Work Matters

Derek Dean on Dealing With Fear and Denial in Senior Teams: A Thoughtful McKinsey Quarterly Article

Written by

supermoxie

in

Last week, as I was preparing to get ready to go to Singapore (more on that in another post), McKinsey Quarterly editor Allen Webb asked me if I might be interested in writing a comment on Derek Dean's article "A CEOs Guide to Reenergizing the Senior Team."  I said I would take quick look but was busy getting ready…. well, when I did, I extremely impressed with tone, insights, and balancing act between compassion and the need to get stuff done that Dean described and recommended in the article. The article is short and packed with all kinds gems, but I especially liked the detailed description of how Harrah's Gary Loveman (who may win the award from the best CEO who started as management professor — most of us talk about leading but can't do it) guided his team through the recent tough times.  You can read the article and my comment by going to the above link.  The Quarterly does require you to register, but us free.

 In my comment, CEOs, Tough Times, and Emotions, I made several points,  but perhaps the most important was "to underscore a point that’s implicit but unstated in his essay:
CEOs must work just as doggedly to confront and deal with their own
demons and foibles as they do to help their charges come to grips with
theirs."  CEOs, like other human beings, are often not aware of how their emotions are leaking or spilling out (especially when they are under stress) and how strongly the little things they do affect their teams — especially when members are afraid that something bad is going to happen to them.  I also had a lot of fun using the "interesting shoes" example that originally appeared here.

As a final comment about where life is heading. I am an old guy who has spent much of his career writing stuff and then waiting months and months before it appears.  Indeed, in graduate school, a colleague and I wrote a chapter for an academic book that appeared some seven or eight years later.  Although it is short, the immediate jolt of writing something less than a week ago and then seeing it distributed for all to see is both delightful and disconcerting.  And all for free…. good thing McKinsey charges money for its other work.

I hope you enjoy Derek Dean's article; I found it it very thoughtful and his advice can help CEOs in these tough times, or anyone else who leads a team. 

Comments

21 responses to “Derek Dean on Dealing With Fear and Denial in Senior Teams: A Thoughtful McKinsey Quarterly Article”

  1. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  2. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  3. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  4. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  5. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  6. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  7. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  8. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  9. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  10. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  11. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  12. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  13. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  14. dblwyo Avatar
    dblwyo

    Excellent – thanks. One of the worst time a rock climber faces is looking down and realizing that postage stamp between their boot edges (not really but this is a family blog)is a six-acre parking lot into which they can splat. The response is often to cling frozenly to the face, crying for mother. McK, Booz and BCG found that 70% of major companies had similar experiences during the height of the turmoil. As Dean’s article shows they are just beginning to adapt to the short-term exigencies. In talking to folks in the re-structure and performance business those preparing for a new, reset future is vanishingly small. The next decade will be fundamentally different than the last three and, on the whole, most are frozen on the rock.
    On the whole. I grade a “wait and see” as a reactive C/C-. Prepartion for, let’s say, 2003 instead of 2007 at best, a B and “resetting” (borrowing Immelt’s label) as an A. When the largest proportion of businesses are in “wait and see mode” they’re going to lock themselves into reactive mode and be scrambling to play catch up for years imho. Let’s say 15% are F, 20% are D, 50-60% are C/C-, 10% are B and 0-5% are A then.
    And unlikely to change because of organizational resistence to change – about which you know a lot.
    That means a lot of aggregate under-performance for a long time to come, my best guess. We squeaked thru the Tech Bust on the back of low hiring, limited investment, financial engineering and a Credit Bubble.
    Don’t think there’s going to be any places to hide.

    Reply
  15. mbt shoes Avatar
    mbt shoes

    I agree with it,CEOs must work just as doggedly to confront and deal with their own demons and foibles as they do to help their charges come to grips with theirs.

    Reply
  16. mbt shoes Avatar
    mbt shoes

    I agree with it,CEOs must work just as doggedly to confront and deal with their own demons and foibles as they do to help their charges come to grips with theirs.

    Reply
  17. mbt shoes Avatar
    mbt shoes

    I agree with it,CEOs must work just as doggedly to confront and deal with their own demons and foibles as they do to help their charges come to grips with theirs.

    Reply
  18. mbt shoes Avatar
    mbt shoes

    I agree with it,CEOs must work just as doggedly to confront and deal with their own demons and foibles as they do to help their charges come to grips with theirs.

    Reply
  19. mbt shoes Avatar
    mbt shoes

    I agree with it,CEOs must work just as doggedly to confront and deal with their own demons and foibles as they do to help their charges come to grips with theirs.

    Reply
  20. mbt shoes Avatar
    mbt shoes

    I agree with it,CEOs must work just as doggedly to confront and deal with their own demons and foibles as they do to help their charges come to grips with theirs.

    Reply
  21. mbt shoes Avatar
    mbt shoes

    I agree with it,CEOs must work just as doggedly to confront and deal with their own demons and foibles as they do to help their charges come to grips with theirs.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

More posts