A look at the world’s top business leaders show they possess both financial savvy and personal acumen.
We measure today’s top business leaders on a variety of scales, including personal acumen and their company’s financial performance. Regardless of how a leader is gauged, one thing is clear: 21st century leaders must have strong engagement and stellar interpersonal skills on multiple fronts — from the numbers to corporate responsibility to how to best motivate employees.
The Harvard Business Review suggests the world’s best-performing CEOs share three crucial traits: long-term thinking, short-term savvy, and a relentless focus on employees. HBR’s annual data-driven annual survey of top CEOS in the world weighs companies with an 80/20 formula — 80% based on financial performance, and 20% based on ESG (environment, social, and corporate governance performance).
The top leaders, by the numbers
The tension between short- and long-term decision-making affects top leaders’ financial performance, since overall strength is not based on a single positive financial quarter, HBR reports, but rather the cumulative effect of consecutive strong quarters.
“They really are running today’s business while trying to create tomorrow’s business,” Dan McGinn, senior editor at Harvard Business Review, said in a recent podcast about how CEOs manage the challenges of focusing on long- and short-term growth of business. “They’re dealing with a very fast-changing global landscape.”
The top three business leaders in HBR’s survey — Lars Rebien Sorenson of Novo Nordisk, Martin Sorrell of WPP, and Pablo Isla of Inditex — all had different paths to the top, although 84% of CEOs are promoted from within. Only 24% of HBR’s top leaders have an MBA, signaling that the coveted business degree is not integral to becoming a top leader. Of note is that only one of the top 10 HBR leaders is from the United States — Jen-Hsun Huang of Nvidia — because of the generally lower ESG numbers for U.S.-based companies, McGinn said in the podcast. None of the top 10 are women.
The metric commonly referred to as “Corporate Responsibility,” ESG importance is rising in the United States, but is still outpaced by European companies. This is only the second year that the HBR survey included ESG, which resulted in Amazon CEP Jeff Bezos dropping from the top 10 to number 76 on HBR’s list.
In addition to being on top of the ever-changing socio-political world, top business leaders may have to consider a shift in their corporate culture because of the rising number of millennials in the workforce.
Forbes estimates that by 2020, millennials will comprise nearly 50% of the workforce. Successful business leaders need to know how to best motivate and manage this workforce segment who, according to HBR’s McGinn, have different sets of values and different ways of thinking about their careers. Companies today have to adapt their culture to this growing part of the workforce, he says.
Leadership traits that stand the test of time
Industrialist Andrew Carnegie, often credited with being one of the world’s most successful business leaders, met with journalist Napoleon Hill early in the 20th century to relay what would become his “31 Traits That All Business Leaders Have,” a guidepost for those looking to follow in Carnegie’s footsteps.
The personality traits, although more than 100 years old, are still relevant in today’s business world.
Hill published two books that included Carnegie’s traits: Think and Grow Rich (1937), and Think Your Way to Wealth from 1948. He posited that top traits of great leaders include:
Having a company purpose and a plan for attaining it
Being motivated
Coordinating efforts with talented workers
Being disciplined, persistent, creative and decisive
Being diplomatic and tactful, enthusiastic and likable
And treating others with respect
The top traits have stood the test of time and, mixed with the significance of today’s financial and corporate responsibility, create the ideal 21st century business leader.
The shortage of drivers paired with the continued growth of the trucking industry paves the way for driverless trucks.
This guest post comes to us from Rachel Everly, a writer for Cerasis, a top freight logistics company and truckload freight broker.
The trucking industry has been serving America for many decades, and even today it is the main method by which freight is transferred all over the country. Anyone who says the trucking industry is facing a decline or a reduced demand is way off the numbers. More large trucks are coming on U.S. roads, traveling more miles, and transporting more good than ever before.
We have seen more than 3% increases in the number of trucks, which translates to almost 11 million trucks. Also, trucks are still transporting 73% of almost all cargo weight moved in one year. With all these impressive numbers, surprisingly there is a shortage of drivers. That spells both trouble and opportunity for this industry.
Where is there a shortage of drivers?
The U.S trucking industry is facing a severe driver shortage. One estimate shows that around 48,000 drivers are required to move about 70% of freight.
To improve safety, in December 2015, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) announced that driver hours will be recorded via Electronic Logging Devices by 2017. This becomes mandatory by December 18, 2017. This was introduced because the existing systems of time-logging are purposely made very complicated, thus not allowing one to check how many hours is a driver on the road.
This is being introduced to ensure that driver safety is not compromised, keeping fatigued drivers off the road. According to calculations, this will save 26 lives a year and prevent 562 injuries every year. Not just this, the ELD will save companies the hassle of paperwork, eventually leading the trucking industry to save somewhere around $1 billion due to reduced paperwork and time-savings.
However, this means reduced hours per driver, thus increasing the need for more drivers. Small trucking companies will be hit the hardest, but overall the industry will be in a better position thanks to this rule. It is estimated that this new rule would cost the industry $1.8 billion, but cost savings from reduced accidents and paperwork amount in excess of $3 billion.
The way to driverless trucks
Humans are amazing creatures, but we are prone to human errors. Human errors account for the majority of the road accidents. Plus with the new rule in, companies will need more drivers, adding to costs. Uber has been actively working on getting driverless trucks on the roads, with a project already started in Singapore, and now has turned its eyes on the trucking industry.
Uber has recently acquired the start-up Otto. Otto has made great inroads into driverless trucks. Otto currently has 6 working self-driving trucks, with plans to expand to 15. This year Otto is continuously running tests; trucks are hauling random items from the company’s garage to test how the vehicles respond to hauling weight.
The company is confident that soon they will be moving all kinds of goods for shippers. They have already started forging relationships with big names in the trucking industry. The self-driving trucks have shown that they can easily operate on highways, maneuvering off the open interstate is still a work in progress.
The following infographic outlines some of the benefits of driverless trucks:
The NRF’s annual survey found that 171 million Americans will celebrate the holiday, spending a total of $8.4 billion, the most reported in the survey’s 11-year history. Consumers plan to spend an average of $82.93 each, up from last year’s $74.34 per person spending.
As far as costumes go, NRF says to expect zombies, Minions, and characters from Star Wars and Disney’s Frozen to show up at your door. If you’re still looking for ideas yourself, try Pinterest, where 17% of consumers plan to get their inspiration for costumes this year.
Are you one of the 16% who will dress your pet up for Halloween? Take a note from last year’s top 5 pet costumes:
Pumpkin
Hot dog
Batman character
Devil
Bumblebee
Check out our infographic of other interesting Halloween 2016 facts from the NRF’s survey of 6,791 consumers below.
Company X also saw web traffic grow by 180% in 90 days by using Google AdWords and Facebook Ads.
Sometimes our clients can be a little hesitant to try pay-per-click advertising. Take Company X, for example.
Company X’s target customer fits a very particular profile, in terms of geography, income, and age. Because of those specific demographics, the client was not confident that a pay-per-click advertising campaign would be an effective way to reach those target customers. But we thought differently.
When paired with a content marketing program, pay-per-click can be one of the cheapest, in terms of cost-per-lead, and most efficient ways to reach a target audience. Thus, we convinced Company X to try PPC on a trial basis, investing just a small budget.
We developed a strategy for the client, using Google AdWords and Facebook Ads. Over the course of 90 days, the results were phenomenal.
A few key results:
Company X acquired 54 leads.
Traffic from paid search grew by 180%.
The lead-to-customer conversion rate was nearly 3x the industry standard.
Needless to say, Company X will be expanding the use of pay-per-click advertising in the future.
How can pay-per-click help your business?
PPC can seem intimidating to the novice. But, when done right, it can be a highly effective way to reach the very specific kind of customer your business is looking for. A little bit of know-how can be all the difference.
As such, Fronetics has developed a quick training on the basics of pay-per-click advertising: what it is, what platforms are available, etc. If you are interested in learning more about PPC and how it might complement your marketing program, download our free guide below.
A reduced workweek may mean better performance, talent retention, and bigger payoff for employers.
In August 2016, the Washington Post reported that Amazon plans to pilot a program in which select teams will work just 30 hours a week. The teams’ employees will be salaried and receive full benefits, as well as 75% of the pay full-time employees earn. The entire team, including managers, will work on this reduced schedule.
“We want to create a work environment that is tailored to a reduced schedule and still fosters success and career growth,” states an event posting by the company. “This initiative was created with Amazon’s diverse workforce in mind and the realization that the traditional full-time schedule may not be a ‘one size fits all’ model.”
The program comes just a year after a New York Times report depicted Amazon encouraging marathon workweeks while discouraging vacation — and even unfairly evaluating employees in the wake of personal crises like cancer or miscarriages.
Will the new part-time program help combat that image? Will the 30-hour workweek model impact Amazon’s productivity? While Amazon does not plan to roll the program beyond the select teams, research suggests that the company might reap some positive benefits from employees’ working less.
A reduced workweek benefits employees and the employer
Let’s look at how working fewer hours might result in healthier, more productive employees.
1. Shorter hours improve the physical and emotional health of the worker.
A National Bureau of Economic Research study examined manufacturing companies that experienced an unexpected spike in exports, meaning longer working hours, and the resulting toll on employees. The findings revealed that long hours on the job increase an employee’s risk for heart attack, depression, and injury. But despite more health concerns, employees took fewer sick days. The impact on productivity when a company has more sick, injured workers is self-evident.
On the contrary, a shorter workweek correlates with better physical, mental, and emotional well-being. That translates to more alert, adjusted, happy employees who have more stamina to complete their jobs. In fact…
2. A reduced workweek does not decrease productivity — rather, it often increases it.
Well employees leading balanced lives are able to accomplish more in a shorter amount of time, and that pays off for their companies.
3. Shorter hours may increase employee engagement and decrease turnover.
All the extra hours workers are putting in actually drive disengagement. Left wholly left unchecked, the culmination of issues arising from an unbalanced work-home life can increase absenteeism and turnover. Simply put, employees logging long hours are significantly more prone to burnout.
And turnover can be costly for employers. The U.S. Department of Labor currently estimates the average cost of a bad hiring decision to be as much as 30% of an individual’s first-year potential earnings. Think about how that adds up as employees put more time with the company and earn higher salaries.
So, Amazon is definitely onto something with its 30-hour workweek experiment. The question is, what will happen when it succeeds? Will more businesses try reducing working hours? Could something like this work for your business?
Millennials have a reputation for being lazy and feeling entitled — but what if we got it all wrong?
This guest post comes to us from Argentus Supply Chain Recruiting, a boutique recruitment firm specializing in Supply Chain Management and Procurement.
For the past few years, there’s been a glut of articles about the millennial generation in the workforce. These articles originally focused on how millennials’ perceived laziness and entitlement kept them from securing long-term employment. Coincidentally (or maybe not) these articles first started popping up around 2009-2010, when the great recession made for the toughest jobs climate in decades, especially for young people trying to find their first good jobs out of university — a difficult task for most grads even in a boom economy. Over time (as the economy improved and millennials’ ranks in the workforce began to swell), these millennial-focused articles shifted to discussions of what makes millennials “difficult” to work with. There are a few negative stereotypes that tended to come out of this analysis:
Millennials ask for raises and promotions constantly.
Millennials hop around from job to job with little loyalty to their employers.
Millennials always want to take more vacation time than their superiors.
Of course these stereotypes (like most stereotypes) don’t actually hold up to scrutiny. And in the past couple years it seems as if the business press has finally caught on to the fact that millennials are fitting in and thriving in working culture. Now, companies recognize that this generation offers unique advantages to employers. Millennial-focused analysis has shifted to talking about millennials’ good qualities, including being creative, highly proficient with technology, and excellent multi-taskers.
What millennials aren’t doing
What it comes down to is that companies are now fighting over millennial talent. They’re trying to do all they can to get the star performers to the table. On this topic, we read an interesting piece in the Toronto Star recently — just the latest in the long history of millennial thinkpieces — that bats down one of the nastiest stereotypes about millennial workers. It discusses how new research shows that millennials actually take less vacation than other employees, and tries to tease out the implications of how a seemingly-more “casual” working environment can lead to a chained-to-your-desk working culture.
Interesting stuff.
The article, titled “Millennials Can’t Afford to Keep Skipping Vacation,” discusses the phenomenon of millennial “work martyrs” — people who are afraid to take time off, even if that time off is paid vacation mandated by employment contracts. It cites research from the non-profit U.S. Travel Association that millennials take much, much less time off than stereotypes would dictate. (We should mention that, over the past 15 years, the use of paid vacation days has fallen off a cliff among a lot of different age groups). At Argentus, we try to stay abreast of whatever’s happening in the world of work, so it’s interesting to us think through issues like this.
So what are the implications of this trend?
The article echoes a lot of anxieties about 21st-century white-collar working culture more generally: that in our hyper-connected world, employees are expected to be always working, even when they’re not in the office. Companies reward people based on time commitment rather than productivity. Vacation time might be generously apportioned, or even unlimited, but workers don’t necessarily feel like they can take vacation. The Star article cites an interesting case: in 2015, Kickstarter began offering unlimited paid vacation, but the result was that actual time off taken went down. It appears that workers, especially millennials who are often working more junior, more precarious jobs, won’t take time off unless you tell them to.
Whether this plays out in every company, anxieties about these changes in the workplace are real: They illustrate the importance of work/life balance, which, despite being a buzzword, is also a real concept that pays dividends for employers. Employees who take vacations are not only happier, they’re more productive.
The solution? Maybe companies should start enforcing paid time off instead of rewarding workers who adopt a “work martyr” mentality.
