Category Archives: Management

Management, Style, Value

Time For a Reality Check

1 Comment

I think we have all heard some of the somewhat hackneyed and stale marketing blurbs such as “Give them the steak. Sell them the sizzle.”, and “Perception is reality.”, and the like. This is basically the statement that style has triumphed over substance. Personally, I have not found the consuming of the “sizzle” to be nearly as satisfying as the consuming of the steak. I think that the focus on style and perception is also part of the list of issues we are encountering every day as we try to run a business.

 

It seems that sometimes we are actually more concerned with how we are perceived than with what we actually do and accomplish. In good times, when opportunities are rife, we may be able to succeed with a style focus. In tougher times, when there can not help but be a more attentive focus on the bottom line, it will be the quantifiable value that is provided that will be key.

 

In a difficult market it seems that there is a great deal more attention paid by management to how things are being done than there is to what is actually being done. As difficult as it may be, that behavior needs to stop. It is even more difficult to do when others within the organization are displaying the same bad behavior.

 

When others are concerned with perception and position, publically focus on deliverables and accomplishments. If some are not being as forthcoming with information and support, make sure to copy them and others on all pertinent documents and information.

 

It is not entirely clear if or when the business climate may improve. The needed “Reality Check” in today’s business environment is to focus on the “real” and quantitative aspects of business. We need to concentrate on the doing of what is needed to get the job done and the measuring of progress both within the business and with the customers. I think that once that reality sets in, and takes root, we can continue getting back to the business of providing value and making progress.

Employees, Incentives, Management

Culture of Entitlement

1 Comment

In my last article I discussed the concept where employees have asked for some sort of incentive or reward for their participation in the generation of new ideas that would help the company. It was my view that incentives and rewards should be based on the value that is produced and results generated by the implementation of an idea (revenue, earnings, etc.), not the subjective value of the idea itself. It did get me thinking though….

What has occurred in business that has caused this sort of request to even be made?

 

Do we need to put incentives, or better put, more incentives in place to encourage each specific or incremental request or behavior? Have we reached a point where we all believe that our salary or wage is an entitlement?

 

This is tricky ground. I believe that there are numerous issues that have and do contribute to this evolving situation. Knowledge worker allegiance has shifted from the company to themselves. There are many reasons for this but I believe its roots are in the market boom of the 1990’s when employees changed companies with almost great regularity in order to receive ever higher compensation. They focused on their own best interest.

 

Company allegiance to it employees has been changed under the combined pressures of cost reduction (including both true staff reduction and the drive to outsource functions to low cost labor locations), the demands of stockholders for improved stock value, and the prolonged downturn in the general economic conditions. The company too is focusing (maybe more so now than in the past) on its own best interest.

 

It seems that what was a somewhat mutually supportive relationship between the company and its employees may have become somewhat more mutually adversarial. That could explain why companies only want to pay for what they quantifiably get, and employees only want to do what they are quantifiably paid to do. This could explain the employee requests for incremental incentives for every company incremental work/output request. I am not entirely sure, and I will think about it some more.

Incentives, Management, New Ideas

What are You Paid For?

4 Comments

I am a big believer in the alignment of objectives, goals and incentives for a business to achieve its maximum potential. If everyone is working toward the same goals and is compensated on those items that bring the most value to the business then you should have a structure that is both efficient and focused. Is that enough?

 

I was on an organizational wide call where there was a general discussion regarding the business structure and potential new opportunities in the market, and how to most effectively and efficiently pursue them. The group conducting the call was asking for input and ideas from the team based on the fact that the team members were the ones closest to the markets and issues and should therefore have some of the best ideas how to deal with them. This made sense to me.

 

It then took a strange turn. Members of the team then asked “would there be any incentives put in place based on their generation of ideas?”

 

Now I understand that incentives are designed to try and generate desired behavior, but where do we cross the line and start asking for incentives for people to “think”?

 

My logic here is that if you can come up with a better or more efficient way to do your job, you should implement it. If it truly is better, you should be able to exceed your existing objectives and then be compensated better based on the current incentives associated with your role. This is what you are paid for.

 

We are all essentially knowledge workers. We should try to generate the maximum value for our businesses possible. We do this by applying our knowledge to the best of our abilities. Incentives should be based on the output generated from the application of knowledge and ability, not the application of knowledge and ability itself.

Management, Responsibility, Task Completion

Don’t Send an Email

1 Comment

Technology is a good thing. We have all come to depend on it to get our jobs done. It has helped remove both time and space from our work and has enabled us to do things in minutes that used to take days or longer. It can however become a crutch. It does not alleviate the responsibility you have for seeing to it that the job is completed.

 
There was a recent situation where an assignment was given to a staff member. He was the owner of the assignment and had the responsibility to get the assignment completed. Some time later the deadline came and went. When queried about the topic his response was the ever more common:

“I sent out emails requesting help, and I am still waiting for the responses…”

Sending out an email is not the same as completing the task. It does not transfer the responsibility for completing the task to the person you are sending the email to. In short, in today’s busy, high stress, under staffed business world, emails are easy to “miss”, especially when you are requesting time and effort that we all feel we have little enough available to do our own work.

 
A better solution, if help is needed, is to call. Make contact. Exchange information real time. If the person needed is local, get up and go see them. Once you have the required information, or achieved closure on a topic, then send an email confirming what was discussed, what the solution was and what the steps are moving forward. That email requires no active response from the recipient and enables everyone to get on with their respective jobs.

 
“Sending an email” does not get the job done. Make the call. Get up and make the visit. Take the initiative and get the job done.

Management, Objectives, Recognition

On Time is Now Early

2 Comments

I have written several times about the changing standards for performance in the business environment. I personally believe in setting reasonable expectations for my own, and other peoples performance, and then monitoring progress to goal completion. Having been on both sides of the equation, I have found it is better to reasonably promise and then try to over deliver.


 


It seems in tough economic times corporate business has changed but the way we view, and review it may have not. It has become more and more difficult to attain, let alone exceed objectives in today’s business climate. As staff numbers are reduced, “reasonable” goals and expectations seem to remain only in the eye of the beholder. Goals and objectives that you were once able to exceed given the “then” staff and budget, are now difficult to attain with the “now” staff and budget.


 


Both management and staff need to be aware of this new status quo. Incentives, rewards, recognition, ratings and reviews need to be prepared to reflect the fact that there are now fewer resources trying to deliver more objectives. Attaining today’s goals in this environment may in fact be more difficult than exceeding yesterday’s goals in that environment. There are always cycles in business. How we manage and treat our teams in tough times will have a significant affect on how they view and treat the business when times improve.

Achievement, Management, Objectives

“Nice to Do” vs. “Have to Do”

Leave a comment

Times have changed. This is a pretty trite statement in business, but it bears repeating. It used to be that your abilities were viewed based on the breadth of your knowledge and capabilities. To a certain extent this view still has credence, however more and more it is your depth of expertise and achievements in a specific field or function, not your breadth of capability that you will be judged on, whether you are in a position, or looking for one.

 

Hence the “nice to do” vs.“have to do” approach to business. Let me illustrate: If you are in sales you are normally responsible for achieving revenue objectives. It is what you are measured on. It is very quantitative. You have a goal to achieve. It is your quota.

 

You may also have the knowledge and capability to perform marketing functions such as the creation of sales programs and presentations.

 

Understand that sales staff are measured on their ability to achieve their quotas. If you can achieve your quota (a “have to do”) and also create useful marketing capabilities (“nice to dos”) then you have demonstrated incremental value above your required tasks.

 

If however you have NOT achieved your quota, but have also created useful marketing capabilities, you have still failed. Incremental “nice to do” work will not compensate for not achieving your goals in your “have to do” job. Remember, there is usually also a Marketing group who has the “have to do” job of creating marketing capabilities.

 

Business today is looking for the best experts in each discipline, whether it is Sales, Marketing, Operations, or anything else. While being adept and capable in multiple disciplines may demonstrate your ability for bigger roles, it will not compensate for failing to meet your objectives in your area of expertise. You must achieve your “have to do” goals before any of your “nice to do” work can be considered value added.

Customer Management, Customer Relationship, Management

Deliver the Bad News

2 Comments

We have all seen it, and probably even done it at one time or another. A customer wants something. It is a logical request. They are a good customer. We really want to make them happy. The problem is that we are just not able to provide them what they want. It is now somebody’s responsibility to tell them.


 


It may be too expensive to develop the capability or to do. You may not have the resources available. The product or service may just not be technically capable of delivering what has been requested. It may be so far outside the contractual arrangements that you just can’t do it.


 


It is bad news.


 


Our first response is to try and soften the news. We naturally look for some way to get around the issue. We want to leave some feeling that there may be some way around the problem or a potential solution in the future. Don’t defer it, avoid it, or assign it to someone else.


 


This is only digging the hole deeper.


 


Business is about setting expectations and then meeting them. If you can not meet a customer’s request, you need to deliver that position and set the expectation that the request will not be met. It is business. People understand that they will not always be able to get everything they want. If positioned properly and honestly, it will be known that it is your desire and position to provide the best service and capabilities available, but that sometimes you are not able to fulfill every customer request.


 


In the future, if a solution to the customer’s request is found or developed, they will be pleased as their expectations (of no solution) will be exceeded. Whereas if you have positioned for a potential review or solution at sometime in the future to avoid delivering bad news, you have delayed meeting their expectations and created frustration. Customers understand a “yes” or a “no” answer, but a “maybe” will almost always frustrate them.

Change, Management, Performance

The Black Swan

1 Comment

Have you ever seen a Black Swan? I had to go out and Google it to see if they really exist. They do. All the other swans that I have seen were white. When someone mentions swans I think of white ones. It was a common expression in the early U.K. as a statement that describes an impossibility, from the old world presumption that “all swans must be white”, because all historical records of swans reported that they had white feathers. The Idea of a Black swan was outside my initial perception set. I guess it shouldn’t have been. If we can have white (albino) tigers, why can’t we have Black Swans?


 


So what?


 


A gentleman by the name of Nassim Nicholas Taleb wrote a book in 2007, by the name of The Black Swan. Taleb asserted, “What we call here a Black Swan (and capitalize it) is an event with the following three attributes. First, it is an outlier, as it lies outside the realm of regular expectations, because nothing in the past can convincingly point to its possibility. Second, it carries an extreme impact. Third, in spite of its outlier status, human nature makes us concoct explanations for its occurrence after the fact, making it explainable and predictable. I stop and summarize the triplet: rarity, extreme impact, and retrospective (though not prospective) predictability.” He goes further to state “A small number of Black Swans explain almost everything in our world, from the success of ideas and religions, to the dynamics of historical events, to elements of our own personal lives.”


 


I think we need to apply this theory to business. In looking at the various corporate cultures and methods of business conduct that I have been associated with, I see many, many white swans. When I look back at the various roles I have had throughout my career, I find that I was my most successful when I decided to operate outside what was then the expected norm and go my own new/different way. I had my highest impact on the organization, and I was my most successful.


 

In today’s unpredictable business market it may seem risky to operate outside of the expected norm. After all, the Chinese proverb is “The nail that sticks its head up gets pounded down.” On the other hand, as businesses today strive for cost reduction and profitability improvement they are finding that they don’t need as many white swans in the labor flock. In this day and age I think I would rather be regarded as “High – Impact” and “Rare” than be regarded as just another member of a flock that is being reduced.

Expectations, Management, Performance

The Dallas Cowboys Are Starting to get it Right

1 Comment

I think there is a very good lesson to be learned from the recent success of the Dallas Cowboys football team. Much had been made about their poor record and poor performances in “December” in the past several years. This year they have done well by winning some of their high profile December games.


 


All of the sudden all the analysts and critics are back on the Dallas Cowboys band wagon. They are riding high. The team is riding high. The fans are riding high. Success makes life good. I too am impressed by their recent performance, but I also remember the words of one of their previous and most successful coaches, Jimmy Johnson.


 


He said to enjoy the success, but to remember that you were only one week from humility.


 


What he was saying is that past performances and successes would not guarantee future successes. You had to continue to work hard, and continue to perform at the levels that generated your success if you wanted to be a success in the future. The competition is always going to try and beat you.


 


The challenge for you and your business is going to be to look forward and continue to try and step up your performance, and fight the urge to look back and bask in the glory of previous victories.  You have already been paid for those.


 


As for the Dallas Cowboys, we’ll see how they do. They may have found the key to improving their December performance, but they still have not won a playoff game in 14 years……..

Management, Organizations, Structure

Cloud Computing – Yes, Cloud Management – No

Leave a comment

As the use of cloud computing proliferates, the ability to access applications via the network without having a defined path or structure to them, we also seem to be proliferating “Cloud Management”. Cloud management is the creation of a matrix structured organization where both responsibilities and reporting structures are overlapped.

 

Cloud management can occur when Sales reports via a geographic structure, Operations, Marketing and Support report into functional structures and customers are organized by vertical market alignments. The cloud gets worse when none of these reporting structures converge until the very senior most levels in the organization.

 

The net result is that usually each reporting structure begins to duplicate aspects of the other functions due to the number and difficulty of management hand-offs and the lack of overall alignment. Sales will create operations and support “like” groups, operations will create sales and support “like” groups,etc. to make sure that their needs are looked after.

 

When multiple groups have similar responsibilities, it ends up that no group has final responsibility.One group will always think another has the responsibility, and can point somewhere else when the goal is not achieved. The matrix organization structure can be very elegant in theory, but very difficult to implement and work well. Organizations where reporting structures, responsibilities and objectives are clear, simple and defined reduce functional overlap and clear up the business confusion that the “Cloud”can create.