Decision discipline

Making decisions is like any other process, you gather relevant information, consider options, look for the optimum outcomes, and decide accordingly. Right?

Often wrong.

Decisions are often made based on the HiPPO (Highest Paid Persons Opinion) what was done last time, how it would be viewed by others, what the “rules” say should be done, and a host of other drivers that really add little value to the quality of the decision making.

Decision making is like any process, the better that information, and the more objectively it can be analysed, the better  the decision is likely to be.  As importantly, the process is optimised by being sufficiently robust such that if the decision were to be made again, with the same information, but a different , but equally capable group of people, the outcome would be the same.

There are a few questions to be asked of any decision making group:

    1. Where did the data come from?
    2. What analysis has been done?
    3. What is the level of confidence in the outcomes?

Pablo Picasso is reported to have said ” computers are useless, they can only give you answers” which goes to the issue at the heart of decision making, the quality of the questions that are asked and the manner in which that are answered.

How disciplined are your decision making processes?

4 strategies to change culture

Culture is elastic, it is the hardest thing to change in any organization,  the ‘way people do things around here” to quote Michael Porter, is a powerful organiser of behavior.

Changing culture by decree  from the corner office simply does not work, all it does is depreciate the credibility of the person issuing the decree.

Often the decree is associated with some mandated behavior changes, they can be imposed, but once the pressure comes off, and  in the absence of the changed behavior being well bedded in, it reverts to the old models as soon as the mandate is not aggressively enforced, just like taking away the stretching device in a length of elastic.

The only way to eliminate the ‘elastic effect” is to cut it, by encouraging employees to change their behavior because they see the sense in it, and the change is consistent with their own best interests.

Four ways to make it a bit easier:

  1. Don’t try and change everything at once by decree. Instead, pick a few critical behaviors, and demonstrate a determination to change them, and articulate the reasons why they must change.
  2. Recognise that not all the behaviors of an existing system will be bad, there will be good elements that warrant retention, even prominence, so highlight them.
  3. Ensure that the behaviors you are seeking are consistent with the behavior demonstrated by the senior management
  4. Ensure that the behaviors required are consistent with the strategy, business model selected to deliver it, and the metrics by with performance of the business and individuals is measured.

If this seems simple, don’t be fooled. Changing culture is the hardest task any leader has, Rosabeth Moss Kanter’s list of the 10 reasons people resist change is a great one. Most “leaders” are not up to the task, and then they are called Managers.

Where is the money?

To stay in business we all need to make money today, and we also need to understand where the money will be tomorrow, invest in these future cash generating activities, and sometimes  make adjustments to the business model.

These adjustments are not just another re-organisation, but evolution in the way the enterprise interacts with and responds to changes in their competitive, technological and regulatory environment.

To a degree this is crystal-balling, predicting the intersection of your capabilities and customer needs, but it is more about being sufficiently agile to enable experimentation to occur in the manner in which you do business.

If you encourage and support  such experimentation with the business model and customer offer in a framework that responds to the question “where will the money be in 5 years?” you will be in pretty good shape.

The old quote from ice hockey great Wayne Gretsky when asked what made him great, “I do not skate to where the puck is, but where it will be” is just as valid in business as it is in hockey.

Give a mile, take an inch

We are in an evolving age of flattened, silo-less, collaborative enterprises, where accountability for outcomes is increasingly devolved to those teams and individuals on the “front line”  who carry the responsibility for implementation. 

Under these circumstances, the old carrot and stick management no longer works, and the replacements often leave many management groups struggling with the ambiguity, as employees fail to respond  with initiative and enthusiasm for the new management style.

The dilemma was summarised for me by the rework of the old “give them an inch, and they take a mile” saying by a bloke who added, “if only”.

When you have a workplace largely educated and conditioned to following the established orthodoxies, rules and regulations that at best inhibit, at worst, penalise for initiative, why would the outliers and mavericks stick around?

Leadership and passion encourages the taking of the mile, and nothing really useful happens until somebody does.

 

Wisdom has a context

Strategy is about choice, which market, customer, technology, and so on.

Never has this black and white choice been so stark a challenge as in publishing, as the established operators struggle to find profitability in the electronic age.

Fairfax in Australia recently announced a record loss of 2.7 billion dollars, a continuance of their recent performance, on top of a series restructuring announcements and a precipitous drop in the share price over the last couple of years. They are not alone in the world of print media.

However, all is not lost. A few weeks ago I heard the editor of the “New Yorker”  Henry Finder being interviewed on Sydney radio, a whimsical interview, but the astonishing difference is that the New Yorker is thriving in  the new digital  environment.

Instead of chasing the commodity, fluffy stories available anywhere, the magazine is  going deeper into stories, rewarding readers with superior journalism and a range of views not available elsewhere.

They made a choice, not just to be different to everyone else, but to do it in a way that is consistent with the history and culture of the magazine.

My revered old mentor, Jim Hagler, scion of Harvard Square said to me almost 40 years ago “son, create a  niche and then OWN it”. Jim had never heard of the internet, or the disruption it would bring publishing, but his wisdom still holds, and the New Yorker  has listened. Wisdom has a context, but it remains wise.

 

Rocking horse syndrome

I observe lots of activity in all sorts of enterprises, public and private, see KPI’s set and met, initiatives announced with fanfare (and in the case of the NSW Government re-announced)but little of any value seems to be happening.

Familiar?

Enter the Rocking Horse syndrome.

Lots of activity, failure to make any useful progress, but sometimes it keep the kids happy, for a while anyway.