Reply
Author Archives: andrewl
Trainer
A trainer helps someone develop specific knowledge, skills and competencies that are required to fulfill a specific job, task or role. The key benefit to leadership or management training is that an organization’s key participants become better equipped to make the critical, costly decisions that they are entrusted to make.
Hiring
Andrew Leach: First Nations Management Consulting and Interim Manager
Hi! My name is Andrew Leach. First, a few facts about me:
- St’at’imc Nation Member (Interior BC, Canada)
- Raised by grandparents on Squamish Reserve
- Bachelors and Masters degrees in Business
- Management Consultant, Andrew Leach & Associates (www.andrewleach.com)
My passion is to learn and teach anything that is related to MANAGEMENT.
I am a long time subscriber to Harvard Business Review. It is my favorite periodical. According to Wikipedia, “HBR’s articles cover a wide range of topics that are relevant to different industries, management functions, and geographic locations. They focus on such areas as leadership, organizational change, negotiation, strategy, operations, marketing, finance, and managing people.”
Over the years, I have learned a lot from reading HBR articles. Indeed, I have applied many of their ideas into my professional (and personal) life.
For example, while doing my undergraduate degree, I came across John P. Kotter’s “Leading Change” article (HBR, May 1995). That article really opened my eyes to organizational change in general and Indigenous community change in particular.
I tweaked Kotter’s 8 Step Model to Change to fit Indigenous environments and started applying that in my management consulting work. Within a few years, I became very busy doing First Nations organizational change work.
To this day, helping Indigenous leaders with organizational change is a mainstay of my consulting practice.
I especially like that HBR articles are quick reads. Executive life is so fast and full, it can be a challenge to stay on top of our professional development. But we must! Digesting to-the-point articles is one good approach.
Thus, this Blog will focus on summarizing and interpreting published, well known leadership and management articles. My purpose is to create a space where those who hold Indigenous leadership positions can exchange important, timely and relevant management ideas.
I welcome your ideas and comments!
Andrew
Job Posting: Carrier Chilcotin Tribal Council (CCTC) Tribal Administrator
CCTC is a partnership of four communities that are a part of the Southern Carrier Nation and Tsilhqot’in Nation, working together to advance our collective social and economic well being. It seeks an experienced, innovative and results driven individual for this challenging position. In this exciting role you will be working with a dynamic team and will be responsible for overseeing the day to day operations of the CCTC.
Minimum qualifications for this position include :
- Five (5) years experience as a Senior Manager
- Knowledge of federal government funding
- Experience with First Nations leadership and staff
- Strong management and leadership skills
- University degree or combination of education & experience
- Experience successfully increasing program budgets
- Entrepreneurial skills and abilities
Applicants interested in learning more about this position email .
An information package will be emailed to you. No telephone calls please.
Deadline: April 14, 2014 at noon. Expected interview date is April 28, 2014.
The Fallacy of the Canadian Dream for First Nation Homeowners
This is the final article in a three-part series on First Nation housing. The first article was written for national leaders about how to correct the First Nation housing crisis. The second article was written for community leaders about better managing their housing stock and programs. This final article is for community members who struggle with getting ahead in a First Nation home.
First, let’s look at the “Canadian Dream,” which is largely based on buying a home and making that the centrepiece of an investment strategy. Indeed, most Canadians generate the bulk of their wealth from their homes.
The “Canadian Dream” goes something like this: in your twenties (hopefully), after scrimping and saving, you will buy your first home. It will be at a good price and in a decent neighbourhood. Then, you will work steadily to pay down your mortgage: “I owe, I owe, so off to work I go.” Over time, your home’s value goes up. For some, it goes way up.
After 20 years of paying off your home, you have raised your kids and hopefully put something aside for retirement. When you finally decide to sell your home (called “downsizing”) any profit you make from that sale is tax-free. Along with your company pension, you should have socked enough away to live a comfortable retirement.
Those who entrench themselves in the “Canadian Dream” live a comfortable life. It’s a good life.
Now let’s compare that with the “First Nation Dream” of home ownership.
First and foremost, First Nation homes are not wealth generators. Their values do not go up over time. This is because the land that First Nation homes sit on has little or no market value.
Still, you want a piece of the “Canadian Dream.” So you go down the path of buying an on-reserve house. Whether you go through CMHC or the bank, you will have to pay back the costs to build your home—this can total a few hundred thousand dollars—which has no financial payback for you down the road. Your home will never have the market value of what you paid.
Sidenote to the Canadian taxpayer: First Nations do pay for their own homes. The rules have changed since the 1980s in that CMHC now lends the money to build the home but it is expected that the loans will be repaid in full by the homeowner (or the Band, if the homeowner defaults).
Thus, since the 1980s, First Nations have spent their prime working years paying off a home that does little for creating wealth the way other Canadians enjoy. This flawed system of First Nation home ownership has created a paradox in First Nation housing: an off-reserve home is an asset. An on-reserve home is a liability.
Another critical difference between the “Canadian Dream” and the “First Nation Dream” is that the latter does little to promote the mindset of wealth generation. For example, pursuing the “Canadian Dream” encourages a whole string of positively reinforcing behaviours, such as saving money, leveraging equity and planning for retirement.
Indeed, it’s a sad state to see an Elder today who has worked hard to pay off his home but has nothing to show for it, other than a CMHC house.
So until the on-reserve housing system changes fundamentally, First Nation individuals must find other ways to attain the “Canadian Dream.”
First and foremost, you should start acquiring good assets. In general, good assets will increase in value over time. Bad assets depreciate over time. I see a lot of bad assets when I drive through the Rez: high depreciating vehicles and way too many recreational toys.
Second, live within a modest budget. This probably means cutting back on a few of your most frivolous expenses. If you can reduce even 15 percent of your discretionary expenses and shift those savings to buying good assets, within a short time, you’ll see a positive shift in your circumstances. For example, cut a bit of your entertainment budget and buy a GIC from an on-reserve bank.
Finally, find ways to bring in more cash. For example, if you run a business, take a part-time job. If you work full-time, start a part-time business. There are myriad ways to make a little more cash. Even a 5 percent increase in annual income can have a big impact on your long-term wealth.
It’s as simple as ABC:
Assets: buy good ones, avoid bad ones
Budget: live simply, like your Elders
Cash: bring in a little more
One of the most important books I have read on financial planning was “The Millionaire Next Door,” which proved that the average millionaire was not a flashy jet-setting business tycoon. Rather, he was frugal, owned modest things, and invested smartly and conservatively. In effect, when it comes to financial planning, the turtle does win the race.
Finally, I had the pleasure of meeting a First Nation “Millionaire Next Door” recently. He was a quiet, humble elder, about 67 years young. He never made a ton of money, working mostly for his Band and in a few off-reserve labour positions. But he lived a frugal life, saved smartly and invested in some off-reserve property that made him a very decent return. When he finally cashed out on his property, he just banked the money.
So, it can be done!
Andrew Leach, MBA, is a successful First Nation management consultant specializing in turning messy situations into prosperous ones. Visit his website at www.andrewleach.com or drop him an email at .
Fixing Your Band’s Housing Crisis
This is the second in a three-part series on First Nations Housing.
Housing is the toughest government program that First Nations oversee. The reason is simple: First Nations are expected to collect monthly rents from their own relatives.
Worse, the Band is responsible for all rents that are not paid by delinquent tenants. This formula has spelled disaster for many First Nations. Some Bands have lost millions because of unpaid rent. For many Bands, there seems to be no end in sight to their losses.
A few First Nations have found a way out of this mess. They have pulled themselves out from massive debts and now operate decent housing programs. There is a common theme to their turnaround stories. Here are the five biggest housing mistakes that First Nations make—and the solutions to overcome these mistakes.
Mistake 1: Lack of Political Will to Evict
Some band members don’t pay their rent and some abuse their neighbours. Worse, some members get involved in illegal activities that put other community members at risk. When First Nations let problem tenants get away with bad behaviour, they send a clear message: It’s okay to behave irresponsibly.
When dealing with persistently bad tenants, the only option left to Councils is eviction. Yet many Councils fail to pull that trigger. Sometimes it’s because of fear. Sometimes it’s because the Council has too soft a heart. The result is the same: the Band incurs major losses.
Create political will by pressing Council to evict bad tenants and by not defending bad tenants—even if they are close friends or relatives. Ultimately, let everyone know the actual amount that the band loses every year from lost housing income. In effect, show that the benefit to solving this problem greatly outweighs the price.
Mistake 2: Poor Policy Development
First and foremost, housing policies are valuable only if they are used. So, don’t waste money creating policies if you’re not fully committed to using them. This may seem obvious. However, I have seen far too may communities get into a housing crisis because they didn’t follow their policies.
Second, developing housing policies can get bogged down, sometimes for years. To prevent this from occurring, assign the right person the task of developing housing policy. A good housing policy development process shouldn’t take more than a few months from start to finish.Finally, make sure that your policies are clearly understood by all. This includes Council and community members, who often need several rounds of consultations and messaging. It is much better to over-communicate than under-communicate your pending housing policy changes.
Mistake 3: Poor Governance Structure
Role clarity is a critical part of governance structure. Make sure that the roles of Council and the housing committee are clear and distinct.
Poor governance structure exists when Council overrules its housing staff, even though the staff followed housing policies.
Poor governance structure exists when the housing committee has lots of meetings but gets little done.
Speaking of housing committees, they are a mixed bag. If they are set up properly and have decent committee members they can serve an excellent purpose. But I have seen far too many that were either poorly structured or had poorly trained committee members.
There is no cookie cutter governance model for First Nations housing. Just be sure that roles are clear and that good people are chosen for key positions.
Mistake 4: Hiring and Keeping the Wrong Staff
Housing officers must have a wide range of skill sets. They have to be organized, literate, good with numbers, good with people and good at problem solving.
That’s a tall order to ask, especially when these positions don’t typically command big salaries (especially with small bands, which have correspondingly small budgets to work with).
If I had to choose one quality for a housing manager it would be that the person be organized. A second quality is to have good people skills. The housing manager needs to be able to work with politicized Councils, problem tenants and cagy contractors. A reasonably mature, organized person is a necessity for any First Nations housing office.
Any hope of getting your housing mess turned around is virtually impossible without a strong housing manager.
Mistake 5: Poor Record Keeping
Filing systems and record keeping are fairly simple endeavours, if they are properly set up and maintained. Each file should contain the tenant’s application, the rental agreement, the forms that confirm rental amount and a record of the tenant’s payments.
The record of payment is the most important record to maintain. Not having it can lead to hefty arrears and huge losses for the Band.
Indeed, if you take a look at why most First Nations get into housing trouble, it often starts with poor record keeping.
For example, if a tenant fails to pay his rent and doesn’t get any notice about it (because of poor record keeping), he soon learns that not paying rent is acceptable.
Staying on top of your rental income starts with good information. And that means keeping good, accurate records of your housing files.
Summary
Make any of these five mistakes and you are setting your Band up for housing failure. Alternatively, here are five steps to creating a successful First Nation housing operation:
- Set Up an Effective Governance Structure
- Set Up a Good Information System
- Hire the Right Staff
- Have Good Policies in Place; Use Them
- Evict Bad Tenants
Andrew Leach, MBA, is a successful First Nation management consultant specializing in turning messy situations into prosperous ones. Visit his website at www.andrewleach.com or drop him an email at .
Why First Nations Housing is so Messed Up
A Three-Part Series by Andrew Leach, MBA
In this three-part series, I will clearly show what must be done to address Canada’s on-reserve housing crisis.
In this first article, I will compare Canada with the Native American Housing experience.
Last year, I had the tremendous honour and opportunity to organize the World Indigenous Housing Conference held in Vancouver, Canada. As the lead organizer, I worked closely with governments and indigenous leaders in Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand. I visited many indigenous communities in each country, examining their housing stock and programs.
I learned a lot from this experience. Probably the most important thing was that there is a direct relationship between the state of our housing and the level of control that we have over it.
It’s really that simple. The horrible conditions that we see on the reserve are a symptom of the root problem: lack of control over our housing affairs.
In Canada, First Nations face a choking bureaucracy—mostly CMHC (Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation)—that is ill-equipped and not structured to support the complex issues facing on-reserve housing.
To illustrate the linkage between autonomy and performance, let’s look at our neighbours, the United States, and their experience with Native American housing.
In the United States, the Native American Housing and Self Determination Act (NAHASDA) was passed in 1996 and has since achieved excellent results. Prior to NAHASDA, United States tribal housing was much like Canada’s: widespread poverty, horrible living conditions and massive underdevelopment.
But the enactment of NAHASDA led to a remarkable turnaround in the Native American housing sector. With greater autonomy—through less restrictive block funding that is controlled and distributed by Native Americans—today’s tribal homes are in far better shape. Today, three times as many homes are being planned and built on tribal lands. Furthermore, tribal members give an 87% approval rating to the NAHASDA. The Act has also led to improved Tribal-US government relations, with respect to Indian housing.
NAHASDA is widely considered a success and was reauthorized in 2001 and 2008.
The most important aspect of NAHASDHA is that it allows each US Tribe to determine its own housing needs and to act on those needs in a manner that they know will work best for them.
Obviously, there is ample precedence for devolving programs from the Canadian government to First Nations. The recent transfer of British Columbia’s entire First Nations health portfolio is one example.
Thus, Canada needs to take a closer look at the Native American Housing model. And let’s not forget what underpins that model; it’s called a “Self-Determination” act for good reason.
Even if the Canadian government suddenly shifted its policy in First Nation Housing, it would take years to get this issue turned around and headed in the right direction. In the meantime, many First Nation families are suffering from depressing, unacceptable living conditions.
In addition to sweeping changes needed in the government-First Nations housing relationship, we must establish interim measures to help alleviate this crisis. I cover this in my next two articles.
This article was for national housing leaders and those who can influence them.
In my next article, I will write to First Nation community leaders, on what they must do to make the best of a bad situation. My final article in this series will be for First Nation homeowners and tenants.
Andrew Leach, MBA, is a successful First Nation management consultant specializing in turning messy situations into prosperous ones. Visit his website at www.andrewleach.com or drop him an email at .
Managing Your Consultants
By Andrew Leach, MBA
During the last ten years, I have done contract work for hundreds of organizations across Canada and the United States. During this time, I’ve come across a lot of consultants: a few good ones, most decent, and some terrible ones. This article offers three tips to manage your consultants and get value for the money you spend on them.
Get ‘em In, Get ‘em Out
First, determine if you really need a consultant. Generally, organizations need to hire a consultant for one of three reasons:
- She has the expertise you need
- He has the time and you don’t
- She is independent and can objectively evaluate a sensitive, internal issue
If you think you need a consultant, getting one is fairly easy. Getting someone out can be a bit trickier. One way is to establish expected deliverables with all of your consultants in a signed contract.
And beware of the consultant who becomes a “jack of all trades” for your organization. He’s the planner, organizer, proposal writer, management guru, and trainer. These consultants end up becoming too dependent upon you and vice versa, which is not an effective way to run business.
So remember GIGO: “Get ’em In, Get ’em Out.”
Establish Clear Policies
The main reason for establishing policies is to provide consistency for routine activities like hiring consultants. Two things can go wrong with written policies:
- Your policies are not adhered to
- Your policies have loopholes
Problem #1: If your present policies are not being adhered to, political will is required to correct this situation. Without the political will to enforce policies, your policies are worthless.
The biggest problem occurs when a high-ranking leader disregards the contracting out policy. For example, a senior manager hires her preferred consultant for a large contract without putting the work out to tender, an act that may breach the organization’s tendering policy. This is a delicate situation that requires tact and perseverance. In a nutshell, you need everyone to agree to the same set of rules.
Problem #2: If your policies are vague and filled with loopholes, you need to update them. Look at your history with consultants when updating the contracting policy. Ask yourself, “What have we done in past with consultants that hasn’t worked well for us?” Create new policies to address these specific issues.
In short, have good policies and make sure you stick to them.
Be Proactive with Fees
Finally, make sure you monitor your consultant’s fees. Be clear about price (including expenses) before you commit to anything.
Also, don’t be shy to question prices. “How did you come up with that figure?” “What can we do to get this proposal within our budget?” In short, keep consultants focused on deliverables, so they provide solid, short-term support.
Finally, without a signed contract, the consultant potentially has carte blanche on what he will bill you. So make sure you develop a contract system for all of your consultants. Contract templates are easy to develop and go a long way to keeping consulting fees in line.
Summary
Most consultants can provide needed support, if you manage them properly. If you don’t, expect problems to arise. Indeed, good consulting work is often the result of both the consultant and client doing their jobs. And for you, the client, that means managing your consultant.
Andrew Leach is from the St’at’imc Nation (Lillooet, BC) and has a Master’s degree in Business Administration (MBA). He also operates a successful management consulting business (www.andrewleach.com), and welcomes feedback to his articles. Email or call him at 604.868.4004.
A Brief History of Management
By Andrew Leach, MBA
Did you know the study of management has been around for at least 2500 years? In this article, I will briefly discuss the history of management and, as usual, will offer a First Nations perspective on this important topic.
About 2500 years ago, a Chinese general named Sun Tzu, wrote an astounding piece of work “The Art of War.” In his book, Sun Tzu acknowledged the need for inter-organizational communications, hierarchy and staff planning.
A little later, between 400-360 BC, Socrates and Aristotle, two Greek philosophers, wrote about the principles of management and the nature of executive power.
In the Middle East, around 1300 AD, ibn Taymiyyah outlined an approach to administration using the scientific method in “The Principles of Religious Government.”
In North America, for thousands of years, First Nations and Native Americans used management principles and concepts in many areas, including forestry, fisheries, land use and government. For example, the Potlatch system required a complex set of management tools, including planning, organizing, monitoring, and regulating.
Because First Nations had oral cultures, our management principles were passed down from generation to generation orally and through socialization, using ceremonies, for example.
Later, in 1532, Machiavelli, an Italian, wrote “The Prince,” a bold piece of work that discussed the practical use of power. The term “Machiavellian” is used today to describe a ruthless way to get and keep power.
In the 1700s, the Industrial Revolution started. With the explosion of industry, came a wave of new management writers, mostly from Europe and the United States. The basis for their works is largely rooted in ancient Western thinking. Generally speaking, Western thought assumes we can control the world through reasoning and science. This is known as the “classic” management view.
By the 1900s, people started seeing the limitations of classic management thinking. Management based solely on reasoning and science was missing a critical ingredient: the human factor. Thus, by the 1950s, management concepts like Maslow’s hierarchy of basic human needs were popping up.
By the 1980s, Americans started examining Japan’s approach to management. Japan is a fascinating case study in “how to build an economy.” After being totally devastated by World War II, Japan recovered and quickly grew into a leading industrial power. By the late 1980s, 53 of the top 100 companies in the world were Japanese.
The Americans learned very quickly that Japanese management had a different way of working. Specifically, the Japanese emphasize teamwork and employee development, and give workers an environment to do quality work.
Since the 1980s, many North American companies have tried to incorporate various Japanese management principles. However, one challenge to this approach is that Japanese and Western cultures are, in many respects, fundamentally different. The 1980s movie Gung-Ho dramatized the challenges of blending Eastern and Western cultures into a single company.
In comparing Eastern, Western and Native American thought, it is clear that Eastern concepts are much more compatible with First Nations principles. For example, Eastern principles emphasize the importance of relationships and the interconnectedness of all things.
Interestingly, many of today’s leading Western writers are pushing for a more non-Western approach to management. For example, in his bestseller “The Fifth Discipline,” Peter Senge advocates for a complete change in Western managerial thinking. He calls this new worldview systems thinking, which sounds like a First Nations concept, if you ask me!
There are other signs that Western companies are trying to become more holistic. Hot topics in management today include concepts like 360-degree feedback, servant-leadership, social capital, and spirituality in the workforce. I believe the rising interest in these kinds of topics signifies that the West wants a more meaningful approach to work and management.
Fitting many Western management concepts into First Nations organizations is like “trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.” In examining the history of management, three things are apparent:
- All cultures have developed their own management principles based on their own worldview.
- The First Nations worldview is fundamentally different than the Western worldview.
- First Nations today need to develop their own explicit management principles, consistent with their own worldview.
Andrew Leach is from the St’at’imc Nation (Lillooet, BC) and has a Master’s degree in Business Administration (MBA). He also operates a successful management consulting business (www.andrewleach.com), and welcomes feedback to his articles. Email or call him at 604.868.4004.