Situation: A CEO’s company is short of cash to make a scheduled payment against a line of credit. They have been notified that if the payment isn’t made, the bank will transfer cash from the company’s checking account to satisfy the payment. This would compromise their ability to meet payroll and pay vendors. How are your relations with your bank?
Advice from the CEOs:
What the company needs is time, so that they can pay down the line of credit from cash flow. It is best to compartmentalize any discomfort with this situation. Remember that any bank action generally takes time.
Advice from the company’s lawyer is that if they stop making deposits, the bank will notice and react negatively. Given that the current interest rate on the line is low, a negative reaction from the bank could lead to an increase in the rate.
The company has a bargaining chip. The bank does not want to show the company’s line as delinquent. If they admit that a delinquency exists, it puts them in a bad place.
Develop a contingency plan to guard against the company’s biggest risk – inability to make payroll. Assure that this can be covered.
Use checks paid by customers to move a portion of company assets to another bank.
Secure a new line of credit with another bank to cover credit needs, including salary coverage if the current bank acts adversely.
Assure that any conversations with the bank are documented in letters to the company’s contact at the bank.
Situation: The CEO of a company has a problem. Quality control is an essential part of the company’s success, but ownership of quality control issues is proving difficult. When more than one department is involved, each blames the other for issues or deficiencies. Who owns quality control?
Advice from the CEOs:
At the end of the day the project owner must own this responsibility. This individual can delegate work but not accountability.
QC must be embedded within the company’s systems. In addition, someone has to walk in daily to ask what is wrong with this project? What can be done better? A skeptic.
Put a skeptic in the QC role – the job is to find what’s wrong, not what’s right – a tactical skeptic.
Skeptics are ideal for design reviews.
It isn’t necessary to hire someone for this role if there’s already a productive skeptic on staff.
This person needs to be vocal and will irritate some of the other staff. Coach staff to tolerate this, because the individual is performing an essential role.
It’s impossible to check everything. However, as issues are identified, everything can be documented.
As systems are reviewed, look for patterns of problems.
Develop solutions as problems are identified.
Log issues and solutions on a shared server to facilitate access by project managers.
Institute cross-functional design reviews – representatives from different functions offer different perspectives. Formalize design reviews in the early and start-up stages of projects.
Work on company culture – build anticipation of challenges into the culture.
Build a heuristic of the output of each program. Use this to make sure that inputs, filters and system checks will produce the desired output and the desired level of quality.
Ask: where is QC currently working within the company? Why is it working?
Operations and testers catch the errors.
The issue is distributing the knowledge gained. In complex systems nobody understands the full picture or the impact on the customer.
This becomes the responsibility of the project owner.
Situation: The CEO of a specialty component company wants to standardize documentation of company procedures covering sales, production and ISO documentation. This will take time and effort, and employees are concerned about accountability for poor results. How do you incentivize employees to document SOPs?
Advice from the CEOs:
Are employees are being asked for accountability without being empowered or rewarded for performance? Currently, there is nothing about employee performance that is directly tied to:
Dollars in raise, or
Share of the bonus pool.
Everything is determined at the CEO’s discretion.
Why would anyone want more accountability if they feel that they have little control over their jobs or future at the company?
To increase accountability and drive, employees must be given control over the factors tied to retention, pay and bonuses.
To create an effective system for employees to document standardized SOPs they need:
Incentives that are under their control to achieve the objective – creating standardized SOPs.
Objectives that are achievable with clearly stated rewards for performance.
Performance evaluations tied to clearly stated objectives, discussed with and agreed to by each employee, which drive raises, bonuses and rewards.
The messaging about these changes must be delivered with energy and passion. Employees must feel excited by this opportunity.
Understand that this may cost 10-15% in increased overhead but will boost the value of the company way beyond the cost.
Employees need to know the vision for the company and must be empowered to achieve the results to fulfill this vision.
The why behind the desire for standardized SOPs is just as important as the incentives created to achieve them.
The why must be clear, simple, and must be understood by the employees for everything to work.
To further motivate the team, involve them in designing the incentive program.
Ask what they want. Maybe it’s something as simple as a fun day with the team.
If they aren’t asked, the danger is that they will not respond to the incentive offered. Money is not the only, and in many cases is not the most effective incentive.
Situation: A company hired an employee one year ago. The employee is competent but slow. Even after a year on the job, other employees with similar skills and experience are able to complete the same job three times faster. What is the best way to handle this? How do you set expectations for an employee?
Advice from the CEOs:
The most important principle governing situations like this is clarity of communications. You must clearly express your expectations, and you must assure that the employee clearly understands your expectations.
Assure that expectations are clearly expressed. This means what you expect in terms of performance, and firm timelines for achieving minimum requirements. You also must assure that the employee understands the consequences for failing to meet minimum requirements. The best assurance is written confirmation that the employee understands what is expected.
Don’t be vague or nice about your expectations, performance requirements or the consequences for failing to meet minimum requirements. This risks sending the wrong message to the employee.
Put the employee on a performance improvement plan to meet minimum job requirements. Monitor and document for 30-60 days and then handle according to how the employee responds.
If the individual can’t meet the objective, but has potential value to the company, offer the person an appropriate position at the level that the new position pays.
Have a second person in the room when you deliver the message. If you determine that you have to terminate the employee and the employee elects to sue, this will help your case in a judicial action.
Situation: A company’s leadership is wrestling with how to handle an accusation of employee theft. In the case presented, the accuser lacks credibility, but the charge is serious. The leadership team wants to deal fairly and equitably with the case, but doesn’t want to send the message that pilferage is acceptable. How do you handle allegations of employee theft?
Advice from the CEOs:
To assure fairness and equity, determine a way to substantiate, with objective or third party information, whether charges of pilferage are valid.
Express your seriousness about the situation, and ask the accuser what evidence they can provide to substantiate the allegations.
In a warehouse or stock room situation, install inexpensive video equipment to record and verify pilferage.
To assure that messages to employees are clear, revise employee manuals to specify serious repercussions for pilferage as well as measures being taken to prevent it. This will demonstrate awareness of the issue as well as the company’s determination to discourage pilferage.
If you can verify the allegation, either through objective or third party evidence, face the employees involved. The choices are simple:
Either the behavior stops and the estimated damages repaid to the company by the employee, or
The employee is fired.
Do not think that this is something that will go away on its own. If there has been pilferage and the situation proceeds unchecked, it will damage you both financially and in terms of employee respect and morale. Employees will be watching your response closely.
To protect yourself, once you determine a course of action be sure to document everything.
Situation: A founder of a company also heads business development. This person had no prior experience in business development, and no other skills to offer the business. Over the last two years he has generated only a fraction of his salary in new or additional business. The CEO has concluded that it is time to hire a business development professional; however, the Board is reluctant to act. What are the steps that you would take to let a founder go?
Advice from the CEOs:
Because the individual in question is an owner, the situation is delicate. Staff relationships are involved as well as morale. Therefore, it is essential that you create a convincing case for replacing the individual and show that this is the best for the business. Don’t rush the process. However, once you’ve built a solid case for what needs to be done, act expeditiously.
Start by evaluating and documenting what the individual is doing to develop new business.
Count customer connects per day. Set a baseline expectation and measure against this.
Look at the pipeline. Historically what does your new business funnel look like – contacts, presentations, evaluations, closes. How does this individual’s pipeline stack up?
What are his business advancement and close ratios? How do these compare with industry standards?
For the individual: Demonstrate that his performance is penalizing his own return as an owner. Create a spreadsheet that shows:
The current situation, and his return as a shareholder from current results, versus
Hiring two effective business development people, and how this could change his return.
Show the individual a graceful way out – one that works for him.
For the Board: if the current direction is negative, create a model that shows your current direction and the break even implications. Present this analysis to the Board to show that the company needs a change.