STAYING CONNECTED

Today's post is about staying connected to people and to new ideas. Over the past two weeks, I have had conversations with several successful people about the challenge of maintaining their network of friends and colleagues. They all know the value of staying connected but the challenge is finding the available time.

Over the years, I have come to the conclusion that the most valuable assets we have in life is the relationships we develop with people and the experiences and knowledge we gain throughout our lives. These assets are ours for life. They are not dependant on the job we have, or more frequently in today's world, the job we do not have at the time. However, we have more and more demands made on our time so we have less and less available time. But remember, that our days still consist of 24 hours. We do not have less time, we just have less available time. So how do we make time for staying connected not only to people but to new, fresh, and different ideas?

Well, in my opinion the first step is to reevaluate your priorities. Are you spending your time on the things you value most? Mike does a great discussion in our workshops about treating your family as your number one client. That technique is really about aligning your priorities with your allocation of time. But after you have done that, it is also about find effective and efficient ways to use your time.

Let's start with staying connected to people. In the discussions I have had recently, I mentioned that just sending a quick email that states you were thinking about the person and hope they are doing well. To each person that I suggested this their response was, "I do not want to send such a trite email to anyone." My response, "So you think it is better to not contact them at all? How will they even know you are thinking of them?" A quick email or quick call is better then no contact at all. Remember, they are just as busy and pressed for time as you are, so quick is good. The second thing I would mention is that people remember the smallest kindness. Be nice and caring to everyone and it will come back to you when you least expect it.

Now let's talk about staying connected to ideas and creative thinking. There are so many ways to stay connected to world and business events today that I could not list them all. The trick though is to see out ideas and thoughts that are different than yours. Instead of selecting a news channel or newspaper columnist because you usually agree with them, choose one because you usually disagree with them. One of two things will happen. You may find that you agree with them on more than you originally thought or even if it confirms your suspicion that you will disagree, you will understand the oppositions point of view better and can better prepare yourself to successfully debate the issue. Your brain can handle an infinite amount of information. Allow yourself access to dissenting views, expand your horizons and make your own decisions. You will be wiser and a more interesting individual, which will assist with the first point of connecting with people.

Relationships are not only fun but are vital to your career success. Invest in yourself and make the effort to stay connected to people and to new ideas. Share with us your ideas on how to use your time efficiently and effectively to stay connected.

Until Next Time,
Gail

PREPARE A FLIGHT RISK PLAN

Leaders are sometimes faced with a difficult situation where one of their direct reports behaves in a manner inconsistent with the culture and values of the company. For example, in a consulting firm, a key producer could might treat the employees who work for him/her poorly. The treatment may be inconsistent with the values of the company but, the key producer is important to the firm. There is a price to keep the key producer, but heretofore the price has not been considered too high.

But then the key producer starts to get arrogant about his/her behavior and the behavior causes more issues. The leader is now faced with a problem that must be addressed or will it? Remember, the key to leverage is being willing to accept any outcome. If the leader cannot accept losing the key producer, the leader will be relatively powerless to change that person's behavior. When push comes to shove, the leader can't accept losing this employee.

When we had our own firm, we used to identify our key flight risks. We would consider which of our top people might leave or might have to go away. We then put together a plan if that person had to leave immediately. This plan gave us the comfort to know that we could handle the departure of a key employee.

It also gave us the ultimate leverage in any negotiation with our people. We could handle the result of their departure. It wouldn't be our preferred result, but we could handle it. A leader must be able to handle the departure of key employees in order to effectively lead and maintain the values of the company.

Cheers, Mike

CHRYSLER IS LOOKING AT FALLING FALL SALES

This is what happens when you have 30 day bankruptcy. The WSJ reports that all is not going smoothly in Chrysler land. The management often spend its time trying to get out of bankruptcy not fixing the core business issues to ensure the company's viability.

The WSJ also reports that Chrysler's issues may be more difficult than the FIAT management may have understood. They must have noticed the issues that Daimler Chrysler and Cerberus had running Chrysler previously. This movie has just started and the outcome is in doubt. Just sit back, have some popcorn and watch. It should be interesting.

Cheers, Mike

NEGOTIATING LEVERAGE

One of our followers is selling his BMW convertible. This reminds me of a story about negotiating leverage. Twenty-five years ago I owned a Triumph Spitfire. For those of you who are not familiar with the Spitfire, it spent more time with the hood up then it did on the road. The time had finally come for the Spitfire to go away.

I put the car out with a 'for sale' sign. I was a reluctant seller of the car. I was asking $1800 and after a couple of days I had two parties who were interested in the car. So I scheduled them both for a fall Saturday. The car looked great and the hood was down. A college guy and his brother were scheduled first.

We took the car for a test drive and they decided they wanted the car. The older brother said, "Put our your hand." I put my hand out and he put 17 hundred dollar bills in my hand. "How does it feel?" I replied, "It feels one light." He said smugly, "It is $1700."

I replied, "I have someone coming this afternoon who wants the car." He said, "$1700 in hand is better than $1800 in the bush. And it is only $100 short." I decided to speed up the negotiations. "Actually it is $200 hundred short. I just raised the price to $1900."

The older brother looked surprised and said, "You can't do that!" "Of course I can, and I just did. If I were you, I would hurry. I am a heartbeat away from raising the price to $2,000." He pleaded, "Would you take the $1800?" "Well, I just raised it to $1900. But you seem like nice guys, I will give it to you for $1800." They gave me five twenties and I gave them the keys.

They were negotiating with no leverage. They really wanted the car. Ultimate leverage comes from being able to accept either outcome. I was truly indifferent whether I sold the car or not. They never had a chance.

Cheers, Mike

YOU LOST 30% AND THE REST IS ILLIQUID??

Really stellar job done by the much touted endowment investment groups of Harvard and Yale. For years the two schools have blown their own horns as to their investment acumen. David Swenson, Yale's investment office head, even wrote an investment book that was a big hit with the endowment and foundation crowd.

But Yale's and Harvard's 30% losses over the past year is even worse. First of all the year ended June 30. Many investors have recovered somewhat in the rebound since March. But not Yale and Harvard. Both institutions have a very low percentage of their portfolios in public equities and apparently a high percentage in illiquid investments. Investments which haven't rebounded and if they are in commercial real estate, still may go down. The Brown University story is also telling.

Clearly the endowments were entirely too illiquid. This wouldn't be so bad, but these universities used their endowments to fund significant portions of their operating budgets. So perversely, these schools, which still have multi-billion dollar budgets, have to resort to cost containment actions such as wage freezes, hiring freezes, cost and service cuts and capital expenditure deferments.

The losses are understandable given what has transpired over the past year, but the lack of liquidity given how much their annual operating budgets depended on the endowments is a little perplexing.

Cheers, Mike

FOLLOW THE RULES

My wife has been seriously bitten by the golf bug. The other night she came home and had a rules question. I answered the question but she said the other players thought it was the wrong answer. So I went online to the USGA.org and found the answer which backed me up. Thank you USGA, I knew I had to be right once this year.

On the way to the golf course today, I decided to pick up a copy of the rule book for my wife (I am such a big spender). I stopped by Golf Galaxy, seemed like a likely candidate to sell me a copy of the rules. I waited at the front desk to ask for a copy. While I waited, I saw that they sold lip balm, Advil (breakfast of champions), little bag watches, various faux climbing caribiners to hang stuff on a golf bag and other relatively useless items. Finally it was my turn, "Yes, I would like to buy a USGA rule book." I was met with the following reply, "We don't have any rulebooks." I chuckled to myself, you have all this crap (technical term) but you have no rulebooks. I said, "thank you, have a good day."

I live in Shopping Center USA, so I drove a par 5 away to Golfsmith. I went in and asked for a copy of the USGA rules. The salesperson said, "We may have some in the back." While I waited, I looked at the now usual lip balm, Advil, Heathcliff bars, Gatorade bars, some gizmo to put a line on golf balls and all sorts of other odd items. The salesperson came out and said, "We don't have rule books." I said, "Thank you, have a good day."

I then went to the club, hoping against hope for a rule book. I went into the pro shop and looked around. Hmmmm, no rule books hanging around. So I asked the young lady at the counter for a rule book. "Sorry, we don't have any rule books." Wow, is this for real or is this Candid Camera. But then the assistant pro cheerfully spoke up, "I have a rule book, you can have mine." I replied, "I don't want to take your rule book." He said, "I have another home, please take mine." And so I thankfully did.

It is really hard to follow the rules if you can't get a copy.

Cheers, Mike

WOMEN IN POLITICS

Women now drive the global economy controlling $20 trillion in annual consumer spending is the conclusion in an article in this month's Harvard Business Review entitled The Female Economy.

That global economic power should also mean increased opportunities for women in business and politics when we begin to come out of this global recession. There is a survey being conducted by The Boston Consulting Group on what women want and early results of the survey can be viewed at http://womenspeakworldwide.com/.

Specifically, given the amount of government influence today and in the future around the world, women will need to hold a larger percentage of elected positions in order to have their voice and views influence legislation. In the USA, there is a group focused on helping women prepare for political office. Check out this website http://thewhitehouseproject.org/.

Finally, check out this Forbes article You Want To Run For Office. Now What? The article is the story of a woman with no previous interest in politics that made the decision to run and won a seat in her state assembly.

Do you agree that more women need to run for public office?

Great to be back at the blog the day after Labor Day! Until Next Time,
Gail

HOW OPEN SHOULD A LEADER BE?

Rich Karlgaard has an interesting commentary in Forbes on a leader's openness. He writes about how open a leader should be or not? My style was to be generally open. There were times though where as soon as I said something to our employees, I new I was too open. People don't need to know all the details of why a leader thinks, acts or speaks in a certain manner.

It is one thing to show you are human and totally another thing to leave people doubting you because you told them all your imperfections and fears. Everyone has to find what works for them. Here is hoping you think of what you want to share before you share it.

Cheers, Mike

THE BIG THREE NOW

Good to see that Ford was the lone US car manufacturer to benefit from the Cash for Clunkers Program. It is also clear that just because Chrylser and GM are out of bankruptcy, doesn't mean the companies are not still broken (technical term). According to Forbes in this article, GM and Chrysler's sales actually went down!

Yes, they have new balance sheets that make them potentially viable. But have the operations really been changed in a meaningful way to ensure their viability? Are they making cars that people actually want to buy? Well maybe GM has some cars in the oven that Americans will buy. But Chrysler? I can't see the FIAT cinquecento taking off in any meaningfull way. The Smart Car sized car will likely have limited appeal. I am a big fan of the recent styling of the Alfa Romeo, but really, how many of these will be sold?

Watch closely to see how GM and Chrysler do going forward. It should be interesting.

Cheers, Mike

MADOFF, REN TEC AND WHAT YOU READ

So, little Bernie is a page one topic again. This time however, the prime suspect is the SEC. The SEC's Inspector General issued a report that casts the SEC in a very poor light. This report can be viewed in its entirety at this link.

How could he do this volume of options?While this report will be covered in detail by the financial press, I want to focus on a hedge fund, Renaissance Technologies, that decided to exit the Madoff funds several years ago because, they didn't like the answers they were getting and the answers they couldn't get. How was Bernie making such consistent returns? How could Bernie always be in cash just when he needed to be? The WSJ today has a good article on their decision. But is it the complete story on Ren Tech?

Check out this Zerohedge piece today which reads further into the SEC Inspector General's report and discovers that Ren Tech didn't take everything out of the Madoff funds and didn't disclose its suspicions to the SEC.

Many of the matters I worked on were covered by the financial press. One of our interns once said to me, "It was great working the summer on a matter that was in the business section every week. But I was very surprised how much was incomplete or wrong."

Good to bear this in mind when reading various financial pieces, including this blog!

Cheers, Mike

COMING BACK AFTER VACATION

As Gail announced and I didn't, we are now back from our vacations. Why do two retired people need a vacation? Hmmm, hard to answer.

Starting today, we are back blogging on Leadership during times of financial crisis Monday thru Friday with bonus posts on the weekends.

Cheers

LOAN TO OWN? OR WHAT CHOICE DO WE HAVE?

There is an A1 WSJ article this morning, Distressed Takeovers Soar. The main points of the article are that M&A deals are largely occurring in bankruptcy court these days and that many investors are buying the debt to take over financially troubled companies.

I agree that M&A bankers are now spending most of their time on bankrupt M&A deals. This is not because it is a novel way to do a transaction or because it is efficient. No one would ever accuse a bankruptcy M&A process of being efficient. Expensive yes, efficient no. It is simply because in these economic times, corporations are playing it close to the vest and not on acquisition sprees. It is sometimes easier to let a competitor go out of business than to aquire the competitor.

The other main point is that investors are using debt to acquire bankrupt companies. This is the so-called loan to own approach. There are several examples of this technique and the article implies this is now happening everywhere. Au contraire!

Most of these so-called 'loan to own' situations are really as follows. Banks, hedge funds and others make loans to less than stellar companies. The lenders believe they have priced the deal and collateralized it to protect their reasonable downside. The company then underperforms and the debt starts trading down. Some of the banks and mutual funds sell their loans to hedge funds and other distressed investors. These investments are still made with the thought of getting a large enough return to justify the purchase. The investment thesis is not generally, 'hey, let's buy more of the debt at a discount and then we can bid our debt and buy the company'.

The way it often works is that the funds now have one or two rounds of debts purchases at a discount and then the company underperforms again! Now the investors realize that a sale of the company is not imminent at a sufficient price (see Delphi). The next great thought? Hey let's own the company! We can buy it with out debt. Just great, now they are bidding in their debt to own a company which the buyers are not set up to own.

Loan to own works much better when a buyer decides to buy an underperforming company whose debt is trading at a discount. The buyer starts buying the debt at a price under which it will bid for the company. This effectively lowers the buyer's price and protects the buyer against losing the purchase in a bankruptcy. If the buyer is outbid by another buyer, then by definition it will have made a profit on its efforts.

Loan to own, not as a black and white surgical process as you might be led to believe.

Cheers, Mike

HURON CONSULTING & AN ACCOUNTING PROBLEM

What happened to Huron Consulting? Zerohedge reported, amongst others, that Huron's CEO and CFO had resigned due to an accounting scandal. Another article set forth some more info.

Apparently someone at Huron, it is not clear who, became aware that the accounting for one of the companies acquired by Huron a few years ago was not correct. Basically, Huron acquired a company and the selling shareholders decided to give some of the proceeds to non-selling employees.

Huron booked the acquisition as if all of the price paid to the selling shareholders was for the equity and therefore largely set up as goodwill on Huron's balance sheet. However, if some of the sales price actually went to non-shareholder employees, then GAAP requires that the portion paid to non-shareholder employees be expensed as compensation. The proper treatment increases expenses and reduces net income. Further, upon review by an outside firm, there were three other acquisitions that were not accounted for properly.

Huron has stated that its prior three years of financial statements have to be restated for a pretty material reduction in earnings. The NY Times has an interesting Q&A on the Huron situation. What is doesn't ask or answer who knew what, when? I suspect that since three very senior management members resigned, someone may have knew something previously. Finally, The Chicago Tribune has a piece on the hometown company.

It is always unfortunate when something like this happens. It is unfortunate for the employees, especially the support staffs, who are dedicated to the firm. Hopefully Huron will be able to survive this.

Cheers, Mike

CONFRONTING REALITY

Recently in Forbes Magazine, there was a series of interviews with several CEO's on leadership. One of the items was Confront Reality covered by Ingersoll Rand CEO Herbert Henkel. He says "always question whether the 'halo effect' of a business or business situation is blinding you to what lies on the horizon."

His point is that in the past year some business leaders ignored or wished away the negative signs of a slowdown in their businesses. Others quickly started to put their contingency plans into effect just in case the downturn was significant.

There are two points that Gail and I stress in our sessions. The first is "Confront the Brutal Facts" on page 67 of our book. Essentially, leaders must accept the facts no matter whether they are acceptable or desirable or not. It is what it is. Pretending the facts are not valid or wishing them away is not acceptable behavior for a leader.

The second point is to protect the downside. Many business people get themselves into trouble by focusing to heavily on the upside and spending much less time on the potential downside. It should be almost the opposite. Leaders protect the downside first and then look to the upside. Often times if one protects the downside, the upside almost takes care of itself.

Cheers, Mike

SEE YOU IN SEPTEMBER!

Hello everyone. I hope you are all having a great summer. Mine has been so good that I have not been keeping up on the blog. So, I have concluded that I should quote great old song line....See you in September! When I am back in September, I plan to write a series of articles about women running for public office. Enjoy the summer!
Until Next Time,
Gail

DIP LENDERS TAKE OVER DELPHI

A few weeks ago bankruptcy judge Robert Drain derailed a government sponsored plan for Platinum Equity and GM to take over Delphi and have it emerge from bankruptcy. Delphi is a former GM subsidiary that filed for bankruptcy several years ago. It had been languishing in Chapter 11 limbo unable to put together a confirmable plan of reorganization. The government sponsored plan offered to pay the DIP lenders only 20 cents on the dollar. DIP loans are generally assumed to be money good and there are very few instances over the past 20 years where DIP loans were not paid in full.

Judge Drain ordered an auction to take place for the company. The auction was won by the DIP lenders who bid in their debt. They had $3.4 billion of loans due from Delphi. For another party to win the auction, they would have had to bid more than the face value of the lenders' loans. According to the WSJ, there will be a hearing to approve the sale on Wednesday. It may be interesting to follow since this case has had many twists and turns.

Should the DIP lenders have the sale approved, the fun will only just begin. They will immediately have to work with management to make sure they have a leadership team in place that can ensure that Delphi will be viable for the foreseeable future. These turbulent automotive times require the best leadership available in management and at the board level.

Cheers (back from Scotland), Mike

HOW ABOUT A BANKRUPTCY?

Ah, Chapter 11 bankruptcy, it came into existence in its present form (with some amendments) in 1979. At first it was used largely by retailers and then by the wave of the late 1980's broken LBO's (leveraged buyouts). By the early 1990's, Chapter 11 began to be used to obtain financing (Debtor-in-Possession financing) when financing was otherwise not available.

In 2009, Chapter 11 bankruptcy has been used in ways no one could have anticipated 30 years ago. Al Lewis has an entertaining article on how Chapter 11 is being used. In the Madoff matter, it used to find and recover funds. The Government used it to ram through sales of the assets of Chrysler and General Motors (whatever happened to a plan of reorganization?). Sam Zell, aka "The Grave Dancer", may use it to sell the Chicago Cubs. In the Phoenix Coyotes filing, creditors are using Chapter 11 to get a look at Wayne Gretzky's tax returns.

It has been a crazy year for Chapter 11's. Look for it to continue with all the crazy precedents that have been set for better or worse (mostly worse).

Cheers from Scotland,

Mike

CIT SHOULD HAVE MADE CAR LOANS

CIT is a large financial institution that lends to small and middle market businesses. By today's definition however, CIT's $75 billion of assets makes it not a large financial institution. And apparently way too small to be too big to fail. And finally, CIT must not have a big portfolio of car loans like GMAC. So, the Government has left it to CIT's existing creditors to assist in giving CIT more time to right the ship. Gee, this approach is so last century.

I guess the Government has made its point because the press is pointing to a multi-billion dollar loan being done with CIT's major bondholders to keep it out of bankruptcy. The next couple of days should provide more details as to how such a deal, if completed, will allow CIT to successfully restructure.

According to this article in last week's WSJ, the company has some work to do. CIT made some management changes around 2001 that resulting in Vice-Chairman Joe Pollicino and other experience credit people leaving the firm. The new management ultimately led CIT down the subprime mortgage and student loan roads. And we all know where those roads led.

We should expect that management changes amongst strategy changes to be coming down another road very soon. Maybe the bondholders will call Joe....well, maybe not.

A number of years ago I used to attend a CIT golf outing every year at Fenway Golf Club. Fenway is a great track originally designed by 1920's noted architect, A. W. Tillinghast and recently worked on by a well respected architect, Gil Hanse. But I digress. One year one of the people checking in golfers for the outing asked if I was related to Joe Pollicino the Vice-Chairman. I, of course, replied, "Yes, he is my uncle." For a few years I received the royal treatment at the outings. One year however, Joe came up to me and said I had to stop saying he was my uncle. To which I replied, "Ok unc."

NY TIMES ON DIMON

The NY Times followed up my post from last week on Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan, with an article in the Sunday edition. Nice of them to pull their weight on this item.

Cheers from Scotland,

Mike

BUT, THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO .....

I was speaking with a young CEO a few weeks ago. He was complaining that an important member of his team should be able to perform certain tasks, but the member couldn't perform those tasks. He went on to complain that he didn't have the time to do the task.

I made a couple of observations. First, you can't keep acting as if the member can do what they should be able to do. They can't do it. It is like a football coach who has a quarterback who cannot roll to his left and throw an accurate pass. The coach can keep calling the rollout to the left because the quarterback should be able to throw an accurate pass or he can call rollouts to the right where the quarterback can throw an accurate pass. So, don't expect someone to be able to do what they should be able to do if they can't do it. Plan accordingly.

Second, managers get more frustrated with a team member when they are pressed for time (isn't that always?) or when they can't do the task either. The managers say "they should be able to do their job!" Leaders however, acknowledge the truth of the situation. Leaders evaluate how to support the person can't do what they should be able to do. Sometimes more training and education is required. Sometimes additional support is required. And sometimes, the task needs to be done by someone else.

When I had my own firm, we had a former Big 8 accounting firm partner working with us. He had great instincts (probably still does) and did great work. However, he could not commit his work to writing. He literally couldn't get a report out. After speaking with him a few times, it became clear to me that he was not able to put it on paper. Instead of complaining about it, I found a young staff person who was progressing rapidly. The staff person wrote great reports. So I 'velcroed' the staff person to the senior person and he became the report writer. The staff person benefitted greatly from the constant exposure to the senior person.

In closing, work with "what is" not "what should be".

Cheers, Mike