Linked had one of those congratulating posts last week in
reference to the promotion of Nicholds Paula Nicholds to the position of first female MD in John
Lewis.
The theme of the
post was "look a women has worked to the top isn't that great" and to
be fair I suppose to some that's good. Mind you in some ways it degrades her
achievement because if the appointment was to a male than the post wouldn't
have been made. So "she got their despite being a women", which
really I'm sure isn't the message and is probably if you think about it a
little insulting to her undoubtedly excellent achievement. Good on her or him
whoever they are and whatever their gender. John Lewis is a great organisation
and persists in a rapidly changing retail environment a bastion of historic
retail business models some argue the only remaining multi site department store in the UK "Are
you being served" mold - " Bless you Young Mr. Grace".
One point I saw
which I didn't comment on, because I didn't want to be seen to be diminishing
the achievement, or to be negative, was the fact that she has worked in John
Lewis 22 years working her way up from a lowly start in the haberdashery
department, which incidentally is reported she has decided to close. I did
start to consider whether having an MD, a strategic role no less, who had
worked her way up women and girl to this latest role was such a good idea?
Today, I noticed
the announcement of the closure of many Marks and Spencer stores and again saw
a senior manager CEO I believe, a Steve Rowe who had worked in the business
since he was 15 having spent a year break form M&S elsewhere (Top Shop) at
the tender age of 18 before settling into a man and boy career at M&S ; if
the maths are correct that means a service of 30-31 years. Some would argue
that is great- it shows loyalty, inspires others that anything is possible. It
demonstrates an organisation with a career path and a future.
If you study business
change and cultural aspects in particular, then some concerns start to come into
play. Corporate change requires an understanding of culture and whether that
culture is right for the strategy. The longer you work for an organisation the
less culturally aware you become; you see little else and can assume that
everywhere else is the same. Seeing what is wrong and challenging the status-quo is pretty difficult when you know little
else than that your own organisation.
I find in
workshops in general, long service people have great difficulty in understanding
their own corporate culture and whether it is positive or not positive. If an
organisation is set in its ways and cannot change in response to external
drivers then there is a big issue. Topics such as strategic drift, death
spirals and cultural gravity come to mind in this discussion.
If senior people
have not worked anywhere else and have not experienced anything different - are
they perhaps part of the problem? Are they going to come up with strategically
exciting ideas or is it going to be more of the same. In retail which is in its
biggest shake up in its history presently surely walking in the same old
footsteps is not going to provide the innovation needed.
Change leadership
is going to be a real challenge for individuals with such introspective
background unless they are really talented and have capacity for self-analysis
and high levels of reflection. Not commenting on these two names specifically,
most senior people with egos and hubris that goes with the rank are not well
known for those qualities!
The reverse we
often see too, Executives jumping from one organisation to another,
re-engineering slashing and burning, restructuring and leading change. Whatever
their lowly status in their early careers the experience is not in the business
using the operational processes of the business that they now lead.
Many see these
individuals as not knowing their business, inexperienced in the detail and the
mechanics of the operating model. So, too much service or too little what is
the answer.
Probably a mix is the answer; neither too much service nor too
little, or a mix at the senior level with some long service people and some
newbies balanced in the organisational power structure.
Some suggest you appoint
a solid BAU (business as usual) character
in times of stability and a mover and shaker in times of transformation and
hand back to a "Steady Eddie" career long timer after the change. Today though, are we now in continual change; the old Lewin theory of unfreeze - change - refreeze seems a bit "out of touch".
Is retail currently in BAU territory or transformational change? It
has to be the latter.
I still think
appointing someone to the most senior strategical role having worked virtually
nowhere else, with no experience of any other industry too to give you different perspectives is a risky
appointment in such a turbulent time in retail.
Of course these
two may well be the exception and I do sincerely wish them both luck and my respect; time will
tell.
