Execution
The Egg and I
Ever wonder about the question of which came first, the chicken or the egg? It’s hard to escape the current media about eggs, salmonella outbreaks again! I confess that part of me is a chicken, more than a bit concerned about the eggs. Although the broadcasted data says my eggs are likely to be safe, the current outbreak is disturbing. Egg farmers everywhere are sharing the chilling thoughts of what fear can do to our buying behaviors. A bad egg amongst the good can spoil the lot. It’s not just about eggs, is it? So, what would we be willing to pay for the good eggs? I know all about the value of data in decision making, the power of an objective lens, the better understanding of what risk really means, how it improves performance, and that is all good. That is, in fact, good as long as we have evidence that the data is good, timely, and reflective of what we really need to know for good decisions. So, how do I make up my mind about the eggs, particularly when my grandkids want some “cheesy eggs”? Cooking them thoroughly is supposed to kill the microbial varmints, but the old, “just in case” whispers in. I’m making decisions with second hand information with a cost versus perceived risk imbalance. Does that happen with other decisions we make at home, work, or play? (The golf course counts here)
It’s complicated since good eggs look the same to me as bad ones. What I need to know is inside the shell, and I don’t have the tools or knowledge to check. Here’s the challenge. I only know that eggs are bad by the damage they’ve done to someone and if somehow the word gets out and if the media decides to share it and if I happened to catch the news. Those are lots of ifs. Someone has to crack the shell and eat the egg. I don’t have testing data on the carton, and food safety failures are nothing to ignore. The wonders of science and high tech supply chain systems make eggs plentiful and really cheap. I suppose that applies to lots of other stuff that’s really cheap. So if we were in the egg business, we would want our customers to enjoy our eggs safely, always safely, and come back and buy some more. A history of great safe eggs is important and I would want to make sure only good ones hit the skillet.
But, this is not really an egg problem; it’s a quality management problem. The golden rule of “thou shall not use your customer as your inspector,” has been broken. That’s a rule that is foundational to ethical business practices. When we make a sale, accept an order or sign a contract, we are in fact making a promise that our customer will get what they expect, based on either a standard, a contract, or what we advertise or put on our “boxes.” Accepting a specification is the same as making a promise, and those that don’t intend to keep it but still sell the “stuff” are “fibbers” as my grandkids might say, or something much uglier in our adult language. It’s a real problem in industries where all the suppliers make the same promises and claims.
So, how do we make promises to our customers? How do we keep them? Do we rely on customer failure data to know, or do we know that the likelihood of failure is unlikely? How unlikely? Do we need someone with a badge and a club looking over our shoulder or is our respect our customers, employees, and investors a big enough motivator? There is really no difference between eggs, or cars, or cough syrup, or toys, or the innumerable products and services we provide. A promise is a promise and when we break one and harm is done, it’s on our name and reputation.
• Do we know what we’ve promised, or more importantly, what our customers believe we’ve promised?
• Do we lead and manage from the big print or the fine print?
• When was the last time we checked our processes? Are they about always keeping the promises? To whom?
• When did we last evaluate how effective and efficient our controls are? How likely are we to keep the promise?
• How and when do we decide what is “good enough” for our customers?
• What evidence could we produce on demand that would support our promises and earn the trust of our customers?
“Quality is not an act, it is a habit.” Aristotle
Oh, Can You See By the Dawn’s Early Light?
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
So begins the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence from Great Britain signed by the United States Congress on July 4, 1776. We in the US, celebrate July 4th as Independence Day this weekend with festivities, fireworks, picnics and devotionals to those whose lives were dedicated and often taken to secure these unalienable rights. In fact, the words could serve as anthem to peoples all over the world as a never ending objective and pursuit.
The instrument declared states as the independent parties, and in doing so established, “that these united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states; that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of right do.”
The Declaration of Independence was a consequence of a people rebelling against abuses with no responsiveness to appeals or due recourse for resolution. It is interesting to recognize that the only activity specified that is specific to an individual is the right to establish commerce. The document enumerates abuses by the Crown and intolerable and unendurable behaviors and, not surprisingly, many can be traced to actions to serve commercial objectives, those of the Crown and to the detriment of the colonists. (It took a subsequent Constitution and Bill of Rights to establish governance.) But, to continue the thread, business strategies are in fact conquest strategies and occupation strategies, and governments align to these to different degrees. Political colonies have typically as occupation entities to be harvested.
The consequences of the boldness of the Declaration of Independence and subsequent execution have enabled many of us to pursue happiness, enjoy liberty, and create life with hope. Three important dimensions are forever present in my mind:
1. Declaration was followed by sacrifice and vigilance to earn the liberties and the responsibilities to sustain them. Declaring that we are or we will be better or great can warm the tummy for a bit, but it is execution and on-going management that makes it real. Projects exist to create processes and processes must manage to the objectives of the entities. This applies to governance of individuals, organizations, enterprises, societies, religious orders, groups, and nations.
2. As the world changes and our prosperities grow, our opportunities are a powerful magnet for others seeking life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Although many believe that these rights come as a consequence of national versus global birth, perhaps through education or lack thereof, it is the right to earn them that effectively determines what we do and whether life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is achieved.
3. The first two create obligations and responsibilities, societal and commercial. Recognizing the unalienable rights do not come as a geographical or political birthright … not because of where we were born, but rather, because you were born is important, particularly if we are to be civil in our behaviors among our global community. We must not act in a way that denies the right to the pursuit of opportunity to earn happiness, personal or commercial, simply because we can at this point in time.
I cherish the opportunities life in the United States brings every day, and am grateful that my loved ones can pursue their own dreams. I honor and respect those that live and die daily to protect these opportunities and am ashamed of those that deny them to others, here or abroad.
Today, independence is more complex, perhaps because prosperity has redefined for many what the pursuit of happiness is or ought to be. Somehow, I find it is easier to find clarity in challenging times, and rewarding to reflect on the earned independence we enjoy and the responsibility to continue to earn and never deny.
Happy 4th!
How Did You Get So Ubiquitous?
“Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.” – Winston Churchill, House of Commons, August 20, 1940. Many recognized this as the timeless phrase describing the valiant effort by the British Royal Air Force Fighter Command during August 18th, 1940. It has come to represent the Battle of Britain and lives among the legendary victories, Agincourt, Trafalgar, and Waterloo. The Battle of Britain was very different, strategically, tactically, and operationally. The Battle of Britain developed a fascinating strategic application that becomes ever more relevant, Strategic Ubiquity.
Under the genius of Air Marshall Sir Hugh Dowding, the RAF Fighter Command overcame overwhelming odds against the behemoth German air forces. Dowding did so through technology, stealth, organization, managing awareness, resource dispatching, and mostly agility. I will leave the details to those willing to invest in further reading as many hundreds of books abound. The principle of Strategic Ubiquity manifested the ability to “be everywhere” with much fewer resources than thought possible. The strategy also generated a world class pull system for delivering aircraft long before the Japanese could spell Deming or develop what we apply as Lean. Again, this is a different tickler for the curious. This strategy incorporated leveraging the agile integration of cross-functionality and achieved measurable synergy, one plus one equals three; even more for the curious …
At this time in military history, great powers (military or commercial) relied on quantity, power, and mass as a strategic hammer with which to overcome the opposition. More, everywhere as deployed resources, that could battle it out until consumption won out or size scared the opposition into submission. RAF Fighter Command under Dowding harnessed the power of more information, deployed to the right people, specific to the purpose of the specific people, and in time to act. It was “predict and prevent” rather than “detect and correct.” Downing’s resources, his “chicks”, always feigned to be too few, but were able to be where they were needed, when needed, with as close to real time data and awareness as then unimaginable. The few, through agility, were able to execute against the many. The strategy did not completely lift Clausewitz’s “fog of war”, but did much to see through it. It was not a software thing, it was a process thing. It was an agile thing…
Strategic Ubiquity is something very doable. With the right focus, discipline, and follow-though, the leverage created by technology can be game changing. There is a way to think about it, plan it, deploy it, measure it, and sustain it.
Agility is much more than an athletic term and ubiquity is more than being everywhere. Strategic Ubiquity is about being at the frontiers where and when the business battles are fought, not everywhere where battles may be fought. A few (300) agile Spartans along with a few thousand supporting Greek city-states in the Second Persian War picked the straits of Thermopylae for good reason. Agility put the right resources with the right focus, discipline, follow through and technology to achieve a strategic objective of delay. It was not Strategic Ubiquity circa 550 BC, but Dowding’s Fighter Command made it happen in the summer of 1940.
Today’s dynamic business environment demands capability on multiple fronts and challenges how to plan, build capability, and then have sufficient agility to win. It’s harder and too expensive to be big enough to be everywhere. Garrisons, be they business or military are places where waste is born and bred.
‘Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.’ Sun Tzu
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?
Love 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?
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.
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?
I Have a Dream
When was the last time you dreamed? Not the go-to-sleep dream, but the dream that has a future that is really attractive, one we wanted to be part of? Is that dream still alive? In the universal words of kids in the back seat of the car, “Are we there yet?” Has the dream taken a detour, stuck in traffic, parked in the remote lot, or crushed in a junkyard, fodder for recycling? In this dream, were we the driver, passenger, or someone on the curb watching traffic go by?
The current calamities have, for so many, turned dreams into nightmares. For organizations, value has been destroyed, visions have blurred, and scarcity and survival have replaced abundance and growth. But, maybe it’s time we dreamed again. There is incredible power in effective leadership. I have believed for many years that the best leaders are the masters of delivering and creating optimism. Great leaders, be they captains of nations, captains of industry, or captains of their lives see light and create visions that pull us into the future. Visions can create the possibilities we dream about and great leaders energize collective motivations into plans and execution.
Growing up, my favorite leaders were defined by adversity, Winston Churchill and Abraham Lincoln to name just two. They manifested an eloquence that gave, to so many, the courage to hope and the will to endure and strive. The adversity and nightmares around them did not defeat them, but rather inspired them to dream, focus, create a vision and motivate the delivery of a better future. It’s possible, not easy, but doable. Without the adversity, the greatness within these leaders may have been buried under the blanket of comfort and success. Adversity defined Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, even the business giants like Andrew Carnegie and Henry Ford. Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech is timeless, the message creating and motivating a visionary power to fuel capacity, a capacity to move forward through adversity fostered by what is worst in people and enable millions to reach within and find what is best in people.
Adversity creates opportunity. Adversity energizes leaders and innovators. Adversity is what problem solvers dream about. The Great Depression was a fountain of new business creation, stoking the engines of creativity and diversification. It’s not easy, but doable again.
We approach a season redefined by prosperity. Be it the traditions of giving thanks or the tsunamis of buying presents, they have trappings of what abundance could look like and what “merry” or “happy” would look like. This year may not look as abundant. Maybe it’s the time to dream again, create new visions and challenge the leaders within us to embrace adversity and bring light to others.
Great leaders are judged by what they enabled others to accomplish, because others followed, sacrificed, endured, persisted and overcame adversities. Opportunities are always infinite. What we haven’t considered is always infinite. Only what we’ve accomplished so far is finite, memory is finite, scarcity is finite, even fear is finite.
“Hope is a waking dream.” Aristotle
The Choice is Yours … Maybe
What defines a good strategy? What does it mean? Strategy may be one of the most overused and subsequently confusing subjects in practically any realm we encounter. We hear about so many categories of strategy, that subjectivity has overcome objectivity in the usefulness of the word. Military strategy, business strategy, product strategy, life strategy, financial strategy, global strategy, marketing strategy, project strategy, retirement strategy … are among the near infinite categories.
Add to that the subject of planning … and it gets even messier. I believe that the two terms have been comingled sufficiently to take on whatever meaning one chooses and therefore beginning to approach becoming meaningless when evaluating or comparing between entities. Try testing this sometime. Ask 20 different people to define strategy, planning and strategic planning and see what you get. Expect to be amused, or maybe even confused. You may also discover that the responses will often predict what the respondent does and where they fit within an entity.
Add to that the confounding impacts of organizational structure and budgets, and, … maybe we begin to make it really hard to get clarity. Yep, I’m going to have a go at it ….
Let’s stipulate that all the stuff about goals and objectives is important and not up for debate right now. Let’s also stipulate that stuff is not free and we need to have control over resources and spend and therefore budgets are important. Plus, accountability, transparency, time, cost, and quality all matter too…
Strategy is what we do to create a future such that we maximize the choices and degrees of freedom along the way because some of what we believe or wish for is wrong. We could be wrong in what it will be like, what we actually want, what is going to happen,,, lots of ways. A strategy makes us think and consider the destination(s), the journey, and options for the detours and bumps in the road. Apply this to the categories above and see if it works. Strategies that reduce degrees of freedom and constrain choices tend to end up with calamitous consequences. Try it out on Betamax, the Peloponnesian Wars, mortgage backed derivatives, the Maginot Line, health care oligarchies, pension plans, hard wired enterprise systems, onerous controls and compliance requirements, procurement approvals …. When things do not play out as you expected, or wished, or sold, do you have the preparation and capability to adapt and exercise other choices? Decisions about Afghanistan, health care reform, even our next cell phone contract and provider choice would benefit greatly from this perspective (I believe..).
Planning is what we do to create confidence, not affirmation, that what we seek to do to deliver the strategy has legs. Planning is what bridges the activities between the present and the future so that we are capable to execute and adapt over time. It is about the verbs we will execute in order to secure the nouns and adjectives in our strategy.
So, my oversimplification would argue that we want confidence that we can get to the future we want, or emerges, with choices to make it better when we were wrong a little or a lot. Strategy gives us choice. Planning gives us confidence …
Thoughts?
Thinka Linka Do
“Divide et impera”, or in English, Divide and Conquer is a phrase that we’ve all heard, many have experienced, and the clever have overcome. Forms of it have been attributed to Philip of Macedon and Julius Caesar and some incorrectly to Machiavelli, who in fact was denouncing it. It speaks to the power of effecting fragmentation, disintegration and dissolution of unity as a means to overcome adversaries or as a means to break down tough problems. Many problem solvers apply the technique, sometimes inappropriately to systems issues.
As a business practice, divide and conquer has been the effective stick that clever folks have applied to groups of competitors. The tool has been effective across almost any competitive environment, be it military, political, intellectual, athletic… endless arenas. It has been very effective when leveraging the shortcomings of traditional communications and transparency to events. But in the world of business, not so anymore. In fact, the world today may often give the advantage to the apparently fragmented, but virtually networked. Yes, the strength can be invisible and the responsiveness astounding. I would pose that a new adage might follow Sun Tzu’s logic and proclaim “Appear Divided, then Conquer.”
Here’s why … the big are always fighting entropy, the tendency towards disorder (it’s a rule of the universe). To those not anally retentive, entropy can be cool, it can be a tool. But to the big, entropy creates variability and variability looks bad. To the big, fighting entropy requires policies, controls, standards, inspections, oversight, hierarchies of non value adding resources, in other words, stuff that adds costs, time, and conservatism. Lots of that is necessary for many processes, but it is never free and mostly builds rigidity. Change comes hard and slow. The rigid can find that they are dead before they learn that they are sick.
When the fragmented could not connect, they became easy pickings. Not a hard one to figure out. In the business world firms typically have what the Japanese call an either “product out” or “customer in” philosophy and practice. Simply, it means that a business has a bias for promoting and selling who and what they have by persuading a customer that it is the best solution, or the business can configure and fit a solution specifically to the customers’ needs and circumstances. A big factor in this game has been bandwidth or resources, capabilities and talent. So there are factors of strategy, solutions and resources at play. Hard to make all the calls right, but historically the bigger had the larger catalog to show. The show of force and one stop shop can be a powerful tool to instill an image of reliability and capacity to a prospective client. But the bandwidth, capacity, catalog and resources have a cost. It’s a trade-off and balance issue. Balance is the operating word. We think of balance on a scale of weights, a static view. Today’s challenges call for dynamic balance, the kind you might see in an agile athlete or a top gun in a fighter jet.
Now … this is not about big is bad or sinister, and little is good. Good and bad have little to do with size, but rather principles and values. This is about agile is good and rigid is bad. Big or small, rigid is bad for the business and the customer. Here is how the game can change!
Never before has the capability to build and operate as a virtual enterprise been greater. The advent of technology is a tsunami of possibilities. The calamities of the recent economic failures have precipitated the freeing up (some call it unemployment) of armies of talent. Those that connect that talent virtually and create networked configuration of solutions can win the game with superior customer in.
Think then link, then think linked!
Lots to think about on this one …. Because agility is within reach to the big or the small. It’s less about size and more about paradigms and practices.
What do you think? How are you linked?
