Taking the Low Road in Minnesota

Few problems get better by failing to address them early. Here’s a case in point where sometimes the “right” decision creates unintended consequences if the process is not handled well.

The University of Minnesota was just handed a legal defeat when a jury awarded $1.25 million to would-be assistant men’s basketball coach Jimmy Smith. The jury found that head coach Tubby Smith misrepresented himself to Jimmy Williams, when he claimed he had the authority to hire an assistant coach, when apparently he didn’t. Williams claimed that Smith offered him an assistant coach position, after being named to the head coach job at Minnesota in 2007. Following the verbal receipt of the offer, Williams accepted the offer, immediately quit his job at Oklahoma State where he made $200,000, put his house on the market and prepared to move to Minnesota to join the Gophers staff.

Shortly after Williams’ acceptance, Tubby Smith met with Athletic Director Joel Maturi to inform him of his choice of Williams. Maturi performed a background check and it showed that Williams had been hit with NCAA violations in the past – at Minnesota — when he was an assistant coach under Bill Musselman many years ago. So Maturi told Smith that Williams was unacceptable for the role, given his track record.

So now Smith had a dilemma. Did he inform his new boss that he just extended an offer that Williams accepted and that Williams has resigned his post at Oklahoma State to join Minnesota? Did he acknowledge there’s a problem he’s created for Williams and the University by extending an offer that apparently he didn’t have the authority to extend? By all accounts, the answers were “No”. So what did Smith do? He left Williams hanging. Radio silence. Didn’t initiate communication with Williams. Didn’t return Williams’ calls. Precious time ticks off the clock. Smith was incommunicado. And Williams becomes a man on an island.

On May 26, the University of Minnesota, following the jury’s verdict, issued a press release that the “university respectfully disagrees” with the findings of the courts. They state that refusing Jimmy Williams’ employment as assistant coach was the right call.

Yes, it was the right call, but how the University handled Williams was shoddy and disrespectful, and evidently illegal.

Here’s my view. Minnesota shouldn’t have hired Williams, given the recruiting violations that previously occurred at the University. How could you be the Athletic Director and in good conscience explain that decision to your university president, when the NCAA comes knocking at the door, which they seem to always do? But the low road they took to handling Williams put them in the predicament they find themselves in today. Shouldn’t Maturi and Smith have been in agreement about Smith’s authority and the process to hire/fire assistants? When a problem with Williams’s background was surfaced, shouldn’t there have been immediate communication to him, letting him know there was a problem, so that he could potentially recover his position with OSU? And if that wasn’t possible, shouldn’t Minnesota have taken the high road and at least internally acknowledged the true facts? The fact that Smith had offered a position which was accepted by Williams? And now the offer must be rescinded given the findings of the investigation. It would have been much cheaper and efficient to have dealt with the situation in 2007, possibly even entering into a small settlement with Williams, rather than have a 63 year old man who has been unemployed without health insurance since that time take the witness stand to a sympathetic jury in 2010.

I think the University of Minnesota got what they deserved. The botched the process, took the low road and tried to sweep the affair under the carpet. They tried to legalese and they weasel-worded their position. They acted with low integrity and showed no accountability. Williams deserved to be dealt with respectfully, timely and candidly. Even if you are right positionally, you still have to attend to the details and take the high road. Leaders have to have the tough discussions, make tough decisions and sometimes have difficult conversations with others who are impacted by their decisions. Smith and Maturi both are culpable. Smith has been known as a coach who shows high integrity. Not in this example. And Maturi should have seen the big picture and fixed this probelm before it came to a jury trial. An expensive lesson for Tubby Smith, Joel Maturi and the citizens of Minnesota — who will be picking up the check for these misdeeds.

Why Did The CEO Flinch?

When an outsider is named the Chief Executive Officer of a Fortune 500 corporation, the eyes and ears of employees, customers, shareholders, suppliers, board members, industry followers and other stakeholders are hyper-focused. Everyone is anxious to learn more about this person and their character. Verbal statements and non-verbal cues are paid attention to and interpreted. Both the new CEO’s words and actions receive careful attention as all the stakeholders assess if the “walk” matches the “talk”.

Imagine if you were hired as the new CEO of a publicly-traded medical device company that has deep regulatory, product, financial and legal woes. Central to your problems has been the integration of a company acquired by your firm four years ago. This acquisition has been heralded by many as one of the worst acquisitions in corporate history. The acquisition cost your company more than $27 billion, continues to cost $300 million in annual interest costs and has torpedoed the market capitalization of your company. Today, your company’s market cap is under $11 billion — $16 billion less than what was paid for the standalone acquisition four short years ago. In fairness to you, these problems and headaches were inherited and not the result of your decisions. However, as the new CEO, they are now your problems. You are now accountable and own these problems.

As the new CEO, at some point in year 1 you’ll be on center stage at the annual shareholder meeting. Annual shareholder meetings are typically highly-structured, highly-scripted affairs with tight agendas that are both short and relatively uneventful. But given the state of affairs at your company, this annual meeting might be more challenging. There will probably be attendees who throw some tough questions your way. You could be put on the spot. It could be uncomfortable for you. You will probably be asked to discuss matters you’d rather not address. And you know the print media will be there, too. But as uncomfortable as it might be, as the new CEO it’s critical for you to be visible, transparent and to demonstrate your personal leadership and accountability.

Unfortunately, Boston Scientific failed to allow the media to attend the company’s annual shareholder meeting on May 11. New CEO Ray Elliott flinched by closing the meeting. This is an unheard of action for large publicly-traded companies. Even companies in proxy fights (such as Biogen IDEC and Carl Icahn in 2009) allow the media to attend the annual shareholders meeting. And when asked why the meeting was closed to the media, the chief spokesperson for the company failed to respond to the request. So we can now only speculate why Boston Scientific closed the meeting.

What’s the result of not opening up the annual meeting to the media? More negative perceptions. Fear that Elliott is hiding problems. More mistrust. More fuel to the fire. As if more fuel is needed after the negative spiral in the price of the company’s stock, its continued losses, FDA problems, the $1.7 billion payment for patent infringement to competitor Johnson and Johnson, etc, etc.

Today’s CEOs need to be visible and be seen as trustworthy by their shareholders and other key stakeholders. And trust can’t be created without transparency. So by failing to allow the media to attend the event, Elliott created more skepticism toward Boston Scientific, at a time when shareholders desperately need some reassurance the truck is out of the ditch (or at least will soon be out of the ditch). Furthermore, he role-modeled to other leaders and employees within the company that it’s OK to not be transparent – not the best lesson to teach in a firm beset by FDA and legal problems.

Bill George, retired Chief Executive Officer of Medtronic, a competitor of Boston Scientific, is at the top of the list of high performing CEOs in the medtech, healthcare and life sciences segments. During his tenure as CEO of Medtronic, the company grew on average 35% a year, increasing their market capitalization from $1 billion to $60 billion. And Medtronic is consistently recognized as a premier company for developing leaders, a best company to work for, most admired and many other similar honors. George put Medtronic on a sustainable path. George is now a professor at Harvard Business School and a best-selling author. In his most recent book, 7 Lessons for Leading in Crisis, George offers straight talk and clear guidance – lessons Boston Scientific could benefit from learning.

One of the steps for winning George shares is “Creating Your Company’s Image as the Industry Leader.” That’s a step that should be followed by Elliott: to re-create Boston Scientific’s image as an industry leader. Becoming an industry leader means putting Boston Scientific on a path of predictable performance and being seen as trustworthy by its stakeholders. Of course, this starts with Elliott’s personal leadership and a willingness to be candid and transparent with his stakeholders. Last week’s actions didn’t demonstrate personal leadership, candor or transparency, in my view.

In closing, I’m reminded of a quote from former Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis. Brandeis said, “Sunshine is the best disinfectant.” That quote is over 80 years old. It still seems relevant today – especially for the CEOs of publicly-traded companies. Let the sun shine, Ray!

How Is Your Team Performing?

On a scale of 1 – 10, how do you rate your team’s performance?

And how should it be performing?

As the leader of a business, you depend on others to make things happen. You depend on a top team to help run the show and get things done. You need a winning team.

If your business is like most, there’s a hole in your top team. Performance is leaking out. The top team fails to reach its potential. Do you know why? Do you know where the leak is occurring?

When these questions are asked of both the team leader and their direct reports, both see an enormous gap in top team performance. When asked “How effective is our top leadership team today on a scale of 1-10, and how effective should it be?” on average, team leaders responded 6.2 and 9.6 respectively. Their direct reports responded 5.9 and 9.4 respectively.

For teams to perform to their potential, they need to get results and they need to demonstrate the right behaviors so the results can be sustained. Where does your team rate today?

What’s required to stop the performance leaks so your team gets aligned and wins in the market?

Handling Life’s Curveballs

It was a sunny spring day in 1968 in Louisville, Kentucky. My Mom and I had made the hour drive from our house in Kentucky, to the S&H Green Stamp store. Mom handed the clerk a stack of books filled with stamps that she had earned and saved from shopping at the Winn-Dixie grocery store. She told the man behind the counter, “I’ll take the catcher’s mitt.” The clerk looked at me and asked, “Is that mitt for the young fella? He looks a little skinny to be a catcher.” Mom said, “No, that catcher’s mitt is for me, he’s going to be my left-handed pitcher.” And they exchanged stamps for the mitt.

My Dad had died suddenly the year before. As an 8 year old, my world had been shaken. I never knew of anyone who had died. And the idea a parent could die was not a concept I had ever thought of. Since I was 6 or so, I had enjoyed playing catch in the backyard with my Dad when he got home from work. With his death, the game of catch abruptly stopped – a huge void for me.

With an older brother and sister who were away at college, my Mom was simply not going to allow me to not have a partner with whom to play catch. She jumped in to fill the void. My Dad’s beat up, tattered left-handed first baseman’s mitt with a rag in the inside wasn’t going to work for Mom, so she saved her stamps with an eye on that catcher’s mitt.

Once she had that mitt, the games of catch began again. Having been the only girl with four brothers, she was fearless. She hit it with gusto. Playing catch together lasted until I was about 11 and started throwing pretty hard and experimenting with curve balls and throwing sidearm. Fortunately, we had moved to suburban Chicago, where I could ride my bike to the park where our Little League games were played and there were plenty of catch partners. So when I was 11 and she was 51, we were both glad to see her retire that catcher’s mitt. It had served its purpose. And my Mom had gotten me over the baseball hump. I could now fly on my own.

Her support clearly didn’t end with hanging up the catcher’s mitt. From a baseball standpoint, she was my greatest fan. I can’t accurately guess the number of hours she sat on those uncomfortable stands watching Little League, Pony League, Babe Ruth, High School, Summer League, and traveling All Star games. And when I played in college and our team played anywhere close to Chicago at Illinois, Notre Dame, Indiana State, Eastern Illinois, University of Illinois-Chicago and other schools, she would always travel to see us play.

My Mom was truly my hero. Helen Bolton. She didn’t have it so easy. She was widowed at 48 with two children in college and me. She moved us to Chicago to take care of her aging parents. She went to work as a legal secretary to support us. She cared for her elderly mother and other relatives. And she was an incredible woman. I cannot remember her ever complaining. She was a leader. She was so kind and wise. Always inviting people to the house for dinner that were alone. Giving people who didn’t have rides, rides back and forth from church. She cared deeply for others. While she didn’t’ have a lot of free time, she volunteered for Red Cross and the United Way. She served on the Board of Directors of the United Way for Chicago in the ‘70s – how many legal secretaries served on Boards at that time? A life master bridge player. An excellent golfer who had her first hole-in-one at age 70. And she sure loved her kids and her grandkids. My greatest teacher. She died 19 years ago. I miss her every day.

When I tell the catcher’s mitt story, I can’t tell it without getting choked up. I am crying as I write it now! My Mom was a great mother; a great woman. I can only hope my kids feel that I’m the kind of parent my Mom was to me. While she helped me learn how to pitch, what she really did was help me learn how to handle life’s curveballs. That’s what Moms do. Happy Mother’s Day, Mom!

How To Work With Anyone

Have you ever wondered how to get along with that person with the difficult personality? Have you wondered why others think the way they do? Solve problems the way they do? See the world, express their feelings and interact with others the way they do? Have you ever wondered the key to more effectively understanding and working with others who see the world differently? Have you ever hoped for a better understanding of and more effective working relationships with your clients or within your department or company?

With the vast majority of what we do and say controlled by personality, self-awareness is the hands-down differentiator in explaining why some are more successful than others. Plato confirmed the importance of self-awareness in 400 BC when he stated, “Know thyself.” When we’re self-aware, we know our strengths and blind spots, and we flex our own communication style to get on the same page as others who may have different communication tendencies. In short, self-awareness breeds success. So how do we increase our self-awareness, social awareness and learn to work with anyone?

Proception2 is an on-line, DISC-based profiling system that provides insights into the key dimensions of behaviors we demonstrate in our work environment. Being self-aware of our tendencies allows us to engage our talents and strengths, avoid the pitfalls of our behavioral and communication types, work more effectively with others and build stronger relationships. Proception2 is particularly effective in a business setting as the feedback reports are written in clear business language, examples are shared in a business context and over 2,100 unique report iterations are possible.

The Proception2 questionnaire is self-administered, takes approximately 15-20 minutes to complete and generates a 12-15 page personalized report. The feedback report identifies how we prefer to function, how we adjust our primary behaviors to the work environment, our behavioral strengths and development areas, our preferred work environment, our motivators and communication builders and barriers.

Proception2 is widely-used for self-development, leadership development, selection and interviewing, team alignment, conflict resolution and coaching/career development. If you are interested in creating greater self-awareness, growing professionally and improving your ability to interact and connect with others, the insights from Proception2 will be invaluable.

Chuck Bolton is interviewed by NBC’s KARE11 Sunrise co-anchor Kim Insley on How To Work With Anyone. In this interview, Chuck discusses the four communication styles and the Proception2 tool. To view this interview, click here.