 |
Publisher: HarperAudio; Unabridged edition (November 12, 2002)
ISBN: 006052944X
Most public-policy leaders will probably see little reason
to pick up this book. They will assume it is about technology
or about Gerstner’s personal story of his tenure at IBM.
They are wrong. It is about leading complex change – moving
from the current failing state of affairs to an uncertain but
desired and effective future state. Government leaders dealing
with such things as restructuring school systems, pension programs,
redesigning homeland security, national intelligence capabilities
or national cultures should read this book before taking another
step
This is a book about the natural resistance to change and
the complexities of dealing with established cultures. It concentrates
on clearly defining the focus of an organization or society
(why it exists) and on how it works (principles not processes).
Most importantly, it recognizes the attainment of desired results
as the highest objective.
A criticism of the Public Governance Institute is that we can
sound too abstract. “How does this apply to my world?”
is a common refrain. The same is frequently said of private-sector
consultants working in the world of complex corporate change
projects. The message implied in this wonderful book, and by
the management gurus of the corporate world, is that leadership
of change is a fundamental of everyday business; whether or
not one works in the private or public sector. Effective leaders
of public policy are little different than their corporate counterparts,
and this book rams that message home.
Although once a consultant, Gerstner avoids an abstract tone.
He tells a simple story about the dynamics of complex change.
For public-sector readers, these private-sector dynamics can
easily be translated into the public-sector world.
The IBM Gerstner agreed to lead was probably in much worse shape
than most people realized. The media (we are talking early 1990’s
here) was reporting that the upstart kings of the desktop computer
were leaving IBM behind. It was “bleeding cash”,
in Gerstner’s words. Insiders were deep into the planning
process to break the corporation into what they believed would
be viable, but smaller, stand-alone corporations. It seems laughable
today to think that at one time Gerstner reports they had seventy
advertising companies fighting over new names and images for
these future mini-IBMs.
Sounds a lot like some of the squabbles one hears at any government
debate about reorganizations and effectiveness. One group argues
to breakup the failures, the next tries to consolidate the failures
to make a single effective entity. “Do what?!” Gerstner
might ask.
Gerstner was an unlikely candidate to head IBM. He came from
RJR Nabisco, which itself was doing poorly – complexities
of leveraged buyouts, etc. He’d previously headed American
Express’s card division and oversaw great expansion of
the business, but he wasn’t recruited to the IBM job because
he knew technology; he didn’t, or because he was a finance
wiz-kid; he wasn’t. He was recruited because he had the
image of being an effective leader of change. Oddly, the Board
that hired him did not even have a plan to save the giant, they
just knew that business as usual meant the death of IBM.
Gerstner clearly communicates the value of committed leadership
and why single speeches or memos never get the job done. He
understands why strategy and effective execution are more important
than process. Early in his career at IBM he held a news conference
where he was asked about his long-term “Vision”.
He made news that shocked the business world for days by saying
he was not concerned about vision. What becomes clear after
learning about the plight of IBM when he arrived is that he
had a much higher imperative to act without a new vision. Either
the company radically reduced cost, priced its products competitively
to stop losing market-share and made better use of its personnel
or it was going to sink. Survival trumped vision, but only in
the short run. Within a year he was concentrating on a new vision
that went beyond simple survival and towards market dominance.
Public-policy leaders have to address these same issues. In
the US the question of the month is: How do you reorganize leadership
of federal intelligence operations so you avoid or thwart future
terrorist attacks? Decisions makers should pause and understand
key points of Gerstner’s message. One has to understand
what change means in terms of resistance, commitment, leadership,
how one can control consequences (rewards) for those who adopt
change within the new plan and how one sanctions (punishes)
bad behaviors. One has to be objective and not just compromise
with resistance, which will accompany all change.
In short order, Gerstner realized that focusing on what
to do was undermined if one did not focus as much or more on
how to get things done. In the long run, he
reversed most of the radical change ideas that existed when
he arrived and took on a much larger and more complex change
than anyone anticipated: He opted to change the culture of IBM.
This meant attacking the old bureaucracy, not just getting rid
of the white-shirt, blue-suit mentality. It entailed rebuilding
a new structure refocused on the needs of the customers, on
effectiveness and on profitability.
Every observation in his book has a direct application to the
public arena, if public-policy makers will take time to see.
The public sector is different, but the humans inside react
to the same motivations and face the same structural hurdles
as their corporate comrades. The needs of the country call for
change just as much as the needs of stockholders in a corporation.
Review by Jerry Climer,
based on the unabridged audio version.
August 2004
|
