Is there a place for personal values in leadership?

Margaret Hodge MP accused Google of being "devious, calculated and, in my view, unethical”. Photograph: Andrew Winning/REUTERS

In the banking sector, standards have been widely condemned in the wake of the global economic crisis. This year, corporate values were in the spotlight again when Google was accused by Margaret Hodge MP of being "devious, calculated and, in my view, unethical".

To be successful in the cut-throat world of business, you may think there's no place for soft values and morals. But holding on to personal principles as a leader is not just about ethics – it can also boost your career and organisation.

Being true to your values helps performance in the long term, according to Petra Wilton, of the Chartered Management Institute. "Not only does it have consequences for reputation and trust in business, it also has a huge impact through employee engagement, productivity and outcomes."

"Too often people's personal principles go out of the window when they take up leadership positions, when they've got the pressures of targets and bad examples to follow. You can certainly behave unethically and still get good business results in the short term, but it's likely to come back and bite you at the end of the day."

With an increased focus on corporate responsibility since the banking crisis, many companies have made efforts to embrace an ethical culture among employees. But, although company values may provide a useful framework, the ethics of an organisation are ultimately set by the example of its leaders.

"It's what you're doing, not what you're saying, that people will use as an example," says Philippa Foster Back, director of the Institute of Business Ethics. "People recognise that to get on they maybe need to behave like their boss. So the culture of the organisation is set by the top."

If sticking to your principles seems like an obvious objective, why do so many leaders seem to get it wrong?

Petra Wilton suggests: "Most people don't get up and say: 'I'm an unethical individual, I'm going to go and make the wrong decisions'. A lot of the time it happens when people try to meet the corporate and business objectives without having any real measure of the human consequences."

One of the main problems for business leaders is subjectivity – there are no clear cut rules on ethics. "The meaning of ethics changes from person to person," explains Sankalp Chaturvedi, associate professor at the Imperial College Business School.

"What is ethical to me may not be ethical to you. And business processes themselves are very contextual – what is ethical in one country may not be in another."

It's easy to see how principles may not always translate to other people. For instance, Starbucks has been ranked in the world's most ethical companies for six years in a row. Yet its tax avoidance methods have sparked protests and criticism.

Given the ambiguity of ethics, your personal principles may not be shared by everyone. So for leaders, valuing principles must be about honesty and having an open conversation. Chaturvedi says: "Problems happen when people are not authentic – when they say one thing and do something else – so it's about being consistent about what you're saying.

"Being a leader is not just about making decisions, but also making sure people understand what the intention is behind it."

But balancing business and principles is not always easy: challenging decisions can require compromises. "There will always be ethical dilemmas where it's hard to weigh up the consequences of a decision you are making," says Wilton.

"Sometimes there's no clear right or wrong answer. But valuing your principles is about considering the implications of what you're doing and, when in doubt, challenge things where possible."

Back adds: "It comes back to the choices that individuals make, and what they feel comfortable with. What's important is having a mental checklist while you're making decisions and being open about things you're not comfortable with. True leadership is having the courage to say no."

Ethics are not just important for the sake of companies, but also for the leaders themselves. Back says: "If you're not true to your values then you're likely to end up with stress and unease as you have to take on a different persona as you walk in through the door at work. So it is very important for individuals."

And holding on to principles can help guide you through your career. Steve Nicholls, who coaches executives and managers, says that as you climb up the career ladder into more senior roles, there is often less in terms of peers and reality checks.

"It's important to hang on to personal values because, as a leader, there may not be anyone who you see as a peer to put an arm around your shoulder. One of the most difficult things as a leader is the management of ambiguity in business contexts. Yet you need to do this alongside having clear communications."

"At the end of the day, leaders have got to lead and they've got to be strong."

Chaturvedi adds: "Research has shown consistently that culture has an impact on performance in a company. If people share values consistently then there's a strong culture – and that is definitely going to have an impact on the performance of the individual, as well as the company."

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To get more content and advice like this direct to your inbox, sign up for our weekly update and careers ebook.

View the original article here

Friends and family test: is there a better way to find out views?

Meaningful, qualitative feedback from patients means spending time listening carefully to what they have to say.

The problem with most patient questionnaires is that they ask closed questions, requiring just a yes or no answer. This is also an issue with the government's friends and family test. What's the point of knowing that a patient wouldn't recommend your service to their friends and family if you don't know why?

Spiral Health's 40-bed rehabilitation unit in Blackpool has just been nominated for a Nursing Times award for our approach to patient care, the cornerstone of which is our unique approach to gathering patient feedback. We use an innovative system called Working Together for Change which gathers meaningful, qualitative feedback from patients and then allows them to decide their own priorities for change within our unit.

The system was originally developed as a tool to help people change public services from within. We're working with Helen Sanderson, a personalisation expert, to introduce it for the first time into a hospital setting. It's an eight-part process in which a group of people representing all stakeholders in our hospital community – managers, healthcare assistants, therapists, nurses and patients – gather together to analyse patient feedback and decide on action points. Our staff and patients have loved being involved, and it is interesting to hear feedback on problematic issues from so many different perspectives.

Before we start, we collect patient views by conducting friendly bedside interviews. Each patient is asked to talk to us about two things that are working, two things that are not working and two things that people would like to see if they came back to the unit again. The interviews are more of a chat than a formal process and we work hard to make patients feel at ease. We also remind them that negative feedback is as important as glowing praise. Older generations sometimes don't like to make a fuss, even if something is troubling them.

The issues raised vary hugely. In the beginning, we were surprised to hear that so many people were unhappy with our food. We also learned that some patients needed their exercise regimes to be explained more fully and that others were frustrated that bells weren't being answered on the wards. More recently we've learned that some patients would appreciate more quiet time away from the hubbub of the wards, while others feel there are too few activities to help pass the time.

Almost all the issues raised can be resolved. We've already made significant changes to our menu, personalised our exercise regimes and implemented a policy of zero-tolerance on unanswered bells. Over the past few months, I've also researched options for extra soft mattress toppers and arranged for wi-fi to be available. We have conducted a full run-through of the process twice in the last six months and plan to continue with the same frequency. Eighty per cent of our patients are now being interviewed during their stay and we aim to achieve 100% as soon as possible.

As we are determined to be open and honest about the feedback we receive – negative and positive – we have a display in our reception area that highlights issues raised and what we are working on.

Some people have said we are brave to invite criticism, but we feel strongly that if we are going to be truly patient-centred we must listen hard to them and learn from them. If we were just content to ask tick-box questions of our patients, would the results really be worth the paper they were written on?

Cheryl Swan is clinical director of Spiral Health

This article is published by Guardian Professional. Join the Healthcare Professionals Network to receive regular emails and exclusive offers.

View the original article here

Is there a place for personal values in leadership?

Margaret Hodge MP accused Google of being "devious, calculated and, in my view, unethical”. Photograph: Andrew Winning/REUTERS

In the banking sector, standards have been widely condemned in the wake of the global economic crisis. This year, corporate values were in the spotlight again when Google was accused by Margaret Hodge MP of being "devious, calculated and, in my view, unethical".

To be successful in the cut-throat world of business, you may think there's no place for soft values and morals. But holding on to personal principles as a leader is not just about ethics – it can also boost your career and organisation.

Being true to your values helps performance in the long term, according to Petra Wilton, of the Chartered Management Institute. "Not only does it have consequences for reputation and trust in business, it also has a huge impact through employee engagement, productivity and outcomes."

"Too often people's personal principles go out of the window when they take up leadership positions, when they've got the pressures of targets and bad examples to follow. You can certainly behave unethically and still get good business results in the short term, but it's likely to come back and bite you at the end of the day."

With an increased focus on corporate responsibility since the banking crisis, many companies have made efforts to embrace an ethical culture among employees. But, although company values may provide a useful framework, the ethics of an organisation are ultimately set by the example of its leaders.

"It's what you're doing, not what you're saying, that people will use as an example," says Philippa Foster Back, director of the Institute of Business Ethics. "People recognise that to get on they maybe need to behave like their boss. So the culture of the organisation is set by the top."

If sticking to your principles seems like an obvious objective, why do so many leaders seem to get it wrong?

Petra Wilton suggests: "Most people don't get up and say: 'I'm an unethical individual, I'm going to go and make the wrong decisions'. A lot of the time it happens when people try to meet the corporate and business objectives without having any real measure of the human consequences."

One of the main problems for business leaders is subjectivity – there are no clear cut rules on ethics. "The meaning of ethics changes from person to person," explains Sankalp Chaturvedi, associate professor at the Imperial College Business School.

"What is ethical to me may not be ethical to you. And business processes themselves are very contextual – what is ethical in one country may not be in another."

It's easy to see how principles may not always translate to other people. For instance, Starbucks has been ranked in the world's most ethical companies for six years in a row. Yet its tax avoidance methods have sparked protests and criticism.

Given the ambiguity of ethics, your personal principles may not be shared by everyone. So for leaders, valuing principles must be about honesty and having an open conversation. Chaturvedi says: "Problems happen when people are not authentic – when they say one thing and do something else – so it's about being consistent about what you're saying.

"Being a leader is not just about making decisions, but also making sure people understand what the intention is behind it."

But balancing business and principles is not always easy: challenging decisions can require compromises. "There will always be ethical dilemmas where it's hard to weigh up the consequences of a decision you are making," says Wilton.

"Sometimes there's no clear right or wrong answer. But valuing your principles is about considering the implications of what you're doing and, when in doubt, challenge things where possible."

Back adds: "It comes back to the choices that individuals make, and what they feel comfortable with. What's important is having a mental checklist while you're making decisions and being open about things you're not comfortable with. True leadership is having the courage to say no."

Ethics are not just important for the sake of companies, but also for the leaders themselves. Back says: "If you're not true to your values then you're likely to end up with stress and unease as you have to take on a different persona as you walk in through the door at work. So it is very important for individuals."

And holding on to principles can help guide you through your career. Steve Nicholls, who coaches executives and managers, says that as you climb up the career ladder into more senior roles, there is often less in terms of peers and reality checks.

"It's important to hang on to personal values because, as a leader, there may not be anyone who you see as a peer to put an arm around your shoulder. One of the most difficult things as a leader is the management of ambiguity in business contexts. Yet you need to do this alongside having clear communications."

"At the end of the day, leaders have got to lead and they've got to be strong."

Chaturvedi adds: "Research has shown consistently that culture has an impact on performance in a company. If people share values consistently then there's a strong culture – and that is definitely going to have an impact on the performance of the individual, as well as the company."

This content is brought to you by Guardian Professional. To get more content and advice like this direct to your inbox, sign up for our weekly update and careers ebook.

View the original article here

Is There Any Substance To The Buyout Rumors Surrounding BioMarin And Catalyst?

(Editors' Note: This article covers a micro-cap stock. Please be aware of the risks associated with these stocks.)

BioMarin Pharmaceutical, Inc. (BMRN) is a fast growing orphan drug developer with the history of a strong appetite for gobbling up small pharma companies with promising pipelines while they are cheap. Always on the lookout for low priced buyout candidates that fit their orphan drug profile, BioMarin now finds itself both the buyer, and the target.

Ever since October 2012 when it was announced that BioMarin purchased 17% of Catalyst Pharmaceutical Partners, Inc. (CPRX), buyout rumors have been circulating about BioMarin making an offer for the balance of the company. Is Catalyst a good fit? If so, what will the buyout price be? When will the offer be made? On the other side of the fence, BioMarin shareholders are asking the same questions about their company if a larger company makes a bid for them as rumors are suggesting.

The following history may be helpful to answer these questions:

In 2009, BioMarin acquired Huxley Pharmaceuticals for approximately $22.5 million and $36 million in royalties from future sales of Firdapse for the treatment of the orphan disease Lambert-Eaton Myasthenic Syndrome, LEMS.

In 2010, BioMarin paid $22 million for Zystor Therapeutics giving them a drug now being developed for Pompe disease, a muscle disabling disorder.

Also in 2010, BioMarin purchased LEAD Therapeutics for $97 million. This acquisition provided BioMarin the opportunity to treat rare cancers with PARP-sensitive mutations, as a single agent and in combination with other DNA damaging agents, and to improve on PARP inhibitors currently in development for more common tumor types.

In October 2012, BioMarin may have made the best investment in its history by investing only $5,000,000 for a 17% stake in Catalyst Pharmaceutical Partners. At the same time, they out-licensed the North American rights for Firdapse to Catalyst that has already begun the Phase III clinical trials. Firdapse has already been approved and is selling in Europe and with its multiple orphan drug indications, North American Firdapse sales are projected to be between $200 and $400 million yearly.

It is especially important to note that Catalyst owns CPP115 that is very attractive to BioMarin because it is expected to treat several Orphan Drug indications such as, Epilepsy, Refractory Epilepsy, Tourette Syndrome, Infantile Spasms, Movement Disorders, Post Traumatic Stress Disorders and others. CPP115 was designed by the well-known Dr. Richard Silverman, who also designed the blockbusters Lyrica and Neurontin for Pfizer (PFE). An April 18th analyst report initiating coverage of Catalyst projects peak sales for CPP115 at $1.6 billion.

Like other big-pharma companies, Pfizer is seeking opportunities in lucrative Orphan Drugs and they know how successful Dr. Silverman has already been for them so it would not be a surprise if Pfizer also becomes interested in BioMarin if CPP115 becomes part of their pipeline. There have even been a few rumors recently that Pfizer may be interested in Catalyst because of their confidence in Silverman and because of the large potential for CPP115.

With BioMarin's resources, CPP115 would be an extremely valuable addition to their pipeline that could increase their valuations substantially in the next two to three years. CPP115 could almost double the size of BoMarin's already robust pipeline. Catalyst is therefore another logical but understandably quiet takeover target for BioMarin.

In January 2013, BioMarin acquired Zacharon Pharmaceuticals for $10 million plus additional undisclosed milestone payments. This gave BioMarin control of Zacharon's heparan sulfate synthesis inhibition platform, which BioMarin plans on researching in the treatment of MPS III, other MPS disorders, and ganglioside diseases such as Tay-Sachs.

After all the successful takeovers that helped BioMarin grow, now the company finds itself a target as rumors are heating up again. An article in Fierce Biotech suggests GlaxoSmithKline and Shire, two U.K. drugmakers with a keen interest in lucrative rare diseases, are rumored to be considering bids for BioMarin.

Even in the face of persistent buyout rumors, Bienaime, BioMarin's CEO said he didn't anticipate interest from an acquirer until BioMarin reports later this year on final testing on GALNS, a treatment for the rare genetic bone disease Morquio A syndrome. Analysts predict peak sales for GALNS of $500 million. In April this year, after positive data from a Vimizim Trial (previously known as GALNS), BioMarin Submitted its Vimizim BLA to the FDA for the Treatment of MPS IVA and now the rumors are flying again. And the stock is following right along with the rumors. Michael Yee, an analyst at RBC described GALNS as the biggest driver and most important data set of the year for BioMarin.

Given Bienaime's statement that BioMarin would not be interested in an acquisition even at a 25% to 30% premium, that would set a buyout price in the neighborhood of $90 per share based on the recent high over $70. If BioMarin can lock up Catalyst's CPP115, soon, that makes them even more attractive and may give them more leverage for a loftier price. Until a formal takeover offer is made, the predicted price is not known for certain, but based on BioMarin's expected growth, it could easily be north of $100.

If BioMarin moves forward with an offer for Catalyst, a reasonable assumption is that it might come right after results from the current CPP109 trial for Tourette's Syndrome are released. Top Line results are expected to be released in Q4 2013 that is coming up very soon. CPP115 is at least 200 times more powerful than CPP109 and does not have the potential adverse side effects to peripheral vision that have been associated with CPP109. If results are positive, that could trigger the green light BioMarin needs to make an offer for the remainder of Catalyst.

If BioMarin makes a bid for the remainder of Catalyst shares, it is in their best interests to do it while shares are cheap, and when there is enough evidence that CPP115 really works as well as believed. If BioMarin paid $8.00 per share for Catalyst, that would translate to about $300 million that seems like a bargain for both Firdapse and CPP115. They could easily pay $50 million in cash and the balance in BioMarin shares. BioMarin has the resources to expedite CPP115 for multiple indications faster than Catalyst can and time gives them the clear advantage.

BioMarin is relatively low investment risk because they are adequately capitalized and have large revenues flowing. The primary risk associated with BioMarin is a share price retreat due to failed trials or negative news. Catalyst is higher risk than BioMarin because although the company has adequate cash through next year it will have to offer a round of finance sometime next year. Catalysts drugs could also fail trials, but with a European approval already in place for Firdapse and with Silverman behind CPP115, the risk looks favorable. Given Catalyst's low price today, and the potential for high percentage returns over the coming year, the risk to reward appears justified.

BioMarin and Catalyst are both being watched very closely and Catalyst is under unusually heavy accumulation.

Disclosure: I have no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it. I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article. (More...)

How would you like your alerts on   delivered?

Added to your bookmarks on the Seeking Alpha homepage

new SA.Pages.Article.bookmark("_bottom");

View the original article here