Today’s guest post is from Anthony Portuesi, Senior Sales Rep at Johnson & Johnson and author of DrivenLeaders.com. DrivenLeaders.com is a blog devoted to personal and professional development for the emerging leaders of tomorrow.

When we think of great business leaders, many things may come to mind; the ability to inspire, to motivate, to be a visionary, or perhaps to radically challenge the status quo. Each attribute demonstrates a cornerstone of strong leadership, but this being known, the question facing many in leadership positions today is – Do we need to include the “being tech savvy” to the list?

Is it necessary? Some argue yes, with the advancements in software and the impact technology has had in developing new markets and business opportunities, how can one not? Others dispute that good leaders need to keep abreast of current technological trends, but not necessarily have extensive knowledge of them to be successful. Maintaining that in the big picture it’s about leadership, not technical prowess.

The question can be argued from both points of view, each one having multiple real world examples with varying levels of success. Regardless, one overarching point remains clear. Business as we know it continues to evolve and leaders who are slow to embrace technology in any capacity are sure to fall behind the pack. Emerging technologies will continue to be a source of competitive advantage, drive new market opportunities and redesign our current organizational models.

I think Mark Somers, PhD and professor at the NJIT School of Management, said it best with the statement. “There is only one certainty in the current business environment — continual, rapid, unpredictable change. Much of that change will be technological in nature and the future will belong to business leaders who can leverage technology to capitalize on the opportunities that arise in this fast-evolving competitive arena.”

So the question remains, does a leader need to be tech savvy? Perhaps it may not as simple as a yes or no answer… My belief follows that of Mr. Somers. I think it is vital for those in leadership positions to understand the true impact that technology has on their position, not only on a macro-level to their market or industry, but also on the micro-level with the effect it has on how people interact and how it impacts daily work flow. With that working knowledge one would have the skill set to manage through the ever changing dynamics of business.

So what do you think? Should a leader need to be tech savvy? I’d be interested to hear your thoughts…

DrivenLeaders.com is a blog devoted to personal and professional development for the emerging leaders of tomorrow. The pressure on new leaders to hit the ground running has never been greater, and the likelihood and cost of failure is escalating. As Gen-Y continues to become an increasing force in the workplace, the need to develop the necessary skills to be a successful leader grows ever more important. As a compilation of resources, thoughts and inspiration, Driven Leaders is as open forum for those interested in leadership and personal development.  If you enjoyed Anthony’s post, you should visit his blog and subscribe via RSS.

One of the biggest misinterpretations of brand management is that being a Brand Manager and being a Marketer are one and the same.  The simple fact is they can be very different.  You can be a stellar marketer, but not a great Brand Manager.  Likewise you can be an amazing Brand Manager, but not a breatkthrough marketer.  Each “position” not only requires different skills but in many ways, requires different mindsets as well.  You can learn to be great in either role…but the first step is realizing the differences. (more…)

Just came across a really interesting presentation from Google’s SVP of Product Management & Marketing, Jonathan Rosenberg. On Brain Sells, you can watch a video of his speech with highlights. What I love is that the presentation doesnt focus on just marketing but instead on creating a great organziational foundation. Here are what caught my eye as my favorite takeaways:

Hiring Brilliant People: A’s hire B’s…B’s hire C’s and so on. You can train A’s to hire A’s, but you can’t train B’s to hire anything but second rate B’s or Cs, because they are threatened by A’s and can’t understand them anyway. Maintain a high bar.

Antibodies in Companies Try to Kill Big Ideas: Most people in a company under promise, and over deliver. That’s wrong. Creates fear, complacency and rewards mediocre work. Google looks at it differently. You are only expected to achieve a mark of 60% on your Objectives, but your Objectives must be big. People may not achieve the big goal, but reward people who do reasonably well, instead of them under-performing in hopes of maybe over-delivering and ending up just being mediocre.

Avoid Hippos: A hippo kills more people than any other animal. In business, hippos kill more products & ideas than anyone, A hippo is the highest paid person’s opinion. Hippos say “I think…”

Rewarding Innovation: Most companies have profit sharing…HP gives 6.5% to 8.5%…everyone gets about the same. Instead, pay the people that deliver more. The best guys in an investment bank make more, shortstops on a baseball team gets more, etc. At Google the guy who made Google News has made us lots of money, millions of dollars, so we pay him millions of dollars. Life is not fair…I’m not as pretty so I got less dates…I can’t shoot slam dunks so I don’t get to play in the NBA. Reward innovation.