Monday, June 17, 2013

Four Legacies of a Leader: Which one would you leave behind?

Four Legacies of a Leader: Which one would you leave behind?

There is a yearning in us to leave behind a legacy. Many focus on accumulating wealth and leaving behind property and bank balance. Others focus on their children and try to make them better than themselves. Leaders often think beyond themselves or their children. They think about a legacy that is memorable and whose reach would extend beyond their time.

Legacy of a leader can be of four types: Legacy of buildings, legacy of systems and processes, legacy of people, and legacy of ethical values [1]. 

We see great monuments and buildings that remind us of the leaders. Whether these are the Pyramids of Egypt or Taj Mahal and Qutub Minar in India, or the Süleymaniye Mosque in Turkey, or the Eiffel Tower of Paris, they stand for a long time inspiring people with their architecture and the history of the people who created them.  Buildings are often the first creation of a leader's enterprise and is a reflection of how he wants himself to be remembered.  Taj Mahal as a symbol of love exerts the influence of beauty and perfection through its architecture. 
Ford's Model T Assembly Line

Unlike the building which is rooted in a particular time and place, a system has a life of its own and has the ability to replicate itself and perpetutate itself in other structures and move across time and place, and across cultures. Leaders worrying about continuity of their control processes, establish the legacy of  systems.  Hence, we see the influence wielded by the systems and processes of the assembly line perfected by Henry Ford for the production of Model-T, which was then replicated across industries and which became the signature of the mass production sysem of the Industrial Age.  
British Raj in India

However, systems grow old and processes become outdated unless they are continuously re-engineered, improved, and modified. Eventually, they get replaced when their fundamental assumptions are challenged and exposed by more powerful new assumptions and paradigms. We see the classic text-book example of the bureaucratic system and processes that were imported in India by the British and were improved and perfected for the efficient control of its huge population. At the height of power of British Raj, their bureaucratic system enabled less than ten thousand white Britishers to control the entire population of the huge subcontinent! [Population of India in 1901, excluding princely states, was 210 million spread over an area of 2 million sq km.

Despite having left the subcontinent in 1947, the British legacy of the bureaucratic systems and procedures continue to exist till today. They control our masses by installing an elite class, which is distant and different in its lifestyle from the masses and do not share their aspirations. As the fundamental assumptions of this system are now challenged, the system has lost its ability to improve and sustain itself. Consequently, we see the decadence and deterioration all around us which is beckoning a new crop of leadership to come up and rethink of the fundamental assumptions and to leave a legacy that is nearer to the aspirations of our masses. Note that the Soviet system with its rigid centralized systems and processes, lost its ability to redesign according to the changing environment and thus folded and imploded under its own weight. 

Emphasis on systems and processes indicates a penchant for control of people and reflects a negative view about the human as an unthinking dumb machine part that requires external stimulus, direction and control. Even more important and more powerful than the legacy of systems, is the legacy of the people left by great leaders. Influence of such leaders projects in to the future for several generations because people are intelligent and thinking beings who can redesign the systems or even replace old systems with new systems. Effective leaders nurture the talents of the people around them, give them confidence, and enable the visions of their subordinates to surpass even their visions. Once the heart and minds of the people are opened in this manner, they are on the auto-pilot and they go on to create new institutions, in new places, adapt themselves and their orientation, design new processes and new systems. Built-to-last  corporations and institutions are good at producing inspiring leaders who can take the legacy forward, and can wield huge influence spreading across continents, countries and cultures. 

However, legacy of the people without the foundation of ethical values and principles can not go too far. Smart people who are too much engrossed in here and now in the quest for short term gains create crisis such as the great depression of 1930 or the great economic recession of  2008 where major banks and financial institutions of USA and the world got blinded by the corporate greed and brought the world to the verge of disaster. 

Buildings get destroyed, systems and procedures become obsolete and are replaced, and people die without creating successors. However, principles and values are universal and timeless. Truth, honesty, integrity, conscience, care for the poor, choosing-that-for-others-which-you-would-like-to-be-chosen-for-yourself are among the principles that are eternal. Irrespective of what Machiavellis, Hitlers, Stalins or Blairs would have us believe, lying and cheating will always be defeated by honesty and integrity. When the legacy of people, institutions and systems gets permeated with such timeless principles, they acquire universality and transcendence. Whether it is the exhortation of principles centered leadership, or the emphasis on ethics, the drive is to associate our work with the timeless values. 
Data Ganj Bakhsh's Tomb

The message of truth, principles, and eternal values has a life which on permeating the mindset of people and the systems, imbues them with the characteristics of timelessness and universality. Thus, we see the message of Prophets continues to inspire people over centuries and millennia. Transmission of such values continues through sufi "silsala" (chains) such as the naqshbandis, chishtis, qadris extending over centuries across cultures, languages and continents. 
Janhangir's Tomb

In one of my trips to Lahore when I went to Data Darbar and from there to Jehangir's Mausoleum, I was struck by the contrast. One was alive with people praying, distributing alms, and thronging the  place with respect, day or night, as if in the midst of a perpetual fair. The other was desolate with an eerie silence, quiet with a few tourists trying to take a quick stroll and be out of the premises as quickly as possible. One can see the the contrast between someone who transmitted values and whose legacy is a source of sustenance to millions even after the passage of over ten centuries  and someone who crowned himself as the ruler of the world (jehan-gir). 

Without the principles and values, systems and processes die, buildings die, people die and are forgotten by history, or become footnotes. Many do not even get that small a mention. Many  multinational conglomerates have become transmitters of vices such as exploitation, greed and selfishness as evidenced by the destruction wrecked over environment and poor countries in West Africa (Blood Diamonds), Kenya (ivory trade and pharma), India (spices), Middle East (oil). These vices have robbed the environment of its natural ecosystem and has for the first time in human history brought the earth to the point of self-destruction through global warming and related degradation. This has prompted the business gurus such as Stephen CoveyPeter SingeJim Collins and others to promote once again the concept of values and ethics in promoting principles centered leadership. 

We in Pakistan are looking once again for a leadership that goes beyond buildings, systems and face of people to the values of justice, fairplay and integrity. 

----------------------------------------------

Do not follow where the path may lead. Go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.”
-Ralph Waldo Emerson
_______________________________



[1] Talk of Shamsh Kassim-Lakha, founder president of Aga Khan University and Hospital, at South Asia Strategic Leadership Summit, April 2, 2013. This blog was triggered by this talk.



Related Posts:



Monday, June 10, 2013

Values Based Leadership

How do you become a great leader? Through successes and mistakes, and by staying true to your "four cornerstones" i.e. Values

[Source: Received in an email. Not known]

John Quincy Adams once said, “If your actions inspire others to dream more, learn more, do more and become more, you are a leader.”

His quote, along with tens of thousands of other great quotes on leadership, inspired me to find out more about what defines great leaders and to answer the age-old question of whether they are born or made. I have come to believe that the only innate elements of great leadership are passion and energy. Everything else can be taught. 
Great leadership doesn’t happen overnight. There’s no 6-week course that will suddenly turn you into George Washington or Jack Welch. Great leadership is built brick by brick over many years with each decision and every mistake you make. Done correctly, great leadership stands on a rock solid foundation. 
Within that foundation are four cornerstones. These are the four words that best describe the type of leader you are today. They also represent the type of person and leader you aspire to become. Some cornerstone examples include: Integrity, Gratitude, Decency, Vision and Character. The words are the core of what you stand for as a person and a leader. 

My Four Cornerstones

To give you a better sense of how to select your leadership cornerstones, here are the four I chose for myself over 30 years ago when I was a teenager. I had parents who were also great mentors and showed me the importance of having these stones in place during the formidable years of my life. My four cornerstones are:
  • Character. The mental and moral qualities distinctive to an individual. When you hear someone described as a “person of character,” you get a positive, leadership image.
  • Credibility. The capability of being trusted. As a small-business owner, credibility is a critical element to success. You will lead your company through sometimes murky waters while dealing with larger companies who may hesitate in doing business with a small company whose leader doesn’t possess the utmost credibility. Remember these words: “I can’t do business with you if I can’t trust you.”
  • Integrity. Having strong moral principles. This goes hand in hand with credibility and character. There are times in our business lives when we’ve been offered opportunities that were less than honest. The result may be a leg up on the competition or an easier path. In essence, it’s nothing more than a cornerstone test. We’ve all seen the disgraced leaders in newspapers and on television who failed the cornerstone test. Remember their faces, tears and shame. It’s all a result of a poorly built foundation.
  • Vision. Seeing what others cannot see. I’ve always aspired to be a person who challenges himself to see what others cannot see. This cornerstone is critical in times of crisis when there is no clear path.

Filling in the Foundation

Once you’ve established your four cornerstones, it’s time to fill in the foundation. Select 15 to 20 more words that describe your personal and leadership skills (e.g., excellence, respect, humility and responsibility). Lay these words across your foundation, let them settle in and stay committed to them. 
Just as important as selecting the positive words that represent you as a person and leader are selecting the words you want to avoid, such as: dishonest, conceited, insincere and dictatorial. These words are red flags when they come up in discussion. You not only want to avoid them yourself, but you want to steer clear of other people who embody these words. They will quickly drag you down and keep you from achieving your objectives.

Testing Your Words 

If you want to become a great leader, it’s imperative to gauge how others view you. This is not a popularity contest, but rather a litmus test to see if you are being true to the words you’ve chosen for yourself. What do others say when describing you as a leader? Do their words match your cornerstone words? What about your foundation words? 
Ask your family, friends, colleagues and employees to select three to four words to describe you: a) as a person, and b) as a leader. Which were the most common words used to describe you? Were there any surprises? Are the differences big enough to make you change how you live and lead? 

Wednesday, June 5, 2013

Changing Role of CIO

Changing Role of CIO

Presented at the CIO Summit, May 21-22, 2013, DHA Golf Club Convention Center, Karachi. (Presentation pdf)

We know that we have transited from the industrial age in to the information age. We can put the date of this transition formally to the start of internet revolution in the mid 1990s. What is the impact on workforce when one moves from one age in to another age? To study this impact of change we should look back to the time when we transited from the agriculture age to the industrial age.

One useful parameter is the nature of employment of people. In agriculture age, significant majority was that of farm workers. In the industrial age the significant majority was that of industrial workers.  In early 1900s, in USA, about 70% of the population was farm workers and only 3% were working in the industry. The situation has totally reversed by 1980s when only 3% of population of USA was working in the farms and about 70% of the people were working in the industry. We are now in the midst of the information age. Employees working with information are often called knowledge workers. The shift of the population from the industry workers to knowledge workers is already significant. In information age, only a very small percentage of people around 5% would be industry workers, and 70% and even much more would be knowledge workers.

We can already see the shift. Over the last fifteen years, nature of work in organizations has already changed. Most employees are adept at the use of computers and information technology.  Kids starting from a very early age are born knowledge workers __  Much more proficient and comfortable with mobile phones and computers than their predecessors. It is a common sight to see even a two year old playing with mobile phones. This generation is fundamentally different from its predecessor in the ease with which it lives with the technology and works with it. Gone are the days when the IT department had to convince the higher management about the need for the adoption of the information technology. There is now enough of the pressure from the youth that even die-hard opposers of technology are now forced to change.

There is now widespread use of technologies and platform. Organizations have now fundamentally changed from whatever they were doing to becoming knowledge organizations. Their task has now become to manipulate, process and present data. Their existence has become virtual.  Any organization that fails to see itself and its mission as manipulation, processing and presenting of data in a unique format is destined for oblivion.  It is a matter of life and death for every organization that wants to survive in the information age. The industry is now littered with examples upon examples of organization that failed to see themselves as knowledge processors and were forced to either redefine themselves or to become relics of history.  

Once upon time, we used to consider postal industry to be different from the movie industry, movie industry to be different from the telephone industry, telephone industry to be different from the TV industry, TV industry to be different from the camera industry, camera industry to be different from the computer industry, and computer industry to be different from the telecommunication industry. The boundaries between these industries were dismantled by the information age some fifteen years ago. Only those companies managed to survive who were quick to see themselves as part of the wider knowledge processing industry. The classic distinction of industries and sectors is now obsolete and irrelevant to the economic analysis.
If you don’t see yourself as a knowledge processing industry you are gone. A mobile phone today is a computer, telephone, camera, movie maker, communicator, bank branch, retail outlet, and much more. Anything that you want it to be, even your friendships and family life is now there.

Once upon time there used to be big giant of a bookseller Barnes and Noble. I think it is still there trying to define itself in terms of internet and identity. They did not know from where they were hit. They were sitting smug, not realizing that a virtual competitor called amazon.com came from nowhere and took the central stage in the book selling business. Not content to selling of only the books, amazon had redefined itself as a general retailer as well and is now redefining itself as IT solutions and infrastructure provider.

Microsoft today is not being challenged by a computer company but a search engine on the internet.

In 1997 Encyclopedia Britannica with its over 200 years history was sitting smug. Some diehard crazy individuals thought they could create an Encyclopedia with volunteers and unpaid knowledge workers.  We can give some license to Britannica they were in a different field. But what about Microsoft and its Encarta Encyclopedia. That also got started in 1997. Even they could not foresee the trend. In 2012 officially Encarta division of Microsoft was shutdown. Britannica after its illustrious reign of several centuries starting in 1776 stopped its print business and was forced to simply exist only as an online business. Both a computer giant Microsoft and the print encyclopedia giant Britannic were forced out by a collaborative encyclopedia site that was free and developed by unpaid volunteers, Wikipedia. Newsweek, the big name in the weekly publications established in 1933 was forced to shut down  in 2012. Many other big names in the newspaper industry are already gone. Unable to survive the challenge from the online news.

We have the example of Nokia whose emergence, reaching the status of giant and whose decline has been so rapid. Similar is the case of blackberry now trying its best to survive from the challenge from a company that never classified itself in the mobile business, google.

I am giving these examples to show that if you do not envision yourself as a knowledge processor in the IT domain your existence is threatened. You are doomed.

Let me now give you the example. There are these monster enterprises over the world established over the last few centuries that think they control the generation and production of knowledge. They are known as universities. They think that their biggest assets are their buildings and their campuses. Even the most progressive of government organizations such as the HEC in its latest criteria thinks that the quality of a university is its campus and its physical facilities. They are now sadly out of sync with what has been now labeled as the “avalanche” which is hurtling down the mountain and which is going to shatter all the long held beliefs about the universities and their quality criteria about how to create and disseminate knowledge. How can this not be!

When the majority of the population is a knowledge worker, when all their day they are working with knowledge, creating knowledge, manipulating knowledge, presenting knowledge, then the role of a secluded physical space where the same would be done and would be considered value addition is questionable. Let me pronounce today.

University as we see it today is doomed. Let me tell you how. It is very simple. Whom do you think would take on the role of a university? The primary role of the university is to certify that such and such knowledge processing task i.e. subject has been passed by the student.  I think this kind of certification could easily be done by a company like LinkedIn.  An individual can already endorse the project work of a person on the net. An organization or its authorized representative can then do this endorsement.  Supposing a student does 40 projects for reputable companies like IBM, Engro, Lever , TPS, etc and has to its credit on his linkedin account endorsement from such companies. Each project may correspond in its nature to a relevant course required for a degree. Would you consider this endorsement of practical project much more valuable than an endorsement by a university teacher?

I will give you another example, supposing a student has done 40 courses through MOOCs conducted by the faculty of Stanford, MIT and Berkley. Would you consider their endorsement as more powerful than an endorsement of a university with its ordinary teachers. Same is true by the generation of knowledge. Previously it used to be the domain of specialized labs. Today these labs data is available on line to volunteers and online analysts to study and churn out results. There is democratization of knowledge creation all around. There are now more wonderful and exciting learning environments available on line than with any other teacher. For universities to survive they need to redefine their expertise and leverage the internet to be one step ahead of the technology. Their inability to do this would render themselves to be obsolete and irrelevant to the fast pace of change. 4 years is a terribly long time in the information age to gain any expertise where a technology from its introduction to its zenith and its obsolescence covers the entire product life cycle in a few years.

I have been giving these example to show that the role of CIO is now different. The other day I called the CIO of the university where I work and gave him a number of papers on this avalanche which is about to hit the existence of universities. I told him to develop a business strategy for the institute and assume the role of a leader who can guide the higher management about the trends and the followings in different areas. He fortunately had already done a MOOC from a Stanford Professor and was knowledgeable about what was happening. However, my challenge was to tell him that his role is much more than to oversee the implementation of PeopleSoft and ensuring that the organization moves towards a campus management system and an ERP.

The role of CIO is now that of a person who monitors the changing trends in the industry and not just in a particular industry but all around. The next challenge to your organization may be from a very different player that you may not have thought about. Who would have thought that Telenor with EasyPaisa would be a threat to the Western Union and a Commercial inter-bank transfer.

The other challenge is to understand that the employees may be more expert in the technology than even the IT workers. Their knowledge and expertise in particular areas may surpass that of the expertise in the IT department. They would probably be more interested in selecting for themselves  the particular application and features. A role that was previously with the CIO. This power will now go the consumer departments. There is more democratization of the power. Functional features and their ownership and requirements would now be the domain of the consumer departments.

The other is that CIO may be the person looking at the big picture involving non-functional features such as integration, scalability, reliability, maintainability, security, extensibility, performance etc.

As you can see from the topics of the sessions in this summit the issues now involve organization wide data and its long term use. The existence of the organization in the virtual domain, very well termed now as the cloud. We will now all be living in the cloud. The days of living on the earth where our feets are firmly planted on the ground are over. Our existence and our future is now up in the clouds.


The bargaining power of the CIO now has to change. He must be able to articulate the non-functional requirements of the various “ity”-s in the form of business strategy and business terminology. These non-functional “ity”-requirements include reliability, extensibility, maintainability, modularity, testability, availability, etc.  He needs to be the owner of the virtual existence of the company. The designer of the virtual existence of the organization in the cloud and owners of the expertise and knowledge of the organization in the form of big data.

See Also: