TWICE: Lewis To Leave Sears
Sears Holdings CEO Aylwin Lewis will step down later this week and be replaced on an interim basis by W. Bruce Johnson, executive VP, supply chain operations.
The names may change, but Sears'
Punditry and observations on technology, and current affairs in Canadian and Global business.
Copyright 2010 by Lee Distad. All rights reserved.
Sears Holdings CEO Aylwin Lewis will step down later this week and be replaced on an interim basis by W. Bruce Johnson, executive VP, supply chain operations.
Posted by
Lee_D
at
8:10:00 a.m.
0
comments
Labels: management, retail, sears
George Granoff has been named the new CEO of Tweeter Newco.
He replaces the former CEO, Joe McGuire, who resigned Monday.
The
announcement was made by Schultze Asset Management, an investment group
specializing in distressed businesses that acquired Tweeter in July for $38
million.
Granoff’s experience includes the roles of president and COO at both
Ames Department Stores and at Bradlees. He has also been CEO of Party City, CEO
of art specialty retailer The Art Store, and founder and CEO of Sherborn
Optical.
"For Tweeter, we now have a fresh voice at the top. George [Granoff]
is new to Tweeter but brings such a wealth of experience. Without a doubt, we're
now ready to move forward swiftly. It's a great day for this great company,"
said Tweeter chairman George Schultze.
Posted by
Lee_D
at
1:00:00 p.m.
1 comments
Labels: ce industry, management, retail, tweeter
Tweeter’s corporate staff was cut by half on
Friday to eliminate red tape and bureaucracy, the retailer’s new owners
said.
Tweeter chairman George Schultze, principal of Schultze Asset
Management, told TWICE that the cuts were difficult but “absolutely necessary”
in order to reduce excess corporate overhead which was “choking the
stores.”
Schulze confirmed that approximately 80 staffers were let go, most
based at Tweeter headquarters here, and that all departments were affected.
Tweeter’s senior management team was not yet impacted, he said. The executive
staff includes CEO Joe McGuire and senior VPs Gregory Hunt (chief financial
officer), Robert Staples (sales and installation services), Philo Pappas (chief
merchandising officer), Patrick Reynolds (chief marketing officer) and William
Morrison (chief information officer).
The downsizing was limited almost exclusively to
corporate staff, Schulze noted, and there were no reductions in stores or
store-level personnel. There are no plans to divest the headquarters facility,
although some of the excess space may be sublet.
Posted by
Lee_D
at
5:35:00 a.m.
1 comments
Labels: ce industry, management, retail, tweeter
Posted by
Lee_D
at
8:05:00 a.m.
0
comments
Labels: CE Pro, management, shameless self-promotion
Posted by
Lee_D
at
6:27:00 a.m.
2
comments
Labels: business, management
DealBreaker: Deal Lingo Lexicon
In case you ever get caught napping in a meeting, and the Senior Vice President of Sophistry and Circumlocution asks you to suggest some lateral action items to leverage your core resources towards stemming the negative growth, here's a one-stop-shop for catch-phrases and jargon to make you sound like corner-office material, if you're not already there.
Some of my favorites:
"chasing our tail"--looking at deals but getting none of them closed
"looking under a lot of rocks"--looking for deals in strange places
"keeping your powder dry"---saving capital to deploy via better opportunities
"running parallel" a disguised way of saying we are whoring it out to everyone and let the lowest/highest bidder win
"carry it across the goal line"--close a deal
"stick a fork in that puppy"--kill the deal
And whoever wrote this one, which is way too long to quote, and way too perfect to abridge, needs to be made partner at his firm immediately. If he's already a partner, he needs a bigger bonus.
Posted by
Lee_D
at
11:08:00 p.m.
0
comments
Labels: business, dealbreaker, jargon, management
CE Pro: Four Steps to Successful Performance Management
A big hearty thank you to editor Jason Unger who did a fantastic job of clarifying my voice on a topic that I tend to go off about.
I would also like to publically thank old mentors and luminaries from the past, without whom I would have had to reinvent the wheel, and who can all take a public bow for contributing to my success and development:
John Reeves of The Running Room
Howard Toering, once of Forzani Group, but I have no idea where the hell he is now.
Rev. Brian J Munro, formerly of Sony of Canada
Ufuk Yavasser of Sony of Canada
Dave Barton, formerly of Sony of Canada, now with Amex*
Dave Reid, formerly of HBC, now a big wheel at Saan Stores*
Dave Grobman, formerly of A&B Sound, now at Future Shop*
All of the above are Leaders of Men, and I wish them every success in their future endeavors.
*these are the Daves I know
Posted by
Lee_D
at
9:35:00 p.m.
1 comments
Labels: business, CE Pro, management
This week, I was giving some advice to a friend. She and her partner have been trying to collect from a reseller who has been delinquent on his account for over a year. The issue had been on the backburner for them because it was a small invoice, and they’ve been too busy with their real customers to follow up. This week, they finally received payment, along with a condescending note claiming that half of the goods suffered shipping damage, and that the reseller undertook it upon himself to pay for advertising to support sales of her product. The bottom line was that the reseller insinuated that she owed him money. No damaged report with the shipping company, no photos of damaged boxes, no evidence, and most importantly no explanation of why he dodged their phone calls and emails for a full year.
Regardless, all of this is beside the point, except as the lead in to a funny story an acquaintance of mine once told me. He used to work as a national account rep for Admiral appliances way back when, and one day he paid a surprise visit to the head office/distribution center of a well-known Canadian home furnishings retailer. He walked in via the loading dock entrance around the back, and since he was wearing a suit and tie, the workers assumed he was a head office guy, and ignored him as he poked around their operation.
Well, at the same time that he was nosing around, a truck loaded with Admiral washers and dryers came in and the workers started receiving them. My friend noticed that the foreman was marking two out of every three cartons with a giant “X” in black magic marker, and then scribbling notes on a clipboard. So he sidles over and says “Receiving washers, eh?”
“Yeah.” Says the foreman.
“So, what’s with the X’s you’re marking on those units?” He asked.
“I’m reporting them as dented in shipping, with hidden damage.” Responded the foreman, “I give this report to the buyer, and then Admiral will send him a rebate to compensate us.”
“I see.”
“Yeah, it’s free money. Pretty smart, really.”
Needless to say, Admiral’s relationship with that retail chain ended later that day.
If any of you have fond remembrances of shady dealings or sly business partners, send them to me to publish here. I promise to omit names to protect the guilty.
Posted by
Lee_D
at
11:11:00 a.m.
0
comments
Labels: business, gossip, management
Long or Short Capital has a wonderfully mean-spirited article that outlines all the reasons why they don’t like Human Resources personnel.
http://longorshortcapital.com/bear-vs-shark-the-corporate-edition-hr-vs-it.htm
It is closest thing to working for the government outside of…working for the
government. The whole department is an entrenched intracorporate bureaucracy
which spends its days finding cipherlike ways to spend money, mainly to justify
its own existence.
Posted by
Lee_D
at
3:37:00 p.m.
2
comments
Labels: human resources, incompetence, management
http://www.twice.com/article/CA6366255.html
Jim Hamilton, executive VP of merchandising and marketing joins former president and COO Claire Babrowski and former CFO David Barnes in walking the plank.
Not content with taking an axe to the deadwood at the senior management level, newly-appointed chairman/CEO Julian Day is eliminating up to 450 positions at the head office level.
None of this is especially unusual to observe in a struggling retailer. Personally, the fact that it took Day less than a month to identify 450 HQ personnel who could stand to get the sack indicates to me that RadioShack's tail has been wagging the dog for far too long. What makes the story hot, is how he's doing it: firing people by email:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,211318,00.html
http://www.cepro.com/news/editorial/14926.html
A bold, unconventional move to be sure, and one that's drawing fire from the media, HR consultants, and other soft fuzzy types who care about employees "feelings."
If you recall, one of Day's first executive decisions last month was to eliminate quarterly conference calls with the financial analysts.
http://www.forbes.com/facesinthenews/2006/07/17/radioshack-conference-calls-cx_gl_0717autofacescan02.html?partner=links
Some people (mostly analysts and shareholders) have taken issue with Day's decision to reduce the transparency of management's decision making. On the other hand, if you have nothing nice to say about your company, you're better off not saying anything at all.
RadioShack needs someone at the wheel who isn't afraid to make tough, unpopular calls. And taking the helm of a loser challenged company that's wallowing in its own corporate inertia requires doing lots of tough, unpopular things to stem the bleeding, batten down the hatches, and start making headway. Whether or not Day can plot a new course forRadioShack is subject to debate. Then again, skeptics thought Kmart was sunk before he came on board.
What's with all the ship metaphors? Maybe reading this was the reason:
http://longorshortcapital.com/peak-piratery-time-to-walk-the-plank.htm
Posted by
Lee_D
at
12:39:00 p.m.
1 comments
Labels: incompetence, management, radio shack
Former Harman International CEO Doug Pertz gets US$3.8 million to go away.
Reported in:
http://www.dealbreaker.com/2006/08/how_to_survive_on_4800000_per_1.html
http://www.footnoted.org/striking-the-wrong-chord/
Audio electronics marker Harman International (HAR) blew a speaker yesterday when it announced the resignation of CEO Doug Pertz. Pertz, who was just hired at the end of April, is leaving immediately, marking an abrupt end to his brief tenure. As Forbes noted, however, it wasn’t exactly perfect harmony from the beginning, given Pertz’s lack of relevant industry experience. Pertz, however, is singing a sweet tune.
How come? In the 8-K Harman filed late yesterday to announce the CEO change, it noted that Pertz is walking away with a severance payment of $3.8 million. That works out to about $48,000 a day for Pertz’s four months of work! The musical chairs certainly didn’t sit well with shareholders, who now have to bear the cost of signing yet another CEO. After all, compensation consultants aren’t cheap. Ditto for executive search firms. Investors responded to the resignation by pushing the stock down 4% yesterday, erasing all of the week’s gains.
Stories like this remind me of the Dilbert cartoon where the pointy-haired boss exclaims, “Tell me again what we manufacture? Never mind, it’s irrelevant, a great manager can manage anything.” (Or something to that effect)
Maybe I’m unduly opinionated on the subject of executive compensation because of all my years in commission sales. In my world, if you can’t hunt or farm (or both), you don’t eat. So from my perspective, unless they’re growing key metrics that deliver profit, I don’t know why senior execs feel they deserve seven-figure compensation. Rewarding failure seems like such a misguided approach to doing business. Many companies in manufacturing or retail industries would do well to look at the compensation model of the insurance and financial services industry: senior management gets a fair six-figure salary, but the real money comes at bonus time. If you did a great job, seven and eight-figure bonus cheques are how the firm says, “thank you.” If you didn’t do a great job, you’re probably out on the street.
Posted by
Lee_D
at
9:08:00 p.m.
0
comments
Labels: gossip, incompetence, management
As someone who has not only shopped at the HBC family of stores for my entire life, but who once worked for HBC for a few years, I applaud Jerry Zucker’s promise to breath new life into the company, but it is my opinion that if Zucker and his team wish to reverse HBC’s fortunes, they have their work cut out for them.Every article in the business media that deals with the woes of Canada’s oldest retailer make the same points; a hypercompetitive retail marketplace, strong American competitors moving in, and HBC’s inability to differentiate their brand. However, I have never seen anyone draw the inference that most, if not all, of HBC’s struggles stem from an inertia-laden corporate culture that resents change, and a fundamental disconnect between the directives of the Head Office and the attitudes amongst the rank and file sales associates in the stores.During the years that I worked in two different Bay department stores, I observed that store-level culture and morale are dictated by a cadre of senior associates and sales managers, all of whom have been employed for a decade or more. When Head Office and store management call for the execution of a new marketing program, the prevailing attitude is almost universally one of cynicism and apathy. More than one senior associate confided to me that since they get paid the same regardless of how hard they work, they had no desire to deliver more than the bare minimum expected of them. Conversely, associates show a great deal of initiative when it comes to maximizing the use of their coffee breaks and sick days.I can’t imagine that this comes as a surprise to any Canadian who has tried to round up a sales associate in a Bay store on a busy Saturday. More often than not, when you do find someone to help you, they are neither helpful, nor well-informed. Regardless of the efforts of the buyers and merchandisers to create attractive displays full of hip, eye catching products, and the sophisticated logistics necessary to fill the stores with stock, I strongly suspect that the Bay’s lackluster sales metrics ultimately result from the lack of buy-in amongst senior associates (who I often refer to as “lifers”) who believe that their employment is an entitlement.Sadly, this culture is deeply ingrained at the store level. In any staff break room in the company, bitterness and complaining is a universal pastime that I can only imagine has reached a crescendo during the Maple Leaf Holdings buyout drama. In order to affect a turnaround of a Canadian retail icon, it is going to be necessary for Zucker’s team to address the deep-rooted disaffection of HBC’s personnel, no matter how drastic the solution may be.
Sphere: Related Content
Posted by
Lee_D
at
4:46:00 p.m.
2
comments
Labels: HBC, management, retail
I’d like to draw your attention to the article “Fire your duds” by Jim McElgunn on the Canadian Business Magazine website: http://www.canadianbusiness.com/entrepreneur/human_resources/article.jsp?content=20050524_090427_3508
Mr. McElgunn’s article does a great job of laying out why it is so important to set expectations for your team, and making it clear that they need to live up to them. To back up a few steps from the termination procedures that he focuses on, where many organizations go wrong in the Performance Management process is that they fail to adequately execute the process itself.
“Performance Management” is an ominous sounding term that inevitably conjures up grim visions, whether of unpleasant disciplinary reviews, or of odious micro managing. In reality, having a clear policy and a recognized process for conducting performance management, and executing that process in a timely manner is a critical task for any managers who want to do more than just pretend that their organization is focused on success.
Step One: Have standards, and communicate them. Every person that reports to you needs to receive a written set of the company’s expectations regarding how they carry out their duties. If you or your human resources department don’t have or can’t find your organization’s Job Descriptions, then you need to get your act together. Don’t use the excuse that job descriptions are only for employees of large corporations either. I know several small independent entrepreneurs who utilize detailed job descriptions for their staff. Especially in a small operation, it is critical that every team member understands how their performance affects the entire business, and buys in to the understanding that each one of them is entirely responsible for contributing to a successful enterprise. For that matter, it doesn’t hurt if business units in a larger organization buy in to the same mindset.
Step Two: Schedule regular evaluations, and do them on time. This is where most organizations lose their way. Time commitments, deadlines, and scheduling make many managers downgrade the priority that they assign to performance evaluations. I have observed this pattern time and again: a New Performance Management Initiative is created. The managers, full of zeal, conduct regular evaluations of their people. Then they start to get busy with other priorities, and start putting off the evaluations. The devolution slides rapidly from monthly reviews to quarterly, then annually, then not at all. Some organizations even manage to leapfrog from monthly to not-at-all in a single bound, although this is usually symptomatic of other, more serious problems with the management team. Regular evaluations have two key functions: they allow you to paint a clear picture for yourself of what each member of your team is producing, and most importantly, it allows your people to have a clear idea of what you think of their work, and to provide them with coaching to help them work towards a higher level of performance.
Schedule evaluations according to whatever time frame makes sense, according to the tempo of your particular business or industry. Monthly evaluations are, in my opinion, a bare minimum. For some strongly sales-focused businesses such as car dealerships, bi-weekly might be better. For almost all industries, having regular monthly, quarterly, and annual evaluations works best. Only doing an “annual” or “year-end” evaluation is a shameless cop-out that is barely better than not doing them at all. It is impossible to give significance to a team member’s projects completed, projects delayed, deals made, and deals lost many months later. If it takes you a year to get around to handing out tummy rubs or rebukes, your people are likely to think that you don’t really know or care what they do all day. If that is the case, they’re probably right.
Step Three: Coaching, which is the whole point. This is the reason why you are making the time to sit down with a member of your team and conduct a formal evaluation. As a manager, you are (in theory) entirely responsible for the results produced by your team. It is your job not only to recognize good performance, but also to draw attention to areas that need improvement, and to provide constructive solutions that will bring those areas up to standard.
Everyone, regardless of how well they perform, has areas that are opportunities for improvement. Just as an under-performing employee needs to be shown the steps they need to take to deliver an acceptable performance, your superstars need to be coached on what they need to work on to go from “Good” to “Great” or from “Great” to “Exceptional.” From my experience as both a “top performer” and a manger of top performers, these individuals thrive on feedback and recognition. They enjoy the warm fuzzy feeling that comes from getting a great evaluation, but the most highly motivated of them will also actively seek coaching tips that will help them get to the next level. This is why it is so important for managers to break out of the mindset that Performance Management is solely a tool to move non-performers out the door. When applied regularly and correctly, evaluations help you coach everyone on your team to produce results at a higher level than they are doing now. And that is what you (and your boss) want, right?
At this point, you need to set targets, and set timelines. Now that you have clearly explained to your team member how their performance rates, and what you want to see them change, you need to set a timetable for when you want to see demonstrable examples of the development opportunities that you have discussed. Not only does this begin to provide you with the documentation that you will require when the time comes to dismiss a non-performer, it creates a sense of urgency for the team member who wants to deliver a higher caliber performance, and this in turn helps instill in them a commitment to change. Except for the most severe cases, you should refrain from phrasing this portion of the evaluation in Doom & Gloom: expressions like the venerable “your performance will be reviewed in 30 days. If in that time an appreciable improvement is not noted, further action will be initiated” are better off saved for progressive discipline letters. Rather, you should express the need for improvement in terms that build consensus. If someone is under-performing, the evaluation is your opportunity to make sure there is no misunderstanding between the two of you about how they measure up, and what they need to deliver by the time their next evaluation comes around.
There you have it, in three steps. Actually, there is a fourth step: Do it again. Just as you can’t embark on a long road trip without a map and a clear idea of where you want to go, you can’t expect to execute a business plan without knowing where your performance is now, where you want your performance to be at the end of a set time, and what steps you will need to take to achieve that objective. And if you don’t have a clear picture of what that objective and the required steps are, then you can hardly expect your people to figure it out all on their own. That’s your job, and if you want to be good at it (and get compensated as well as you think you should be), then you need to exhibit the leadership necessary to deliver the performance that is expected of you and your team.
Posted by
Lee_D
at
7:48:00 p.m.
0
comments
Labels: management