by Gary Mintchell | Oct 2, 2015 | Leadership
On my other blog, I write about leadership regularly on Fridays. I saw an article that came through an email newsletter that spurred some thinking. See if you relate to this.
You got shipped off to some type of leadership training. Maybe it was for work. Maybe for church. Maybe for another type of organization.
You attended the training. It was long. The coffee was less than satisfactory. The pastries were stale. The leader was pumped up on something that made him or her optimistic to the point of causing gagging. You recorded a bunch of cute sayings from old leaders in your conference notebook. The talks seemed like they belonged in some sort of old-fashioned tent revival meeting.
You went home. The boss asks what you learned. You show her the notebook with notes.
Nothing changes.
I have been to so many of these that I’m lucky to be able to lead a kid to a candy store!
So the article title on the email newsletter caught my eye. Why Leadership Training Is So Much BS. It is in a manufacturing trade journal called Industry Week written by an acquaintance, Steve Minton. He interviewed Jeffrey Pfeffer author of Leadership B.S.: Fixing Workplaces and Careers One Truth at a Time (Harper Business, September 2015). I’ll have to buy the book, now. Maybe I can score an interview.
Minton writes:
“But a steady diet of inspiration fables, Pfeffer warns, also misleads and does little to improve organizations.” He contrasts the state of leadership training with medical education, which strives to base its teaching on carefully measured studies and their results.
“No wonder medical science has made significant strides in treating many diseases while leadership as it is practiced daily all over the world has continued to produce a lot of disengaged, dissatisfied, and disaffected employees,” he writes.
What can businesses do to improve their leadership development efforts? Pfeffer told IndustryWeek that companies first need to change their evaluation criteria. Too much development work either is not evaluated or evaluated on the basis of enjoyment of the course.
“What are we trying to accomplish in leadership development? If we are trying to attain higher levels of employee engagement, higher levels of trust in leaders, higher levels of job satisfaction, lower levels of turnover, more people succeeding and having more people ready for leadership positions, then those are criteria you ought to use to evaluate your efforts,” he stresses, “not whether or not people had a good time, whether or not they liked the donuts, whether or not they thought the speaker was inspiring.”
Companies must also have people teaching these programs who have at least some expertise in leadership, he adds.
I continue to see people go off to leadership training only to memorize stories and tips. Putting the knowledge into practice is left to chance.
Thinking about various leadership training experiences I’ve had, I’d have to agree about using some sort of science. There was a class in 1981 that has stayed with me–and experience has proved it over again. The trainer displayed a 2×2 matrix. Feel for people (good, poor) versus Intellectual control of emotions (good, poor). Top performing leaders? Feel for people didn’t matter much. Intellectual control of emotions was the key ingredient.
Other than that, I’ve found that better leadership training is done in smaller groups over time. This allows time for trial and error and feedback.
Think Yoda teaching the young Jedi Luke Skywalker.
Find your Yoda. Or, find your Luke.
Me? I’m looking for another Luke to bring along.
by Gary Mintchell | Sep 18, 2015 | Automation, News
Acquisitions are always interesting news. They always signify something about the industry. Sometimes it’s consolidation in a mature industry. Sometimes it’s larger companies growing, adding technology, or adding talent.
In today’s news, there is some of each.Remember when the robot and vision markets were thriving—especially the small SCARA robots? Those days are long over. The price of vision systems plummeted. Just look at the capabilities of the camera and software in your smart phone.
The first announcement is that Omron is acquiring Adept Technology. The second is Emerson Process Management adding some interesting technology to its portfolio.
The only thing surprising to me is the acquirer, not the fact that Adept is being acquired. Those cards have been played a long time ago. Omron Corporation and Adept Technology, Inc. announced that the two companies have entered into an agreement whereby Omron will acquire Adept.
Omron plans to acquire 100% of the outstanding shares of Adept common stock through an all cash tender offer followed by a second-step merger. It will offer Adept investors $13.00 per share of Adept common stock, which represents a 63% premium over the closing price for Adept’s common stock on September 15, 2015. This values Adept at approximately $200 million. It will fund the tender offer through cash on hand.
The tender offer is expected to commence on or about September 23, 2015, and the transaction is expected to close on or about October 23, 2015. The closing of the transaction is subject to customary closing conditions, including at least a majority of shares of Adept common stock being tendered in the offer, expiration of the applicable waiting period under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 and receipt of required foreign antitrust approvals. The transaction has been unanimously approved by the Boards of Directors of both companies.
Commenting on the acquisition, Yutaka Miyanaga, Omron Industrial Automation Business Company President, said, “We are delighted Adept Technology, a world leader in robotics, has agreed to join Omron. This acquisition is part of our strategy to enhance our automation technology and position us for long term growth. Robotics will elevate our offering of advanced automation.”
Rob Cain, President and Chief Executive Officer of Adept, added, “We are excited about the opportunity to join Omron, a global leader in automation. Together, our products will offer new innovative solutions to customers all around the globe.”
Following the transaction, Rob Cain will continue to lead Adept and will report to Nigel Blakeway, Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and President of Omron Management Center of America, Inc., Omron’s wholly owned United States subsidiary.
Emerson acquisition
Emerson announced it has acquired Spectrex, Inc., a leading manufacturer of flame and open path gas detectors. With this addition, Emerson Process Management will have the most comprehensive line of flame, gas, and ultrasonic leak detector solutions used for safety monitoring in the industry.
Spectrex will join the Rosemount portfolio of measurement and analytical technologies. Terms of the acquisition were not disclosed.
For nearly 34 years, Spectrex has been the leader in flame and open path gas detection. It developed the world’s first ultraviolet-infrared (UV/IR) and triple infrared (IR3) flame detectors and was first to introduce xenon flash lamps in open path detector design, increasing detectors’ resilience to atmospheric conditions while reducing power consumption. These innovative advancements in safety monitoring provide a powerful solution for customers in the oil and gas, petrochemical, chemical and power industries.
“We are very excited about adding the Spectrex product line to our flame and gas detection portfolio,” said Tom Moser, group vice president of Emerson Process Management’s measurement and analytical technologies. “Emerson is committed to helping our customers protect their employees, facilities, and the environment, and we are now better positioned to serve that need.”
Spectrex and its staff are located in Cedar Grove, N.J., with sales and technical support offices in Houston, the United Kingdom, and Taiwan.
by Gary Mintchell | Jul 31, 2015 | Leadership
Every week (almost) people who subscribe to my special email newsletter (you can do that by entering your email on the right side of the Web page) get an additional insight either on the industry or something relating to leadership.
Recently I shared thoughts from Creativity, Inc.: Overcoming the Unseen Forces That Stand in the Way of True Inspiration, by Ed Catmull, president of Pixar and Disney Animation.
This book could be called a creativity course, leadership guide, or a history of Pixar. Another take would be “working with Steve Jobs.” The heart of the book really contains a story about how to build and maintain great creative teams.
I use the term “story” on purpose. When a bunch of computer graphics geeks decided they wanted to make animated movies a new way, they discovered they needed to learn the elements that lend power to story. And then came Toy Story, Cars, and the rest.
Most of you are leading teams of engineers, or you are engineers, or you may think that the kind of creativity necessary to make a great movie has nothing to do with you. You would be wrong. Even engineers who are made fun of in the press as narrow-minded, geeky, focused problem solvers must be creative or they will fail to solve the important problems.
On the other hand, many of you are bringing new products to market. You live in obvious creative cycle.
Let’s look at building and managing a team. I can think of the times in my life where I was building teams and failed. If I had read this book then….
I’ve led or been a part of some fabulous teams. We accomplished much and had fun doing it. Then there are the painful experiences. There was the time I brought in a too-young admin, an insecure salesman, another salesman who spent more time plotting about how to replace me than in selling. Talk about dysfunction. And it was all my fault. Ouch.
Catmull discusses valuing people as the core practice. Candor and transparency are key interaction values. When the executive team sensed something was amiss at Pixar after many years of successes, the diagnosis was that people stopped taking risks and they stopped giving rigorous feedback to the creators.
Success during the creative cycle requires open and honest collaboration. The type of interactions that, when a status meeting is called, people are free to point out anything that looks like it needs fixing—as long as the criticism deals with a problem and not on a person.
The conclusion of the book includes an afterword talking about the Steve Jobs that Catmull worked with for 26 years.This is worth reading far more than all the biographies I’ve read. He also leaves us with several pages of bullet points of values and learnings. I’ll share just a couple to whet your appetite.
- Give a good idea to a mediocre team, and they will screw it up. Give a mediocre idea to a great team, and they will either fix it or come up with something better. If you get the team right, chances are that they’ll get the ideas right.
- When looking to hire people, give their potential to grow more weight than their current skill level. What they will be capable of tomorrow is more important than what they can do today.
- If there are people in your organization who feel they are not free to suggest ideas, you lose. Do not discount ideas from unexpected sources. Inspiration can, and does, come from anywhere.
- There is nothing quite as effective, when it comes to shutting down alternative viewpoints, as being convinced you are right.
- If there is more truth in the hallways than in meetings, you have a problem.
Want a more effective team? Read this book, think about it, share and discuss it with your team.
by Gary Mintchell | Jun 9, 2015 | Automation, Marketing, News
What Does It Mean When An Industry Consolidates?
For companies in the control and automation space, as well as manufacturing in general, acquisitions power growth.
Rockwell Automation became a factor in process automation through a number of strategic acquisitions. Siemens fulfills its digital manufacturing vision through acquisitions. ABB, until recently, pursued a growth by acquisition strategy. Schneider Electric, keeping pace with European rivals swallowed Invensys—and much to my surprise seems intent on not only keeping but even building its software presence.
What is the result of acquisitions in an industry? Consolidation. And the result of consolidation? Less competition.
Writing in Industry Week Michael Collins, president of MPC Consulting, asks, Is Manufacturing Industry Consolidation Stifling Competition and Innovation?
That is a fair question. I have been surveying the industry in the two years after leaving Automation World (and Maintenance Technology, where I stayed briefly) looking for what’s new and interesting. The latest cool startup was ThingWorx, which sold to PTC. There are companies doing instrumentation, control and automation well, but not much really new or innovative.
Collins tries out a definition, “Capitalism is a free market system that is supposed to promote competition. In capitalist theory, competition leads to innovation and more affordable prices for consumers. Without competition, a monopoly, oligopoly or cartel may develop.”
This statement contains an amount of belief, but it does describe a market economy in keeping with the 18th Century “liberals” who valued “liberty” over government. The economic theory superseded mercantilism where the government picked winners and losers.
Wishing for more government regulation, Collins reviews history, “This formation of monopolies and oligopolies also occurred in the Gilded Age, when the robber barons controlled entire industries, including oil, railroads, steel and the telegraph. The consolidation did not stop until President Theodore Roosevelt broke up the monopolies using antitrust legislation.”
Today’s monopolies/oligopolies
Collins then surveys today’s consolidations:
- Airlines
- Banks–“In 1995, the six biggest U.S. banks had assets equal to 18% of GDP. Today, they hold assets of about 63% of GDP.
- Search Engines–The search engine business is dominated by Google, which, according to Forbes, owns 90% of the market in non-mobile search worldwide.
- Media Companies–In 1983, 50 companies controlled the vast majority of news media including newspaper, magazines, radio and TV stations, books, movies, videos, and wire services. Consolidation reduced the original number to 24 companies by 1992 and to six companies by 2000. Today, five corporations—Time Warner, Disney, News Corp., Bertelsmann (of Germany) and Viacom control the majority of the U.S. media industry.
- Hospitals
Manufacturing industries also have consolidated:
- Meat Packers–In 1982, the five largest meatpackers controlled 16% of the meat industry. Today four firms control 85% of the beef market, an oligopoly that includes National Beef, Cargill, Tyson, and JBS (which purchased Swift).
- Microsoft
- Intel
- Beer–At that time (1970s), there were 43 firms making beer, and the largest had 25% of the market. Today two firms—Anheuser Busch and Miller/Coors—own 90% of the non-craft beer market.
- Autos–The auto industry is now a global industry where five multinational companies have 50% of the world market. The top 10 auto manufacturers control 70% of the world market. [Note: and now the Chrysler CEO is drumming up support for a merger with GM.]
- Oil and Gas–Exxon merged with Mobil Oil and Conoco merged with Phillips. Along with Chevron and Occidental Petroleum, these four giants have 70% of all oil produced in the U.S. (1,919 barrels).
Collins concludes:
I think it is in the DNA of capitalism to create oligopolies and monopolies, and they can only be restricted by government regulation.
Gary Responds
Often consolidation is a reflection of a mature industry. Not much is happening. It’s an industry ripe for disruption.
A number of entrepreneurs are trying innovative airline models. Who knows when one will “take off”, so to speak?
Doctors are forming small companies, removing outpatient surgery and other services out of the hospitals.
Brewery consolidation means companies run by finance people rather than product people. While many will buy according to price even if the taste is not there, the interesting end of the market is now wide open among small craft brewers. When I travel, I always ask for the local beer.
Microsoft is being pressured by Linux in the enterprise and smartphone and tablet products in the low end. Google docs are a viable alternative to Office.
Intel is pressured on many sides with new competition.
Software as a Service models are pressuring the major automation software companies. And open source hardware and software threaten disruption of those markets.
Innovation often comes from outside the dominant market leader group. It is difficult to predict. But there is no doubt disruption is occurring. What’s that famous phrase? “The future is here, just not evenly distributed.” Yep.
by Gary Mintchell | May 21, 2015 | Automation, News
For some reason, I keep getting requests for information and analysis on robotics. The standard models of robots have remained pretty much the same for years. The market has not grown much. The association magazine devoted to robots folded years ago. Yet, there remains some interest in the market.
Given that, ABB had a robot technology day May 20. It was on my calendar to drive up to the Detroit area and attend. A sudden business meeting relating to one of my angel investments interfered. Here is the big news from the event.
ABB announced it is to start producing robots in the United States. Production is to commence immediately. ABB claims it is the only major international robotics player to actually manufacture in the US.
The new plant is ABB’s third robotics production facility, alongside Shanghai, China, and Västerås, Sweden, and will manufacture ABB robots and related equipment for the North American market.
The United States is ABB’s largest market with US$7.5 billion in sales. The company has invested more than US$10 billion in local R&D, capital expenditure and acquisitions since 2010, taking local employment from 11,500 to 26,300. Continued investment in the North American value chain and manufacturing constitutes a significant part of ABB’s global growth plans reflecting the company’s Next Level strategy.
“Today, we are marking and celebrating the next stage of our commitment and growth in North America with the start of local robot manufacturing in Auburn Hills, US,” said ABB CEO Ulrich Spiesshofer. “ABB is the first global automation company to open a robot manufacturing facility in the United States. Robotics is a fundamental enabler of the next level of North American industrial growth in an increasingly competitive world. With our continued commitment and investment, our local team is well positioned to support our customers with robotics solutions made in the United States. Our leading technology of web-enabled, collaborative and safe robots will contribute to job security and quality of work.”
“The new North American manufacturing presence elevates our offering and service to robotics customers in the United States, Mexico and Canada, allowing us to achieve best-in-class delivery schedules and technical support in North America,” said Per Vegard Nerseth, Managing Director of ABB Robotics. “The expansion is consistent with our global strategy, which is to establish a local presence in key robotics growth markets to provide our leading technology to our customers.”
The portfolio of products manufactured at the new facility will expand in phases, with the goal that most ABB robots and robot controllers delivered in the United States, Canada and Mexico will be manufactured in Auburn Hills. Localized manufacturing streamlines the delivery process and results in significantly reduced robot lead times for customers.
