Study: Most managers are ineffective

ByMargaret Heffernan  Article

” Power is the ability to get things done. You could say that management is the art of ensuring that things get done. Yet what’s so striking about most organizations is that so little management is effective.

That’s what academics Heike Bruch and the late Sumantra Ghoshal discovered when they investigated what they called “decisive purposeful action.” Most companies, far from being hives of busy, effective executives, could instead be seen as “a few isolated islands of action amid an ocean of inaction,” the researchers found. Does this ring any bells? It certainly reminded me of many places I’ve worked — and run — where a small number of people always seemed to be doing the majority of work that mattered.

Bruch and Ghoshal’s study quantified my impression. “What we found in our research surprised us,” the authors write. “Only about 10 percent of the managers took purposeful action.” The remainder were busy, just not very effective: 40 percent were energetic but unfocused; 30 percent had low energy, little focus and tended to procrastinate; and 10% were focused, but not very energetic.

No wonder most businesses are so unproductive. What all of this suggests (and there’s plenty of other supporting evidence), is that we waste most of the human resources we hire.”

 

Creativity rocks opposites

By Michelle James  Article

“Creativity comes to life at intersections. It thrives on opposites. It engages paradox until something new emerges. This transfers to the design of projects, processes, workshops, teams, organizations, etc. If we design for space to accommodate opposites (just like nature does) we have a more creative system. This is part of a presentation I’m giving on the yin/yang of creative process: “

Your business needs a good SWOT

By Steve Baker  Article

“To continue the growth and success for your business, you need to periodically step back and analyze what’s going on. One of the best tools I have used for years is the SWOT Analysis. SWOT is an acronym for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats.

SWOT analysis was developed from research conducted at Stanford Research Institute in the 1960s and is an extremely useful tool for a deeper understanding for all sorts of situations in business and organizations. I have found it helps me balance the decision making process. …

The SWOT analysis has multiple uses. The brains at Stanford Research Institute spent 10 years using SWOT with over 1,100 companies verifying that SWOT analysis is a powerful model for many different situations and is a valuable aid in the decision making process. Some of important Stanford examples of how companies use a SWOT analysis are:

• A company’s position in the market, commercial viability, etc.
• Methods of sales and distribution
• Competitors
• New products or brands
• A business idea
• Strategic options, such as entering a new market or launching a new product
• An opportunity to make an acquisition (or be acquired)
• A potential partnership
• Changing a supplier
• Outsourcing a service, activity or resource
• Project planning and project management
• An investment opportunity
• Personal career development – direction, choice, change, etc.

You’ve probably guessed by now that I’m sold on SWOTing my business decisions. Completing a SWOT analysis is very simple, and is a good subject for workshops and brain-storming sessions.”

The truth about leadership: A book review by Bob Morris

By Bob Morris   Review

“Kouzes and Posner’s purpose in the book to identify and examine several basic truths about great leadership that have endured throughout human history.  After I read the first three chapters, I paused to compile a list of those I consider to be the greatest leaders. When the totals reached 25, I reviewed the Kouzes-Posner list of ten truths. However different the leaders on my list are in most respects, all of them

1. Made a positive difference both during and beyond their lives
2. Were credible
3. Values-driven
4. Focused on what could, indeed should be done
5. Attracted followers who shared their vision
6. Were trusted
7. Were strengthened by severe challenges
8, Led by example
9. Were voracious learners with insatiable curiosity, and
10. Cared deeply, passionately”

The 6.5 steps of financial self-defense: Part 1

By John Kyle   Article

“Have you ever taken a self-defense course before? Many people have. They learn to block, punch and kick their way out of a situation. I’ve studied and taught martial arts for more than 30 years; I’ve learned a lot and had the opportunity to use it as well (in competition, of course).

Yet in all that time, no one has ever taught me how to defend my finances. So, as a martial arts instructor and a licensed and professional financial advisor, I do what I can to educate my clients, as well as my community, about simple steps that anyone can take to help defend their wealth for the long haul and grow that wealth at the same time.

I’ve developed 6.5 simple steps that help accomplish just that.

1. Be an Investor, NOT a Saver.

Most of us know that the majority of savings accounts give less a 1percent return on your money and inflation is almost 3percent. If we do the math you realize that you’re actually taking more risk by not investing because you’re guaranteed a loss. Simply by understanding that simple truth, you’ll be more likely to get off the sidelines and back in the game and getting your money to work for you to help you reach your goals.

After the drop in the market in 2008, millions of Americans lost 30, 40percent or more of their wealth, and the biggest drop of all came in the way of investor confidence, we don’t trust the market anymore. “I took my money out and haven’t put it back.” “I hear there’s another recession coming, I think I should wait.” …

2. Create a safety net

Another thing that became very apparent to many investors, is that when the market dropped back 2008, they had nothing to safe guard their investments. There was no safety net in place. ….”

Three signs your company culture is going down the tubes

By Andy Porter   Article

““That’s not my/our responsibility.”  Translation:  You’re screwed!  Well, maybe it’s not completely over but unless you take drastic action immediately you might as well just close up shop.  Seriously, this is like the DEFCON 5 of culture.  Somehow you ended up with an employee(s) who are more concerned with their own piece of the puzzle instead of caring about the good of the whole or who are no longer connected to the mission and vision of your company.  Unfortunately, there’s no quick fix for this one.  It requires a full stop – re-clarifying the mission of your company and re-connecting your people to it and getting rid of those people who don’t. “

How to create buy-In before you blowup

By Dan Rockwell   Article

“The hardest thing to change is an organization’s culture. It’s exponentially more difficult when you see the need but othersdon’t. Some organizations die in the process. Others start, struggle, stagnate, and revert to mediocrity.

Changing organizational culture destroys leaders.

Implementing culture change produced the biggest mistakes of my leadership career. One thing I learned is people go along in silent agreement until change hits them personally. The moment of pain is the moment resistance begins.

The thing that motivates change stops it, pain. …

Buy-in only happens if people are actively involved in the culture change process.

1. Talk with them.
2. Ask them to be involved in the process.
3. Listen to their ideas.
4. Give them projects to work on themselves.
5. Implement some of their proposed changes.

….”

Declaring victory

By Seth Godin   Article

“Whenever you start a project, you should have a plan for finishing it.

One outcome is to declare victory, to find that moment when you have satisfied your objectives and reached a goal.

The other outcome, which feels like a downer but is almost as good, is to declare failure, to realize that you’ve run out of useful string and it’s time to move on. I think the intentional act of declaring becomes an essential moment of learning, a spot in time where you consider inputs and outputs and adjust your strategy for next time.

If you are unable to declare, then you’re going to slog, and instead of starting new projects based on what you’ve learned, you’ll merely end up trapped. I’m not suggesting that you flit. A project might last a decade or a generation, but if it is to be a project, it must have an end.”

What I learned from Google – You Get Fifteen Years

by: Matt Heusser    Article

“But what about the old dudes?

During my interview at Google, I realized something very important: You get fifteen years. That is to say, your half-life as a worker in corporate America is about age thirty-five.  Around that time, interviews get tougher.  Your obligations make you less open to relocation, the technologies on your resume seem less-current, and your ability find that next gig begins to decrease.

Notice I said half-life.  By thirty-five, half the folks who started in technology have gone on to something else — perhaps management, consulting, on to roles in “the business” or in operations.  Some have had a full-on career change, got that MBA and gone into management consulting, or perhaps real estate, education, or, well … retail store management.   Who knows? A few might go into journalism. Yet a few stick it out.  Half of the half-life is fifty, and, sure, perhaps 25% of the folks who started as line technologists will still be doing that when they turn fifty.

But by the time you turn thirty-five, you’d better have a plan. That gives a new college graduate fifteen years to build some savings, to get the house paid off, and to find a second career.  That’s plenty of time.

The good news

Is a different way to look at it.  That twenty-one year old, fresh-faced kid we are all so jealous of with the great gig at happenin’ company?  He isn’t really qualified to do anything else.  He goes and gets a job by default, because it’s the easiest thing to do.  He can’t consult, or at least he shouldn’t; you see, he hasn’t done anything yet.

That is where those of us in the middle of the half-life curve have an advantage. Hitting half-life may be a shock, but it’s kind of same shock as a bird, kicked out of the nest by a parent. You have to leave the nest in order to learn to fly. And, surrounded by twenty-somethings talking about order-n-linear algorithmns and the efficiency of recursive vs. linear solutions, that is what suddenly hit me. I didn’t fit in, and that was good.  It was time to leave the nest.”

Got what it takes to be an entrepreneur?

ByJeff Haden  Article

“You spend a lot of time personalizing your office. … Money should never be spent on anything that won’t touch the customer. You will be too busy chasing customers to worry about whether your office befits your stature or aligns with your personality.

You manage your fantasy teams at work. … Starting a business is overwhelming. Exit your fantasy leagues now. Spend that time thinking about how you’ll make profits.

You never empty your own trash. … If doing whatever needs to be done isn’t something that comes naturally, stay where you are.

You are sure you could be a lot more productive if you only had a new (insert hot new tech tool). … In your own business you’ll be lucky to get the “must have” stuff. Even if you have the funds, “nice to have” is money wasted.

You can’t get over the fact your department got shorted during the last budget cycle.Unless a VC comes calling or your dad funds your start-up, you won’t really have a budget. Money spent doesn’t come from an invisible corporate pot. It comes from your pocket. …

You passionately discuss work-life balance issues. … If you think a lot about the conflict between work and life and you feel work is winning the battle, just wait until you start a business. Work will eat life for breakfast.

You sometimes say, “Wait, I’ve paid my dues.” When you run your own business, you pay your dues every day. (The same should be true if you work for someone else: The only real measure of your value is the tangible contribution you make, each and every day.) Today, tomorrow, the next day: You earn the right to stay in business. No one cares about your experience or years of hard work. …”

But he must do it because

““On some positions, Cowardice asks the question, “Is it safe?” Expediency asks the question, “Is it politic?” And Vanity comes along and asks the question, “Is it popular?” But Conscience asks the question “Is it right?” And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular, but he must do it because Conscience tells him it is right.” – Martin Luther King   Source

The professor and the jar

By Mitch Ditkoff   Article
“A college professor stood before his philosophy class at the start of a new semester. Silently, he picked up a very large jar and filled it with golf balls. Then he asked the students if the jar was full. They agreed that it was.

The professor then picked up a box of pebbles and poured them into the jar. He shook the jar lightly, pebbles settling into the open areas between the golf balls. He then asked the students again if the jar was full.

They agreed that it was.

The professor next picked up a box of sand and poured it into the jar. He asked once more if the jar was full. The students again responded with a resounding “yes.”

The professor then produced two beers from under the table and poured them into the jar, filling the empty spaces between the sand. The students laughed.

“Now,” said the professor. “I want you to understand that this jar represents your life. The golf balls are the important things — your family, health, friends, and feeling of well-being. If everything else was lost and only they remained, your life would still be full.”

“The pebbles are the other things that matter — your job, your house, your accomplishments etc. The sand is everything else — the small stuff.”

“If you put the sand into the jar first,” he continued, “there’s no room left for the golf balls or pebbles. The same holds true for life. If you spend all your time and energy on the small stuff, you’ll never have room for the things that are really important to you.”

“Pay attention to the things that are essential to your happiness. Spend time with your children. Spend time with your parents. Take your spouse out to dinner. Smell the flowers. Enjoy the beauty of existence. There will always be time to clean the house and fix the disposal. Take care of the golf balls first — the things that really matter. The rest is just sand.”

One of the students then raised her hand and asked what the beer represented.

The professor smiled, “I’m glad you asked.”

“The beer shows you that, no matter how full your life may seem, there’s always room for a couple of beers with a friend.”"

We’re going into the tablet computer business

Creating shared value

By Michael E. Porter and Mark R. Kramer    Article

“… A big part of the problem lies with companies themselves, which remain trapped in an outdated approach to value creation that has emerged over the past few decades. They continue to view value creation narrowly, optimizing short-term financial performance in a bubble while missing the most important customer needs and ignoring the broader influences that determine their longer-term success. How else could companies overlook the well-being of their customers, the depletion of natural resources vital to their businesses, the viability of key suppliers, or the economic distress of the communities in which they produce and sell? How else could companies think that simply shifting activities to locations with ever lower wages was a sustainable “solution” to competitive challenges? Government and civil society have often exacerbated the problem by attempting to address social weaknesses at the expense of business. The presumed trade-offs between economic efficiency and social progress have been institutionalized in decades of policy choices. …

The purpose of the corporation must be redefined as creating shared value, not just profit per se. …

Moving Beyond Trade-Offs

Business and society have been pitted against each other for too long. That is in part because economists have legitimized the idea that to provide societal benefits, companies must temper their economic success. In neoclassical thinking, a requirement for social improvement—such as safety or hiring the disabled—imposes a constraint on the corporation. Adding a constraint to a firm that is already maximizing profits, says the theory, will inevitably raise costs and reduce those profits.

A related concept, with the same conclusion, is the notion of externalities. Externalities arise when firms create social costs that they do not have to bear, such as pollution. Thus, society must impose taxes, regulations, and penalties so that firms “internalize” these externalities—a belief influencing many government policy decisions.

This perspective has also shaped the strategies of firms themselves, which have largely excluded social and environmental considerations from their economic thinking.”

I was wrong

“In 1993, I saw the web coming. I was hired to write the cover story for a now defunct computer magazine about the internet, and dismissed the new Mosaic browser in a single paragraph.

I figured the web was just like Prodigy, but slower, harder to use and without a business model.

About as expensive a wrong analysis as a single entrepreneur with an email company could make in 1993.

The reason it was an insanely valuable lesson: I got better at announcing that I was wrong, learning from it and doing the next thing.

Politicians, of course, are terrible at this. They are never wrong, apparently, and when they are, spin instead of admitting it. Which not only hurts their trustworthiness, it prevents them from learning anything.

Two elements of successful leadership: a willingness to be wrong and an eagerness to admit it.”

7 things your employees will never tell you

By Jeff Haden   Article

“Your employees have a lot of thoughts. Most of those thoughts they don’t share– especially with you.

At times their silence is a good thing, especially where your ego or their employment status might be concerned, but their silence also may keep you from understanding what your employers really think and what they really need from you.

Consider whether your employees might be thinking one or more of the following:

1. “Please don’t talk to me about your personal life.” … Employees, especially new employees, have no interest in hearing about your go-to topics like your last vacation or your antique collection or your beach house. New employees want to feel like they belong, but more importantly they want to know how they’re doing. Long-term employees want to know you care about them; talking about yourself only shows you care about yourself.

2. “Can’t you see I’m really busy?” Here’s what happens. You stop by to talk, the employee stops what they’re doing to chat with you… and when you walk away they’re behind and have to catch up. … Never interrupt an employee who is busy simply because today you’ve decided to “check in with the troops.”

3. “I can tell you really don’t care about my personal life.” Walking up and asking an employee a generic question like, “Hey, how are your, um, kids?” or, “Are you doing anything fun after work?” or, “Hey, who do you think will win the NBA championship this year?” comes across as forced and insincere, at least to your employees. Either take the time to get to know your employees well enough so you can have a decent conversation or just stick to work-related subjects. (Employees definitely prefer “all business” to “pseudo-personal.”) …

7. “That gift card is nice, but a simple ‘thanks’ is really all I need.” Sure, every time you hand out paychecks you’re implicitly saying thanks, but not really. Find reasons to thank your employees as often as you can. Look for an accomplishment, however small or fleeting, and express your appreciation. “Thanks for taking care of that difficult customer.” “Thanks for jumping in and helping Mike.” “Thanks for letting me know we have a problem in the warehouse; I hadn’t realized orders were consistently shipping late.””

Workers report pressure on ethics rules in survey

By Holly Rosenkrantz    Article

“U.S. workers report mounting pressure to violate corporate policies, according to a survey by the nonprofit Ethics Resource Center that also showed retaliation against whistle-blowers reached a record level.

Demands on employees to ignore company policies, or even break the law, are approaching the highest level since 2000, just before corporate scandals led to laws combating violations, according to a report released today by the Arlington, Virginia- based group.

The percentage of employees who perceived pressure to break rules rose to 13 percent, from 8 percent in 2009, and 93 percent of those workers said they saw misconduct. Retaliation was more far-reaching than in 2009, according to the group.”

Plutonomy

By Barry Ritholtz   Article

“Exactly 5 years ago today, the WSJ published this post (Plutonomics) about a rather fascinating study on wealth inequality.

It was written by of all folks, Citigroup global strategist Ajay Kapur. In 2005, Kapur’s research team “came up with the term ‘Plutonomy’ in 2005 to describe a country that is defined by massive income and wealth inequality. According to their definition, the U.S. is a Plutonomy, along with the U.K., Canada and Australia.”

What are the basic characteristics of Plutonomies? According to Kapur:

1. They are all created by “disruptive technology-driven productivity gains, creative financial innovation, capitalist friendly cooperative governments, immigrants…the rule of law and patenting inventions. Often these wealth waves involve great complexity exploited best by the rich and educated of the time.”

2. There is no “average” consumer in Plutonomies. There is only the rich “and everyone else.” The rich account for a disproportionate chunk of the economy, while the non-rich account for “surprisingly small bites of the national pie.” Kapur estimates that in 2005, the richest 20% may have been responsible for 60% of total spending.

3. Plutonomies are likely to grow in the future, fed by capitalist-friendly governments, more technology-driven productivity and globalization.”

The money paradox

By Martin Conrad   Article

It’s easier to talk contrarian than to be contrarian.

“Studies of investor behavior tell us some surprising things about the decisions they make. Two results are particularly striking. First, 85% of sell or exchange decisions are wrong — the investor would do better by doing nothing or going the other way that 85% of the time. Simple random decision making (with no investment knowledge) would have yielded about 50% good decisions.

The second result follows from the first one: In the 20 years ended 2008, a period that included the best decade of performance ever for stocks, the average stock-fund investor averaged only a 1.9% annual return (due to consistently poor buy and sell decisions) even though the average stock mutual fund returned 8.4% annually over the same period. With compounding, the difference was about ninefold (402% vs. 46%) over 20 years. This is a compelling demonstration of the illusion of control, the mistaken belief that better results come from more-direct, detailed control and using it to make lots of decisions and transactions. …

The economist and investor John Maynard Keynes emphasized that individual investment profits are largely determined by how investors behave at market tops and bottoms — which is where price volatility concentrates, where sudden spikes occur, where the big investment mistakes are made.

The huge losses from buying into popular asset manias near the top at high prices (with no safety margin in case of a decline) and the lost opportunities from selling temporarily unpopular but cheap assets at or near a bottom devastate long-term results because of the powerful effect of compounding, which multiplies the effect of large errors.”

Reasons people resist change

By Julie Rains    Article

5 Reasons People Resist Change

“I used to believe that there were two kinds of people.

1. Those who thrive on change
2. Those who avoid change

The former are inspired by freshness, embrace novel experiences and jump at opportunities to instigate innovations. The latter seek stability, enter new situations cautiously and place roadblocks before the slightest mention of anything different. Now, I realize that there is a third category: people who want change but are not willing to do anything risky to achieve it. …

Here are a few beliefs about change that inhibit creative responses and limit the willingness to let the business grow.

1. Productivity will plummet and stress will skyrocket

After years of mastering her job duties, she has an efficient routine. When employees bring problems to her attention, she gives direction by following a self-developed, mental image of a decision tree with a limited number of variables. …

2. Embracing change means admitting past mistakes.

He believes that championing new work processes or pursuing new customer segments mean public acknowledgement that previous procedures caused errors. Or perhaps marketing programs didn’t deliver the right kinds of customers. …

3. Failures are not occasions for learning.

She is not afraid of failure per se, and accepts that changes may not bring immediate results. What she fears is her inability to understand which factors influence success. Navigating change is like falling into an abyss rather than interpreting clues on a hidden-treasure map. …

4. Difficult problems arise from change.

He is eager to positively impact the company but is reluctant to implement new ideas. The side effects of change may involve handling situations that he does not fully understand. He may have to deal with consequences that he cannot predict or control. …

5. Preserving status among colleagues and employees is key.

She enjoys her title, position description and place in the organizational chart. ….”

High performance

By TC North   Article

Nine unusual high-performance traits

“1. Willingness to fail. People are willing to fail in order to learn and succeed, and this is encouraged throughout the organization. …

2. Motivation driven by excitement, not fear. Both individual and team motivation is driven by excitement versus fear. When you’re in fear, you play not to lose. …

3. Obsessive focus. Leaders are obsessively focused on two things: 1) creating a high-performance culture and 2) being known for one product, service or something that differentiates the company in its market. …

4. Respect. For all team members to be inspired by their leaders and align with the vision and strategies, leaders must be respected. They don’t necessarily have to be respected for every part of their life, but they must at least be respected for their brilliance in vision and strategy. Leaders who are also highly respected for their values and ethics can create an even stronger, values-driven, high-performance culture – the ideal culture.

5. Alignment. To create alignment, people must believe in the vision and in one another. In aligned organizations, trust is extremely high in all interactions, and cover-your-butt, protect-your-turf and “siloing” activities are virtually nonexistent.  …

6. Positive accountability. High performers love positive accountability; only masochists like fear-based accountability. Positive accountability occurs when mutually agreed-on goals are regularly discussed, successes are celebrated, and unattained goals are learned from and corrections are made. …

7. Shared values. Values are shared among all team members and drive all interactions. …

8. No whining, complaining or excuses. There’s little to no whining, complaining or excuses. People take full responsibility for deadlines as well as their goals and mistakes. This may be the greatest differentiator of all high-performance characteristics! …

9. Meet or exceed. If you implement the above psychological characteristics of high-performance organizations and teams, you’re likely to meet or exceed your critical goals. This is the ultimate measure of becoming a high-performing organization or workplace – you regularly meet or exceed what you commit to accomplish.”

Burn your résumé!

By John Heckers  Article

“Did you know that you have a less than 1 in 500 chance of getting a job through the sending of an unsolicited résumé? Did you know that your chances of getting employed through a job board are about the same or less? So why do people spend so much time and money on their résumés? Here are some reasons:

1). Superstition. Having a well-tweaked résumé is sort of like having a rabbit’s foot. People believe at their core that their résumé will help them get an interview ….

2). Laziness. It is far easier to sit at home and play with one’s résumé than it is to go out and network and look for jobs in other effective ways.

3). Propaganda. Career coaches and résumé writers tell people that it is important to have a great résumé. In fact, most of my clients only use a résumé far into the interviewing process when most decisions have already been made.

4). Delusion. Fiddling with your résumé can make you think that you’re doing something on your job search. But that’s like saying that shooting hoops in your driveway is an NBA game. … you feel like you’re doing something with your job search, you get a warm, fuzzy feeling that keeps you from actually doing anything on your job search. …

Everyone who is unemployed wants a shortcut to getting a job. I’m sorry, but there isn’t one. Headhunters don’t have very many jobs these days. Résumé sending is useless. Job boards rarely land anyone in the upper-echelons jobs. … the ugly truth is that finding a job is going to require you to wear out the soles of your shoes and network – both in person and on-line – but mostly in person. Anyone who tells you differently is lying to you, even if that person is yourself.

No one likes to job hunt. It is frustrating and thankless work. But don’t compound the sense of frustration by sending résumé after résumé into cyberspace where no one can hear you scream. Do what works, which is highly effective and well-planned networking.”

China insolvency wave begins

By Tyler Durden   Article

China Insolvency Wave Begins As Nation’s Biggest Provincial Borrowers “Defer” Loan Payments

“Well, now we learn that as the global insolvency wave finally moves to China, a bankruptcy is now called something even less scary: “deferred loan payments” … After all, who in their right mind would want to scare the public that the entire world is now broke. Certainly not SWIFT. And certainly not that paragon of 8%+ annual growth, where no matter how many layers of lipstick are applied, the piggyness of it all is shining through ever more acutely. Because here are the facts,from China Daily, and they speaks for themselves: “China’s biggest provincial borrowers aredeferring payment on their loans just two months after the country’s regulator said some local government companies would be allowed to do so ….

As local governments delay payments for projects commissioned as part of the stimulus to ward off recession in 2009, less money is available for bank lending even as China is taking steps to inject more into the economy. …

“When companies start to roll over debt they’re not retiring debt, and banks aren’t retrieving their capital, so you’re crowding out new lending,” Patrick Chovanec, a professor at Tsinghua University in Beijing, said in a Dec 13 interview. “This is a problem that’s going to start to bite next year.”"

 

Promoting heretics

Source: Innovation Blog

Seth Godin on Leaders and Promoting Heretics

“The work of leadership changes dramatically when wage slaves become artists, argues MIX Maverick and bestselling author Seth Godin. The best leaders make their organizations havens for heretics by suspending religion (rules) whenever possible and focusing on faith (deeper purpose).”

Watch 4:26 video

Happy 2012 video

Sissel Kyrkjebø (Norwegian ; born 24 June 1969 in Bergen), also simply known as Sissel, is a Norwegian soprano.

http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=x91rBzNKvlc&vq=large#t=160

Note: Be sure to “rewind” it from the beginning if necessary.