Sep 19, 2012 | Leadership, Marketing, Strategy
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.
Sep 3, 2012 | Leadership, Personal Rant, Small business
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.
Aug 13, 2012 | Innovation, Leadership
Being different is the guts of innovation, no matter how good, how big (or small) how effective, how cheap, if it is not different, none of the rest will matter a whit.
Why is it then, that we have processes and disciplines that weed out the deviances from the norm?
Who is to say the norm is right?
The bloke who always disagrees, has an odd view of the world, irritates, and creates discord is usually the first to go when times are tough, and when the boss needs to demonstrate his machismo, but sometimes, just sometimes, the deviate is right.
Those who see the world differently to most are usually those who have the potential to come up with something new, something that disrupts the status quo, they may also just be a pain in the arse, so the management task is to balance the odds, moderating the risk while cultivating the environment in which the whackos will flourish.
As George Bernard Shaw said, “all great things start as blasphemies”
Jul 29, 2012 | Leadership, Personal Rant
Recently my local council took a decision under extremely dubious circumstances, and against the wishes of much of the local community, and their own guidelines.
In preparing for my 3 minute opportunity to voice my disgust at the decision, and its inevitable outcomes, I broke my objections down to three components that the council leadership should consider as they imposed a decision made in isolation of the wishes of the community, for reasons that had nothing to do with the good of the community.
- Morality and legality. Just because something is legal, does not necessarily make it moral. Just because you may be able to manipulate the existing regulations to accommodate a 7 story apartment block overshadowing an area you listed as a heritage area does not make it right to do so, particularly when the financial basis of the alterations are at best, obscured.
- Transparency of leadership. Those who wish to lead, particularly those who are elected to do so have an obligation to ensure that decision-making is a transparent process. Without transparency, the leadership is compromised past repair very quickly. Look no further than the mess in Canberra for confirmation.
- Consistency of decision-making. A decision made today, must be consistent with those made yesterday, and if not, the reasons for the inconsistency must be overwhelming, and transparent to everyone affected.
Whilst my impassioned pleas did not change the decision, when I look back on it, the headings to which I spoke still resonate.
By the way, I am still angry, and with council elections now very close, at least some retribution is coming. Just a pity it is too late for to prevent the disaster emerging from the hubris, incompetence, and self interest of the those about to lose their sinecures at the developer honey pot.
Jul 4, 2012 | Innovation, Leadership, Marketing
Contrary to much common usage, these two concepts are not synonyms, they are very different.
Creativity is the process of dreaming up something new, while Innovation is the process of making use of the new stuff.
How often has Van Gogh, or Beethoven been accused of being innovative? Just sometimes, when the discussion is about the way an artist wields his palette knife, or the structure of a symphony. Usually they are described as creative, because what they created opened a door that had not been opened before, made connections in a new way.
Make no mistake, creative and innovative need each other, one does the art, the other brings in the benefit. Van Gogh after all died mad and broke, must have been creative without innovative, but his brother recognised the value of his work, and made a buck. He was innovative.
Most artists create something for the intrinsic value, it sounds great, looks good, or feels right, whilst the innovator finds a role for the art to add some monetary or exchange value.
To be creative, you need, according to John Cleese who knows a bit about this stuff, Space, Time, Time, Confidence, and Humour. Yes, I know “Time” got two mentions, to understand why, you will have to listen to Cleese’s presentation, which should not be a problem, in fact to my mind, should be compulsory.
Jun 25, 2012 | Change, Leadership, Operations
Much has been written about the management of change, and it usually focuses on the challenges, acknowledging just how difficult change really is.
When you turn it around, and consider what happens in successful change programs, there is very little management, and a lot of selling.
Leaders lead from the front, demonstrating the behaviors necessary, whilst managers push from behind. Demonstration is the oldest, and still the best form of selling, so when those whose work place, and the processes they operate are subject to being changed seeing those with the decision making power demonstrating the altered behavior makes the change easier.
You do not manage change, you sell it.
You sell it to your employees, shareholders, customers, suppliers, and anyone else who will stand still long enough to listen, and most importantly, believe.
