|
Katherine, a talented up-and-coming leader at a high-growth technology company, was eager to be promoted, but specific development areas were getting in her way. Sarah conducted a 360 review that yielded largely expected results. Unanticipated and surprising, however, were the comments about Katherines technical prowess and that people viewed her as visionary and strategic. For many, blind spots represent a failure to recognize the weaknesses or biases that get in the way of performance. In an effort to improve, they may hyper-focus on those areas for development. In Katherines case, she had a blind spot for her strengths. The skills not in the job description Like many leaders, Katherine was aware of the skills that were closely tied to her job description, but didnt have the full picture of the value she was bringing to the organization. Her sole focus had been on developing the areas that were impeding a potential promotion. In our work with leadersbrand development (Rebecca) and executive coaching (Sarah)weve noticed parallels between business owners and organizational leaders. Regardless of their field, both groups can fail to recognize the very traits that others deeply appreciate. When a talent comes naturally, without deliberate effort, we often dont recognize it as a strength. Skills like critical thinking, problem solving, or strategic insight can feel so effortless that we dont notice them in ourselves. Or sometimes, we assume others are equally adept at the same skills, and dismiss their value. Self-perception is only one piece of the puzzle though. Its equally important to understand how colleagues or clients see you, and what they value most. Uncovering the true essence of your unique contribution can be an illuminating process that strengthens your personal brand and boosts your leadership effectiveness. Whether you lead a team or run a business, the principle holds: you cant act on strengths you dont recognize. Recognizing your secret strengths When you see your most intrinsic strengths clearly, everything changes. Heres what becomes possible: Personal brand differentiation: Tuning into the attributes others consistently recognize gives you clarity on what matters most to the people who influence your career or business, and how those skills differentiate you from others. That insight can help sharpen your positioning and messaging, making it easier to attract aligned opportunities with clients, projects, or promotions. Greater influence: Owning and leveraging your key strengths can increase your confidence, clarity, and credibility, making you more magnetic and influential. Faster decision-making: When you’re anchored in what you do best, you dont second-guess as much. You make decisions faster and with more conviction, because you’re not wasting energy trying to be someone you’re not. Fuel for innovation: Unearthing strengths like vision, creativity, or strategy, can give you permission and embolden you to step outside your lane, challenge the status quo, speak up with new ideas, and pursue opportunities you may have previously dismissed. If youre not sure if youre seeing your full value, there are several ways to uncover how others experience you. 360 Feedback A 360 provides feedback from multiple perspectivesusually direct or indirect reports, peers, your manager, and senior leaders. The process is typically confidential and designed to provide a well-rounded view of a leader’s performance. Two common approaches include qualitative interviews with key stakeholders and third-party quantitative assessments. Both can provide a leader with data on how they are perceived in the organization, helping to surface key strengths and pinpoint areas for growth. Client Interviews or Surveys Business owners, check in with your clients! You may know theyre happy with your service, but what about it makes them happiest? One to two-question surveys are helpful if youre merely seeking something like a Net Promoter Score, but to really uncover strengths, youll want to go deeper. Here are some of the questions Rebecca asks when she conducts interviews on behalf of her clients, adapted for your use: Why did you choose me over other [service providers]? Have you worked with other [service providers] before? / If yes, How was this experience different? Is there anything that has surprised you about this experience? What have been some of the key benefits youve gained from our work together? If a friend of yours were looking for [XYZ service], what would you want them to know about the experience? Conversational Inquiries Asking colleagues to list three to five words they would use to describe you can yield rich insights. And, when coupled with an example of that strength or trait in action, will provide you with robust data to hone in on your points of differentiation. For example: Im working on identifying my personal strengths and overall brand. When you think of me, what are the first three to five words that come to mind? When have you seen me demonstrate any of the above? What was I specifically doing or saying? This gives you real examples of how your strengths show up and helps you spot the traits others consistently associate with you. Keep a Brag Book You likely receive emails or Slack messages from colleagues or clients thanking you for work youve done. Save the notes! Better yet, copy them to an online file or go analog with a notebook. Over time, youll see themes emerge about how youre perceived and which traits others most value in you. (Added bonus: The brag book offers a confidence boost if you happen to be having a rough day.) Integrating the uncovered strengths Once weve uncovered these talents, its up to us to integrate them into our activities and positioning in a way thats intentional rather than accidental. For business owners, that may mean shifting your positioning and value proposition so that it better aligns with what your target audience values most. Consider Rebeccas brand client, Mark, a data analytics consultant serving small business owners. He had built his brand around his ability to analyze disparate stores of data to inform marketing strategy. But when Rebecca interviewed his clients, a different pattern emerged: they also praised Marks ability to see the big picture, is deep network, and his effortless ability to connect them with the right experts for their goals. These qualities hadnt even been on Marks radar as part of his value proposition, but for small business owners with lean teams, these traits turned out to be a tremendous source of value. Mark now has the opportunity to use this new knowledge as a point of differentiation in his brand: data-minded and a connector. For leaders in organizations, the integration of this new information may involve speaking up more, raising your hand for cross-functional initiatives, or mentoring others in areas where your strengths are emerging. In the case of Sarahs client Katherine, recognizing the strengths she had been overlooking shifted her mindset. Clarity on her value to the organization gave her more confidence as a leader and helped bolster the other areas she was working on. She realized that she had been emphasizing the wrong things, possibly to her detriment. With a more balanced view of how people experienced her, she began speaking up in executive meetings and reframed her development plan to include her strategic strengths. That shift in visibility and positioning led to two promotions over two years. It takes effort to see yourself in a new light. We often assume our value lies in how neatly our strengths align with our job description. But clients and colleagues may value something else entirely. If youre not asking, youre probably missing it. Taking the time to uncover those overlooked strengths can sharpen your personal brand, differentiate you in a crowded field, and accelerate your career by helping you lean into the talents that matter most.
Category:
E-Commerce
Imagine its April 2025 and youre the owner of a small but fast-growing e-commerce business. Historically, youve sourced products from China, but the president just announced tariffs of 145% on these goods. Do you set up operations in Thailandrequiring new investment and a lot of workor wait until theres more clarity on trade? What if waiting too long means you miss your chance to pull it off? This isnt a hypotheticalits a real dilemma faced by a real business owner who spoke with one of us over coffee this past spring. And shes not alone. As of 2023, of those U.S. companies that import goods, more than 97% of them were small businesses. For these companies, tariff uncertainty isnt just frustratingits paralyzing. As a family business researcher and a former deputy administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration and entrepreneur, we hear from a lot of small-business owners grappling with these challenges. And what they tell us is that tariff uncertainty is stressing their time, resources, and attention. The data backs up our anecdotal experience: More than 70% of small-business owners say constant shifts in trade policy create a whiplash effect that makes it difficult to plan, a recent national survey showed. Unlike larger organizations with teams of analysts to inform their decision-making, small-business owners are often on their own. In an all-hands-on-deck operation, every hour spent focusing on trade policy news or filling out additional paperwork means precious time away from day-to-day, core operations. That means rapid trade policy shifts leave small businesses, especially, at a disadvantage. Planning for stability in an uncertain landscape Critics and supporters alike can agree: The Trump administration has taken an unpredictable approach to trade policy, promising and delaying new tariffs again and again. Consider its so-called “reciprocal tariffs. Back in April, Trump pledged a baseline 10% tariff on imports from nearly everywhere, with extra hikes on many countries. Not long afterward, the administration hit pause on its plans for 90 days. That period just ended, and it followed up with a new executive order on July 31 naming different tariff rates for about 70 countries. The one constant has been change. This approach has upended long-standing trade relationships in a matter of days or weeks. And regardless of the outcomes, the uncertainty itself is especially disruptive to small businesses. One recent survey of 4,000 small-business owners found that the biggest challenge of tariff policies is the sheer uncertainty they cause. This isnt just a problem for small-business owners themselves. These companies employ nearly half of working Americans and play an essential role in the U.S. economy. That may partly explain why Americans overwhelmingly support small businesses, viewing them as positive for society and a key path for achieving the American dream. If youre skeptical, just look at the growing number of MBA graduates who are turning down offers at big companies to buy and run small businesses. But this consensus doesnt always translate into policies that help small businesses thrive. In fact, because small businesses often operate on thinner margins and have less capacity to absorb disruptions, any policy shift is likely to be more difficult for them to weather than it would be for a larger firm with deeper pockets. The ongoing tariff saga is just the most recent example. Slow, steady policies help small-business owners Given these realities, we recommend that the final negotiated changes to trade policy be rolled out slowly. Although that wouldnt prevent businesses from facing supply chain disruptions, it would at least give them time to consider alternate suppliers or prepare in other ways. From the perspective of a small-business owner, having that space to plan can make a real difference. Similarly, if policymakers want to bring more manufacturing back to the U.S., tariffs alone can accomplish only so much. Small manufacturers need to hire people, and with unemployment at just over 4%, theres already a shortage of workers qualified for increasingly high-skilled manufacturing roles. Making reshoring a true long-term policy objective would require creating pathways for legal immigration and investing significantly in job training. And if the path toward reshoring is more about automation than labor, then preparing small-business owners for the changes ahead and helping them fund growth strategically will be crucial. Small businesses would benefit from more government-backed funding and training. The Small Business Administration is uniquely positioned to support small firms as they adjust their supply chains and manufacturingit could offer affordable financing for imports and exports, restructure existing loans that small businesses have had to take on, and offer technical support and education on new regulations and paperwork. Unfortunately, the SBA has slashed 43% of its workforce and closed offices in major cities including Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, New Orleans, and Los Angeles. We think this is a step in the wrong direction. Universities also have an important role to play in supporting small businesses. Research shows that teaching core mangement skills can improve key business outcomes, such as profitability and growth. We recommend that business and trade schools increase their focus on small firms and the unique challenges they face. Whether through executive programs for small-business owners or student consulting projects, universities have a significant opportunity to lean into supporting Main Street entrepreneurs. Thirty-five million small businesses are the engine of the U.S. economy. They are the job creators in cities and towns across this country. They are the heartbeat of American communities. As the nation undergoes rapid and profound policy shifts, we encourage leaders in government and academia to take action to ensure that Main Streets across America not only endure but thrive. The authors would like to thank Gretchen Abraham and Matt Sonneborn for their support. Peter Boumgarden is a professor of family enterprise at Washington University in St. Louis. Dilawar Syed is an associate professor of instruction at the Department of Business, Government, and Society at The University of Texas at Austin. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
President Donald Trump is again attacking the American pressthis time not with fiery rally speeches or by calling the media the enemy of the people, but through the courts. Since the heat of the November 2024 election, and continuing into July, Trump has filed defamation lawsuits against 60 Minutes broadcaster CBS News and The Wall Street Journal. He has also sued The Des Moines Register for publishing a poll just before the 2024 election that Trump alleges exaggerated support for Democratic candidate Kamala Harris and thus constituted election interference and fraud. These are in addition to other lawsuits Trump filed against the news media during his first term and during his years out of office between 2021 and 2025. At the heart of Trumps complaints is a familiar refrain: The media is not only biased, but dishonest, corrupt, and dangerous. The president isnt just upset about reporting on him that he thinks is unfair. He wants to redefine what counts as libel and make it easier for public officials to sue for damages. A libel suit is a civil tort claim seeking damages when a person believes something false has been printed or broadcast about them and so harmed their reputation. Redefining libel in this way would require overturning the Supreme Courts 1964 ruling in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, one of the most important First Amendment legal rulings in American constitutional history Trump made overturning Sullivan a talking point during his first campaign for president; his lawsuits now put that threat into action. And they raise the question: What happened in Sullivan, and why does it still matter? What Sullivan was about As chair of a public policy institute devoted to strengthening deliberative democracy, I have written two books about the media and the presidency, and another about media ethics. My research traces how news institutions shape civic life and why healthy democracies rely on free expression. In 1960, The New York Times published a full-page advertisement titled Heed Their Rising Voices. The ad, which included an appeal for readers to send money in support of Martin Luther King Jr. and the movement against Jim Crow, described brutal and unjust treatment of Black students and protesters in Montgomery, Alabama. It also emphasized episodes of police violence against peaceful demonstrations. The ad was not entirely accurate in its description of the behavior of either protesters or the police. It claimed, for instance, that activists had sung My Country Tis of Thee on the steps of the state capitol during a rally, when they actually had sung the national anthem. It said that truckloads of police armed with shotguns and tear-gas had ringed a college campus, when the police had only been deployed nearby. And it asserted that King had been arrested seven times in Alabama, when the real number was four. Though the ad did not identify any individual public officials by name, it disparaged the behavior of Montgomery police. Thats where L.B. Sullivan came in. As Montgomerys police commissioner, he oversaw the police department. Sullivan claimed that because the ad maligned the conduct of law enforcement, it had implicitly defamed him. In 1960 in Alabama, a primary defense against libel was truth. But since there were mistakes in the ad, a truth defense could not be raised. Sullivan sued for damages, and an Alabama jury awarded him $500,000, equivalent to $5,450,000 in 2025. The message to the press was clear: criticize Southern officials and risk being sued out of existence. In fact, the Sullivan lawsuit was not an isolated incident, but part of a broader strategy. In addition to Sullivan, four other Montgomery officials filed suits against The Times. In Birmingham, public officials filed seven libel lawsuits over Times reporter Harrison Salisburys trenchant reporting about racism in that city. The lawsuits helped push The Times to the edge of bankruptcy. Salisbury was even indicted for seditious libel and faced up to 21 years in prison. Alabama officials also sued CBS, The Associated Press, The Saturday Evening Post, and Ladies Home Journalall for reporting on civil rights and the Souths brutal response. The Supreme Court decision The jurys verdict in favor of Sullivan was unanimously overturned by the Supreme Court in 1964. Writing for the court, Justice William Brennan held that public officials cannot prevail in defamation lawsuits merely by showing that statements are false. Instead, they must prove such statements are made with actual malice. Actual malice means a reporter or press outlet knew their story was false or else acted with reckless disregard for the truth. The decision set a high bar. Before the ruling, the First Amendments protections for speech and the press didnt offer much help to the press in libel cases. After it, public officials who wanted to sue the press would have to prove actual malicereal, purposeful untruths that caused harm. Honest mistakes werent enough to prevail in such lawsuits. The court held that errors are inevitable in public debate and that protecting those mistakes is essential to keeping debate open and free. Nonviolent protest and the press In essence, the court ruling blocked government officials fromsuing for libel with ulterior motives. King and other civil rights leaders relied on a strategy of nonviolent protest to expose injustice through public, visible actions. When protesters were arrested, beaten, or hosed in the streets, their goal was not chaosit was clarity. They wanted the nation to see what Southern oppression looked like. For that, they needed press coverage. The Supreme Court recognized this danger. Public officials treated differently Another key element of the courts reasoning was its distinction between public officials and private citizens. Elected leaders, the court said, can use mass media to defend themselves in ways ordinary people cannot. The public official certainly has equal if not greater access than most private citizens to media of communication, Justice Brennan wrote in the Sullivan ruling. Trump is a perfect example of this dynamic. He masterfully uses social media, rallies, televised interviews, and impromptu remarks to push back. He doesnt need the courts. Giving public officials the power to sue over news stories they dislike could well create a chilling effect on the media that undermines government accountability and distorts public discourse. The theory of our Constitution is that every citizen may speak his mind and every newspaper express its view on matters of public concern and may not be barred from speaking or publishing because those in control of government think that what is said or written is unwise, Brennan wrote. In a democratic society, one who assumes to act for the citizens in an executive, legislative, or judicial capacity must expect that his official acts will be commented upon and criticized. Why Sullivan still matters The Sullivan ruling is more than a legal doctrine. It is a shared agreement about the kind of democracy Americans aspire to. It affirms a press duty to hold power to account, and a public right to hear facts and information that those in power want to suppress. The ruling protects the right to criticize those in power and affirms that the press is not a nuisance, but an essential part of a functioning democracy. It ensures that political leaders cannot insulate themselves from scrutiny by silencing their critics through intimidation or litigation. Trumps lawsuits seek to undo these press protections. He presents himself as the victim of a dishonest press and hopes to use the legal system to punish those he perceives to be his detractors. The decision in the Sullivan case reminds Americans that democracy doesnt depend on leaders who feel comfortable. It depends on a public that is free to speak. Stephanie A. (Sam) Martin is the Frank and Bethine Church Endowed Chair of Public Affairs at Boise State University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|