The First 90 Days, ft. Michael Watkins and Asha Aravindakshan, SF ’17

Hello partners. Greetings from New York. My name is Asha Aravindakshan, Sloan Fellows Class of 2017, and I am delighted to welcome back leadership and career transition expert Michael Watkins to speak with our Sloan Fellows program alumni and students. Quick Cleanup: You're on mute and your video is off. You can use the Questions and Answers button in the menu at the bottom of the screen to ask questions during the session. The session will last a full hour with Michael's presentation and questions from him after the session. You will receive an email from the Office of External Relations with the recording and a link to a landing page with the slides and articles Michael references.

Michael, as a reminder, we will be joined by mid-career executives who have spent a full 12 months in residence at MIT Sloan in an MBA program that focused on magnifying their impact as leaders. They work for 2,000 global companies, family businesses, and some of their own startups in over 40 countries around the world and are constantly reinventing themselves for the next chapters of their career. The

first

90

days

serve as a kind of bible for us as leaders advancing our careers. I've read it with my last few transitions and each part of your roadmap resonates in different situations. For those of you listening to Michael for the

first

time today, you are in for a real treat.

A quick introduction: Michael is a leadership transition expert who specializes in C-level coaching. He resides in Switzerland, where he teaches at the IMD business school and runs a leadership development consultancy called Genesis. He is the author of many leadership articles, which he will hear about today, and books such as The First 90 Days and Master His Next Move, which we featured in our inaugural webinar on June 4. Michael, I'll pass it on to you. Thank you very much Asha and welcome everyone. I come today from Zurich, Switzerland, where I have been sheltering in place since the Covid crisis began.

But I'm really delighted to be able to talk to you today about my favorite topic, which is accelerating leadership transitions. I should say, as background, if you look at their careers so far, I think they are experienced leaders. You've probably been through multiple transitions by now, right, and you've certainly learned something about how to make successful transitions into new leadership roles. Many good lessons, many good experiences and yet each new transition is different. Each new transition presents you with unique challenges, and sometimes you know that what got you here will not necessarily, as Marshall Goldsmith so aptly put it, get you there.

So it's just a matter of taking a step back and thinking a little bit about your experience with transitions. How many jobs have you had so far in your career? Sometimes I talk in terms of leader cycle time, what is the average time and position. These

days

, well, since Covid, it's changed again, but even before Covid, many of the organizations I worked with, leaders at the VP level had an average of 2.5 years in the role, which is a Pretty fast cycle. It makes it even more important to be effective at getting up to speed quickly in a new role, because every moment you gain doing so is an opportunity to truly have an impact on the organization.

I should also say that, of course, we will send you a copy of these slides so that you can count on it. Also, if you have any questions, please write them in the Q&A box and I will try to answer them as I go. They do appear or you can save them if you want for the end, but I think one of the things that I found with this work is just the benefit of having a proper framework, the benefit of having something to organize yourself. You're thinking you know: I always say The First 90 Days isn't rocket science, right?

There is no rocket science there. It's really distilled common sense, but a lot of the value comes from having that framework and a set of tools that give you confidence that, in the end, you're really focusing on the right things. And when you think about The First 90 Days, I just want to emphasize that there really is a huge impact in using this particular framework the right way. We've done some research on this. This is a summary of a study I did with Egon Zehnder where the results that they looked at this group of executives joining large companies were that they could achieve peak performance in about 50 percent of the time it would otherwise take them and That's actually a pretty wonderful Impact, right?

And obviously it's something that I'm very proud of and if you look at the details of the impact, this is just an idea of ​​what people find most useful when using this framework. And here you can see different themes of stakeholders just having a plan, getting information about the team, understanding the culture and certainly we're going to delve into some of these things in a little more depth, but I think I hope it's useful to see them. that there are quite important transition dimensions that you really get a lot of benefits from if you apply this particular framework and toolset.

So why focus on transitions? Well, you know it's because what you do from the beginning is very important because it sets the tone for everything that follows. And we know from the beginning, from research on things like confirmation bias, that people form opinions very quickly. Once formed, they are quite difficult to change and so if you can get up to speed effectively, build the right relationships and understand the challenges, that can start to create a sense of trust and that can drive you throughout your time. . on the paper. And on the other hand, if you get into trouble early, it can be very difficult to turn it around. and I've had the unfortunate experience a few times of being asked to coach executives who have gotten themselves into a lot of trouble, maybe six months into the job, they've alienated some key stakeholders, something in their leadership style has changed. .

I upset people the wrong way, you know, they are abrasive in one way or another and there is really very little they can do, or indeed I can do, to help them at a stage like that. Because opinion is hardened, you know? Conventional wisdom has put a big cloud around someone and it's going to undermine everything they do. Because people are simply looking for them to do more and feed that set of perceptions. The other side of the coin is that you know that if you can gain some credibility early on, you get a little bit of a halo.

And that halo is something that isolates you a little. A little, true, against what comes later. That doesn't mean you can make terrible decisions later and everything will be fine, but there is a little cushion, so to speak, that comes from having a successful transition. That quote about how you never get a second chance to make a first impression: Will Rogers, the comedian. TRUE. But also in the case of taking on a leadership role, a new one, you often don't even have the first opportunity to make a first impression. Because, as we'll see, you come with a reputation, a set of expectations that surround you, really, you know, before you even take the position.

And we'll talk a little more about that as we go along. So I was, you know, a leader whose transition I didn't advise on, but I studied after the fact. He was someone who came out of a large industrial company and specified the company with a lot of product development experience and was hired by Not a startup, but an early-stage company that was about to take off, you know, with the vision that he would be the new type of COO and would bring discipline and systems to the organization. And you know this was an organization that at the time had about 2,500 employees and was ready to take off.

You know, the CEO recognized that they needed to become more systematic and structured in order to scale. But he went very wrong because the culture was very different because this person didn't really have a clear understanding of his mandate. They came in understanding or thinking that they could simply implement processes and systems when in reality there was no broader support to do so. They didn't focus enough on building those critical peer-to-peer relationships with other members of the leadership team, and overall he was the wrong person for the job because they didn't have enough experience leading what was basically a transformation.

So they know that they probably made four of the five traps, or fell into four of the five traps that you see here on the right. They got too attached to what they knew, they thought they knew it, they gave the answer, they were engaging in the wrong types of learning. We'll talk a little more about that. They did not dedicate enough time to relationships with their peers. But the key here is to simply understand from a starting point that there really are some common traps that leaders fall into during transition and that you don't want to fall into them.

This was some of the first research I did on transitions, which was simply looking at what are the common mistakes that people make. I want to emphasize that. Sticking with what you know comes first for a reason, right? It's the most common reason I see people struggle. You'll see the Mark Twain quote, on the right: "To a person with a hammer, everything looks like a nail." or you think back to Marshall Goldsmith: "What got you here won't get you there." One key thing to do from the beginning is understand how you need to change what you do and what we're going to focus on, given the demands of this role, what you need to accept that maybe it's challenging or difficult or something you don't love. do it.

What do you need to let go? That's a mental discipline that I always bring to the people I coach from the beginning, right? What do you need to embrace, what do you need to let go of, because it's usually the case that your skill set isn't perfectly suited to what you need to do? I mentioned the idea of ​​momentum and catching up, but there really is a kind of dynamic to this, a non-linear dynamic, right, if you do things wrong and it often stems from not doing a great job of learning. and if you don't do a good job of connecting, you can make some bad decisions.

You can't build the alliances you need and this can really undermine your ability to do what you need and ultimately contribute to these types of vicious cycles. So don't do that. Good transitions are often based, as seen at the end of the second diagram, on being effective in building those key relationships and alliances, which we will talk about in a few minutes. But also engaging in the right kind of learning so that you can make the right early decisions, focus on the right things, build a strategy and a vision that is really compelling in the context of the organization.

So keep in mind that the transition to me is largely about how to build momentum, positive momentum, and avoid negative momentum in the context of the role you've taken on. So if you think about a framework to do this, this is an extension of the work I did on 'The First 90 Days' that reflects the subsequent research and creating tools etc. What you see here is a framework that is intended to give you a sort of roadmap, if you will, to move forward in your transition. I'm just going to explain some of the elements of this to you.

Hopefully it makes you think a little about how this might apply to you. These nine elements separate and I'm really going to start with this whole idea of ​​getting started. I just got a question and I'll get to it very quickly, but I'll get back to it. How to handle discriminatory behavior in the workplace as a female leader. That's a really broad topic and I think it almost always starts to appear in the transition. So you often have an idea that this is going to be a problem. I guess I would wonder what your due diligence is on the culture of this organization.

Is it a cultural thing or is it a matter of a specific individual that you know? Is it systematic or individualistic? There are standard answers, as I'm sure you know, to these things: go talk to HR, talk to your boss, unless it's your boss...the reality is that often HR and others they're not very helpful and I've seen senior female leaders get into really challenging situations where it was clear there was bias involved, but it was very difficult to prove it quote unquote. It really limits your ability to look for solutions. And I know I'm not really giving you answers here, but I think for me part of this is about, first of all, trying not to take on a role where you're setting yourself up for that, but often there's no way to know it. completely in advance.

As part of the transition process, be sure to build broad alliances, because that can help you deal with these types of challenges. But the broader question of what is different for transitioning women as leaders is fascinating to me. And coincidentally, one that I just had a meeting to talk about. So as you think about startup processes, I would emphasize a couple of things here: the first is to understand the types of transitions that you are going through and, in fact, oftenIt involves several types of transitions in parallel, so try this a bit. of a checklist. Think perhaps about the last time you took on a new role or maybe you are taking on one now.

How many of these applied to you? That example I gave you, the leader who derailed, and I should have said, derailed: he left the organization after about nine months. There were a lot of transitions here, right: joining a new company, you were promoted to a higher level, you actually moved geographically, you were moving from a functional role in product development, although you had some functional dimensions, a truly cross-functional role. I didn't see it, but it was a newly created type of role. I was leaving an organization that was largely focused on maintaining success and realigning something that looked more like an accelerated growth scenario.

I'll talk about that in a minute. So there were many, many dimensions to the transition, and the more types of transitions you go through, the greater the risk. Now, there is no easy antidote to this, although you have to be very careful about setting goals and involving too many dimensions, right? You have to think about the size of the jump you want to make. Or if you're taking a big leap, what kind of support will really help you in those circumstances. It's also really valuable to break it down and think about what parts of this are really challenging.

Are you adapting to the new company culture? Is it learning to operate at a higher level? Is it about managing multiple roles or specialties when you've been more of a specialist? And the more precise you are about the nature of the challenge, the better you can mobilize to meet it. The other thing I always recommend is to think about how you are going to get there and the preparation you are going to do before formally assuming the position. Obviously, that means educating yourself about the organization, about the position, assuming you have some time to do it, which is often the case.

But it is also anticipating what the reaction will be to your arrival. What are people who know about you before you arrive going to think? What dimensions of that are good, what are going to be a little problematic that you're going to have to deal with? Really think about crafting the messages you want to send about yourself and your leadership when you arrive, and plan in some detail how you will engage in that initial work of communication and connection. These are really the dimensions of what you might think about as you begin to play this role in this general framework.

Then there are three pieces here that I consider really diagnostic. Learning is being accelerated, strategy is being tailored to the situation, and alignment is being made with key stakeholders. Especially with your boss, but potentially with others as well. Simply go through each of these in turn. Oh, that's a great question: "Anything to highlight or pay attention to when joining a new company as a leader remotely?" --Yeah. In fact, I published an HBR online article a couple of months ago that we can send you the link to onboarding new leaders remotely. It's hard, because the normal things you would do just to informally gather information don't exist.

It means that you have to be much more structured about the learning process and ask the organization to help you with that process. It means you need to be much more structured and disciplined when it comes to connecting with people, and you want to ask the organization for help to do that too. I guess what I would add is that we constantly find that the biggest challenge is not dealing with your own team, your own new team, because you have the power to summon those people to start leading them, to start connecting with them even. If you're feeling a little isolated.

The really challenging thing is connecting with your peers. While normally you might be able to interact much more organically with your colleagues or your boss, here you have to be really organized and you need to gain their attention and that's not necessarily easy, especially given everything that's going on right. now. I think as part of the follow-up, maybe we can send a link to that article. -- Absolutely -- So, a little bit about each of these three things: Accelerate your learning: I think, first of all, is recognizing that there are different types of learning that you may need to do.

I divide it into technical learning: products, markets, technological systems; cultural learning: values, behavioral patterns, ways of doing things well, successes and mistakes, set of organizational values; and then political learning: how decisions are made, who has power, who has influence, how you navigate the corridors of power to get things done in the context of the new organization, and thinking about the relative balance, right? So the leader I mentioned before, the derailed leader, was too focused on technical learning and not enough on understanding the culture or the political system that he came to, which was almost like a family or a tribe.

They had been together while building this organization up until that point, so he didn't do the work necessary to become part of the family or the tribe and that was part of what really weakened him. Keep in mind that culture is like the organization's immune system. You have to be very careful not to do some things that can activate the immune system and, for example, overestimate its mandate to make changes. He may have been told that he is there to make change, but that doesn't necessarily mean he actually has a mandate. So once you get into the organization, you really need to check and double-check that you have the mandate to do what you think you need to do.

And if not, that mandate needs to be developed and clarified. Coming up with the answer: No one likes to be told that you have the answer to the problems they've been struggling with, even if you really do have the answer to the problems they've been struggling with. You still need to socialize, you need to deal with the reality of the egos that you're dealing with and try to progressively incorporate maybe what you already know you had, some of what you need to do. This is the last one: creating the feeling that you believe that there is nothing good here.

This was something I learned, or didn't learn, but I saw it very directly with a CEO I worked with. I was training him as the new CEO of a large healthcare system in the US, and he was a very focused, disciplined, problem-solver, you know, originally trained as an engineer, a very focused CEO. in operations and, indeed, in the organization. he needed that. But in the process of starting to connect and make his diagnosis and think about his agenda, the only thing he focused on was the things that weren't working right. He didn't pay any attention to "this is pretty good" or "they've done a good job there" and so the organization, when I did the series of interviews that I usually do to see how a new executive is doing, the comments was, "he doesn't think we've done anything good here in the entire history of the organization." That wasn't what he thought, but he was creating the impression, and that's why I gave him this feedback.

You know like me, and he literally hit himself in the head and said, "I know!" He says, "I know! My wife always tells me, 'Sprinkle some sugar on it, darling, sprinkle some sugar on it!'" So here's a lesson: I think about the perceptions you can create as a new CEO or as a CEO. new senior leader without even intending to do so. Therefore, you have to be very careful when managing the impressions that are being created and balance the necessary focus on what needs to be worked on with the parts where the organization has done a good job.

I joke that there's no organization so depressing that it hasn't accomplished something good in its history that you can find, which is similar to Dale Carnegie's advice, the famous advice on how to influence people: find something you like about this person, Even if it's something small, find something you like about them. Let's hope this is clear. Culture, as you know, is a complex topic. I'm not going to discuss it in detail beyond saying that most transitions, even if they are moving internally, involve some dimension of adaptation to a new culture. It could be a new functional culture.

It could be a new part of the organization. It could be that the culture at the highest levels is subtly different than the one you are currently working with or in. Therefore, understanding culture as correct levels: the surface level of terms and acronyms that people use and symbology; the lower level of those fundamental assumptions and values; but really that critical middle level of behavioral norms that I think you should focus your attention on. I'll give you some ideas. And the slides again, we'll share with you about ways - dimensions of those behavioral norms to look at and questions to ask and of course in The First 90 Days, there's more information on how to do that. this type of diagnostic work.

That is accelerating your learning; Obviously there's a lot more to it. In the end, it's really about creating a learning plan and understanding where you're going to get the information you need and how to be as efficient as possible in getting that information. The second part of diagnosing your situation is understanding what type of business situation you are most commonly in or mixed with, and how that really influences your thinking about the transition. And so I built this little framework, the STARS model: startup, recovery, accelerated growth, realignment, sustained success. It is not the sum total of all possible trading situations, but rather a reasonable categorization.

And by going through the process of thinking about what you're dealing with, it gives you an idea of, for example, how you should present yourself, the kind of style, the kind of approach that will be helpful. I like to contrast changes with realignments and there was another leader I worked with a few years ago who left Europe in an organization, a global food organization, where he had made a big change and moved up to a position in the US. a promotion that really was a realignment and a lot of what he needed to do was adjust his approach.

Because he was really good at change, he was very action-oriented, he was very decisive: he would go in and do the analysis, determine what classification needed to be done immediately, plan the replacement of most of the equipment; while the new job was actually very different. It was about involving an organization, transforming elements of its culture, making it operate in a more integrated way, and there it was much more about convincing people and building allies to involve the organization and the necessary transformation of its culture and, to a certain extent, its structure. And he wasn't replacing people, he was mainly working.

There was one exception with the existing leadership team, so this framework can be very helpful in getting your bearings from the beginning and really engaging with the organization. The example I gave you, the leader who went off the rails, was a fast-paced growth situation where the name of the game was implementing structures and systems that enabled scaling. Now, the reality is that there may be an overarching theme, but there may be different parts of what you inherit that are in different states and it can be a really useful exercise to think about them. But also engage his team in a dialogue about how they view the nature of business situations.

I often work with teams to get them to come to a consensus on what the status of different parts of the organization is because it's a great place to start with the work that needs to be done there. So the third dimension of that article about really diagnosing your situation is having the right conversations, first of all, with your boss, but perhaps with key stakeholders. I'm not going to go into this in detail other than to say that there are some obvious things here and some not so obvious. The obvious conversations, and by conversations I don't mean a one-time conversation, it's more of a topic that you need to address, focusing on those expectations and the resources available to you.

It's easy to overlook the other two. Style, which is really how you're going to work most effectively with your boss, how does he prefer you communicate with him? Are you someone who prefers to talk or prefers to communicate through other means, some written means? How much detail they like, what kind of frequency of interaction they want and if you can discuss that explicitly from the beginning, it can really go a long way in terms of building that key relationship. And conversation number two revolves around the situation and that is making sure that you and your boss and maybe others are on the same page about the nature of the STARS situation.

We are in a pivot rather than a realignment. On the contrary, we are experiencing sustained success. Because, and I hope it's obvious, if you have a different vision than your boss (and, for that matter, your team), this can create all kinds of challenges. So, achieving alignment in your understanding of those things is really nice and beautiful and fundamental. The middle box: you are establishingthe direction. This is an issue that I don't think leaders have to struggle with too much because I think most organizations' own business processes help to focus on creating strategy, creating objectives, you know, planning. long-term financial, etc.

But to summarize, for me the essence of setting direction in an organization is about the what, the how and the why. What should we do? Think of it as mission, goals, priorities. How we're going to do it: Think about this strategy not in the grand sense of corporate strategy, but in terms of how we're going to do it. And why: why people should be excited, what's inspiring about what we're going to do and that really brings us to things like vision and purpose. So if you dig into this, it's really about how to answer these questions and do it in a way that people find compelling, that makes it clear what really needs to be done, that taps into the "it's all us." We'll be on the same page with a strategy that hopefully provides a sense of vision or purpose around people can come together.

So Laura simply asked a question: "Any advice for a situation where we join a startup in a new position that is not very well developed yet?" Yes. So, you know, a different category, Laura, I consider it the newly created position. And this is usually much more difficult, I'm sorry to say, than the established positions. Because? Because you have to work to define what that role is. And really put some substance into how you're going to create value in the context of that role. And what's particularly challenging is that it can overlap with other people's roles and there can be points of friction where one person thinks that's what they should do when it's pretty clear to you that you're there to do it.

What's critical here is making sure that your boss, or in this case perhaps the CEO or others, do the work of supporting you and defining what your role should be because the more ambiguity there is about the rule, the less clear it is. about how you are going to create value. The less clear you are about what success looks like, the less clear you are about how success will be measured, it's going to create a lot of problems for you right now. Does it mean that if there is ambiguity you are doomed? No. But it means you usually have to build more relationships, work to define what the role is really about.

Laura, I hope this is helpful. It is an interesting challenge, without a doubt. So as you think about direction, the one thing I wanted to mention and link to an article that we can give you is that it's great to set goals, it's great to set strategies, it's great to set a sense of vision. But you also have to focus in great detail on exactly what the organization is doing and what it is not doing. Because sometimes I say that the true strategy of the organization is the sum of the activity in which people participate. That's why I co-authored this article in 2018 called "Too Many Projects," but the issue is really initiative overload and how can you really define the core and most important initiatives that will support the strategy and achieve the objectives; instead of placing more things on top.

And how do you go about the exercise of carefully looking at the entire set of activities and deciding what to stop doing? Because that's actually very critical. And again, we'll provide you with a link to that article. So you've made a successful start: you've understood your types of transitions, you've accelerated your learning, you've thought about the STAR situation and how you will show up as a leader. You've achieved some alignment with your boss and key stakeholders, and based on all that information, you've begun to set the direction of your organization. So it's really now that it starts to have an impact.

So those three boxes that you see in lime green on the right side are about: how do you start to really have an impact and start driving results for the organization? A little about each of them. Then Sheinal added that the point of work style is super critical: the act of asking for someone's preference is critical. I totally agree with you, talk about values... Yes, at the very least be aware of your own values ​​and make sure that even before you accept the job you know that the organization will be reasonably aligned with your values ​​and will not put you in situations that they contradict.

Thanks Sheinal, that's a great observation. Building the team – such an important topic in itself. We could spend an entire day talking about taking over a leadership team, inheriting one, and starting to reshape it. But I think the starting point is understanding that you usually can't build your team. Sometimes you do. It's a new position, it's a role that hasn't existed before, you can build a team from scratch, a startup or something, maybe a new project to build your team. But the reality is that you usually inherit someone else's team and it is a team that has been shaped and led by your predecessor.

When you arrive it is not your team. Your goals may be different than those of your predecessors due to the demands of the business. This is a very different challenge than the quote-unquote "building a team." It's a challenge to evaluate that team and evolve it into what you need it to be in whatever time frame makes sense given the situation you're in, while continuing to make the organization operate and achieve the necessary results. Will the presentation slides be available after the webinar? Yes they will. We will get you a copy of the presentation. So the analogy I use is that leading a team that is inherited is like preparing an airplane in flight.

Again, a big part of this is how do you get involved in the process of evaluating a new team? What do you look for in your team members? Are there roles that are particularly critical that you want to focus on, making sure you have the A players first? And there is the delicate evolutionary dance of making changes without overwhelming the organization with too many changes. It is a fascinating challenge. I actually wrote an article, another HBR article that we can give you a link to: "Leading the Inheriting Team" that addresses that topic in a little more detail.

I would also say that it helps if you have a model or a framework for thinking about what you are looking for in your team. This is something I use and think is helpful, especially for leaders who are taking on new roles. The high-performing team you want to create has the right people in the right roles, is powerfully aligned, operates efficiently, and collaborates effectively. Now we could talk about each of them. How do you get the right people into the right positions? Note that these are about people but also about roles. Sometimes you have good people but they are not in the right position.

Sometimes you need a different role structure. At a minimum, you should first focus on what your most critical roles are and make sure you have the people you need to really achieve your goals. Powerful Alignment: This goes beyond simply having shared goals and strategies; It's about a sense of purpose. It's about really understanding each other on a pretty deep level, about really growing. My two children are team athletes, they row and grow together, of course, they are going in the same direction. Operational efficiency: This is how the team is actually run. The cadence of meetings, the way meanings are executed.

As a new leader, you have a lot of control over that, so you might think, “How did my predecessor do that?” but also "how do I want to do it?" Well, to make sure I get the most out of this team with the time we spend together. And of course Collaboration. The secret sauce of making people feel comfortable enough to engage in difficult issues, to support each other, to feel involved in something that is truly a joint effort. And again, these are just starting points, but we will provide links to these articles. What's relevant here is "Lead the team you inherit." Secure are the first victories.

Let's get back to the momentum, let's get back to how I'm going to start having an impact from the beginning. It's about credibility, about connection, about a positive impression. But you don't get very far before you have to think about where you're going to focus your effort to really start having a clear and measurable impact, or at least an observable impact on the organization. So there's a whole process that you have to go through: thinking a lot and summarizing what are the key areas that you're going to focus a lot of attention on and you can't address too many, right?

You really have to place your bets, enough bets, that if you know something doesn't pay off, you're still going to make some progress. But not too many unless you're that spread out. Getting wins the right way: It's about understanding the culture and understanding that the way you do things needs to be consistent with the culture unless you're trying to change it. And that is another topic, taking into account the STAR situation. What I mean by this is that the way victories and change are achieved is very different than what a victory looks like in a realignment or accelerated growth situation.

Sheinal asks: "When I take different styles into account and am told to make personnel changes very quickly, particularly layoffs, I feel that there is some level observation of the data that helps make this decision along with some intuition." So the only place I'm missing the point with the statement is the "super fast" part. I think it really depends on the situation. In a radical change, absolutely. In a realignment or in a successful environment, maybe not so quickly. What is absolutely true, Sheinal, is that if you let too much time pass, the team becomes your team in a deeper sense and making changes becomes more difficult.

As a general rule, and it's just a general rule, you don't want to pull the trigger without giving people a decent chance. Because what you observe may not be correct. Even what you have been told may not be correct. Now, here again there are political realities and limitations. My rule of thumb is that when 90 days are up, I want to be very clear about the biggest changes I want to make to my team. If it's a turnaround, you may have to trade faster than that. It doesn't mean I've made all the changes, but I have an idea of ​​what changes I need to make and I've started to implement the process to deal with that. "Any perspective on managing extremely different generational groups?" Wow, another great topic.

Wow, I don't even know if I can do that justice, because it's such a big group and such an important topic. I think this is obviously a problem that will solve itself as the new generation takes over, so to speak. Meanwhile, it can be a source of tremendous frustration, conflict, and loss of potentially important people. You have to hope you have leadership that is in tune with some of this. Sometimes some forms of reverse mentoring can help, but again, there is no easy answer, especially if you are a leader managing people much older than you. And you are the child right now.

The answer is as always, but more difficult: you must demonstrate that you are capable of leading them effectively. There's no real answer beyond that. "Do I do individualized training?" Yes. Usually, now almost exclusively at C level. The best way to contact me is always through Linkedin. That's why I welcome Linkedin connections. I do my own communication on Linkedin, so that's probably the best way to communicate with me. Lucas asks: "How to balance the need to make sense and not rush the action/decision before fully understanding the context, while ensuring early victories?" Lucas, this is a great question.

When I do programs on The First 90 Days, currently virtual programs, I emphasize the need to strike the right balance between learning and connecting, versus deciding and acting. The right balance depends a lot on the situation. In a change of direction, you will have to operate much more quickly, but the learning you need is, in some ways, easier. The analyzes you need to do, whereas if you're into something more like a realignment, you might need to take more time to make sense of it as you describe it. I love the term, to really understand it. You can fall on either side of this, right?

I've seen people act too soon because they feel pressure to prove that the powers that be made the right decision in implementing them. I have seen people who wait too long and that is why people start to wonder what is this person doing right? There is no hard and fast rule to do this right. You will never have 100 percent of the information you need to make some key decisions, so you should be comfortable with having 80 to 90 percent of the information you need or the knowledge you need. But the first step is to do what you just did, Lucas, which is recognize that you have to strike the right balance and often, at least for the executives that I work with, you can negotiate that a little bit upfront before you even get there. . "I'm going to go in and do a 45-day evaluation and come back with a summary evaluation and aplan of what I'm going to do," would be an example.

You also need to keep an eye on the currents of the organization to make sure you don't let frustration build too much because you're not taking action. By the way, another strategy is I once had an interview , I interviewed the former CEO of CVS, a large pharmaceutical organization, at that time only in the US, and he said to me: "You know from the beginning, I want to create "It gives the impression that I am decisive, but I have decided not to still decide on some key issues. So what he would do is pick some small things and make some decisions to demonstrate his decision, but also buy some time to engage in the meaning-making process that you're describing.

Final piece, substantively in terms of delivering results, creating alliances, it's really about mapping the stakeholders in the organization. Understanding where you are and what you are trying to do aligns with what other people are trying to do. Understand that there are ways to support other people in what they are trying to do to build relational capital. Looking at the organization's networks, thinking about how you are going to exert influence. Again, great topic, right? Before becoming a business school professor, I was a professor of diplomacy at the Kennedy School of Government, where he researched international negotiations. And so I took a lot of ideas from what great diplomats do in terms of thinking, in terms of alliances and advancing agendas, and I kind of incorporated it into that part of The First 90 Days.

Finally, there is the process of managing yourself. You realize this is underneath everything because it's really about how you manage your energy and yourself during what can be a very exciting but also very stressful time. And for me, a lot of it is about managing energy through that process, but again, there are some things that I think help. Make sure you take the time to step back, reflect and plan, and not completely immerse yourself in things and not gain the necessary perspective. Make sure you focus on the right things. I'm not going to go through the entire list.

Harness and manage your energy and, critically, I think especially at the highest levels, build your advisory network. As someone who works with CEOs in transition, probably the most important thing I do is give them someone who I think is reasonably thoughtful and certainly wants to help. Someone to talk to when they really can't talk to anyone else or have very few people who do. And so for leaders at all levels, I think focusing on making sure you build that advisory network because that will really help you stay balanced and make good decisions as you go through the transition process.

So that's the framework. I guess I would also say that the way I think about this and the way I've tried to implement it is to see it not only as a framework to help individual leaders take on new roles, but also as a framework to help organizations speed up everyone. So the work I do these days is really about implementing this framework as an acceleration system in the context of organizations. Why is this important? Because there are many transitions at any given time in organizations. If I could probe you directly and ask: Do you have anyone who is working for you who is transitioning?

A colleague in transition, a boss in transition? etc Most of you will know of at least one other person's transition that impacts what you are doing, and there may well be several that you know of. And so when you start to look at organizations through the lens of transition, what you see is that there is a sea of ​​things happening all the time. Teams are changing, individual leaders are taking on new roles, there is this constant change today, even more than was known before. And that is at the same time a problem because those transitions can contribute to disruption, loss of knowledge, loss of concentration; but it's also an opportunity because if you can implement this type of framework throughout the organization, you can really accelerate everything that happens in the organization.

Take a step back and think about the impact of transitions on your organizations. There are also critical sets of transitions occurring that may need to be accelerated, so you know a large global sporting goods company that you know is working with has a whole group of senior executives who are simultaneously taking on new roles and we're working. with them to create a process based on our things that will really help them move together into the future and part of that is what you know and, all virtually by the way, part of that is content like this, but it's also group training, Small group coaching is individual coaching, so it can dramatically accelerate not only transitions, but also connections and support networks between groups of executives who are going through transitions in parallel.

So Harvey has a question: "I've been announced for a new role starting January 1, 2021 with a gradual transition until then. It seems dangerous to not have a real start. Are there ways to manage this big transition?" Yeah. So this isn't fun, is it? And it's not especially fun if there's a starter playing your role and you're there as an understudy waiting to take over the role. Obviously I don't know the details, Harvey, of what you're dealing with. So look, regardless of how long it lasts, I think you need to have a formal beginning when the time comes, even if you feel like you've been around forever.

I think you have to tread carefully from the beginning to not get too involved in the decision making unless that's what you're asked to do. It's certainly an opportunity to learn a lot about the role and start making those critical connections with people. Where you don't want to go is a place where there starts to be ambiguity about who is really in charge because, in my experience, that never ends well. And so I would be very careful with that. And then when the time comes, make sure there is a proper formal handover. But there is a moment when it becomes clear that the transition has really occurred.

That would be just a couple of tips I would give you, Harvey. I'm not going to go into this in detail, I think these are just the benefits to both the individual and the organization of implementing these types of transition acceleration systems. So, we're five minutes shy of the hour. If there are any additional questions, I would be happy to address them with Asha. Or any questions that she has that she can answer and let's go into that mode. That was great. Thank you very much Miguel. I was taking notes like slide seven with the vicious cycle and the virtuous cycle of those system dynamics diagrams that resonated with everyone in the room.

That's one of the first classes we took when we got to Sloan, so putting those photos in front of us, I'm sure everyone liked it today. I really like slide 27 on energy. I think, especially in the times we live in and the new normal, it is important that we take care of ourselves. We know how to maintain balance and practice self-care and we're thinking about that. I like the eight points that you listed on that slide. For me, plan, plan, plan was something else that resonated and, you know, the first time I read the book it was listen, listen, listen.

So for me, every time I hear about the book, I listen to it, something else resonates and for me today that's what it was. Well, thank you and I think you know I'm also a big fan of proper planning, but plan, plan, to learn. Plan your learning process well. --yeah-- you know, engage in planning to take advantage, you know what you're trying to do. Be very efficient in your learning, right? Think about how you are going to do that. Be planned and know how you will successfully connect with key stakeholders. Obviously it's a combination of learning and adapting, but planning, Asha, plays a really crucial role.

Here's a question from Priya: "Any advice on how to handle a situation where you are an external candidate who manages to land a job that an internal candidate didn't?" Well, sure. So this happens all the time and it's also often the case that 'congratulations, you're now leading the person who wanted to have the job!' They know everyone, they know the culture, depending on who they are. You know they may be attacking you and wanting you to fail. That definitely happens. So the question is, you have to find out early on if this person can come on board and accept you as a leader.

And you know, you have to try and push that and if the answer is no, then they have to find another role because you will be constantly undermined. But the best of these situations is one where, if they are good, if they are good, of course, you successfully re-enlist them and one way to do that is to show that you care about their advancement, that we are going to help them develop and continue. his career. Because often the number one worry for someone like that is 'oh, my career ended well, I didn't get the job, this person comes from the outside, you know, it's the end.' Then you know there's a bit of an art to knowing when and how to engage in that kind of conversation.

Another question: "How do you approach a transition situation where, after you start, you discover that your boss is on shaky ground with the board?" Running away screaming is my response. I'm kidding, um... very difficult, right? Really difficult. And I agree with you that I've seen situations like this where you know your new boss isn't completely transparent with the fact that he may, in fact, be about to leave. Again, it comes down to building those alliances top-down and side-by-side, doing the job as effectively as possible, and recognizing that you know you'll likely face an uphill battle if your boss leaves and someone new takes the job.

Because you are going to be seen as his person and you have to be careful with that. I've seen situations like that where it wasn't possible for the person to build a successful relationship with the new boss after the boss who hired them failed, you know, he left. I've seen other situations where their value was really recognized and they were given a decent opportunity. A lot of this really depends on who fills that position next. If it happens. But the number one piece of advice I would give you is to do the work. work in the most efficient way possible.

That's so powerful. On that note, with one minute left, Michael, thank you again for joining the Sloan Fellows and teaching us about leadership transitions. Again your books are incredible. I am very happy to welcome you twice this summer. As I mentioned at the beginning of the webinar, we will send an email from the Office of External Relations with a recording and a link to a landing page. That home page will have the slides, recording, and articles that Michael mentioned and are available through HBR. Thank you all. Thanks Asha, take care everyone.