The issue is less on who controls executive pay but rather do we want the government involved in business enterprises. I agree with critics of executive compensation that there should be accountability for performance and a link between performance and bonus payment structure. Bureaucracy is inherent in government programs and if we allow the “Pay Czar” to dictate pay structure in our companies that receive “bail-out” funds, the czar will not stop there. Power corrupts. Shareholders should influence executive compensation but the system of proxy voting is indeed slanted to the benefit of the corporation or the liberal agendas of political action committees and other lobbyists s who have the time and money to mount campaigns to effect change. But I have my doubts as to the support of their “change agendas”.
As a former portfolio manager of a 1940 Act mutual fund I voted proxies for the companies held in my fund. I like to believe I was responsible in my voting of said proxies, but rarely if ever was compensation a point of a shareholder vote. Shareholders attempted to get the issue on the ballot but rarely was it ever there and even rarer for the vote to be cast in the majority for the pay to be reviewed let alone constrained. Still, in a capitalist society (while we are a republic, capitalism is the basis of who we are as US citizens) there is no room for the government to dictate profits, business plans, and compensation. Enable the shareholder and owners of businesses do that. I do not trust my government to manage private businesses anymore than Thomas Jefferson did 210 yeas ago.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
Would You Work For Free?????
Most of us undervalue the services we provide our clients, partly because the market will only bear so much and many of us (Baby Boomers) do not place a high enough value on what we offer our clients in terms of services. Now if we were auto mechanics and we were offering our essential services to get their car back on the road, we would probably say we are charging the right amount or even providing a service at a discount because the end result (car in working condition) is visible and quantifiable. I am in the financial services arena and much of what we do outside of investing does not have the immediate, gratifying feel of driving the car out of the garage, therefore we feel the end user (client) will not pay full price but will grudgingly pay the discount which becomes the basis for even more discounts when the economy or market volatility makes price levels heavy and laden down with human emotions. And once we cut prices we are loath to raise them again for fear of allowing our clients a reason to shop around. The end result: Our services may not be free but the compensation may not be free but it is in many cases not up to the point of what they are worth in the long run but we have already stepped onto the slippery slope of giving away services.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Leadership Philosophy
I have been in leadership and management positions for over thirty years. Early in my Army career I along with 200 other second lieutenants were asked to describe our leadership style and the important aspects of how we would lead men and women under our charge. Over the years this first, simple three paragraph statement has grown as my experiences have built upon one another to produce the leader I am today. And I continue to learn as new experiences and techniques come into play. But the tenets of that first plain leadership paper remain the basis of how I lead and manage within the culture of the firm.
I submit for your edification a shortened version of my leadership philosophy. If you would like to see the piece in its entirety, please feel free to contact me.
Leadership Philosophy
I. Purpose of Philosophy.
Leadership first of all is a people business. Our greatest asset goes out the door each night – our team members. Each member of the team should have a deep sense of self respect as well as respect for others within the team.
I envision my role as a leader including the leading and facilitating members of the firm to produce superior results, to develop cohesive processes and attendant policies, and the management of resources. The intent of my leadership philosophy is to provide the guidance necessary for the accomplishment of these three tasks. I must instill confidence in each and every individual and establish open, two-way communications. Loyalty must be a two-way street where all know that the firm cares about them and will take care of them.
II. Statement of Philosophy.
Leadership at executive levels is no different than at lower levels of an organization, the scope has just gotten broader. The principles of leadership remain the same in application. The most significant challenge I face as a leader is to have my "presence" felt throughout the team, even though I am not able to directly influence all of the events taking place. This indirect leadership takes on significant importance, as my will or intent must be infused throughout the team. My contact and subsequent direct leadership of those personnel around me allows for this infusion of my intent to start and spread downward and outward.
The personal interaction with others in the organization; superiors, peers, and team members, requires leadership, direct and indirect, to make an organization effective. The two types of leadership, indirect and direct, go hand in hand. As I have progressed in my career, my direct leadership needs have grown but so have requirements for indirect leadership skills. Until now the two have been used in tandem, based upon the span of control at the time. But at this level I find myself having to rely more on the indirect method to accomplish assigned tasks because of the wide diversity of the skills of our personnel and the ever-increasing complexity of the business environment.
My role as a leader is a combination of leadership and management, but without the people, management can be done without any real personal contact or feeling. My personal actions and behavior will set the example for my team members. If I am harsh or unforgiving, then they will probably be the same. They will do this out of fear or because they perceive that this technique of leadership is effective. I don't believe fear tactics are effective leadership techniques. I feel that all of us; regardless of status or position, want to do the best job possible and will do so if given the opportunity, trust, and resources. I will make this perception known to the firm and understood by all.
My management philosophy reflects the values and beliefs instilled in me by my parents, education, and service to my country. As a professional, I will maintain my vision by realizing it is shaped by my perceptions of the past, present, and future. My attributes as a leader require that I set the example in all that I do, both at work and away from the office. I will be a teacher, coach, and mentor to those on my team. I must provide the necessary direction and purpose to team members to achieve the integration and synchronization of the efforts of all members of the team. This direction takes the form of my vision while the purpose, long term or short, is embodied in my intent.
My vision for the team also includes the prioritization of the team's efforts, which ties back into unity of effort. The direction, which I establish, and subsequent prioritization, will contribute to the building of the required team effort.
Conclusion:
I will place the welfare of the team and firm ahead of any personal gain or advantage I may receive from position as Chief Executive Officer. I am responsible for all that my team does or does not do, for what reward or promotion I receive is a result of what my team accomplishes, not what I am able to personally do. Team members produce the results and they will receive the credit.
I submit for your edification a shortened version of my leadership philosophy. If you would like to see the piece in its entirety, please feel free to contact me.
Leadership Philosophy
I. Purpose of Philosophy.
Leadership first of all is a people business. Our greatest asset goes out the door each night – our team members. Each member of the team should have a deep sense of self respect as well as respect for others within the team.
I envision my role as a leader including the leading and facilitating members of the firm to produce superior results, to develop cohesive processes and attendant policies, and the management of resources. The intent of my leadership philosophy is to provide the guidance necessary for the accomplishment of these three tasks. I must instill confidence in each and every individual and establish open, two-way communications. Loyalty must be a two-way street where all know that the firm cares about them and will take care of them.
II. Statement of Philosophy.
Leadership at executive levels is no different than at lower levels of an organization, the scope has just gotten broader. The principles of leadership remain the same in application. The most significant challenge I face as a leader is to have my "presence" felt throughout the team, even though I am not able to directly influence all of the events taking place. This indirect leadership takes on significant importance, as my will or intent must be infused throughout the team. My contact and subsequent direct leadership of those personnel around me allows for this infusion of my intent to start and spread downward and outward.
The personal interaction with others in the organization; superiors, peers, and team members, requires leadership, direct and indirect, to make an organization effective. The two types of leadership, indirect and direct, go hand in hand. As I have progressed in my career, my direct leadership needs have grown but so have requirements for indirect leadership skills. Until now the two have been used in tandem, based upon the span of control at the time. But at this level I find myself having to rely more on the indirect method to accomplish assigned tasks because of the wide diversity of the skills of our personnel and the ever-increasing complexity of the business environment.
My role as a leader is a combination of leadership and management, but without the people, management can be done without any real personal contact or feeling. My personal actions and behavior will set the example for my team members. If I am harsh or unforgiving, then they will probably be the same. They will do this out of fear or because they perceive that this technique of leadership is effective. I don't believe fear tactics are effective leadership techniques. I feel that all of us; regardless of status or position, want to do the best job possible and will do so if given the opportunity, trust, and resources. I will make this perception known to the firm and understood by all.
My management philosophy reflects the values and beliefs instilled in me by my parents, education, and service to my country. As a professional, I will maintain my vision by realizing it is shaped by my perceptions of the past, present, and future. My attributes as a leader require that I set the example in all that I do, both at work and away from the office. I will be a teacher, coach, and mentor to those on my team. I must provide the necessary direction and purpose to team members to achieve the integration and synchronization of the efforts of all members of the team. This direction takes the form of my vision while the purpose, long term or short, is embodied in my intent.
My vision for the team also includes the prioritization of the team's efforts, which ties back into unity of effort. The direction, which I establish, and subsequent prioritization, will contribute to the building of the required team effort.
Conclusion:
I will place the welfare of the team and firm ahead of any personal gain or advantage I may receive from position as Chief Executive Officer. I am responsible for all that my team does or does not do, for what reward or promotion I receive is a result of what my team accomplishes, not what I am able to personally do. Team members produce the results and they will receive the credit.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Is "Backshoring" the Next Big Trend?
Many economists believe backshoring or reverse offshoring, as the practice is also known, will help stabilize the world's largest consumer market-the U.S.-as well as the world economies that depend on U.S. spending. They add that backshoring will also yield larger profit margins over the long term. (Pam Baker, http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9133586, 5/27/2008).
I agree that this trend could continue but eventually market competitive forces will reassert themselves and the trend will be short lived. Our capitalist society unfortunately places price and savings on products ahead of the national health of our economy. If this were not so we would not have let the bulk of our manufacturing capability move offshore in the first place. We still have the capability to produce the safest, most effective and beneficial products in the world but we cannot do it at the lowest prices when some can make a widget in SE Asia for a dollar and it costs a company in the US $5 dollars.
This issue goes beyond economics and thrusts at the heart of our national security. For every product line we pay to have built overseas we also send vital resources (not including money) to those regions that we could use here for the same purpose. More importantly, if we make tractors, trucks, computers, and the components of each overseas where do we go for these items if these countries (who are often as not unstable democracies at best) overseas decide they do not like us and shut off the flow? Where do we go for these durable goods that we as a society and a government need to maintain our way of life? Imagine South Korea telling us we cannot have item x unless we do something counter to our best interests. What do we do and where do we go? CEO’s of these companies will not have a clue and will turn to the US Gov’t for answers. Look where that has gotten us (AMTRAK, GM and Chrysler).
I am not advocating we reject our capitalistic ideals. I am a capitalist. But let’s stop blaming corporate America for the loss of jobs overseas and look at the issue through clear lenses (not rose colored) and see the problem lies with all of us here in the United States (and Canada, they have the problem as well). Produce products here, using parts from overseas if you have to but then find suppliers here even if the product costs more. The Federal government must get involved and reduce taxes for goods produced domestically or provide tax incentives repatriating production to U.S. shores. Tariffs on goods produced overseas should be used only as a last resort in order to protect fledgling enterprises.
I agree that this trend could continue but eventually market competitive forces will reassert themselves and the trend will be short lived. Our capitalist society unfortunately places price and savings on products ahead of the national health of our economy. If this were not so we would not have let the bulk of our manufacturing capability move offshore in the first place. We still have the capability to produce the safest, most effective and beneficial products in the world but we cannot do it at the lowest prices when some can make a widget in SE Asia for a dollar and it costs a company in the US $5 dollars.
This issue goes beyond economics and thrusts at the heart of our national security. For every product line we pay to have built overseas we also send vital resources (not including money) to those regions that we could use here for the same purpose. More importantly, if we make tractors, trucks, computers, and the components of each overseas where do we go for these items if these countries (who are often as not unstable democracies at best) overseas decide they do not like us and shut off the flow? Where do we go for these durable goods that we as a society and a government need to maintain our way of life? Imagine South Korea telling us we cannot have item x unless we do something counter to our best interests. What do we do and where do we go? CEO’s of these companies will not have a clue and will turn to the US Gov’t for answers. Look where that has gotten us (AMTRAK, GM and Chrysler).
I am not advocating we reject our capitalistic ideals. I am a capitalist. But let’s stop blaming corporate America for the loss of jobs overseas and look at the issue through clear lenses (not rose colored) and see the problem lies with all of us here in the United States (and Canada, they have the problem as well). Produce products here, using parts from overseas if you have to but then find suppliers here even if the product costs more. The Federal government must get involved and reduce taxes for goods produced domestically or provide tax incentives repatriating production to U.S. shores. Tariffs on goods produced overseas should be used only as a last resort in order to protect fledgling enterprises.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
What does It Mean to Me to Be A Rotarian
When I first had this idea for the members of my Rotary Club to talk about what it means to them to be a Rotarian it was actually in response to the question: What is a Rotarian? Of course my answer (elevator speech) came right from the published material we all have seen and read at least once; espousing the four ideals (objectives) of Rotary: Opportunity for service, High ethical standards, Ideal of service in our personal life, community, and business; and advancement of international understanding, goodwill, and peace.
The person then said to me, "No, no. What does it mean to you?" I was taken aback somewhat but recovered and answered, "Rotary allows me the opportunity to give back to others what I have been blessed to receive". I went on to say that my service (and that is what it is) in Rotary continues the trend in my life of serving others. These activities include the military, church and the Boy Scouts of America. I am still involved in the church but left the Army many years ago and when my son matriculated from Scouts as an Eagle Scout I was looking for another avenue of service. I came back to Rotary. Joining Rotary is more than meetings and service projects. I enjoy being around like-minded people who look outward for fulfillment of their life purposes. Rotarians fit that mold. I hope I do as well.
What does it mean to me to be a Rotarian: Service Above Self through Living the Four Way Test.
Is it the Truth?
Is it Fair to all concerned?
Will it build good will and better friendships?
Will it be beneficial to all concerned?
That says it all - What it means to be a Rotation and the standards to follow.
The person then said to me, "No, no. What does it mean to you?" I was taken aback somewhat but recovered and answered, "Rotary allows me the opportunity to give back to others what I have been blessed to receive". I went on to say that my service (and that is what it is) in Rotary continues the trend in my life of serving others. These activities include the military, church and the Boy Scouts of America. I am still involved in the church but left the Army many years ago and when my son matriculated from Scouts as an Eagle Scout I was looking for another avenue of service. I came back to Rotary. Joining Rotary is more than meetings and service projects. I enjoy being around like-minded people who look outward for fulfillment of their life purposes. Rotarians fit that mold. I hope I do as well.
What does it mean to me to be a Rotarian: Service Above Self through Living the Four Way Test.
Is it the Truth?
Is it Fair to all concerned?
Will it build good will and better friendships?
Will it be beneficial to all concerned?
That says it all - What it means to be a Rotation and the standards to follow.
Monday, May 4, 2009
Appropriate Fee Structure for Investment Advice
Back in December when I was working with an investment firm, we were going through the initial stages of the planning cycle and we had a discussion about their fee schedule and its structure. As we continue to discuss this issue we examined their goals and where they needed expend their energy in efforts to serve current and future clients. This is closely tied if not directly linked to the firm’s mission statement in terms of client service and client retention. The feeling at the time was they had to differentiate themselves through investment performance/style as well as providing a level of client service competitors s are unwilling or unable to provide within the specific client niche. This discussion returned to the forefront as a result of reviewing the Investment News (Vol 13, No 17, April 27, 2009) on fees developed and charged within the industry.
This particular firm is enjoying the benefits of superb investment results of the last 5 years and the last 18 months in particular but they need to be able to offer the services clients need and/or desire from the firm. What services to offer, either through proprietary own efforts and skills or through strategic partnerships, has yet to be fully explored and discussed. Additionally the firm leadership must examine the full cost (fixed and variable) of these services and the cost/benefit of offering them to current and future clients. Another related issue is whether to offer these products and services to all clients? Does the firm then further segment the client base into those who only get asset management and then those clients who receive varying levels of service (À la carte client service)?
What is an appropriate fee for a firm’s listing of products and services? Is the asset management fee competitive or is the firm actually under-charging clients and subsequently not being compensated adequately for what they offer clients of the firm?
Investment management is, in general, a commodity. Most advisors (RIA’s) offer asset allocation, models of mutual funds/ETF’s/etc through a wrap program and do not offer individually managed portfolios (which we obviously do). Many of these competitors also offer outside managers through a platform based approach but still charge a fee for their services in bringing the platform to them with an ambiguous pledge to provide services. These fees are for very basic services.
I believe advisors try to offer more but we also do not know how to price their services in order to be more profitable. I disagree with the statement in the article that charging clients solely for asset management is not worth 75 to 150 basis points. It may not be worth it if the investment management is not unique or chronically underperforms and the client subsequently fails to meet their financial goals. It is also not worth this fee if that is all the firm offers but that is not the case. I like to think most advisors are available to clients to answer their questions, make decisions on their behalf and to anticipate their needs based upon their desires and goals. I do not feel a sense of guilt for charging them a competitive fee for what I can offer, even if the client does not avail themselves of the services. It is enough, in my view, to offer the services and be prepared to deliver on the offer. A firm needs to evaluate what it is able to offer and answer the following questions:
Can we provide the service in a competent and timely manner?
Can we offer the service through a strategic partner?
Can we provide the service and make a profit?
Fees need to be aligned with the business model, or net income goals and subsequent ratios used in evaluating the firm’s success. Without this analysis a fee structure can be viewed as arbitrary and probably underpriced for the value the client receives or perceives the advisor brings to the relationship.
Remember: If a client pays too little for a service/product then the client will place little value in that service and the firm. This is indeed a very fine line to tread.
This particular firm is enjoying the benefits of superb investment results of the last 5 years and the last 18 months in particular but they need to be able to offer the services clients need and/or desire from the firm. What services to offer, either through proprietary own efforts and skills or through strategic partnerships, has yet to be fully explored and discussed. Additionally the firm leadership must examine the full cost (fixed and variable) of these services and the cost/benefit of offering them to current and future clients. Another related issue is whether to offer these products and services to all clients? Does the firm then further segment the client base into those who only get asset management and then those clients who receive varying levels of service (À la carte client service)?
What is an appropriate fee for a firm’s listing of products and services? Is the asset management fee competitive or is the firm actually under-charging clients and subsequently not being compensated adequately for what they offer clients of the firm?
Investment management is, in general, a commodity. Most advisors (RIA’s) offer asset allocation, models of mutual funds/ETF’s/etc through a wrap program and do not offer individually managed portfolios (which we obviously do). Many of these competitors also offer outside managers through a platform based approach but still charge a fee for their services in bringing the platform to them with an ambiguous pledge to provide services. These fees are for very basic services.
I believe advisors try to offer more but we also do not know how to price their services in order to be more profitable. I disagree with the statement in the article that charging clients solely for asset management is not worth 75 to 150 basis points. It may not be worth it if the investment management is not unique or chronically underperforms and the client subsequently fails to meet their financial goals. It is also not worth this fee if that is all the firm offers but that is not the case. I like to think most advisors are available to clients to answer their questions, make decisions on their behalf and to anticipate their needs based upon their desires and goals. I do not feel a sense of guilt for charging them a competitive fee for what I can offer, even if the client does not avail themselves of the services. It is enough, in my view, to offer the services and be prepared to deliver on the offer. A firm needs to evaluate what it is able to offer and answer the following questions:
Can we provide the service in a competent and timely manner?
Can we offer the service through a strategic partner?
Can we provide the service and make a profit?
Fees need to be aligned with the business model, or net income goals and subsequent ratios used in evaluating the firm’s success. Without this analysis a fee structure can be viewed as arbitrary and probably underpriced for the value the client receives or perceives the advisor brings to the relationship.
Remember: If a client pays too little for a service/product then the client will place little value in that service and the firm. This is indeed a very fine line to tread.
Client Retention and Client Service
I am process driven. In this particular area (client service/retention) a business can succeed by following the simple rule of treating each and every client as if they were a new client. This will ensure that each client is valued and treated as such. We all know that it is far easier and less expensive to retain a client than to search out and land a new client. Yet we forget this once a client comes in the door and transfers assets to us to manage. Yes, client segmentation does allow us to place clients into profitability buckets but the process for this must ensure that the client is still given the service and products they were seeking when you sold them your business. Consistent application of processes and procedures will ensure the client experience is preserved throughout the life of the relationship.
Monday, April 6, 2009
The Joys and Challenges of Working with a Small Firm as a Consultant
One of the more enjoyable aspects of being a business consultant is helping a business improve or even transform itself as a result of your efforts.
When working with a small firm of organizational structure and scale, the consultant may find driving change with leadership less complex and more responsive due to a lack of bureaucracy. On the flip side personalities and, yes, leadership egos are often left unchecked. The consultant must quickly gain a measure of the human factor politics and adjust his/her vehicle and course in which to navigate any issues arising from the personal interactions within the firm without becoming part of the problem. A consultant must avoid becoming entangled in the morass that many firms suffer.
One solution to this problem, and it is not an easy one for the consultant, involves the consultant giving up ownership of the ideas and allowing the ideas to become the prodigy of the leaders of the firm. This facilitation is a direct outgrowth of the Socratic Method of teaching that is integral in the success of working with small firms. David Morales of ChandlerHill Partners says, “Behind the scenes we consultants often quietly judge our own success by the speed it takes a client to present our suggestions back to us as their own.”
Gaining acceptance and ultimate buy-in of your ideas is in many cases the more important facet of being a consultant for any size firm. Without ownership and attendant buy-in from the client, the efforts of the consultant will not have staying power after the consulting engagement is complete.
There are many rewards and opportunities to learn from an engagement with a small firm. The consultant must gain the trust of the members of the firm and be willing to learn from the experience. The lessons learned from the observations and yes personal interaction with all members of the company will provide the consultant with additional tools and examples for work with other firms. The best consultant is after all, a student as well as a mentor.
Written by: Charles Steven Brennaman
Brennaman Consulting
www.brennaman@csbrennaman.com
When working with a small firm of organizational structure and scale, the consultant may find driving change with leadership less complex and more responsive due to a lack of bureaucracy. On the flip side personalities and, yes, leadership egos are often left unchecked. The consultant must quickly gain a measure of the human factor politics and adjust his/her vehicle and course in which to navigate any issues arising from the personal interactions within the firm without becoming part of the problem. A consultant must avoid becoming entangled in the morass that many firms suffer.
One solution to this problem, and it is not an easy one for the consultant, involves the consultant giving up ownership of the ideas and allowing the ideas to become the prodigy of the leaders of the firm. This facilitation is a direct outgrowth of the Socratic Method of teaching that is integral in the success of working with small firms. David Morales of ChandlerHill Partners says, “Behind the scenes we consultants often quietly judge our own success by the speed it takes a client to present our suggestions back to us as their own.”
Gaining acceptance and ultimate buy-in of your ideas is in many cases the more important facet of being a consultant for any size firm. Without ownership and attendant buy-in from the client, the efforts of the consultant will not have staying power after the consulting engagement is complete.
There are many rewards and opportunities to learn from an engagement with a small firm. The consultant must gain the trust of the members of the firm and be willing to learn from the experience. The lessons learned from the observations and yes personal interaction with all members of the company will provide the consultant with additional tools and examples for work with other firms. The best consultant is after all, a student as well as a mentor.
Written by: Charles Steven Brennaman
Brennaman Consulting
www.brennaman@csbrennaman.com
Who I am and How I got Here
Hello my name is Steve Brennaman; As an executive with more than 30 years of leadership experience, I developed winning organizations through challenging team members to set then accomplish ambitious goals.
I have strong leadership and management capabilities focused on inspiring the team to strive for excellence. Throughout my career I have been a problem solver, using my analytical abilities to identify obstacles and then conceptualize successful solutions. I have developed and implemented new processes to improve operations and lower risk across the organization.
I am a people oriented professional with excellent organizational and technical skills.
I am now interested in transitioning to a position where I can make a positive, long term contribution to the organization by developing and accomplishing successful business strategies.
I am fortunate to have two careers where I have a passion rather than just a job. My first career was a soldier in the Army where I led and commanded men and women in the service of their country. Most recently I have been performing duties as a business consultant providing services to businesses in the areas of organizational effectiveness, leadership development, process improvement, and operations efficiency. Prior to that my most recent duties were as chief investment office of an investment management firm where I lead a team of 18 men and women in the financial planning and investment of clients’ assets.
In the beginning I had every intention of going to college but knew that I had to pay for it myself. I planned early on as a teenager to enlist in the Navy for the GI Bill benefits, which I did upon graduation from high school. I served my enlistment and went to college where I decided to pursue a commission in the U.S. through ROTC. I never intended to make the military a career until I realized I was very good and that the personal rewards were immense.
Despite my longevity in the career workforce I have changed careers only once. After I had nearly 21 years in the Army I decided to retire and seek a 2d career. I chose portfolio management as a sub-field of investments and pursued additional education to supplement my Master’s degree to prepare myself. The results of the changes I made in my careers are very positive. I have had the unique opportunity to have two careers that are both fun and rewarding. Application of my leadership and of my analytical and organizational skills has always played a significant part in my career progression and career objectives.
I have strong leadership and management capabilities focused on inspiring the team to strive for excellence. Throughout my career I have been a problem solver, using my analytical abilities to identify obstacles and then conceptualize successful solutions. I have developed and implemented new processes to improve operations and lower risk across the organization.
I am a people oriented professional with excellent organizational and technical skills.
I am now interested in transitioning to a position where I can make a positive, long term contribution to the organization by developing and accomplishing successful business strategies.
I am fortunate to have two careers where I have a passion rather than just a job. My first career was a soldier in the Army where I led and commanded men and women in the service of their country. Most recently I have been performing duties as a business consultant providing services to businesses in the areas of organizational effectiveness, leadership development, process improvement, and operations efficiency. Prior to that my most recent duties were as chief investment office of an investment management firm where I lead a team of 18 men and women in the financial planning and investment of clients’ assets.
In the beginning I had every intention of going to college but knew that I had to pay for it myself. I planned early on as a teenager to enlist in the Navy for the GI Bill benefits, which I did upon graduation from high school. I served my enlistment and went to college where I decided to pursue a commission in the U.S. through ROTC. I never intended to make the military a career until I realized I was very good and that the personal rewards were immense.
Despite my longevity in the career workforce I have changed careers only once. After I had nearly 21 years in the Army I decided to retire and seek a 2d career. I chose portfolio management as a sub-field of investments and pursued additional education to supplement my Master’s degree to prepare myself. The results of the changes I made in my careers are very positive. I have had the unique opportunity to have two careers that are both fun and rewarding. Application of my leadership and of my analytical and organizational skills has always played a significant part in my career progression and career objectives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
