Going for the Gold
By now many of us are working through the withdrawal symptoms of POSD, or Post Olympic Stress Disorder. The quality of coverage keeps ratcheting up every time, particularly with the clarity of HDTV, bigger screens, and cameras suspended in truly agile systems. I am amazed at how the athletes perform at levels that continue to redefine what is humanly possible and just how little the difference is between the first and the fifth placers … often a fraction of a second. High performance is redefined.
The human interest stories take a peek under the hood and into histories revealing that the road to high performance is not easy, ridden with adversity, overcoming pain, loss and, a host of challenges. Hours of practice and more hours to build capability under the watchful and critical eyes of coaches deliver world class fitness. That fitness enables world class performance wherein the medal is but one definition of winning.
What rings very true is the recurring theme that fitness precedes performance. It is as true in sports as it is in life and particularly in the world of business. Achieving sustainable business performance does not come from buying tools and handing them out with “how to” manuals and books, on-line streaming, or the overused cheerleads of “You can do it!” It comes from relentless hard, focused, effort pointed towards a goal that demands excellence, not trying hard. High performance will always demand focus, discipline, and follow-through.
How fit are our organizations to compete in races where competitors are improving rapidly? Are the standards of high performance outpacing our fitness to keep up, win, or just catch up? Years ago I was speaking with a former Olympian who coached our high school gymnastics team. He was sharing what it was like and how his coaches set goals. He said, “John, for many years the standard for this event was set by the East Germans. Year after year, the kept raising the bar, literally. We would watch and believed that we would become winners if we could jump as high as the East Germans were jumping. Our coaches would not settle for such low goals. Our coaches demanded that we jump to the height that would beat where the East Germans would be jumping at the next Olympics or world event.” The bar is always moving.
High performance is a slippery slope, one that a former world ice skating champion learned all too well last week. Capability is now set dynamically by the moving requirements. Often, by the time we find out the requirements, it has moved again. For those who lock down requirements very early the development or innovation process, the planning rigidity will result in missed targets, oops, it moved. Ask the telecommunications providers who deliver 3G, particularly iPhones, what happens at high concentration events like football games …. Hmmmm … the models don’t always anticipate ….
Some say that the tea leaves foresee an improving economy, perhaps the beginnings of better times ahead. These leaner times have been an opportunity to build better fitness, better capability to compete.
- How prepared are we?
- Are we jumping to the heights of the last competition or where the competition will jump tomorrow?
- Have we overcome the adversities and come out stronger, or has performance obesity found a way to ride out the storm?
- How do we measure and determine if our fitness will win? What motivates us?
- What do our coaches demand from us?
- What does focus, discipline and follow-though look like, and feel like?
- Do we compete as individuals or as teams?
Toyota’s Headache and Tylenol
Toyota’s woes continue. This week they’ve announced production idles at two US plants, their recalls have grown to 8.5 million vehicles globally, allegations of cover-ups are blazing across the news wires, and dealers across the nation are experiencing further drops in demand. Toyota’s chairman has apologized to their customers and the US government has posted a statistic of 34 alleged deaths attributed to the acceleration defects in their cars. The picture has the uncomfortable sensation that some of the Toyota leadership responsiveness to the issue has been provoked by data becoming visible to many where it was being hidden beforehand. It is disturbing, and if true, it challenges the credibility much of what we and the world has celebrated as “The Toyota Way.” Their projected business forecasts are frightening and no one forecasts a speedy recovery. With regulators and hearings dragging the giant into more limelight, apologies may sound hollow to many.
Contrast the current Toyota calamities to the response we observed from Johnson & Johnson in September 29, 1982. Seven people died in the Chicago area from Tylenol capsules containing cyanide. The cause was clearly caused by sabotage and malice and the incident could have killed their flagship brand. The response was immediate, uncompromising, and massive. The products, 31 million were pulled off the shelves, all shelves, at all locations. No wait and see, no “we’re working on it”, no “special task force” or recommitment to quality. Customer comes first, integrity must be common cause not special cause, and leadership leads from the front as chairman James Burke did. Today they are a pharmaceutical giant. Today recalls are so commonplace that they often fall under the radar.
Johnson & Johnson did not have an established recall process as none existed anywhere. Johnson & Johnson demonstrated agility. Tamper proof bottles did not exist, but Johnson & Johnson innovated. This took place in 1982, before the rest of the world learned to manage quality and flow, some of it from Toyota.
So, is this a surprise? Is the hubris unexpected? Do we see similar patterns as great performance brings a great image and the great image brings wealth or power? Does the importance of the image ever become more important than the foundations that earned it?
As the allegations and discoveries mount, regulators join the party, hearings ramp up, and the press has a global media event, what behavior should we expect? Currently, regulators at the FDA are critical or Tylenol’s poor responsiveness to a 2010 recall requirement. Hmmmm ……
Enterprises lose capability from disruption or decay ….. leadership can lead into or out of either.
Last year I wrote about how we earn more regulation and the impacts leaders have on this process. I suggest that it may be relevant again.
He is heavy, … , he ain’t my brother …
Also: A Tale of Two Tigers
Sphere: Related ContentA Tale of Two Tigers
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times; it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness; it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity; it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness; it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair; we had everything before us, we had nothing before us; we were all going directly to Heaven, we were all going the other way.” So begins “A Tale of Two Cities” by Charles Dickens. Although a story replete with social commentary, it brings into focus the impacts of adversity, particularly on the elite and unprepared. Aristocracy meant respect and a special place in the eyes of many, perhaps leading to hubris, and hubris often led to disaster.
Our current tale is akin, perhaps “A Tale of Two Tigers”. The recent months have put the light on two icons of the modern world, a commercial aristocracy, Tiger Woods and Toyota. Both have demonstrated a level of performance superiority that has not only secured dominance as the standards for performance and quality, but have become idolized and revered as role models for industry. The Toyota brand has bred an image and reputation that placed their management system as near perfection in creating strategy, culture, and execution excellence, devoid of constraints, and in perfect harmony with customers and suppliers. Tiger Woods may well be the greatest golfer of all time whose incomparable agility on the golf course has led to corporate sponsorship inclusive of Rolex Watches and Accenture, the consulting giant, both seeking affinity with the image of high performance.
What got the two Tigers to the pinnacle may have left them unprepared for the calamities they are confronting today. Success and recognition are powerful narcotics for anyone or any enterprise. Success reinforces confidence and creates energy for increased initiative, spurs growth and breeds many followers. Success can sometimes make us believe that it comes from our special place in the order of things, earned through focus, discipline and follow-through. Success can make us believe that we are better. But does it prepare us for adversity? When all is well, how often do we think of the world otherwise? How often do we prepare for failure and how to deal with it?
This “Tale of Two Tigers” can be about any or all of us. The financial meltdown and experiences with the global economy of the last 18 months are not unlike the two tigers. Success led to confidence and some of it diverted into hubris, we followed in adulation with investments, and perhaps did not think about a need to prepare for the adversity that followed.
So let’s consider:
- What makes us successful?
- Does our success create a belief that we are good or perhaps that we’re lucky?
- What are our assumptions of what lies ahead? Will these new trees continue to grow to the sky?
- What book are we reading or writing about the “Way” to succeed?
- Are we investing in becoming better at what is making us winners today? Does that mean that tomorrow will be like today?
- In 1970 there were 35,000 tigers in the world. Today, fewer than 7,000 tigers are left. Why is that?
Why did the French build the Maginot Line? What is the difference between confidence and complacency? Defending Against Risks with Structures and Controls? Think Again!
Also: Toyota’s Headache and Tylenol and
Sphere: Related ContentExcuse Me, I’m Having a Eureka Moment
Years ago a colleague asked me to define what a successful consultant, coach, or mentor does to help their client. “Hmmm”, I thought about the question, “we work in a process of managing epiphanies! We help others discover what is, perhaps has always been, but not necessarily in focus”. It certainly was not original thought, but I believe that it is nonetheless true, and we owe much of that to Socrates. Socrates, a Greek philosopher, mentor of Plato, helped others to find truth, or fallacy in thought by asking great questions. Great answers pick the destination and great questions lead to discovery.
For many, asking great questions is a learned habit, one that may require overcoming other really strong habits. One of the strongest habits to break is our desire to have good answers. If we have great answers, then better. If you’re successful and you’ve grown in responsibilities over time, having great answers has been important. Having great answers is a way to demonstrate capability, competence, smarts, knowledge, foresight, preparation, diligence, initiative… lots and lots of favorable traits. In fact, people who work for you know that they can always count on you to have a great answer. Is that good? Does that increase or decrease the options, degrees of freedom, genius contribution, ownership, and fulfillment? How about the overall quality of answers? How do we know?
“We are usually convinced more easily by reasons we have found ourselves than by those which have occurred to others.” Blaise Pascal
Is it possible that the more others count on our answers, the less likely they will come up with good ones themselves. Is that a good thing? Let’s start with some data gathering (on ourselves, our leaders, and our team members.)
- What are our answers given versus questions asked ratios?
- Are we sounding boards or decision buttons?
- Do we welcome better answers or do we see them as competition?
- How often do folks wait on our answer before executing?
- How well prepared are our folks for great questions?
- How often do we hear “I understand or I got it” versus “Eureka”?
What is critical thinking? How do people gain critical thinking capability? How is that different than always knowing the answer? Which is inductive thinking and which is deductive thinking? If you could only pick one, which would you choose to have in changing times?
“Wisdom begins in wonder.” Socrates
Sphere: Related ContentLove that Potential!
A long time ago I studied engineering, mechanical engineering. I loved the subject and the lenses it brought. It was and is about transformation, solving problems, creation, leverage, and making new things that work and making old things work better. Engineering teaches how to open the hood on what we observe and appreciate the many systems at play when something happens or doesn’t happen. Later on, when I studied business, the engineering lenses were very helpful again, but now I could apply the business lenses to the engineering world and, wow, I could really see great stuff happening.
I recall several lectures on the subject of energy, particularly the contrasts between potential energy and kinetic energy. Basically, potential energy is work that we’ve done (force stored in a bottle) that is in a state that can be used to work we want to do (make something go or move), kinetic energy. Some may bristle at this folksy definition, but it will do for now. The battery in our car has potential energy stored that can be unleashed to turn a motor to start our car. When the car is running, it turns a generator that sparks the plugs (so that we can use the potential energy in the fuel) and returns some energy back to the battery for storage. Our bodies do the same thing with what we eat. By the way, if we let the battery stand around long enough it drains and loses the potential energy inside (sort of leaks out slowly). All the potential is gone and has to be recharged or replaced. Use it or lose it.
The business lens is the same isn’t it? We hire, develop, train, build capability and skills, staff up, put money away, and buy all kinds of equipment and supplies, right? All of that has lots of potential. Why? We do so use it to start and run our processes, projects, and respond when necessary. We make it kinetic! In doing so, we trade the deliverable for another type of potential energy, money. The cycle goes on and on between potential to kinetic and then again, but not always. We tend to waste lots of kinetic energy in activity that doesn’t produce something. We also leave lots of potential underutilized, and if it goes too long before we use it, we may find it as useless as a dead battery.
So,
- Do we know how well we build our “potential energy” within the enterprise?
- Where is that potential stored? Is it available and convenient?
- How much potential is leaking out and becoming unusable?
- Do we buy or build too much potential? Do we know?
Living in Florida, we need to prepare for hurricanes. We store potential in batteries, fuel, food, even a generator. If you ask me where they are stored, I would have to show you, because they keep moving from potential to kinetic and replaced with fresh potential capacity. Otherwise, they will be of diminished value when we really need them.
Do we have storms in our enterprises?
Sphere: Related ContentTrident in the Storm
“There is opportunity in every storm”, is a phrase I often use. Storms disrupt, are not completely predictable, and affect many of us simultaneously and uniquely, since there is only one of each of us and the effects to us are different than for any other. We experience storms directly and indirectly. In all cases we get outcomes, some that are not evident, need to develop, and then emerge. Some are awful and some are wonderful, for businesses, enterprises, families, people, societies, economies, lots more.
The English benefited greatly when the Spanish Armada was destroyed in a storm, none too soon since attack was imminent. Winds from a storm and great strategy enabled the Athenian fleet to destroy the Persians during the Battle of Salamis in the second Persian Wars (that’s the one that involved the 300 Spartans at Thermopylae …) The outcomes from each have profound effects on what the world is today and even the fact that you’re reading this at all and specifically in English. Storms, opportunities and outcomes and inextricably linked with an every shifting mix of deterministic and random effects. What we do before, during and after these storms will drive outcomes, just like what others do create outcomes that we experience. Inaction and action drive outcomes. Spectators to a storm are impacted, but perhaps with a lesser influence on opportunities.
For many of us the economic storms of the last 18 months have created havoc, redirection, disorientation, and many positive opportunities as well. We’ve learned much about ourselves and even more about others we know and many we’ve trusted. Disappointments may make us wiser and wisdom may make us wealthier in work and life choices. At our shop, we have taken the linkage between storms and opportunities to heart and action. We are delighted to announce that our enterprise, Trident Leverage, is continuing its growth and is now Trident Leverage Group. We are now a full partnership of Kevin Bazinet, Dave Dippre, and me as the Managing Partners. With our growing consulting and business development team, we are excitedly addressing the opportunities that only these storms could have provided.
We believe that our choices matter, particularly during storms. We’re excited at what’s ahead and invite you to join us in making 2010 the year where nightmares become dreams and dreams become reality.
Sphere: Related ContentThink About It!
Have you ever thought about how we think, particularly the kind that leads to decisions? What drives important decisions? How do we know if we made the “right one”? As we enter into the New Year, how will we decide how to navigate ourselves and our enterprises successfully?
How we approach this tends to fall into two major categories (with some dangerous variations within). First, there’s the type of thinking that comes from experience. We observe and experience, develop some pattern describing the experience and tuck it away for reference. When we believe we recognize the pattern, we pull that memory out and make some conclusion about what is in front of us. Some people can store lots more patterns than others, have longer memories and can capitalize from that. It’s called inductive thinking and people with “good” inductive thinking can market that as experience. Hiring practices validate that the marketplace places a positive value on that. Experience is not always good, nor is experience a sure bet, so some further prodding and poking is usually a good idea. There are some areas where inductive thinking can be very valuable, particularly when there is little time available for decision making. It is a subjective realm, nonetheless.
There is another kind of thinking that has to do with the world of math and data and science (real science, not the subjective pretenders…). It requires evidence that is measurable and leads to the quantitative practices where many people will reach the same conclusions when presented with the same data. This kind is deductive thinking and there are lots of professions and methodologies that are built upon deductive thinking. It’s very powerful, learnable and very scalable. It too has limitations in that the person who engages in deductive thinking must learn how to do it correctly and not all of us learn or remember well. Experience here is important insofar as we can use it to demonstrate competence in the applications of the rules and tools. It is supposed to be the objective realm, subject to our ability to measure correctly. Memory also plays a role here. I would be challenged to apply much of what I learned in engineering school decades ago with any confidence.
Variations of the two types of thinking, comingling, and the influences of biases are always at play, so certainty or absolute correctness is elusive. There is however a dangerous type of thinking we may all be subject to. It’s called wishful thinking. We know it well and if we are practitioners in it, we now it’s capability to disappoint. We bring to bear what we have in deductive and inductive capabilities and we put the right bit of optimism and conjure really great scenarios. Sometimes wishful thinking blinds us to lots of really good inductive signals and deductive facts along the way. Some misapply the meaning of positive thinking to the process and don’t survive to tell about it.
So what is the right mix for the upcoming year? We know that there has been a lot of change amiss. The financial rules of engagement have been rattled by poor inductive, pseudo-deductive and far too much wishful thinking so as to create a fair bit of timidity. The way we are interconnected and interdependent in a multi-polar world present us with new data and rules as to what may or may not work. So how do we decide?
- Are we planning for a good year? Why so? Why not?
- Is uncertainty scary or energizing?
- What opportunities does a new playing field present?
- What do we induce, deduce or wish for 2010.
Happy New Year and Good Hunting!
Sphere: Related ContentA Good Night with Charles Dickens
Every year during this week I watch at least one or two renditions of Charles Dickens transformative classic, A Christmas Carol. It was written in bad times, economically and socially in England. I believe there are currently well over 30 different film versions. The story was transformative as an agent of reversing terrible social conditions, many fueled by the migrations into the cities brought on by the industrial revolution. It reflected Dickens’ abhorrence of the human capacity for inhumanity as well as his personal love for a holiday that evoked charitable and warm behaviors. It became so popular that it gave Christmas many of the trappings we see today. It was not a much celebrated event in England at the time and the goose was the centerpiece of the holiday dinner. The book brought on the turkey we may believe is the meal of choice. Roast pork, black beans and rice, yucca with onions, and plantains on Christmas Eve would be what you’d see at our home, should you visit sometime. But the opportunity for merriment and warming of our hearts is cast upon us, food notwithstanding (we call it Noche Buena … meaning The Good Night).
I truly love the film because of what it can do on an individual, more personal level. It evokes a reflection and introspection that lives can change their direction, choices matter, and that goodwill can be infectious. The message is not depended on faith or beliefs, but rather about attitude and behaviors. (In fact, the religious attributions are more recent than many realize). His book changed our world long before we were born. It can change it yet some more, if we each change our lives by choice.
Our wishes to you for the happiest of holidays! May your lives be enriched with better choices and the affection of those around you.
Sphere: Related ContentSimply Speaking with Albert Einstein
Years ago I was visiting a financial services regional office and conducting an informal “walk-through” prior to deciding on whether to pursue business development with them. This particular division serviced auto loans. As I went around the workstations I noticed a desk with a very large stack of mail, a very large stack. One individual was opening and sorting each envelope. I asked about it and was told that the individual was the accounting manager and they were the only person in the facility authorized to open incoming mail. I tried very hard to mask my reaction as I asked why that rule was in place. “Well, a few years ago we had an individual steal some money from a payment envelope, so we implemented this improved control so that never happens again.” Flashes of Humphrey Bogart and strawberries in the “Caine Mutiny” suddenly appeared.
I’m certain most of us have countless similar stories. I’ve long held that given enough time, today’s problems generate solutions that eventually become tomorrow’s problems. In fact, most controls have an inherent constraining dimension; they want to keep something from happening. When they are good controls, they attack the current causes and then adapt to changes in inputs or causes, but for many controls, not often enough. Controls become part of the paradigms of “how we do it around here.” Sadly, poor controls tend to punish the innocent in search of the guilty.
Albert Einstein is well known for his genius and insights into the nature of the cosmos. He cracked the nut around what gravity is, something Isaac Newton described as an attractive force, but could not explain. Genius notwithstanding, many of his enjoyable insights have survived in quotations that serve us well in life and business. Constraints that we encounter in our processes are often invisible to our eyes because they are consistent with the way we think or have been trained to see. We are empirical creatures who observe patterns and ascribe meaning to patterns. When we try something and it appears to work, we store that bit of information and draw upon it over and over. We call that knowledge and experience and it gives us and those around us comfort and confidence, even when that knowledge and experience is the cause of current calamities. Albert would say, “We can’t solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them.”
There is unquestionable merit in reducing unnecessary complexity and inappropriate controls in or work and lives. In fact, Albert would say, “Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius — and a lot of courage — to move in the opposite direction.” Many have assumed that simplification is the way to go. I’ve noticed a disturbing trend to make simplification the objective of improvement, potentially at the expense of quality and consequences. Years ago a good friend explained that where they grew up, calling someone “simple” was very uncomplimentary …. I understand why. Simplification does not mean simple.
Our auto loan example likely dealt with dishonest behavior, but at a huge price to flow and bandwidth. It did not address the root causes that were likely to be more complex and likely to emerge in other behaviors.
“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.”
Sphere: Related ContentThe Net, Gear, and Route to Tears
There are few experiences that are more aggravating than unmet expectations, particularly when failure occurs at multiple points. I seldom list organizations by name, but this one is earned.
Our business is growing in our use of the power of the web. We are holding better meetings, avoiding unneeded travel, collaborating, and improving the customer experience and convenience on the shoulders of the wonderful electrons we can direct. Today we can deliver and share so much more, constrained only by our bandwidth at times. Upgrading makes great sense and so we embarked to muscle up.
After tripling our connection speed, we decided to match our router capabilities to the pipe outside. I decided to investigate, ask around and then buy a new router. We decided on the top of the line Netgear WNDR3700 Range Max (max is good!) dual band (2 is better than one!) 300 Gigabit router with ReadySHARE storage access (usb drive capability). The box reads Push and Connect, brings an install disk, and has a sticker on the box with a big Windows 7 link. I have a new machine with Windows 7, but we also have multiple users with Mac, Windows Vista, and Windows XP operating systems.
- The first bit of bad news was when the install disk notified us that it does not support Windows 7.
- When visiting the website, no install drivers were available for download.
- The 24-7 support walked us through a slow and painful process of manually configuring the router.
- The process to connect with wireless added to the time and aggravation. While the rep put us on hold (again) to find out how to proceed, we ran Windows 7 troubleshooter and connected (on our own).
- The router install webpage indicated that new firmware was available for upload, so we asked the rep whether we should upgrade. “Yes”, he said. We backed-up the settings and forged ahead. (The rep felt that we could do that without his help and politely disconnected.)
- 30 minutes later, we lost all internet access.
- Next call to 24-7 consumed an incredible amount of time. First confirming that we had the upgraded firmware (said that that was good!), doing diagnostic Q&A, resetting the router, and going through a new entry of settings (some different). We finally reconnected.
- The connection was great until 9:00 AM this morning when we lost all internet and router access.
- Next call to 24-7 involved two different reps and more hours. We were told we should not have upgraded to the recommended firmware because it was only in beta stage. New reset and restoration to prior firmware, new set up again. Add hours.
- All in all around 28 hours between initial attempt and current state (it’s working right now).
- I had to reschedule three events, inconvenienced and likely aggravated others …. After all, they could wait with me …. and Netgear.
Was the release of Windows 7 a surprise? Should our loss of productivity be forgiven, forgotten or ignored, all in the spirit of the season? This is not just about a router and a disappointed customer, is it? We have all had our version of this story, or been the perpetrators of the calamities. We’ve arrived early on a flight then waited for a gate when others were available, received mail promotions that the phone center did not know about, sales advertised with no inventory or store awareness, on and on…
Many years ago I learned that organizations typically fall into two modes of operation:
- Product out, then Customer
- Customer in, then Product.
There is one rule that I have always recommended, “Never let the customer become your quality inspector.” Today can add, “Don’t learn about problems from a blog.” We don’t want to learn that we’re dead before we learn that we’re sick.
Sphere: Related Content