From complex to profoundly simply – not for dummies

I was chatting with a colleague today about one of my major frustrations with my consultant colleagues. Consultants seem to have a desire to make things that are complex somehow magically simple, or I would say simplistic.  But there is an important difference between ‘dumbing something down’ and pushing through complexity to a point where you can see a profoundly simple solution. A profoundly simple understanding of a complex situation is one where the hard work of comprehending the complexity has been accomplished, and as a result the solution appears.

Here’s the problem. That type of work generally requires a joint effort – it is true knowledge work, because it takes different perspectives, approaches, and thought processes to tackle a truly complex situation. It is rare that a single individual can go off and construct a profoundly simple solution to a complex problem, but individuals can reduce a complex situation to a simplistic set of tasks or steps that lead to a simple solution.  Effectively solving complex problems through collaboration that results in a profoundly simple solution that everyone can execute against is a LOT of work, and it tends to be messy work – not linear, hard to anticipate and structure, and highly iterative as the team works through the complexity.It happens in moments, in flashes, and in intense work marathons. It is unpredictable.  Consultants have a disturbing need box everything into deliverable timeframes, where their people are billable 40 hours a week for a defined period of time.  That’s inconvienent for the reality of highly strategic work.

Just think about what happens when you do it right – you can end up with a well aligned team that understands their reality, not some simplistic version of it, and is able to navigate it correctly. That’s pretty cool.

 

Hyper Local – the New Normal?

In the United States, we have converted from being an economy driven by manufacturing to being a services economy.  Many of the norms developed in the 70s and 80s and implemented in the 90s around business process are dated in today’s service driven world.

We are seeing a gradual shift to what I call a “hyper-local” services economy – a combination of a return to the local market with the power of reach provided by the internet. How this materializes is specific to industries, markets, and individuals.

Take, for example, this recent article in the Denver news about a young couple who bought a local pharmacy. They are in some ways a throw-back to the pharmacist who knew everyone and what was going on in the local lifeblood, but they are uniquely Millenials, positioning to provide hyper-local service in an increasingly bland market, carving a niche for themselves as being more than corporate grey.

I think we will see more and more of this as the “hyper local” services economy finds its footing into today’s market.  And in that term, I don’t mean “local” to be purely geographic. It can be virtual, but it is about an intimate connection with the customer that doesn’t come through personas (yawn) or demographic modeling – it comes from having local, personal connections that only real human beings can materialize. What do you think?

“Older generations…” Hey GenX, that’s You!

Don’t worry, I’m a GenXer too.  I caught a New York Times article today entitled Embracing the Millenials by Tom Agan, where he made the age old claim that “Older generations of workers are sometimes annoyed and perplexed by millennials, many of whom want to take on big projects and responsibilities right off the bat, whereas earlier generations expected to pay their dues first.”  Really, with that sentence, you could replace “perplexed by…..” any generation and you’d have it right. GenXers were entitled, not willing to work hard, expected fast promotions, and to ‘have their cake and eat it too’ by making their own rules about work. Sound familiar?Believe it or not, Baby Boomers were somewhat sneezed at by the “Silent Generation” and the “Greatest Generation” when they came into the workforce too. This is a historic complaint by older generations leveled against younger ones.

Mr. Agan did follow that up with something that is unique to the Millenials: “Millennials are also accustomed to living in a world of vast transparency — tweeting, texting and emailing one another in a nonstop exchange of information and opinions.”  This commitment to transparency is what very well may change the fabric of work as we know it. As he deftly points out, when information can be controlled people can be controlled, and that has been a defining characteristic of managerial principles since the industrial age in America. The Millianals are poised to shatter that paradigm, and new management constructs will have to emerge that can exist effectively within an ever more transparent world.

Sure there will be those who resist, who remain committed to old models of control, who seek to fight the tide. But they will eventually be washed over, it is a question of when, not if.  So what happens then? I see a whole new form of organizational structure emerging, one in which information flows more fluidly throughout the ecosystem, and where checks and double checks happen real time about what “management” is saying. It is the fearless who will win in this construct – those who are willing to speak plainly and truthfully rather than obfuscating in ‘consultant-speak’ or ‘management-speak’.

I, of course, am a GenX offender in that regard – blame my almost 25 years in consulting for that. My only mea culpa is that I recognize it and have some levity towards it as a result. I love where the Millenials are taking us, and where the Millenial mindset, adopted by anyone at any age, can lead.  Give it a try and see what happens.

 

Bring on the hurt – big change isn’t meant to be easy

Is your organization priming itself for a signficant change?  Is there a consultant whispering in your ear that they can make it easy, painless, sure to succeed? Be honest, are you the consultant whispering that? Are you the client who is buying that? Or are you the client who is saying “we need transformational change, but I don’t want anyone to know about it because it would be too disruptive?”

Have you ever gone through a truly transformational change that hasn’t hurt a little bit, caused some disruption personally or professionally?  Even the best changes take some struggle, some soul searching, and some hard work, together with some distraction from the work right in front of you. It is OK if your clients know it, if your employees know it, and if your shareholders know it – be proud of undertaking something bold and hard.

What isn’t OK is if it isn’t clear why and how you are doing it. Set the expectation that it will be hard but that you are committed to seeing it through, and start telling your new narrative every change you get. Anchor on and reinforce the future until it becomes the current reality.  When it gets hard, realize that you are making progress, and if it never gets hard realize that perhaps everyone else is just politely listening to you but not really changing how they work.

In 2020 Millenials will start turning 40 – GenX, are you ready?

It is hard to believe, but it is coming!  Many companies are working on their 2020 visions and goals, but I’ve noticed that it is a lot of late Baby Boomers and solid Gen Xers making the plans. And yet, in 2020, Millenials will start turning 40 – just at the age when they will be coming into their own in their careers, with significant influence on how those plans go forward. As well, they will be the biggest consumers of the products and services that come out of the plans you are making now.  Are you ready for Millenials to turn 40?  Are you working with intention in your planning to make sure your company is ready?

Millenials are different in some important ways.  Over 30% of them don’t choose to get a driver’s license when they come of age. Many of them would prefer a smaller house than their parents. They are spending their time and money on different types of products and services, and have a different modality for integrating work and life. In America, they are the first generation to enter a workplace that is dominated by services, not product or manufacturing. Check out this article from the NYTimes about one father’s experience with understanding how to measure the success of his Millenial son.

What strategies are you putting in place for employees and customers to attract and maintain this up and coming generation’s affiliation to your brand?

Behind the website at Zappos

I recently had the opportunity to go with a client to visit Zappos and see its well publicized culture up close on a tour of their new headquarters in Las Vegas.

It was pretty cool to see a branded culture in action. They are explicit and direct about who they are and why, and they celebrate it in many ways.  The design of the space they share, the way in which they communicate, and the services they provide to employees all speak to the idea of living their core values.  Interestingly, every one of the employees with whom we spoke referenced the core values, but even more, they demonstrated them in the way they answered questions. That’s what it looks and feels like when values are embedded in everything you do – it isn’t a recitation, it is an embodyment.

We had a good debrief from the tour as well. My client is almost 100 years old, and in a fairly serious business.  As one person said, when the worst thing you can do is sell someone the wrong sized shoes, it is OK to be a little irreverent and edgy in your culture. But when the worst thing you can do is leave someone living in poverty at the end of their life, you probably need a branded culture that is a little more serious.  I think she was exactly right. The take-away from Zappos isn’t that everyone should have a wacky and fun culture, it is that there is power in having a well articulated and understood culture – that it gives your people and your customers a deeper understanding of your commitments and your brand promise.

What happens then?  You move product more effectively, and stand out in a commoditized market as having something unique and valuable.

 

Everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth….

I recently referenced the famous D. D. Eisenhower quote on planning with a group of clients: “In preparing for battle, I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable” – to me, the relevant point in a strategy planning session is that people need to be present, engage in the conversation, and build connections to people in the room. Because the most beautiful artifact from the meeting will be close to meaningless once they walk out the door and are faced with the real world.

One of the clients in the meeting offered up a Mike Tyson quote – upon being asked by a reporter about his plan for an upcoming fight, he reportedly said “everyone has a plan, until they get punched in the mouth.”  or something like that….

It is truly a great point – the best plans go out the window once things get very real. The metaphorical punch in the mouth comes in all sorts of ways in business – a budget cut, a key resource leaving, an unhappy client, a non-functioning government that changes regulations and requirements on a political whim – you name it, people deal with it in business every day.  So all the planning work that goes into delivering products and services to internal and external customers is still at the mercy of that punch to the mouth that causes everyone to react and move.

How well you deal with that as a leader, as a leadership team, and as a company is what is really important – more so than the beautiful roadmap you’ve all created. I’d suggest that back to Eisenhower’s point, the process of planning together builds the ties that bind that help you through all sorts of twists and turns, including getting punched in the face.  What happens then?  You are able to stay consistent and steady on direction while adjusting to the new reality.

What’s the value of a CIO?

The role of the CIO continues to be debated – operational? strategic? digital? data? innovative? keeping the lights on?  It is a mish-mash of expectations, skill sets, and desired outcomes.  These days it seems like CIOs are expected to do everything from keeping the lights on for the operations of the business to creating the next new innovation to be competitive and differentiated in the market.  This comes in part from the fact that it wasn’t very long ago that having what we now consider to be operational was actually innovative and differentiated.  The ERP systems of the 90s that companies actually told their customers about because it was SO COOL are now expected to be a part of how you run your business – they are table stakes. So CIOs who made their mark implementing those systems are now saddled with keeping them running in the face of rapid changes in technology, business expectations, customer expectations, and product support.

But one thing remains true – a C-suite level role is generally about a component of the business that is a strategic asset or a strategic differentiator. CIOs became popular in the 1980s and 1990s – prior to that, few companies had a C-level role focused on technology. Did you know that prior to 1990, the majority of companies did not have a CIO role defined?  So it is a young role, just hitting adolescence as a fixture in an organization. And we all know that’s an awkward time of life – full of strange things happening, changes, and growth.  What’s your thought on the role of the CIO in your organization? It is conflicted today?

The WSJ recently had an interesting article on the topic of the CIO, check it out for some good perspective.

Who do you think was the first CIO of a major US corporation, and when was the role assigned?  An interesting little research project.

Transformation? I’m not sure that means what you think it means.

Lately it seems like everything is “transforming” (when it isn’t being “disrupted”).  There’s transformative change, transformation of businesses, and a need to transform or “have a transformation”.  It often sounds very glamorous and exciting. It is also often described to me as being something being done for other people.  As in “the only way we can transform our business is if everyone (else) starts doing things differently.”  It is rare that someone says to me “we have to transform our business and that means I have to start doing things differently.”

That’s where I have a problem. For me, transformative change means that I feel three very conflicting emotions, and they materialize in my stomach (so I guess I could go on a “transformation diet” hmm…)

  1. I feel excitement that gives me butterflies in my stomach
  2. I feel anxiety that makes my stomach do flip flops
  3. I feel a sense of loss that is gut wrenching

If any one of those is missing, it is usually not what I would call transformative. It might be a big change, but it isn’t rocking my world. I have to be willing to own getting myself right with all three of those emotions to step out of my comfort zone and start to do thing differently, and to help the people around me to do thing differently.

Maybe that’s not everyone’s definition, but that’s what I mean when I say I’m working on transformation, and I challenge my clients to think in those terms. I get that it isn’t easy – especially the 3rd one. But transformation should be hard – otherwise it isn’t that big of a deal, right?

At the intersection of Creativity and Management

Somewhere in the world today there are ‘creative types’ chafing under the burden of management processes, who just want time and space to ‘do their thing’. Just down the virtual or real hallway from them is a ‘management type’ who is drowning in frustration with them because of a missed deadline, a failure to follow process, or a need to create a status report on progress that is not following the plan.

These archetypes populate many an article, TED Talk, or best seller on innovation – the thing so many companies say they want, and that so few companies truly foster. As I wrote about earlier this year, many companies say they want creativity, but they have really no interest in the messiness that it brings. They want the neat and tidy version of innovation, which rarely produces groundbreaking results. The yin and the yang of corporate life in the internet economy – freedom or bureaucracy, it is a dualism that cannot be resolved.

And yet, I think that creatives and management types are actually quite co-dependent. In today’s market, we need people who can comfortably move between the two, interpreting, guiding, and providing enough structure to validate budgets and enough freedom to encourage broad thinking. The best companies are seeing a convergence of technology, marketing, and management as they develop new products. This convergence creates a space where people who can conceptualize beautiful things, leverage new media to render their concepts, and by the way know their way around a project plan are the new rock stars – the triple threats as it were.

Take a look around you. Are you recruiting and retaining triple threats? Or are you starving them by forcing them to ‘choose a discipline’? People coming into the job market today aren’t likely to be satisfied with being one or the other. Roles need to be shaped and management processes rethought to create the space for these individuals to thrive. And yes, the creatives need to learn a few new skills themselves. That’s what convergence means – everyone moves.

If you have someone who is a triple threat, figure out how to grow them in all ways. If you are a triple threat, first congratulations, and second, don’t settle for being compartmentalized. You are the first of your kind, and you will have to fight to grow and to establish a place in the new economy.