Kan & Company

Marketing for results

Home » Governance

Governance

The Importance of Performance Management for Directors and Common Hurdles

Performance management is a critical aspect of a director’s role in any organization. It involves setting clear expectations, providing regular feedback, and fostering an environment that encourages continuous improvement. Effective performance management can lead to higher employee engagement, better productivity, and ultimately, the success of the organization.

Why Directors Must Manage Performance

  1. Alignment with Organizational Goals: Directors must ensure that the efforts of their teams are aligned with the strategic objectives of the company. By managing performance, they can direct their teams towards these goals effectively.
  2. Identifying and Developing Talent: Through performance management, directors can identify high-potential employees and provide them with opportunities for growth and development, which is essential for succession planning.
  3. Enhancing Employee Engagement: Employees who receive constructive feedback and are involved in their performance discussions tend to be more engaged and motivated.
  4. Improving Productivity: Regular performance reviews help in identifying areas of improvement and implementing strategies to enhance productivity.
  5. Risk Management: Performance management allows directors to identify and address performance issues before they escalate, reducing the risk to the organization.

Why Directors Often Fail to Manage Performance

  1. Lack of Time: Directors often cite a lack of time as a reason for not engaging in performance management, due to their involvement in strategic tasks.
  2. Insufficient Training: Some directors may not have received adequate training on how to conduct effective performance reviews and provide constructive feedback.
  3. Fear of Conflict: Directors may avoid performance management due to a fear of conflict or damaging relationships with employees.
  4. Inadequate Systems: Without a robust performance management system in place, it can be challenging for directors to track and evaluate performance effectively.
  5. Cultural Barriers: In some organizational cultures, there may be resistance to performance management practices, making it difficult for directors to implement them.

While performance management is essential for organizational success, directors often face challenges that prevent them from executing it effectively. Overcoming these hurdles requires commitment, training, and support from the organization to ensure that performance management is a priority at all levels.

0

Why it’s so important to discover what you’re really, really good at

The Key to Success: Uncovering Your Unique Strengths in Business

In the dynamic world of business, understanding and leveraging your unique strengths is not just beneficial; it’s essential for success. This self-awareness serves as a compass, guiding entrepreneurs and professionals alike towards roles and strategies where they can shine brightest.

Why is this self-discovery so crucial?

Firstly, it fosters excellence. When individuals engage in tasks that align with their innate talents, they are more likely to excel. This excellence is not just about outperforming competitors; it’s about reaching one’s highest potential. It leads to better job satisfaction, higher quality work, and, ultimately, a stronger reputation in the industry.

Secondly, it enhances efficiency. Knowing your strengths allows you to tackle tasks more effectively, saving time and resources. It also helps in delegating or outsourcing activities that fall outside your skill set, ensuring that every aspect of the business operates at peak performance.

Thirdly, it cultivates innovation. When you’re working within your area of expertise, creativity flows more freely. This can lead to innovative solutions and services, setting your business apart in a crowded marketplace.

Moreover, it aids in strategic planning. Understanding what you’re good at helps in setting realistic goals and crafting strategies that play to your strengths. It’s about making informed decisions that propel the business forward based on what you know you can deliver exceptionally well.

Lastly, it contributes to brand identity. Businesses often reflect the strengths and passions of their leaders. By embracing what you’re good at, you create a brand that’s authentic and resonant, which can attract customers, partners, and employees who share or value your strengths.

Identifying and harnessing your unique strengths is not just a path to personal fulfillment; it’s a strategic move in business. It’s about placing the right people in the right roles, creating a culture of excellence, and carving out a niche where your business can not only survive but thrive. So, take the time to reflect, assess, and embrace your strengths. Your business—and your sense of accomplishment—will be all the better for it.

0

Being financially disciplined is so important…

It’s important but so many businesses lack financial discipline. Some might say they aren’t a numbers person or that the accounting jargon intimidates them so they leave it to their accountant or their CFO to handle it for them. But generalist managers need to make it one of their key competencies: knowing and understanding the financial health of their company.

Financial discipline is the cornerstone of a successful business. It involves meticulous planning, stringent budgeting, and prudent financial management. In the competitive world of business, staying within budgets is not just important—it’s essential for survival and growth.

Firstly, financial discipline ensures operational efficiency. By setting and adhering to budgets, businesses can allocate resources where they are most needed, avoiding wasteful expenditure. This leads to leaner operations, maximizing profit margins and ensuring that every dollar spent contributes to the company’s objectives.

Secondly, it builds credibility with stakeholders. Investors, lenders, and partners are more likely to trust and engage with a business that demonstrates a strong track record of financial discipline. This trust translates into better financing terms, more investment opportunities, and favorable partnerships, all of which are vital for business expansion.

Moreover, staying within budgets is critical for cash flow management. Businesses must balance their income with their expenses to maintain liquidity. Financial discipline helps prevent cash shortages, ensuring that there are sufficient funds available for day-to-day operations, as well as for investing in growth opportunities.

Additionally, financial discipline is key to risk management. By maintaining a strict budget, businesses can set aside reserves to cushion against market fluctuations, economic downturns, or unforeseen expenses. This proactive approach to financial planning can be the difference between weathering a storm and facing bankruptcy.

Furthermore, disciplined financial practices enable strategic decision-making. When businesses have a clear understanding of their financial position, they can make informed choices about investments, expansions, and cost-cutting measures. This strategic foresight is often what sets industry leaders apart from their competitors.

In conclusion, financial discipline and budget adherence are not just about controlling costs; they are about ensuring the strategic deployment of financial resources to achieve business objectives. They provide a framework for making informed decisions, managing risks, and capitalizing on opportunities. For businesses aiming for long-term success and sustainability, financial discipline is not an option—it’s a necessity.

0

Combining the roles of board chair and CEO

Combining the roles of board chairperson and chief executive can have several benefits for an organization, such as:

  • Enhancing strategic alignment and vision. Having one person in charge of both the board and the executive team can ensure that the organization’s strategy and vision are consistent and coherent, and that the board and the executive team are working towards the same goals.
  • Improving decision-making and accountability. Having one person responsible for both the board and the executive team can facilitate faster and more effective decision-making, as well as clearer accountability for the outcomes. The combined leader can also communicate more directly and transparently with the stakeholders, such as shareholders, employees, customers, and regulators.
  • Reducing costs and complexity. Having one person hold both roles can reduce the costs and complexity of having two separate leaders, such as salaries, benefits, travel expenses, office space, etc. It can also simplify the governance structure and avoid potential conflicts or duplication of roles and responsibilities.
  • Bringing better board visibility. Usually a board expects a CEO to have thought through an issue and presented the board with a solution and a recommendation before it is brought before them. On the other hand, members of the board have a duty and responsibility to keep the board informed of issues and risks as soon as they become aware of them. This means that an Executive Chair should bring issues to the board before they have been fully worked through, giving the board real time awareness of the issue and its resolution.

However, combining the roles of board chairperson and chief executive also has some drawbacks and risks, such as:

  • Concentrating too much power and influence in one person. Having one person control both the board and the executive team can create a situation where there is a lack of checks and balances, independent oversight, or constructive challenge. This can lead to potential issues such as groupthink, tunnel vision, ethical lapses, or abuse of power.
  • Increasing the workload and stress for the combined leader. Having one person handle both roles can create a heavy workload and stress for the combined leader, who has to balance multiple demands and expectations from different stakeholders. This can affect the leader’s performance, health, well-being, or succession planning.
  • Reducing diversity and representation on the board. Having one person occupy both roles can reduce the diversity and representation on the board, especially if the combined leader is from a dominant or privileged group. This can limit the board’s ability to reflect the interests and perspectives of different stakeholders, such as minority shareholders, employees, customers, or communities.

Therefore, combining the roles of board chairperson and chief executive is not a one-size-fits-all solution for every organization. It depends on various factors such as the size, nature, culture, strategy, performance, challenges, opportunities, and stakeholder expectations of the organization. It also requires careful consideration of the potential benefits and drawbacks, as well as appropriate safeguards and mechanisms to mitigate the risks.

0

Board Committees: The Dog Should Wag the Tail

Board Committees can be useful

Board Committees can be a useful and efficient tool for large boards to address specialist areas where only a minority of the board has the expertise to deal with them.

They save wasting the entire board’s time from being mired in the detail of, say, the organization’s financials or health and safety.

Committees can also give more intensive scrutiny to specific aspects of a board’s duties. 

Thus, complex issues can be explored in greater detail.

The Board remains liable for Committee decisions

However, a committee generally only has the constitutional power to make recommendations for the full board to ratify as the liability for any committee’s actions remains with the board.

Consequently, any significant recommendations forwarded to the full board should include sufficient background information so that board can make an informed decision on whether to ratify the recommendation. 

Board members are often encouraged to avoid re-litigating matters considered by subcommittees so that the time and energy expended by the committee is not wasted. As a result, subcommittee recommendations are often ratified with hardly a murmur.

Committees can slip through potentially controversial decisions without adequate board scrutiny

Not every matter warrants close board scrutiny.

It becomes a matter of judgement as to what is a significant matter.  One way to assess this is to consider whether the decision carries reputational or financial risks, or both.

As with all matters of trust, it can be abused.

Potentially controversial matters can be obfuscated with

  • A too-brief description of the recommendation,
  • The recommendation is buried amidst many other pages of board papers,
  • The description in the committee minutes omits even why the matter was considered and what factors were taken into consideration in arriving at the recommendation.

In this way, the board is unable to scrutinize the work of its subcommittees and the subcommittee has in effect hijacked the board, at least in that particular matter, anyway.

The line between governance and management can become blurred in board committees

Committees often become exposed to a lot more operational detail than the full board.  The line between governance and management matters can become blurred and so this must be carefully managed. 

The line can be further blurred if attending managers are made full committee members and each is given a vote. 

Often the concern about the demarcation between governance and management centres around board members unhealthily encroaching on what should be operational matters. 

But with executive committee members having voting rights then the composition of the committee must also be carefully considered, because the majority of committee could conceivably be composed of executives. 

When combined with the idea that a committee can slip its controversial decisions through under the noses of the board without it being aware of it, the executives on the committee has in effect hijacked the board.

This doesn’t mean that the executive are necessarily malevolent or Machiavellian they may be genuine and have the organisation’s interests at heart. 

But an important role of the board is to provide independent and unbiased oversight, and this role can be compromised when executive representation on board committees is too high and they are exercising voting power as if they are board members through their committee membership. 

Board committees can be beneficial but they can also be abused

Especially for large boards, board committees can be beneficial.  They can save time and allow complex matters to be considered in more detail.

But board committees must be very aware of what matters are significant and carry a disproportionate risk to the organisation. 

If a decision is likely to be controversial then this is a clear signal that the matter is significant. It can be tempting to obfuscate the matter to avoid conflict.

The attention of the board should be drawn to significant matters so that the board can adequately scrutinize the recommendation so that an informed decision can be made.

The executive team shouldn’t become de facto board members through their voting power in committees.

Board committees should always remain subordinate to the full board. The dog must wag the tail, not the other way around.

0