June 28, 2010

What are Your Strengths? How to Identify Your Strengths

"What are your strengths?" is one of the most common job interview questions and difficult to answer. Prepare before the interview by using simple guidelines to identify your strengths.Before you can answer the job interview question "What are your strengths?" you need to understand your specific strengths.strengths.(Original Source :http://www.best-job-interview.com/what-are-your-strengths.html)
What is a strength?
A strength can be defined as a combination of talent, behavior, skills and knowledge that you apply consistently to produce a successful result. To identify your strengths you need to look at four criteria. What activities make me feel involved and engaged? Ask yourself these questions:
When I am busy with this activity do I think about other things and when it will be over or am I totally concentrated on the task at hand? Do I look forward to doing this activity again?
What are my spontaneous reactions to the situation and activity? Ask yourself:
When do I feel a sense of "rightness" and enjoyment? What activities give me a sense of satisfaction? What activities consistently produce the desired results?

Ask yourself:
Where do I perform at a high level?
What provides a consistent pattern of successful results?
What seems to be done well and effortlessly?
Where and when do I experience rapid learning?
Ask yourself:
What activities and tasks have I been able to learn quickly?
In what areas and activities have I experienced quick insight and understanding?
Use the strengths-finder list below to identify possible activities/skills/knowledge-areas/behaviors that can be translated into strengths by answering the questions above.
What are Your Strengths?

1.activating, adapting, administering, analyzing, arranging
2.budgeting, building, briefing, balancing
3.communicating, controlling, co-ordinating, creating, checking
4.deciding, detailing, developing, directing, devising
5.empathizing, evaluating , examining, explaining
6.finding, fixing, formulating, finalizing
7.guiding, gathering, generating
8.helping, handling, hosting
9.imagining, implementing, influencing, initiating, innovating, improving
10.judging
11.keeping
12.learning, listening, locating, launching
13.managing, mentoring, monitoring, motivating
14.negotiating, navigating
15.observing, organizing, overhauling
16.persuading, planning, preparing, presenting, problem-solving
17.questioning, qualifying
18.researching, resolving, reporting, recording, repairing
19.scheduling, selling, setting -up, supervising, simplifying, speaking
20.teaching, team-work, trouble-shooting, training, tracking
21.understanding, uniting, upgrading, updating
22.verbalizing, volunteering, verifying
23.writing, working

If it feels good when you are performing an activity the chances are that you are using a strength. Your strengths are things that come naturally and relatively easily to you.
Once you have identified your strengths it is important to understand what they mean on a practical, work-related level in order to answer the question What are Your Strengths?. Relate your strengths to the tasks and activities involved in the job you are interviewing for.
What are your strengths and weaknesses? - sample

The Philip Kotler interview


Few people have dominated a single business discipline as surely as Philip Kotler has dominated marketing. His book, Marketing Management, is the definitive marketing textbook and has been read by students for the last 40 years.
His most recent book is Chaotics (with John Caslione) which provides a new take on the economic downturn. Philip Kotler talked with Stuart Crainer in London.
Q:With success comes responsibility. Do you ever feel daunted by the sheer reach of Marketing Management which is now in its thirteenth edition?
I've been gratified that it's adopted in all countries by graduate schools of management. The concern is that if my formulation of the discipline of marketing is wrong, I've set back the world.
So far, many attempts have been made to build another version of marketing and they all have failed. Apparently, I am able to sense the next set of ideas and I put them in just before someone else hits those ideas.
Q:What first ignited your interest in marketing in the first place because it's been a lifetime's passion?
I am trained as an economist and it was what was missing from economics that led me into marketing. I studied under Milton Friedman and became a monetarist and a free market thinker at the University of Chicago and then I went to MIT and I studied under two Keynesians who won Nobel prizes -- Bob Samuelson and Robert Solow.
But I began asking whether economists are in touch with the marketplace? Are they of any help in decisions like, how many salesmen should I have? What should I spend on advertising and what about media mixes and so on? These subjects are not part of the economist's mindset.
I got into thinking that maybe I should look at the books written on marketing. At that time they were very good and all ran to 800 pages but they were primarily descriptive – what is a salesman and what is a wholesaler?
I decided to recast marketing on the basis of what we know about economic theory, organisational theory, consumer psychology and mathematics and those basic disciplines supported a whole new look at the field of marketing.
Q:It's easy to forget that marketing was a fledgling discipline at that time.
It really started in the 1910s, the word marketing, because we always had the word market. It went through some interesting stages, in fact, we could read some of the old marketing books and remember things we've forgotten.
For example, there is a very good book by Beckwith back in the forties about credit and how credit should be disciplined because if you are too generous in lending money to people who won't pay it back, you could have a bust. One would find some treasures in some of the old books where they spotted things that we've forgotten about.
Q:How do you stay fresh – you have written about marketing from virtually every angle?
I read outside of marketing because some of the best ideas are in quantum physics and look at what we are doing with nano-technology and so on.
One of the things that I am proud of is broadening the concept of marketing. Previously it was only about selling goods or services and I said, my God, we have the tools to sell causes, like say no to drugs and don't smoke, and then we got into marketing personalities, bands, singers who wanted to get high visibility and we could market places that want more tourists, want more industry or factories. Broadening the concept of marketing was one of my pleasures.
Q:You are still doing that.
Yes. I have a book on museum marketing and strategy, I have a book on educational marketing and a book on performing arts marketing.
Q:Which other marketing thinkers do you admire because when we do our Thinkers 50 ranking, you are always the top marketing guy.
I still have to put Peter Drucker at the head because although we think of him as the father of management, I think of him as the grandfather of marketing.
He said that the purpose of a company is to create customers and then he went on to say that the two most important functions of a business are innovation and marketing, all the rest are costs. That influenced a lot of my thinking.
Then within marketing there has been Ted Levitt at Harvard with his marketing myopia, his globalisation article and a number of other things. There have been some very good original thinkers both outside of the field of marketing who gave us some sense of things, like Marshall McLuhan about media, but inside the field there are a lot of great people.
Q:Your most recent book is called 'Chaotics'. It comes out at a time, obviously, of turbulence and recession, which is often a time when HR budgets and marketing budgets are the first in line to be questioned and then cut.
Yes and we have talked about what marketers and businesses should do during hard times when the cycle is in the down phase and usually it's spelled out, cut your budgets and cut everything by 20 per cent.
This, to me, is the biggest mistake because every company is winning through some virtue that it has. One company may be best at service; if you cut 20 per cent of everything in a service-minded company that means we get less service from them, and have less of a reason to prefer them.
We need very selective cunning but the truth is there are some companies that ought to welcome the recession as a time when there is enough dis-equilibrium to make new opportunities.
I love companies that see the opportunity side rather than the danger side of a recession. I think it was Ryanair where they said, finally, a recession, now we can really go after the big guys.
Q:It is a difficult message because people aren't very comfortable with turbulence and uncertainty, naturally.
Yes and we distinguish, by the way, between the business cycle phase and turbulence. Turbulence will exist even after the business cycle is over and we want to see turbulence as a set of spikes of varying sizes that are disturbances to a business.
We believe that we are headed for heightened turbulence. With globalisation and digitalisation, businesses will be hit faster by more disruptions and interruptions and so on than ever before. I keep telling CEOs, be reachable wherever you are.
Companies have to know when their strategy has decayed and is not working. There is a concept we have called Strategic Inflection Points. General Motors had one about 15 to 20 years ago. That is to say their strategy was dying and they kept to it and now we know that they failed completely.
Q:You also talk about hyper-competition, which I know Richard D'Aveni talked about in the 1980s and 1990s but that does now seem to be reality.
That is a major factor in the turbulence we are seeing and experiencing. There are three things, actually. There are business cycles which we can predict. There is secular change where an industry is absolutely changing the rules -- like the way online is taking over our newspapers and other traditional media.
Airlines went through that secular change when we began to get discount airlines. Then there is this third thing: there are more spikes and the question is how companies should prepare for this.
We believe that they need things such as an early warning system, scenario planning and flexible budgeting. Until those processes and systems are put in place their ability to cope with changes, sudden and otherwise, will hurt them.
Q:Something like scenario planning has been around for a long time.
It actually started with the military because they have to imagine scenarios, but we are at a stage now where the uncertainty level is so great that we also have to imagine some of the things that could happen. We distinguish between undetectable turbulence and detectable turbulence.
The early warning system takes care of things we should have noticed anyway but we have to imagine what is the worst that could happen? What would make us a house of cards so we would just fall apart? We don't know the probabilities, but let's at least loosen our minds and think out of the box, what might hurt us?
We can do the same with opportunities. What is the best that we could imagine? How would we take advantage of it if it happens? I am talking about thought exercises, I am not talking about you choose one scenario and say that is the one we are going to have and we are going to use the response to that scenario.
We don't know which one of them will work but what we learn in the process of trying to build scenarios has been invaluable.
Q:We are in a period of unprecedented turbulence do you feel optimistic? Yes. I think we have bottomed out in some places, in many places, actually. They talk about green sprouts being noticed. I think if I were in Asia I would be more optimistic because what I saw on this last trip was very great resilience in places like Indonesia and China. They are complaining in China that they were expecting a 10 per cent growth rate in GDP and it is 8 per cent. We would love to hit 4 per cent or even 2 per cent.
I think Britain and the US have people with unbelievable creativity and skills so I think we will see an up trend. I think it is going to be slow – I am waiting for 2010 to see if there is a real pick up.
Q:Do you think marketing is heading in the right direction with people understanding it more and it being practiced more professionally? It is a good question because marketing to so many people means advertising or it means hard selling. The imagery is very bad. But when it is practised beautifully…
You have an example of it in Tesco and the way with its club cards it can learn so much more about what different groups of people in its community want and how Tesco could address those different groups. Marks & Spencer picked itself up from a bad situation through good marketing thinking and Richard Branson is always full of new ideas -- the talent pool is incredible.
I have to rewrite my marketing management book every three years because so much new has happened. I told a CEO who wanted me to sign his book that I couldn't do it because he is still working on the first edition of "Marketing Management" and it's well thumbed.
I said, do you like the chapter on the Internet? He says, you're joking. I said, did you use the concepts of brand equity, customer equity and customer lifetimes? He said, that's not in the book, are you trying to sell me a new book? I said, yes, for your sake.
Marketing changes, it's not geometry; geometry hasn't changed for 2,000 years. That's why I keep getting this excited and why I enjoy it.

Increasing confidence as more staff jump ship

The US jobs market is still a long way from being as buoyant as it was before the recession. But it's a significant sign of returning confidence that more Americans quit their jobs in the past three months than were laid off - and the first indication for employers that they could soon be experiencing a stampede for the exit as their top performers quit in droves for better opportunities elsewhere.
google_protectAndRun("render_ads.js::google_render_ad", google_handleError, google_render_ad);
After 15 months in which layoffs exceeded voluntary departures, official figures from the US Department of Labor show that the number of people quitting their jobs in April rose to almost 2 million compared with just 1.75 million who were laid off - the lowest number since January 2007.
Almost a million (982,000) private-sector jobs have been created this year, the figures showed. And while that's still a long way from enough to replace the 8 million that have vanished as result of the recession, the number of people willing to quit of their own volition is a clear sign t5hat confidence - and opportunities - are returning.
Just how profound the implications for this could be is spelled out in a report by the Corporate Executive Board (CEB), a research and advisory services company, which claims that a quarter of companies' top performers plan to leave their current job within a year, a far higher figure than the heady days of 2006 when the proportion was just 10 per cent.
The study also revealed that one in five employees identify themselves as "highly disengaged", a three-fold rise since 2007 and a direct reflection on the way employees feel they have been treated since the recession took hold.
Sylvia Ann Hewlett, author of Top Talent: Keeping Performance Up When Business Is Down, said that many top performers feel neglected and taken for granted. In addition, many of them are struggling by working in companies with broken business models.
"Imagine being in a company within the financial sector right now — or the pharmaceutical industry or maybe the media industry.
"There is massive turbulence in those entire industries, and those working in such companies feel that they're not involved in figuring out how to help move their company forward. They also feel that somehow they're not nearly as important as they used to be. They're struggling by working within depleted teams, given that many of their peers might have been fired over the last couple of years.
"My sense is that 50 per cent of the workforce is spending more than half of their time looking for their next job," she added.
"And keep in mind that the top performers are the most mobile, the ones who can get new jobs easily."
And if companies face a very real flight risk, they shouldn't think that offering their top performers better career prospects internally is necessarily the answer, either.
The CEB's research, which included a recent survey of 20,000 high-potential employees in more than 100 organizations worldwide, also reveals that nearly four out of 10 internal job moves made by people identified as high-potential employees end in failure.
"Organizations are at a real risk of losing their most talented employees as disengagement levels increase, the economy recovers and the labor market warms up," said The CEB's Conrad Schmidt.
"It is paramount that companies act now, not only to re-engage and retain high-potential employees, but to re-evaluate and shore up their succession plans and preserve leadership development within their organizations."

May 21, 2010

Steven Spear on high velocity organisations

It's a fast paced world we live in. Blink and the competition has stolen a march, and disappeared along the fast lane leaving you languishing on the hard shoulder. So how are corporate leaders to keep up?
Steven Spear senior lecturer at MIT, and an expert on how exceptional organisations can create competitive advantage through the strength of their internal operations, has an answer - high velocity organisations.
The author of The High-Velocity Edge: How Market Leaders Leverage Operational Excellence to Beat the Competition talked to Des Dearlove.
How would you describe a high velocity organisation?
In the book I write about companies succeeding over many years, sometimes decades, in even the most hypercompetitive markets. Given the intense rivalry in these markets, no one should get a lead, and if they do then others should overtake them. But these high velocity companies, as people start to close the gap, come up with another good idea about what the market needs, what to offer the market, and how to deliver it, and they keep running away. So they're the firms setting the pace – leaving it to everyone else to try and catch up.
Can you name some of the high velocity organisations you looked at in your research?
When I first started my research, I looked at Toyota. Toyota not only maintained a lead over its rivals, but widened the lead. It kept advancing quality and productivity, entered new regions, expanded its product portfolio, adding new brands like Lexus, and at the time was on the cusp of introducing new technology like the Prius hybrid. It just kept running away from the field.
Other companies that had continued to create and then widen a gap in hypercompetitive markets included Southwest Airlines in commercial aviation in the United States, and Alcoa, in heavy industry.
You spent some time at a Toyota supplier in the US. What did you discover?
Toyota realised a long time ago that it has these very, very complex systems. The car is complex, the equipment to make the car is complex, the factory is complex, the supply network is complex.
And it kept discovering that as much as it invested in trying to design these complex systems, it designed very imperfect systems. But there was discovery over time where it realised that if it couldn't design perfect systems, it had to constantly, relentlessly discover perfection.
If you can't see the subtlety, the nuance, and the details of how work gets done, you're likely to miss opportunities to get better. But if you really train yourself, starting with what's going on in the truck, and then working your way to much more sophisticated situations, more nuanced situations, you have a chance to gain insight and convert what you don't understand into knowledge which is useful.
Are there some characteristics and universal principles that apply across the board?
Sure. It's rooted in the problem people have, particularly when working in large groups that no matter how smart they are, how much effort they invest, they're going to design something complex and it's going to be broken. The problem is they just don't know how.
The folks at these high-velocity organisations are optimistic, though, in the sense that they believe that if they can see the problems and see them quickly, they can solve those problems. So, the very first capability or principle here is that work is designed in these high-velocity organisations so that the problems are immediately evident when and where they occur.
Anything else? The second capability is that when problems present themselves, these organisations don't just say that's normal, it always happens, and then work around the problem - cope and compensate.
When they see problems, they swarm them very aggressively, and with tremendous discipline, they understand the root cause of the problem, develop a treatment, and then follow up to make sure the treatment works. And if it does, they realise they've converted something which they didn't understand - that's why they had the problem - into something which they do understand.
How do you use that knowledge for the organisation's benefit?
Once they've got this little pocket of knowledge, the most sophisticated organisations realise that if you've had ignorance in one place, you probably have the same ignorance laced throughout your system. If you can get a multiplier effect by spreading what's learned locally in a disciplined fashion and make it systemically useful, then you get this huge return on your investment in solving the problem.So the third capability of these high-velocity organisations is tremendous discipline around knowledge sharing.
What about leadership in this context?
Well the fourth capability is leadership. The conventional wisdom on what a leader does is that they make decisions, they delegate other decisions, they give commands, they enforce them, and they ensure compliance. But at Toyota when I asked people to tell me about the best leader they've ever had, every single person told me a story about a leader they had, at some point, who took the time and effort to teach them how to be a great learner in their right, and how to teach others to do the same.
So this different style of leadership also sets the high velocity organisations apart?
That's right. When people say, what's difficult about this? The tools are not the hard part. There are hundreds if not thousands of people who can sell you the tools. The hard part is the leadership model. With high-velocity organisations, their whole operating system is based on the premise that the job of a leader is to find ignorance, convert it to knowledge, and teach others to do the same. So to convert a company from a typical company into a high-velocity fundamentally demands that leaders change their posture and their approach from telling other people what to do, to helping other people discover and, when in doubt, leading the way on discovery. And the thing about leading the way on discovery, the very first step is raising your hand and saying, I just don't understand.
Although we don't know the full details behind what has happened at Toyota recently, what do you think might have been the issue?
Toyota has become extraordinarily successful based on a model of developing people to be very agile learners, so that the products and the processes got much better more quickly than anyone else in the industry could manage. That development of people depends on a very intimate coaching process, and that coaching process has had more and more demands placed on it as Toyota's business expanded through the 1980s and 1990s. The real challenge is maintaining the intimacy and continuity of those coaching mentor apprenticeship relationships and developing enough people fast enough. I certainly do not think it invalidates Toyota's approach towards achieving greatness; what it says is that achieving greatness is rate limited and the critical processes that are the rate limiters are the processes you use to develop people.

Leader or manager?

Too many people still confuse strong leadership with good management and vice versa. So I thought I would provide some simple guidelines and examples to differentiate between the two and determine whether an individual is either or both
Wikipedia cites 12 clear distinctions between good managers and strong leaders, but I'd just like to concentrate on four of them and put those into some kind of context.
Leaders focus on people, whilst managers focus on systems.
Leaders do the right thing, whilst managers do things right.
Leaders inspire trust, whilst managers rely on controls.
Leaders originate, whilst managers imitate.
We can all cite examples of strong leaders, but how many of us can do the same for good managers?
Leaders and managers don't necessarily come out of the same bucket, and yet in business and commerce it is often taken as given that good leaders and strong managers are one and the same.
But did Alexander The Great develop and execute military campaigns which are still considered mandatory reading by the military strategists of today, by concentrating on systems, imitating others and doing things right? Did Ernest Shackleton give considered thought to his chances of survival in sailing 800 miles in an open boat in the Southern Ocean, from Elephant Island to South Georgia?
In 1945, Winston Churchill was beaten comprehensively by Clement Atlee in the UK general election because the country wanted a manager, not an inspirational leader. And what was it that drove Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela to pursue similar goals which, at the time, were deemed impossible to achieve?
If these men are considered amongst the great leaders of our time, then what makes them so and do they also qualify as good managers? I suspect that the answer is probably not, because inspiration and originality and organisation and planning are strange bedfellows.
For example, Alexander's legacy was not the longevity of his empire, but the cultural influences which remained as a result of his conquests. Had he planned this? If Ernest Shackleton had been a better planner and organiser, would the Endurance have been crushed in the ice and the survivors stranded; prompting his heroic rescue?
Had Winston Churchill, an inspirational but disorganised leader, not replaced Neville Chamberlain, a capable manager and skilled organiser, at the start of the World War II, would Britain have been defeated by Germany?
And what of Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela? Did either of them conclude that campaigns of violence and terrorism would have been less successful than the campaigns of non-cooperation and non-violence they opted for? And was this inspired and original thinking, executed with organisation and planning, or was this just a case of doing the right thing at the right time?
The answer, I suspect, is that it is a little bit of both. Being a good leader isn't something that you take out of a textbook or a training manual. Becoming a good leader, in whatever circumstances, is ingrained within us, should we choose to look for it and release it. It's just that, more often than not, our employers and superiors would prefer us to act more as capable managers than inspirational leaders, because leaders tend to challenge the status quo.
Managers, after all, are there to manage - and it's always easier to recognise, assess and evaluate those who manage versus those who lead. As Paul Birch, in his book 'Instant Leadership' suggests, managers concern themselves with tasks, whilst leaders concern themselves with people.
And yet history will again prove that in turbulent times and periods of uncertainty, people everywhere will look towards those who lead, as opposed to those who manage, for their own inspiration.

May 19, 2010

What Are Some Career Options in Supply Chain Management?

What Are Some Career Options in Supply Chain Management?
Because Supply Chain Management covers every component of the business cycle, from production to customer service, those interested in a career in Supply Chain Management have many job roles to choose from. Read on for a description of a few career options.
According to careersinsupplychain.org, a web site created by the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP), there is a wide variety of career options in Supply Chain Management. Here are just a few.
Supply Chain Analyst
Many begin a career in Supply Chain Management by obtaining a position as a Supply Chain analyst. Supply Chain analysts use quantitative and analytical skills to gather and interpret data about demands, productivity and costs. They use analysis to help improve and predict Supply Chain Management processes. Working for Supply Chain members such as manufacturers, logistics service providers and retailers, Supply Chain analysts also:
Investigate problems and find causes and solutions
Create performance reports
Monitor the compliance of logistics service providers
Customer Service Manager
Customer service managers help meet the needs of customers by directing the actions of customer service employees. They make sure that order entries are accurate and products are delivered to customers quickly and efficiently. Customer service managers also:
Create processes to identify and resolve customers' problems
Create and evaluate standards for customer service
Work with transportation, logistics and marketing and sales departments to fulfill customers' orders while controlling costs
Warehouse Operations Manager
Warehouse operations managers control and direct the operations of warehousing or distribution centers. They manage the inbound activities of receiving of goods and managing inventory; they also manage the outbound activities of fulfilling and shipping orders. Warehouse operations managers also:
Create procedures for housekeeping, safety and security
Hire, train and supervise warehouse employees
Manage productivity
Supply Chain Software Manager
Supply Chain software managers design software tools that measure and help increase productivity. They manage distribution technology such as warehouse operations systems, order taking systems and electronic communication systems. Supply Chain software managers also:
Develop software solutions for business areas such as transportation, customer service, warehousing and production planning
Incorporate supply chain information into a company's databases
Provide general computer support

May 7, 2010

Interview with Michael Shermer on skepticism and evidence based management


Michael Shermer is an adjunct professor in economics at Claremont Graduate University, founder of the Skeptics Society, chief editor of Skeptic Magazine and (co)author of many books and articles that take on everything from the existence of Bigfoot to Intelligent Design and why people believe in such phenomena. Recent publications include The Mind of The Market. He is also contributing editor and monthly columnist for Scientific American, and is the host of the Skeptics Distinguished Lecture Series at Caltech. Managementsite.com interviews him about skepticism in general and the emergence of evidence based management in particular.

The Skeptics Society is inspired by the philosophies of great thinkers, like the 16th Century Dutch philosopher and lens grinder Baruch de Spinoza, who tried to understand human nature throughout his life and the 20Century theoretical physicist Albert Einstein, who said all our science is child play and primitive compared to reality, but it is the most precious thing we have. Skepticism is a method, not a position. Skeptics are not cynical.
Richard: On the English Wikipedia entry about you, there is the following statement: I became a skeptic on Saturday, August 6th, 1983, on the long climbing road to Loveland Pass, Colorado….I got the impression you had an epiphany. Like you denounced everything you believed in previously and chose the scientific method. Like a conversion to science. What happened on the mountain?

Useful Links

Google

SICOMS

OPAC

E-Journals

Open J-gate