How do effective leaders execute a plan when the future is so wildly unpredictable? - part #1

When it comes to executing a plan in wildly unpredictable times, we need to remember that executing a plan comes with a commitment to risk and a commitment to relationships. As John Paul Lederach in his book, The Moral Imagination: The Art and Soul of Building Peace (Oxford University Press, 2005) writes “Commitment to relationship always entails risk. Sitting in the messy ambiguity of complexity while refusing to frame it in dualistic terms requires risk…. Risk is mystery. It requires a journey. Risk means we take a step toward and into the unknown…. It is the journey of the great explorers for it choose, like the images in the maps of old, to live at the edge of known cartography. Risk means stepping into a place where you are not sure what will come or what will happen.”

Robert H. Miles in his article, “Accelerating Corporate Transformations (Don’t Lose Your Nerve!) Six mistakes that can derail your company’s attempts to change” (Harvard Business Review, January - February 2010) writes that there often is a loss of focus during the execution of a plan. Here are three common mistakes:

- PostLaunch Blues: It can be tough for a leader to switch from playing a visionary role to serving as “ballast and keel,” but that is just what is needed after a strong launch, because a real transformation is about execution. The top leader has to make sure managers at all levels receive and relay a consistent message about the need to drive the key transformation initiatives in the agreed-upon manner. One way to signal your shift into execution mode is to start weekly staff meetings with a review of progress on transformation initiatives, calling attention to people and plans that have drifted out of alignment and noting early lessons that need to be quickly shared.

- Midcourse Overconfidence: The next major slump typically comes after two quarterly check-points have passed…. The business model will need refining, and you will need to tweak initiatives based on lessons from early execution. Miles encourages leaders to hold quarterly checkpoint meetings and   immediately following each of them with mini-cascades, and interventions that take place throughout the company.

- Presumed Perpetual Motion: As the first performance year comes to a close, many executives will succumb to the presumption of perpetual motion. This is the idea that things will continue to progress as the company sticks with the year-one game plan. Miles recommends you do “launch redux” to boldly kick off the second year of execution.

There is a lot more in this very good article, but right now I am seeing the above problems in multiple organizations and at multiple levels.

Another recent insight for me about executing a plan during wildly unpredictable times is the recognition that successful organizational change takes place in small visible moments rather than as large sustained processes or actions. We get so busy as leaders that we do not really “see” organizational change. We do not see the series of small visible moments people are making. As Kotter reminds in his seminal research, missing “short term wins” does not create large sustained processes or action.

As leaders, we need to remember that the process of organizational change is more than just building teams or work place communities of like minded people. We need to think, plan and execute in such a manner so we deal with who needs to change and how to get them engaged in the process. Lederach notes that “… framing the process as one that must create like-minded communities produces a narrow view of change wherein little thought or work is given to the broader nature of who and what will need to change and how they will be engaged in such a process.” If the focus is on building and maintaining like-minded people and teams, we limit the scope of what we can achieve because we perpetuate a dualistic perspective of people, i.e. good vs. bad, us vs. them, or you are either with us or against us.

While I agree that building teams and community are important in organizational change, I also think about how to engage others who will need to change. Their resistance to change initially could offer important insights and perspective. In essence, we need to understand that their resistance is a form of feedback.

This week, when you see small visible moments of change, visit with those involved and ask them the following three questions: Who are we? Where are we going? How will we get there? By doing this, we create clarity and commitment rather than just a “get ‘er done mentality”.

Geery Howe, M.A. Consultant, Executive Coach, Trainer in Leadership, Strategic Planning and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

Decision-making In The Middle of A Pandemic

All over this world, people are overwhelmed and doing their best. At work and at home, people are making small and large decisions. It is exhausting and it is very challenging. Sometimes we forget that “Life seeks organization,” says Margaret Wheatley in her book, Finding Our Way: Leadership for an Uncertain Time. (Berrett-Koehler, 2005), “but it uses messes to get there. Organization is a process, not a structure.” Many days we struggle with the messy nature of this time period and we desperately want organization and structure.

One the reasons we are struggling, especially in the area of decision-making, is that we have encountered an unknown unknown, a phrase former U.S. defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld made famous in 2002. As he explained” “there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. There are also known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don’t know we don’t know. And … it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.”

In recent executive coaching sessions over the phone, I have spent a great deal of time talking about making decisions and decision architecture. In the beginning we need to think of decision-making as a four step process, namely preparing to make a decisions, making a decision, executing a decision and evaluating a decision. This framework can be used at work and at home. And since most of of are working from home, it would be good if everyone at home is aware of this framework.

In the Preparation Phase of decision-making, leaders sense what is happening in their environment and identify the problems that are taking place. From my perspective, this is the stage where I have to sort the noise from the signal. What information is actually useful, important and something I need to pay attention to vs. what information is just noise, i.e. non-salient factors or interference? As I answer this question, it is good to do an analysis of causality, i.e. what is causing what to take place. Furthermore, I need to think about what is the best way to make and execute my decision, i.e. the decision architecture. 

One interesting thing for me as an executive coach is that when I see good decision-making taking place in the midst of COVID-19, I see that all people involved know two very specific things. First, they understand the difference between what is a priority and what is a goal. Second, they know whether or not they should bump an issue up to a higher level in the company. Clarity about these two things are making a major difference between functional teams, all working digitally from home offices, and dysfunctional teams who are struggling in the exact same working environment.

In the Call Phase of decision-making, leaders actually make a decision. Most people think of this as the single moment of rational analysis based on knowable and quantifiable variables. In reality, it is a dynamic process influenced by multiple variables which are often outside of a leader’s direct circle of control or influence. The best leaders make decisions that influence now but they also set up a framework for others to make successful decisions.

From my perspective, the people who are making the best decisions right now are the ones who stop and think carefully about the impact and precedent that they are setting when the decision moves to the execution phase of the process. This depth of clarity does not happen instantaneously but with time and good coaching, it can become a learned and executable skills set.

In the Execution Phase of decision-making, a leader needs to mobilize resources, e.g. people, information, and technology, to support it. One of the most powerful resources is to make sure people have the time to work that is not interrupted by other people’s agenda’s or goals. Given current events and how many people are feeling overwhelmed and are overwhelmed, we have to recognize that everyone in the workforce has a reduced bandwidth for execution. Their minds are just full of trying to figure out the known unknowns and still being blown away by more and more unknown unknowns.

Finally, in the Evaluation Phase of decision-making, we engage in an evaluation process to determine whether or not our decision was effective. One thing I think we need to remember in the midst of this global pandemic is that the outcome of good decisions should be a shared commitment to continual improvement and a shared level of clarity about how all our decisions connect to the mission of the organization and our own personal sense of purpose in our lives.

For those of you who want more information about decision-making, I encourage you to read the following article: “Making Judgment Calls: The Ultimate Act of Leadership” by Noel M. Tichy and Warren Bennis in the October 2007 issue of the Harvard Business Review.

As always, stay strong, stay healthy, stay safe, and keep in touch. I look forward to seeing you on the other side.

Geery Howe, M.A. Consultant, Executive Coach, Trainer in Leadership, Strategic Planning and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

How do effective leaders do goal setting and execution? - part #4

When executing a goal, I love Marcus Aurelius’s mindset as described in Ryan Holiday’s book, The Obstacle Is The Way: The Timeless Art of Turning Trials into Triumph, Penguin, 2014. “Our actions may be impeded . . . but there can be no impeding our intentions or dispositions. Because we can accommodate and adapt. The mind adapts and converts to its own purposes the obstacle to our acting. The impediment to action advances action. What stands in the way becomes the way.” 

As we move from goal setting to the execution stage, we need to discuss two items with all involved. First, we need to define what is the difference between a goal and a priority. As we all know, priorities will surface. We also know that most people don’t know how to determine if something should be more important than executing their goals.

Second, we need to discuss how to prioritize all of one’s different goals. With three to five goals as the norm for peak performance, which one should I focus on first? Remember people will always prioritize day to day work over a goal.

Furthermore, every one needs time to work on their goals. As Greg McKeown, in his excellent book called Essentialism: The Disciplined Pursuit of Less, Crown Business, 2014, writes: “What we can’t do is concentrate on two things at the same time…. Multitasking itself is not the enemy of Essentialism; pretending we can “multifocus” is.” In short, the execution of goals comes down to time and attention

Next, we as leaders need to understand that effective execution involves an accountability system. As Ken Blanchard in his book,  Leading At a Higher Level: Blanchard on Leadership and Creating High Performing Organizations, Prentice Hall, 2006, wrote: “To obtain desired performance from its people, an organization must first have a well-defined accountability system.” He also pointed out that “People must also know what a good performance looks like.”

When we keep the above in mind, we recognize that people need regular feedback about their work. And supervisors need people who are working on goals to send progress reports about how they are doing on their goals. As Gary  Keller with Jay Papasan in his book, The One Thing: The Surprisingly Simple Truth Behind Extraordinary Results, Bard Press, 2012, notes, “Individuals who wrote their goals and send progress reports to friends were 76.7 percent more likely to achieve them.”

This week, remember to help people make meaningful progress on their goals. The outcomes will be spectacular.

Geery Howe, M.A. Consultant, Executive Coach, Trainer in Leadership, Strategic Planning and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

The goal of the plan is to have it be owned and understood by those who have to execute it; the goal is not just to get it done.

When a senior team comes to the realization that the organization needs a new strategic plan, it is “all hands on deck.” Meetings are organized. Charts and graphs are created. People go into a frenzy of goal setting. Metrics abound. There is a rush to create the document so that the really important work of execution can take place. 

Some times, a strategic planning consultant is brought in to make it go faster and to be better organized. If that person is me, one of the first things I do is to stop the entire goal setting madness and slow things down. I remind people that the purpose of strategic planning is way more than creating a document in record time so that everyone can get it done in even faster time period.

Instead, I point out that the purpose of strategic planning is to create a process and a document where by the people who will do the work own it and understand why this is the best plan given the challenges before the organization and their industry. When people understand the WHY behind the plan and feel like they had a voice in creating it, then, when it is time to execute the plan, the plan is framed up as “our plan” rather than senior management’s plan.

When we create a process that results in clarity, commitment and ownership, then we have created something that is amazingly powerful, namely the desire to want to execute the plan. This is the secret to creating a strategic mindset which will be the foundation for creating multiple strategic plans over time.

This week focus on the process of building ownership and understanding. It will make a world of difference.

Geery Howe, M.A. Consultant, Executive Coach, Trainer in Leadership, Strategic Planning and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

What Is The Connection Between Excellence, Culture And Strategy? - Part #2

It is time we talk about strategy again. I like how Ken Blanchard and Michael O’Connor wrote in their book, Managing By Values (Berrett-Koehler, 1997) that leaders must think like CEOs. For them, these initials stand for the following groups: customers, employees, owners/stockholders (in the non-non-profit world, think funders) and other stakeholders. When we hold this more global perspective, we remember that strategy is not a singular thing but really the sum of the following three concepts:

- it is an extensively premeditated, carefully built, long term plan designed to achieve a particular goal.

- it needs to be adaptable by nature due to unforeseen variables rather than presenting a rigid set of instructions or tactics which has the potential to create organizational vulnerability.

- it serves an important function in promoting ongoing evolutionary success.

In short, strategy is an adaptable and evolutionary plan.

Now as we grasp this perspective, we also must understand the difference between the following two concepts:

- individual competencies refer to a specific person’s knowledge and skills required to fulfill specific role requirements.  

- organizational capabilities are collective abilities of the firm required to execute the business strategy.  

We need to hold this perspective because if we want to build and execute an organization’s strategy then sometimes we work at the competency level and other times we work at the capabilities level. Occasionally, we work at both at the same time. Recently, I have noticed that we need to improve the individual competencies level of this work, not just the organizational capabilities.

Furthermore, there are two two stages and two unique choices within the world of strategy. At the strategy formation or planning level, the determination of strategic intent, including such aspects as an organization’s mission, vision, and goals is very important. Sometimes, this planning work is highly planned, i.e. well defined and determined through a preset and well-structured process. Other times, the planning is more emergent, i.e. unfolding and evolving through a dynamic and less structured process especially during complex times. Aaron Olson and B. Keith Simerson. in their book, Leading With Strategic Thinking: Four Ways Effective Leaders Gain Insight, Drive Change, and Get Results (Wiley, 2015) note this depth of clarity about these elements makes a big different in the quality of the plan and within the culture of the organization.

However, as I think about these important choices, I remember what John Doerr wrote in his book, Measure What Matters: How Google, Bono, and Gates Foundation Rock the World with OKRs (Portfolio, 2018). As they explain, “Ideas are easy. Execution is everything.” And I agree 100%!

In summary, strategy only matters if it leads to purposeful action. So the big question this week is the following: Does your organization’s culture support purposeful action that allows the strategy to move from the paper document into key behaviors at all levels of the organization?

Geery Howe, M.A. Consultant, Executive Coach, Trainer in Leadership, Strategic Planning and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

How do leaders help others think and act strategically? part #1

It was a lunch meeting with the CEO and 2 VP’s around a small table at a busy restaurant The VP to my left wanted to talk about performance reviews and organizational clarity. The VP to my right asked the following question: “What are the questions you ask people to make sure people are clear?”

Here are the questions I gave him:

- What do you do at (name of organization)? This checks role clarity.

- What are your priorities? This checks goal clarity.

- What do you do that matters most? This checks mission clarity.

- Why is this important work to do? This checks strategic clarity.

Then, we entered into a discussion about how to help people transform chaos into a challenge.

One of our great challenges as leaders is to get people to think and act strategically. First, according to Aaron Olson and B. Keith Simerson in their book, Leading With Strategic Thinking: Four Ways Effective Leaders Gain Insight, Drive Change, and Get Results (Wiley, 2015), strategic thinking comprises three activities, namely assessing situations, recognizing patterns, and making decisions. Others define strategic thinking as the ability to anticipate the future, the ability to create strategies to achieve the organization’s vision, and being aware of the impact of your actions.

These are all very good answers. Yet, I want to approach this from a different angle. First, I believe thinking strategically requires someone to have the capacity to zoom out before they zoom in, i.e. knowing when to step back rather than to lean in. According to Jim Collins and Morten Hansen in their book, Great By Choice: Uncertainty, Chaos, and Luck - Why Some Thrive Despite Them All (HarperCollins, 2011), when we zoom out before we zoom in, the goal is to sense a change in conditions. It is not merely seeing the big picture; it is to understand how the big picture is changing. Once we sense a change in the environment, we need to ask ourselves the following question: How much time before the risk profile changes? The next question is the following: Do the new conditions call for disrupting our plans? Once these question are answered, leaders zoom in and focus on the execution of plans and objectives. 

From my experience, one difference about thinking strategically is that it is not about execution as in personal effort, but instead it is about execution of the plan as in making sure the whole of the organization stays focused on achieving the plan. 

Another notable element of those who think strategically is that they are not caught in polarity thinking. One unique element of those who do not get caught in polarity thinking is that they do not do this work by themselves. From my observation, if one is able to think strategically, it has happened after lots and lots of practice. I believe you need a strategic network of people outside of the organization who ask you questions about the things you are thinking about but from different angles. Effective leaders cultivate this strategic sounding board and utilize it on a routine basis. I believe a strategic network in combination with working with an executive coach makes a big difference in thinking and acting strategically.

For example, an executive coach and a wide and diverse strategic network will ask you to think through the following kinds of questions:

- Who are the different stakeholders involved?

- What is the impact to each group?

- What is the precedence being set for each group?

- What is the core message you are trying to send?

- What is the mindset you want to achieve amongst those who follow you??

It is the questions in combination with active listening that will make a profound difference in the long run.

At the same time, being able to think and act strategically means being able to understand the follower. Why? Because thinking and acting strategically is always followed by helping others to do likewise. According to Aaron Olson, and B. Keith Simerson in their book, Leading With Strategic Thinking: Four Ways Effective Leaders Gain Insight, Drive Change, and Get Results (Wiley, 2015), there are four types of followers. First, there is the follower who lacks competency and is unwilling to perform the task. Next, the follower who lacks competency but is willing to do the task. Third, there is the follower who is competent to perform the task but lacks self-confidence and does not believe they can perform the task, and therefore has self-doubt and lacks commitment. And fourth, the follower who is self-confident, is willing, and is capable of performing the task.

With the above mind, we need to find the “bell cows,” using a former University of Iowa football coach Hayden Fry term, namely the members of the herd that other cows always follow. Once we have identified these people, then we can connect with them on a one to one basis and begin the journey of helping others to think and act strategically. 

This week, build your strategic network, seek out excellent executive coaching on a regular basis and reconnect with the “bell cows within your herd.” All these steps will make a big difference over time.

Geery Howe, M.A. Consultant, Executive Coach, Trainer in Leadership, Strategic Planning and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

One of My Favorite Words

If I were asked to pick my favorite leadership word, it would not be purpose or mission although I do love these two words. It would have to be the word capacity. To me, it is a word with tremendous depth and complexity. I use it often and I am around many different leaders from many different industries who use it regularly.

When I teach the From Vision to Action Leadership Training, I point out that the dictionary definition of the word capacity has two different meanings. The first states that capacity is “the potential or suitability for holding, storing, or accommodating” something. The other definition for the word is “the facility or power to produce, perform, or deploy.” And, for me, each definition holds a clue to understanding this very interesting word.

In the first definition of the word capacity, there is a recognition that leaders who have capacity can hold, store and accommodate key information as they go about their daily or strategic work. They have the ability to zoom out to see the bigger picture and zoom in to focus on elements within a system or process to make sure it is functioning properly. In essence, capacity is a mindset of working through the intricate levels of strategic and operational thinking.

The second definition of the word capacity, for me, is all about execution. It focuses on making things happen on either a strategic or operational basis. It generates the desired outcomes, results or short term wins that have been planned out in advance.

Now, as leaders, our challenge is to help people to become better in their ability to think through technical or adaptive problems. We are to assist people in the creation of a mental framework by which all involved know what can and can not be changed or improved as they move forward through their days. Then, we are to assist them in choosing the right actions so they can be successful on an on-going basis.

This week, focus on building the capacity to plan better and to execute better. Help people think more clearly and work more clearly and you will have created a powerful flywheel at the core of your business.

Geery Howe, M.A. Consultant, Executive Coach, Trainer in Leadership, Strategic Planning and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

How Successful Leaders Make Decisions

Given what I wrote last week about how leaders think, I want to explore in more detail the subject of decision-making which is critical to success in the world of leadership. Decisions may come in the form of strategy, people or culture. They may impact structure, systems or strategy. But having worked with many successful leaders, it is clear to me that they all make decisions in a unique manner.

First, successful leaders understand that decisions do not matter if nothing happens afterwards. Many leaders think that once they have made a decision they have solved a problem. But as an executive coach, I have to continually remind people that decisions are not action. Decisions do not equal implementation. Decisions are not the mobilization of resources. Decisions do not equal execution. Decisions are empty without action that follows.

Second, successful leaders understand that effective decisions begin long before the actual call. It starts with the ability of a leader to sense there is a problem within the context of service delivery or the context of the service environment. “Sensing and framing” is a term defined by Noel M. Tichy and the late Warren G. Bennis in their great article, “Making Judgement Calls: The Ultimate Act of Leadership”, Harvard Business Review, October 2007. It is critical to decision-making as it gives the decision a foundation or reason “why.”

Still, many executives forget that there is an important next step after they make a decision. What I have observed is that successful leaders focus on mobilizing resources, e.g. people, information, technology, etc., to support the decision and to make it actually happen. The key is that successful leaders also stay involved during the execution phase post the decision by helping to define clear milestones or planned short term wins so people can clarify their progress and be successful. People do not mind executing a decision or implementing a new system or solution as long as they know they are making progress. The best leaders make sure this element is part of the implementation post the act of making a decision.

Third, successful leaders understand that relationships are not linear, especially when it comes to the successful implementation of important decisions. In a linear relationship, a positional leader will approach it from the point of view that more of variable A will produce more of variable B. Successful leaders do not approach people like they are flow charts but instead recognize that the health and effectiveness of the relationship is based on clarity through dialogue. If this level of work is done in advance of the actual decision, the usual challenges with organizational change, e.g. resistance, is reduced and the forward momentum of the organization can proceed without major complications. However, the key is to build healthy work relationships on an on-going basis, not at an episodic level.

In short, when we step back and reflect on how successful leaders make decisions, we realize that they spend significant time and energy teaching others how to think rather than simply telling them what to do. And this is one of the main reasons why they are successful.

Geery Howe, M.A. Consultant, Executive Coach, Trainer in Leadership, Strategic Planning and Organizational Change Morning Star Associates 319 - 643 - 2257

Improving Mid-level Management - part #2

THEME: Spring 2010 From Vision to Action Roundtable Report

FOCUS: Improving Mid-level Management - part #2

Monday morning: May 24, 2010

Dear friends,

Every week, someone in mid-level management wants to improve day-to-day operations, maximize efficiency, and get a lot things done in an orderly manner. When they struggle doing this, their organization often hires a consultant. This individual will arrive on-site, interview a variety of people to find out what is the problem, and, nine times out of ten, they will deliver the following solution: “In order to be more successful, the organization needs to empower more people, listen to more people, include more people, and support more people.” If the consultant is someone who reads the latest management best sellers, then they also state that “senior executives need to show that they care, and work hard to create a "no-spin" zone characterized by candid, frequent communication about strategic issues.” While I have tremendous respect for consultants and I know they can make a big difference, at times, I am frustrated by the quality of their answers.

When we seek to improve mid-level management, we have to realize that we often hire smart people and insert them into really dumb situations driven by even dumber systems. The solution is not to change the person, but to examine the systems that cause them immense frustration and poor performance. The first step is to review and more likely upgrade the current performance management systems.

Mid-level managers live in a world of goals, metrics and expectations. Some are realistic and some are so far out in left field and unrealistic that they are comical. Some goals are just not clear and never communicated well. Therefore, in the beginning, analyze how goals, expectations and metrics are developed, communicated, measured and utilized. Routinely, this is the source of many problems.

Second, mid-level managers need and deserve effective coaching. When I encounter problems in the performance of mid-level management and the goals, expectations and metrics have been clearly communicated, then recently I have discovered that many mid-level managers are receiving situational coaching instead of proactive coaching. As a mid-level manager passes a senior executive in the hallway, they ask a question or share a problem. Standing side by side, the issue is resolved. However, the learning and performance of those involved may not have been improved. In proactive coaching, time and space is reserved so a senior executive and a mid-level manager can focus on improving both skill set and strategic mindset rather than simply revolving the majority of their working relationship on emergency problem solving.

Third, we need to reframe execution by all managers. Earlier this spring (see Monday Thoughts Weekly E-mail for 4/5/10 at my blog link: http://chartyourpath.blogspot.com/), I advocated for a more holistic training and development model where we recognized that once an employee is hired, national statistics indicate there is a 33% chance of turnover in the first six months. Therefore, rather than thinking of on-boarding as filling out of paperwork and attending mandatory HR/Risk Management training, it is time to comprehend that this on-boarding process is where people learn about how to work effectively.

However, “... flawless execution cannot guarantee enduring success in a knowledge economy,” notes Amy C. Edmondson in her article “The Competitive Imperative of Learning”, July-August 2008, Harvard Business Review. As she explains, “great execution is difficult to sustain, not because people get tired of working hard but because the managerial mind-set that enables efficient execution inhibits employee’s ability to learn and innovate.”

There are two choices when it comes execution, namely to focus on execution-as-efficiency or to focus on execution-as-learning. In the former, execution-as-efficiency focuses on discipline, respect for systems, and an attention to detail. To make this happen, managers need to motivate employees using “carrots”, i.e. pay more for work completed, or “sticks”, i.e. reprimand or threaten job loss. The result of these choices is simple, controllable production and controllable employees. The major problem is an undercurrent of fear. To remove the fear, we need to not penalize any one who asks for help or admits a mistake. Otherwise, employees will go out of their way to pick easy tasks to show competence and avoid all challenges. Next, we need to acknowledge the lack of answers to the tough problems that employees face. Instead, we need to help mid-level managers learn to ask better questions which generate clarity and perspective.

This week, do not put smart people to work within dumb systems, improve your proactive coaching, and rethink execution.

Have a great week,

Geery

Geery Howe, M.A.Consultant, Executive Coach, Trainer inLeadership, Strategic Planning and Organizational ChangeMorning Star Associates319 - 643 - 2257