NURTURE CORPORATE CULTURE

Mike's post on October 20 Oh, The Culture, combined with the questions we get at many of our leadership session including the one we recently did at West Point, have caused me to spend a significant amount of time thinking about corporate culture. Mike ended his post with the following two sentences. "In a crisis, you reap what you sow from your culture. Address the culture now so it will serve you well in the crisis." As usual, I completely agree.

This post is about the need to nurture the culture and reinforce the values or risk an erosion of the company's culture that can eventually cause the crisis. Let me share some of my research and thoughts on this topic. We should probably start with a definition of corporate culture.

The easiest way I have found to describe corporate culture is how your employees act and the decisions they make when no one is watching. I found two articles with more in depth definitions. Corporate Culture Definition is quite good in describing the various layers within culture. Another article Definition of Corporate Culture is also good and uses an analogy of culture as the invisible energy field or electricity that runs throughout a company and either enables or restricts its ability to achieve strategic objectives. I would submit that the invisible energy source known as culture needs to be constantly reinforced and nurtured or you run the risk of erosion particularly in the area of values and ethics. Another interesting article is about corporate culture and brand entitled Corporate Culture is Brand, and Brand is Corporate Culture which highlights that how your employees act is much more the brand than any logo or advertisement. Lastly, my research uncovered some articles on measuring corporate culture, although I did not find anything that provided REAL measures. The two articles I liked were Human Resources: Measuring Corporate Culture which differentiates artifacts, espoused values, and basic underlying assumptions. This article refers to corporate culture as the Other Bottom Line. In my experience, the erosion happens within the basic underlying assumptions that can change over time. It is fine if it is an intentional change but lax risk management and not reinforcing the values will erode the culture even if not intentional. The other article Corporate Culture covers small businesses and culture definitions. The reason I included it here with measurement is that there were a few questions that are very helpful to assess what the culture is and could over time help you to measure any changes. The five questions are:

• What 10 words best describe your company?
• What is really important around here?
• Who gets promoted here and why?
• What behaviors get rewarded here?
• What type of people are the "in" crowd and the "not in" crowd?

During my 30 years in the consulting industry, I learned that I needed to understand two things at each of my clients in order to be successful- what was their corporate culture and how they compensated their executive team. If I knew these two things I would know what they would and would not buy, how to handle myself in meetings, and what problems I could and could not recover from with them and how to do it. In addition to observing the cultures at each of my clients that enabled or restricted performance, I watched a strong culture at Arthur Andersen that truly was the other bottom line (it may have even been the cause of the true bottom line) erode over time and cause the crisis that destroyed the firm. Hindsight has allowed me to see now the signs that were there before the crisis. At Bearingpoint I saw a culture that destroyed value. I know first hand what can and does happen if you do not nurture the right corporate culture. BTW, does anyone know of any good measurement tools for corporate culture?

This is NOT soft stuff. Companies need strong, healthy cultures and CEO's need to focus on nurturing it or the culture will erode and so will profitability and corporate sustainability.

Until Next Time,

Gail

OH, THE CULTURE!

Every company has a culture. Usually culture is a by-product of how the company is run by the current CEO or how it was run by the last CEO. It is rare in my experience for the CEO to say, "I don't like the culture and we are going to change it." Or to say, "What culture do I want at my company?" Yes, there are the rare CEO's that actually focus on the culture. But for the most part, it is about running a profitable business as if culture isn't that important.

And yet, a company's culture is an invisible force that runs throughout the company and affects everything that is done. Fortune has an article that point to the culture of Bear Stearns and that a few of its alumni may have been inflicted with the dark side of that culture.

Whether that is true or not or whether one can't paint with such a broad brush is neither here nor there. The real questions for today's leaders are the following:

What is your company's culture? Is it the culture you want? How are you going to get the culture you want?

Gail often says that she and her team at Andersen's Business Consulting Group were able to keep the group together because of the culture. In a crisis, you reap what you sow from your culture. Address the culture now so it will serve you well in a crisis.

Cheers, Mike

GALLEON, HEDGE FUND IN CRISIS?

On Friday, the founder of Galleon was arrested and charged with insider trading. Put aside whether he is guilty or innocent. The remaining managers of the fund have to deal with the resultant crisis.

In a crisis such as this, the remaining managers must decide what individual or small group of individual should be in charge of the fund in the interim. They must realize that the fund is a separate and distinct entity from its founder. Each party will have their own legal issues to address.

Next the management must get the right team on board. This will include at least, special counsel, a crisis public relations firm and a financial crisis expert. One part of the management team should be dedicated to dealing with the crisis and one part of the management team needs to address the day-to-day operations of the fund.

All of the stakeholders have to be identified and addressed. The stakeholders will include, investors, employees, lenders, companies invested in by the fund, SEC, state regulatory agencies including the attorney general, and other parties.

The communications from the firm must be carefully managed and critically previewed with counsel. All the stakeholders will have questions, some of which can be answered and some of which cannot be answered at this time. All employees need to be briefed with a list of questions and answers and instructed to send parties to a central communication point. If this does not occur, misinformation will cause additional problems that will have to be addressed.

The interim fund management may also have to decide whether it must pursue its own internal investigation. This will be a very sticky wicket which will require constant legal advice every step of the way.

It is not what the innocent managers bought into. But it doesn't matter that they don't like it, they have to deal with it. Such is the challenge of dealing with a crisis.

Cheers, Mike

US Military Academy at West Point

Yesterday, Mike and I were invited to be guest speakers at the US Military Academy's Eisenhower Program on Cross Cultural Leadership. It was an honor to be asked to speak by the department head and a friend of ours, Col. Tom Kolditz. This was a group of over 20 participants, mainly Army Captains that have all had some form of command responsibility and have served all over the world.

As always, Mike and I had fun and were happy to share our experiences and lessons learned. But as always, I received more than I gave at the session. It was inspiring to be there. Lately, I find myself disappointed with the lack of leadership demonstrated by many business "leaders" and by many politicians. But this visit was inspiring and a source of renewal. I was in the presence of leaders striving to be even better leaders in the future.

It reminded me that there are many great leaders doing great things every day. And, the Dow stayed above 10,000. A great day!

Until Next Time,
Gail

LEADERSHIP COURAGE

There is an article in the WSJ entitled Are Most CEO's "Wusses"? The author explains that being a "wuss" has nothing to do with being willing to fire people for poor performance. Instead, it is not b eing willing to hold employees accountable for their behavior before the poor results register.

To me this is about being a leader and having the courage of your convictions. If all a person does is wait for the poor performance results to show up in the numbers before they take action on an employee (especially an executive), I would argue that by definition they did not lead but rather followed the numbers. Anyone can take action after the fact. A leader is someone who is looking at the quality of the person and the quality of the numbers. We have certainly learned from this recession that very good numbers can precede very bad numbers. This is particularly true if the individual is sacrificing long term value for short term results or taking unusually high risks without the correct risk mitigation steps. This brings us to the courage part of the discussion. It is difficult when an employee is driving strong financial performance, to fire them for bad behavior. It is human nature to not want to risk your own srong financial performance. But that is exactly what a good leader must do.

Holding people accountable for financial results AND proper behavior is a leader's job and key to long term value creation. If an individual is driving strong financial performance but has questionable business ethics the risk is too high that long term they will destroy value. Also, I am a strong believer in the concept of the shadow of the leader. If you say something but do not follow through with action, the bad behavior can spread like a virus through the organization. The opposite is also true. If the leader demonstrates by their actions that their ethics and corporate values are not just empty words, the entire employee base will follow that lead. So you get a bigger benefit than the one employee for which you took action.

If all leadership required was looking at the historical financial performance to determine action, companies could be led by computer spreadsheets. Leadership requires judgement and courage but most of all action. I have heard too many times someone say that they know someone is not exhibiting the right behavior BUT their numbers are great and so no significant action is taken.

Be the courageous leader. Don't be a "wuss".
Until Next Time,
Gail

THE MANAGEMENT BANKRUPTCY BONUSES

I have always found it quite interesting that for the past 20 years, top management for larger bankrupt companies require handsome retention and success bonuses for getting a company through a bankruptcy.

Here is an article from the NY Times setting the stage for the Chicago Tribune bonuses. The Tribune is in bankruptcy as the newspaper industry fights going the way of the slide rule and the typewriter. The theory of these bonuses is that people have to work very hard and they should be rewarded. And if they don't get a bonus, the good people will leave.

While some bonus may be appropriate to retain people, the total situation should always be considered. For example, yes, the people have to work hard. I am unaware of many jobs where you don't have to work hard. And yes, they need to rewarded for their efforts. Yet many people have had their wages frozen or reduced due to the lack of profitability afflicted thousands of companies.

And, yes, the good people will leave. Although, who is hiring in the newspaper industry? My experience is that the really good people may leave anyway. For them the issue is not the golden handcuff known as a retention bonus. For them the issue is the certainty of having a job. Put aside whether anyone has employment certainty anywhere these days.

So, retention bonuses for large groups of managers who were at the helm when the ship was grounded? You could bring in an outside firm to run the company or augment the team. But then, that may or may not be the best bargain either.

Cheers, Mike

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