They must take on risks.[22]
As the international business network expands, it incorporates many different national cultures, meaning that attitudes to authority differ and assumptions and ambitions vary. Leaders must adapt to these differences, and they must also cope with the ambiguities of an unavoidably complex international structure. The challenge for global leaders today is to guide and direct their organizations and employees in this era of unprecedented complexity and fast-paced world change. This chapter has illustrated that in order to effectively lead change, the global leader must have a proactive and positive mindset. Global leaders must be open-minded, prepared, flexible, and farsighted if they are to effectively guide their organizations to achieving desired results.
1. Products and services, United States, 41.
2. Technology, Poland, 39.
3. Healthcare, United States, 33.
4. Products and services, Brazil/United States, 29.
5. Investments, United States, 27.
6. Warren Bennis. On Becoming a Leader. Perseus: New York. Copyright © 1989, 1994.
7. Government, Canada, 34.
8. Research and development, United States, 56.
9. Non-profit, United States, 24.
10. Products and services, United States, 32.
11. See "The Impact of Direct Report Feedback and Follow-up on Leadership Effectiveness," a study by A4SL, which involved more than 8,000 respondents.
12. Products and services, Brazil, 49.
13. R. T. Moran. "Handling Two Swords at the Same Time." International Management. July 1986.
14. R. Jenkins. Churchill: A Biography. Plume/Penguin Putnam Inc.: NY 2002.
15. Products and services, Switzerland, 45.
16. Telecommunications, United States, 34.
17. Technology, South Korea, 43.
18. Products and services, 45, Switzerland.
19. Pharmaceuticals, United States, 41.
20. Technology, United States, 34.
21. Pharmaceuticals, United Kingdom, 30.
22. Transportation, Canada, 47.
23. Information and quotes taken from interview with Eric Greenberg conducted by Cathy Greenberg. May 2002.
24. Interview with Eric Greenberg, chairman and founder of Scient, January 11, 2000. http://leadership.wharton.upenn.edu/ecommerce/interviews/greenberg.shtml. The Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania.