Mentoring System in Burberry - Essay Example

?Executive Brief Mentoring in Burberry I. Overview Burberry (hereafter, is a leading brand in luxury apparel. Operating in the U.K. but exporting itsprincipal products around the world, the Company has just announced a 6% rise in profit for the first half of the year, despite the sluggish economy. This is out of the ordinary, because luxury is usually expected to do poorly at a time when people would limit their buying to essentials and forego luxuries. Apparently the Company culture is geared towards competitiveness, for which reason it must explore the potentials associated with mentoring. Mentorship is not new to Burberry, although its experience is largely external, philanthropic, and along the line of corporate social responsibility. Presently, the Company is a corporate sponsor of IntoUniversity, a charity organisation dedicated to educating the youth through mentoring. Through its local learning centres, some of Burberry’s employees and managers are already dedicating time and effort as volunteers mentors and e-mentors, to Britain’s poor but deserving ‘young people [who] are inspired to learn’ (IntoUniversity, 2010). In 2011 alone, Burberry associates volunteered 5,500 hours of mentoring. For one particular Burberry associate, more than 200 young students were mentored globally in programmes ranging from three months to three years (Burberry Annual Report 2011/12, p. 64). Recent studies have highlighted the use of internal mentoring, as a technique to improve performance and enhance competitiveness. It is believed that by adopting internal mentoring, the firm will benefit competitively. II. Proposition This paper proposes that Burberry engage in internal mentoring throughout the organisation until the highest levels, in order to enhance its competitiveness. Mentoring is seen as a tool not only for implementing social development programs external to the firm, but is also perceived as an effective instrument in pursuing the company’s strategic goal of remaining competitive. The viability of mentoring in Burberry will be discussed. III. Theoretical background Mentoring is ‘an intense and complex relationship where the mentor plays the role of peer and parent’ and functions as ‘teacher, advisor, sponsor, and friend’ (Ehrich & Hansford, 1999, p.93). Academic literature states that mentoring improves individual behaviour and performance, particularly in the training and encouragement of the young. However, the impact of mentoring on firm behaviour and outcomes has not been established, particularly in the highest policy levels. Offstein, Shah and Gnyawali (2011) propose a model whereby the board of directors (BOD) mentors the chief executive officer (CEO), for the purpose of improving the CEO’s ability and motivation to ‘competitively engage the firm’ (p. 75). In the diagram that follows, the mentoring role of the BOD is depicted in terms of sponsorship, protection, and coaching or counselling. By providing legitimacy, a proper sense of discretion and risk-taking, and knowledge and learning, the mentoring exercise is expected to lead towards a greater firm competitiveness. Competitive behaviour is defined by their magnitude and complexity. Source: Offstein, Shah and Gnyawali, 2011, p. 80 According to the theory by Offstein, et al. (2011), competitive actions are ‘purposefully directed, specific, and observable.’ The model adheres to the principle that companies that undertake bold and complex competitive actions benefit as a result, because such actions disturb the status quo and establish new rules by which the competitive stage is reset. According to Schumpeter (1934) in his seminal study, first mover advantage (i.e., the advantage of being the first firm to undertake an innovation that defines a new competitive environment) generates abnormally high profits, until such time as other firms catch up and themselves pursue innovative actions in an effort to overcome the market leader. From the executive levels, mentoring by CEO to his division heads, and from them to the department heads, and onwards down the organisational structure, should convey the competitive behaviour to middle and lower ranks. Formal mentoring and coaching extended by superiors to subordinates are effective in improving quality, retaining valuable employees, meeting global competition and social change, and incorporating changes in technology and work design (Joo, Sushko & McLean, 2012). IV. Advantages and disadvantages of mentoring in Burberry There are a number of benefits to both the mentee and mentor, but this discussion will focus on the benefits to the organisation as a whole (Ehrich & Hansford, 1999). These include: The efficient development of strong future managers Enhanced commitment of participants to the organisation Cost effectiveness due to targeted coaching Improved organisational communication resulting from personal interactions Facilitates an articulation of organizational goals and perspectives Mentoring also has disadvantages to the organisation, as follows: Lack of time, since mentorship is a learning process Lack of skills required by prospective mentors Pressure experienced by mentors in their mentorship Resentment developed among mentees against either their mentors or the activity Need to develop criteria for matching mentors and mentees In Burberry, the BOD is comprised of a Chairman, a Chief Executive, two executive directors other than the CEO, and four non-executive directors. Burberry is registered as a Limited Company. Its Board regularly holds briefings with major shareholders to keep abreast of their views. It has a globally distinctive luxury brand positioned as authentically British, with highly diversified distribution channels and international business experience. By virtue of its unique and somewhat sensitive market position (considering that it is a luxury brand), Burberry’s continued existence depends on a culture of competitiveness which allows it to defend its brand name for the luxury market. Clearly, the BOD appears to be well-informed of the external and internal environment, having an equal number of executive and non-executive members, without counting the Chairman. The board appears extremely competent to mentor the CEO, which is one of its members, in balancing and aligning all stakeholder interests and planning out a bold strategy to gain and hold market share. V. Recommendations The study finds that Burberry will benefit from a systematic adoption of mentoring of the CEO by the BOD, and from that level downwards through the organisation. The competitive behaviour of the CEO should be allowed to embed itself in the organisational culture to enhance firm performance as well as the firm’s competitive edge. Bibliography Baek-Kyoo (Brian), J, Sushko, J, & McLean, G 2012, 'Multiple Faces of Coaching: Manager-as-coach, Executive Coaching, and Formal Mentoring', Organization Development Journal, 30, 1, pp. 19-38 Burberry Annual Report 2011/12. Retrieved 14 November 2012 from http://www.burberry.com ‘Edinburg Tram Project’ 2008 City of Edinburgh Council/ Transport Initiatives Edinburg (TIE) IntoUniversity. 2010 IntoUniversity. Retrieved 14 November 2012 from http://intouniversity.org/content/about-us Offstein, E, Shah, A, & Gnyawali, D 2011, 'Effects of CEO-BOD Mentoring on Firm Competitive Behavior', Review Of Business, 32, 1, pp. 75-88 Schumpeter, J 1934 The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Williams, S, & Kim, J 2011, 'E-mentoring in Online Course Projects: Description of an E-Mentoring Scheme', International Journal Of Evidence Based Coaching & Mentoring, 9, 2, pp. 80-95 Williams, S, Sunderman, J, & Kim, J 2012, 'E-mentoring in an Online Course: Benefits and Challenges to E-mentors', International Journal Of Evidence Based Coaching & Mentoring, 10, 1, pp. 109-123 Read More