One of the biggest advantages of being self-employed is having the flexibility to dictate your schedule.
Many freelancers find themselves frittering away their days,
unsure of how to leverage their autonomy.
One way to be more efficient is to cluster all your client meetings on the same days. Those days will be long and intense, but they’ll allow you unfettered productive work on the other days.
This is especially important if you have to travel for your meetings: If you can tackle multiple meetings downtown on one day, you’ve saved yourself hours of painful commuting. And before you even agree to that in-person meeting, make sure it’s a good use of your time.
Ask questions about the agenda, and only attend if an important issue needs to be discussed and decided. Otherwise, gently suggest that you’re available by phone or email.
There are several compelling reasons why you should take my friends at Beyond Budgeting Institute seriously!
Below you will find 10 reasons why budgeting and traditional performance management practices cause significant problems and therefore should be replaced.
Did you know that:
Budgeting prevents rapid response. You need to respond rapidly to unpredictable events but the annual budgeting process was never designed for this purpose.
Budgeting is too detailed and expensive. Budgeting is highly bureaucratic and very expensive (often absorbing 15-20 percent of management time).
Budgeting is very quickly out-of-date. Many of the key assumptions change frequently (such as commodity prices, exchange and interest rates and of course customer demand) causing confusion and much rework.
Budgeting is out-of-kilter with the competitive environment. Today’s drivers of success are concerned more with fast response and continuous innovation than managing people and budgets.
Budgeting is divorced from strategy. Budgets are based on functions and departments rather than strategic themes. The chances of the goals and plans of many disparate functions and department being aligned with a coherent corporate strategy are often negligible.
Budgeting stifles initiative and innovation. Budgets tend to support an authoritarian management regime that stifles innovation
Budgeting protects non-value-adding costs. Cost budgets are usually compiled and agreed based on prior year outcomes. There is little time or incentive to understand and challenge the root causes of costs allowing huge amounts of waste to fester and grow.
Budgeting reinforces command and control. Budgets were designed to enable functional leaders to manage the organization from the center thus local decision-making is usually delegated within strict budgetary controls.
Budgeting demotivates people. When starting a new job most people are highly motivated to maximize their performance. But soon they learn not to fight the system but to ‘go with the flow’. This means doing little more than their job description specifies and the minimum to achieve their targets. Budgets are aligned with McGregor’s Theory X. The assumption is that people will only do the minimum required unless there is an additional incentive to do more.
Budgeting encourages unethical behaviour and increases reputational risk. Aggressive targets and incentives drive people to meet the numbers at almost any cost. This can lead to unethical selling and ‘creative’ accounting placing the CEO’s (and the company’s) reputation in jeopardy
Our mission is to deliver a high-calibre short-list against a client mandate in days (rather than weeks) adapting and improving upon interim provider skills and applying them to BOTH interim and permanent C-suite appointments in a global context.
All for a single, and universally flat, fee 100% contingent on success. 1000 + successful appointments across 70 countries indicates a winning combination of global reach allied to local knowledge.
How: Once mandated a database of candidates is just the start-point. In common with most executive search firms although some of them consider prior short-lists and LinkedIn to be sufficient for this purpose.
Our database – a unique e-platform underpinned by advanced data management metrics – is based on rigorous up-front selection and to successfully complete the process, candidates must match the following profile:
Be looking for their next interim management assignment or a permanent executive position
Have a proven track record of more than 10 to 15 years as a successful international executive and/or as a serial entrepreneur.
Have a reputation for excellence in leadership, enabling them quickly to gain respect and credibility within a team
Understand the venture community and have built fast growing organizations
Fluency in English (in addition to their mother tongue, if applicable)
Have the ability to analyse and model businesses in a very restricted time frame in their area of expertise
All of which are validated prior to consideration for short-listing against a client requirement. Of over 100,000 applying from 180 countries since 2002 just over 16,000 have reached the certified – iCEO – standard.
The identification phase can well end there due to this massive up-front, and on-going, investment in a constantly updated database. However sometimes other activity needs to supplement this activity and for this we use the full range of UC* technology available.
Also in common with others there follows an extensive process to arrive at a final short-list. With global reach (candidates resident in 180 countries) and having local knowledge (in country Client Partners) this will always involve on-line and face to face interchanges between all parties.
In the case of CEO Worldwide the efficiencies of the digitally driven business model deliver cost and productivity savings which are passed down to the ultimate client in the form of flat fees and a much reduced ‘time-to-fulfilment’. This level of transparency and speed of execution is undoubtedly welcomed by all in the C-Suite.
Then, and this I’ve found to be another area of concern in the boardroom – experience and expertise.
CEO Worldwide Client Partners are operationally experienced people understanding the unique international issues and opportunities faced by the client. They in most instances have been managing international expansion, M&A, turn-around, fund raising etc.. In short they are not regular search consultants who, again in general, lack experience in international C-level roles.