The Four Secrets of Choosing Management Development Programmes

Have you been tasked with choosing a management or leadership development programme for your people? Are you uncertain about what to look for? What are the pros and cons of sending your people to a hotel for a five day residential or a back to business school?

Follow these four simple steps to ensure you make the right choice:

1. Choose a programme that produces business results. Why do you want your people to become better leaders and managers? So that they create stronger business results. A course that does not produce results will not justify the expenditure. Choose a course that produces tangible results in your business from the very first seminar – after all, why wait to see the ROI?

The material covered in Governing Change can be turned into results quickly. This is why my interest remained for days 1-6. The theory can be put into practice and, to paraphrase my own presentation, I have the results to prove it.
Tim Palin, The Metal Centre

2. Look for robust, proven content. If your people are going to create real results, they’ll need practical input which they can implement quickly and effectively. It will be hard for your people to call complex models and abstract theories to mind when they are under pressure – and when they are under pressure is precisely when they’ll need to use what they’ve learned from the course they’re attending.

For any manager it bears relevance to their principal objectives for success. Every session had content that I could relate to my everyday working environment and equipped me with the tools to improve myself and my team between each session.
Jane Bradshaw, Gould Alloys

3. Insist on a structure which demands that delegates implement what they are learning back in the workplace, and supports them in doing so. The best structure for this is a day a month. That way delegates can experiment in modifying their approach, create results, report their progress back to their group, and build their understanding over five or six months, rather than attending a three day event and then not implementing half of it and forgetting the rest.

Anyone in management, no matter what level of experience they have, will learn from this course. This is not a course where you go away feeling inspired but then never apply what you’ve learned. The course forces you and supports you in developing your skills.
Sophie Davies, Victim Support

4. Ensure that the programme is run by people who are expert in developing the leadership and management capabilities of others, rather than experts from your particular industry, who may have little to impart other than a dressed up version of their autobiography.

A 6 month Mitchell Phoenix management programme that, frankly, changed my life. It broadened my outlook and since completing it my enthusiasm soared and the techniques he showed us to deal with difficult or sensitive management challenges have been invaluable to me, and of course my business.
Ian Ford, Watts Group

Finally, if you are looking to develop not only a group of individuals, but the whole culture of your organisation, choose a development initiative which is robust enough to scale up to produce an organisation-wide effect.

The Governing Change training course has equipped our managers with the necessary tools to manage their teams and achieve a high level of success. It enables all of us to take a consistent approach when managing our people
Andy Howitt, Regional Director, Aalco

And of course, treat any tangential approach with caution. A programme which seeks to achieve improvements in the business environment through participation in an unrelated activity, such as outward-bound sessions or actor’s trust games, is unlikely to create lasting results.

Having been on numerous training courses I have no hesitation in recommending the Mitchell Phoenix Course as the best yet. There is no management-speak or pointless exercises - instead the course is tailored to each and every delegate due to the focus on practical results and making improvements in your workplace.

Mark Lowe, Midwich Ltd


Can You See the Business Opportunities?

As economic conditions improve, it will be those managers and organisations which can see the opportunities which will flourish. And what we see is a function of how we think.

We normally imagine that things work the other way round: that we see, and on the basis of the evidence in front of us, we alter our thinking. But without a certain level of understanding, we cannot interpret the evidence we are looking at. It is tempting to think that Galileo looked through his telescope and saw the evidence for the Earth orbiting the Sun. In fact, if he had not had the benefit of Copernicus’ theories which argued that that this was so, Galileo might have looked through his telescope and not understood what he was seeing. In other words, Copernicus thought it, then Galileo proved it – not the other way around.

What do most senior managers think? They think that they have been in management, and been successful at it, for long enough that they don’t need any further input to sharpen their thinking. Or they think that there is no-one out there who can develop their understanding in such a way that when they look at their business again, they see it with fresh eyes.

With most senior managers thinking this way, this in itself is an opportunity to gain an advantage. Where can you find a programme which will develop senior managers’ thinking, and create results as a consequence? Mitchell Phoenix have been developing the leadership and management capabilities of senior managers for over twenty years, opening their eyes to new possibilities:

Puts a completely new perspective on managing. A truly inspirational course.
Paul Skipton, Aalco

The course has allowed me to look at myself and others in a differing way and will allow both my own and others’ potential to be fulfilled.
Robert Hillman, Watts International

The course is excellent in opening your mind to managing your business, people, targets, time, etc and is invaluable in everyday use. I would recommend this to anyone who would like to develop as a manager and personally.
Paul Temple, Aalco

How equipped are you to see the opportunities – both internal and external - which will arise over the next period? How sharp is your thinking? Can you see
the way forward?

When Vision does not Equal Reality, Innovate

Mitchell Phoenix believe that organisations should Govern Change, which means anticipating and responding actively and flexibly to the changing circumstances in which businesses operate. In doing so, companies create an advantageous, profitable future for themselves. Blind adherence to past processes and procedures, failure to ask searching questions about our business and the environment in which it exists, and unwillingness to really listen to those around us are all factors which can prevent us from Governing Change successfully.

In Innovation and Entrepreneurship Peter Drucker explores a number of situations where there was an incongruity between business’s vision of reality – of what they thought was happening – and the actual reality which was unfolding around them. In the following three examples, Drucker shows how certain businesses identified gaps between their vision and the true reality, and then responded creatively to effectively Govern Change.

1. Incongruity Between Reality and Assumptions About It

When erroneous assumptions are made about reality, businesspeople are not concentrating their efforts on areas which will generate results. Those who see the true reality may also see the opportunity to innovate.

For example, in the early 1950s ocean freighters were thought to be dying. They were a slow, high cost method of transport. Why was this? The shipping industry had made an incorrect assumption – they had focused their efforts on reducing the cost of running fully loaded freighters at sea, by developing smaller, faster ships which ran on less fuel and required fewer crew. But the reality was that as a piece of capital equipment a ship is most expensive when it is not working, and ships were spending significant periods of time queuing at ports waiting to load or unload. This time spent queuing was the main reason why freighters were deemed to be so slow and expensive.

So instead of focusing on reducing the already low cost of running a fully loaded ship at sea, it was decided to uncouple loading from stowing, and container and roll-on, roll-off ships were born. Queuing time at ports was reduced, and freighters became more profitable. Crucially, the techniques for doing this were already in use in the railroad and trucking industries; they simply had to be applied to shipping.

2. Incongruity Between Perceived and Actual Customer Values and Expectations

No customer is as immersed in or committed to the product as the supplier, and therefore often what the customer buys is not what the supplier thinks the customer is buying.

Drucker argues that the prime motivation of those who work in the large financial institutions on Wall Street is to get rich, and that they therefore assume that this is the prime motivation of all their customers. He then charts the rise of a securities firm which appealed not to customers who wanted to become rich, but to customers who wanted to protect their money. These customers included local professionals, small businesspeople and substantial farmers. The firm’s strategy was based on protecting its clients’ money, and because of this only one eighth of its business was stock exchange business.

Drucker goes on to underline the power of those who see a mismatch between what suppliers think customers want and what they actually want:

“The big Wall Street houses cannot even imagine such customers [who want to protect their money rather than get rich] exist because they defy everything the houses believe in and hold true.”

If your competition cannot even imagine your customers exist, it will be difficult for them to steal your market share.

3. Incongruity Between the Rhythm or Logic of a Process

A manufacturer of lawn care products had a similar catalogue to its competitors, composed of fertilisers, pesticides and the like. All the competition promised ‘scientific’ products which had been extensively tested and would make your lawn look fantastic. Precise instructions were given on how much of each product should be applied to your lawn, depending on soil conditions and the desired effect.

Customers bought the products because of the promised benefits, and were receptive to the idea that each fertiliser had been scientifically developed to deliver those benefits. But when it came to actually applying the products, the logic of the process fell down. Customers found it difficult to be as scientific as they felt they should be in putting the correct amounts onto their lawns. Then one particular manufacturer produced a ‘Spreader’. This was a lightweight wheelbarrow with adjustable holes which would deliver exactly the right amount of product as the customer walked over the lawn. The ‘Spreader’ boosted sales significantly.


What can we learn from Drucker’s examples? Asking open questions about the environment in which we operate, listening, and remaining open to new ideas and approaches will all help us to capitalise on situations where the vision of what is happening around us does not match the reality. How close is the relationship between your vision of what is happening in your business environment and the reality? Which of your past processes and procedures are holding your organisation back? What can you change tomorrow in order to take advantage?

Can You See Opportunities to Govern Change?

Governing Change means seeking out opportunities to innovate and adapt to the change which is taking place all the time in our business environment. It means having the flexibility, creativity and resourcefulness to ensure that we are commanding change, rather than simply reacting to it every day.

Where can we find opportunities to Govern Change? A useful place to start is to look for instances in which our idea of what is happening - what we want or expect to be taking place around us - is not matched by the reality. Wherever there is an incongruity between our vision of reality, and the actual reality, there is a chance to Govern Change.

In Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Peter Drucker cites an example of just such an incongruity. A pharmaceutical company salesman wanted to go into business for himself. He looked for an instance where the vision of what people wanted did not match the reality.

He found it in eye surgeons’ experience of conducting routine cataract operations. The surgeons were highly skilled and felt comfortable in conducting every stage of cataract procedures except one. When they had to cut a particular ligament and tie off the blood vessels the eye was in danger, and surgeons dreaded this short section of every procedure. The surgeons’ vision of how they would like to feel and the control they wanted to have did not match the reality of this section of the operation.

The pharmaceutical company salesman considered how this might be done differently in the future, and soon found an answer. An enzyme had been discovered in 1890 which would dissolve the ligament in question. At the time it was discovered, science did not have a method of storing this enzyme for any length of time, and so it had never been considered for use in cataract operations. The salesman set to work and in a few months had discovered a preservative which would extend the shelf life of the enzyme without reducing its power to dissolve the eye ligament. Within a short space of time, eye surgeons were using his patented compound to make this short section of the operation run to their satisfaction.

What would have prevented the salesman from Governing Change? If he had not asked questions about established practice, if he had not really listened to the people he wanted to do business with, if he had accepted the received wisdom that eye operations had always been done like that, if he had not dared to challenge the established procedure, he would not have been able to find a solution. He did not need significant research and development funding because the enzyme had already been discovered. What he did need was a willingness to ask questions, to listen hard and to see how what was already available to anyone who cared to look could be used to advantage. This is Governing Change.

The Power of Silence

A couple of years ago I phoned a client who told me that I had just made him $40K. He was negotiating a pay off and wasn't satisfied with the first offer. He simply remained silent while the offer grew and grew. The generous fellow that he is credited his Mitchell Phoenix experience to the result.

I received an email from another client yesterday asking if I had watched "Into the Storm", a movie covering Winston Churchill's war years. On the Governing Change program there is a story about how Churchill became Prime Minister. Lord Beaverbrook, the newspaper tycoon, made Churchill promise that he would remain silent for 3 whole minutes before giving Halifax the okay. Below is the clip from the movie showing the power of silence. It is a 1min 22secs. (Thank you, Piers)

The Power of Silence

Hidden Secrets of Management Training – Look Inside the Box!

I recently added 20 yards of distance to every club in my golf bag with no effort whatsoever (and the chipping now is sublime). For the non-golfers out there, this is quite a significant improvement. For the golfers out there, send cheques to…

I have played the game for about 15 years achieved a reasonable standard and plateaued, content in the knowledge that I know enough to be competitive and to enjoy myself. Over the years I have taken, on average, two lessons per year, read copious amounts in magazines, watched my heroes on the TV, dreamed of faultless rounds, practiced my bad habits at the driving-range and, of course, played once a week.

I would say that I qualify as a golfer. My discovery was so basic, so fundamental, that I had classified it years ago as something I already did and, therefore, dismissed it from the long list of possibilities for making improvements. This raises the question; what else do we discount as known and, therefore, applied?

In my first year with Mitchell Phoenix I remember a meeting I had with the CEO of Ferranti and fell into the trap of proudly telling him about everything we did. After listening patiently he said, “Yes. We do all that. What more is there?” Years later I came up with the perfect response. At that moment, I was flummoxed.

In management, “What more is there?” The answers are likely to have been staring us in the face for eons; it’s just that they were part of the furniture. When things are taken for granted it’s hard to see their true value. This is what managers are up against and the challenge is to rediscover the hidden power of simple truths that have disappeared from consciousness.

I see Mitchell Phoenix management training programs as containing the kind of insights to bring about substantial gains personally and corporately with little effort. Some of these insights may never be uncovered in an entire career in management. If you want to add 20 yards to every club in your management bag re-examine your application of everything you know. Look inside the box.

Management Development or How to Make a Soufflé

The Four Pillars of Successful Management Development

Pillar 3: Structure

You are choosing a management development programme for yourself or others in your organisation. Of all the factors you take into consideration – the cost, the content, whether the course is residential or not, whether you’ll be able to swim and sauna before the gourmet evening meal at the venue –probably the last thing to cross your mind will be the structure of the programme.

Of course, you might discount a week-long programme on the basis that you can’t afford the time out of the office (or alternatively you might choose to shortlist it because you’ll do anything to get away for a few days). But beyond the length of the time commitment, what else is there to consider?

Management and leadership are activities which are done, not known. It is one thing to know the recipe for a soufflé, for example (any good cookbook or search engine can furnish you with the relevant knowledge), but it is something else to be able to walk into a kitchen and make a soufflé. Similarly, it is one thing to sit in a seminar room and receive input on how to lead and manage a team, and it is another to go back into the workplace and actually lead and manage your team.

You would not teach someone how to make a soufflé without asking them at some point to go and make a soufflé. There is little to be gained from management development programmes which do not demand that managers to go back into the workplace and apply what they have learned to create results. This is like training chefs but never asking them to cook, like coaching golfers but making sure they never go out on the golf course, like banning aspiring swimmers from getting wet.

The only structure which will produce a real return on investment in development is a structure in which delegates attend the first part of a programme, then go and apply what they have learned in the workplace to create results, then attend another section of the programme, then go and apply what they have learned in the workplace, and so on. This is the only way we learn how to do anything – from our own experience. If opportunities to accumulate experience – and a strong demand to create results – are not built into the structure of a management development programme, you can be certain that no real experience has been gained, and no results created.

After over 25 years in management development, Mitchell Phoenix’ Managing Director Kevin Yates is convinced that the only viable structure is a day a month. “A day a month is often as long as senior people can be away from the office,” he says, “and it keeps the focus firmly on the delegates and their responsibility to use the material to create results. The quality of the results which come back gets stronger and stronger as the programme goes on and participants gain in skill and experience, so that the results on day 6 are often much more sophisticated than those reported on day 2. The whole process is cumulative, and designed to spotlight the participants and how they are changing and adapting what they are doing in the workplace.

“On the other hand, programmes which are geared towards input for the delegates, rather than output from the delegates (ie results), are often more cost effective and conveniently accessed via a book.”

Leadership Example - Berlusconi

More allegations about Silvio Berlusconi, Italy’s Premier, have emerged in recent days. This time he is alleged to have exchanged business favors for sex from an escort. Call it sloppy management, a devil-may-care attitude or just bad luck, the whole episode reflects back on the vessel under his leadership.

What business is it of ours how leaders behave on their own time? Surely they are entitled to a private life? Of course they are, as long as it remains private.

Berlusconi has proved over many years that he is a flawed leader. He seeks the limelight and has frequently been accused of insensitivity, abusing his position and shady dealing. What, therefore, is his duty to those he leads?

The first principle of leadership is to demand the utmost of oneself. At one level it encapsulates the idea of setting an example. It is a very simple idea that provides a daily personal challenge. A leader’s example can inspire or dispirit in the same measure. Setting an example requires consciousness and an acceptance of responsibility.

As children you may have played a game called ‘Follow the Leader’. Luckily we get to decide if we want to or not in adulthood. Is Berlusconi a rascal or a rogue? Would you follow him?

Management Training Needs Expert Facilitation

When choosing a leadership and management development programme, one is likely to encounter courses which promise “facilitation by experts.” The experts will have a background in a particular industry, and will draw on this background as they develop managers from the same industry on their programme.

In this way, ex civil-servants will train other civil servants, ex manufacturing directors will instil leadership and management disciplines in those working in manufacturing, ex-lawyers will develop other lawyers, and ex IT professionals will inculcate “soft skills” in current IT professionals.

When the development focuses around technical information, it is easy to understand why those with a background in a similar industry might be preferable. Non-lawyers will have no grasp of technical aspects of law, non-IT professionals will know little about the technical issues facing those working at the front line of IT.

Where leadership and management attitudes and skills are to be developed, it is less clear why those with a particular industry background will be a useful choice. An impressive track record working in a particular industry suggests a person is expert at working in that particular field, rather than in developing others to do so. Further, the more impressive the track record, the stronger the hold it will exert over the person’s thinking. Hard-won experience is even harder to relinquish. Yet anyone who wishes to develop wider understanding must do just that: let go of the particular, loosen their grip on their individual insights and begin to see further than their own autobiography.

Developing and inspiring others is not the same as doing oneself, as footballers who turn to management often discover. Who had a better track record than Sir Bobby Charlton? In terms of industry experience, of “been there, done it, got the medals to prove it,” at one stage he was peerless in the English game. His management career underlined the gap between doing oneself and mobilising others. (His choice of subsequent activities shows how fast he learned this, and how shrewd and adaptable he is.)

What qualifications should one look for from those involved in management development? Expert facilitation: facilitation by those who are expert at facilitating, rather than those who are expert at something else, however relevant that may appear. Development by those who have a proven track record of developing others, and who can show measurable results from their work. Management based on principles which hold true for any environment, rather than tactics which worked in certain circumstances, but may not in others.

Hamsters on Wheels

“Time Management” is a myth. No matter how slowly time seemed to drag in the meeting you just attended, no matter how quickly a deadline appears to be thundering down on you, time passes at a constant rate. We cannot manage the passage of time any more than we can influence the phases of the moon.

What we can do is make decisions about how we fill the 24 hours we have in each day. Time management is really decision making on how we spend our time.

Yet most of the advice on time management available to businesses and individuals tacitly assumes that these decisions have already been made. Type “time management” into any search engine and scan the results. You will find tips on making to do lists, prioritising activities, and putting those activities in a diary. There is information on stopping procrastinating, filing documents so you can find them quickly and motivating yourself to press on and achieve your goals.

The question is how did you arrive at those goals? When you stop procrastinating, what exactly are you going to do? After all, the major decision is not to pursue a certain goal between three and five o’clock, but to work towards that goal at all. The available information on goal setting mainly revolves around how we should formulate and subsequently achieve them. In other words, traditional time management does not cover what you do, merely when you do it.

Imagine everybody in your department improves their time management. They choose goals, focus on them, and stick to their schedules scrupulously. Unless major decisions had been taken about the department’s strategic aims and how they will be distributed and achieved on a team and individual basis, everyone will simply get better at doing what they were already doing. The status quo will be maintained even more efficiently than before, like hamsters taking steroids so that they can run on their wheels for an extra hour every night.

In the second half of 2009 sound decisions around our time usage are more important than ever before. The recession has inspired a new more frugal attitude to what we really need: businesses have slashed costs and profligate practices, over-staffing is a thing of the past and in its place is a hard focus on what investment actually produces profit.

Kevin Yates, Managing Director of Mitchell Phoenix, sounds a warning note about our appetite for time management, “as we creep out of the recession, everyone is over-stretched. Clever diarising doesn’t help staff who are covering more than one position, or teams operating at half the strength they had two years ago. This is a problem for senior management. Only informed, strategic decisions about time usage from the top of organisations will create the conditions for more profitable behaviour throughout the business and ultimately secure the future.”

The 'will' to lead

I was recently asked what I considered to be the most important attribute of a leader. It's a challenging question since we all seem to have our own idea about this and quite a few of these ideas are not shared. Perhaps it is not possible for all the people to share the same description all of the time. But if we take a step back and ask what could a leader become proficient at, given the will to do so? The answer is surprising; most leaders could learn almost all the skills of leadership you care to come up with. Charisma may escape this concept, but it would not have been on my list in the first place as it is a product of application. Other qualities deliver charisma (or not) through their use.

So I believe now, and have done so for some time, that the most important characteristic of leadership is the 'will' to do so, all the important other skills can be learned. While all else can be learned, not all is learned and I believe this dichotomy has a bearing on the quality of leadership and is a complex mix of the the same will to learn and the sense to guess that there is more to learn. This sounds a little absolute but I am interested to open up this area, our modern society needs new type of leadership as followers are much better informed and become sceptical of those they perceive as charlatans.
The will to lead is the most important attribute of a leader, the will to learn follows quickly.
Kevin Yates
Mitchell Phoenix London

Mitchell Phoenix Newsletter February '09

Mitchell Phoenix Newsletter 02/09

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Newsletters Periodicals & Report coaching creativity

Mitchell Phoenix Newsletter December '08

Publish at Scribd or explore others: Periodicals & Report coaching creativity

Welcome to Mitchell Phoenix 'Live'

I have finally been dragged into the 21st century - I have a blog! Well, to be precise Mitchell Phoenix have a blog. You can look forward to hearing views, ideas and opionions on all matters related to leadership and management in business. We welcome comments and discussion on the posts presented.