I recently listened to a talk given by Greg Barnett, one of Hogan’s veteran consultants and our Director of Product Development, about the importance of defining a strong leadership brand. The concept of an individual leadership brand departs from our conventional understanding of branding from an organizational standpoint. For example, consider the brand that Apple computers has created; the exemplars of innovation, elegant simplicity, and sleek, modern, technology. Now consider the individual leadership brand that Steve Jobs created – in many ways, his personality embodies many of the same qualities of Apple’s brand – Jobs is hailed as an innovative, creative genius who changed the world with his brilliance and innovation. Even his physical image aligned with Apple’s brand – sleek, simple, and timeless with a modern slant.

So, what does a strong leadership brand get you? To cite Barnett, developing a strong leadership brand can earn friends, fans, and followers – and not just the kind you get on Facebook or Twitter. It defines your identity and distinctiveness, communicates what value you bring to the table, and provides focus and direction to guide leadership efforts. It also insulates you from your shortcomings and mistakes.

A strong, consistent brand creates a kind of umbrella, so-to-speak, that defines you as a leader and makes your day-to-day actions (and blunders) less relevant. For example, consider the legacy left behind by Bill Clinton; despite his well-publicized lapses in judgment and abuse of political power, he remains a beloved American president who is remembered for leading our nation through one of the most prosperous decades in U.S. History. Although President Clinton withstood some harsh criticism and mockery, his overall image, strong leadership brand, and arguably his charm, helped cushion these blows and preserve his overall reputation and contributions in the hearts, minds, and history books of the American people. By contrast, Howard Dean’s brand image was not strong enough to save him from his “I have a scream…” speech, which sealed his fate forever as a volatile lunatic unfit for presidential office.

However, no matter how magnetic, impactful, or authentic the leadership brand, all human beings have a dark side – a kind of shadow that follows you around, lurking in the peripheral, with the potential to emerge in times of stress, pressure, novelty, or boredom. This is what Hogan refers to as leadership derailment, wherein our personality characteristics betray us, degrade our success, and generally send us on a fast train to nowhere. Our shadow is particularly dangerous because it tends to lie beyond the reach of our awareness, but is highly apparent to those around us.

In the wake of Jobs’ premature passing, his strong leadership brand permits his fans and followers to remember him fondly for his brilliant contributions to the world, his insistence on quality, and the legacy he leaves behind him at Apple. Nobody is highlighting his failures, setbacks, or well-known dark side. Well, almost nobody…

In a scathing post-mortem commentary titled What Everyone is Too Polite to Say About Steve Jobs, Gawker’s Ryan Tate points out some elements of Steve Jobs’ shadow. Some have described him as a ruthless tyrant who inspired fear among his ranks with his hostility, unpredictable temperament, humiliation tactics, and harsh censorship practices. Yet, in the aftermath of Jobs’ death, he is still heralded as a prodigy, a strategic genius, and a gifted innovator who changed the technological landscape forever. Only history will be able to tell us which version of Jobs lives in the collective public memory – the genius, or his shadow? Was his brand strong enough to fend off the smudge that his shadow left on an otherwise pristine career?

In listening to Greg’s talk, he posed some powerful questions that are still rattling around persistently in my own head many days later: What defines your leadership brand? What do you stand for? What do people say about you when you’re not around?

People have a difficult time answering these questions honestly because human beings are masters of self-deception. Our clever minds and defensive egos do a phenomenal job of protecting us from the truth, as do the people around us who shield us from the painful reality that we are not perfect. We receive feedback from our peers and loved ones in the form of sugar-coated rubber bullets that contain a shred of truth, but do little to help us become truly self-aware.

It is worth reflecting on the unintended consequences that your shadow can have on your brand reputation and ultimate success. If you get to know your shadow, you arm yourself with the self-awareness needed to manage your dark side, prevent derailment, and create a true leadership brand that is authentic, high-quality, and differentiates you from others.
 

Apple CEO and co-founder Steve Jobs recently announced that he will take yet another medical leave of absence with an unspecified return date. His announcement was followed by much discussion and debate about when and whether he will return. This news re-awakened the debate among worried stockholders and industry analysts who are sweating out the question of whether or not the Sultan of Silicon Valley can be replaced. As reported by the LA Times, Apple’s shares fell 6.45% immediately after markets opened the day following Jobs’ announcement. Consequently, stockholders are putting the pressure on the board to publicize a succession plan. Why the sudden iPanic? Many believe that Jobs’ vision and innovation is integral to the success and brand image of Apple, and that he simply cannot be replaced. Admittedly, Jobs’ uncanny ability to predict, or even create, market demand for consumer technology products has catapulted Apple to undeniable success over the years. So the question remains – can Jobs be replaced?

Jobs’ announcement got me thinking about the problems inherent to succession management, and some recent industry research that has shed some light on the issue. In a December 2010 research report published by Towers Watson, a survey of over 700 global companies indicated that the top two workforce challenges facing businesses today are (1) loss of talent in key positions and (2) lack of succession planning/management. An online survey from the American Management Association of over 1,000 senior managers and executives revealed that only 14% of respondents reported being “well-prepared” for a sudden loss of the organization’s key leaders. In addition, 61% reported being “somewhat prepared”, while one in five admitted to being completely “unprepared.”

After reflecting on the realities of this issue, the public clamoring for Apple to release a succession plan seemed misguided in a few ways. First, what the stockholders seem to actually want in reality is a successor to be named, which is far from establishing a true succession plan. Identifying a successor or even a pool of successors is only a fraction of the battle. What is more important is the need to develop the talent by exposing them to relevant experiences, training activities, or other developmental opportunities. For example, Jobs designated Apple COO Tim Cook to step up to the plate during his first medical leave of absence. Jobs remained involved in major strategic decisions, while Cook oversaw daily operations. Business seemed to go smoothly during Cook’s time in charge. This certainly qualifies as relevant experience, and the truth may be that Jobs and his team are indeed grooming several high-potentials internally at Apple in preparation for Jobs’ eventual retirement. However, a quote from Cook published in Forbes magazine reads, "Come on, replace Steve? No. He's irreplaceable."

Second, succession planning is a long-term, organization-wide initiative. It takes time, considerable planning, and an overall talent management strategy to function properly. For example, the downstream effects of each staffing event must be considered – for every promotion or transition, a well-developed talent pool should be prepared at each subsequent level. If it turns out that Cook is the apple of Job’s eye, a successor must also be prepped and ready to take over Cook’s responsibilities to ensure a smooth transition.

Third, succession planning requires defining what constitutes exceptional performance within each key leadership level, and then finding the talent that will fit the bill. For example, Jobs is celebrated for his creativity, relentless attention to detail, and keen eye for aesthetic appeal. Hogan might measure these characteristics using the Inquisitive, Prudence, and Aesthetic scales. He is also known for his charisma, mischievous business strategies, and ability to convey effective and persuasive messages. Jobs and Cook both share a passion for the Apple brand and a tendency to make extremely bold statements on record. By contrast, Cook is not known as a compelling public speaker, is not seen as a visionary, and does not wear the signature black turtleneck. He is the unflappable operations specialist with a logical mind and an engineering background, and does not spend much time on the creative side of the house. Jobs is an intense, creative mastermind whose vision and aesthetic focus guides all aspects of the product design process. The conundrum of succession planning is that plucking an operations master from his perch and placing him in the chief executive chair often means you lose a great COO and gain a mediocre CEO. Would naming Cook as the successor simply be a case of going after low-hanging fruit? Is comparing Jobs to Cook as useful as comparing apples to oranges?

But seriously folks, all pomological puns aside, the succession planning issue is a relevant one, and personality plays a key role in the ability to effectively fill the holes in the talent pipeline. Cook obviously has talent and a strong track record. However, having the right mix of skills, experiences, and innate personality characteristics provide the necessary foundations for making an effective succession decision. However ambiguous the succession planning issue, one thing is certain: whoever eventually becomes Jobs’ successor will undoubtedly have big New Balance 992’s to fill.