[floppydisk]

Wisest words I ever got early in my career from a boss who spent a couple of decades in senior management at a variety of big and small tech companies was if you're hired as an executive you immediately do three things. 1) Get in early, leave late, and read everything about the group you're running. 2) Get to know your people and understand the problems you're dealing with. 3) Change nothing immediately. Waltzing in and changing things willy nilly is a recipe for disaster. I'd counter and say within 90 days you should have a handle on the group you're running, what's going really well, what's going poorly, and identify plan(s) to address major areas that need addressing. It shows you actually understand and aren't simply kicking the apple cart for the sake of making an impression.

[varunjuice]

Fair point. When I say 90 days, I think if things are bad, it's typically easy to spot where the degenerate behaviors are starting, and correcting them. In 90 days, the leading indicators need to start looking good. It takes time for that to flow through the system.

[shostack]

The other piece of that of course is to communicate clearly to the rest of the executive that this is your approach in case some of them have expectations of you coming in making radical changes from day one.

[dikaiosune]

This has the benefit of also being able to develop some traction with your team before you make huge changes. Even if from day one you have a very clear (and right) idea of what needs to be fixed, it might take much longer to have the trust of your team so that your plan is executed well.

[withoutairs]

Indeed. "The First 90 Days"[0] is a great book that provides a framework and techniques for being strategic when starting a new job.

0: http://www.amazon.com/The-First-90-Days-Strategies/dp/159139...

edit -- links, how do they work