Osborne Interim Management is pleased to welcome Ivan McClelland (MBA, P.Mgr, CRM) to the organization as a Principal.
Based in Calgary, Ivan is a senior executive with a track record of providing strategic business direction in all areas of risk management. He has over 30 years’ experience in linking risk control with the objectives and goals of leading Canadian and international organizations. Ivan’s value to his clients is his breadth and depth of knowledge and experience from front line policing to executive leadership in complex business environments. He brings his clients a rare combination of strategic business management and enterprise risk management.
Osborne Interim Management is pleased to welcome Suzanne Wilson (BA - Econ) to the organization as a Principal.
Based in Calgary, Suzanne is a senior Human Resources professional with over 20 years of experience across a broad spectrum of disciplines. As Senior HR Director for two oil sands companies, she built a department from the ground up, developed compensation strategies, created recruitment plans for a high growth industry and created policies and procedures where none previously existed. As Director of Corporate Services she had taken responsibility for IT, corporate communication and administrative support functions. Experienced in transitioning companies from private to public. Adept at working with compensation committees and Boards of Directors. Suzanne is a builder of high performing teams with clear goals and accountabilities.
Of Suzanne joining the OIM team, Mark Olson, Managing Partner states: "We are thrilled Suzanne has agreed to take on the senior HR chair in our Calgary Osborne Interim Practice. Her skill set will be a tremendous asset to companies of all sizes in multiple sectors. Her experience in oil and gas in these somewhat turbulent times will be highly valued."
THE CLIENT
A mid size oil and gas company with head office in the US with Canadian operations.
THE CHALLENGE
The Human Resource department of the company had recently experienced significant turnover and the Director had been transferred to the Head office in the US. A new leader was placed into a managerial role reporting to a Director in Houston, but accountable to the local leadership. The challenge was to assist the outgoing leader with his exit and mentor the incoming manager and team to help them build a foundation for success, including new hires and new processes.
THE APPROACH
The initial approach was to spend time with the outgoing Director in two areas:
- Hand off incompleted projects.
- Develop ongoing structure for the HR department.
Working with the incoming leader, important matters relating to the field employees and contractors of the company were addressed allowing the new manager to focus on the HR team and the path forward for HR. Considerable time was also spent mentoring team members on projects and processes.
THE RESULT
The new leader was able to address the day-to-day matters of HR and start working with the Canadian team on their strategic HR priorities. The Principal took on several large scale projects (which arose from a recent process and procedure audit) that would have taken the current team several months to complete with their current workload. These projects were completed in a few months, satisfying the company auditors.
The HR team, although still relatively new, was able to gain the respect and confidence of the Canadian leadership team and the field employees, improve processes and prepare for future success in all areas of the HR lifecycle.
THE CLIENT
A mid-size not-for-profit charitable organization.
THE CHALLENGE
To provide leadership during the transition following the departure of a 23 year Executive Director.
THE APPROACH
Operating as Interim Executive Director for a period of five months, the Principal empowered and supported the staff to deliver services while providing assurance to the funders and stability to the administration.
THE RESULT
Staff retention was 100% and program funding actually increased during the period, and with the Principal’s assistance the organization found a dynamic new leader to take the reigns going forward.
Next time you decide to fire a senior executive or make a significant change in the operation of your organization, avoid stating the reason as “we’ve decided to go in a different direction”. You might think that’s a short, clear-cut and irrefutable explanation for making the change, but it seldom calms the departed and can send a ruinous message to your stakeholders, irrespective of whether the organization is competing in the private, not-for-profit or public sector.
I always like the sports analogies; if you’re a team does that mean a complete overhaul/re-build? Or are you just replacing the head coach because you don’t think he/she is getting enough out of the talent? One might lose season ticket holders, the other might increase sales.
If you’re a not-for-profit society does that mean there’s a void in leadership, or are you changing your programming? Funders will be nervous!
If you’re a consumer goods company, does that mean you’re ditching or dramatically altering the current product line? Maybe a good thing but in the meantime, customers are going elsewhere. In 2011, when then CEO Leo Apotheker of Hewlett Packard announced the company was getting out of PC computers they did terrific damage to their channel partners who thought they were abandoning hardware altogether. It’s taken years to rebuild that trust and business under Meg Whitman. Now they’re at the point where they can split the business units and create more shareholder value.
In executive dismissals, what is said behind closed doors is often covered under a cloak of confidentiality as the result of a non-disclosure agreement tied to a settlement. That of course only serves the purpose for which it is intended if both sides honour the pact. You could prosecute if the deposed executive takes to social media or commits an obvious breech, but you may never know about the over the phone and over the fence conversations that have a way of spreading like an oil spill. You’re taking the high road and you can’t understand the backlash.
Unless the dismissal is “for cause” it seldom changes the fate of the individual to say he/she was let go, but what’s the right “spin” publicly? When Canadian Pacific Railway ousted its CEO a few years ago in a very messy and public battle, it was very clear why .The winning shareholder group was validated as Hunter Harrison, ex of CN, proceeded to take the company to a new level of performance and profitability (some may argue at the expense of other metrics, but that’s another story).
Why not just say it like it is? We needed a change in leadership after this many years (in sports vernacular that’s called the players tuning out the coach). We are looking for more growth and innovation over this next period. We need to generate a greater return for shareholders. Whatever piece of straight talk fits.
From the executive’s perspective, the best professional athletes know when they need a change in scenery and systems to “spark” their game. They also tend to realize when they don’t have what it takes anymore to perform at a peak level and would rather go out on their terms than fight their replacement. Organizations need to be able to make the same call for the same reasons and be very clear about it. It usually ends up being the right approach for all concerned.
Mark Olson (click to see Mark’s profile)
Managing Partner & Principal
Other Related Articles
The Courage to Get it Right
Other Articles Written by Mark Olson
When RFP Stands for Real Flawed Process
All Interim Management Models Aren’t Created Equal
The Hidden Potential in Any Organization
