TIME’s 25 Most Influential Leaders: Why Mark Carney Made the List

As you may have heard, TIME has named Mark Carney, the Governor of the Bank of Canada, to their list of the world’s most influential leaders.

Why did the magazine choosing Carney? Because he presided over a banking system that didn’t need to be bailed out and because he continues, to this day, to stay focused on the root causes of the crisis.

Through the tumultuous year that was 2009, Carney was the voice of reason. His authoritative and cool delivery had a calming effect, making us feel confident: things may have been tough on our end, but there was a belief that our solid banking system would weather the storm far better than the rest of the world’s, particularly in comparison to our friends and neighbours to the south.

His comments blunt, his outlook tempered with realism and a conservative approach, Carney drove that view. He also took the road less travelled: in the midst of the crisis, he opted to take a different approach to his western counterparts by not injecting billions in cash into the system – instead he kept interest rates low.

In fact, as TD Bank’s chief economist Don Drummond said, Carney deserves credit for what he didn’t do. As Drummond told The Canadian Press: "He didn't follow all the extraordinary measures adopted elsewhere because they weren't required here. I can confirm that he has the respect of his international peers, as do his senior officials. So I too would rank the governor highly."

(Now there are rumblings that Carney should replace Dominique Strauss-Kahn and become the new leader of the IMF… )

What’s important here is why TIME is recognizing Carney. Often the toughest choice a leader can face is whether or not to jump on the bandwagon. Carney charted Canada’s course through the recession, based on Canada’s needs. He took a path that is not common, but one which is now proving to be popular, and he did it confidently – thus inspiring confidence in all of us. That’s great leadership.

The indirect effect? Carney is influencing Canada’s presence on the world stage; hot on the heels of the Olympics, he’s another example of the “hip-yet-smart” Canadian brand.

So kudos to Carney for being named to TIME’s list and for being recognized for his above the line leadership skills. May he continue to lead the Canadian monetary system with the same thoughtfulness and financial prudence.

_________________________

Jaffer and Guergis: Definitely Not The Right Fit

“Happy (expletive) birthday to me. I guess I’m stuck on this hell hole.”

You almost have to feel sorry for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. What do you think his reaction was when he heard about how then Minister of State for the Status of Women, Helena Guergis, allegedly hurled these nasty words to staff at Charlottetown Airport in February? He may have muttered his own expletive or two (under his breath, of course) when he got wind of her deplorable behaviour…

Despite Guergis’s lame apology for the situation and the added embarrassment of a bizarre letter-writing campaign to media from members of her own staff, the Prime Minister waited to toss Guergis from cabinet until earlier this month – and he did so only when the behaviour of her husband (former MP Rahim Jaffer, once a rising star in the Reform and Conservative parties of Canada), and his questionable business associations, became front page news.

You’re probably following the Guergis/Jaffer saga in the news, like I am, so I won’t regurgitate all of the gory details regarding reduced charges, alleged misuse of a parliamentary office, questions surrounding unregistered lobbying activity, the stretched truth and contradictory testimony in front of a Commons committee…what a mess.

In fact, what I want to talk about is whether or not the Conservative Party of Canada, as an organization, could’ve prevented all of this from happening in the first place.

What if the party had conducted detailed behavioural assessments of both Guergis and Jaffer? Would the red flags have been raised?

The Conservative Party of Canada, like any other organization, should hire and/or recruit based on cultural fit. But to know what “fit” means for your organization, you first have to assess your culture.

A cultural assessment is essentially an understanding of the core values and behaviours of your organization. When it’s done right, it’s invaluable – the insights gleaned can and should be used to improve organizational performance. What we tell our clients is that once culture is defined within your organization, you’ll know who is – and who isn’t – the right fit.

More importantly the alignment of those behaviours needs to be measured – and on an ongoing basis. This is of particularly of relevance to the Guergis and Jaffer debacle.

We have recently completed our 2010 Canadian Corporate Culture Study, an annual survey which asks senior leaders across Canada important questions surrounding corporate culture. Here is a very interesting statistic: since we first started conducting the survey, the percentage of respondents who’ve indicated that they measure corporate culture has more than doubled, from 35 per cent in 2006 to 77 per cent in 2010.

Clearly, good leaders know that culture needs to be defined and that systems and processes should be put into place to measure and support culture – so that the right people are hired, and, so that the organization can truly perform.

So I’m going to give this one a double call: I think the Prime Minister’s overall handling of the situation is above the line. But the party’s overall ability to pick the right people to represent them well? Below the line. There is definitely room for improvement.