Archive for December, 2009
A 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.
Simply 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.”
The 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.
Blaise Pascal and the Somali Pirates
Are we confident that our processes are delivering to the right quality and compliance requirements? How did we decide what the right controls, checks and balances are? Do we build in a safety margin or pay for insurance because we might fail? After all, failure has consequences, and insurance and safety cushions can be costly.
For many years I’ve held the view that when managing processes, decisions about controls and risk management fall into a range that has fear-driven on one end and confidence-driven at the other. Admittedly, this omits the groups that are either clueless, delusional, or the different forms of arrogant. Fear or confidence can be very rational or irrational, often affected by our access to information, our knowledge, skill, bandwidth … and endless other influences. But in any of the cases, we make choices and implement decisions that affect how we do what we do and what costs we incur in doing it.
For a long time, most of human history, the decisions about controls and insurance were driven by a lot of subjectivity or by the economic value of the product or delivery. Fear of loss was a big factor. Until someone figured that likelihood of something happening matters and that there are ways of determining that likelihood.
In fact, the evolution of the commercial applications of probability took decision making on just a journey. When insuring merchant vessels, decisions about risks and premiums moved from very subjective values based on the value of the cargo only to one that comprised value and probabilities and consequences. Much of that journey’s naissance we owe to the French essayist, mathematician, philosopher and religious thinker, Blaise Pascal. His life and works are essential reads. Additionally, Pascal sponsored and funded work by others, among which was entitled La Logique, Ou L’art de Penser by the Port-Royal monastery in Paris (Pascal also owned a transport company and needed to figure out the cost and level of insurance). The author of the work, Antoine Arnauld said, “Fear of harm ought to be proportional not merely to the gravity of the harm, but also to the probability of the event.”
The ramifications of this journey transformed decision making and problem solving, all the way to our current approaches that include Six Sigma, Lean and countless modeling algorithms. So in some instances, fear could be replaced by objectivity and the science of prediction leading to prevention and upstream controls. History could be tracked and the data could be complied to provide us with distributions that allow us to make inferences about the future, should the future be like the past. This gave us lots of opportunities to quantify our risks and improve our decision making and investments in controls or insurance. Now, that’s confidence.
Confidence that is supported by facts is surely better than actions driven by ignorance and fear. This is true as long as the past is a great predictor of the future. Since we rely on these predictions, we become predictable. Often that’s really good, but it can also create blinders when things or others are changing. Some of that has been happening with more frequency and some have happened with severe consequences, September 11, 2001 as a grim reminder. The growth of Somali piracy has certainly redefined the boundaries between fear and confidence as well as the requirements for capabilities and insurance.
So, the basis for fear or confidence may be evolving. The capabilities that serve us well to control the many areas that behave like our past are essential. Are they sufficient?
- When evaluating our process and decision making, do we look at the rates of change we face?
- Are the skills and tools that made us successful and confident balanced against the changes and requirements we must meet?
- Are we investing in responsiveness to change or insurance against the consequences of failure?
Virtual Value and Space-Time
Wow, the future was yesterday. The shopping data for Black Friday and Cyber Monday 2009 is eye-popping. In the never-ending race for shopper’s wallets, the agile have taken the day. Below are some data released by Coremetrics’ second annual Cyber Monday Benchmark Report:
- Cyber Monday continued the momentum set by Black Friday. Sales were up 24.1 percent compared to Black Friday 2009.
- Consumers spent more per online order ($180.03 versus $170.19 for an increase of 5.8 percent) compared to Black Friday 2009.Sales were up 13.7 percent compared to Cyber Monday 2008.
- The average dollar amount consumers spent per online order rose 38.2 percent from Cyber Monday 2008 ($180.03 versus $130.24), led by apparel retailers.
- Consumers bought nearly 10 percent more items per order on Cyber Monday 2009 compared to Black Friday 2009 and nearly 30 percent more compared to Cyber Monday 2008.
- Consumer shopping hit its peak from 9-10 a.m. PST, but maintained stronger momentum throughout the day than on Cyber Monday 2008.
More people chose convenience over crowds, comfort over queues, time over traffic, delivery over bundles and bags, price over pain ….. wow … the virtual marketplace is past gaining ground for holiday shoppers, it holds the hill. Cyber Monday brings evidence that some figured out the value is not only about price… it comprises much more.
So how virtual are we?
How do our customers find us?
Are we convenient to do business with? How do we know?
Do we have a handle on what value means and, more importantly, how to measure it?
Are we delivering more or less value today than yesterday?
How much are we dependent on structure, place, headcount, brick and mortar?
Is our value sustainable, decaying or being disrupted?
Have we learned about how to achieve business ubiquity?
Do we have ubiquity in our strategy?
Space-time is not just for physicists, is it?
