How to Avoid an Ugly Mess

 

 

How to Avoid an Ugly Mess

By Leslie S. Pratch

Not every management assessment is the same. Picking the right assessment approach could mean the difference between having an outstanding investment return and having to explain an ugly mess to your partners. Different options answer different questions, so you need to figure out what you most want to learn.

What you might like to know

Has he done it before?

This question is good to ask when you know what you want and are sure it isn’t going to change. A good way to answer this question is with a talent and skill assessment. Search firms, many assessment firms, and many psychologists focus on past achievements. They document if the “candidate has done it before in a compelling fashion”. Typically, they use behavioural interviewing to understand how and when the candidate has “done it before”.

If you plan to exit the deal in three to five years, and know that the company won’t change and the world won’t change in that interim, and that there will be no unexpected opportunities and no unexpected problems, then this could be a good approach — for your needs.

How will he cope with change?

Will he capitalise on opportunity? Can he do something no one has ever done? How much do you care about how well the candidate will perform under new or unexpected conditions? You can pick someone who seems like he fits the bill but the world changes for better or worse. When it changes for the worse, you see how adaptable he is. But you may not know when it changes for the better, because the executive doesn’t take advantage of the change until the competition does.

In faster-moving or more uncertain markets, expecting the unexpected makes sense. You need someone with skills but ability to cope — which requires raw cognitive capability and a stable information-seeking personality much more than specific pre-defined skills — is also critical. Talent and skill assessments don’t address these at all. An approach aimed at understanding active coping capabilities as they will be needed for the business challenge fits well here.

How can you get the most of the executive?

Sometimes a candidate brings a lot but isn’t perfect. That introduces the other party in the interaction — you. How can you act so you capitalise on the executive’s strengths and proactively protect against his weaknesses as a leader? Talent and skill assessments won’t shed any light here; Pratchco’s approach to understanding personality as part of the assessment will.

How will he cope in a private equity environment?

The pace is fast and CEOs have to cope with having investors challenging their thinking. If they’ve been in a private equity environment in the past and you know the investors they worked with before, a talent assessment is adequate. If they’ve never been in a private equity environment or you don’t know the other investors, you should use Pratchco.

Are incumbents worth keeping, even though the strategy is changing?

You are inheriting a management team. They know the business and losing them would be a big loss. But they haven’t done what is being called for next, even if they thought of it (similar to founders’ problem with startup), so they will all fail a simple talent assessment. But they might very well be keeping if you could supplement them with your skills or add a team member at the right time. If you assume they can’t do it, you will have to hire a new team, which will lack the understanding of the company the original team had.

What’s in it for the executive?

Executives don’t generally relish the opportunity to be assessed. Putting them through a painful assessment that provides no value to them won’t be a great way to start a relationship and might even be a way to end one.

Talent and skill assessments document what the executive says and usually provide no value to the executive. Assessments that find underlying themes can help executives understand themselves better and can provide guidance that the executives can use to improve how they interact with others (including but not limited to you).


A version of this post appeared in The European Financial Review

About the Author

Leslie S. Pratch is the founder and CEO of Pratch & Company. A clinical psychologist and MBA, she advises private equity investors, management committees and Boards of Directors of public and privately held companies whether the executives being considered to lead companies possess the psychological resources and personality strengths needed to succeed. In her recently published book, Looks Good on Paper? (Columbia University Press, 2014), she shares insights from more than twenty years of executive evaluations and offers an empirically based approach to identify executives who will be effective within organisations — and to flag those who will ultimately very likely fail — by evaluating aspects of personality and character that are hidden beneath the surface.

Advertisements

Serious Human Capital Management for Seriously Good Performance

Choice of the personnel

HR contemplating where to put the employee.

By Leslie Pratch

Private equity firms develop financial and strategic plans and manage their portfolio companies by them. But most private equity firms are more casual about avoiding human capital disasters, and very casual about ensuring the best results form human capital. Portfolio companies are generally left alone to manage their own leadership issues until problems show up — and they will.

Some larger firms have realised that unthinkingly ignoring human capital issues until there’s a big problem is a strategy for having big problems. Doing nothing and then having a problem 18 months later seems like a poor idea. In response, some larger firms have recently decided to use an outside consultant to deal with human capital or have hired an internal staff member to oversee management recruitment and to otherwise support portfolio companies on matters related to traditional human resources functions.

You need to know what’s happening with your key managers. Good private equity firms can earn even better returns by having someone know all the people who report to the CEO in a portfolio company and how they work together.

It’s not voluntary to give quarterly numbers, it’s not voluntary to discuss the strategy, and it’s not voluntary to be able to talk intelligibly about the status of your top management teams. Your standard operating procedure should be poking your noses into how your CEOs work with their management teams. Just as you don’t stop assessing the leading indicators of profit and cash flow, you should not suspend HR diligence after the deal is done.

Medium-sized firms also need a methodology to monitor portfolio company talent, and they likely will need help in executing it.

A Part-time Human Capital Advisor is the Right Solution for Certain Firms

A part-time human capital advisor can track the status of management teams on an ongoing basis and also be a resource to address situations before they deteriorate and cause financial damage. A part-time human capital advisor may be the best answer for any medium-sized firm with aggressive timetables and financial goals, a history of surprise poor performance by CEOs, and/or little knowledge about the portfolio company management teams and what’s happening in them. It can also be a great solution for some larger firms. It may be right for your firm if you are:

  1. A medium-sized firm that makes control investments in growth companies, investments in distressed situations, or buyouts
  2. A large buyout firm that does not do in-house assessments of CEO candidates
  3. A firm with a history of replacing CEOs post-close and of being surprised by poor CEO performance
  4. A firm that needs better knowledge about portfolio company management teams

Someone who has taken the time to know investors’ value creation plan can be positioned as management’s advisor whose role is to help the portfolio company management succeed in carrying out the strategy.

What a Good Human Capital Advisor Actually Does

A good human capital advisor gets to know the managers, and with them, conducts a structured analysis of their jobs. With the manager, the advisor identifies key targets and metrics and documents the relationships that will be crucial for the manager’s success. Together, the advisor and manager make plans for building and measuring the progress of those relationships, especially the manager’s relationships with investors, Board, key customers, and key team members. Having assessed the baseline of each relationship and developed a plan for each relationship, the advisor then monitors the manager’s progress on the plan in the context of the business as it evolves.

If the advisor has done a thorough psychological assessment of the manager (typically as part of due diligence or just after the deal closes) the advisor starts with an enormous understanding of how the manager’s mind functions and how to be most effective in helping him or her change; the advisor understands where and why resistance arises for that person and therefore has a better chance of avoiding it.

An advisor focuses on how people interact. But just as a good CFO assesses progress and thinks about the business with a focus on finance but does not limit him/ herself to finance, so a good human capital advisor helps investors and CEOs assess progress and think about the business with a focus on key relationships and the functioning of its top managers but does not limit him/ herself to this perspective.

An advisor works all sides of each relationship. The advisor identifies a problem and then considers which behavior changes, by whom, would be the easiest route to the solution. Sometimes it’s the CEO who must change, but often the Board or investors can slightly adjust their own behavior and therefore remove or minimize the problem.

An advisor brings independent judgment and experience to bear on the business situation as a whole and to the challenges that the manager faces. The advisor’s goal is the successful achievement of investors’ goals. At the same time, though, the advisor facilitates the development of the manager’s capabilities, so to the manager the advisor may feel or seem more like a coach.

Deliverables

The start-up phase of this service can include assessments, regular discussions with the CEO and/ or CEO and management team members, and then twice yearly Board updates with or without the CEO.

Benefits

This kind of advising/human capital monitoring leads to better solutions and more successful execution, and to problems not occurring even when things appear to be going well. It leads to the advisor’s being able to find problems as they arise and spot patterns that are important for investors to know.


A version of this piece was published in The European Financial Review

About the Author

Leslie S. Pratch is the founder and CEO of Pratch & Company. A clinical psychologist and MBA, she advises private equity investors, management committees and Boards of Directors of public and privately held companies whether the executives being considered to lead companies possess the psychological resources and personality strengths needed to succeed. In her recently published book, Looks Good on Paper? (Columbia University Press, 2014), she shares insights from more than twenty years of executive evaluations and offers an empirically based approach to identify executives who will be effective within organisations — and to flag those who will ultimately very likely fail — by evaluating aspects of personality and character that are hidden beneath the surface.

 

 

Leslie Pratch, Ph.D. – Good on Paper

CEO of Pratch & Company, Leslie Pratch, Ph.D., specializes in assessing candidates for senior leadership roles in organizations, public and private. She is presently writing a book, provisionally entitled LOOKS GOOD ON PAPER, to be published in March, 2014 by Columbia University Press.

Leslie Pratch emphasizes that it is not enough to assess the candidate in the abstract. It is also important to try to get some sense of what new problems might face the business so that the assessment can focus on the qualities needed to cope with those kinds of problems. For example, George Fisher had been an outstanding leader at Motorola. He seemed an ideal candidate to reposition Kodak from film-based to full-spectrum-imaging technology. But he failed to grasp that the shift to digital imaging would make the manufacture and production of paper and film obsolete. Leslie Pratch’s assessment might have predicted that his self-confidence included a blind spot to the scale of disruptive technological change.

To evaluate leadership potential, a psychological assessment works hand in hand with insightful business analysis. Assessing a candidate begins by understanding the situation in which the executive is expected to perform. For this insight her principal source is the client, along with her own research into the industry, the company, customers, and competition.

It is possible to predict, at least much of the time, how an executive will cope with unexpected complexities and changes. For this, Leslie Pratch does not rely on a model that seeks to explain a wide variety of situations in general, one-size-fits-all terms. She does not seek to establish the average effect of one powerful variable on a large set of companies. Rather than establish the average effect, she seeks to tailor-make a fit.

Just as investors evaluate a company to understand the underlying basis for its earnings growth, Leslie Pratch assesses an executive to predict his potential to grow and perform in a specific role. Identifying a candidate’s coping style forms the core of her evaluation process, but not the full extent. The comprehensive predictive model she has developed takes into account the interactions of the executive, the corporate strategy, and the operating environment. Each situation is unique, but knowing the effects of each component with a high degree of detail strengths her ability to predict whether executives will perform as required.

Leslie Pratch developed her psychological model of leadership by by studying the theories behind the concept of active coping and the qualities required for effective leadership. She thought about what effective leaders did, felt, and thought; why they behaved as they did, why they made the decisions they made, and why those actions were effective—or not. She condensed these thoughts and theories to create her personal definition: leadership is effective when it influences the actions of followers toward the achievement of the goals of the group or organization.
With this definition, Leslie Pratch identified four elements of the active coping style that underpin effective leadership: integrity, psychological autonomy, integrative capacity, and catalytic coping.