https://nextforge.com/ Fri, 03 Mar 2023 15:32:40 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6.2 Think of a Meeting as a Process https://nextforge.com/think-of-a-meeting-as-a-process/ https://nextforge.com/think-of-a-meeting-as-a-process/#respond Thu, 02 Feb 2023 18:59:22 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=4115 For years, we heard from our clients about their love-hate relationship with meetings. Meetings are critical not only to our work with others, but they a core to just about every organization’s success. In our research, we found hundreds of very tactical recommendations; but we did not find any overall, structured approach to meetings. This article recommends Thinking of a Meeting as a Process.

The post Think of a Meeting as a Process appeared first on .

]]>

Do you feel like you are in too many meetings? You are not alone.

Whether you are a leader needing to inform your organization about the transformation plan, a facilitator grinding with a cross-functional group to collaborate on an innovative go-to-market process, or a planner tasked to drive prioritization and decide on a quarterly replan, you rely on getting a number of willing (and sometimes unwilling) participants together to work toward agreed upon meeting outcomes leading to business results.  As the bias towards more meetings increases, along with associated concerns, this significant resource expenditure needs to be managed as any other core business process.

Bad meetings don’t have to be a way of life4

The most common improvement opportunities we observe with our clients, across-the-board, are improvement in communications and in meetings.  In the following, we are going to focus on both the quantity and quality of meetings, as we have addressed the importance of communication in a previous post.

While there are literally thousands of articles focusing on a very specific issue or one particular component of meetings, we will focus on helping you think holistically about most types of meetings- the 20% of content covering the 80% of situations.  In order to simplify one of business’ most common tool, we will share our points of view around 1) the contextual stages of a meeting, while thinking of meetings as a process and 2) using four management principles to support the meeting process.  With a focus on these themes, we believe you will be able to optimize the quality and number of meetings.  And, you will begin to be able to manage meetings as you manage processes based on results and cost.  Perhaps you will even apply some of your well-worn techniques for continuous improvement.

Figure 1 | No. of US Meetings everyday 
Source: Lucid Meetings Blog

Long-term Trend of Meetings

Lucid, an organization focused on meeting innovation, estimates at least 60 million meetings every day in the U.S.1 and 2022’s estimate caps a trend

  • 1976: 11 million
  • 2015: 55 million
  • 2020 lockdown: 80+ million
  • 2022: 62 to 80 million
 

Typical Meeting Concerns

Senior managers across a number of industries believe meetings2…

  • keep them from completing their own work (65%)
  • are unproductive and inefficient (71%)
  • come at the expense of deep thinking (64%)

 

Meeting research3 also stacks up against meetings as:

  • unproductive time (30-50% of meeting hours)
  • time to do other work (admitted by 73%)
  • time to daydream (admitted by 90%)
  • run by “untrained” leaders (only 20% are trained)
 

Meetings are a cost to be managed, just like any other core process

Consider a weekly standing meeting of say six employees, each at $60/hour (e.g., assuming an average employee’s unloaded cost of $120K/year).  With some quick math, 6 employees at $60/hour for 50 weeks = $18K each year.  If we invite 4 more employees to the meeting, do we get $12K increase in productivity? 

The illustration above is for one meeting.  How many weekly standing meetings do you have in your department, your division, and your organization as a whole?  What share of total labor cost is associated with meetings, especially for office-based employees?  For an even better assessment, add in the opportunity cost of what these people should, or could, be doing if they were not sitting in meetings.  Ultimately consider the value for all recurring and overlapping meetings across your organization.

What is a meeting?

If we start to unpack Wikipedia’s definition, a meeting is a “gathering of two or more people that has been convened for the purpose of achieving a common goal through verbal interaction.5”  We immediately see a few basic characteristics.  A meeting…

  • Focuses on a common goal
  • Involves some number of people, in real-time
 

And yet, one of the most common issues we hear about and observe are inefficient meetings with unclear outcomes.  With unclear outcomes or key results6, is it surprising we end up with the wrong people, or too many people, in the room?  Often we find that meetings are implemented as a “quick fix” to underlying problems in routine business processes.

Before we get too far into definitions, processes and principles.  Let’s set our guiding star, our precept, our procedural rule…

We only put as much structure and management into a meeting (and its process), as is required to efficiently manage and avoid failure

That said, let’s start by simplifying the lifecycle of a meeting- from initial decision to “have a meeting” through to business results.  We have broken the meeting lifecycle into four stages. (See Figure 2)

At a high-level, a meeting process considers the stages and steps you go through to plan, execute and follow-up on the work accomplished during the meeting.  We also incorporate a decision framework for you to consider the implications of the types of outcomes (e.g., inform, collaborate and decide) and number of participants (e.g., discrete group, working group, and venue-limited) (See Figure 4).  We will begin with the meeting process (See Figure 5) and end with some thoughts on remote meetings.

MEETING AS A PROCESS

Start with the “Why?”

Results!  Every meeting should begin with a crystal-clear focus on the endpoint, and how, with follow-up, meeting deliverables and outcomes will create key results for the organization.

Consider how most people enter a meeting with disparate and competing needs.  We think about this as the “paradox of meetings.”  We want to increase communication from, and to, meeting participants.  While at the same time, we want to reduce meetings, because, if not well considered and composed, can be incredibly inefficient.  Having a common language of Meeting as a Process including, clarity of results, for example, can be a foundational start.

Some of what we are NOT addressing in this post

While we believe there are opportunities for improvement, this post focuses on the 80% of the business meetings we are all familiar with:  The standing daily, weekly, monthly meeting, the “Why am I here?” meeting… 

  • We are not focused specifically on team meetings
  • We are not defining facilitation beyond its importance in creating a Supporting Environment. Certainly, facilitation is critical to achieving results in certain types of team meetings, and there are plenty of books on our and your bookshelves to cover facilitation. 
 

We are not advocating for meetings to share status, except in special cases, as we believe status can be best handled with an asynchronous consent agenda7.

Figure No. 2 | Outline of Meeting Lifecycle in 4 stages

Four stages of a Meeting as a Process thinking 

At a high-level, a meeting process considers the stages and steps you go through to plan, execute and follow-up on the work accomplished during the meeting.  We also incorporate a decision framework (see Figure No. 4) for you to consider the implications of the types of outcomes (e.g., inform, collaborate and decide) and number of participants (e.g., discrete group, working group, and venue-limited).  We will begin with the meeting process and end with some thoughts on remote meetings.

Stage 1: Microassessment

Consider: Do we need a meeting8?  What are the alternatives to a meeting?
For example, can we achieve our results through email, through video to inform, through comments on a draft brief, or through asynchronous voting to decide?  Is it worth the cost?  What are the risks?  Do we need a business case?  Are we proposing a meeting because of a failure in the normal work process?

The Microassessment9 can be as informal or formal as you need to manage the tradeoff of the cost of having the meeting versus the risk of not having a meeting, but should be informed by our guiding star (e.g., a reminder… We only put as much structure and management into a meeting (and its process), as is required to efficiently manage and avoid failure).  Alternatives may range from an informal mental check list or qualitative read on achieving results, up to a formal business case including cost/benefit analysis- particularly for large, geographically distributed set of participants in a multi-day event composed of multiple breakout-meetings.

Figure No. 3 | Decision thread for considering whether to have a meeting or not

We feel this idea of a microassessment is rarely, if ever, considered.  But, if you think of meetings as a process, there are many ways to continuously improve the meeting process.  Starting with more often considering the underlying need/benefits of a meeting.

However, if we do need a meeting, our next stage is to consider what type of meeting do we need to be thinking about, based on meeting outcomes and expected post-meeting organizational results impacting the business.

Stage 2: What type of meeting do we need?

With focus on results, consider “how many” and “who” should attend a meeting to produce one of three meeting outcomes in our perpetual chase for better business results.

  • Inform
    Sharing information through one-way or two-way communication to achieve results from engagement, alignment, training, building relationships, and one-on-one development
  • Collaborate
    Work jointly to solve problems or create a deliverable
  • Decide
    Come to a conclusion after consideration of a defined topic10

Figure No. 4 | Worksheet illustrating key dimensions of each meeting result-type

On the people side of meetings, we believe there are some natural breaks in group-size for each meeting type.  For example, one key research thumb-rule based on Bain’s research and work with clients defines having 7 or less people in a decisioning meeting11.

Use the Figure No. 4 Worksheet to help you consider the profile of your meeting based on meeting results-driven outcomes.  Specific types (e.g., Inform, Collaborate, Decide) and targeted knock-on results, will be best accomplished by a specific group size. 

With an optimal meeting type identified, we are now ready to move to the stage focused on the work of the meeting through a common process.

Stage 3: Common Process

Because of all the one-off solutions and the breadth of meaning of “meeting,” the common process defines the elements common to most meetings.  We believe the common process, the activity of creation to all meeting can be defined as: the “3Cs”: Compose, Conduct and Change (See Common Process, Figure 5)

  • Compose: All work before the meeting by the owner, facilitator and participants
  • Conduct: All work within the meeting to achieve objectives and targeted meeting outcomes.
  • Change: All post-meeting work required to convert meeting outcomes into business results
 

If we push to some basic definitions of the Common Process (e.g., more detail and structure for most meetings) and its 7 descriptive activities: Assess & Prepare (setting expectations and prework); Open (prepare for the meeting journey), Focus (Do work), Plan (Define post-meeting steps); and Operationalize [Meeting] Outcomes (post meeting follow-up) and Achieve Results (post-meeting plan execution).

We have also defined in the following draft a Tactics “Checklist” of sorts to inform some of the activities and key steps which would be considered in Common Process work.  This Tactics Checklist should be refined by meeting type, your organization’s culture, and the specifics of your meeting design.

Figure No. 5 | A worksheet defining the common meeting process

One of the key benefits of a common process is the ability to engage process management and improvement capabilities for both more efficient and effective meetings as measured by business results.

Stage 4: Key Results

Not only should we be constantly thinking about “Why are we here?” outcomes during the meeting, we should be focused on “How we are going to achieve the key result(s)” informed by our work and outputs/deliverables, including next steps (e.g., a post-meeting plan), to achieve impactful, Key Results (e.g., Balanced Scorecard performance measures: financial, customer, internal, innovation and/or learning12).

For recurring meetings, are there changes to work processes and/or their execution that could eliminate the need for a meeting altogether?

   

Beyond the lifecycle stages and common process of meetings, there are key principles which define some process basics (e.g., inputs/outputs, meeting steps) and some contextual and meeting specific attributes (e.g., supporting environment, modality) required to make your Meeting as a Process capability drive organizational performance.

KEY PRINCIPLES13 FOR SUCCESSFUL MEETINGS

So, how do you manage the Meeting as a Process for improved results?  You can start with the following attributes.

Figure No. 6 | Outline of 4 key principles supporting the Meeting Lifecycle

Principle: Inputs & Outputs

Just like a process, you should have clear inputs and outputs for the various meeting steps.  These inputs and outputs to each meeting step should collectively reflect the expectations of the meeting as developed during the Compose stage of the meeting Common Process architecture.

Be sure to sharpen your focus on your inputs and outputs throughout the lifecycle of your meeting.  Specifically, start with a crystal-clear alignment on your meeting outcomes and expected post-meeting key results.  Picking the meeting type, the second meeting lifecycle stage, requires consideration of the number and specific individuals who should be included to do the work during the focus step of the Common Process to achieve the key results (Inform, Collaborate or Decide) your meeting needs to achieve.  Looking to process basics, like stage-gated milestones14, may help here too.

Other inputs considered during Assess and Prepare include, for example, ensuring enough time for participants to prepare15, supporting data and analysis, common assumptions, and relevant decision criteria.

Principle: Supporting Environment

The most common support for your meeting environment is typically referred to as Meeting Hygiene.

Meeting Hygiene (a few starter lists)

In a LinkedIn post, Liz Evenden posited four “Hygiene Factors” for meeting hygiene16.  She shares: “they are obvious, but they’re not effort-free.  They’ll need a little energy and focus to initiate.17” So, let’s start with Ms. Evenden’s Factors.

  • Factor 1: Start and finish on time
 
  • Factor 2: Have an agenda18 *
 
  • Factor 3: Have a skilled person in charge **
 
  • Factor 4: Remove distractions
 

Empathetic Leader19

  • Asks rather than tells
  • Listens rather than speaks
  • Serves rather than commands
  • Cares about people’ concerns
  • Is receptive to feedback
  • Does not overact to people’s questions or concerns
  • Does not interpret concerns as resistance

Looking for more a detailed set of hygiene factors? Billionaire founders typically have a POV on many topics, and meetings appear to be one of them.  Here are two billionaire-founder’s thoughts:

Eight rules for running a great meeting20
Eric Schmidt, Google
   

  1. Every meeting needs a leader **
  2. The meeting needs a clear purpose and structure *
  3. Meetings used for sharing information or brainstorming still need owners
  4. Have a meeting only if it’s necessary
  5. Don’t include more than 8 people
  6. Include only the necessary people and no more
  7. Strictly follow time constraints
  8. Be fully present in the meeting

 

 

 

* **   Indicates a common recommendation among all three examples

If it is your meeting to run, manage the conversation21  
Ray Dalio, Bridgewater Associates

  1. Make it clear who is directing the meeting and whom is the meeting meant to serve **
  2. Be precise in what you are talking about to avoid confusion *
  3. Make clear what type of communication you are going to have in light of the objectives and priorities
  4. Lead the discussion by being assertive and open minded
  5. Navigate between the different levels of the conversation
  6. Watch out for topic slip
  7. Enforce the logic of conversations
  8. Be careful not to lose personal responsibility via group decision making
  9. Utilize the “two-minute rule” to avoid persistent interruptions
  10. Watch out for assertive “fast talkers”
  11. Achieve completion in conversations
  12. Leverage your communication

Notice above, we only found two common recommendations out of lists of 4, 8 and 12 from those who are experts in running meetings.

Based on our experience, here are a few more components of meeting hygiene to consider

  • Participant meeting roles
    Not every meeting needs every role tightly defined, and an individual participant can hold multiple roles (e.g., facilitator and scribe)
    • Leader
    • Facilitator22
    • Timekeeper
    • Scribe
    • Participant
    • SME
    • NO GAWKERS (It is critical to limit your meetings to proactive, productive contributors)
   
  • Meeting notes
    • Capture key themes/decisions; summarize in bullet points
    • Sequence next steps, including who and when
  •  
  • Behavioral ground rules: culturally-driven with best-practice aspirations
    • Self-filtering participation
    • Complement and build
    • Check your phones at the door
    • Self-opt-out (abstention), participants see as low/no value add (nullification)
    • Parking lot to list important topics to be covered at a different time
    • Start on time23
    • Why Am I Talking? (“WAIT”)
   
  • For every hour of meeting, plan on 10 minutes of non-work activities (a design thumb-rule)
   
  • Meeting length24
   

Again, considering our guiding star25, it will be critical for you to consider what meeting hygiene is necessary for your meeting type, your team, your culture, and your preferences.

Psychological Safety

In order for your primary participants to engage and participate, you must ensure a psychologically safe environment26 that will support engagement, sharing of information, sharing of ideas, and, most importantly, sharing of a portion of each participant’s brainpower to help achieve meeting outcomes.

Other Techniques (Meeting “How To” resources)

On the internet, in articles and in published books, you can find thousands of recommendations on the “how to” run, facilitate, and manage meetings.  We encourage you to create and internally publish a custom set of elements which create an appropriate, supportive environment for your organization.

   

A supportive environment should include the basics shared above (e.g., Hygiene, Psychological Safety and other techniques) as customized by you and your organization through a learning environment.  We spent the most time on meeting hygiene, as it provides the most support for the heavy lifting during the meeting.  One of the best tools to aid learning on “what is best” within processes, projects and meetings is an After Action Review (AAR).  Do you regularly conduct after meeting assessments of some type?  You should! AARs will help build and refine a common meeting process.

Principle: Meeting Steps

As we look at each of the 3 Common Process steps (3C’s) of Compose, Conduct, and Change (e.g., Assess & Prepare; Open, Focus, Plan; Operationalize Outcomes & Achieve Results), we can see how the Process Tactics (e.g., Assess and agree on need and actionable [meeting] objectives, goals; Practice Good Meeting Hygiene; Welcome People and Help Them Connect; etc.) inform the Meeting Steps.  And, we can see the Tactics as a starter list relevant to most, but not all, meetings.

It is up to you and your organization to develop the best Tactics Checklist for your organization and your specific needs.  Please consider this Illustration of tactics and prompts when developing your starter-list.

Figure No. 7 | Reinforcement of the roles and relevance of Common Process Tactics

   

Principle: Modality Matters

According to Hooijber and Watkins, “hybrid work means team interactions in which some meetings are in person and other are virtual, but everyone is participating in the same ‘mode.’”27  Hooijber and Watkins are talking about the new reality most organizations are wrestling with- namely, how much face-to-face and how much remote participation is optimal. 

Our experience managing mixed mode-meetings seems to align with research findings- mixed-mode meetings are the least desirable meeting type (e.g., a combination of face-to-face and remote participants).  Hooijber and Watkins also weighed in how mixed-mode meetings raise “the risk of creating two tiers of participation, access and influence.28” In short, the authors found four tests. Passing the tests is required to support the use of mixed-mode meetings over, for example, all remote and the gold-standard of all in-person meeting.  (We have restated the four options in the following list for clarity)

  • If the group has a strong foundation of trust and connection
  • If the mixed-mode would create business value
  • If the remote participants can present as a “powerful presence”
  • In the meeting can build informal connection between the in-person and the remote participants29

   

Meeting as a Process | A worksheet

The following worksheet, including prompts, can be a helpful focusing mechanism to support your consideration of the 3C’s of the high-level Common Process (e.g., Compose, Conduct and Change). The Meeting as a Process should be considered throughout the stages of the meeting lifecycle to achieve not only meeting-objectives-driven outcomes, but also the ultimate driver of the expected business results.

Figure No. 8 | Worksheet with prompts to consider the Principles role by Lifecycle Stage

 

A FEW CLOSING THOUGHTS ON MEETINGS

“Innovation isn’t always a planned activity”
Tim Cook, CEO Apple30

Trevor and Holweg in a recent MITSloan Management Review article identified 2 out of 4 categories (e.g., coordinated group tasks and collaborative creative tasks) where a high level of human interaction is required31.  In short, we will continue to need meetings for certain tasks.

Interestingly Laker, et al32, showed the impact of meeting-free days along 8 individual [performance] dimensions based on their research of 76 companies with more than 1,000 employees each.  Their findings covered between 1 and 5 meeting-free days a week.  Laker, et al, found 3 meeting-free days a week was optimal, where employee ratings showed: Productivity improvement reported up by 73%, Communication reported improved by 61%, and Employee Satisfaction was reported improved by 65%.  Not surprisingly the Laker, et al, article on meeting free days was the second most widely read MITSloan Management Review article for 202233, demonstrating the keen interest most of us have in meetings and meeting management.

We believe managing Meetings as a Process allows you not only to look at effectiveness, but also the efficiency (e.g., direct cost of buns-in-seats and opportunity costs) of Meetings as a Process thinking.  From this perspective, one organizational challenge relates to the question of whether or not to have a meeting: should the default answer be “YES” or “NO”?

Any ideas how you can improve your organization’s approach to meetings?  Please join the discussion…

End Notes

  1. See Elise Keith, “How many meetings are there per day in 2022? (And should you care?)” Published Aug 31, 2022, [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://blog.lucidmeetings.com/blog/how-many-meetings-are-there-per-day-in-2022
  2. See Perlow, et al, “Stop the meeting madness,” Harvard Business Review. Jul-Aug 2017  “We surveyed 182 Senior managers across a number of industries…”
  3. See Rogelberg, “Why meetings go bad (and how to fix them),” Ideacast, Nov 5, 2019 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://hbr.org/podcast/2019/11/why-meetings-go-wrong-and-how-to-fix-them
    Also see Rogelberg’s The Surprising Science of Meetings, NY, NY: Oxford University Press (2019), which informed our thinking along with Professor Rogelberg’s cited and not cited podcasts.  Specifically focus on “Meeting Recommendations” pp 141-147 and “Tools” pp 149-165
  4. See Rogelberg, “Why meetings go bad (and how to fix them),” Ideacast, Nov 5, 2019 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://hbr.org/podcast/2019/11/why-meetings-go-wrong-and-how-to-fix-them
  5. See “’Meeting’ a definition” Wikipedia, [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meeting
  6. We are adding a bit of precision through word choice here, more than might be initially obvious.  We are suggesting “key results” in lieu of goals or objectives.  There is a large following, including your author, who believe there is power in simplicity of planning.  We advocate for Doerr’s OKRs as he defined in Measure What Matters (2018) where Objectives are directional “what” and less specific than the “how” to achieve those objectives through the “metrics” and “targets” of “Key Results.”  And, while we are stretching a bit to apply a longer-term planning concept to meetings, we believe the focus on meeting outcomes and organizational results in support of operations and strategy is central to successful meetings
  7. Consent agenda we are most familiar with typically includes a short (less than one page) note on status (e.g., activity/progress since last meeting, issues or problems the individual would like feedback on or help solving and is reviewed by participants as prep for a standing/progress meeting)
  8. See Sanders, “Do you really need to hold that meeting?” Harvard Business Review, Mar 20, 2015 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://hbr.org/2015/03/do-you-really-need-to-hold-that-meeting
  9. Microassessment could include consideration of alternatives (e.g., non-meeting publish, comment, decide; a process; a project; business as usual) and a decision (e.g, hold a meeting or NOT hold a meeting) .  Other considerations for the Microassessment include high-level requirements, inputs and outputs, business case worksheet, etc.
  10. See Dalio, Principles, NY, NY: Simon & Schuster (2017) “decision making is a two step process: first take in all the relevant information, then decide,” p 188
  11. See Blenko, et al, “Effective decision making and the rule of 7,” Bain.com, Sep 28, 2010 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://www.bain.com/insights/effective-decision-making-and-the-rule-of-7/
  12. See Kaplan and Norton, “The Balanced Scorecard- Measures that drive performance,” Harvard Business Review, Jan-Feb 1992
  13. See Dalio, Principles, NY, NY: Simon & Schuster (2017) “Principles are fundamental truths that serve as the foundations for behavior…” p ix
  14. See Gupta, et al, “Make milestones mater with ‘decision gates,’ stage gates with real teeth,” McKinsey & Company Operations Extra Net, Jun 2017 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/make-milestones-matter-with-decision-gatesstage-gates-with-real-teeth Using a product development project as an example, McKinsey discussed gating product stages, just as we would consider gating (e.g., GO/NO GO) a Meeting as a Process  decision for some types of meetings which, for example, require specific inputs and outputs to be successful
  15. See Umoh, “Why And How Every Company Should Use Amazon’s Six-Page Memo Format,” CNBC, Apr 23, 2018 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/23/what-jeff-bezos-learned-from-requiring-6-page-memos-at-amazon.html  Bezos is quoted in the article “‘Amazonians’ create six-page narrative memos that are read at the beginning of each meeting—kind of like a ‘study hall,'” and, Bezos continues, “[The memo is] supposed to create the context for what will then be a good discussion.”
    Also see Ladd, “Why And How Every Company Should Use Amazon’s Six-Page Memo Format” Forbes Aug 30, 2022 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbescommunicationscouncil/2022/08/30/why-and-how-every-company-should-use-amazons-six-page-memo-format/?sh=3c236430311e “Instead of using PowerPoint, Amazon executives sit around a table and read six-page memos in silence. This strategy allows a company’s executives to discuss the idea and review the details after reading the memo”
  16. See Evenden, “Meeting Hygiene- Clean up you act!,” LinkedIn, Mar 17, 2019 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/meeting-hygiene-clean-up-your-act-liz-evenden/
  17. See Evenden, “Meeting Hygiene- Clean up you act!,” LinkedIn, Mar 17, 2019 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/meeting-hygiene-clean-up-your-act-liz-evenden/
  18. See Rogelberg, et al, “How to create the perfect meeting agenda,” Harvard Business Review, Feb 26, 2020 “Research has actually found little to no relationship between the presence of an agenda and attendee’s evaluation of meeting quality”
  19. See Conley, “Leading with Empathy,” Leaderchat.org, Apr 7, 2022 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://leaderchat.org/2022/04/07/leading-with-empathy/
  20. See Feloni, “Google Chair Eric Schmidt’s 8 Rules for Running a Great Meeting” BusinesInsider.com, Sep 2014 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://www.businessinsider.com/googles-rules-for-a-great-meeting-2014-9
  21. See Dalio, Principles, NY, NY: Simon & Schuster (2017) “4.4 If it is your meeting to run, manage the conversation,” pp 365-368
  22. While we defer to the wide body of knowledge published on facilitation, a couple of examples do come to mind
    > Ensuring engagement of all participants through for example, “calling” on meeting participants
    > Quiet time to capture thoughts on a facilitated prompt, followed by round-robin readout
  23. The behavioral rule of timeousness is particularly critical to remote meeting to minimize “popcorn popping” effect of late-entry notices
  24. We have seen an uptick in the number of organizations that have moved to define an organization standard of 25-30 minute meeting, with the intent to bring more focus and efficiency to meetings.  This shorter meeting time can be complemented by enterprise-wide platforms for pre-read, post-edit and other meeting-adjacent one-way communication of information
  25. Recall our Guiding Star statement at the top of the post: “We only put as much structure and management into a meeting (and its process), as is required to manage the risk of failure”
  26. From Amy Edmondson’s personal website: Psychological Safety is… “a belief that one will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, or mistakes, and that the team is same for interpersonal risk-taking,” [internet], [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://amycedmondson.com/psychological-safety/. Amy Edmonson is a Harvard Business School professor who coined the term “Psychological Safety”
  27. See Hooijber and Watkins, ”When does it make sense to have mixed-mode meetings?” MIT Sloan Management Review, Aug 25, 2021 [internet], [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/when-does-it-make-sense-to-have-mixed-mode-meetings/
  28. See Hooijber and Watkins, ”When does it make sense to have mixed-mode meetings?” MIT Sloan Management Review, Aug 25, 2021 [internet], [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/when-does-it-make-sense-to-have-mixed-mode-meetings/
  29. See Hooijber and Watkins, ”When does it make sense to have mixed-mode meetings?” MIT Sloan Management Review, Aug 25, 2021 [internet], [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/when-does-it-make-sense-to-have-mixed-mode-meetings/
  30. See Trevor & Holweg, “Manage the New Tensions of Hybrid Work” MIT Sloan Management Review, Winter 2023. Focused on the future of work, this is a citation for Tim Cook quote
  31. See Trevor & Holweg, “Manage the New Tensions of Hybrid Work” MIT Sloan Management Review, Winter 2023. The four categories of individual tasks include: individual procedural tasks; focused creative tasks; coordinated group tasks; and collaborative creative tasks with the later 2 requiring social, human interaction to be completed
  32. See Laker, et al, “The Surprising Impact of Meeting-Free Days” MIT Sloan Management Review, Jan 18, 2021. [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-surprising-impact-of-meeting-free-days/
  33. See MacDonald, “The Top MIT SMR Articles of 2022”, MIT Sloan Management Review, Dec 21, 2022 [internet] [cited Jan 19, 2023] Available from https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-top-mit-smr-articles-of-2022/  Most widely read articles, of which “The Surprising Impact of Meeting-Free Days” was ranked number second most popular for 2022.

The post Think of a Meeting as a Process appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/think-of-a-meeting-as-a-process/feed/ 0 How To Adopt Agile Business Practices: A SAFe 5.0 Flyby https://nextforge.com/how-to-adopt-agile-business-practices-a-safe-5-0-flyby/ https://nextforge.com/how-to-adopt-agile-business-practices-a-safe-5-0-flyby/#comments Tue, 05 Jan 2021 18:48:58 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=3863 Determining how to adopt agile business practices is best aided by a comprehensive framework. In SAFe 5.0 Flyby (Part 2) we build on a conceptual foundation of Lean-Agile utilizing 7 group areas to structure and understand more than 100 elements of the scalable, comprehensive SAFe approach. Part 2 of a 2 part series.

The post How To Adopt Agile Business Practices: A SAFe 5.0 Flyby appeared first on .

]]>

The SAFe Roadmap: Showing the initial steps of moving from ad hoc agile to a structured agile framework for an organization
Source: Scaled Agile’s “Download the implementation roadmap” 8.5×11 poster

New frameworks are like climbing a mountain – the larger view encompasses rather than rejects the more restricted view.

Albert Einstein 1

In this second of two articles about “How To Adopt Agile Business Practices” we conduct a SAFe 5.0 Flyby, to provide you a high-level perspective- what we call “clearing the chart”- to dispel some of the SAFe complexity.  A perspective we did not easily find in Scaled Agile’s training and publications.  Paraphrasing Einstein a bit, we are going to provide the mountain-top view of the framework while embracing the more restrictive views- in a flyby. 

Before you read any further… 

You should know all components of Scaled Agile’s SAFe 5.0 are not only shown on the “Big Picture” graphic (Click here to go to the Full SAFe configuration- The Big Picture), where each component (enabler story shown here) has additional information (e.g., definition, description and links) available to everyone- no paywall.  Just hover over any component and you can click down into more detail.

Our point of view for an enterprise, scalable agile methodology is best met by Scaled Agile’s Structured Agile Framework (SAFe).

If you haven’t already done so, you may want to read our opening article focused on an abridged view of Basic Concepts of SAFe’s Lean-Agile methodology.  Click here to read our first article of the series focused on a Lean-Agile mindset.

We broke our point of view into two parts, because the “How To Adopt Agile Business Practices” is so broad and comprehensive.    

  • Part 1 of 2: Basic Concepts, founded in familiar concepts, but with SAFe’s unique spin on both of lean and agile as seen through NextForge’s general management business perspective.
  • Part 2 of 2: Scaled Agile Framework- A SAFe 5.0 Flyby– (this article) gives you a sense of the breadth and depth of coverage, including our perspective on how to think about the extensive number of elements (more than 100 in list form, mapped into 7 groups to ease understanding) of the SAFe framework as a whole- clearing the “Big Picture”- beyond what is covered in some introductory SAFe training courses.

How we think about the SAFe “Big Picture”

The organizing concept of SAFe’s Big Picture can be a bit overwhelming.  It has an entire methodology represented in 8.5 x 11!  And, even if you zoom in, it is helpful to keep in mind the context of the specific element you are researching.

The following is our flyby2 of what we see as seven distinct areas or groups of the SAFe Big Picture’s organizing concept.  We have keyed the groups to letters “A” through “G” in the following graphic.  Note: We are consistent with the SAFe moniker on areas they have named; and the number in the parenthetical indicate the number of sub-components defining the next level of an area.

  1. CORE COMPETENCIES (7)
    These competencies are used in combinations to execute specific configurations
    Note: Lean-Agile Leadership is included in both core competency and foundational groups
  2. FOUNDATION [CONCEPTS and TOOLS] (6)
    Components of this group support all configurations
    Note: Lean-Agile Leadership is included in both core competency and foundational groups
  3. SPANNING PALETTE (8)
    The roles and artifacts in the spanning palette are used in combinations to execute the work of specific teams and configurations

horizonal slices

  1. CONFIGURATION
    The various configurations represent the scaled methodology depending on the scope of the value to be added with ESSENTIAL the smallest, least sophisticated and FULL being all inclusive
    • ESSENTIAL CONFIGURATION (basic building block)
    • LARGE SOLUTION CONFIRGURATION (large + essential)
    • PORTFOLIO CONFIGURATION (portfolio + essential)
    • FULL CONFIGURATION (portfolio + large + essential)

vertical slices

  1. AGILE TEAMS (Roles)*
    Specific roles are relevant to their graphically connected configuration
  2. CONCEPTS*
    These key concepts are relevant to their graphically connected configuration
  3. EVENTS & ARTIFACTS (Process)*
    The structures, artifacts and processes are relevant to their graphically connected configuration

* indicates a grouping and group name defined through NextForge analysis

Want more information in a traditional format?

Scaled Agile, Inc. have pulled together a summary of the narrative available online in a just recently published book (2020).  The book includes descriptions of key concepts and tools supporting the various elements of the framework, including graphical connections back to the “Big Picture,” in 296 pages.

If you are in early stages of considering SAFe, or even if you are certified, we recommend this book as a handy reference to a comprehensive view of SAFe 5.0.

Closing thoughts

Click here to read about the underlying conceptual Lean-Agile framework presented in the first article of this two part series “How To Adopt Agile Business Practices: Basic Concepts.” 

This article presents the framework through a flyby of the details of the comprehensive, scalable framework applicable to any level of agile business practices maturity from ad hoc to enterprise level.  SAFe 5.0 is a great resource to enable your organization to be more agile in “the way we do things around here.”

The following appendix is abridged and is only intended to give you a “flyby” view into the comprehensiveness (more than 100 elements in this list view) of the SAFe framework to complement the SAFe Big Picture seven areas/groups “A” through “G” graphically identified earlier in this point of view.  Many of these components will feel familiar to you, while the advantage of SAFe is they are all integrated into a systemic whole.

APPENDIX

Continuing with our flyby theme, this appendix provides a list based outline of more than 100 elements of the Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe 5.0) viewed in 7 groups based on similar content, artifacts and concepts with occasional, but not consistent levels of description. We have attempted to include in this flyby a listing of all elements shown with the SAFe 5.0 “Big Picture.”

Breaking Down the SAFe 5.0 “Big Picture” (with a few notes here and there)

A. Core Competencies (7 each)
Core competencies are also the components referred to as the “Overview”

strategic

  • A.1. Lean-Agile Leadership (Also a Foundational Element)
    Model desired behaviors; Align mindset, words and actions to Lean-Agile values & principles; Actively lead the change and guide others to the new way of working
  • A.2. Team and technical agility
    High performing, cross-functional agile teams; Business & tech teams build business solutions; Quality business solutions delight customers
  • A.3. Agile product [result/solution] delivery
    Customer-centric product strategy; Develop a cadence, and release on demand; continuously explore, integrate, deploy and innovate
  • A.4. Enterprise solution delivery
    Apply lean engineering to build systems; Coordinate and align the full supply chain; Continually evolve live systems
  • tactical
  • A.5. Lean portfolio management
    Align strategy, funding and execution; Optimize operations across the portfolio; Lightweight governance empowers decentralized decision making
  • A.6. Organizational agility
    Create an enterprise-wide, lean-agile mindset; Lead out business operations; Respond quickly to opportunities and threats
  • A.7. Continuous learning culture
    Everyone in the organization learns and grows together; Exploration and creativity are a part of the organization’s DNA; Continuously improving solutions, services and processes is everybody’s responsibility

B. Foundation (6 each)
Principles, values, mindset, leadership, roles & implementation guidance to drive change

B.1. Lean-Agile Leaders (Also a Core Competency; See Core Competency for more components of a definition)

B.2. Core Values

B.2.1. Alignment

B.2.2. Built-in Quality

B.2.3. Transparency

B.2.4. Program Execution

B.3. Lean-Agile Mindset

B.3.1. Growth mindset

B.3.2. SAFe house of lean

B.3.2.1 The Goal: Value

Achieved through 4 pillars of:

o Respect for people & Culture
o Flow
o Innovation
o Relentless improvement

B3.2.2 Built on upon a Foundation of: Lean-Agile Leadership

B.4. Safe Principles3 (10)

B.4.1. Take an economic view
Deliver early and often; Apply a comprehensive economic framework;
4 Elements 1) Operate within lean budgets and guardrails, 2) Understand economic tradeoffs, 3) leverage suppliers, and 4) sequence jobs for maximum benefit

B.4.2. Apply systems thinking
The solution is a system; The enterprise building the system is a system too; Understand and optimize the full value stream; Only management can change the system

B.4.3. Assume variability; Preserve options
With set-based design with learning points, to winnow options, versus point-based design

B.4.4. Build incrementally with fast, integrated learning cycles
Integration points create knowledge from uncertainty; integration points occur by intent; faster learning through faster cycles (PDCA)

B.4.5. Base milestones on objective evaluation of working systems
Base milestones on objective evidence

B.4.6. Visualize and limit WIP, reduce batch sizes and manage queue lengths
Visualize & limit WIP; Reduce batch size; Manage queue lengths (avoid: longer cycle times, increased risk, increased variability, lower motivation)

B.4.7. Apply cadence; Synchronize with cross-domain planning
Align developmental cadence; Synchronize with cross-domain planning

B.4.8. Unlock intrinsic notification of knowledge workers
Leverage systems thinking; Understand the role of compensation; Create an environment of mutual influence; Provide autonomy with purpose, mission and minimum possible constraints (Pink: autonomy, mastery, purpose)

B.4.9. Decentralize decision-making
Centralize: infrequent, long-lasting, provide significant economies of scale.
Decentralize: frequent, time-critical, requires local information (everything else)

B.4.10. Organize around value
Understand the value flow; Realize value streams with agile teams and trains; Reorganize around value

B.5. Implementation Roadmap (12 steps)

B.5.1. Reaching the Tipping Point

B.5.2. Train Lean-Agile Change Agents

B.5.3. Train Executives, Managers, and Leaders

B.5.4. Create a Lean-Agile Center of Excellence

B.5.5. Identify Value Streams and ARTs

B.5.6. Create the Implementation Plan

B.5.7. Prepare for ART Launch

B.5.8. Train Teams and Launch the ART

B.5.9. Coach ART Execution

B.5.10. Launch More ARTs and Value Streams

B.5.11. Extend to the Portfolio

B.5.12. Accelerate

B.6. SAFe Program Consultants
change agents who combine their technical knowledge of SAFe with an intrinsic motivation to improve the company’s software and systems development processes

C. Spanning Palette (8)
The Spanning Palette contains various roles and artifacts that may apply to a specific team, program, large solution, or portfolio context

C.1. Vision

C.2. Roadmap

C.3. Milestones

C.4. Shared Services

C.5. Community of Practice

C.6. System Team

C.7. Lean UX [user experience]

C.8. Metrics

D. SAFe Configurations (4)

D.1. Essential SAFe
The most basic configuration of the framework and it provides the minimal elements necessary to be successful with SAFe

D.2. Large Solution SAFe
Is for enterprises that are building large and complex solutions, which do not require the constructs of the portfolio level

D.3. Portfolio SAFe
Provides portfolio strategy and investment funding, Agile Portfolio operations, and Lean Governance. Aligns strategy with execution and organizes solution development around the flow of value

D.4. Full SAFe
Represents the most comprehensive configuration. It supports building large, integrated solutions that typically require hundreds of people or more to develop and maintain

E. Agile Teams & Roles (12)

E.1. Agile Team: Members

E.2. Agile Team: Scrum Master

E.3. Agile Team: Product Owner

E.4. Agile Release Train: Release Train Engineer

E.5. Agile Release Train: System Architecture/Engineering

E.6. Agile Release Train: Product Management

E.7. Essential: Business Owners

E.8. Solution Train: Solution Train Engineer

E.9. Solution Train: Solution Architecture/Engineering

E.10. Solution Train: Solution Management

E.11. Epic: Owners

E.12. Enterprise: Architect

F. Concepts

F.1. Kanban

F.2. Scrum

F.3. Team Backlog

F.4. Program Backlog

F.5. Customer Centricity

F.6. Design thinking

F.7. Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE)
is the practice of developing a set of related system models that help define, design, analyze, and document the system under development. These models provide an efficient way to virtually prototype, explore, and communicate system aspects, while significantly reducing or eliminating dependence on traditional documents.

F.8. Set-Based Design (SBD)
is a practice that keeps requirements and design options flexible for as long as possible during the development process. Instead of choosing a single point solution upfront, SBD identifies and simultaneously explores multiple options, eliminating poorer choices over time. It enhances flexibility in the design process by committing to technical solutions only after validating assumptions, which produces better economic results. [Note: SBD pairs nicely with the project management concept of “Progressive Elaboration4” where we will know more then than we know now]

F.9. Solution Backlog

F.10. Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF)

F.11. Strategic themes

F.12. Portfolio Vision

F.13. Portfolio Backlog; Lean Budgets; Guardrails

G. Events and Artifacts (Process)

G.1. Program Increment Objectives

G.2. Program Increment Planning

G.3. Program Increment
[Note: Program Increments are composed of a series of iterations; a typical series kicks off with program increment (PI) planning, followed by 5 iterations including the last iteration of the series designated as  an innovation and planning iteration (IP); the IP iteration serves several functions, including contingency for the Program Increment]

G.4. Iteration Planning

G.5. Iteration Execution (a.k.a. agile sprint)

G.6. Plan, Do, Check, Adjust (PDCA)

G.7. Daily Scrum

• What did you do yesterday?

• What will you do today?

• Are there any impediments in your way?

G.8. Iteration Retrospective

G.9. Feature
a service that fulfills a stakeholder need. Each feature includes a benefit hypothesis and acceptance criteria and is sized or split as necessary to be delivered by a single Agile Release Train (ART) in a Program Increment (PI).

G.10. Capability
a higher-level solution behavior that typically spans multiple ARTs. Capabilities are sized and split into multiple features to facilitate their implementation in a single PI.

G.11. Stories
short descriptions of a small piece of desired functionality, written in the user’s language. Agile Teams implement small, vertical slices of system functionality and are sized so they can be completed in a single Iteration.

primary artifact used to define system behavior in Agile. They are short, simple descriptions of functionality usually told from the user’s perspective and written in their language. Each one is intended to enable the implementation of a small, vertical slice of system behavior that supports incremental development.

provide just enough information for both business and technical people to understand the intent. Details are deferred until the story is ready to be implemented. Through acceptance criteria and acceptance tests, stories get more specific, helping to ensure system quality.

G.12. Enabler
supports the activities needed to extend the Architectural Runway to provide future business functionality

G.13. Weighted Shortest Job First (WSJF)

G.14. Agile Release Train
is a long-lived team of Agile teams, which, along with other stakeholders, incrementally develops, delivers and, where applicable operates, one or more solutions in a value stream.
Creates a continuous delivery pipeline:
“Continuous exploration, Continuous integration, Continuous Deployment” to “Release on demand”

G.15. Built in quality

G.16. DevOps

G.17. Solution and Solution Context

G.18. Capability
higher-level solution (above Feature) behavior that typically spans multiple ARTs. Capabilities are sized and split into multiple features to facilitate their implementation in a single PI

G.19. Solutions Train
the organizational construct used to build large and complex Solutions that require the coordination of multiple Agile Release Trains (ARTs), as well as the contributions of Suppliers

G.20. System Demo and Solution Demo

G.21. Epic
container for a significant Solution development initiative that captures the more substantial investments that occur within a portfolio. Due to their considerable scope and impact, epics require the definition of a Minimum Viable Product (MVP) and approval by Lean Portfolio Management (LPM) before implementation

G.22. Value Stream Coordination
defines how to manage dependencies and exploit the opportunities that exist only in the interconnections between value streams

The content summarized above is sourced from various SAFe 5.0 artifacts including the SAFe website and Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework® (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020).

END NOTES
__________________________

  1. AZ Quotes,  https://www.azquotes.com/quote/533483 [cited 1.3.2021]
  2. Flyby definition “2. a flight of a spacecraft past a celestial body (such as Mars) close enough to obtain scientific data” https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/flyby [internet, cited 12.19.2020]
  3. For more detailed discussion of the 10 SAFe principles see Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework®, (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020) pages 39-61
  4. Progressive elaboration is a project management concept relevant to waterfall and agile type projects defined by the Project Management Institute. See Progressive Elaboration https://www.projectmanagement.com/wikis/295452/Progressive-Elaboration [internet cited 12.19.2020].
    “Progressive elaboration involves continuously improving and detailing a plan as more detailed and specific information and more accurate estimates become available. Progressive elaboration allows a project management team to define work and manage it to a greater level of detail as the project evolves.

    “In agile approaches, progressive elaboration is achieved by short iterations or development cycles with a step of refining the backlog at the beginning of (and sometimes during) an iteration. In iterative projects, rolling wave planning is a common technique of progressive elaboration.

The post How To Adopt Agile Business Practices: A SAFe 5.0 Flyby appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/how-to-adopt-agile-business-practices-a-safe-5-0-flyby/feed/ 1 How To Adopt Agile Business Practices: Basic Concepts https://nextforge.com/how-to-adopt-agile-business-practices-basic-concepts/ https://nextforge.com/how-to-adopt-agile-business-practices-basic-concepts/#comments Tue, 05 Jan 2021 00:15:42 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=3796 Determining how to adopt agile business practices is best aided by a comprehensive framework. We like the scaled agile framework (SAFe) starting with an Lean-Agile mindset (Basic Concepts). Part 1 builds a conceptual foundation for a scalable approach is characterized and supported by more than 100 elements (SAFe 5.0 Flyby). Part 1 of a 2 part series.

The post How To Adopt Agile Business Practices: Basic Concepts appeared first on .

]]>

Graphic illustrates Kotter’s Dual Operating System of a network for flexibility and a hierarchy for efficiency
Source: Scaled Agile’s “SAFe White Paper” 

Systems thinking is a discipline for seeing wholes. It is a framework for seeing interrelationships rather than things, for seeing patterns of change rather than static ‘snapshots.’

Peter Senge, MIT Lecturer and author of The Fifth Discipline1

Continuing, and justified, interest in agile and lean-agile

Since posting our Point of View, “Why Agile Management? Because it is an increasingly VUCA world,” it has become our most read POV.2  So, we followed our experience and our research to focus on a logical next step to better results through business agile- a focus on “How.”  

We take a holistic approach3 to achieving results.  It is one of our guiding principles.4  We considered the “how” of agile’s various methodologies through the lens of the breadth and depth of our general management consulting experience.  We followed agile’s development from the Manifesto for Agile Software Development (c. 2001) to confluence with, for example, more familiar methodologies, including Toyota Production System’s basis for Lean.

For example, a recent McKinsey article explores how the combination of lean and agile “complement each other in ways that increase the impact they generate.”5  The McKinsey authors further posit lean and agile “share a set of [four] foundational objectives,”6 and they demonstrate the strength from different combinations of lean and agile team models are most appropriate for situations of varying “nature of demand” (variable to predictable) and of varying “nature of activity” (repeatable, operational to creative customer facing).7

Our point of view for an enterprise, scalable agile methodology is best met by Scaled Agile’s Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe).

Because the Scaled Agile Framework is so broad and comprehensive, we have broken our point of view for “How to adopt agile business practices” into two abridged parts.  

  • Part 1 of 2: Basic Concepts, (this article) founded in familiar concepts, but with SAFe’s unique spin on both of lean and agile as seen through NextForge’s general management business perspective.
  • Part 2 of 2: Scaled Agile Framework- a SAFe 5 flyby– to give you a sense of the breadth and depth of coverage, including our perspective on how to think about the extensive number of elements (more than 100 in list form mapped into 7 groups to ease understanding) of the SAFe framework as a whole- clearing the “Big Picture”- beyond what is covered in some introductory SAFe training courses.

Why we like the Structured Agile Framework

We like SAFe for a number of reasons.  However, underlying all of these reasons is SAFe’s unique combination of proven management concepts we are all familiar with coupled with the SAFe Framework’s flexibility.  The following begin to illustrate in a bit more detail why we like SAFe’s Structured Agile Framework.

It focuses on results

  • Business Results include: Faster time to market, Increased quality, Increased productivity, Increased employee engagement8
  • Business agility through customer centricity9 at capabilities, program iteration, demo, solution and portfolio level

It is a customizable framework

  • SAFe builds on and incorporates many familiar management concepts. For example, Deming for quality, The Toyota Production System for lean, Kotter for Change and the dual operating system, Kanban and Scrum.
  • SAFe encourages you to use what is necessary out-of-the-box, and to refine and complement concepts and sub-frameworks to fit your culture.
  • The “Big Picture” graphic interface allows you to see the entire picture and easily click down to more detail for better understanding

Its content is constantly improving

  • “Out of the box” artifacts are being refined, revised and updated
  • Organization-specific learning can complement version-based improvements

It incorporates progressive elaboration

  • Cadence sets learning points of progressive elaboration10 (“We know more now than when we started”)
  • Cadence allows efficient periodic reprioritization and reallocation of resources while preserving increments of value delivery

It scales

  • As one of our guiding project and process principles: only add enough structure to manage the risk; activated only the “success pattern” needed for a particular instance of a configuration11
  • The comprehensive tool, artifacts, and processes, from the Enterprise Agile Framework leading in both implementations and considerations, support from ad-hoc to full configuration of business agility.12
  • Established configurations13 depend on the results to be accomplished
    • Essential: Minimal set of roles, events, and artifacts required to continuously deliver business solutions
    • Large: Additional roles, practices, and guidance to build and evolve the worlds largest applications, networks and cyber-physical systems
    • Portfolio: Minimum set of competencies and practices that can fully enable enterprise and division business agility
    • Full: Most comprehensive configuration, including all 7 core competencies needed for business agility

We believe there are a few bedrock concepts SAFe builds on, and we would like to introduce you to them- specifically, SAFe’s view of Lean and Agile.

Introduction to SAFe’s Lean-Agile Mindset

For an organization to be successful with SAFe, the organization must ensure the culture, leaders and managers all have a “lean-agile mindset.”  We are going to take a quick walk around the primary components (the basic concepts) of Lean and Agile integrated in the SAFe framework.

Lean

Lean has been a popular management concept for some time.  With its roots in The Toyota Production system, as a concept it can stand alone14, and, over time, lean has been combined with a number of other popular management concepts.  As a sampler, here are a few titles including lean from my bookshelf: Lean Thinking (Womack, 1996), Lean Six Sigma (George, 2002), and Lean Startup (Ries, 2011).

SAFe considers this “House of Lean” model with the focus on the Goal: “Value in the shortest sustainable lead time”.

The lean goal is supported by four pillars briefly summarized in the following15:  

  • Respect for people and culture– a generative culture in a performance-centric environment
  • Flow– a continuous flow of work supporting incremental value delivery based on constant feedback and adjustment; includes eliminating waste and removing delays of long-lived value streams
  • Innovation– provide the time and space to innovate at all levels; includes gemba- “go see”
  • Relentless improvement– based on a learning organization; includes a systemic perspective

Leadership supports organizational change and scale to complement agile’s team-based process.  Also see our article “Agile Leadership for Organizational Adaptability, At-A-Glance.”

Agile

While there is a direct connection to agile for software development, agile has its background in physical product manufacturing at Fuji, Xerox and Honda16.  Agile for software development extends back to the Agile Manifesto, c. 2001 based in part on a paper discovered by Jeff Sutherland, creator of Agile Manifesto and Scrum, in 1986.

The Business-Agile Leadership Team’s Manifesto, like the Manifesto for Agile Software Development, focuses on minimalist or lean thinking.

Agile Software Development17Agile Business & Leadership
(Working Draft)18
That is, while there is value in the items on the right [in each statement], we value the items on the left more.That is, while there is value in the items on the right [in each statement], we value the items on the left more.
  • Individuals & interactions over processes and tools
  • Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
  • Working software over comprehensive documentation
  • Working solutions/results over bureaucratic rules and control
  • Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
  • Customer engagement over structure and hierarchy
  • Responding to change over following a plan
  • Flexibility over intractable plans

  Sources: See endnotes; NextForge analysis for Agile Business and Leadership

Business Agility Definition, Core Values and Principles

“Business Agility is the ability to compete and thrive in the digital age by quickly responding to market changes and emerging opportunities with innovative business solutions.”19

We believe the “how to” of lean and agile are best illustrated in SAFe’s Core Values and Principles20

Core Values

Alignment

Built-in Quality

Transparency

Program Execution

Principles (See Flyby appendix B.4.1-10 for definitions)

  • Take an economic view
  • Apply systems thinking
  • Assume variability; Preserve options
  • Build incrementally with fast, integrated learning cycles
  • Base milestones on objective evaluation of working systems
  • Visualize and limit WIP, reduce batch sizes and manage queue lengths
  • Apply cadence; Synchronize with cross-domain planning
  • Unlock intrinsic notification of knowledge workers
  • Decentralize decision-making
  • Organize around value

Nothing is perfect

There are some things about the Structured Agile Framework (SAFe 5.0) which give us a pause for concern, including:

  • The SAFe framework is complicated
  • Lumpiness of components of the SAFe 5.0 framework. Some areas of the framework are well defined and tight, with other areas not as immediately clear.  For example, we have only been able to find a definition for Built-in Quality of the 4 Core Values.
  • Mixing of academic, time-proven concepts and research with pop management (e.g., Drucker and Pink; Kotter and Heath Brothers21)
  • Tweaking well-known management frameworks for no apparent reason
    • Shewart’s/Deming’s “Plan-Do-Study (Check)-Act” to “Plan-Do-Check-Adjust”)
    • Agile sprints versus SAFe’s increments
  • Scaling is not intuitive
    • Essential is basic building block and is included in all configurations
    • Large Solution is composed of Essential + Large Solution
    • Portfolio is composed of Essential + Portfolio (does not include Large Solution)
    • Full is composed of all configurations (Essential + Large Solution + Portfolio)
  • Essential’s Agile Release Train is meant to be a continuous process, not a discrete one-off project

Overall, the SAFe framework, like so many we currently use to help us think, manage and lead is rigorous and a formal broad-reaching approach to business solutions small and large.

Next Steps: Getting into the details

SAFe is a scaled agile framework.  It is able to support a range of organizational scopes spanning from ad hoc agile practices to an integrated, continuously improving enterprise-level approach to “the way we do things around here.” 

In this article, we explored the conflation of lean and agile at a conceptual level- providing the bedrock foundational mindset for agile leaders.  In our second of two articles, “How To Adopt Agile Business Practices: SAFe 5.0 Flyby,” we begin to dive into the details, including an introduction into a 7-bucket organizing concept for SAFe (Note: some of the organizing buckets we will share with you are explicit- if you dig deep enough- in the SAFe methodology, and some we created to bring a collectively-exhaustive thinking-wrapper to the framework). 

No matter where you are in your agile thinking, be it “just considering” or “ready to expand penetration enterprise-wide,” we feel SAFe can be a great resource for how to adopt business agile practices.

Click here to continue to see “How to adopt agile business practices” with a flyby of the detail and overall organizing framework which makes up the Structured Agile Framework (SAFe).

The content summarized above is sourced primarily from various SAFe 5.0 artifacts including the SAFe website and Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework® (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020).

END NOTES
__________________________

  1. See Senge, The Fifth Discipline (NY, NY: Doubleday-Currency, 1990) page 68
  2. According to Google Analytics “Why Agile Management? Because it is an increasingly VUCA world” is the most read NextForge point of view for both calendar year 2019 and 2020
  3. See Senge, The Fifth Discipline (NY, NY: Doubleday-Currency, 1990) page 68
  4. See NextForge “Guiding principles” https://nextforge.com/services-of-nextforge-general-management-consultants/ [internet cited 1.3.2021]
  5. De Raedemaeker, et al, “Lean management or agile? The right answer may be both,” McKinsey Operational Practice article, July 14, 2020 [internet cited 1.3.2021]  Beyond the quote, also note two case studies with differing bias of agile and lean systems
  6. De Raedemaeker, et al, “Lean management or agile? The right answer may be both,” McKinsey Operational Practice article, July 14, 2020 [internet cited 1.3.2021]  See four common foundational objectives, Exhibit 1
    1) Connecting strategy, goals, and meaningful purpose,
    2) Discovering better ways of working,
    3) delivering value efficiently to the customer, and
    4) Enabling people to lead and contribute to their fullest potential
  7. De Raedemaeker, et al, “Lean management or agile? The right answer may be both,” McKinsey Operational Practice article, July 14, 2020 [internet cited 1.3.2021]  See Exhibit  3 “Different lean-management and agile team models are suited to different activities.”
  8. For more detail see Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework®, (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020) Fig 2.1, page 13
  9. For more detail see Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework®, (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020) Fig 2.3, page 15
  10. Progressive elaboration is a project management concept relevant to waterfall and agile type projects defined by the Project Management Institute.  See Progressive Elaboration https://www.projectmanagement.com/wikis/295452/Progressive-Elaboration [internet cited 12.19.2020].
    “Progressive elaboration involves continuously improving and detailing a plan as more detailed and specific information and more accurate estimates become available. Progressive elaboration allows a project management team to define work and manage it to a greater level of detail as the project evolves.“In agile approaches, progressive elaboration is achieved by short iterations or development cycles with a step of refining the backlog at the beginning of (and sometimes during) an iteration. In iterative projects, rolling wave planning is a common technique of progressive elaboration.
  11. For more detail see Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework®, (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020) page 20
  12. See “Survey Analysis:  Enterprise Agile Frameworks Maximize Potential for Achieving Agility at Scale,” Gartner, 2018.  EAF’s evaluated include Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe), Large-Scale Scrum (LeSS), Spotify, Disciplined Agile (DA), and Nexus
  13. For more detail on configurations see Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework®, (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020) pages 17 to 20
  14. There are a number of definitions of lean.  From the Lean for Dummies (Sayer et al, 2007) can be as simple as “Eliminate waste, add customer value, and improve performance” (cover) or as expansive as “Lean is a business strategy based on satisfying the customer by delivering quality products and services that are just what the customer needs, when the customer needs them, in the amount required, at the right price, while using minimum materials, equipment, space labor and time” (page 12).  According to Sayer, the principles and practices of lean date back to the late 1980’s (page 19) and the Toyota Production System “TPS is the birthplace of lean” (page 21)
  15. For more detail see Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework®, (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020) pages 26-30.
  16. See Darrell Rigby interview transcript, “Staying Agile Beyond a Crisis,” HBR IdeaCast, Episode 742, May 26, 2020, https://hbr.org/podcast/2020/05/staying-agile-beyond-a-crisis [internet, cited 12.19.2020] “agile did not begin in technology or software development. It began much earlier. Fuji and Xerox and Honda were developing physical products… …Sutherland who co-created the Scrum method and he came across a paper in 1986 called the ‘New, New Product Development Game’ that said, this is the way innovation teams should work. And so, he adapted the methodology to fit software development and it took off very, very quickly.”
  17. See “Manifesto for Agile Software Development,” https://agilemanifesto.org/ [internet, cited 12.19.2020]
  18. Inspired by Rigby, et al, “The Agile C-Suite,” Harvard Business Review, May-June 2020 pages 64-73
  19. See Glossary, Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework®, (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020) page 267
  20. The 10 SAFe core values and principles are cited in various SAFe 5.0 resources including https://www.scaledagileframework.com/posters/.  The letter numeric code corelates with detailed appendix in “How Adopt Business Agile: Structured Agile Framework- A SAFe 5.0 Flyby”
  21. For more example of Scaled Agile’s use of pop business concepts e.g., Heath brothers, see Knaster, et al, SAFe Distilled, Achieving business agility with the scaled agile framework®, (Pearson, Addison-Wesley, 2020) page 73

The post How To Adopt Agile Business Practices: Basic Concepts appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/how-to-adopt-agile-business-practices-basic-concepts/feed/ 1 Getting to Your Next-Normal https://nextforge.com/getting-to-your-next-normal/ https://nextforge.com/getting-to-your-next-normal/#comments Tue, 21 Jul 2020 19:19:26 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2882 Getting to the next-normal requires 3 key, but common, building blocks: a stress-tested strategy, a vision and an adaptive roadmap. And, requires three dynamic capabilities: Agile leadership for organizational adaptability, Scenarios to bound uncertainty, and Supply Chain for operational resilience

The post Getting to Your Next-Normal appeared first on .

]]>

Most likely outcomes, based on survey of executives: “U” shaped recovery— virus is contained (scenario A3, achieve 209Q4 GDP in 2020Q4, light-blue); or “Swoosh” shaped recovery— virus recurs (scenario A1, achieve 2019Q4 GDP in 2023Q1, gray).  The global difference in estimates between the two most popular scenarios with a range as high as $15 trillion to $20 trillion.

Sources:
Survey “Big difference between economic scenarios executives view as most likely,” McKinsey, 5.29.20201
Graphic “Crushing coronavirus uncertainty: The big ‘unlock’ for our economies,” McKinsey, 5.13.20202

 

“Ultimately the virus is going to determine when we can safely reopen.  Not only in general, but in a particular location”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, M. D.
Director of National Institutes of Health’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases3

We are in a novel crisis.  While unique in its speed and breadth of impact, what makes this event so distinctive is the lack of any social, political or economic triggers.  However, this COVID-19 novel-type crisis has been preceded by other novel-type crises, some recent enough and in our lifetimes to draw learnings and insight from.4

  • 1979: Energy crisis
  • 1986-1995: Savings and loan crisis
  • 2000-2002: Dot-com bubble
  • 2007-2009: Subprime mortgage crisis (The Great Recession)
  • 2020-TBD: Coronavirus pandemic

There are a number of academics, former military leaders and management consultants who have recently published a flood of articles including guides on what businesses should do to survive in the short-term and thrive in the long-term.  For example, a diverse group of professors from Harvard Business School all with an interest in crisis leadership, having studied and taught crisis management for years to thousands of executives and MBAs, recently conducted a series of webinars for alumni. During the 5-part series, the Harvard teaching group encouraged attendees to widely share their research, frame-works and approach.  The following provide my simple summary of their recommendations.5

LEADING AND MANAGING IN A CRISIS

What enterprise leadership should do in six steps

  • Establish a critical incident management team and process
  • Assemble the right people from three groups with three distinct perspectives (e.g., a group familiar with company; subject matter experts with unique expertise to understand root-cause of issue; a group who understand core company priorities)
  • Engage in iterative, agile problem-solving process
  • Create conditions for successful agile problem-solving
  • Execute chosen actions, but treat them as tentative and experimental
  • Set reasonable expectations

While survive now (e.g., the immediate and near-term time-horizon objective) was the burning issue for most enterprises during initial shut-down— and remains a constant and conscientious area of focus— most of the academics, consultants and enterprises sharing their advice believe it is time to launch teams to prepare to thrive in the next-normal.  For example, learning from the Great Recession, the companies which aggressively pursued and refined future-plans, increased their market position and total return to shareholders.6

TODAY

No one is certain how long it will take us to get to the next-normal; and the future destination’s environment is also unknowable.  Yet individuals and organizations do not perform well without clarity of purpose, a destination, and understanding the road to get them there.

Leveraging a concept called progressive elaboration,7 we suggest defining mosaic-like visions, which, with more calendar time and more information, become more clear— a more detailed or pixelated image of the future.  This approach requires three dynamic capabilities: Agile leadership for organizational adaptability, Scenarios to bound uncertainty, and Supply Chain for operational resilience (click on these capabilities for an at-a-glance post description of each). These three organizational capabilities combine to inform and support the following critical artifacts to help in getting to your next-normal.

A FEW FOUNDATIONAL BUILDING BLOCKS

1.  You need a stress-tested strategy

According to Dean of the Wharton School, Geoffrey Garrett, “the COVID-19 pandemic will reverse the trends of globalization and urbanization, increasing the distance between countries and among people.8”  Is this thinking baked into your 5 year strategy?  Should it be?

Using scenarios to bound the uncertainty of the future, consider the viability of your strategy— the choices which differentiate your enterprise in the marketplace— as you think through your strategic architecture.  As a quick, illustrative trial, consider the following- starting from the outside-in:

  • What are the implications of COVID on your ultimate consumer, distribution and customers, and employees and supplier/partners… …if it goes longer?  …if geographic breadth expands or contracts?  … if hot spots develop in geographically critical areas of customers, suppliers, or facilities?  …if regulatory, industry norms, and other knock-on effects of COVID occur?
  • What are the implications for… …how you go to market?  …your products and services?  …promotions and sales?  …how you deliver value physically and/or remotely?  …digital transformation?
  • What are the implications for… … your competitors? …their business model(s)? …your business model(s)?  …your supplier’s business model(s)?
  • How will you… …compete in the next-normal?  …assess key competitive risks? …identify competitive opportunities?
  • What changes in needs and wants of your…  …ultimate consumer? …distribution channels and customers?  …value propositions?  …stakeholders?
  • What are the geographic sourcing and lean implications for your supply chain?
  • What are the geographic citing implications, including digital opportunities, for your headquarters, divisions and local plants/offices?
  • Where are the biggest operational… …implications? …changes? …digital opportunities? …risks? …priorities?
  • What changes need to be made to your strategic themes, priorities, and initiatives?
  • What are the key messages to be communicated about… …your north star/purpose? …values and business drivers? …other elements of the Strategy Paksm change?

As you consider the range of implications of long-term (e.g., 5 year +/-) competitive strategy on your enterprise’s resilience, you should think about how the supporting visions define multiple planning horizons.

Key Thought: The impact of exogenous factors are unique to each industry, to each company within industry sector(s), and to each company’s distinctive competitive choices.

2.  You need a vision, a destination, to support your strategy

“There are four areas to focus on: recovering revenue, rebuilding operations, rethinking the organization, and accelerating the adoption of digital solutions,”9 according the Kevin Sneader, global managing partner of McKinsey’s management consulting.  Are these the four, or rather just some among many, drivers of your business to be highlighted in your strategic vision(s)?  How has and will these change over time? For example: What impact will COVID have on your key customers’ perspectives and relationships?

Rally your agile leadership team to create a measurable vision of the future within the boundaries of uncertainty defined by your scenarios— create the visions like mosaics with more precision for each nearer planning horizon.  Innosight, the innovation consultancy co-founded by the late Clay Christensen, describes the approach as Future-Back Strategy, one of four lenses and 10 questions for consideration of innovative learning in uncertain times.10 These interim visions become milestones for your adaptive roadmap, including implications for a multiple option (set-based design) operating model of your enterprise.

Your vision should include consideration of: operational support and requirements, measurable targets, and positioning to define “Where are we going?” within the scenario boundaries.  Critical to the agile leadership team are a number of roles including the agile concept of rapid feedback loops11 necessary to lead and manage volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUVA).12

Key Thought: Keep the progressive elaboration concept in mind when creating your visions across planning horizons.  As environmentally, we don’t know what we don’t know.

3.  You need an adaptive roadmap

“Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?”
“That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,” said the Cat.
“I don’t much care where–” said Alice.
“Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,” said the Cat.
“–so long as I get SOMEWHERE,” Alice added as an explanation.
“Oh, you’re sure to do that,” said the Cat, “if you only walk long enough.”
Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, Chapter 6 13

Unlike Alice, your strategy and vision give your organization a destination.  Characteristics of your next-normal vision may include: faster clock speed for the enterprise; more transparency and more frequent communication; more distributed decision making; increase in remote and digital work; and more sharing from the edge— particularly what customers of our organization need and want.  Consider simultaneously leading and managing through a combination of an efficient hierarchy and an innovative network— a dual operating system.  Execution of your strategic architecture— your strategy and your vision— need to be guided by simple guard rails to convey leadership’s direction and intent.  While vision defines a destination at some level of detail, it should vary by planning horizon and be informed by impactful events in near real-time.  There are many characteristics to consider when thinking “how to” manage, including, for example, agile-at-scale.  All of those characteristics, and more, particular to your organization need to be considered within your overall approach, as defined by your adaptive roadmap.

We believe in customizing roadmaps (e.g., high-level approaches) by conflating how you plan with relevant emerging and proven tools and techniques.  For example, today, we believe agile for the enterprise is best organized through the Structured Agile Framework (SAFe).  You should begin with milestones of multiple time horizon visions bringing strategy into view.  Visions which, like our mosaic metaphor, become more clear with time and information of progressive elaboration.  Visions with their uncertainty bounded by scenarios, yet ensuring the preparation of the foundations of common capabilities to support the breadth of relevant scenarios.  An example of this type of systemic thinking, of combining scenario planning with agile execution, is reflected in this McKinsey article’s Exhibit 3.

 

Source: Barriball, et al, “Jump-starting resilient and reimagined operations,” May 2020, https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/jump-starting-resilient-and-reimagined-operations

Systemic thinking leads us to a number of operational and tactical considerations including our globalized and lean supply chain.  Independent of how Professor Garrett’s prophecy of diminished globalization plays out in your planning, your scenarios and roadmap must consider how lean and concentrated you can afford to run your suppliers and supply chain inventory geographically.  During the “Harvard Business School’s Crisis Management for Leaders” series, Professor Raman, an expert in operations and supply chain, shared an observation that lean concepts had been misunderstood and carried too far— to the point where companies carry no safety stock.  We should not remove all safety stock— particularly if the cost of disruption is very-high (e.g., Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) at hospitals for COVID-19).14 Perhaps a guiding principle for your next-normal supply chain will rhyme with just-in-time and just-in-case to ensure operational resilience.15

Key Thought: There are a broad range of work streams to be considered for inclusion in an adaptive roadmap beyond issue-targeted agile-teams, supply chain team(s) and a next-normal conversion team.  Consider, for example, financial business case, change management and communications to name but a few.16

NEXT STEPS

Have you decided?  Are you ready?

If you haven’t already done so, you need to launch your next-normal team to thrive.  There are a number of approaches17 or combinations thereof, for your consideration.  And, capabilities to support remote collaboration is probably front-and-center to both engage geographically dispersed subject matter experts (SMEs) and high-potential team members still under quarantine or working from home to accommodate governmental requirements or mitigate COVID hot spots.  This organizational muscle is necessary to prepare for the next-normal novel crisis requiring remote collaboration for rapid adaptation— supporting the survive-to-thrive cycle.

Key Thought: Consider how those companies aggressively pursuing an offensive posture during a downturn outperform better on total return to shareholders during recovery and growth phases.  This offensive position historically allows a company to also capitalize on accelerated growth through your successive expansions.18

“Fear is a reaction.  Courage is a decision”
Winston Churchill

 

This article is part of our COVID series— “Getting to Your Next-Normal” – a four-part series originally distributed to clients and colleagues in early June, 2020.

Also see the remainder of the series

 
 

END NOTES

  1. “Big difference between economic scenarios executives view as most likely,” McKinsey, May 29, 2020, https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/coronavirus-leading-through-the-crisis/charting-the-path-to-the-next-normal/big-difference-between-economic-scenarios-executives-view-as-most-likely
  2. “Crushing coronavirus uncertainty: The big ‘unlock’ for our economies,” McKinsey, May 13, 2020, https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/crushing-coronavirus-uncertainty-the-big-unlock-for-our-economies
  3. “Fauci: Virus determines when US can safely reopen,” April 14, 2020, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAilMa0C9u4
  4. Selective US domestic, economic crises, “List of economic crisis,” Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_economic_crises
  5. For more detail see “Summary of Harvard Business School’s Crisis Management for Leaders COVID-19 | 5 Program Series | MY NOTES,” LinkedIn, April 2020, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/summary-harvard-business-schools-crisis-management-leaders-tom-reeder/. Once in the summary, see links to MY NOTES from each of the five programs. Expanding on the “engage in iterative, agile problem solving process,” consider their suggested iterative, learning process:
    0) Establish goals, priorities, and values
    1) Understand the situation
    2) Develop options
    3) Predict outcomes for each option
    4) Choose the best course of action
    5) Execute (repeat, starting with step 0 or step 1)
  6. See “Stronger for longer: How top performers thrive through downturns,” McKinsey December 2019, https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/stronger-for-longer-how-top-performers-thrive-through-downturns where, for example, McKinsey discusses study of 1,000 publicly traded companies in North America and Europe with more than 1 billion dollars in annual revenue. Top quintile of “resilients” in total return to shareholders included 25 point higher EBITDA than nonresilients with differences showing up in recovery/growth period through, for example: 1) faster, more aggressive cost cutting; 2) more aggressive deal makers; 3) more prone (25% versus 18%) to divestitures; and 4) increased optionality by financial deleveraging. Note: in this piece, the ability to take cost out was thought to be more difficult in a coming recession, and other future differences include digital disruption.
    Other articles studying previous economic downturns trend toward similar findings and recommendations. For example, Boston Consulting Group’s “Advantage in Adversity, Winning the next downturn” BCG 2.4.2019, https://www.bcg.com/publications/2019/advantage-in-adversity-winning-next-downturn.aspx where BCG’s research identified high performance companies (14% of whole) in the last four downturns averaged 14% of revenue growth and EBIT margin increase of 7 points more than the 44% of companies that showed losses in both metrics. BCG’s key recommendation was to prepare to Perform or “build resilience” following the Survive or “maintain viability” as both a defensive and an offensive posture. Thrive or “opportunities for growth and competitive advantage“ was their third level.
  7. Progressive Elaboration is “the iterative process of increasing the level of detail in a project management plan as greater amounts of information and more accurate estimates become available.” A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), 5th Edition, (Project Management Institute: Newtown Square, PA: 2013), p 553.
  8. Garrett, “The Post-COVID-19 World Will Be Less Global and Less Urban,” Wharton, May 13, 2020, https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/post-covid-19-world-will-less-global-less-urban/ Professor Garrett, Dean of the Wharton School at University of Pennsylvania, stated “In retrospect, we will come to view the years right before the 2008 financial crisis as ‘peak globalization.’ “ Statistical support for the build-up of globalization and urbanization drivers cited 1980 global trade at less than 40% of World GDP and has now increased to more than 60% today.
  9. Sneader, et al, “From thinking about the next normal to making it work: What to stop, start, and accelerate,” McKinsey, May 15, 2020 https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/leadership/from-thinking-about-the-next-normal-to-making-it-work-what-to-stop-start-and-accelerate McKinsey puts forward 7 recommendation areas including, for example, No. 2 “From lines and silos to networks and teamwork” and No. 3 “From just-in-tune to just-in-time and just-in-case”
  10. See Anthony, et al, “10 Questions for Executives in Uncertain Times,” Innosight Executive Briefing, May 2020, https://www.innosight.com/insight/10-questions-for-executives-in-uncertain-times/ where Anthony suggests 10 questions and 4 lenses (e.g., Future-Back Strategy; Jobs to be Done; Disruptive Innovation; and Encouraging innovation habits) to aid executives in considering theory of frameworks, models and tools to support leadership and management during times of uncertainty. Note: this Innosight article advocates for considering opportunities in times of uncertainty, citing, for example, the iPod launch after the dot-com crash and Adobe’s transformation in the middle of the Great Recession.
  11. See “OODA Loop,” Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop. We refer to OODA when discussing process and agile feedback loops. “OODA is an acronym The OODA loop is the cycle observe–orient–decide–act, developed by military strategist and United States Air Force Colonel John Boyd. Boyd applied the concept to the combat operations process, often at the operational level during military campaigns. It is now also often applied to understand commercial operations and learning processes”
  12. Reeder, “Why Agile Management? Because it is an increasingly VUCA world,” Nextforge Point of View, https://nextforge.com/?p=2449
  13. Third quote on the page from “Book chapters & movie scripts, Alice in Wonderland quotes,” Alice-in-wonderland.net http://www.alice-in-wonderland.net/resources/chapters-script/alice-in-wonderland-quotes/ The quote should be attributed to the original: Dodgson, Charles Lutwidge (pseudonym, Lewis Carroll). Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland (London: Macmillan and Co.1865): Chapter 6 according to Fairbrothers, et al, “Going Somewhere?” Forbes, Nov 29, 2011, https://www.forbes.com/sites/greggfairbrothers/2011/11/29/going-somewhere-2/#f479614431eb. We have included the full quote for a number of reasons, but mostly to demonstrate the value in research versus accepting common group-think of the typical misquote “If you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there” which is widely attributed to Lewis Carroll’s dialogue between Alice and the Cheshire cat
  14. See my summary notes of Program 4: “Case studies on identifying (or not) and managing novel risks,” from Reeder “Summary of Harvard Business School’s Crisis Management for Leaders COVID-19 | 5 Program Series | MY NOTES,” LinkedIn Article, April 14, 2020, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/summary-harvard-business-schools-crisis-management-leaders-tom-reeder/
  15. See Sneader, et al, “From thinking about the next normal to making it work: What to stop, start, and accelerate,” McKinsey, May 15, 2020 https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/leadership/from-thinking-about-the-next-normal-to-making-it-work-what-to-stop-start-and-accelerate McKinsey puts forward 7 recommendation areas including, for example, No. 2 “From lines and silos to networks and teamwork” and No. 3 “From just-in-tune to just-in-time and just-in-case”
  16. Consider the section entitled “Integrate planning and execution of all components: ‘One Approach Map’,“ Reeder, “Results’ Catalyst— Leading and Managing Change,” NextForge Point of View article, https://nextforge.com/?p=2612
  17. For example, McChrystal’s Team of Teams; McKinsey’s overview of militaristic structure including four common roles and activities (e.g., insights team, plan-ahead team, operations team, and communications team; see Atsmon, et al, “Lessons from the generals: Decisive action amid the chaos of crisis,” McKinsey, May 2020, https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/lessons-from-the-generals-decisive-action-amid-the-chaos-of-crisis); or Boston Consulting Group’s “Two Crisis Office for Steering and Acting on Scenarios” Exhibit 4, “How Scenarios can help companies win the COVID-19 battle,” BCG Henderson Institute, April 23, 2020, https://www.bcg.com/publications/2020/win-covid-19-battle-with-scenarios.aspx
  18. See “Stronger for longer: How top performers thrive through downturns,” McKinsey, December 2019, https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/stronger-for-longer-how-top-performers-thrive-through-downturns, in particular see Exhibit 2 where resilient firms outperformed the S&P 500 on total return to shareholders, not only during recovery phase, but continued to build on its lead during growth phase.

The post Getting to Your Next-Normal appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/getting-to-your-next-normal/feed/ 3 Supply Chain for Operational Resilience, At-A-Glance https://nextforge.com/supply-chain-for-operational-resilience-at-a-glance/ https://nextforge.com/supply-chain-for-operational-resilience-at-a-glance/#comments Mon, 08 Jun 2020 22:19:43 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2850 Supply Chain, along with Agile Leadership and Scenarios, is 1 of 3 COVID/crisis-era capabilities supporting the path "Getting to your next-normal." This at-a-glance article quickly outlines key elements to consider for supply chain, with focus on building resilience through assessment and general operations

The post Supply Chain for Operational Resilience, At-A-Glance appeared first on .

]]>

Photo image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

In our previous supply chain strategy work, we have used a constellation metaphor for the end-to-end supply chain, with each supply chain node (star in the constellation) providing value to the supply chain.  The supply chain (constellation) should be designed to easily flex to alternate combinations of value, should one branch, or value node, of the supply chain be disrupted.

“Nearly 75% of companies report supply chain disruptions in some capacity due to Coronovirus”1 

From Bain’s Management Tools Survey “Supply Chain Management synchronizes the efforts of all parties— suppliers, manufacturers, distributors, dealers, customers, and so on— involved in meeting a customer’s needs.”2

The direct supply chain implications and knock-on effects3 of COVID-19 lock-down are as unknown today as the characteristics of the disease itself.4  The implications of blind adherence to minimization of waste of excess inventory (e.g., one of 8 muda’s, or types of waste5), a goal of Toyota Production System and Lean Manufacturing, may be at least partially to blame for the lack of Personal Protection Equipment inventory by hospitals in particular and the healthcare system in general.6

The following are a number of topic areas for supply chain and operational consideration as you define your next-normal strategy, vision and roadmap.

  

BUILD RESILIENCE: UNDERSTAND SUPPLY CHAIN CAPABILITIES

  • Consider the implications of trends and scenarios (e.g., health, geographic, political, technology, innovation, disruption, competitor demands, other industry sectors for competing for value of supplier node, etc.)
  • Consider the constellation, value nodes, sub-tier suppliers, supplier muscle and resilience of your supply chain; For example, Toyota does not know its suppliers below tier 2, and there are many tier 4 suppliers7
  • Consider “Just in Time + Just in Case8 (safety stock) inventory”

     

BUILD RESILIENCE: SUPPLY CHAIN9

  • Review asset strategy including geographic footprint and concentration risks
  • Transform for agility (e.g., modularity & workforce upscaling)
  • Build robust supply chain function

  

BUILD RESILIENCE: GENERAL OPERATIONS10

  • End-to-end digitization (e.g., customer experience, workforce productivity, flexibility)
  • Transparency (e.g., spend, cost structure, strategic initiatives mapping)
  • Future of work (e.g., digital comms and collaboration)
  • Durable operations competitive advantage

  

DEFINE IMPLICATIONS NEXT-NORMAL STRATEGY ON SUPPLY CHAIN ASSETS AND OPERATIONS

  • Clarify and communicate leader’s intent
  • Push decision making downstream to increase speed of decision making and prevalence of feedback loops (e.g., Observe, Orient, Decide, Act (OODA))
  • Segment, lead and manage your supply chain
  • Define trigger events

  

Screen shot of HBS Program 4: Supply Chain11 

Key takeaway: For lack of thousands of dollars of chemical inventory, Ford lost nearly $ 400MM in profit

Key Thought: While Supply Chain is a function and discipline into itself, leaders must understand enough about the immediate and next-normal supply chain implications for organizational muscle and operational resilience required to thrive across the range of multiple time-horizons, future and next-normal scenarios.

 

This article is part of our COVID series— “Getting to Your Next-Normal” – a four-part series originally distributed to clients and colleagues in early June, 2020.

Also see the remainder of the series

END NOTES
  1. Spiske, “75% of companies see supply chain disruptions due to Coronavirus,” Supply and Demand Executive, April 14, 2020 https://www.sdcexec.com/transportation/press-release/21128379/institute-for-supply-management-ism-75-of-companies-see-supply-chain-disruptions-due-to-coronavirus
  2. See “Supply Chain Management,” Bain & Company Management Tools, https://www.bain.com/insights/management-tools-supply-chain-management/
  3. For example and implication, see Haag, “New Threat to New York City: Commercial Rent Payments Plummet,” New York Times, May 21, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/21/nyregion/commercial-rent-NYC-coronavirus.html, sub-headline: “One landlord reported that 80 percent of retail tenants missed rent at the start of the month. The drop in commercial rent payments could imperil property tax collections that pay for city services”
  4. For example, MIS-C in children. See Wachtell “My Son Survived Terrifying Covid-19 Complications”, New York Times, May 21, 2020, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/21/opinion/mis-c-coronavirus-children.html for a personal perspective of emerging COVID disease presentation and implications in children and young adults.
  5. See “Toyota Production System,” Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toyota_Production_System
  6. See Professor Raman’s (Harvard Business School) comments citing several cases where carrying too little inventory, at a minor cost, had significant impact on business performance, including reference to COVID-19 Personal Protection Equipment. During the program, Professor Raman mentioned, while being a proponent of Toyota Production System, Lean had been misunderstood by blindly following minimal inventory management with little understanding of resilience of multiple tier suppliers and value of safety stock. From, Reeder, “MY NOTES to Harvard Business School’s Crisis Management for Leaders (4 of 5) SUPPLY CHAIN,“ https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/my-notes-harvard-business-schools-crisis-management-leaders-reeder-1e/
  7. See Reeder, “MY NOTES to Harvard Business School’s Crisis Management for Leaders (4 of 5) SUPPLY CHAIN,“ LinkedIn Article, https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/my-notes-harvard-business-schools-crisis-management-leaders-reeder-1e/
  8. Sneader, et al, “From thinking about the next normal to making it work: What to stop, start, and accelerate,” McKinsey, May 15, 2020 https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/leadership/from-thinking-about-the-next-normal-to-making-it-work-what-to-stop-start-and-accelerate McKinsey puts forward 7 recommendation areas including, for example, No. 2 “From lines and silos to networks and teamwork” and No. 3 “From just-in-tune to just-in-time and just-in-case”
  9. Barriball, et al, “Jump-starting resilient and reimagined operations,” McKinsey, May 2020, https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/jump-starting-resilient-and-reimagined-operations
  10. Barriball, et al, “Jump-starting resilient and reimagined operations,” McKinsey, May 2020, https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/jump-starting-resilient-and-reimagined-operations
  11. “Crisis Management for Leaders” (5 program series), Harvard Business School Webinars (3.24 to 4.9.2020), presented to more than 1,000 alumni in each evening session at 5:30 pm ET via Zoom

The post Supply Chain for Operational Resilience, At-A-Glance appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/supply-chain-for-operational-resilience-at-a-glance/feed/ 4 Agile Leadership for Organizational Adaptability, At-A-Glance https://nextforge.com/agile-leadership-for-organizational-adaptability-at-a-glance/ https://nextforge.com/agile-leadership-for-organizational-adaptability-at-a-glance/#comments Mon, 08 Jun 2020 22:19:01 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2736 Agile Leadership, along with Scenarios and Supply Chain, is 1 of 3 COVID/crisis-era capabilities supporting the path "Getting to your next-normal." This at-a-glance article quickly outlines key elements to consider for Agile Leadership, with focus on direction and business agile as an organizing concept

The post Agile Leadership for Organizational Adaptability, At-A-Glance appeared first on .

]]>

SAFe Portfolio Poster
https://www.scaledagileframework.com/posters/

“Agile requires core strength… ability to change focus quickly… extreme flexibility and accompanying range of motion… knowing where you want to go… and, NOT pushing oneself beyond one’s physical or mental limits”1

Jennifer Jordan, Professor of Leadership and OB, former dancer

As you would imagine, changing the traditional hierarchical operations for a large enterprise to be more Business-Agile and faster, is a complex proposition.  While not every element of every methodology is necessary, a robust methodology is necessary as a base.  With nearly 20 years of foundational experience in software development, Agile is returning to its innovation roots2 to meet the next level of Business-Agile requirements.

In the following sections we briefly touch on some of the high points of Business-Agile.

  

AGILE REQUIRES A NORTH STAR

Strategy and vision are essential3 to guiding all the decisions and managing all the knock-on effects of a Business-Agile organization and transformation.  For example, consider McChrystal Group’s four principles of organizational agility,4 beginning with “a compelling goal”— the clarity of its North Star.

  1. The network has a compelling goal
  2. The network comprises small groups
  3. The groups have an action orientation
  4. The network is the sum of the small teams

  

AGILE GROWTH ORIGINS IN TECH, ARE NOW IN BUSINESS

Business-Agile does not replace traditional operations, but complements those operations which need to be more innovative and faster.5  Agile operations in this sense are similar to Kotter’s dual operating system of traditional hierarchy and dynamic networks— both have their advantages (efficiency and flexibility respectively) and both are necessary.6

The Business-Agile Leadership Team’s Manifesto7 like the Manifesto for Agile Software Development8  focuses on minimalist or lean thinking.

 Agile Software Development Agile Business and Leadership (DRAFT)9
  • Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
  • Working software over comprehensive documentation
  • Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
  • Responding to change over following a plan
  • Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
  • Working solutions/results over bureaucratic rules and control
  • Customer engagement over structure and hierarchy
  • Flexibility over intractable plans
That is, while there is value in the items on the right [in each statement], we value the items on the left more.That is, while there is value in the items on the right [in each statement], we value the items on the left more.

  

AGILE AT SCALE

SAFe is the structured agile framework, a methodology, providing an approach to agile from the daily developer scrum to the Business-Agile portfolio of strategic initiatives (a partial poster illustrates the portfolio process in the header graphic for this article).  “The Scaled Agile Framework (SAFe) is an online knowledge base of proven, integrated principles, practices and competencies to implement Lean, Agile and DevOps at scale.”10

  

AGILE IS ORGANIZATION

In the March-April 2018 edition of the Harvard Business Review, ING, the Dutch financial services company shared their Business-Agile transformation experience with the world.  One of the article’s highlights was the scalable structure, similar to a matrix structure, where ING organizes its workforce by domain (tribe— a collection of squads), customer need (squad— ≤ 9 cross-functional team, self-steering individuals) and function (chapter— functional expertise headed by a chapter lead).11

  

AGILE REQUIRES AN AGILE LEADERSHIP SUITE

Executives of Business-Agile organizations require their Business-Agile Leadership Team to balance multiple roles.  In addition to their corporate responsibilities, the executives must build and run the Business-Agile operating system.  However, while the executives need to be aware of the importance of the roles, ceremonies and artifacts, the executives are not accountable for the details.  The Business-Agile Leadership Team is, for example, accountable for setting direction and guardrails in simple language. At a minimum, the Business Agile Leadership Team includes the CEO and a sub-set of the company’s executive committee.12  As with any strategic initiative, leadership commitment defines the success of not only the initiatives, but, in this case, also the effectiveness of the organization’s Business-Agility.

  

AGILE IS FLEXIBLE ENOUGH TO ADDRESS YOUR UNIQUE REQUIREMENTS

Each industry has its own vocabulary and peculiarities, just as each competitor within the industry has their own culture, technology infrastructure and set of strategically competitive choices.  Taming the volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA) at increasing speed is going to be a difficult undertaking. Beginning mastery of VUCA is probably best started slowly and grown organically. Absent a big-bang approach to gain individual employee engagement, to embed model behaviors and to ensure key agile skills and abilities, the targeted outcome of Business-Agile is to achieve maximum customer value and increase productivity.

  

Key Thought: Business Agile is a lot like athletics.  It requires flexibility within a set of rules, applied in a competitive way to produce results, led by an executive, and coached by a manager.

  

This article is part of our COVID series— “Getting to Your Next-Normal” – a four-part series originally distributed to clients and colleagues in early June, 2020.

Also see the remainder of the series

  

END NOTES

  1. See Jordan, “Lessons in Agility from a Dancer Turned Professor,” Harvard Business Review, April 6, 2020, https://hbr.org/2020/04/lessons-in-agility-from-a-dancer-turned-professor
  2. See Darrell Rigby interview transcript, “Staying Agile Beyond a Crisis,” HBR IdeaCast, Episode 742, May 26, 2020, https://hbr.org/podcast/2020/05/staying-agile-beyond-a-crisis “agile did not begin in technology or software development. It began much earlier. Fuji and Xerox and Honda were developing physical products… …Sutherland who co-created the Scrum method and he came across a paper in 1986 called the ‘New, New Product Development Game’ that said, this is the way innovation teams should work. And so, he adapted the methodology to fit software development and it took off very, very quickly.”
  3. See Aghina, et al, “Enterprise agility: Buzz or business impact,” McKinsey, March 2020 https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/enterprise-agility-buzz-or-business-impact
  4. See Denning, “Why organization agility is key to defeating the Coronavirus,” Forbes, April 5, 2020, https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2020/04/05/why-organizational-agility-is-key-to-defeating-the-coronavirus/
  5. See Rigby, et al, “The Agile C-Suite,” Harvard Business Review, May-June 2020, pps 64-73
  6. See Kotter, “Accelerate,” Harvard Business Review, November 2012 with particular attention to the sidebar headed “Two Structures, One Organization.”
  7. See Rigby, et al, “The Agile C-Suite,” Harvard Business Review, May-June 2020 pps 64-73
  8. From “Manifesto for agile software development,” https://agilemanifesto.org/
  9. Inspired by Rigby, et al, “The Agile C-Suite,” Harvard Business Review, May-June 2020
  10. SAFe’s definition from “SAFe 5.0 White Paper,” Scaled Agile, Inc., December 2019, https://www.scaledagileframework.com/safe-5-0-white-paper/, page 3. Also see “Agile at Scale,” Harvard Business Review, May-June 2018
  11. See ING’s story of business agile transformation “One Bank’s Agile Team Experiment,” Harvard Business Review, March-April 2018, pps 59-61
  12. See Rigby, et al, “The Agile C-Suite,” Harvard Business Review, May-June 2020

The post Agile Leadership for Organizational Adaptability, At-A-Glance appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/agile-leadership-for-organizational-adaptability-at-a-glance/feed/ 3 Scenarios to Bound Uncertainty, At-A-Glance https://nextforge.com/scenarios-to-bound-uncertainty-at-a-glance/ https://nextforge.com/scenarios-to-bound-uncertainty-at-a-glance/#comments Mon, 08 Jun 2020 22:18:01 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2801 Scenarios, along with Agile Leadership and Supply Chain, is 1 of 3 COVID/crisis-era capabilities supporting the path "Getting to your next-normal." This at-a-glance article quickly outlines key elements to consider when leading within a highly uncertain environment.

The post Scenarios to Bound Uncertainty, At-A-Glance appeared first on .

]]>

Parts As Yet Unknown “A new map of North America shewing its principal divisions, chief cities, townes, rivers, mountains,” Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/resource/g3300.ct003990/?r=-0.206,-0.047,1.396,0.482,0

“Scenarios are well crafted narratives about the future that tell very different stories about what might happen… …the aim is to stress test your current strategy and make sure your plans contain enough flexibility that you will win no matter what the future brings”1

Paul Schoemaker, Senior Fellow and Former Research Director, Wharton’s Mack Institute

From Bain’s periodic management tools survey summary, “Scenario and Contingency Planning allows management to pressure-test plans and forecasts, and equips the company to handle the unexpected.”2   For COVID-19, key issues could include: Crisis Length, Recovery Time, Sales Impact, Social Distancing Impact, Supply Scarcity, Workforce Retention, and Expense,3 while also considering Customer Expectations and Supplier Offerings.

Each combination of industry, company, location and individual workers’ situation is unique, but we can use relevant dimensions to create plausible scenarios to bound the uncertainty we cannot know.  Scenario planning in our experience is a bit of art and science, as analysis can quickly get out of hand through, for example, too many scenarios.  The following illustrates a number of key analyses which we believe will help you pressure-test your strategy and vision as you work toward your next-normal environment.

  

AN APPROACH TO SCENARIO PLANNING

From Schoemaker, “Scenario Planning: A tool for strategic thinking,” MIT SMR, Winter 1995

Schoemaker’s Figure 2 graphic generally aligns with an approach we have used successfully with a client.  So, the following steps include our summary of each step as an illustration of the five steps or building blocks of Schoemaker’s scenario model.

 

Drivers of Change— focus on scope, timing and stakeholders to identify what are most important to our strategy and vision.

Basic Trends— are relevant to the drivers, external and generally certain.  Said another way, trends carrying only marginal uncertainty.

Key Uncertainties— allow us to capture and range environmental factors whose uncertainty is high as well as exhibiting high potential consequences.

Rules of Interaction— consider the assumptions, interdependencies, and inferences between trends and uncertain environmental factors.

Multiple Scenarios— we typically pair factors with high uncertainty and high impact at both ends of their uncertainty continuum.  This pairing allows creation of a 2×2 matrix proving 4 potential scenarios.  The quality of the pairing is where the art and science come together.  See graphic titled “High Impact and High Uncertain Dimensions”

 

Source: NextForge analysis

COVID SCENARIOS DEPEND ON THE VIRUS

For example, Boston Consulting Group believes it will take 24 months to develop and deploy a working vaccine, and they breakdown the COVID impact into three phases (flatten, fight and future) considering:4

  • Disease progression
  • Healthcare system capacity
  • Government policies and stimulus
  • Business engagement, response, and degree of reopening
  • Public engagement and response
      

All of these factors impact not only consumers, companies and industries, but also impact each constituencies’ confidence to drive demand.  In this same article, BCG posits in some geographies, there will be new episodes of COVID disease growth leading to repeated lock-down mandates.

 

SCENARIOS DEPEND ON TYPE OF INDUSTRY

For example, Bain has defined several business types (e.g., Customer-facing Businesses, Manufacturing Plants, Warehouses and Distribution Centers, and Offices) each with a unique fingerprint of characteristics:5

  • 6 Worker risk factors

Possible mitigating action areas

  • Personal health and safety
  • Physical workspace
  • Staffing and attendance
  • HR policies
  • Travel policies
  • External interaction
  
SCENARIOS DEPEND ON GEOGRAPHY

Bain’s iterative framework for work-site ramp-up addresses the uncertainty of a complex number of factors.  There are any number of approaches to each level of uncertainty (e.g., simple, complicated, complex and chaotic), the advance, retreat, adapt, and repeat approach is representative of the chaotic environment we find ourselves while in this COVID-19 world.6

Source: Bain & Company— “Back to Work” Fig 11: Advance; Retreat; Adapt; Repeat7

SCENARIOS: AT THE INTERSECTION OF ENVIRONMENT AND EXECUTION

From Ramirez, et al, “Using Scenario Planning to Reshape Strategy” MITSMR, Summer 2017 https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/using-scenario-planning-to-reshape-strategy/

Just a few comments about this MIT scenario graphic.  We go to all the work of creating scenarios to test our strategic and operational resilience.  We want to consider the implications of uncertainty at the boundaries of operations, and we want to understand if we have enough organizational resilience to endure plus enough organizational muscle to adapt to a range of possible futures.  Another supportive tool is building in action triggers as the certainty of a given scenario grows or uncertainty shifts.

We discuss scenario planning as a complement to Agile Business including, for example, Shell’s scenario layers (global to local)8  in our “Why Agile Management? Because it is an increasingly VUCA world” (See the section headed “Beyond Agile— Scenario Planning”).  Also in this article, we introduce the Cynefin Framework (See table “Cynefin Framework— From Several Perspectives”) giving a range of four categories of uncertainty from “simple” to “chaotic” including management approaches associated with each category/domain.

Key Thought:  General Eisenhower is often quoted “Plans are worthless, but planning is everything.”9  Scenario planning for pressure-testing strategy is like that— you may not need it, but when the worst hits, you know you are ready.

 

This article is part of our COVID series— “Getting to Your Next-Normal” – a four-part series originally distributed to clients and colleagues in early June, 2020.

Also see the remainder of the series

    

END NOTES

  1.  Schoemaker, “How to Prepare for the Unexpected,” Inc., https://www.inc.com/paul-j-h-schoemaker/scenario-planning-prepare-for-unexpected.html
  2. See “Scenario and Contingency Planning,” Bain & Company Management Tools, https://www.bain.com/insights/management-tools-scenario-and-contingency-planning/ Also consider: time frame; assumptions; refresh based on company and market activity/trends
  3. Barry, “Turn What-If to What-Now: The importance of Scenario Analysis,” https://articles.bplans.com/turn-what-if-to-what-now-with-scenario-analysis/
  4. Gjaja, et al, “COVID-19: Win the fight, win the future,” Boston Consulting Group, https://www.bcg.com/en-us/publications/2020/covid-scenario-planning-winning-the-future-series.aspx
  5. Saenz, et al, “Back to work,” Bain & Company, May 2020, https://www.bain.com/insights/covid-19-back-to-work-advance-retreat-adapt-repeat/
  6. See Reeder, “Why Agile Management? Because it is an increasingly VUCA world,” Nextforge Point of View, https://nextforge.com/?p=2449. In particular see the table titled “Cynefin Framework— from several perspectives” where various management approaches are mapped to each of the four domains of uncertainty
  7. Saenz,et al, “Back to Work,” Bain & Company, 2020 https://www.bain.com/insights/covid-19-back-to-work-advance-retreat-adapt-repeat/ Note: This approach is similar to management approaches necessary in the Complex and Chaotic domains of the Cynefin Framework (For more detailed description see table “Cynefin Framework” in Reeder, “Why Agile Management? Because it is an increasingly VUCA world,” NextForge, https://nextforge.com/?p=2449)
  8. See “Three Decades of Scenario Planning in Shell,” California Management Review, Fall 2005, https://www.scribd.com/document/122417705/Three-Decades-of-Scenario-Planning-in-Shell-California-Management-Review-48-1-2005
  9. “Dwight D. Eisenhower” https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower Quote of “Plans are worthless, but planning is everything,” from a speech to the National Defense Executive Reserve Conference in Washington, D.C. (November 14, 1957); in Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1957, National Archives and Records Service, Government Printing Office, p. 818
 

The post Scenarios to Bound Uncertainty, At-A-Glance appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/scenarios-to-bound-uncertainty-at-a-glance/feed/ 3 Results’ Catalyst- Leading and Managing Change https://nextforge.com/results-catalyst-leading-and-managing-change/ https://nextforge.com/results-catalyst-leading-and-managing-change/#comments Wed, 15 Aug 2018 19:14:23 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2612 Leading and managing change can successfully catalyze results, but it requires an integrated approach including: 1) support of individual change; 2) support of organizational change; 3) nimble planning and execution; and, 4) relentless integration

The post Results’ Catalyst- Leading and Managing Change appeared first on .

]]>

Change happens one person at a time
Ghandi

We agree with Ghandi. And, aggregating those individuals toward common and integrated goals is anything but easy.  Enterprise level change is hard and complex.

Shortcomings of Enterprise Change Management

The success rate of implementing change to achieve business objectives is dismal.  For years Professor Kotter, based on his research, has been talking about the accelerating pace of change and a 70% failure rate of change in business 1.  The following independently support that range of implementation failure.

  • According to Boston Consulting Group, 85% of companies have undertaken a transformation during the last decade; That same research found nearly 75% of those transformations fail to improve business performance 2.
  • Also, from PricewaterhouseCoopers research on M&A, “two out of three acquisitions destroy value rather than create it 3.”
  • Finally, Forbes “84% of companies fail at digital transformation 4.”

It’s not like there aren’t plenty of change solutions to pick from.  The massive transformation of “digital” and “agile” is bringing change management back to the forefront since falling out of grace following several waves of popular improvement methods including: reengineering of the mid-90’s, retrenchment of the late-90’s, and the batten-down-the-hatches actions as the world stumbled during the great recession.  Today, the major management consulting companies actively promote their own secret sauce for approaching change management through frameworks and services.  For example, from a quick internet scan:

Why aren’t the historic and current solutions for change, while widely used, effective 5?  Because they are too narrowly focused.  Successfully implementing change happens by changing individual behaviors.  Aligned processes and systems are critical, but most any practitioner and many researchers will tell you leadership support is the most important success factor for change- bar none 6.

So, is Organizational Change Management’s top-down view the answer?  No.  It it is too highly focused on leadership alignment, again necessary but not sufficient, and misses the detailed managerial-driven change necessary for the individual.  Individual change management, while necessary and effective for individuals, only provides support and reinforcement from the bottom-up.

Enterprise change requires the rigor of detailed task management and integration found in Project and Program Management, but again while defining the “how” in detail through EPMOs 7, is also insufficient as a stand-alone solution.  What is required to implement change in most of our businesses is an integrating approach considering Individual Change Management, Organizational Change Management, Project and Program Management, and more- all pulled together and aligned through a set of guiding principles.

There are commonalities to successful implementation.  Be it post-M&A integration, digital transformation or continuous improvement, it all boils down to getting the organization and individuals within the organization to do things differently.  And, we must accomplish this multi-faceted effort of leading and managing change to provide a catalyst both for the organization and for the individual to achieve targeted results.

Unpacking enterprise change management

In the following discussion, we will focus on four key interrelated and reinforcing components. And, while we are tool agnostic, for simplicity we will represent each component by the methodology we feel is most common in the businesses we work with:

  • Individual Change Management (ICM)- Prosci’s ADKAR® 8
  • Organizational Change Management (OCM)- Kotter’s Accelerate 9
  • Project and Program Management (PPM)- Program Management Institutes’ A guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) 10
  • Guiding Principles- Informed and aligned by NextForge’s “Concept of One,” principles for integration and alignment of change management activities

The representative methodologies for each of these four component’s at least touch on the others through a number of complementary, and sometimes competing, frameworks, tools and methodologies.  For the sake of brevity, we will begin with a few widely referenced mental models for change, but we will remain focused on the role of each of these components (i.e., Individual Change Management, Organizational Change Management, Project-Program Management, and Guiding Principles).

Understand Some Key Foundational Mental Models of of Change

As a practitioner and student of leading and managing both organizational and individual change for more than 25 years, including 6 years with a boutique consultancy focused on and named for large-scaled strategic change, C-Change, I have yet to find a framework, or an approach, which doesn’t have its foundation in The Change Formula.

The change formula

The basis of The Change Formula is, according to Wikipedia, attributed to an Arthur D. Little
consultant in the 1960’s, David Gleicher.  As I was researching change in the 1990’s I found a number of references to The Change Formula, but at that time I was unable to find attribution to a very simple framework I have used as a basis of describing and driving change and key messages of communication for more than 20 years.

  • Need for Change represents dissatisfaction with the present conditions; a compelling gap between “as-is” and the “to-be.”
  • Vision of the Future represents a positive picture of what is possible in the future. I recently discovered a management consultancy advocating for the “vision” to be a compelling and emotional story, similar to current thinking in brand marketing.
  • Steps to Achieve the Vision represents realistic actions and activities to reach the vision; requires both resources and approach.
  • Resistance to Change represents the natural and normal resistance to change, either personally or within an organization (e.g., loss of control, too much uncertainty, surprise, confused by change, loss of face, real and perceived threats, post-change issues, past resentments, perception of more work, etc.). 11  Note: Some have recently referred to this natural resistance as “immunity to change. 12”

Individuals’ stages of change

A complementary framework, helpful to understanding individual’s, and collectively an organization’s, journey through significant change is probably most renowned for its individual stages like “Uninformed Optimism” and the “Valley of Despair.”

One common mental model used to understand an individual’s perspective on change is to borrow from those facing a very difficult life change- those having just received a diagnosis of terminal cancer.  Elisabeth Kübler-Ross introduced the idea of “five stages of grief” in her book On Death and Dying based on her work with terminally ill patients 13.  There are five common stages which can potentially be shortened if they can be catalyzed through effective therapy, or for our analogy, change leadership and management.  Once an initiative is launched with catalytic leadership and management, we can expect the following in sequence:

  • Uninformed optimism
  • Informed pessimism
  • Hopeful realism
  • Informed optimism
  • Objective achievement

Many initiatives fall into the “Valley of Despair” only to lose traction and fail 14.  We would suggest the high failure rate is at least in part due to not understanding or managing through these emotional stages of change.

Engaging individuals

When we think of what the individual is going through, we should also consider the “how” and “who” is most appropriate to work with an individual.

Gallup has been researching and surveying employees for more than a decade on the topic of engagement.  Initially, they developed their Q12. More recently, Gallup tied employee engagement, and specific management practices covered in Q12, to business performance 15.  The bottom line: what is most critical to employee engagement is the employee’s manager or supervisor. A point echoed in Prosci’s research where, for example, personal messages are preferred by individuals to be delivered by the “employee’s supervisor.” Prosci’s view of a supervisor’s role in Individual Change Management, includes “Coaching: the interactions a manager or supervisor has with direct reports to support them through the change process”.16

Let’s conclude our quick flyby of a few common foundational concepts, and get into our key components of change management by first introducing Individual Change Management through Prosci’s ADKAR®.  

Component 1: Support Individual Change Management

Putting a tactical lens on change- Prosci’s ADKAR® focuses on change management from the bottom-up: the individual. ADKAR® is an acronym for a series of sequential steps individuals must go through to change: Awareness | Desire | Knowledge | Ability | Reinforcement (ADKAR®).  And, while ADKAR® posits its ability to address top-down, Organizational Change Management, ADKAR’s Change Model is founded on two basic ideas 17.

  • It is a person who changes, not the organization
  • Successful change occurs when individual change matches the stages of organizational change

The ADKAR® Framework

Levers of change management

In addition to five elemental phases with their associated factors and tactics, some of Prosci’s published materials, for example, as discussed in their one-page summary “Five Levers of Change Management” (key activities and plans) discuss tools to progress individuals and organizations through the five ADKAR® stages of change including:

  • Communications Plan- Sends the right message to the right audience at the right time from the right sender through the right channel
  • Sponsorship Roadmap- The specific actions you need from your senior leaders to sponsor the changes
  • Coaching Plan- The interactions a manager or supervisor have with direct reports
  • Resistance Management Plan- Steps to prevent and mitigate, but accept that it will happen (Proactive | Reactive | Preventative)
  • Training Plan- Document requirements and ensure proper context

ADKAR® Approach

Prosci follows a series of gates and sequential phases of change as represented from left to right in the following graphic 18.

Prosci refers to the integration of project and change management across leadership and sponsorship as the Project Change Triangle.  This is very similar to Project Management Institute’s project management “iron triangle,” noting Prosci’s addition of leadership and sponsorship roles 19.

Component 2: Support Organizational Change Management

Putting a strategic lens on change- Kotter’s focus on change leadership from the top-down- the affected organization.

Kotter separates the actions of leadership from those of management.  Summarily laid out in the following table, the focus of leadership defines direction and is the engine for the change process, where management’s focus is on tools to keep change controlled.

Dual operating system

Kotter has been advocating for the management-driven hierarchy focused on reliability and efficiency to co-exist with the strategy-accelerating network focused on agility and speed 21.  The traditional, box-and-wire structure continues to serve as the central organizing principle for the enterprise. The idea of the “dual operating system” is to efficiently add cognitive capacity to existing teams, while integrating hierarchical management structures with significantly faster horizontal, cross-silo networks.

The dual operating system complements traditional, hierarchical management through broader reach and through deeper, network and stakeholder involvement. By meshing traditional-hierarchical and network leadership, it supports better informed decision-making, amplifies transparency and trust, and creates a more fluid and friction-free capability for horizontal movement of issues, ideas, resources, and decision-making across the enterprise. 22

This idea of a dual operating system- focus existing hierarchical organization on today, with network(s) focused on tomorrow- is similar to recently published business model frameworks of:

  • Govindarajan’s recommendation in Three Box Solution to, in Box 1, “run the core business at peak efficiency,” use Box 2 to “let go of past practices, habits, activities and attitudes,” and, with Box 3, prepare for “the non-linear future.”23
  • Christensen, et al, research on business models being directional as described in MIT Sloan Management Review article’s sidebar “The Three Stages of a Business Model’s Journey” where Stage 1 creation leads to Stage 2 sustaining innovation leads to Stage 3 efficiency each with a unique operating model (e.g., Value Proposition, Resources, Processes, Profit Formula) focus mix. 24

The eight accelerators

The eight accelerators are processes that enable the strategy network to function.  Earlier versions of Kotter’s thinking suggested a gated sequencing, which in subsequent versions were reconsidered to be concurrently at work throughout organizational change 25.

  • Create a sense of urgency around a single big opportunity
  • Build and maintain a guiding coalition
  • Formulate a strategic vision and develop change initiatives designed to capitalize on the big opportunity
  • Communicate the vision and the strategy to create buy-in and attract a growing “volunteer army”
  • Accelerate movement toward the vision and the opportunity by ensuring that the network removes barriers
  • Celebrate visible, significant short-term wins
  • Never let up. Keep learning from experience. Don’t declare victory too soon.
  • Institutionalize strategic change in the culture

For more information about Professor Kotter’s thinking about change management frameworks, see NextForge’s “Leading Change II- Understanding Kotter” 26

Each of Kotter’s steps and/or accelerators must be led and managed with focus on the individual, and each step’s execution, as with ADKAR®, must be resourced, planned, integrated for the appropriate stakeholder.

Support Summary: Individual Change Management and Organizational Change Management

In the following graphic, we have considered the key elements from both the Organizational Change Management framework by Kotter (left side of following figure) and the Individual Change Management framework by Prosci (right side of following figure).  The Harvey balls represent significant support of the approach workstreams for various change management elements.

Source: NextForge analysis

Support activity for individual and organizational change are best if structured and integrated through common tools and principles.

Component 3: Plan and Execute Nimbly

Make key project management capabilities explicit

In order to plan, prioritize and manage the complexity of large scale change, structured program and project management is necessary to both initiatives targeted at individual change and enterprise-scale success.  There are a few complementing individual and organizational change management headline activities with Project Management Institutes’ knowledge areas at the enterprise level, but they are not comprehensive. We believe in being more holistic to ensure all 10 of PMI’s knowledge areas are explicitly considered during an integrated approach.  For example, the following Project Management Institute’s knowledge areas are not explicitly addressed in the ADKAR® moniker 27:

  • Project Integration Management
  • Project Scope-, Schedule- and Cost-Management
  • Quality Management
  • Human Resource Management
  • Risk Management
  • Procurement Management
  • Stakeholder Management

Source: NextForge comparative analysis of the ADKAR® Framework (see summary above) and A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) 5th edition.

Depending on a number of factors specific to a given project 28, we nimbly apply enough of the appropriate project management structure, informed by guiding principles, to ensure success and avoid the risk of failure.  A continuum of project management support is available to us from simple, un-chartered project management to formal Executive PMO and multi-project program management.

Project Management: In simplest terms, is the constant management of tradeoffs between scope, schedule and costs 29.  Project Management Institute describes project management in terms of the iron triangle or the triple constraints 30.

Program Management: wraps and supports the project management efforts on multiple projects with supporting structure including: Organizing concept, program plan, plan/track/report (scope, schedule and resources), program metrics, and supporting business processes 31.

Agile teams in enterprise project management

Because of increasing uncertainty in the business environment, the need for organizational flexibility continues to increase, and many companies are turning to agile concepts particularly for project planning and execution.  We have been successfully utilizing agile concepts and progressive elaboration in our engagement approach design for more than 10 years.  As a very quick summary of how agile principles can be applied to nimble business-oriented teams, here is an excerpt from our Point-of-View post on agile (scrum) concepts what we have called Swift-Teamssm .

As an engine for driving process and behavioral change into the organization, Swift-Teams provide short-interval deliverables, typically within three to four weeks. Each team’s work is sequenced with other on-going initiatives, and is managed via an integrated plan that lays out the scope and sequence of work/team modules.

The Swift-Teams are flexibly resourced from throughout the enterprise, supplemented as necessary with external experts, customers and partners. At the completion of each Swift-Team cycle precious resource assignments and individual projects may be efficiently adjusted. 32

In order to manage the overlap in the ADKAR® Model for Individual Change Management and the Accelerators for Organizational Change Management, while there are a number of ways to define guiding principles for change management, we recommend a technique we have used for more than 20 years- The Concept of One 33.

We find guiding principles focused on integration critical to early alignment of expectations and activity.  Guiding principles, ensure the design and execution work is planned and scheduled in right priority and sequenced with the right level of change-resistance mitigation resourcing fully supported by leadership, management and employee.

Component 4: Integrate Relentlessly

Inform guiding principles: The Concept of One

For this discussion we acknowledge the various other principles contained in the Concepts of One as informing and complementing other guiding principles, with our focus on “one approach map”:

  • One mission
  • One integrated strategy (business & technology; marketing & operations)
  • One decision making structure and process
  • One economic model (business case)
  • One map (roadmap and phase-map)
  • One team (as appropriate, Swift-Teamssm)
  • One organizing concept
  • One set of common methods and tools
  • One communications plan
  • One implementation plan
  • One approach map- Driving an integrated approach to change

For more on the Concept of One, see NextForge’s “Alignment- The concept of one”. 34

Integrate planning and execution of all components: “One Approach Map”

By focusing on a single overall “approach map” we can “hardwire” key change concepts into the workstreams and steps of the approach including graphically visible relationships between critically interdependent activity.  We have included an approach map template below for illustration of the key moving parts (business objectives through to workstream deliverables) and general layout.  The “one approach map” acts as a master plan including a roadmap, allowing work-stream project leads to utilize their own, or conform to PMO standard, project management tools. Alternately, if the complexity and risk is great enough, we can build an integrated project/program management plan inside a tool, like MS Project or Primavera, for critical-path analysis and enterprise-wide resource management.

Source: NextForge analysis

Our one approach map is a tool to integrate up to 100 key activities organized by workstream and informed by guiding principles to provide a comprehensive frame for detailed planning for executives (top-down) and managers (bottom-up) focused on overall objectives and workstream deliverables.  Critically, outcomes are tied to specific actions; not only do we ensure expectation will be met if the work is done, but we also inform team members how their work contributes to the end results.

Act Through the Four Components to Achieve Results

Consider this “how to” check list

We have quickly covered broad-strokes of a number of concepts including a discussion of change management’s and change leadership’s support for individual and organizational change.  As we wrap up, providing enough leadership, management, and other support to fully catalyze successful implementation, change and results- beyond the common 70% failure rate- requires consideration of all the following:

  1. Support Individual Change through Individual Change Management (e.g., Prosci’s ADKAR®)
  2. Support Organizational Change and alignment through Organizational Change Management (e.g., Kotter’s “Accelerate”)
  3. Plan and Execute Nimbly– Define tasks, integrate and sequence the approach through Project and Program Management (e.g., PMI’s A guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide))
  4. Integrate Relentlessly– Establish the guiding principles based on Concept of One (e.g., An approach map to “hardwire” the necessary activity, and workstreams, into the approach)

Integrating these key components for affect will increase the success rate for your transformation, your M&A post-acquisition integration, and your digital transformation by changing individual employees one at a time in synch with the necessary speed of organizational change.

One closing thought: Culture

Just as each individual employee is unique in their perspective, each company is unique in its culture- “the way we do things around here.”  And, while some may add “and the why we do the things the way we do things around here,” culture must be taken into account when considering Enterprise Change.  The specific methods, techniques, and combinations of tools must complement the “how we do things around here.”  If you don’t customize your approach, if you don’t pick and choose what is best for your department, division, enterprise, and project, you will fall prey to the all too familiar Peter Drucker quote “Culture eats strategy for breakfast.”

When you’re finished changing, you’re finished
Benjamin Franklin

END NOTES

  1. See “Accelerating Change based on the work of John P. Kotter,” Harvard Business Review, [ebook] [purchased 2012] 9467TL-PPT-ENG.Microsoft PowerPoint, 82 pages
  2. See Schwartz, “Leaders focus too much on changing policies, and not enough on changing minds,” Harvard Business Review, June 25, 2018 [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from https://hbr.org/2018/06/leaders-focus-too-much-on-changing-policies-and-not-enough-on-changing-minds
  3. See PricewaterhouseCoopers’ (PWC’s) M&A Integration Survey 2017, “Success factors in post-merger integration,” [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from https://news.pwc.ch/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/success-factors-in-post-merger-integration_2017_web.pdf
  4. See Bruce Rogers’ article of the same name “Why 84% of companies fail at digital transformation,” where, based on Forrester Research’s research by Michael Gale “not enough people within the organization are aware of the challenges.” Further, Gale posits “if you don’t spend time changing people’s behaviors, you don’t spend time changing culture and how people make decisions, all of this falls flat.” And finally, “I think a large part of that 84 percent that fail it’s because they’re not prepared to change behavior.” Rogers, “Why 84% of companies fail at digital transformation,” Forbes, January 7, 2016, [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucerogers/2016/01/07/why-84-of-companies-fail-at-digital-transformation/#22f6ab86397b
  5. “Change Management Programs” rank No. 6 of top 25 management tools in broad use (“significantly above the overall mean”), yet are not meeting expectations/needs (“significantly below the overall mean” for satisfaction); See most recent (2017) Bain survey by Rigby & Bilodeau, “Management Tools & Trends, Five key trends emerged from Bain’s survey of 1,268 managers,” Bain and Company, April 05, 2018 [internet] [cited August 8, 2018] Available from https://www.bain.com/insights/management-tools-and-trends-2017/
  6. “The keys to successful change, according to the American Management Association survey, are first and foremost leadership” and numerically ranked first in table 1; See Gill, “Change management – or change leadership?” Journal of Change Management, May 2003 [internet] [cited August 7, 2018] Available from http://two.nitbj.com.cn/nit/content/references/Gill.pdf; Cited 527 times on Google Scholar.  Also, as a tactical example, see the increasing use of leadership (CEO’s office) sponsorship throughout the organization’s digital maturity in Kane, “Is the right group leading your digital initiatives?” MIT Sloan Management Review, August 3, 2018 [internet] [cited August 7, 2018] Available from https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/is-the-right-group-leading-your-digital-initiatives/
  7. See EPMO treatment in “Enterprise project management,” Wikipedia, [internet] [cited August 7, 2018] Available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterprise_project_management
  8. See Hiatt, ADKAR®, A model for change in business, government and our community, Loveland, CO: Prosci (2006)
  9. See Kotter, Accelerate, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press (2014)
  10. See A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), Newton Square, PA: Project Management Institute (2013)
  11. For more detailed treatment of the change equation and the source of definitions presented here on elements of the change equation, see Reeder, “The Change Formula,” Nextforge, [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=167
  12. See discussion and reference to work by psychologists Lahey and Kegan in Schwartz, “Leaders Focus Too Much on Changing Policies, and Not Enough on Changing Minds,” Harvard Business Review, June 25, 2018, [internet] [cited 7.28.2018] Available from https://hbr.org/2018/06/leaders-focus-too-much-on-changing-policies-and-not-enough-on-changing-minds
  13. See “Kübler-Ross model”, Wikipedia [internet] [cited June 17, 2013] Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model.  Also see NextForge’s “Change Leadership- Traversing the emotional cycles of change,” [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from  https://nextforge.com/?p=2115
  14. “The 8-Step Process for Leading Change”, Kotter International [internet] [cited June 17, 2013] Available from  http://www.kotterinternational.com/our-principles/changesteps/changesteps.  Also see “Kanter’s Law” where Rosabeth Moss Kanter, also an HBS professor who studies change, suggests “Everything looks like failure in the middle”, from Kanter, “Change is hardest in the middle,” Harvard Business Review, August 12, 2009, [internet] [cited July 31, 2018] Available from https://hbr.org/2009/08/change-is-hardest-in-the-middl
  15. For more information on Gallup’s Q12, see Wagner and Harter, 12 The elements of Great Managing, NY, NY: Gallup Press (2006).  At the time of the printing of this New York Times best seller, responses and meta-data on business performance were based on more than 10MM employee surveys.
  16. See slides provided with Prosci’s Webinar “How to drive adoption with Five Strategic Change Plans,” copyrighted 2014, [internet] [cited 7.9.2018] Available from https://portal.prosci.com
  17. See “What is the ADKAR Model for change?” (Part 1 of 2), a 3M46 Video, Prosci [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from https://naijafy.com/video/f_FY8L5xJLE
  18. “ADKAR® Change Management Model Overview,” Prosci [internet] [cited June 22, 2018] Available from www.prosci.com/adkar/adkar-model
  19. See “How to Leverage the Project Change TriangleTM (PCT) Model,” Prosci [internet] [cited July 12, 2018] Slide-deck available at https://portal.prosci.com/resources/view/111
  20. See Kotter, “Change Management vs. Change Leadership- What’s the difference?” Forbes, July 12, 2011, [internet] [cited June 22, 2018] Available at www.forbes.com/kohnkotter/2011/07/12/change-management-vs-change-leadership-whats-the-difference
  21. See Kotter’s, Accelerate: building strategic agility for a faster moving world, Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, MA (2014), p 37 and the typical lifecycle from network to hierarchy p 70.  Also consider the parallel concept based on recent research by Christensen, “The Hard Truth About Business Model Innovation,” MIT Sloan Management Review, Fall 2016, where Christensen, et al’s research demonstrates new business model’s necessary separation from the sponsoring organization, progressing along an arc from new market formation (creation), to process formation in response to recurrent tasks (sustaining innovation), to modular structure formation, and finally to investors’ demand return of capital (efficiency).
  22. Sourced from an unpublished working paper Everson and Reeder, “Enhanced Enterprise Execution, Catalyzed by a Dynamic Social Network,” Adjuvi, April 2017.
  23. See summary table 1-1, p 4, of The Three Box Solution, A strategy for leading innovation, Harvard Business Review Press, Boston, MA (2016)
  24. See Christensen, et al, “The Hard Truth About Business Model Innovation,” MIT Sloan Management Review, Fall 2016.  Specifically, see side bar “The Three Stages of a Business Model’s Journey” of different focus of each stage from creation to sustaining innovation to efficiency, where today’s organizational efficiency focus (through for example hierarchy) cannot support tomorrow’s initial business model’s flexible development needs.  Also see Reeder, “What You Need to Know About Business Models,” NextForge, [internet] [cited August 8, 2018] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=2345
  25. See overview discussion of Kotter on leadership and change in Reeder, “Change Leadership ll, Understanding Kotter,” NextForge, [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=1587; Kotter’s 8 Step Graphic is from “Accelerating Change based on the work of John P. Kotter,” Harvard Business Review, [ebook] [purchased 2012] 9467TL-PPT-ENG.Microsoft PowerPoint, 82 pages.
  26. Reeder, “Change Leadership II- Understanding Kotter,” NextForge, [internet] [cited August 8, 2018] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=1587
  27. NextForge gap analysis of those 10 Project Management Institute knowledge not explicitly included in the ADKAR® framework.  See A Guide to Project Management Body of Knowledge (PBOK® Guide) 5th edition, Newton Square, PA: Project Management Institute (2013)
  28. For example DICE® is an acronym, and elements of a patented equation, for determining the certainty of success including (D)uration of project, (I)ntergrity of the team, organizational (C)ommitment to change, and (E)ffort required to change “DICE- a tool for executional certainty,” The Boston Consulting Group [internet] [cited August 7, 2018] Available from http://dice.bcg.com/index.html#intro
  29. See Reeder, “Defining project management,” NextForge [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=155
  30. See Lee, “Managing the challenges of the triple constraints,” Project Management Institute [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/managing-challenges-triple-constraints-6884
  31. See Reeder, “Defining program management,” NextForge [internet] [cited July 28, 2018] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=153
  32. Reeder, “Swift Teams,” NextForge, [internet] [cited August 8, 2018] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=88
  33. Reeder, “Alignment- The Concept of One,” NextForge, [internet] [cited August 8, 2018] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=773
  34. Reeder, “Alignment- The Concept of One,” NextForge, [internet] [cited August 8, 2018] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=773

The post Results’ Catalyst- Leading and Managing Change appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/results-catalyst-leading-and-managing-change/feed/ 2 After Action Review (AAR) A basis for learning-driven improvement and a corner-stone of organizational agility https://nextforge.com/after-action-review-aar-a-basis-for-learning-driven-improvement-and-a-corner-stone-of-organizational-agility/ https://nextforge.com/after-action-review-aar-a-basis-for-learning-driven-improvement-and-a-corner-stone-of-organizational-agility/#comments Sat, 30 Jun 2018 03:57:34 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2537 After Action Review (AAR) provides a basis for learning-driven improvement and a corner-stone of organizational agility. Also, consider expanding the concept of event analysis to include a full life-cycle of Before-Action, During-Action and After-Action Reviews

The post After Action Review (AAR) <br/>A basis for learning-driven improvement and a corner-stone of organizational agility appeared first on .

]]>

“Tell me and I forget, teach me and I may remember, involve me and I learn.”
Dr. Herb True1

“The After-Action Review (AAR)… was conceived back in 1981 to help Army leaders adapt quickly in dynamic, unpredictable situations they were sure to face2.”  And, I cannot imagine a more important environment for learning than when you and your teammates’ lives are on the line. The Army and the Marines both have extensive investment in training individuals (partially through informal AARs) and the organization as a whole (partially through formal AARs). Although the different branches have some unique nomenclature, for example USMC’s Lessons Learned Report, the objective of learning and improving quickly is consistent throughout.

Most of us only rely on our teammates for our lives metaphorically, but individual and organizational learning can occur the same way- through an After-Action Review (AAR). We think of learning (e.g., what is working/what is not working) as the front-half of the learning-innovation coin, with innovation providing the here-are-the-changes-we-make-now side. And, to paraphrase the title of a Forbes article slightly Agile is the world’s most popular innovation engine3, with business agility as the ability to rapidly respond to change by adapting the organization’s stable configuration4.

Just to be clear, an action can be a project, activity, event or task5– the work we do- and a potential opportunity to learn. Throughout the remainder of this post, we will link the idea of learning through a facilitated technique for event-based analysis: before-, during- and after-action reviews.

Getting started

Both the U.S. Army’s Opposing Force (OPFOR) and Shell Oil were early adapters of After-Action Review (AAR)6. In order to be successful with any project, activity, event or task, we must start with clear direction and leadership support. For example, OPFOR’s four-part direction for each campaign7:

  • The task- What actions to take
  • The purpose- Why the task is important
  • The intent- Explain the sponsor’s thinking
  • The end-state- What the desired results are

A clear directional mantra for the team(s) might rhyme with “In this situation, given this mission, if we take this action, we will accomplish that outcome8.”

The basics of After-Action event analysis

Discussion of an event, focused on performance standards allows participants to learn through self-discovery, reflection, discussion and feedback:

  • What happened
  • Why it happened
  • How-to sustain strengths and improve weakness9

“Good leaders help their subordinates grow by teaching, coaching and counseling10.”
Benefits of conducting After-Action reviews include individual, team and organizational learning along multiple dimensions to11:

  • Think better
  • Build a shared contextual awareness
  • Sustain a competitive advantage
  • Spark creativity
  • Enable decision making
  • Minimize interpretation

 

Expanding the concept of event analysis to Before-Action

Our experience as consultants with post-mortems extends back to our pre-MBA days as engineers. As management consultants, we have mostly relied on kickoff meetings to ensure general communication of the problem and plan, demonstrate leadership commitment, and engage the team. Familiarizing key stakeholders through a Before-Action Review (BAR) is a logical next maturity step in project management, and it prepares the stakeholders and team members for the following After-Action Review discussion(s) with common themes.

Early involvement of the team and other stakeholders increases awareness and provides a basis for innovation during execution to improve performance throughout the project, activity, event or task.

Escalating to During-Action event analysis

Not every action requires interim analysis. But, the now famous 15-minute daily team scrum meetings for tech development projects is a good example where the focus of three questions is on each participant:

  • What did I accomplish since our last scrum meeting?
  • What do I plan to work on by the next daily scrum?
  • What are the obstacles or impediments that are preventing me from making progress?12

In projects and events where interim adjustments can help ensure better and more efficient outcomes, teams can periodically pause to learn, remove barriers and coordinate before reaching key milestones- critical, for example, to scrum’s approach to software development. We have used this concept in our business-driven projects dating back to our Swift-Teamssm approach including a weekly scrum-cycle within three-week “sprints.”

Another expansion of the During-Action Review (DAR) is to periodically include key stakeholders like Product Managers for Scrum Teams or Executive Sponsors for business initiatives. For years, we have advocated and used a weekly Executive Review and Report including:

  • Unresolved (old/open) concerns/issues
  • New concerns/issues
  • Key accomplishments this week
  • Key activity planned for next week
  • Milestones and status
  • Relevant attachments

A working framework for event-based analysis

Looking at the Before-, During-, and After-Action Review concepts together, the most popular technique includes discussions facilitated by prompts or questions. The following provides widely-published prompts for each type of review along four common topic areas (e.g., Intent, Performance, Learnings, and Next Time), and we have included some of our observations as key characteristics for each of the review-types.

 

Guiding Principles for Action Reviews- a starter kit

  • “Begin using it selectively- on projects where the payoff is greatest, and leaders are committed to working through several AAR cycles20”
  • Treat every action as an opportunity for learning how to think21
  • Treat every AAR as more than a post-mortem of failure22
  • “Don’t even think about creating an AAR regimen without determining who is likely to learn from it and how they will benefit23”
  • “Conditions change. Results shouldn’t24”
  • “Everyone can and should participate25”
  • “Conduct AARs so… people don’t just make mistakes, but learn from them26”
  • Improvement requires innovatively-driven change based on individual feedback, reflection and learning
  • Constantly consider the best way to ensure and embed individual-, team- and organizational-learning

Getting started with Action Reviews can provide a cultural foundation for agile business

After-Action Reviews by any name are a proven learning technique in business and in the military. If you take only a token effort from your post-mortem, or if you do not currently capture learnings from your projects to expand your institutional knowledge, start with After-Action Reviews.

If you have After-Action Reviews built into your culture and standard operating procedures for most projects, events and activities-of-scale, adding a Before-Action Review is a great next step.

After you have begun to appreciate the benefits of learning and innovation of AARs and BARs, and, if you would like to enjoy the widely-published benefits of speed and flexibility of an agile organization, consider taking the step toward a scrum approach to agile by including During-Action Reviews, commonly referred to as the daily standup meeting. Keep in mind, that just like project management, you only need to add enough structure to manage the risk. For example, your scrum meeting frequency can vary, as we have found to be successful with our weekly business initiative SwiftTeamssm team meetings and sponsor reviews.

Independent of how your sequence your approach BARs, DARs and AARs, remember the trailing phrase of Dr. Herb True’s memorable quote: “involve me and I will learn.”

 

End Notes and References

[1] Learning quote is widely misattributed to Ben Franklin. See “Misquotes and memes: Did Ben Franklin really say that?” July 1, 2015, Baylor University, [Internet] [Cited June 29,2018] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/07/150701152634.htm | Special thanks to Dr. Clark Quinn who, during his review of a draft of this post, pointed out the misattribution and pointed me to a more reliable attribution of Dr. Herb True sourced from Barry Popkin (a contributor to the Oxford English Dictionary, Dictionary of American Regional English, Historical Dictionary of American Slang, Yale Book of Quotations and Dictionary of Modern Proverbs) in Popkin’s post, December 19, 2012, [Internet] [Cited June 29,2018] https://www.barrypopik.com/index.php/new_york_city/entry/tell_me_and_
i_forget_teach_me_and_i_may_remember_involve_me_and_i_will_lear/

[2] See Darling, et al, “Learning in the thick of it,” Harvard Business Review (July-August 2005); Also note the Marines Lessons Learned have created an AAR Builder including OILS (observations, insights, lessons, trends and AAR)

[3] See Denning, “Agile: The World’s Most Popular Innovation Engine,” Forbes, July 23, 2015 [Internet] [Cited 6.18.2018] https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2015/07/23/the-worlds-most-popular-innovation-engine/

[4] See “Business Agility,” Wikipedia [Internet] [Cited 6.18.2018] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_agility

[5] “An After Action Review (AAR) is a simple process used by a team to capture the lessons learned from past successes and failures, with the goal of improving future performance.” See “After Action Review,” Knowledge Sharing Toolkit, [Internet] [Cited 6.29.2018] http://www.kstoolkit.org/After+Action+Review

[6] See Darling, et al

[7] See Darling, et al

[8] See Darling, et al

[9] See The U.S. Army Leadership Field Manual (FM No. 22-100), (New York: McGraw-Hill, 2004 edition), p. 6 (1-19)

[10] See The U.S. Army Leadership Field Manual (FM No. 22-100), p. 4 (1-59)

[11] From Boss, “Don’t skimp on the after action review,” Forbes, December 1, 2016 [Internet] [Cited June 19, 2018] https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffboss/2016/12/01/dont-skimp-on-the-after-action-review-6-reasons-why/#2185f0dbba3d

[12] See treatment of “Daily Scrum” Rubin, Essential Scrum, (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley, 2013) 7th printing, October 2015, pp 23-24

[13] See Darling, et al; Idea in practice section

[14] “A pre-mortem in a business setting comes at the beginning of a project rather than at the end, so that the project can be improved rather than autopsied.” See Klein, “Performing a Project Premortem,” Harvard Business Review (September 2007).

[15] NextForge analysis

[16] Informed by “Daily Scrum” by Rubin pp. 23-24

[17] See Darling, et al

[18] See U.S. Army Training Circular 25-20, Department of the Army (September 1993)

[19] NextForge analysis; Each activity stage has a different and unique time-horizon

[20] See Darling, et al; Idea in practice section

[21] See Darling, et al

[22] See Darling, et al

[23] See Darling, et al; Sidebar “Five ways to put AARs to work at work”

[24] See Darling, et al; discussion of a consulting-firm’s ad featuring Tiger Woods squinting through the rain to complete a golf shot

[25] See “A leaders guide to after-action reviews (TC 25-20).” Also see The U.S. Army Leadership Field Manual (FM No. 22-100) 5-62 “When subordinates share in identifying reasons for success and failure, they become owners of a stake in how things get done.”

[26] See The U.S. Army Leadership Field Manual (FM No. 22-100) 1-59

 

The post After Action Review (AAR) <br/>A basis for learning-driven improvement and a corner-stone of organizational agility appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/after-action-review-aar-a-basis-for-learning-driven-improvement-and-a-corner-stone-of-organizational-agility/feed/ 1 Why Agile Management? Because it is an increasingly VUCA world https://nextforge.com/why-agile-management-because-it-is-an-increasingly-vuca-world/ https://nextforge.com/why-agile-management-because-it-is-an-increasingly-vuca-world/#comments Fri, 29 Sep 2017 13:03:16 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2449 Agile is an effective approach to managing in a volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world. We share how to think about uncertainty through the lens of the Cynefin framework's domains of simple, complicated, complex and chaotic. And, we illustrate several management approaches mapped to the Cynefin frame

The post Why Agile Management? Because it is an increasingly VUCA world appeared first on .

]]>

Change Surrounds Us

Be it social-political (e.g., India, China, Africa, Southeast Asia [ICASA], Brexit, Syria, North Korea), new competitors (e.g., Tesla, Amazon, Uber, Apple), new technology (e.g., mobile, social marketing, cloud), or any of many more trends, changes are disrupting our status quo in complex ways.

Global, industry, product and competitive trends increasingly point to less stability for most industries.  Our traditional management toolkit, the one we have used our entire careers to think about our competitive environments, is based on known patterns- like best practices. However, these traditionally linear, cause-and-effect models are proving mostly ineffective for the dynamic marketplace where new entrants materialize from other sectors, other industries, and all geographies, seemingly overnight.

How do you know what to do?  How do you manage in a volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA) world?  When, if at all, should you apply specific management approaches?  When and how should we consider dynamic approaches like Agile Management, which has been forged out of the progressively dynamic environment?

We have been injecting agile techniques into our client engagements, long before the agile manifesto, and we are ardent advocates.  However, there are parallel models, and the collective wisdom of the business world continues to expand our thought processes.  Through a survey of recent publications combined with our experience, we thought we might pull a number of popular concepts and frameworks together to shed some light, and possibly a helpful insight or two, on “how to” lead and manage in a world of increasing uncertainty– a VUCA world.

What is Agile?

The Agile Alliance, an open-source organization supporting “people who explore and apply Agile values, principles, and practices,” defines agile as…

The ability to create and respond to change in order to succeed in an uncertain and turbulent environment.

If you factor-in the “why” many organizations are turning to agile from VersionOne’s “11th Annual State of Agile Report,” we begin to see a little more complete picture.

  • Accelerate product delivery- it is faster
  • Enhance ability to manage changing priorities- it is better
  • Increase productivity- it is cheaper
  • Improve project visibility- it is less risky

If you ask why are speed, flexibility, productivity and transparency driving agile’s popularity, we believe you will find increasing VUCA is driving organizations to look for more nimble approaches to management and execution.  Many are reaching for the agile toolkit because of the increasingly VUCA environment.  They consider getting to “one of the best” solutions more quickly as being more valuable than being later with “the best” answer.

How to Think About Uncertainty

Volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA) is a term originally used to describe the post-cold war environment. Over time it has been gaining traction within the realm of business.  And, while there are a number of variations on sense-making frameworks, the most  elegant model to help manage VUCA may be the Cynefin framework initially developed at IBM and currently providing a basis for some versions of agile.

How did we arrive at the Cynefin (Welch for habitat, sense of place) framework?  If we go back to Secretary Rumsfeld’s known-known and unknown-unknown quotes, we will find a correlation to the Johari window.  Johari is based on two dimensions of “known to self” and “known to others.” The Johari window provides a 2 x 2 matrix for known solutions.  But, think about different situations. What if you are in the wrong window pane?  What if there is no right answer?  How do you deal with chaos?  How should you be thinking about black swans?  The Cynefin framework offers five domains to consider how to think, and act, as a leader, manager, and organization within situations at all levels of uncertainty.

Quickly highlighted in a sidebar of an HBR article “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making,” the Cynefin framework constructs domains to address increasing levels of VUCA.  And, through definition, differentiates between five domains: Simple, Complicated, Complex, Chaos and Disorder (see next section “Cynefin Framework for Analyzing and Managing Uncertainty”).  It is the concept and domain of “Disorder”- where management is using the wrong approach- Cynefin provides more rigor than many of the alternative frameworks we have encountered.

Apologies in advance to die-hard Cynefin fans, as we have taken graphical liberties to align the domains of the Cynefin framework with key managerial characteristics, metaphorical bolt-ons from other writers, and our own future-of-management point-of-view in the following.

Cynefin Framework for Analyzing and Managing Uncertainty

Historic management practices are based on Taylorism, stability, calculable risk, and a simple- best practices- environment.  But, as Harvard Business School’s Dean Nohria stated, “a stable equilibrium is unnatural” and “uncertainty is incalculable.”  The Cynefin framework defines domains and provides approaches to support leadership and management under all levels of uncertainty.

As with most frameworks, depending on the context, the analysis can be applied across the entire enterprise through a portfolio approach.  Also, the analysis may be applied to, for example, a single instance: a product line, a division, a topic area, or a specific issue.

How to Lead and Manage Differently in an Increasingly VUCA World

For those in industries and sectors which are stable with known performance frameworks- those in the Cynefin’s simple domain: apply best practices, leverage what has worked before, and continuously improve.  For the rest of us facing increasing VUCA, the question is How do we lead, manage and execute differently?

In addition to the management techniques in the table above, the following sections overview several emerging approaches to align leadership, management and organizational activity within Cynefin domains.  Just as no two companies are exactly the same, in the same situation, with the same product mix, there is no one-size-fits-all best-approach to uncertainty.

Agile

Even though agile techniques can be applied in each of the Cynefin domains, there is no consensus on what constitutes an agile approach.  Strategy, culture, leadership, management, and an industry’s Cynefin domain must all be considered when striving to achieve targeted outcomes in uncertain times.

There are, however, characteristics which are common across instances of agile’s application.  Some of the most common benefits, techniques and challenges of agile can be found in VersionOne’s “11th Annual State of Agile” report, which are excerpted in the following.

Top agile benefits:

  • Ability to manage changing priorities
  • Project visibility
  • Increased team productivity
  • Delivery speed

Agile manages and executes differently through popular techniques:

  • Daily standup
  • Retrospectives (post-mortem to learn and improve)
  • Iteration reviews
  • Short iterations and release planning
  • Hierarchy; Network

Key challenges of implementing agile within the enterprise:

  • Company culture at odds with core agile values
  • Lack of agile experience
  • Lack of management support

While many agile techniques are popular, there are quite a few capabilities beyond agile, or possibly best blended with agile, to aid in leading, managing and executing in a highly VUCA environment.

Beyond Agile- Capabilities for Managing Uncertainty

How should we lead and manage in dynamic situations- those where both employees and organizations embrace uncertainty? Leaders must consider the willingness of the workforce to assume personal risk. “The whole concept of the all-knowing, omnipotent leader is over.  Employees know this isn’t reality- and value a more candid dialogue” according to a change consultant quoted in the MIT SMR article “Embracing Uncertainty.”  However, this will require a change in culture, including encouraging risk, and a more transparent, two-way communication– both based on a change in behaviors.

The Economist’s Managing Uncertainty, reinforces these themes including chapters on strategic anticipation (e.g., flexible planning), navigational leadership, agility, resilience, collaboration, and learning.  And, to focus on the implications of uncertainty relative to strategy for just a bit, the need to consider increasing speed (e.g., from housing bubble to the great recession), interconnectivity (e.g., Arab spring of 2011), and cyber-attacks (e.g., both political- Russia- and commercial- Equifax) as just a few considerations defining a wide-ranging view of the future.  “Strategy Under Uncertainty,” now an HBR classic, discusses four levels of uncertainty (e.g., clear– single view of the future, alternative– limited set of outcomes, range and ambiguity). And, like Cynefin, each level comes with a recommended tool kit, incorporating, for example, game theory, scenario planning and pattern recognition.  Most of these tools are still relevant today, depending on your Cynefin domain/situation.

Immediately following the unexpected U.S. 2016 presidential election results, the business press was awash with articles on uncertainty.  One such article, by Reeves of The Boston Consulting Group, implored an investment in strategic resilience including redundancy, diversity, modularity, adaption, prudence, and embeddedness. Each of these capabilities extend far beyond the traditional risk management approach (e.g., mitigate, avoid or accept risk).

With a focus on leadership, an MIT SMR article “The Five Steps All Leaders Must Take in the Age of Uncertainty” advocates for a new leadership paradigm, with a call for leaders to “master the art of shaping, rather than just operating within [systems],” including the following:

  • Understand the broader system
  • Intervene
  • Orchestrate collaboration
  • Manage risk
  • Lead with a new mindset (e.g., one of positioning and influencing)

The Harvard Business Press Learning Team has identified 14 characteristic skills needed for managing in a complex world.  In a recent Forbes article, the reviewer narrowed the learning team’s critical 8 to “five that are relevant to dynamic, network-oriented businesses future of work organization models,” including:

  • Cultivate learning agility
  • Develop personal adaptability
  • Leverage networks
  • Inspire engagement
  • Manage complexity

Another MIT SMR article suggests that when “Managing project uncertainty” (both an action and the article name), creating uncertainty profiles can help at a tactical level.

These techniques, and others, can provide a more robust tool kit to enable leaders and managers to both enhance and extend beyond agile. Another area for consideration is business strategy’s scenario planning which has proven a robust technique for thinking about uncertainty for decades.

Beyond Agile- Scenario Planning

According to the chairman of Decision Strategies International, a Heidrick & Struggles company, “Scenarios are well crafted narratives about the future that tell very different stories about what might happen… The aim is to stress-test your current strategy and make sure your plans contain enough flexibility that you will win no matter what the future holds.”

Like agile, “there is no cookie-cutter method” of “Using Scenario Planning to Reshape Strategy,” both a summary and a title of a recent MIT SMR article.  The article also includes the concept of the contextual and transactional environment, emphasizing the role of the strategy-environment interaction.

Shell’s use of scenarios in strategic planning is demonstrated in a number of exhibits in the California Management Review article, “Three Decades of Scenario Planning in Shell.” For example, “Bringing Scenarios to the Business” demonstrates the idea of scenario layers driving down from Global to Focused (e.g., Country) to Project (e.g., investment decisions) with explicit definition of implications at each level.

In our experience, scenario planning remains as much of an art as it is a science. Its most important impact may be facilitating leadership teams’ mindset away from linear forecasting and toward multiple paths with alternative visions of the future- requiring the necessary flexible capabilities based on impact (e.g., consequences) and some level-of-certainty of occurrence (e.g., probability).

When thinking about how to develop, manage and leverage the dynamic capabilities of agile, capabilities for managing uncertainty, and scenario planning, we have created an enabling approach to change, based on dynamic social networks.

Beyond Agile- Enhanced Execution through Dynamic Social Networks

GE’s vice-chairman, John Rice, describes the company’s efforts to bust silos, increase collaboration and build internal marketplace of ideas and solutions through social networks in a recent McKinsey Quarterly article.  Based on our work with clients and thought-leading practitioners over the last decade, we have developed an integrated approach on how-to manage and lead Dynamic Social Networks.  The basis of our Dynamic Social Network approach is founded on three key elements.

  • Link network-type with work-type
    Two types of social networks accomplish very different change and improvement objectives: purpose-driven and general-purpose networks
  • Lead and manage through a dual operation system
    With traditional hierarchy as a base, adding the skills and tools to manage and lead networks
  • Increase workforce engagement
    Four areas of focus will drive workforce engagement, including
    –  Community management
    –  Adoption process
    –  Right tool selection
    –  Experiential, community-supported learning process

Managing Today’s and Tomorrow’s Uncertainty

Uncertainty has always been with us.  However, as today’s trends blur traditional boundaries, the Tayloristic management paradigm of the 20th century, linear by design, needs to be supplemented by a faster, more nimble approach to achieve speed and flexibility through agile, integrated with traditional and “beyond agile” capabilities and methods.

Agile characteristics such as short sprints, roadmaps and minimum viable product, complemented by individual capabilities, scenarios and networks, can help you and your organization to support, to integrate with traditional, siloed-hierarchy, to execute processes and projects in all Cynefin domains- each with their unique mix of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA).

Good luck in your journey to find the right blend of agile, uncertainty management capabilities, scenario planning and networks with traditional leadership, management and execution approaches.  You now have at solid  introduction to frameworks and a way-of-thinking to help you make you sense of various levels of uncertainty, and to provide a winning combination we refer to as Business Velocity- the integrated approach needed to sense and respond quickly in today’s VUCA world.

 

 

REFERENCE

These endnotes represent specific reference materials used in preparation of this post.  As there are a number of topics pulled together for this discussion, the notes are sequenced to build on previous references, and, hopefully, make any additional reading easier for you.  We have utilized this approach in lieu of formal footnoting or bibliography.  Also, a few summary comments are included with most citations. The comments are meant to give you a sense of the cited resource.  Please note the citation summary comments may, or may not, have been specifically addressed above.

Endnotes: Agile

  1. “Agile 101,” The Agile Alliance.  A subway map infographic linking many Agile tactics by metaphoric routes of Agile’s “tribes” e.g., daily meeting; Graphic illustrates the central role of Scrum. https://www.agilealliance.org/agile101/
  2. “Embracing Agile,” Rigby, Sutherland & Takeuchi, HBR.  Six practices providing a practical guide to agile throughout the enterprise including “Understand where agile does or does not work,” a summary of the initial Agile Manifesto (c. 2001) principles. https://hbr.org/2016/05/embracing-agile
  3. “A Quick Introduction to Agile Management,” HBR 4M20 video.  Video touches on four key roles (leadership team, initiative owner, process facilitator, innovation team) and a 10-step scrum process. https://hbr.org/video/4846148015001/a-quick-introduction-to-agile-management
  4. “Agility in US national security,” Dowdy and Rieckhoff, McKinsey. Focus on responsiveness in face of volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity (VUCA); “Average S&P 500 company is now being replaced every two weeks;” speed and stability analysis; Concept- modular teams being the apps of the organization; Concept- Utilize OODA (observe, orient, decide and act) loop paired with moving the decision making lower within the organization.  http://www.mckinsey.com/industries/public-sector/our-insights/agility-in-us-national-security
  5. “Has Agile Management’s moment arrived?” Knowledge@Wharton.  Concept- Traditional business models (future looks like today, and we are good at forecasting) have not proven to be accurate;  Concept- Agile emphasizes responsiveness; Concept- Agile requires “recognizing a pattern and responding to it” http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/agile-managements-moment-arrived/ (Also see Sense and Respond, in “Managing Uncertainty” section below.)  http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/agile-managements-moment-arrived/
  6. “11th Annual State of Agile Report, Top three insights,” VersionOne 2M12 video. Agile adoption is growing, with more than one-half of surveyed companies’ teams still not using agile; Measuring enterprise agility with business value is not the most popular metric (speed is); Organizations continue to invest in Agile. https://explore.versionone.com/state-of-agile/11th-annual-state-of-agile-report-top-3-insights-2  Also see “11th Annual State of Agile Report,” VersionOne. Top three benefits 1) Ability to manage changing priorities, 2) Project visibility, and 3) Increased team productivity. https://explore.versionone.com/state-of-agile/versionone-11th-annual-state-of-agile-report-2

Endnotes: Uncertainty

  1. “There are known knowns,” Wikipedia. “a phrase from a response United States Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld gave to a question at a U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) news briefing on February 12, 2002 about the lack of evidence linking the government of Iraq with the supply of weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/There_are_known_knowns
  2. “Johari Window,” Wikipedia, Often a framework applied to business analysis, but does not consider the unknowable; possibly best applied to further analysis of simple and complicated domains where knowledge may be available. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johari_window
  3. “What VUCA really means for you,” Bennet, HBR.  Introduces the framework of Volatility, Uncertainty, Complexity and Ambiguity, including characteristics, examples and approach. https://hbr.org/2014/01/what-vuca-really-means-for-you  Also see “Volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity,” Wikipedia. “The notion of VUCA was introduced by the U.S. Army War College to describe the more volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous multilateral world which resulted from the end of the Cold War” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volatility,_uncertainty,_complexity_and_ambiguity
  4. “Breakthrough Ideas- Risk, Uncertainty & Doubt,” Nohria, HBR.  Brief article touches on a number of concepts including:  Taylorism’s focus on managing risk during (20th century); progression to Ford’s assembly line to budgeting tools to insurance, hedging, and portfolio management all focused on mitigating or managing calculable risk (20th century); And, today’s need to manage uncertainty which is incalculable, in a world where stable equilibrium is unnatural, and the role doubt plays with no “right” outcome. Concept- scenario planning is a tool which can help. https://hbr.org/2006/02/breakthrough-ideas-for-2006
  5. Essential Scrum, A practical guide to the most popular agile process, Rubin, Addison-Wesley. Discussion introduces and frames the concept of domains of uncertainty within Agile; See Cynefin domains, p 7-9.
  6. “A Leader’s Framework for Decision Making,” Snowden and Boone, HBR. Defines five contexts (domains) of Cynefin as a sense-making framework (simple, complicated, complex, chaotic and disorder); Article includes decision by context supporting table addressing leadership approach. https://hbr.org/2007/11/a-leaders-framework-for-decision-making
  7. “Cynefin Framework,” Wikipedia. Article provides history and uses of Cynefin framework. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cynefin_framework
  8.  “Understanding Complexity,” van der Koogh, Medium. Contributed the domain analogy to games of varying uncertainty and complexity. https://medium.com/@evanderkoogh/understanding-complexity-cf1771fa087d
  9. “The critical difference between complex and complicated,” Kinni, MIT SMR. “Complicated problems can be solved with systems and processes;” “complex problems involve too many unknowns and too many interrelated factors to reduce to rules and processes.” http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-critical-difference-between-complex-and-complicated/
  10.  “Black Swan Theory,” Wikipedia.  “The non-computability of the probability of the consequential rate events using scientific methods;” [The improbable, the unknowable]. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_swan_theory

Endnotes: Managing Uncertainty

  1. “OODA Loop,” Wikipedia. Observe, orient, decide, and act; Decision making framework for more robust decisions; sequencing needs to vary depending on Cynefin domain. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OODA_loop
  2. “Embracing uncertainty,” Sweetman, MIT SMR. Four-part situation framework (status quo, unsettling, stifling, dynamic situations) considering both employee and company roles; study focused on doers, who often understand decisions better than managers. http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/leadership-embracing-uncertainty/
  3. Managing uncertainty, strategies for surviving and thriving in turbulent times, Syrett & Devine, The Economist, Touching on “new patterns of uncertainty” (p 11 Cynefin confirming domains) and key capabilities including flexible planning, leadership’s role, agility, resilience, open collaboration, predictive learning. https://media.economist.com/sites/default/files/pdfs/store/Managing_Uncertainty.pdf
  4. Sense and Respond, How successful organizations listen to customers and create new products continuously, Gothelf and Seiden, Harvard Business Review Press. Through a two-way conversation with the continuously changing marketplace, collaborative learning through sense (listening) and respond (acting).  The sequencing of a continuous feedback loop with the marketplace through concepts, like Sense-and-Respond and OODA can be adjusted to align with Cynefin domains of uncertainty.  Also see introduction of outcome focus versus output focus, p 116.
  5.  “Strategy Under Uncertainty,” Courtney, Kirkland and Viguerie, HBR. Prescriptive use of 1) analytic tools, 2) Strategic posture (shape, adapt, reserve right-to-play) and 3) Strategic portfolio; Concept- four levels of uncertainty (clear enough, alternative, range, true ambiguity); Introduction of scenario planning, game theory, systems approach (Senge) simulations, options. https://hbr.org/1997/11/strategy-under-uncertainty
  6. “A fresh look at strategy under uncertainty: An interview,” McKinsey. Uncertainty is formalized into a four-part (levels of uncertainty) framework. http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/a-fresh-look-at-strategy-under-uncertainty-an-interview; Also see, “Strategy under uncertainty,” Courtney, Kirkland & Viguerie, HBR
  7. “The world just got more uncertain and your strategy needs to adjust,” Reeves, HBR. Focus on the need for resilience including six principles (redundancy, diversity, modularity, adaption, prudence, embeddedness) given current social-political environment driving uncertainty.  https://hbr.org/2016/11/the-world-just-got-more-uncertain-and-your-strategy-needs-to-adjust
  8. “The five steps all leaders must take in the age of uncertainty,” Reeves, Levin, Harnoss and Ueda, MIT SMR. The “New Leadership Paradigm” includes 1) Understand broader system, 2) Master system intervention, 3) Orchestrate collaboration, 4) Manage systemwide risks, and 5) Lead with a new mindset (one that “transends corporate boundaries”). http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/the-five-steps-all-leaders-must-take-in-the-age-of-uncertainty/
  9.  “Corporate Learning in a Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, Ambiguous World,” Shah (Future-of-Work contributor), Forbes. Includes introduction, assessment and prioritization of Harvard Business Publishing’s “8 critical capabilities for a complex world”; author’s focus is on 5 (Cultivate learning agility, develop personal adaptability, leverage networks, inspire engagement, manage complexity) of 20 elements grouped into three categories (leading the business, leading yourself, and leading others). https://www.forbes.com/sites/rawnshah/2015/09/22/corporate-learning-in-a-volatile-uncertain-complex-ambiguous-world/#2389563a66a9
  10.  “Managing Project Uncertainty: From variation to chaos,” De Meyer, Lock & Pich, MIT SMR. Considers risk management and getting beyond risk management to the “unforeseen uncertainties;” Introduces four types of uncertainty (variation, foreseen uncertainty, unforeseen uncertainty, and chaos). http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/managing-project-uncertainty-from-variation-to-chaos/
  11. “How to Prepare for the Unexpected,” The author defines scenarios, their objective, and a six-step approach on “how to.” https://www.inc.com/paul-j-h-schoemaker/scenario-planning-prepare-for-unexpected.html
  12. “Using Scenario Planning to Reshape Strategy,” MIT SMR. Article profiles the “Oxford Approach” to scenario planning and provides several case studies. http://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/using-scenario-planning-to-reshape-strategy/
  13. “Scenario Planning,” Wikipedia. Article overviews history of scenario planning, and the concept’s origins at Royal Dutch/Shell; Considers social, technical, economic, environmental and political (STEEP) trends; References Senge’s system thinking and how “many factors may combine in complex ways to create sometimes surprising futures.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scenario_planning
  14. “Three Decades of Scenario Planning in Shell,” Cornelius, van de Putte and Romani, California Management Review. Article covers history and evolution of scenario planning at Royal Dutch Shell. http://strategy.sjsu.edu/www.stable/B290/reading/Cornelius,%20P.,%20A.%20Van%20de%20Putte,
    %20et%20al.,%202005,%20California%20Management%20Review%2048(1)%2092-109.pdf
  15. “How GE is becoming a truly global network,” Rice, McKinsey Quarterly. Rice, GE’s vice chairman, discusses their focus on internal networks, enabling technology, culture and leadership to “move at a speed that’s determined by customer and markets.” http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/organization/our-insights/how-ge-is-becoming-a-truly-global-network
  16. “Enhanced Enterprise Execution, Catalyzed by a Dynamic Social Network,” Everson and Reeder, Adjuvi Working-Draft Whitepaper.  Our approach provides for increased business velocity (speed and agility) to manage in an uncertain environment by complementing processes and projects with business social networks within the value chain, focused on: aligning the right network-type to the work-type, leading and managing through a dual operating system, and increasing workforce engagement. https://adjuvillc.box.com/s/pm9vme97etxs029ribp2jr95q86dllxr

The post Why Agile Management? Because it is an increasingly VUCA world appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/why-agile-management-because-it-is-an-increasingly-vuca-world/feed/ 5 What You Need to Know About Business Models https://nextforge.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-business-models/ https://nextforge.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-business-models/#respond Wed, 01 Feb 2017 21:12:49 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2345 Starting with a common vocabulary of Professor Christensen's (HBS) popular 4-part model: Customer Value Proposition; Resources; Processes; Profit Formula. The emphasis on each of the 4 dimensions varies during three discrete stages of maturity. We then share a general management framework successfully used in multiple industry verticals.

The post What You Need to Know About Business Models appeared first on .

]]> Everyone wants a new one; Few are successful

“In a recent McKinsey poll, 84 percent of global executives acknowledged that innovation is extremely important to their growth strategies, yet a staggering 94 percent were unsatisfied with their own innovation performance.”  From Competing Against Luck

How do you best support innovation and change?  What interdependencies within your organization are impacted by necessary innovation?  What type of innovation are you, or should you be, focused?  Depending on the magnitude of the innovation/change, you may need to adjust or completely change your business model.

Early in my career I had the opportunity to assess and consolidate a number of functional business models for a client- boiling down the common and unique elements to create an integrated, enterprise-wide business model.  Recently there is some research pointing not only to a simple model of the critical moving parts, but also insight into common stages of maturity relevant to business models and implications for leaders and managers driving innovation. Let’s begin with a common framework for thinking about the key elements of a business model.

 

Business model framework: A common vocabulary

Since at least 2008, Professor Christensen at Harvard’s business school has been advocating for a four-part, integrated business model.  The following provides a quick introductory overview of the four, rather intuitive elements of this model. These definitions are from “The Hard Truth About Business Model Innovation” MITSloan Management Review, Fall 2016.

Customer Value Proposition A product that helps a customer to more effectively, conveniently, and affordably do a job they’ve been trying to do (Note: A “customer’s job” is a technique to better understand value to the customer- “creating ¼ inch holes” are the value versus “buying ¼ inch drill bits”)

Resources People, technology, products, facilities, equipment, brands and cash required to deliver this value proposition to targeted customers

Processes Ways of working together to address recurrent tasks in a consistent way: training, development, manufacturing, budgeting, planning, etc.

Profit Formula Assets and fixed cost structure, and the margins and velocity required to cover them

All four of the elements are interdependent.  Any change in one will require an adjustment in the other three.  The interdependencies provide much of the power and understanding this model.  These pathways also enable the framework’s use as an analytic frame to enhance understanding of the implications of innovation and of supporting change.

Note in the graphic “Our preferred framework,” the left stack of Value Proposition and Profit Formula represent entity “Priorities.” With the right stack of Resources and Processes representing “Capabilities.”

 

Driving to an actionable level

In order to be actionable, we need to understand and align the capabilities side of the model, and how those capabilities link to the customer value proposition and the profit formula. From our work in a number of industries, the “General Management Framework” can provide a analytic framework for the next step into the details of aligning resources and processes.

Target Market represents the ultimate consumer of your goods and products. Segmentation differentiates clusters within the market based on needs and preferences.

Distribution Channels are how you “sell into” your target segments depending on needs and preferences. The Internet has brought another distribution channel into play causing some companies to compete directly with their customers.

Offering is the combination of your products and services. Think of this as the Customer Value Proposition.

People and Capabilities represents most of your business’ assets including people, processes, technology and physical infrastructure, brand, industry relationships, patents, intellectual property, and many, many others.

Organization quite simply defines the structure, roles and scope of the departments, divisions, functions that make up your business.

When developing the General Management Framework, interestingly the missing link- not found in the functional models- was “Profitable Sale and Use.”  We believe this concept of sales connects the General Management Framework (e.g., Target Market, Distribution Channels, Offering (CVP), People and Capabilities) to the Profit Formula (e.g., Revenue, Cost Structure, Margin, Resource Velocity).  We strongly believe Profitable Sales and Use needs to be explicit in all business models.

 

Other Business Model Frameworks- A sidebar

If you are looking for an alternative business model framework, see Osterwalder’s Business Model Canvas which includes:

  • Customer segments
  • Channels and Customer relationships
  • Value Proposition
  • Key Activities and Key Resources
  • Key Partners
  • Cost Structure and Revenue Streams

Osterwalder, et al, also have a good workbook on a structured approach to Value Proposition Design if you are looking for “how to” approach to complement Christensen’s “job to be done” from Competing Against Luck.

 

Recent research: Business models follow a one-way, three-stage journey

This fall Christensen, Bartman, and van Bever published research findings on business model phases including two principles for consideration by all leaders and managers.

First, there are three discrete stages all business models follow in their maturity journey.  Each stage focused on a different type of innovation, measurement and management.

Creation Stage Primary focus is on market creation, jobs to be done, and maintaining a flexible business model.

Sustaining Stage Primary focus is on how to continue and build on success, measuring income, and crafting processes.

Efficiency Stage Primary focus is on efficiency, measuring assets, and a rigid business model including return on capital.

Second, there is a single pathway or roadmap through the stages, and it is sequential.  Research has shown the business model tightens over time for all the right reasons- to maximize profitable sales and use.  Metrics continue to become more sophisticated and refined.  And, managers spend more time on tweaking the capabilities to eke out incremental changes to the profit formula.

 

Implications and thoughts

We believe there are three key trends driving business change today including:

Accelerating Technological Innovation

Digital technological change is pervasive, is disruptive, and is changing most everything (e.g., cloud, big data, IoT, social business, mobile, consumerization of IT, machine learning/AI, robotics, genetics, 3D printing)

Blurring Boundaries

Technology innovation is accelerating the blurring of boundaries including geographical (e.g., globalization), industry (e.g., Apple in handsets and music, Amazon in retail and web services, Airbnb in hospitality), and those walls within the enterprise (e.g., go-to-market, supply chain, digital transformation).

Shifting Demographics

Changing workforce demographics create talent sourcing challenges and cognitive deficits.  Millennial talent churn is occurring, while Baby Boomers are leaving and taking their expertise with them.  And, in a parallel theme, shifting demographics are also impacting the marketplace.

These and other trends have shortened the life-span of companies.  According to Innosight, “Half of the S&P 500 companies are expected to be replaced over the next 10 years.”

In order for your company to continue to compete, you will no doubt be faced with the need for significant innovation within your business model.  This redefinition of your business will require a different capabilities’ stack and will require realignment of the elements of the General Management Framework.

Using the business model framework as a common language is helpful, particularly for functional managers who have not had much experience working across the enterprise.  Defining and analyzing the pathways between the four elements (Customer Value Proposition, Resources, Processes, and Profit Formula) can help optimize for building and sustaining a successful enterprise at each stage of business model maturity- both today and tomorrow.

Depending on the size of your organization, you should consider your portfolio of business models.  If, for example, most of your businesses are in the efficiency stage- what are you doing to prepare for the future?  Determining the right blend of businesses in each of the three stages is essential for your business’ long-term health.

Once you have clear targets for your Create-Stage models, consider developing a process for enabling and supporting new business model creation.  BCG advocates four approaches to business model innovation depending on impetus and focus (e.g., Reinvent, Maverick, Adventure and Adaption). It is possible this incubator may need to be outside of your current business, recalling the three stages are sequential.  Perhaps you can “reframe your beliefs” to support innovation as McKinsey posits.  Or, perhaps there are a number of companies with similar needs with whom you could fashion a non-competing network to create a supportive ecosystem.

“Over the long term, the greatest innovation risk a company can take is to decide not to create new businesses that decouple the company’s future from that of its current business units.”

Clay Christensen 1.24.2017 MITSloan Webinar

 

Endnotes and References

See Bartman, “Unlocking Growth and Resilience, Mastering business model innovation to survive and thrive in times of disruption,” Fall 2016 Trending@HBS Webinar Series- Harvard Business School Alumni Events, December 2, 2016. [Internet Webinar] From author’s notes: 2/3 of HBS MBAs take Prof. Christensen’s business model class- BSSE, Building and Sustaining a Successful Enterprise.

Christensen, Bartman, van Bever, “The Hard Truth About Business Model Innovation,” MITSloan Management Review (Fall 2016)

See Christensen, et al, Competing Against Luck, The story of innovation and customer choice (NY, NY: HarperCollins, 2016) for details of the “customer’s job” a manufacturer or a service provider is trying to accomplish- recently popularized as “Milk Shake Marketing.” Innovation quote can be found in the Introduction Chapter, page x

Christensen and van Bever, “Building a Business Creation Engine,” MITSloan Management Review Webinar, January 24, 2017. [Internet Webinar] [cited 1.30.2017] Video webinar available from http://sloanreview.mit.edu/webinar-building-a-business-creation-engine/on-demand/ Webinar slides available from http://marketing.mitsmr.com/events/HBS-Christensen-Webinar-2017.pdf

See de Jong and van Dijk, “Disrupting Beliefs: A new approach to business-model innovation,” McKinsey Quarterly, July 2015. [Internet] [cited 1.30.2017] http://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/disrupting-beliefs-a-new-approach-to-business-model-innovation regarding testing beliefs for innovation- McKinsey’s five step model to “reframe” and four potential focus areas

See Johnson, Christensen and Kagermann, “Reinventing Your Business Model,” Harvard Business Review (December 2008) for Christensen’s initial article on the four-box business model framework (e.g., Customer Value Proposition, Resources, Processes, and Profit Formula)

See Lingardt and Ayers, “Driving Growth With Business Model Innovation,” BCG Perspectives, October 8, 2014. [Internet] [cited 1.30.2017] Available from https://www.bcgperspectives.com/content/articles/growth_innovation_driving_growth_business_model_innovation/ for a way of thinking of four scenarios for business model innovation based on a 2×2 with axes of Impetus (defend against industry decline or disruption; aspire for breakout growth) and of Focus (transform the core; Expand into noncore).  Also, see the second paragraph of the article for more detail on BCG’s executive 2014 survey on innovation

Osterwalder and Pigneur, Business Model Generation, A handbook for visionaries, game changers, and challengers (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2010)

Osterwalder, et al, Value Proposition Design, How to create products and services customers want (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2014)

Reeder, “General Management Framework,” NextForge Point of View [Internet] [cited 1.30.2017] https://nextforge.com/?p=171 

 

The post What You Need to Know About Business Models appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/what-you-need-to-know-about-business-models/feed/ 0 Elements of Continuous Improvement https://nextforge.com/elements-of-continuous-improvement/ https://nextforge.com/elements-of-continuous-improvement/#respond Mon, 24 Oct 2016 18:00:47 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2246 Elements of continuous improvement are based on analysis of 10 popular continuous improvement methodologies. We identified 28 common elements and grouped them into three lifecycle meta categories of Direction, Analysis and Execution. Based on our work to embed continuous improvement within a client, we share some of our approach thinking.

The post Elements of Continuous Improvement appeared first on .

]]> Excellent firms don’t believe in excellence- only in constant improvement and constant change.

Tom Peters

How do you think about improvement in and around your company?


There are countless choices for thinking about continuous improvement, from Deming’s quality movement to Hammer’s process reengineering to Toyota’s TPS.  More recently, “lean” has entered the lexicon and combined with previous methods as well as emerging methods (e.g., lean six sigma, lean agile).

The most commonly overlooked first step in any improvement program is to be clear on your objective.  For example, are we working to reduce costs within a particular function?  Or, are we trying to innovate for risk-reduction in the field?  Or, are we trying to satisfy leadership’s mandate to fully integrate the most recent acquisition?

We were recently asked by a client, who had no structured approach to improvement, to help them think through continuous improvement; like any good consultant, we started with a bit of research.

 

What are your options?

Judging from the pop business publishing industry, there are dozens of unique, competing methodologies to follow depending on your strategy, your point of departure, and your expertise.

Based on our experience, we know there is quite a bit of overlap across the historic, recently popular, and emerging business improvement methods.  We began our client discussion by grouping common concepts within the most prevalent improvement approaches – identifying 28 relatively MECE elements, falling into three areas of focus, or themes.  More on this in a bit.  First, let’s tease apart the types of work we want to improve.

For those of us who are DIYers, we work to maintain and improve our homes and yards on nights and weekends. Even those of us who hire others to take care of these chores know there is a continuum of home improvement.  There are those that are capital intensive, requiring heavy investment in planning and execution.  For example, projects to add a second floor to your house with new bedrooms and baths are on the complex end.  On the simpler end of the continuum, spurred by an article on new lighting technology, you might replace your incandescent lights with LED bulbs some Saturday.  Stretching Chris Anderson’s observation of a number of industries, we refer of these two types of projects as the head projects (the few, the large, the expensive) and the tail projects (the small, the many, the “minor investment required”).  (See exhibit “One view of improvement can be thought of as effort of head and tail.”  Also, for a more detailed treatment of the head and tail see our post “Agile framework for go-to-market execution”)

 

Where do you need to focus?

Continuing with our analogy, enterprise strategic projects tend to be large, periodic, event-driven investments like the bedroom additions – a head activity.  An example of a head project within the enterprise setting might be integration of an acquisition.  Complex planning and integration, usually crossing organizational boundaries, is required for these head-type projects. Tail efforts, each producing relatively low incremental economic potential, must be efficient and tend to be self-directed affairs; examples include improvement of small-group operations or workflow within a team.  Typically, tail projects can be conducted without impacting others outside the team or function – similar to the light bulb changes in the house.

The cumulative business impact of tail projects can exceed that of head projects with lower investment and implementation risk.  Additionally, we believe continuous improvement and adjustment to core processes can mitigate the need for the number and size of strategic head projects.  Given the potential, we see Continuous Improvement as a tool, a value system, and a set of internal capabilities designed to attack these tail projects in aggregate.

 

What capabilities do you need?

From a broader adoption perspective, many of the capabilities needed for improvement, whether on head or tail projects, are interchangeable.   Familiar frameworks supportive of both head and tail efforts include work process management and responsibility mapping. The skills adopted by former head team members can spread organically as they are released from the project and return to hierarchical roles – trained in the art of what is possible – to apply relevant methodologies to the day-to-day work of the organization. (For more detailed treatment of change elements of adoption see our post “Change Leadership II- Understanding Kotter” for a discussion of the dual-operating system.)

However, development and transfer of problem solving skills does not occur by chance; development of sustainable capabilities must be an explicit, defined outcome of the initiative.  Further, a singular focus on capability development without an experiential link is likely to underperform.  Traditional training is expensive, and will meet resistance without a tie to “real world purpose.”  Building for the future requires projects that deliver immediate-term impact while concurrently building improvement skills.  We call this approach to integrated project design “Delivering on Two Fronts.”

As we thought through our client’s request for improvement, we uncovered a need to simplify the myriad of overlapping, sometimes competing improvement models.  (Note:  We are generally tool agnostic; if a suitable methodology is embedded in a client organization we find it better to build on existing capability than dogmatic adherence to a particular method)  In this case, like in many organizations, no one model had been adopted, and the questions were more typically “which one” and “how much sophistication” do we need?  What we found was that the best solution may be “parts” of several different models, and there are more than a few capabilities that are central to all of the popular frameworks including:

  • Engagement and mobilization of the workforce
  • Well-understood and agreed problem statement
  • Defined and documented work processes
  • Process and output measures

For this client, we simplified the key elements of the most popular methodologies into a few themes.  Regardless of the analytics you may use within each of these themes, you will need to address each one to a greater or a lesser extent, depending on your organization’s level of continuous improvement maturity:

  • Direction
  • Analysis
  • Execution

We always recommend keeping in mind one of our foundational beliefs – everything should be focused on business outcomes.

 

How to think about improvement- detailed capabilities

We have identified nearly 30 key elements proposed by the most common methodologies (See exhibit “Key Themes and Elements of Continuous Improvement Methods”).  Each element represents a distinctive capability that are uniquely combined and emphasized to define a particular methodology.  We have applied our judgement to identify what we believe are the “top 10” core elements list (indicated by a prevalence of solid Harvey balls) for each of the 10 popular methods.

If you choose a particular methodology, what do you get?

The matrix can help you understand the relative focus and comparative differences between, for example, Business Process Reengineering and Lean.  The difference of the high importance of Executive Accountability associated with Business Process Reengineering (solid Harvey balls) contrasts with the limited focus within Lean (blank Harvey balls).

If you choose a particular capability, what do you need?

Taking a different perspective, you can look at the key element requirements and self-assess your organization (e.g., SWOT) against the elements (rows) of any of the methodologies we have profiled (columns).  For those elements identified as strengths, you can see which frameworks will feel most natural; conversely, if you have identified existing weaknesses you know need to be improved, you can see which framework will emphasize development of that capability.

 

What do you need and when?

Selecting which elements are most important to your organization depends on: your strategy, where you are in your continuous improvement capability, what you need now, what you will need in the near-term, the split between head and tail projects, etc. – not unlike defining requirements of an information system.

When thinking about the longer term, you should consider not only which elements to add to your capability and in what sequence, but also what is the best mix of execution types (e.g., process, projects, communities)  required for various core commercial processes.  Also, consider how the execution mix will change through time.

Another consideration is where your organization is vis-à-vis future elements, and its readiness for the required speed of adoption.  You should, as we do with our clients, capture this thoughtful planning in a roadmap – defining milestones, business outcomes, capability/element, and capability building over time.  (See maturity illustration along several dimensions in the exhibit “Thinking through “what” and “how fast.”)

When considering exactly where to begin in this example – establishing a basic set of desired capabilities – we developed an initial continuous improvement profile (disguised) as a starting point for an organization beginning their journey into continuous business improvement (See exhibit “A view of table stakes for a continuous improvement program”).  We identified these table stakes as the foundational capabilities our client needed to launch their improvement program while remaining within the context of their business strategy.  We began with a cross-functional meeting of all influential managers, assessing existing capabilities, and determining gaps for each of these essential elements.

In subsequent discussions, we prioritized what was needed (for example, tools and individual skills), and pulled together solutions to develop these needs in head-type projects to simultaneously close priority performance gaps.  These head projects, paired with a broader organizational adoption of an improvement mindset, have positioned our client to more efficiently and effectively accommodate business improvement – for both head and tail opportunities.

Good luck with your constant improvement and constant change efforts – in striving for excellence.

 

The post Elements of Continuous Improvement appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/elements-of-continuous-improvement/feed/ 0 Safe Execution: Business-IT risk discussion https://nextforge.com/safe-execution-business-it-risk-discussion/ https://nextforge.com/safe-execution-business-it-risk-discussion/#respond Wed, 25 Sep 2013 21:18:55 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2216 Getting away from C-I-NO! Discuss Business-IT risk more rationally by considering the 4A's of Availability (of business processes), Access (by the right people), Accuracy (of the information) and Agility (of change). But the most critical element is start the dialogue with IT.

The post Safe Execution: Business-IT risk discussion appeared first on .

]]> If you are anything like me, historically your initial discussions with IT drifts toward their requirements and policies- some version of a C-I-“No”.  This is usually followed by some type of business-sponsor intervention allowing us to technologically enable our business outcome, with at least a little lingering animosity.  During a recent webinar1, Professor George Westerman of MIT’s Sloan Center for Digital Business says it doesn’t have to be this way.

Professor Westerman’s belief is the conflict between the business strategic outcome and IT’s natural resistance to manage and maintain the changes and exceptions into perpetuity can be addressed by:

  • thinking about IT’s risk, and
  • focusing a dialogue with IT on the four A’s (Availability, Access, Accuracy, Agility)

The Four A’s

The four A’s (click on exhibit How to talk about IT Risk: The Four A’s) seem like a very rational place to start a technology enablement discussion.  Initial dimensions center a business-technology discussion around the tradeoffs of business outcomes, service level agreements (SLAs), and potential risks.  By focusing on these types of risk, Westerman posits, we get away from discussion of security, policy, vetoes, “no” and “can’t” to alternatives and managing risk.  Increasing understanding and getting risk built into every conversation should be the goal.

A risk based system

The four A framework functions within a system of “good governance platform”, a foundational technical platform “fit for purpose”, a risk aware culture, and internal communication to facilitate collaboration.  Westerman also discussed six key factors2 to start the transformation to a risk based system.

  1. Talk and think differently about IT risk management
    (e.g., Use the four A framework to assess each business process)
  2. Use the risk governance process to improve IT, not just protect it
    (e.g., Does business continuity inform multiple areas?)
  3. Promote a risk-aware culture
    (e.g., Does risk management support business excellence?)
  4. Break down silos inside IT
    (e.g., Can we use risk to frame infrastructure improvements?)
  5. Be ready for new technologies
    (e.g., What alternatives exist?)
  6. Make risk management part of strategic discussions
    (e.g., Is there a better way?)

The bottom line

Start the dialogue with IT.  I look forward to using the four A’s next chance I get.

 

End Notes and References

1 “IT Risk: The conversation you must have now”, Harvard Business Review Webinar, September 25, 2013, featuring Professor George Westerman, Research Scientist, MIT Center for Digital Business [internet].  Also see Professor Westerman’s books IT Risk: Turning Business Threats Into Competitive Advantage (2007) with and The Real Business of IT: How CIOs Create and Communicate value (2009) both co-authored with Richard Hunter and published by Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
2 This listing is summarized from two slides “How to start your transformation” presented during the “IT Risk: The conversation you must have now”, Harvard Business Review Webinar, September 25, 2013 [internet].  Sub-bullets from the presentation have been edited to one example for clarity.

 

The post Safe Execution: Business-IT risk discussion appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/safe-execution-business-it-risk-discussion/feed/ 0 Blue Ocean Growth https://nextforge.com/blue-ocean-growth/ https://nextforge.com/blue-ocean-growth/#comments Tue, 23 Jul 2013 00:02:46 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2156 We explore the blue ocean growth metaphor (i.e., don't look for growth in highly competitive, red ocean, product/market structures) by summarizing a frame made popular by Kim and Mauborgne (c. 2004), including bringing in what we believe inspired Kim and Mauborgne- Ansoff's product/market matrix (c. late 1950's).

The post Blue Ocean Growth appeared first on .

]]> Blue Ocean Growth is not strategy

Strategy is based in competition, derived from Greek generals, and littered with the vocabulary of war.  Our own definition of strategy, included within the strategic architecture of our strategy-paksm, builds off this combative thinking.  And, while business strategy may share similar goals, tools and a development approach by the same accountable executives, let’s explore how Blue Ocean Growth- highly profitable growth- should be treated differently.

Blue Ocean Growth relies on marketing in one of its purest forms- marketing insights- to align market opportunity with company offering.  Paraphrasing from some of our previous work Marketing Insights seeks, anticipates and understands customer needs, motivations, trends and behaviors.  The blue ocean segment of the market is uncontested market space where competition is irrelevant, demand is created, and the market space is unknown1.

To complete the metaphor, the red ocean is known market space where products and services are prone to commoditization and where “evermore intense competition turns the water bloody”1.

Blue Ocean versus Red Ocean

Red Ocean Strategy Blue Ocean Strategy
Compete in existing marketplace Create uncontested market space
Beat the competition Market where the competition is irrelevant
Exploit existing demand Create and capture new demand
Make the value/cost tradeoff Break the value/cost tradeoff

This table is excerpted from “Blue Ocean Strategy”, Harvard Business Review, October 2004

Kim and Mauborgne, the authors of “Blue Ocean Strategy” (2004), also layout the Four Actions Framework, a formalized analysis framework, to further differentiate red-ocean from blue-ocean (new value curve) markets.

  • REDUCE: Which factors should be reduced well below the industry’s standard?
  • CREATE: Which factors should be created that the industry has never offered?
  • RAISE: Which factors should be raised well above the industry’s standard?
  • ELIMINATE: Which of the factors that the industry takes for granted should be eliminated?2

Kim and Mauborgne have also substantiated the advantages of Blue Ocean Growth through their research of the lower percentage new market initiatives. Summarily, while blue ocean initiatives accounted for just 14% of the investment by the studied organizations, the blue ocean initiatives yielded 38% of all revenue growth and accounted for 61% of total profit.1

Blue Ocean Growth: A Historical Perspective

Working with leadership teams over time, I have come to realize it can be helpful to go back to a version of Ansoff’s product/market matrix as a way to visualize the opportunities of blue ocean growth.

  • Product Development
  • Market Development
  • Diversification
  • Market Penetration3 (Red Ocean)

 

Fast forward about 40 years and consider Hamel and Prahalad’s seminal work Competing for the Future (1994).  While discussing the capabilities (core competences) required to go to market, the concept of white-space with “mega-opportunities”4 assigned to what corresponds to Ansoff’s “Diversification” strategy along with the  existing / existing markets’ analysis seems uncannily familiar.

 

Now skip another 10 years along the timeline to Kim and Mouborgne’s effort “Blue Ocean Strategy” (2004).  And think back to our overview above.  The same Ansoff/Hamel framework appears to be a natural fit.  Bending the boundaries of known market space/industry, the adjacent opportunities resonate like Ansoff’s “market and product development” quadrants, and, when combined support the “diversification” cell. Further, looking through Hamel’s lens of capabilities helps us triangulate on red-ocean market penetration and utilizing existing capabilities beyond the boundaries of our known market.

 

Blue Ocean Growth has a role in business planning

As you work through your business plans, talking about competitive strategy and Porter’s choice5, dedicate some thinking time for the unknown market spaces which provide a higher return than the blood red ocean of today’s marketplace.

 

 

 

End Notes and References

1 Kim and Mauborgne, “Blue Ocean Strategy”, Harvard Business Review, (October 2004)

2 Kim and Mauborgne, “Blue Ocean Strategy: From Theory to Practice”, California Management Review, (Spring 2005)

3 Ansoff reference from “Diversification (marketing strategy)”, Wikipedia [Internet] [Cited July 10, 2013]. Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diversification_%28marketing_strategy%29.  Ansoff defined four main growth strategies in a market/product 2×2 matrix.  Also see- Moore, Writers on strategy and strategic management,  (New York, New York: Penguin 1992), pp 15-33.

4 Hamel and Prahalad, Competing for the Future, (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press, 1994).  See Figure 10-2 “Establishing the core competence agenda”, p 227.

5 Porter, “What is strategy?”, Harvard Business Review, (November-December 1996)

 

First photo of girl and red ocean is from the internet.  See http://www.izi-travel.com/the-blood-red-ocean-in-australia/

The post Blue Ocean Growth appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/blue-ocean-growth/feed/ 1 Change Leadership- Traversing the emotional cycles of change https://nextforge.com/change-leadership-traversing-the-emotional-cycles-of-change/ https://nextforge.com/change-leadership-traversing-the-emotional-cycles-of-change/#comments Wed, 19 Jun 2013 00:51:31 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2115 Traversing the emotional cycles of change is critical to successful change leadership- achieving business results. With research, now common belief, that more than 2/3 of transformation efforts fail, we explore an analogy of significant change with the documented stages of cancer patients.

The post Change Leadership- Traversing the emotional cycles of change appeared first on .

]]> I have a client who is an avid outdoorsman. He often waxes poetically about his kayaking in the Rocky Mountain streams near his cabin- “as long as the water isn’t too high”- and mountain climbing in west Texas. Occasionally, he leaves right after work to get a jump on yet another weekend climbing adventure. His hands are appropriately callused to support all of his outdoor interests and quests. So, looking back it is no surprise he drifted up to the front of the room to talk after a leadership team’s discussion about several “management tools”.

“You know I use this analogy all the time,” he said, referencing the cycle of change. “I tell [my staff] that as you cross the valley below and on much of the climb up, you often cannot see the summit- you just have to believe.”

Change is hard.

Hard for the organization. Kotter’s research indicates 70% of change initiatives fail1.

Hard for the individuals.  Holmes and Rahe have researched individuals’ stress, including ranking of different types of stress.  Further, they have correlated individuals’ levels of stress back to physical illness- large amounts of stress increases your risk of illness.  While it is no surprise there is stress related to business change, the amount of stress for a “business readjustment” is ranked just below “pregnancy” and a bit  above “death of a close friend.”2

How to think about the cycle of change

We need to think about the individuals.  We need to lead and manage the organization, by changing behaviors of the individual.  One mental model we can borrow is one from those facing even more difficult life change- those facing the diagnosis of cancer.  Elisabeth Kübler-Ross introduced the idea of “five stages of grief” in her book On Death and Dying based on her work with terminally ill patients3.  Change leadership practitioners have been using this same frame to describe the stages of change the organization is going through at least since the early 1990’s.  While there are several variations on Kübler-Ross’ initial work4, they seem to support a similar sequence of steps.  And we, as change leadership practitioners, must be ready to lead and manage not only for individuals and our teams, but in support of the organization’s change.

What we should do to go faster and to increase our chance of success

The first step toward improvement is recognition of this 5-step pattern in the cycle of change.  Next, we need to understand organizations change one person at a time.

If we are successful in helping better manage individuals, and thereby the organization, through better understanding of these steps, we can expect to improve on the 30% success rate in achieving our business outcome and on accomplishing the targeted outcome in less time.  The following is illustrative of the type of change management thinking change leaders need to put into leading and managing change throughout the 5 steps of the emotional cycles of change.

Steps in Emotional
Cycle of Change

To better manage the core team, consider…

Uniformed Optimism

Direct enthusiasm toward initial steps-
“It is going to be a long road”

Informed Pessimism

Focus on the approach and milestones-
“Let’s keep going toward the next deliverable”

Hopeful Realism

Revisit the overall business objective-
“We have probably seen the worst of it”

Informed Optimism

Celebrate incremental progress-
“We moved closer to our objective this week”

Objective Achievement

Ensure broad-based engagement-
“Now we are here, let’s lock-in our success”

End Notes and References

1  “The 8-Step Process for Leading Change”, Kotter International’s website [internet] [cited June 17, 2013] Available from  http://www.kotterinternational.com/our-principles/changesteps/changesteps.
2 Wikipedia, “Holmes and Rahe stress scale”, [internet] [cited June 17, 2013] Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holmes_and_Rahe_stress_scale.
3  Wikipedia, “Kübler-Ross model”, [internet] [cited June 17, 2013] Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model.
4  Elsass, Paul, “Stages of Acceptance in Cancer”, 10.2.2010 post on LIVESTRONG.com, [internet] [cited June 17, 2013] Available http://www.livestrong.com/article/267917-stages-of-acceptance-in-cancer/.  Elsass notes the National Cancer Institute recommends three stages of grief from Dr. Roberta Temes’ Living with an empty chair- a guide through grief, including Stage I) Shock & numbness (mechanical functioning); Stage II) Disorganization (hard to plan for the future); and, Stage III) Reorganization (acceptance of the new without the old).

The post Change Leadership- Traversing the emotional cycles of change appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/change-leadership-traversing-the-emotional-cycles-of-change/feed/ 1 The Email Opportunity for Improving Collaboration https://nextforge.com/the-email-opportunity-for-improving-collaboration/ https://nextforge.com/the-email-opportunity-for-improving-collaboration/#respond Fri, 24 May 2013 16:31:34 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2092 The email opportunity for improving collaboration considers how we spend half of our work-year on email. The new collaborative tools with more enhanced search, ask and share capabilities offer an obvious solution, as long as we don't end up doing both.

The post The Email Opportunity for Improving Collaboration appeared first on .

]]> According to an article published by Barry Gill in the June 2013 edition of Harvard Business Review, we spend half our work-year on email.  The statistics are based on Gill’s 2012 survey of 2,600 workers in the US, UK and South Africa who email everyday.

Gill helps us understand where that time goes as he profiles the 50% of our work-year in more detail:

  • 13% Writing emails
  • 15% Reading emails
  • 22% Other email activities (searching, archiving and managing)

Gill articulates the power of the evolving email for the searchable archive, the manager’s accountability source, and the document courier while discounting the “digital hipsters”.  However, today we can hack away at the 47 days we spend searching, archiving and managing our email as simplified in Andrew McAfee’s  treatment of social software platforms (Search, Ask, Share).  We do this through, for example, improved version control, transparent contribution, and ease of finding resources- both human and informational- available through these existing and ever improving social platforms.

That said, our attention needs to be on the business outcome.  We should focus our efforts, including changing our behaviors, to align the outcomes with our strategic direction.  The pull for better tools will follow naturally.

If ever there was a rationale for changing behaviors to support a social business approach inside the enterprise, freeing up at least part of the 111 days of each staffer, manager and executive currently invest in email by improving how they spend 22% of their year managing email would seem to be a good start.

The post The Email Opportunity for Improving Collaboration appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/the-email-opportunity-for-improving-collaboration/feed/ 0 The Calculus of Capabilities- An integrated maturity model https://nextforge.com/the-calculus-of-capabilities-an-integrated-maturity-model/ https://nextforge.com/the-calculus-of-capabilities-an-integrated-maturity-model/#respond Wed, 22 May 2013 04:17:16 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=2020 We present two foundational, integrated maturity frameworks as a follow-up to our previous post “The Calculus of Capabilities“, where we explored various capability maturity models (CMMs) by reverse engineering nearly 20 common CMMs.

The post The Calculus of Capabilities- An integrated maturity model appeared first on .

]]>  

For years executives (and more than a few consultants) have applied judgment in assessing a business’s capability readiness based at least in part on one-on-one interviews.  However, the need for a holistic understanding of core competences has been out of academia and in the real world for nearly 20 years.  To what effect?  Are you routinely measuring your core competencies?  Are you thinking about your capabilities holistically? Are you managing capabilities toward your goals defined by the corporate mission, vision and strategy?

During our initial post “The Calculus of Capabilities“, we explored the breadth of various capability maturity models, and we observed from our reverse engineering of approximately 20 capability maturity models (CMMs) the linkage between maturity-level and scope-of-involvement – said another way: the broader the true social collaboration, the higher the maturity level, independent of business focus. In this closing post of the two part series, we will explore two possible integrated frameworks for a holistic approach- fighting the trend toward fractionalized specialization of CMMs.

Working Draft Foundation 1- Proven Business Improvement Framework

Key components could follow a modified Hammer framework (People, Process, Technology and Strategy1)

  • Strategy
  • People (SEI P-CMM)
  • Process (Hammer’s Process & Enterprise Maturity Models PEMM2)
  • Technology (SEI SW-CMM)

As we consider what is missing from this modified Hammer framework- we did not uncover any widely-cited, or referenced, strategy capability maturity models.  Nor have we been exposed to a rigorous strategy CMM during our collective consulting and business experience.  That said, we propose the following to begin to fill the referenceable Strategy Capability Maturity Model gap.

Strategy is such a broad and often mis-applied concept (see our “Unpack Strategy” series for a more detailed treatment). To simplify, let’s stand on the shoulders of giants and assume our “realized strategy” is crafted from two forms of strategy- deliberate strategy and emergent strategy3 (see Mintzberg’s “Forms of Strategy”).

Why do we need two forms of strategy? Consider the types of scenarios we face as we develop strategy (opportunities) and then execute strategy (choices).  Not to get too wrapped around the axle with this concept as Mr. Rumsfeld did with the press, the known and unknown two by two matrix can provide an interesting reference frame for at least the need-based emergent strategy to complement the deliberate strategy of our planning processes.

Adding one final note to rationalize the selection of axes of the known-unknown two by two: We think of competitive environment, marketplace, economy etc. as providing us with opportunities and, paraphrasing from Professor Porter4, we make choices to execute certain opportunities and forgo others.

In the following we propose leading questions as a surrogate for exploring the types of capabilities necessary to develop and execute strategy.

Opportunities (creating and acting on market insights; adjusting go-to-market for maximum short-term and long-term impact)

  • Unknown- How does our risk management function help us with highly uncertain and highly impactful scenarios?  How actively are we considering black-swan5 events?
  • Known- How effective has our planning process been at preparing us for certain and highly impactful trends, regulations and events?

Choice (supported by decision making frames/mental models, roles and process)

  • Unknown- How ready are we to rapidly respond through, for example, realigning strategic project resources to respond to unexpected events and environmental changes?   How quickly do we share information from employees who interact in the market?  Do we have practices in place to formalize and fund emergent, innovative ideas?
  • Known- How right were we (key performance metrics and goals)?  How do we plan for being wrong6?

Advantages and Challenges of using Hammer’s process-based framework, modified to include strategy

Advantages Challenges
  • Broadly recognized process, technology and people capability maturity models e.g., Hammer’s PEMM assessment tools published (HBR 2007) and in use; SEI CMM models
  • Execution bias misses more market-focused elements e.g., customer, distribution channels
  • No broadly recognized strategic capability maturity model

Working Draft Foundation 2- Proven General Management Framework

Through our experience with a General Management Framework combined with more than 20 years of management consulting and business leadership, we have successfully used a general management framework in multiple industries.  The following summarize the areas of capability focus within the high-level framework of alignment, engagement and enblement.

Strategy & Leadership for alignment

  • Management & Direction
  • Financial/Asset Management
  • Goals & Objectives
  • Strategy/Vision including target market, offering and distribution

People/Management engagement for collaboration- how we work together

  • Relationships including customers, channel partners and suppliers
  • Organization
  • People/Talent/Community
  • Culture/Core Values
  • Environment
  • Communication

Systems/Processes for enablement

  • Measures
  • Data/Information
  • Systems/Tools/Technology
  • Work Processes

Advantages and Challenges of using General-Management-Model-based framework

Advantages Challenges
  • Focus on business strategy, not just functional strategy nor for specific strategic planks
  • Holistic approach to capabilities tied to driving profitable sales
  • Need to create a mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive (MECE) framework of capabilities
  • Effort required to tie business strategy requirements to key supporting capabilities

 

Side bar

This general management model is the basis of our Rapid Assessment Framework for a Rapid Opportunity Assessment- a surrogate for trained consultative interviews.  Participants assess key opportunity areas prioritized during an on-line survey session based on perceived opportunity to impact a specific business issue (current performance and what should be tomorrow’s objective). 

The areas for detailed assessment are chosen through a proven card-sort7 methodology of 14 business elements and today-tomorrow assessment of a relevant subset of approximately 100 topic areas detailing observable behaviors in a capability maturity model fashion.  We apply a four-level maturity model in this framework intentionally omiting level 5, disruptinve innovation.

 

Closing thoughts

Restating the obvious

There doesn’t appear to be a common capability maturity model for all elements of a rigorous business model.  However, this is no reason not to begin to blend rigorous capability planning (measure, prioritize and plan) into your existing and planned business planning processes.

Areas of necessary competitive advantage

Benchmarking is not enough for strategy where durable competitive advantage is necessary.  For example, consider Professor Hamel’s recent comment8  “Who did NASA benchmark for Curiosity9?”

Innovation embeds a life-cycle approach to whatever business element you consider.  Innovation drives S-curves and a constantly march to the next five levels of capability maturity by jumping from the previous curve.  While benchmarking can rapidly spread best practices, innovation is required for long-term competition.

This is the closing of a pair of posts focused on measuring capabilities and specifically exploring the use of Capability Maturity Models.  Also see the opening post “The Calculus of Capabilities“

 

End notes

1   Based on authors’ process improvement work, strategic alignment needs to be explicit and inform traditional process reengineering framework elements (e.g., people, process and technology/information), and yet is often overlooked. See Hammer and Champy, Reengineering the Corporation, (New York, New York: Harper Business, 1993) p80, “The business system diamond”.  Also see, McDonald,  Improving Business Processes, (Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing: 2010) p5.

2   See Hammer, “The process audit”, Harvard Business Review, April 2007 (reprint 14 pages).

3   See Mintzberg, The rise and fall of strategic planning, (New York, New York: Free Press, 1994) p24.  Also, see  graphic shown here sourced from a blog post [Internet] [cited May 7, 2013]. Graphic available from  http://richardjamessharp.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/deliberate.jpg.

4   See Porter, “What is strategy?”, Harvard Business Review, November-December 1996.  Pay particular attention to the concept of choice through a series of trade-offs- a way to establish a unique activity system in how you go-to-market.

5   As used in this post, consider the “undirected and unpredicted” event (9/11/2001) or series of events constituting an environment (the great recession) [internet] [cited 5.08.2013] Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/black_swan_theory.

6  See Heath (Chip and Dan), Decisive, (New York, New York: Crown Business, 2013), p 23.

7  See card sort [internet] [cited 5.8.2013] Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Card_sorting.

8  From authors’ webinar notes of “Change the Conversation, Change the Game”, a CIO/HBR panel discussion, [internet] webinar 5.6.2013

9  Regarding Curiosity- the car-sized rover exploring Mars since 8.6.2012- see [internet] available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curiosity_rover

 

The post The Calculus of Capabilities- An integrated maturity model appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/the-calculus-of-capabilities-an-integrated-maturity-model/feed/ 0 The Calculus of Capabilities https://nextforge.com/the-calculus-of-capabilities/ https://nextforge.com/the-calculus-of-capabilities/#respond Tue, 14 May 2013 20:59:03 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1983 In The Calculus of Capabilities we explore the breadth of approximately 20 common capability maturity models (CMMs), and we observed from our reverse engineering the linkage between maturity-level and scope-of-involvement. We propose a 5-level progression as a CMM base framework.

The post The Calculus of Capabilities appeared first on .

]]> How are we doing?

We typically focus on business performance – results delivered – when answering this question.  For example, what was last month’s top-line revenue, or what is our gross margin for the quarter?

However, if we were to swing the spotlight to focus that question on our capabilities- our ability to deliver- you may take a long-pause, deflect the question, or remember something about a benchmarking study we did 8 years ago.  We are often asked, “Are we that good, or are we just lucky?”  If the business results are not driven by underlying capability, luck is often a good guess.

Strategy should define the requirements and guide the priorities for our capabilities.  And yet, what is our scorecard for our capabilities?  How do we, or should we, measure our readiness to deliver?

Our experience tells us we need some objective measure of readiness- some way we can observe, with reference points, how we are doing- and, possibly more importantly, where we are gapped.

How do you think about capability or competence?  In the mid-1990’s there was a movement by academics to push a business’ competence, most notably Prahalad and Hamel’s focus on core competencies- “a bundle of skills and technologies that enables a company to provide a particular benefit to customers1.”  This mid-90’s rising awareness in business capabilities coincidentally, or perhaps not so coincidentally, paralleled the rise of probably the best known competency model- the software capability maturity model.  Ever since, businesses continue to explore an expanding number of competency models.  The following is a sampling of the business areas with developed capability maturity models.

  • Software (SW-CMM)2
  • Business Process Management (BPM)3
  • People (P-CMM)4
  • Business Strategy-IT Alignment5
  • Corporate Performance Management6
  • Change Management7
  • Business Intelligence (BI)8
  • Social Business9

And the list goes on.

So, what exactly do all of these capability maturity models do and…

What’s In It For Me (WIIFM)?

Röglinger (2012) proposes three nested levels of uses for capability maturity models.

  • Basic design principles to create a common language, including basic definitions and level of documentation
  • Descriptive purpose of use to create a shared need for change, including integrated (cross-topic) objective criteria, assessment methodology, and basic design principles
  • Prescriptive purpose of use to monitor for positive business improvements, including measures for each maturity level, decision calculus for selecting improvement measures, and adoption methodologies

The application of a capability maturity model (CMM) can provide an objective way for our organization to answer the question- How are we doing?

What makes up a Capabilities Maturity Model?

The best known capability maturity model, Carnegie Mellon University’s Software Engineering Institute’s (SEI) CMM, was initially commissioned by the US Air Force in the early 1990’s to increase the quality of software. Apparently SEI’s CMM has influenced the architecture of many of the capability maturity modeling following Watts Humphrey’s10  effort.  Although we have not dug beyond Philip Crosby to understand what ultimately informed Humphrey’s and his successors’ work, there is a good chance a model we are all familiar with could be the basis.  For example Maslow’s hierarchy of needs- advancing from physiological (food, water, shelter) to safety to belonging, self-esteem, and ultimately to self-actualization- seems a good candidate for providing the initial structure and understanding of the plethora of capability maturity models.

What we see by reverse engineering CMM models- an architecture for a CMM

Key observed characteristics of capability maturity models:

  • 5 levels (+ level 0 in some cases)
  • The CMM Structure
    –  Maturity levels indicate process capability
    –  Key process areas achieve goals
    –  Common features addressed or implemented or institutionalized
    –  Key practices describe infrastructure or activities
  • Software process framework (a checklist for each level)
    –  Policy
    –  Standard
    –  Process
    –  Procedure
    –  Level overview
  • Other (See “A working draft Capability Maturity Model”) including
    –  Business outcome including goals and measures
    –  Individual skills
    –  Organizational breadth
    –  Level of adoption/engagement

With so many overlaps among models about real-business in the real-world, it all starts to sound a bit academic.  The question we need to be asking ourselves in considering CMMs is “What is missing?”  Based on our experience and research, we find the models are not mutually exclusive, nor collectively exhaustive (MECE)11.  For example, thinking of the capability necessary for business in this hypercompetitive world [Porter, 1996], innovation within CMMs seems to be given only “continuous improvement” treatment.

So, where is innovation?  For example, Gary Hamel considers multiple dimensions of innovation in his innovation stack- also presented in a near-CMM form (see “Hamel’s Innovation Stack”).

A working draft integrated CMM strawmodel: Key business elements

After reviewing about 20 capability maturity models with varying business concentrations, we have developed a working draft for your consideration.  A way for you: to test the test, to check the rigor of a model in use, or to help define requirements.  Our five levels range from chaos to disruptive innovative.  We boiled our list of elements down to but a few from the high teens.

We found most of the elements regarding capability maturity level clustered around an ever expanding collaborative scope e.g., from individual to work group to function to enterprise to value chain.

Since there are so many CMM’s out there, each with its own functional focus, it may be worth a few minutes to explore one possible future of an integrated maturity model-  One which we could at least try to begin to migrate toward, instead of further fractionalizing elements.  Perhaps a model parallel to the “general management” approach used at some business schools?  In our closing post, we will lay out the foundation for an integrated maturity model, based on proven business frameworks, and take advantage of the growing awareness of the power of broad-based collaboration.

This is the opening post of a pair focused on measuring capabilities and specifically exploring the use of Capability Maturity Models.  Also see the closing post “The Calculus of Capabilities- An integrated maturity model“

End notes

1   See Hamel & Prahalad, Competing for the future, (Boston, Massachusetts: Harvard Business School Press, 1994), p. 199.

2   See Paulk, et al, “Capability Maturity Modelsm for Software, version 1.1, Technical Report, CMU/SEI-93-TR-024, ESC-TR-93-177”, [Internet] February 1993, P 29. [cited May 6, 2013 Google search directly to PDF].

3   See Röglinger, et al, “Maturity Models in Business Process Management”, Discussion Paper WI-352, University of Augsburg, Business Process Management Journal, vol. 18, 2012, (19 pages).  Authors profile 10 BPM capability maturity models.

4   See Curtis, et al, “People Capability Maturity Model (P-CMM) version 2.0 CMU/SEI-2001-MM-01”, [Internet] p. vi, July 2001, (735 pages). [cited May 6, 2013 Google search directly to PDF]

5   See Luftman, “Assessing Business-IT Alignment Maturity”, Communications of Association for Information Systems, [Internet] vol. 4, article 14, 2000 (51 pages). [cited May 6, 2013 Google search directly to PDF]

6   See Aho, “A capability maturity model for corporate performance management- An empirical study in large Finnish manufacturing companies”, [Internet] c. 2009 (20 pages) [cited May 6, 2013 Google search directly to PDF]

7   From “Learning is change. Change is learning.- Changing behavior to produce results” [internet] From author’s notes during 5.6.2013 webinar, Prosci® Change Management Maturity Modeltm [cited from webinar May 6, 2013].

8   See graphic model for business intelligence maturity. [Internet]. [cited May 7, 2013]. Available from TDWI’s toolkit http://tdwi.org/pages/maturity-model/maturity-model-home.aspx

9   See Wang, “Best practices: applying social business challenges to social business maturity models”, January 22, 2011 post [internet] [cited May 7, 2013]. Available from http://blog.softwareinsider.org/2011/01/22/best-practices-applying-social-business-challenges-to-social-business-maturity-models/; Also see Li and Solis, “The evolution of social business, six stages of social media transformation”, March 6, 2013, Altimeter Group (26 pages).

10  See Wikipedia referencing Humphrey, Managing the software process, 1989 [Internet] [cited May 7, 2013] Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability_Maturity_Model.  Also see from this Wikipedia post:- Reference to Crosby’s, Quality is Free, the “Quality Management Maturity Grid”-  Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) project

11  See mutually exclusive and collectively exhaustive (MECE) as a test for mental models and frameworks. [Internet]. [cited May 7, 2013]. Available from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MECE_principle.

The post The Calculus of Capabilities appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/the-calculus-of-capabilities/feed/ 0 Great Teams Require Great Communication https://nextforge.com/great-teams-require-great-communication/ https://nextforge.com/great-teams-require-great-communication/#comments Fri, 29 Mar 2013 21:44:43 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1913 Great teams require great communication, as communications is highly correlated with team success. We developed an analytic frame to consider the number of contributors versus the number of readers. We then mapped current enterprise uses and common tools to illustrate "neighborhoods" of communication.

The post Great Teams Require Great Communication appeared first on .

]]> Does the title surprise to you?

It seems so obvious.  Until I read the “second place” 2012 McKinsey Award winning article, I didn’t even give a thought to communication not being a critical component of team performance in everyone’s mind.  However, with the obvious (team communication) weighing in as the runner-up to the 54th McKinsey Award for excellence in management thinking and our own experience in virtual and traditional teams, it makes sense to make explicit the primary driving characteristic of high performing teams.

Comms drives team performance- full stop

“Patterns of communication [are] the most important predictor of a team’s success” according to Professor Pentland’s research at the MIT Human Dynamics Laboratory.  Further, communication is as important as “individual intelligence, personality, skill and the substance of discussion- combined”1!

One of our favorite articles2 about collaborative platforms- in support of teams (and non-teams)- is a frame proposed by Andrew McAfee including three elements: Search, Ask and Share. Each platform element is focused on locating people and existing information, creating new information through interaction, and distributing through publishing and posting information, respectively.  All elements, and combinations, are forms of communication.  Further, we posit the various tools available to aid collaboration are, in their basic form, communication tools.  What varies among these collaborative tools is a varying number of information contributors coupled with a varying number of information consumers3.

Face to face communications is best

Communications on the phone is second best, with the fewer on the call the better.  The following are detailed characteristics of successful teams1

  • Everyone on the team needs to communicate equally- command and control of a small sub-team is sub-optimal
  • Face-to-face is the most effective mode of communication (energy), particularly facing each other
  • Members connect to each other, including side conversations (engagement), not just with the team lead
  • Members find information outside (exploration) the team and bring their findings back

The least valuable form of communication is email and texting1.

There has been a dust-up over Yahoo!’s CEO calling their telecommuting labor force back into the office.  I recently attended a presentation by Accenture4 where the senior partner presenting described how Marissa Mayer had pulled Yahoo!’s VPN logs only to find a large number of the “telecommuting” knowledge workers were not logging into the Yahoo! systems.  This lack of off-site activity probably speaks more to the Yahoo! culture and values than the remote approach. Certainly Yahoo!’s new CEO recognized the need to increase team communication- all hands on deck- as a primary driver of the turnaround.

What we have learned about virtual teams

You need face-to-face time to start a team effort. Each project is unique, but we have found a few thumb-rules are helpful to drive success. For example, we at NextForge typically start larger projects with a calendar month on-site to get to know our clients on a personal level and get to know the company’s culture.  While some clients require a consultative presence to keep going- possibly requiring some minimal physical presence full-time- we find one week a month on-site provides a good relationship maintenance mix to ensure productive team engagement and communication.

On more traditionally run projects, proximity on a project team is critical.  War rooms are popular because they serve to increase the interaction among both the team members and the stakeholders.  War rooms physically located close to leadership teams is best for a transformation initiatives.  Dedicating space next to the CXO or in the C-suite sends a strong message to the organization.

 The optimal communicator

Key elements of communication

“Traditional” (Pentland1)

  • Energy
 “Emerging” (Reeder + Martin3)

  • Productive contribution transparent to all stakeholders
  • Engagement
  • Passion for outcome- contributing “cognitive surplus”
  • Exploration
  • Networking through subject matter experts and content

Direct communication between team members (independent of positional authority), consistent quantity of communication across team members… these are some of the optimal team dynamics according to Professor Pentland1.

Driving down further, the best individuals, according to Professor Pentland, are those who circulate actively and engage others in short, high-energy conversations, focused on listening more than they talk1.

Future team communications scorecard

In his 6 minute video interview, Professor Pentland describes how the next generation or two of his sociometric badge will be indistinguishable from the typical security key card1.  MIT’s communication measurement methodology seems like a perfect leading key performance indicator for teams.  For example, if a team’s communication profile doesn’t meet the standard, you can intervene early before the first missed milestone.  And, if we can measure one team, we can ultimately measure communications for all of our strategic-initiative teams, managed by the program management office and tracked in a near real-time scorecard for the executive leadership team.  Aspirationally, we can look to moving communications off the top of the list of barriers to team success.

“You have a communications problem” is one of those throw-away observations any consultant can make coming into any organization.  Professor Pentland has put some science behind communications for us.  Now it is up to us to use this once tacit knowledge.

 

End notes and references
1 Pentland, Alex, “The new science of building great teams”, Harvard Business Review, April 2012, pages 3-11
2 McAfee, Andrew, “What is the simplest thing that could possibly work?” [internet] [cited 3.28.2013] Available from http://andrewmcafee.org/2010/05/whats-the-simplest-thing-that-could-possibly-work/
3 Reeder + Martin, “Rising importance of social media“, [internet] [cited 3.28.2013] Available from https://nextforge.com/?p=757 and other NextForge posts
4 Reilly, Matt, “A global consulting firm’s view of the global and North American economic trends”, presented to the Harvard Business School Club of Atlanta at the Buckhead Club, March 26, 2013 [author’s personal notes]

Six minute video interview of Professor Pentland + Executive Summary of “The new science of building great teams” [internet] [cited 3.28.2013] Available from http://hbr.org/2012/04/the-new-science-of-building-great-teams

 

The post Great Teams Require Great Communication appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/great-teams-require-great-communication/feed/ 1 2012 Year-end Favorites- An Overview https://nextforge.com/2012-favorites-an-overview/ https://nextforge.com/2012-favorites-an-overview/#respond Mon, 04 Feb 2013 21:08:48 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1809 One of our mostly-annual series of what we found as our favorites for the year. This year's year-end favorite categories include Business + Economics, Management, Change Leadership, Book, Engagement, and Your Favorite Post (most visited)

The post 2012 Year-end Favorites- An Overview appeared first on .

]]> Once again, we thought you might like to see some of what has influenced our thinking this year, and how we think these concepts will impact business improvement efforts as we move forward.

The following are our favorite thought provoking articles, books and web-based tidbits from this past year.  Six topics span a wide range of perspectives: the underlying drivers of business and economic uncertainty, evolving demands on management and leadership, and our own points of view on the business improvement that supports enterprise/employee transformation.

Note: This is an abridged version of our client and colleague 2012 Year-end favorites email.  If you have trouble reading the following table in RSS or feedblitz please click here

Business + Economics
US Competitiveness

Click here for a 4½ minute video sampler of an a-list of b-school academics, politicians, et al.

Harvard Business School is several years into a project to study US Competitiveness. Here are their recommendations…		 Professors Michael Porter and Jan Rivkin have used an internet survey of 10K HBS alumni as a sample for initial  worldwide  sentiment about the state of our Country and of what needs to improve going forward.  They have labeled this effort The US Competitiveness Project.

In case you missed it, the March 2012 edition of Harvard Business Review was dedicated to findings and recommendations along multiple dimensions- click here for executive summaries
Management
Managing Uncertainty

On  12.28.2012 The New York Times noted the 5% drop in consumer confidence in most recent The Conference Board index; NBC is reporting possible 8 USD milk prices.  Both of these are attributed to gridlock in Washington.

We have used an approach for more than 15 years to assist leadership teams get there arms around uncertainty.  Here is a thumbnail summary…		 For example, what impact will government gridlock, emerging social technology and shifts in customer preferences have on your business?

We continue to advocate the use a scenario development methodology which pits highly impactful andhighly uncertain dimensions against each other in pairs. Each pair of dimensions in a 2×2 matrix creates four potential scenarios.  There is some art is in choosing the right dimensions and the right pairs.

Also consider how social technologies, like SharePoint, allow broader involvement and earlier initial engagement.  Business impact is achieved by successively driving through to implications and building necessary capability.

Click here to see our point of view on the role of scenario analysis in the context of planning.
Change Leadership
More validation…

This time from the recognized thought leader of change leadership- John Kotter

Click here for our published POV		 This year Professor Kotter published several updates to his thinking on change leadership incorporating two key beliefs we have long held critical to transformation efforts:

  • The networked organization- A separate, formalized organization structure focused on critical strategic/transformational efforts
  • The 8 accelerators of change- Kotter has softened the stage-gate rhetoric of his previous writings.  We have also used a simpler framework- The change formula- with overlapping, sequenced elements of change.  The change formula is mapped against Kotter’s  frame in the following graphic.
Favorite Book
A potential basis for helping craft the next-generation management

Click here to see Pink’s 18 M TED talk		 Drive, the surprising truth about what motivates us, 2011 (paperback). Daniel Pink presents a compelling case for what motivates us, including three key elements:

  • Autonomy
  • Mastery
  • Purpose

Full of practical examples, and a few overused examples highlighted in most business publications these days, the book provides a basis for what is required to engage individuals in the work of the enterprise.  A good frame, we think, for “What makes us and our employees tick”.
Business Improvement:
Favorite Engagement
Our favorite engagement of the year

We do not often get the opportunity to start a strategy project with a blank sheet…		 “Strategy is how to create and enhance relevant and durable competitive advantage.”  

We have been using this definition to guide our strategic projects for more than 15 years, and, believe it or not, there are companies still out there making their way without a working definition of strategy, without executive alignment, and without change-leadership basics as part of their DNA.  Some, based on the great recession, are under pressure and may not remain autonomous.  I had the great privilege this year to help one such company’s leadership team.

We were able to fill management concept gaps with traditional frameworks like scenario planning, key performance indicators tied to business drivers, and program management.  For the leadership team, we were able to use emerging social technology to share and to archive for easy access key strategy and communication documents on a single secure intranet page.  We captured the essential elements of strategy in an 5-part series of posts starting with Unpacking Strategy.  Time will tell if they can maintain the course to strength and self-reliance, but they are off to a solid start for 2013
Business Improvement:
Favorite Post
Unpacking strategy

Click here for published POV		  In Unpacking Strategy, we present our point of view on  the critical elements of a strategic architecture we call the strategy-paksm.

  • Definition of strategy
  • Strategy stack
    –  Mission stack (statement, business drivers, values)
    –  Vision
    –  Value proposition
    –  Themes
    –  Initiatives
    –  Key performance indicators
  • Enterprise analysis framework
  • Communication of Key Messages

As a side note, communication options continue to expand.  For example, working with a client, we included internet-based feeds to large television screens located in break rooms throughout the company to feature talking heads of the executive and leadership teams explaining various elements of their strategy.

You may also enjoy our follow-on post What to do with the strategy-pak: A starter list 

At NextForge, we are in the business of advancing the business improvement process.  We do this in part by sharing our thinking and tools with our clients and our fellow consultants through, for example, our Points of View and Library of tools.

We have captured the essence of more than two decades of business improvement experience in the constantly expanding Help Yourself section of our website.  Should you need additional support achieving your business improvement outcomes, we would be honored to work with you and talk about the appropriate blend of traditional and emerging management practices we can help you realize.

We hope you find these year-end favorite materials as interesting as we have in unearthing and developing them.

Best wishes for 2013!

 

The post 2012 Year-end Favorites- An Overview appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/2012-favorites-an-overview/feed/ 0 Improved Vetting: Social-Business-Inside-The-Enterprise Case Study https://nextforge.com/improved-vetting-social-business-inside-the-enterprise-case-study/ https://nextforge.com/improved-vetting-social-business-inside-the-enterprise-case-study/#respond Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:47:39 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1850 Social business methodologies applied inside the enterprise are highlighted in this case study. The case study shares how the engagement delivered on two fronts: 1) business outcomes (WHAT) and 2) social business outcomes (HOW- including capability building). The vetting process engaged a mix of remote (world-wide) and face-to-face (local) leaders and staff very early in the spin-out's lifecycle, further accelerating the change.

The post Improved Vetting: Social-Business-Inside-The-Enterprise Case Study appeared first on .

]]> “Companies are beginning to find that social technologies have enormous potential to raise the productivity of knowledge workers.”
McKinsey Global Institute*

The concept of vetting an idea has universal application in ideas large and small.  The following case study is based on an executive’s need to move quickly to create and embed an operational strategy in her newly formed organization.  We also worked with her to expand the engagement benefits to included establishing a beachhead of social business capability within the leadership of her organization.

The opportunity

The CFO for a then recent spin-out was transforming the inherited elements of her function to achieve the following strategic priorities

  • High integration with business units and other functions
  • Strong performance management
  • Efficient, scalable growth platform
  • Effective communication
  • Customer service excellence

Leading Consulting (an alias) was hired to bring their best-practice suite of finance processes to jump-start the effort.  Initially they focused on working with a few key executives.  These select few included the CFO and a handful of sub-functional heads tapped for their special knowledge.  Each of the few key executives where only exposed to the thinking in their area of expertise.

We helped the CFO improve business results while building social business capabilities in what we refer to as delivering on two fronts.  We believe the effort in both areas (business and social) require rigorous change leadership including a number of Kotter’s change accelerators.  For example:

  • Communicating the change vision,
  • Empowering broad-based action, and
  • Short-term wins

Click here for our POV- a more comprehensive treatment of change leadership and Professor Kotter’s thinking.

Deliver on two fronts: Objectives

The primary objective of our work with clients has always been to focus on business outcomes.  In some cases, as with this engagement, we are asked to focus on mission critical issues.  When building social business capabilities, we begin with the business outcome and find relevant supporting social business elements to embed into the approach.  The following highlight business and social capability objectives.

Business Outcomes

Social Business Outcomes
  • Leadership team understanding and feedback on all best practice recommendations
  • Leadership team review, revision and commitment to areas of their functional expertise
  • Complement best practice recommendations and execution roadmap
  • Ensure recommendations supported and aligned with the strategic priorities (see list above)
  • Business outcomes focused
  • Transparent approach, open to the leadership team
  • Collaborative approach, including high participation and inclusion
  • Demonstrate value of social business

These objectives point to a critical success factor: Getting finance leadership up to the speed of transformation.

Approach overview, including social mechanics

The financial leadership team (about 30 key executives and managers) organized around the work to be accomplished: four overlapping teams each focused on a grouping of recommendations clustered around their sub-function specialty (e.g., accounting, tax…).  Each of the four teams was asked to deliver their recommendations in a common template addressing the following

  • Change readiness
  • Risks, concerns and barriers
  • Possible information gaps
  • Overall recommendations and priorities

We designed two of our hard-learned lessons for rolling out social business capabilities into this social vetting effort: 1) build the new way into the approach and 2) blend traditional, proven methods with emerging collaborative approaches.

Key social business elements of the approach included

  • Seamless approach- vetting was designed into the  overall transformation roadmap (required the tight three-week window)
  • Use of an enabling collaborative platform (SharePoint 2010, out of the box) including four vetting group support sites
  • Light moderation and content curation
  • Initial training of the leadership team in both the approach and use of the enabling platform
  • Virtual kickoff, two break out team meetings (combination of virtual and co-located) and an all-team final review meeting at the corporate headquarters
  • Visibility of all work to all participants, including the CFO

Deliver on two fronts: Results

The sponsor said…

The three week effort satisfied the CFO/sponsor as she shared with the finance division- “we have revised initiative priorities and restructured the implementation roadmap”.  Regarding the effectiveness of social engagement objectives, the CFO/sponsor added in a report-out to the company’s leadership team at an offsite a few weeks after the effort- “my employees, who didn’t even know me for the first 18 months of roadshows, now love me”.

Team executives and managers said…

Nearly half of the team participated in a post vetting process survey and expressed unanimous support for the approach and the final result.

A quick overview…

Business Outcomes/Transformation

Social Capabilities/Transformation
  • Robust pressure-testing and buy-in to operational strategy
  • Hands-on involvement leading to a deeper and broader understanding of what is involved in delivering the transformation effort
  • Enthusiastic support for the final recommendations
  • Achieved business outcome in a an open and new way (quick win)
  • Created broader understanding among a larger group of functional leaders of social leadership moving forward
  • Embedded initial social “doing things differently” thinking and capability throughout function leadership
  • Post effort survey (50% participation) unanimously agree-  Social platform (SharePoint) should be available and in use throughout the organization

The two transformation efforts, functional (finance) recommendations and social business capabilities (anchoring social business engagement), became  intertwined going forward with leadership leading the charge for change.

A couple of closing thoughts

We believe that successful adoption of social business is an iterative process, layering-in capabilities coupled to mission critical issues and directly linked to performance drivers. The pace of implementation must recognize and align with the organization’s change readiness.  Every corporation is different, requiring a high degree of customization.

We believe there are many opportunities for introducing and applying social business capabilities within the enterprise.  For example, in the referenced article McKinsey evaluate the relative benefit to enterprise functions (Click here to see an Enterprise Process Model).  Further, possibly the most critical starting point is advocacy for and definition of what you believe social business to be (Click here to see see our 5i’s, a social business capability framework).

You can start to create social business capability.  You can start now with your group.  You can benefit almost immediately, just as our clients have.

“Organizations that fail to invest in understanding social technologies will be at greater risk of having their business models disrupted by social technologies”
McKinsey Global Institute*

* Excerpts from Michael Chui, et al,  “The social economy: Unlocking value and productivity through social technologies” Executive Summary,  McKinsey Global Institute,  July 2012  [Internet] [Cited January 9, 2013]. Available from http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/mgi/research/technology_and_innovation/the_social_economy.  This study also quantifies untapped potential of social business between 900 MM and 1.3 trillion USD annually in studied industries worldwide.

The post Improved Vetting: Social-Business-Inside-The-Enterprise Case Study appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/improved-vetting-social-business-inside-the-enterprise-case-study/feed/ 0 What to do with the strategy-pak: A starter list https://nextforge.com/what-to-do-with-the-strategy-pak-a-starter-list/ https://nextforge.com/what-to-do-with-the-strategy-pak-a-starter-list/#comments Thu, 29 Nov 2012 22:41:40 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1738 "Like most tools, our strategy-pak(sm) framework has little value unless you put it to use." We present a starter list of potential uses (WHY) for our Strategy Pak(sm), including best practice checklist, common language, cascading linkages, and planning framework (strategy, strategic planning, analysis and vetting).

The post What to do with the strategy-pak: A starter list appeared first on .

]]> Like most tools, our strategy-paksm framework has little value unless you put it to use.  As we briefly explored in our Communicate Strategy for Effect post, we believe in building from the basics.  So, here are a few traditional, time-proven ways we have used the framework to improve our clients’ businesses… the basics.

  • Best practice check list for strategic architecture. 
    Answers: Do we have all the moving parts of competitive strategy?
  • Create a common language of strategy within your organization.
    Answers: Do we have concise definitions and understanding of strategy throughout the organization?
  • Create cascading linkage from corporate to division to functional to department to individual performance.
    Answers: How does what I do support the corporate mission?
  • Provide an initial frame to build-out your strategy.
    Answers: How to the discrete elements of our strategy fit together?
  • Form a basis of your strategic planning process. 
    Answers: Who is working on what and when?  Why?
  • Create a framework for analysis and vetting. 
    Answers: Have we got the right direction, the right priorities, the right plans, and resources? Are we committed?

Strategy is complex.  See our definitional series on the key elements of strategy.  We have included a few observations along the way on how we have, or might, advance the more traditional concepts.  Collectively, we refer to the grouping of strategic concepts as the strategy-paksm.

The post What to do with the strategy-pak: A starter list appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/what-to-do-with-the-strategy-pak-a-starter-list/feed/ 1 Communicate Strategy for Effect https://nextforge.com/communicate-strategy-for-effect/ https://nextforge.com/communicate-strategy-for-effect/#comments Thu, 29 Nov 2012 03:12:14 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1719 Communicate strategy for effect is one of our perennially most popular articles based on Google Analytics as communications is the glue within the enterprise, projects, change efforts, etc. We share a time-tested frame considering target audience, objective, key messages, how delivered, when delivered, and who delivers.

The post Communicate Strategy for Effect appeared first on .

]]> Only 27% believe US CEO’s are credible
Edelman 2012 Trust Barometer1

With so little belief in CEO’s these days, we have our work cut out for us when it comes to communicating strategy to the company2.  In fact, sharing strategy is a key message leaders must execute with precision to ensure alignment in the organization3.  Consistency and constancy of message reinforced by informed layers of management and by walk-the-talk actions are critical to buttress the c-suite’s credibility.

Executive credibility is in large part determined by the ability to interact with stakeholders on all issues.  What follows is a discussion of traditional communication methodology.  We find it remarkable so few companies perform even the basics of communication well, with fewer still exhibiting a complete framework.  While we have hinted at emerging social approaches throughout this series, we will leave more advanced discussion of communications to a successive post.

This post wraps-up our strategy-paksm  series with the final key element- traditional communication of strategy.

Communicating strategy for success

 Traditionally, “corporate communication… is to convey key strategic messages internally and externally, and to remove obstacles that prevent the implementation of corporate strategy.” 4

Based on our experience with historic approaches to communication of strategy, we focus heavily on these seven, basic characteristic areas to get it right from the beginning.

  • Broad participation, particularly important lower in the strategy stack and critical to communications of strategy for understanding, alignment and feedback
  • Stakeholder analysis, focusing on What’s In It For Me (WIIFM) including constituents such as employees, suppliers, customers, shareholders, regulators and communities4
  • Integrated messaging, (content, timing and sequencing) with other communications (requires stakeholder analysis, a master calendar; consider both contributors and readers)
  • Memorable copy, including key characteristics: simple, unexpected, concrete, credible, emotional and stories5
  • Two-way, transparent communications, based on known authorship and origin of traditional top-down messages allowing all to understand “why” and all to provide constructive feedback
  • Repetitive and redundant channels of communication, aspiring to the “rule of 7”- communicate key messages seven times in seven different ways, while keeping in mind some channels place different actors in control of the their mindshare6
  • Message life-cycle, “strategy” as we have defined it is more durable, while themes and initiatives may need to cycle more frequently

In fact, many of these elements could be pulled directly from marketing and in particular marketing communications.  Also, social platforms are allowing acceleration and expanded support of communication activities to keep up with the faster clock-speed requiring more rapid frequency of strategy and tactics.

Tactics drive communication of strategy

“…the level of information now available can make ‘transparency’ more of an imperative than a choice”
Professor James Rubin, UVA4

The backbone of communicating strategy are the messages- the tactical “how”- in the communications plan including

  • Target audience– Who are we trying to reach? Within what context?
  • Objective– What are we trying to achieve? E.g., awareness, behavior change
  • Key messages– What are the key messages to be conveyed?
  • Channel/How delivered–  What channels of communication?  How will messages be delivered?  How will feedback be collected, summarized and acted upon?
  • When delivered–  What is the timing of each channel?  How does it sequence with other communications?
  • Who from/ Who delivers–  Who is the author of record?  Who will deliver?
  • Other- For example, some communications may warrant specific key performance indicators

Now, let’s touch upon a couple of important tactical success factors related to strategy communications.

Sample communications activities and topics during high levels of organizational change8, like strategy roll-out include, include:

  • Progress reports
  • Feedback on progress
  • Education of supervisory staff
  • Identify and challenge misconceptions
  • Continual reassurance of employees
  • Definition and clarifying roles and expectations

There are significant benefits of diverse change teams charged with creating and executing the communications plan.  For example, Jan Klein, MIT, advocates for the productivity of hybrid resources, “Outsiders-Insiders”9, created by bringing both “types”, insiders and outsiders, onto teams.

“Outsiders”

  • Not blinded by internal cultural assumptions
  • See mismatches between current approaches and root causes of problems
 “Insiders”

  • Understand cultural interdependencies
  • Possess organizational credibility
  • Leverage the existing culture

 

Frameworks aid communication thinking

The Framework for Strategic Communication (see graphic) focuses on messages about the strategy to constituents (stakeholders) with formal and informal feedback designed into the process.

While most companies attempt at least initial communication of strategy, we have observed formalized feedback embedded into processes and culture very rarely.  For an example of a formalized feedback process, see a mini-case example (vetting strategy) click here.

Internal communications processes

Regularly left to others, the underlying communication process is often informal and yet provides the platform for meshing all of the internal gears.

Managerial Styles vary from “tell” to persuading individuals to “join” high performing teams and communities of practice.

MIT posits the level of audience involvement correlates closely with the level of author “control”.  Consideration of both axes must influence the management style of communication reflected in the communications plan.

Closing thoughts on communicating strategy

“You only have to go through one or two communication debacles as a senior executive to understand the importance of communication”
Indra Nooyi, Current Chairman and CEO, PepsiCo7

Ask any c-level executive if they have a communications problem and they will undoubtedly say “yes”.  Communication is the basis of how we work together, how we receive and give direction.  Careful planning of strategic direction (vision; what and why), plans (who, how and when) through key messages are critical to achieving our mission.  While the strategy-paksm gives us structure to define our direction, our timing, the who and the where, it is of little value unless everyone who needs to know, knows.  Also, and potentially more importantly, those who have crafted the direction and plans must have jointly pressure tested it with those who will do the work, the heavy lifting of changing their behaviors and the behaviors of others.

We feel this last point, engaging a broader swath of the organization, is easier today than ever because of the rapidly emerging social platforms allowing information to flow more freely from source to target and back again.

“If you get the right people, with the right skills, they can go really fast… so we better make sure they are going really fast in the right direction.”–  NextForge Point of View

This is the fifth and final post in a definitional series on the key elements of strategy.  We have included a few observations along the way on how we have, or might, advance the more traditional concepts.  Collectively, we refer to the grouping of strategic concepts as the strategy-paksm.

 

End notes and references
1 From “2012 Edelman Trust Barometer, Executive Summary”, [internet] [cited 11.19.2012] Available from http://trust.edelman.com/trust-download/executive-summary/, figure 11, CEO Credibility returns to low of 2009, “extremely credible” and “very credible”; informed Publics, pages 35-64
2 See highly referenced scholarly article by Kohut and Segars, “The president’s letter to stockholders,: An examination of corporate communications strategy”, Journal of Business Communication (1992) vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 7-21 [internet] [cited 11.19.2012] Available from http://job.sagepub.com/content/29/1/7.  The authors identify 6 key themes of CEO/President’s annual-report letter including: environmental factors, growth, operating philosophy, product/market mix, unfavorable financial results and favorable financial results.
3 See Hamm, “The five messages leaders must manage”, Harvard Business Review, (May 2006) reprint R0605G. Note: We believe all of Hamm’s five points are critical strategic matters. We have simplified the list to strategy for clarity.
4 See Rubin, “Introduction to contemporary corporate communication”, Darden Business Publishing (2005), case UV0934
5 See Heath & Heath, Made to Stick, Why some ideas survive and others die, (NY: The Random House Publishing Company, 2008) pp. 285-288. 
6 See Jan Klein, “Organizational Leadership and Change”, MIT OpenCourseWare, Course Number 15.317, Lecture 3 Notes, [internet] [cited 11.19.2012] Available from http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-317-organizational-leadership-and-change-summer-2009/part-i/lectures/MIT15_317SUM09_lec03.pdf slide entitled “Capturing Mindshare” in referring to the transmitter-receiver relationship in any communication.
7 See Argenti, et al, “The strategic communication imperative”, MITSloan Management Review(Spring 2005) Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 83-89
8 See highly referenced scholarly article by Stuart Klein, “A management communication strategy for change”, Journal of Organizational Change Management (1996), Vol. 9., No. 2, pp. 32-46.
9 See Jan Klein, “Organizational Leadership and Change”, MIT OpenCourseWare, Course Number 15.317 Lecture 1 Notes, [internet] [cited 11.19.2012] Available from http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-317-organizational-leadership-and-change-summer-2009/part-i/lectures/MIT15_317SUM09_lec01.pdf slide entitled “Outsiders on the Inside Wear Two Hats”
Exhibit “Managerial Styles” of communication from “Communications for Managers, Course Review”, MIT OpenCourseWare, Course Number 15.280, Summary Lecture Notes, [internet] [cited 11.19.2012] Available from http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/sloan-school-of-management/15-280-communication-for-managers-fall-2008/lecture-notes/lec_14.pdf

 

The post Communicate Strategy for Effect appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/communicate-strategy-for-effect/feed/ 1 Enterprise Analysis Framework- Planning for outcomes https://nextforge.com/enterprise-analysis-framework-planning-for-outcomes/ https://nextforge.com/enterprise-analysis-framework-planning-for-outcomes/#respond Thu, 15 Nov 2012 03:28:44 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1632 "As we work through strategy, there is a natural cascade, or progression, from “why” to “what” to “how”. We need to drive the directional thinking (“why” and “what”) down into execution (“how”) because, and we should keep reminding ourselves of this, at the end of the day we need to deliver business results"

The post Enterprise Analysis Framework- Planning for outcomes appeared first on .

]]> “Plans are worthless, but planning is everything” Dwight D. Eisenhower1

As we work through strategy, there is a natural cascade, or progression, from “why” to “what” to “how”.  We need to drive the directional thinking (“why” and “what”) down into execution (“how”) because, and we should keep reminding ourselves of this, at the end of the day we need to deliver business results.

Recall our point of view- the “why” to “what” of strategy is addressed at the top of what we call the strategy stack.  To ensure alignment between all the bits and parts, we embark upon an analysis effort, the planning, to check for congruence among all of the moving parts.

As we begin to think about how we go to market holistically, we can revisit our General Management Framework mental model, including an understanding of our environment.

The environmental assessment framework establishes the context for decisions we make.  It helps us understand pressures on our customers and on our competitors.  All of these environmental factors are then considered when defining potential scenarios for planning.

A side-bar on scenarios: We tend to use a scenario development methodology which pits highly impactful and highly uncertain dimensions against each other in pairs.  For each pair of dimensions in a 2×2 matrix creates four potential scenarios.  The art is in choosing the right dimensions and the right pairs.

 

What’s missing? Sales!
Sales is the linchpin locking the operations drive-shaft (what we know and do) to the power-wheel of execution toward our long-term goals and mission (what we aspire to be, what we plan to achieve). Without profitable sales, all of the leadership, management, analysis, planning and exceptional execution in the world is nothing more than an interesting supply-chain exercise.

A quick walk through the framework
Consider this conceptual example using the “Enterprise Analysis Framework” for positioning and alignment.  Start with our target customers- What are their needs and preferences? What is going to drive their behavior to purchase and consume our product?

Next up- Think through our distribution channels along two dimensions 1) customer penetration and 2) how we deliver value for each channel- What are our channel specific value propositions?

Now that we understand the bundle(s) of goods and services, what is required to win with our customers and win with our channel partners?  Also, don’t forget to consider competitive pressures and trends (products, environment, competition, etc.)- What processes and capabilities are required to profitably deliver the bundles?  What are our priorities for these requirements?

Finally, which almost always causes some friction with our clients (because of their managerial bias to re-organize), once we figure out what needs to be accomplished – we test for the best organizational structure.  This usually leads us to the structure with the least downside, as no organization structure is perfect (See our coverage of one approach the Network Organization overlay in Change Leadership II- Understanding Kotter).

How do we use this?
We believe it takes a couple of cycles through this analysis – top to bottom and back up again- including getting stakeholder feedback, before strategy is aligned and ready for execution.  During each turn of the crank, we need to include risk assessment and contingency planning to help harden our working draft plans. As President Eisenhower reminds us- it is the act of planning which prepares us, as we most often do not execute exactly to plan.  Taken in the modern, social context, it is becoming easier every day to involve and engage more people for more robust planning and a more robust plan.

A mini-case example
Not too many projects ago, we created a vetting process for functional transformation of a large financial services company.  The transformation “strategy”, developed quickly by a few, included executional plans.  Our organizing concept for vetting brought together stakeholders and experts for each of the four primary themes.  With a common vetting deliverable format, each theme-team worked in a unique SharePoint website and reviewed the work-product of the other theme-teams.  The level of engagement and transparency boosted the morale of the function, increased their understanding of the overall business strategy, and seeded commitment to the overall transformation as well as to the sponsoring executive.

This is the fourth post in a definitional series on the key elements of strategy.  We will continue to include a few observations along the way on how we have, or might, advance the more traditional concepts.  Collectively, we refer to the grouping of strategic concepts as the strategy-paksm.

1There are a number of variations around the exact wording of Eisenhower’s quote, we have chosen a passage from WikiQuote.org as it seemed to be pulled directly from a speech to the National Defense Executive Reserve Conference in Washington, D.C. (November 14, 1957).  [Internet] [Cited November 9, 2012] Available from http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower

The post Enterprise Analysis Framework- Planning for outcomes appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/enterprise-analysis-framework-planning-for-outcomes/feed/ 0 Social Business- Don’t start in the tool shed https://nextforge.com/social-business-dont-start-in-the-tool-shed/ https://nextforge.com/social-business-dont-start-in-the-tool-shed/#respond Wed, 14 Nov 2012 00:55:32 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1674 Prof. Hamel asks "Are we changing as fast as the world around us?" Keeping up with our changing environment, or ecosystem, is a constant risk for any organization providing a value proposition and is critical in today's ultra social-business sensitive marketplace. We look at the role social business plays, including a few tools.

The post Social Business- Don’t start in the tool shed appeared first on .

]]> “…the most important question for any organization is this: are we changing as fast as the world around us? ”     Gary Hamel, “What is adaptability?“,  Management Innovation eXchange blog, 11.8.2012

Why Social Business?
There are at least two solid reasons to be interested in social business, just based on part of Professor Hamel’s blog excerpt above.  First, change is relative and the benchmark you should be thinking about is external- your competition and, probably more importantly, your customers.  Second, how will you know how fast the world is changing, that external benchmark, unless you are collecting data from the fringe of the organization?  Both of these issues can be a core value-add of social business inside the enterprise finding and sharing information.

Why start with tools?
Let’s start with a simple analogy to think through embedding social business in the enterprise.  I don’t know anyone who walks out to the tool shed, or into their garage, and starts their Saturday chores with “I think I will use my shovel today”.  Instead, we head into the garage looking for the tool(s) to knock-out our to-do lists.  And, then it’s on to the home center to get the tools and materials we don’t have handy, or replace what we have loaned to a relative or neighbor.

So why is there so much hype and energy about the social tools?  I guess, to mix my metaphors, it is like the car advertisements.  Manufacturers are pushing their products and features and the tech-folks are caught up in the cool-factor.

As a management consultant, focused on helping clients improve their business, we single-mindedly concentrate on delivering business outcomes.  We are tool agnostic, and often will readily substitute tools.  We have been working with social tools ourselves, and with our clients, for more than a few years now and find a number of success criteria.

  • Define business outcomes (what the tech folks love to call use cases).
    We believe there are a number of generic outcomes enabled by the social platforms
  • Faster and easier collaboration for strategic projects, enabled by synchronous communications (e.g., video, chat) and asynchronous communication (e.g., forums, common folders, shared files)
  • Increased access to information and people
  • Supporting environment for community development (interest, practice)1

We have found a very tight scope of work, for example specific strategic initiatives, with social processes “designed in” from the beginning can also be an initial foothold in creating enterprise engagement.

For example, GE “rolled it out to our power users… [trying to] get that user adoption right off the bat”2

Specific examples include:

  • “We are solving problems faster”2
  • Better collaboration (Estimate of collaboration as % of social business benefit range from 37% for consumer packaged goods to 98% for professional services)3
  • Making connections easier
    “one in three connections… are across functions. One in four across geographies… And, one in five is across our business units”2

We need to manage how we work together
How we collaborate can be managed through three dimensions (see “Can social media drive enterprise change?” for a more detailed treatment of Environment for execution)

  • Guidance- Focus on business results
  • Routines- Refine supporting processes and build collective tool kits
  • Interactions-  Access knowledge and patterns

What doesn’t work?
When there is not enough perceived value to shift behavior there will be no change, no adoption.  According to a recent MIT blog summarizing a survey of 56 firms with revenue of more than 1 billion USD, introducing social collaboration platforms requires more than availability of the new technology.  The article suggests answering the question “How to provide enough value to get employees to engage and participate?” 4

Don’t start with the tools, but when it’s time…
We believe MIT’s observations foot well with our mental models and our maturing view of social tools and platforms.

We started with a simple profiling of the more popular tools and key features (“Creating better business outcomes through collaboration” key table on left). Then we progressed to a hypothesis-based approach including a framework defining social inside the enterprise.  Our hypothesis- Social is primarily a communications platform with two key variables 1) the number of writers and 2) the number of readers (“Can social media drive enterprise change?” graphic on the right).

Several webinars over the last few weeks have triggered a revisiting of our last post on tools.  We see the three different approaches to collaboration of three leading platforms as a helpful illustration to better understand the basic differences between some of the established and emerging tools and platforms.

  • Jive: blog based
  • SharePoint: website based
  • Box: document based
  • Email: one to one, audience based

There is a lot of overlap in features among the tool platforms, but having used each of these four illustrative platforms, it will give you a point of departure- something to push against.  Of course in this illustration we have greatly oversimplified and ignored the fact that Oracle, SAP and everyone else who makes software now purports to be social.

Key takeaways

  • Build social capability to deliver business outcomes
  • Embed social processes into your approach
  • Leverage traditional change leadership with emerging social platforms & tools
  • Adoption of social platform is critical, but not the starting point

Also see “A management renaissance- Innovating for the knowledge age”

1 See Etienne Wenger’s work including Communities of Practice (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998)
2 Robert Berkman, “GE’s Colab brings good things to the company”, [Internet] MITSloan Management Review, November 7, 2012 [cited November 9, 2012]. Available from http://sloanreview.mit.edu/feature/ges-colab-brings-good-things-to-the-company/
3 Bughin, et al. “Capturing business value with social technologies”, McKinsey Quarterly (November 2012)
4 Robert Berkman, “They built it, but employees aren’t coming”, [Internet] MITSloan Management Review, October 23, 2012 [cited November 9, 2012] Available from http://sloanreview.mit.edu/improvisations/2012/10/23/they-built-it-but-employees-arent-coming/

The post Social Business- Don’t start in the tool shed appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/social-business-dont-start-in-the-tool-shed/feed/ 0 Change Leadership II- Understanding Kotter https://nextforge.com/change-leadership-ii-understanding-kotter/ https://nextforge.com/change-leadership-ii-understanding-kotter/#comments Mon, 12 Nov 2012 19:53:21 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1587 We explore Kotter's body of work, as well as a simple change management framework "The Change Formula" (Need for Change X Vision of Future X Steps > Natural Resistance to Change). We overview Kotter's framework of 8 accelerators, and the necessity of the dual management operating system

The post Change Leadership II- Understanding Kotter appeared first on .

]]> “Time is the friend of the wonderful business, the enemy of the mediocre.” Warren Buffett

Buffett reminds us, and we should never forget, the reason we change over time is to deliver better business outcomes, to build business capability more in line with competitive needs, and to be the wonderful business.  Also, with the increasing dynamism we all face in the marketplace, we must build a superior capability to improve and to respond quickly to change.

John P. Kotter has been building to his most recent crescendo of “how to” lead change since at least 19901.  And, since his thinking is now even more closely aligned with the work and positions we have been advocating and practicing with clients and colleagues for the last 20 years, we think a quick look back and a snapshot of Kotter’s current philosophy is worth exploring.

 

Let’s start with a simple analogy:
John P. Kotter is to change leadership as Michael E. Porter is to strategy.  And, here are a few examples of how (in addition to both being chaired professors at the Harvard Business School)

  • Both have rigorously researched their areas of expertise and published their findings targeted at the implications for general management
  • Both have developed simplifying frameworks2 and 3, now recognized as seminal works in their respective fields, for use by general management practitioners
  • Both continue to be recognized for their advocacy in their areas of focus, for how they continue to refine their trade, and for how they continue to apply their thinking general management in multiple industries

Foundational View
Over the last couple of years, we have noticed Kotter beginning to pull together his thinking on leadership with his work in the area of change.  For example, let’s start with some of Kotter’s views of what managers and leaders do.

Managers1
(left side; traditional hierarchical structure/system)
 Leaders1 
(right side; network structure/system)
  • Coping with complexity
  • Organizing staff
  • Controlling and problem solving
  • Planning and budgeting (deductive)
  • Coping with change
  • Aligning people
  • Motivating and inspiring
  • Setting direction (inductive)

And, recall Kotter’s 8 stage process for creating major change2

1. Establishing a sense of urgency
2. Creating a guiding coalition
3. Developing a vision and strategy
4. Communicating the change vision
5. Empowering broad-based action
6. Generating short-term wins
7. Consolidating gains and producing more change
8. Anchoring new approaches in the culture

We have always seen a close linkage between Kotter’s 8 step model and the primary mental change model we have advocated for since the early 1990’s- The change formula.  Both begin at the same point: High focus on the “need for change”/”sense of urgency”.

As Kotter has worked with more companies, he has come to realize transformation programs require an overlay or shadow organization structure of their very own.  Better than our moniker of a change management office (or Business/Strategy PMO), Professor Kotter has most recently, and elegantly, defined an analogy for the necessary structures, processes and management practices: Two operating systems for the enterprise4.

Dual Operating Systems
Let’s spend a bit of time with Kotter’s two operating systems which are now the primary engines of his change leadership thinking 4, 5, 6 and 7.  First, we should recognize he is tying the need for management to the efficient, traditional structure of hierarchy.  This traditional hierarchy (the left side, the left brain) is what we think of as modern management- birthed for the railroads (late 1800’s), scaled for mass production (early 1900’s), refined and exported (1960-70’s), automated and off-shored (late 1900’s, early 2000’s) (For a more rigorous treatment of the modern management “s” curve click here).  Thanks in part to our own exporting and off-shoring of management principles, we are now realizing an increased the level of competition and increased velocity of change in the global environment.  All of this increasing speed-of-change requires high-levels of flexibility to compete (For example, see our treatment of the emerging dimension of social capabilities click here).  Kotter’s solution to deal with these new capability requirements linked hand-in-glove with rapid change- the creative, network organization (the right side, the right brain).

Kotter then layers in a metaphor for the networked organization- one with the guiding coalition focused with the intensity of the sun on the single big opportunity (urgency/need for change). Supporting the big idea are planets (projects/initiatives) each with their own moons (sub-projects/sub-initiatives).  We all know what is required for the traditional, hierarchical organization.  Kotter posits what is most important for the networked operating system is strong leadership (see table above) supported through processes and management routines.

The eight accelerators of change
Kotter has recast the 8 steps/stages of transformation into accelerators (with somewhat different wording), and in one fell swoop de-emphasizing the rigid sequencing required (stage 1 to stage 8) from his previous writings.

The rise of the volunteer/Tapping the cognitive surplus
Here is where we get most excited about how Kotter has coalesced his thinking- around getting employees of an organization to volunteer- to unlock what Shirky8 refers to as the cognitive surplus.  (We work through the idea of cognitive surplus in a previous post click here)  The way we see this heading, is to a future of more transparent, more social enterprise, one in which Kotter focused his 5 principles7 for the networked operating system.

  • Has more change agents, is more inclusive
  • Employees “want to” and “get to”
  • Is focused on the head and the heart9
  • Leadership over management
  • Two systems, one organization

Key takeaways
There are a number of areas we could focus on (Kotter has 18 books noted in his HBS profile).  The following are our favorites at this point in time in our aspiration of helping our clients become and remain a “wonderful company”.

Increased emphasis on enduring need for change requires an additional organizational overlay- a network– to complement the traditional organization.

The dual operating system is a capability you can begin to embed in your organization today.

The center of the network, the first element of the change equation- need for change/big opportunity– is the raison d’être for the networked operating system; the networked operating system allows us to respond to these strategic needs quickly.

Volunteers, organizational slack, of up to 10% of our organization’s human resources can be tapped to fuel this social network work within the enterprise.

As a closing point, as we always remind our clients… Change occurs one person at a time

 

End Notes and References (This list includes an abridged listing of Professor Kotter’s work)

1 See John P. Kotter, What Leaders Really Do (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1999) Chapter 3, pp 51-73 (Footnote: First appeared in the May-June 1990 [issue of the] Harvard Business Review)
2 See John P. Kotter, Leading Change (Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1996) p. 21, exhibit 2, “The 8-stage process of creating major change.” (Footnote: Adapted from John P. Kotter, “Why transformation efforts fail,” Harvard Business Review (March-April 1995): 61.)
3 See Michael E. Porter, Competitive Strategy, Techniques for analyzing industries and competitors (NY: The Free Press, 1980) p 4, exhibit 1-1, “Forces Driving Industry Competition.”
4 See John P. Kotter, “Hierarchy and Network: Two Structures, One Organization” [Internet]. Boston: HBR Blog Network. May 23, 2011 [cited November 5, 2012]. Available from http://blogs.hbr.org/kotter/2011/05/two-structures-one-organizatio.html
5 See “Accelerate! How the most innovative companies capitalize on today’s rapid-fire strategic challenges- and still make their numbers,” Harvard Business Review (November 2012)
6 From John P. Kotter, “Accelerating Change, Based on the work of John P. Kotter” [File name: 9467TL-PPT-ENG.PPT]. Harvard Business Review (October 18, 2012).
7 From John P. Kotter, “A Revolutionary Approach to Strategic Change” [Internet screenshot]. Boston: HBR Webinar. November 1, 2012.
8 See Clay Shirky, Cognitive Surplus, Creativity and generosity in a connected age (NY: The Penguin Press, 2010).  A portion of the untapped potential can be available for our work life, for many of the same reasons Shirky sees applying some of our free time to the greater good, primarily through networked communities.
9 See Heath and Heath, Switch, How to change things when change is hard (NY: Broadway Books, 2010).  Chip and Dan Heath use a strong head and heart metaphor with the rider (head) and the elephant (heart) on how to drive transformational change.  Additionally, their 3 part- 9 element framework, p 259, addresses the head (rationale/vision of future), the heart (need for change) and the path (steps to get there) linking back to our favorite mental model for change, The Change Formula.

 

Special thanks to our colleague Leigh Trescot for sharing the picture of the penguin.

 

The post Change Leadership II- Understanding Kotter appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/change-leadership-ii-understanding-kotter/feed/ 2 The Strategy Stack https://nextforge.com/the-strategy-stack/ https://nextforge.com/the-strategy-stack/#respond Wed, 07 Nov 2012 23:27:09 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1560 This is 3rd of a 3 article Strategy-Pak(sm) series. Based on our work to align a rapidly growing consultancy of experienced consultants for consistency, and applied clean-sheet to a pre-acquisition, publicly traded company. This article focuses on the structure of the strategy stack from Mission to Vision to Value propositions to Themes to Initiatives and KPIs.

The post The Strategy Stack appeared first on .

]]> “Three Rules of Work: Out of clutter find simplicity; From discord find harmony; In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity.”  Albert Einstein

Seldom do we have the opportunity to help a client with strategic architecture from a clean slate as we recently completed with ABC.  More typically we have used a comprehensive view, our strategy-paksm, to find “What is missing?”  The reason companies often take a more piecemeal approach is at least two-fold.  First, strategy, like the world we compete in, is complex.  Second, most successful companies have the whole cloth of their historic strategy.  Perhaps with a need for some renovation, perhaps with the need for recutting to fit the current fashion, occasionally in need a bit of mending to fill-in some holes, but seldom are we asked to knit the whole cloth of strategy from, for example, a few bits of culture (more on culture later).

In the following, we will share with you the structure, the warp and the weft of the whole cloth, of strategy.  We have used this strategy stack to guide our work for more than a decade and a half to tailor, to repair, to clean, and, occasionally, to rigorously provide the foundational elements of integrated guidance for a publicly traded company.

Out of clutter find simplicity
The strategy stack is a 5-level hierarchical organizing concept of a number of commonly used strategic elements.  Over time many of these conceptual monikers have picked up ambiguous and conflicting meanings.  We find a focusing question helps side-step engrained beliefs and get to the critical elements of direction.

Mission

Includes: Gross-level business elements (ROI, market share, etc.), Consider softer ( à la balanced scorecard) elements
Mission is unique among the strategy stack elements and breaks down into its own Mission Stack (three level sub-stack)

Mission Statement
Focusing question: Why does the company exist?

Business Drivers
Focusing question:  What things done right will ensure our success in the marketplace?

Culture
Focusing question:  What core values define how we work together and how we work with others?

A side bar- P&G relies on purpose, values and principles to guide their company.  According to survey responses of nearly 1,000 P&G alumni world-wide, the following values were mentioned by the respondents (% response) as contributing to their personal success and the success of the companies they have worked with since P&G: doing the right thing (77%); respect for the contributions of others (66%); merit determined by performance (57%); honest evaluation of causes of poor performance (53%); and Concern for the well-being of partners, customers and community (49%)1.

Vision

Focusing question:  Where are we going?
Includes: Defining a view of the future, high level positioning

Value Proposition

Focusing question:  How do we go to market with our target segment(s)?
Includes: Market-level positioning and relative pricing, understanding of value derived from our offering (product and service package) from a customer’s perspective

Themes

Focusing question:  What are our priorities?
Includes: Capability and performance requirements

Initiatives

Focusing question:  How do we execute?
Includes: Gap-filling projects for future capabilities and table-stakes performance improvement projects for existing capabilities with both types of initiatives driven by prioritized themes

Key Performance Indicators

Each level of the hierarchy provides an opportunity for key performance indicators (KPIs).  We break the KPI’s down into two parts:

Measure: What is to be measured e.g., gross margin
Target: Numeric target to be achieved  e.g., 50% gross margin

A side bar on the Balanced Scorecard- ABC, and other clients we have been involved with, have historically had trouble with KPI’s by 1) diving too deep- defining too may KPIs (or as we referred to lesser performance indicators, PIs) and 2) getting wrapped around the axle within Kaplan and Norton’s Balanced Scorecard2 hierarchy (Financial, Customer, Internal and Learning).  We have, as we did with ABC, consistently recommended to start with just one or two KPIs for up to 7 of the business drivers.  Further, we suggest starting with the no over-arching priority of the drivers, but rather have each organizational unit determined how they can best contribute to each of the enterprise drivers as they are cascaded down through the organization.

From discord find harmony
We encourage diversity and breadth of involvement in the strategy stack formulation for two key reasons: rigor of solution, and anchoring initial direction for change management.  Much of the leading thinking on social business leverages tools which allow leadership to look to the fringe of the enterprise, the customer and competitive hard-face, for ideas to inform the planning process.  For example, ABC included a large management team (double typical span of controls) to include the diversity of thought from operations to the legal to sales to communications to environmental to financial.

Additionally, when the c-level leadership team at ABC went out into the field to begin the communication of new direction through town-hall type events, they started each meeting by introducing themselves (including to the other floors of the home office).  Later during the town hall, they solicited and were met with very direct, frank and unflattering feedback.  But these initial steps led to a very successful wave of enthusiasm in the work of cascading the drivers and operating/functional organization’s KPIs.  And, a representative group of the employees volunteered to define the values initially outlined by the ABC’s leadership team.

In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity
Like ABC’s story, hardship and competitive pressure can provide a compelling need for change (see the change formula).  As a matter of fact we believe the articulation of the need for change needs to be included “at the top” of the strategy stack and is critically necessary to drive behavioral change and support the heavy lifting required at the “lower levels” of the strategy stack.

Communication of key transformation messages were supported at ABC through, for example, SharePoint sites providing the executive team with content (e.g., talking points), scheduling and administration. Also video clips of the leadership team were produced to be used on break room large screens at more than 100 plants and facilities.  Where one of the c-level executives had visited the plant, these video messages helped reinforce their live appearance.  Where the leadership team was not able to visit during their initial town hall rotation, the videos provided complementary messaging to supervisor lead discussions (again, aided by talking points).

This is the third post in a definitional series on the key elements of strategy.  We will continue to include a few observations along the way on how we have, or might, advance the more traditional concepts.  Collectively, we refer to the grouping of strategic concepts as the strategy-paksm.

1 See Tocquigny and Butcher, When Core Values Are Strategic (Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Press, 2012)
2 See Kaplan and Norton, Strategy Maps: Converting intangible assets into tangible outcomes (Boston: HBS Press, 2004)

The post The Strategy Stack appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/the-strategy-stack/feed/ 0 A Working Definition of Strategy https://nextforge.com/a-working-definition-of-strategy/ https://nextforge.com/a-working-definition-of-strategy/#respond Wed, 31 Oct 2012 23:09:42 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1478 This is 2nd of a 3 article Strategy-Pak(sm) series. Based on our work to align a rapidly growing consultancy of experienced consultants for consistency, and applied clean-sheet to a pre-acquisition, publicly traded company. This article focuses on the definition of strategy

The post A Working Definition of Strategy appeared first on .

]]> Everyone knows what strategy is.  Just ask them.  The difficultly we typically encounter is no one group, dare we say no two individuals, share the same definition.

Michael E. Porter
Professor Porter
Director, Institute for Strategy and Competitiveness
Harvard Business School

This is the issue we have faced over and over again.  With our clients, we could expend literally days of team time discussing the “s” word.  While this can be interesting and potentially important, it is not efficient.  Also, when working with other consultants for example, we have found quite a bit of variation in the use of the word “strategic”.  Often, we believe, to raise the importance of the matter at hand, the work I/my department/my team have to do.  Instead of getting scattered like those constructing the Tower of Babel, we have, over the years, found having a rigorously developed working definition of strategy helpful.  Starting with Porter’s seminal work “What is strategy?” and the collective body-of-work by strategic thought-leaders Gary Hamel, Henry Mintzberg, James Brian Quinn, et al, our working definition has been pressure tested by scores of leadership teams.

A consensus?

If you will suspend your possible doubt about a “better” definition of strategy for a few minutes, let us walk you through our thinking, and maybe it will save you a number of man-weeks in leadership team meetings to reach your working definition of strategy.

Strategy is…

… how to create and enhance relevant and durable competitive advantage

Let us breakdown the definition and explain some of our word choices.

“…how to…”

Strategy is not only the concepts, the big thoughts and the mental frameworks.  It is also the plans to execute.

“…create and enhance…”

If we need certain capabilities to deliver on our strategy and if the capability does not exist, we create or build it.  If we currently possess the needed capability, we are looking to constantly enhance or improve it.

“…relevant…”

Looking from the outside in, how is it relevant or important to our customer?

“…and durable…”

Strategies are long-term by nature, not easily reproduced.  They must be durable or sustainable.
[As a side note, this is the one word we have changed from our original working definition.  We updated our word choice to better align with Warren Buffet’s relatively recent popularization of “durable” in lieu of “sustainable” within the common strategic vernacular.]

“…competitive advantage”

This may be the principal point of difference among leadership team members- focusing on competitive strategy or how-we-go-to-market.  Often leaders throughout the organization hang a “strategy” moniker on important tasks and activities.  We reserve the “s” word to those elements of our business, of our business model, causing our customers to prefer and select our product/service bundle over our competitors’ offerings.

How can this help you?

Often we begin leadership working sessions with a pre-meeting homework assignment.  Before the first meeting on the topic of strategy, have your team read Porter’s “What is strategy?”  Have some discussion about what they read and how it relates to your organization.  Throw a slide up with a working definition of strategy and see if you don’t get quick buy-in to the definition.  Now you can rapidly move on to the important and urgent work of leadership- setting direction.

This is the second post in a definitional series on the key elements of strategy.  We will also include a few observations along the way on how we have, or might, advance the more traditional concepts.  Collectively, we refer to the grouping of strategic concepts as the strategy-paksm.

Professor Porter’s picture is from his Twitter account @MichaelEPorter.

The post A Working Definition of Strategy appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/a-working-definition-of-strategy/feed/ 0 Unpacking Strategy https://nextforge.com/unpacking-strategy-2/ https://nextforge.com/unpacking-strategy-2/#comments Wed, 24 Oct 2012 20:41:18 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1466 This is 1st of a 3 article Strategy-Pak(sm) series. Based on our work to align a rapidly growing consultancy of experienced consultants for consistency, and applied clean-sheet to a pre-acquisition, publicly traded company. This article focuses on the overall architecture including a definition of strategy and its component parts

The post Unpacking Strategy appeared first on .

]]> About 15 years ago we were working together at a rapidly expanding management consulting firm.  One of our issues was aligning a diverse group of seasoned consultants around a definition of strategy and its component parts.  You know the drill… “Does the mission statement inform the vision,  or is it the other way around?”  We spent several weeks at night and on weekends to develop a consistent base-line, a package of strategic elements which collectively would allow our clients to test their bits and pieces of strategy- and weave them into a coherent whole.  And, it allowed our colleagues to  focus more on business outcomes and less on taxonomy.

Recently, we had the opportunity to take a blank page approach to strategy with a client.  Let’s call them ABCommodity who,  while in their 3rd-4th generation of leadership, had for more than 50 years focused primarily on operational excellence.  The great recession not only revealed a gap in the operational excellence approach, it required ABC to stop losing money or lose control to active investors.

It never ceases to surprise us, just how often and how important it is to reach back to what we think of as foundational business concepts.  So, once again, we pulled out our strategy basics, now burnished and pressure-tested with years of consultative use and learnings to fill a critical leadership capability plank at ABC.  The following are ABC’s key c-suite learnings from re-building their competitive strategy from the ground up.

  • Strategy is a package of elements including
    –  Definition of strategy
    –  Strategy stack: a hierarchical stack of mission, vision, value propositions, themes, roadmap of initiatives
    –  Key performance indicators (measures and targets)
    –  Enterprise analysis framework
    –  Communications
  • Change leadership is at least as important as content, and potentially more important
    –  Change happens by changing behavior: one person at a time
  • Strategic execution requires a project discipline by both staff and executives
  • Communications is critical to participation and adoption, and requires more than a one-way effort
    –  The social impact of two-way communications built unexpected momentum for cultural alignment and cultural change
    –  The organization has just scratched the surface of unlocking the energy, knowledge and ideas of the individuals

This is our introductory post in a definitional series on the key elements of strategy.  We will also include a few observations along the way on how we have, or might, advance the more traditional concepts.  Collectively, we refer to the grouping of strategic concepts as the strategy-paksm.

The post Unpacking Strategy appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/unpacking-strategy-2/feed/ 2 Best Thought Leadership in Social Business Elements for 2011 https://nextforge.com/best-thought-leadership-in-social-business-elements-for-2011/ https://nextforge.com/best-thought-leadership-in-social-business-elements-for-2011/#respond Thu, 05 Jan 2012 18:46:34 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1382 One of our mostly-annual series of what we found as our favorites for the year. Let us know if you want to be added to our year-end email list

The post Best Thought Leadership in Social Business Elements for 2011 appeared first on .

]]> We thought you might like to see some of what has influenced our thinking this year, and how we think these concepts will impact business improvement efforts in 2012 and beyond.

The following are our favorite thought provoking articles, books and web-based tidbits from this past year.  Six topics span a wide range of perspectives: the underlying drivers of business and economic uncertainty, evolving demands on management and leadership, and our own points of view on the business improvement that supports enterprise/employee transformation.

Note: This is an abridged version of our client and colleague 2011 Year-end favorites email.  If you have trouble reading the following table in RSS or feedblitz please click here

Business + Economics
A macroeconomic view

Click here for 44M narrated slide presentation
 Mary Meeker, partner at Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers, a venture capital firm,  presents a sobering view of the United States government- as if it was a company. In her July ‘11 USA, INC presentation, Meeker addresses: our biggest macro economic issue (healthcare), the scale of recent efforts (2.5% deficit reduction compromise almost shut down the government), and the fact it will require both reduced costs and increased taxes (neither alone is palatable, e.g., requirement to double taxes).  The implications for the environment we will have to lead in and manage in are significant.
Management
The future of management

Click here for 17M video presentation		 For a clear articulation of the motivation to achieve high performance, Gary Hamel lays out his perspective on the drivers of management innovation in a TED-like presentation.

As a reference, Hamel’s MIX site also categorizes a number of companies, mini-cases and thought leaders all focused on the future of management. “The Management Innovation eXchange” (MIX) is an open innovation project aimed at reinventing management for the 21st century. The premise: while “modern” management is one of humankind’s most important inventions, it is now a mature technology that must be reinvented for a new age.”
Change Leadership
Statistical validation of our 20 year focus on engagement’s role in change

Click here for our published POV		 Our favorite statistic of the year is based on nearly 1,400 responses tied to business success…
Favorite Book
Improving decisioning

Like the generic process roles tool ARCI or RACI (responsible, accountable, consult and inform), RAPID (Recommend, Agree, Perform, Input and Decide) addresses responsibilities specific to the decision process		 Decide and Deliver, 2010. Bain has produced a great “how to” book for the decision process. Although their RAPID framework has been previously published in Harvard Business Review, building a decision process capability is already critical for quick decision making.  Looking toward the future, a flexible decisioning capability is foundational for more distributed and social enterprise.
Business Improvement:
Favorite Engagement
Our favorite engagement of the year

Click here for 45 min video of Tom Reeder’s iCitizen presentation (keynote on far right) NOTE: Requires Adobe’s Flash		 Delivering on two fronts- achieving our business outcome, while building social business capabilities– we were able to deliver against business outcomes while creating a vision and roadmap for a client to become a social, high performance business.  We presented key elements of this thinking applied to a hyper-dynamic segment in today’s business world- a conference of digital marketers.
Business Improvement:
Most popular post
Role of social media in enterprise transformation

Click here for our published POV		 We have written a number of posts this year, but the one most visited at our site, according to Google analytics, is our Can Social Media Drive Enterprise Change?  The piece gives a quick overview of some of the most relevant published findings and articulates our point of view to our approach, including the necessary focus on first achieving business outcomes while secondarily building social business capabilities- an evolutionary approach.

At NextForge, we are in the business of advancing the business improvement process.  We do this in part by sharing our thinking and tools with our clients and our fellow consultants through, for example, our Points of View and Library of tools.

We have captured the essence of more than two decades of business improvement experience in the constantly expanding Help Yourself section of our website.  Should you need additional support achieving your business improvement outcomes, we would be honored to work with you and talk about the appropriate blend of traditional and emerging management practices we can help you realize.

We hope you find these year-end favorite materials as interesting as we have in unearthing and developing them.

Best wishes for 2012!

The post Best Thought Leadership in Social Business Elements for 2011 appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/best-thought-leadership-in-social-business-elements-for-2011/feed/ 0 Execution through Processes, Projects and Communities https://nextforge.com/execution-through-processes-projects-and-communities/ https://nextforge.com/execution-through-processes-projects-and-communities/#respond Fri, 23 Dec 2011 19:31:54 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1327 Focusing on execution, we touch on each common organizing concepts in the following sections: Process; Project (program and project management); Community (purpose, practice and interest). We also quickly discuss the role of organization, followed by what is best organizing concept (considering sponsorship and breadth of collaboration)

The post Execution through Processes, Projects and Communities appeared first on .

]]>

“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler”  Albert Einstein

When we talk about execution- achieving some business outcome- each of us has our own bias for how.  Some of us think about who we will task with an assignment.  Others, particularly if it is a game-changing initiative for our company, will begin to think about the team, the stakeholders and the initiative’s leadership.  For this discussion, we are going to focus on the organizing structure which will most effectively achieve business outcomes.  Should it be…

  • Processes,
  • Projects,
  • Communities, or a
  • Combination of the above

We will touch on each common organizing concept in the following sections- the more common approaches to execution necessary to achieve day-to-day work through to transformational business model change.

 Process execution

Most of us are familiar with Lucy and Ethel’s efforts at the chocolate factory.  And yet this simple 1950’s skit is a real example of a process at its basic level-turning inputs into outputs in an end-to-end process where you can see what needs to be done.  Some of the basic process definitions touch on the process customer (can you imagine being Ricky or Fred selling the candies wrapped by Lucy and Ethel?) and there are a number of common tools used to define, for example, responsibilities for process steps.  In this 101 level of process, the supervisor measures through observation.  There are no real hand-offs, and there is no complex structure.

As processes grow in complexity, beyond simple single-task execution and management, the implications of structure begin to become more apparent.  We must address the questions of structure to minimize the impact of functional silos and to minimize hand-offs between tasks.  In other words, should we create a bureaucratic structure (like US Congress with transient objectives and jobs)? Or, are we better off with a flexible process team (like a NASCAR pit crew with known and  inter-changeable roles)?  Each end of the continuum involves tradeoffs.  Once we have chosen a structure, do we view our process as a complete and insular whole, or should we take a more systemic approach?

MIT’s Peter Senge introduced systems thinking to the broader audience of business management through his Fifth Discipline series starting in the early 1990’s.  While focused on organizational learning, many of Professor Senge’s concepts forced consideration of complex multidimensional mental models, including the then exploding concept of business process reengineering.  The confluence of these ways of thinking about processes set up enterprise-level process models which integrated execution activities and became the back-bone for Enterprise Resource Planning programs like SAP and Oracle.

In more recent history, process management has been refined to include detailed measurement schema, waste elimination, learning and feed-back loops popularized, for example, by six sigma and lean.  These process approaches can be traced to their development at Toyota Production Systems and their widely publicized implementation at GE.

Project execution

Project management has its origins pre-dating the pyramids.  Initially practiced within the construction industry, formalized for aerospace, and adopted by technologists for computer systems development, project and program management is the go-to structure for organizing one-off, unique initiatives and efforts. Although, based on our experience, not deeply understood in the executive suite, “project work” ranks up there with restructuring as a key management tool used to enhance enterprise capabilities. (Note: Interestingly neither project management nor reorganization is listed in Bain’s periodic management tools survey)

We think of project management as the continuous management of the tradeoffs between the work to be accomplished, the time-frame and the resources available/needed.  The common thumb-rule for project management is to pick two and define the third- which works within limits (e.g., “Bearing a child takes nine months, no matter how many women are assigned”, Fred Books, The Mythical Man-Month). Program management then provides the platform for managing multiple projects.

Since the mid-1980’s the Project Management Institute (PMI) have created a body of knowledge and certification program expanding from their technology project management roots.

There are a number of approaches to staffing projects and programs to accommodate various real-world constraints.  We have briefly profiled four in the following.

  • Tiger Teams
    Pro: Fast to an “answer”; Can be highly confidential
    Con: Typically high-risk in roll-out due to limited organizational ownership and understanding
  • Cross-Functional Teams
    Pro: Broader representation and involvement of subject matter experts allows some extended reach into the organization
    Con: Slower than Tiger Teams to show initial progress; Requires higher resource commitment- usually locked in for entire project- potentially driving sub-optimal team member selection
  • Collaborative Workgroup
    Pro: Broad participation and ownership from project kickoff accelerates roll-out and enables superior contributions toward a more viable solution
    Con: Slower “front end” of project
  • Swift Teams (A NextForge Hybrid)
    Pro: Deliverbles with each short-term interval; Flexible resourcing
    Con: Like tiger teams, limited number of staff minimize opportunities to embed solutions into the enterprise

Organizations increase their chances of success through highest amount of engagement as early in implementation as possible.  Not only does engagement drive future ownership of the solution, more resources can be brought to bear on perfecting the solution, as represented by the area under the curves. See exhibit, Early involvement…

Community execution

There are as many ways of cutting the concept of community as there are stars in the sky.  For simplicity and illustration, we have highlighted three types of communities based on the scope of their objective.  We have teased these definitions from multiple sources, as there are no “universally accepted” definitions of community management, particularly as it applies within the enterprise.  Community as a way to execute within the enterprise is an innovative management concept facilitated by emerging social platforms providing relatively easy access to people and information.

The table provides characteristics primarily driven by level of focus on outcome.  All promote organizational learning. These illustrative communities include:

  • Community of Purpose- directed at organizational objectives and culture
  • Community of Practice- supporting group efficiency and competence
  • Community of Interest- addressing simple individual effectiveness and knowledge

Communities require attention analogous to a crop.  They must be seeded, fed and weeded before they will produce quality outcomes.  And, just like crops, yields are highly dependent on their environment (weather).

What is best?

It depends.  There is no pure play here, as, for example, projects can be accomplished as part of processes within communities.  We advocate for considering Einstein’s admonishment of enough structure, and no more.

One holistic guide we developed considers both who is doing the work and who is sponsoring the work.  A simple way to consider the categories of each is to think of the individual, a group or the organization (with leadership as a proxy for sponsorship).  See exhibit, Here are four…

It is worth repeating- the highest level of engagement of the most stakeholders as early as possible is best to creating a rigorous and embedded business outcome.  And, one must consider time and other resource opportunities.  This is why we advocate for moving to the more social form- an organizing concept of communities- as much as possible.  Over time the applicability of communities will increase as this capability becomes embedded in the organization.

The post Execution through Processes, Projects and Communities appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/execution-through-processes-projects-and-communities/feed/ 0 What is most important to successful transformation? https://nextforge.com/what-is-most-important-to-successful-transformation/ https://nextforge.com/what-is-most-important-to-successful-transformation/#respond Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:14:02 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1267 Involvement has always been "Change 101" for NextForge. It is part of our DNA. This article explores employee involvement backed by published research (McKinsey). "Involving employees in change initiatives increases success 3.5 times." We introduce a moniker for this involvement iGO- individual, Group and Organization.

The post What is most important to successful transformation? appeared first on .

]]> Suppose I told you there is an element of transformation which, if appropriately integrated into your plan, would increase the chances of success for your transformation effort by 350%.

This is exactly what I heard during a recent webinar- a statistical validation of what I have observed and practiced my entire management consulting career.

First: context and a common problem

To help us with the context of transformation, let’s consider a just a slice of the complexity of large-scale transformation by revisiting the components of change represented in the change formula.  As you may recall, the three components required to overcome the natural resistance to change include:

  • Need for change
  • Vision of future
  • Steps to get there

Transforming a division or company, particularly a multi-national, is very hard work.  To make transformation easier, I have observed companies drifting, particularly during the first decade of this millennium, toward an over-reliance on best practices- to define the vision of the future.  This focus on best practice follows an increased attention to the disciple of “process” thinking initially popularized by the reengineering programs of the early 90’s and formalized by the ERP systems necessary to ward off the Y2K issues of the late 90’s.  Current use of best practices may just be the flattening of the process discipline s-curve, accelerated by 1) the explosion of advisory resources and 2) ready-access to all the industry process learnings related to the older methodologies now repurposed as best practices- a content commodity masquerading as the vision of the future.

Best practices are not enough

While best practices are not an effective operational strategy, they certainly can enable a company to the run with the pack.  Best practices can also be effective if the company has fallen behind the industry norms, and/or if their competitive strategy does not rely heavily on operational practices.

Leading transformational change is more than just getting the content right.  Most managers who have been through a successful major transformation understand this.  From the change perspective, the successful transformation also requires a well-articulated, broadly communicated, deeply understood story- the need for change.   Finally, achieving targeted business outcomes of a transformation depends on how we execute the change- the steps.

 It is about involvement

The steps of how we build out the vision are centered on activity.  All transformation requires people to do something, and most often to behave differently- do an activity differently-  than they have for a number of years.  When talking about how to change behaviors as part of transformation efforts, we advise our clients on “Change 101”- involve those who must change.  This is accomplished within the context of the of the change equation’s need for change and toward the destination of the vision of the future.  However, this most time-consuming effort occurs through the steps of building and executing the projects and initiatives by the employees- to achieve our business outcome- typically starting with stakeholder analysis.

The importance of involvement, particularly in the steps, cannot be underestimated.  McKinsey, the premier strategy firm, has recently conducted a bit of research summarized in June’s McKinsey Quarterly publication and further developed in a recently published text.  A key finding of the research on leading change- involving employees in change initiatives increases success by approximately 3.5 times.

Changing individual behaviors is a foundational building block of our approach to leading change.  We have observed how many companies are missing this “most critical” element of involvement, relying instead on best practices to carry the day (e.g., If you build a better mousetrap…).  Involvement is required to successfully transform all levels: individual, group and organization (iGO).  And, it starts with involving the individual- changing individual behavior.

“The achievements of an organization are the results of the combined effort of each individual.”

Vince Lombardi

The post What is most important to successful transformation? appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/what-is-most-important-to-successful-transformation/feed/ 0 Agile Framework for Go-to-Market Execution https://nextforge.com/agile-framework-for-go-to-market-execution/ https://nextforge.com/agile-framework-for-go-to-market-execution/#respond Thu, 24 Nov 2011 21:36:48 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1226 We begin by considering the tatical and strategic work to be accomplished within the enterprise. Next up is leadership activity, followed by the architecture of participation (guidance, interactions and routines) of how we manage and work. Agile requires people-enabled network, with different skills and organization; but structure is not organization.

The post Agile Framework for Go-to-Market Execution appeared first on .

]]>

“In the face of complexity and multiple competing demands, organizations simply can’t handle decision-making in a totally rational way.  Not surprisingly, then, a single blunt instrument- like structure- is unlikely to prove the master tool that can change organizations with best effect”

This quote reflects our concerns on how to deal with the reality of extremely rapid change in the marketplace, accelerated by new and constantly innovating competitors.  Just one probative slice of the modern enterprise reveals a prime example- the impact of digital marketing’s evolving technologies (see our iCitizen presentation).  Today’s problems and competitive environment are different, and we must approach our go-to-market execution differently along all five dimensions which we collectively refer to as the Agile Execution Framework.

  • Self-directed (day-to-day) Activity
  • Directed (strategic project) Activity
  • Leadership Activity
  • Architecture of Participation
  • People Connected Network

The work to be done- Tactical and Strategic Work of the Enterprise

The way we accomplish both the day-to-day tasks and strategic projects of the enterprise must change- defining a new way of accomplishing the short-term and longer-term work of the enterprise.  To illustrate, let’s make an analogy to Chris Anderson’s The Long Tail. The head, shown in orange on the left, represents the typically strategic projects, the capability-building, bet-the-ranch efforts.  And, furthering the analogy, the long-tail embodies the individual effort of every employee as they go about doing their day-to-day activity of marketing, selling, fulfillment, post-sales service, and the like.  We think of the large, strategic projects as Directed Activity– those efforts directed by leadership.  Leadership directs these initiatives because they are mission-critical, they generally represent a significant risk to the enterprise, and often they build enterprise capability.  A classic directed activity is a significant merger/acquisition. We refer to the day-to-day work as Self-directed Activity– those efforts self-directed by the individual.  Self-directed effort represents an opportunity for continuous improvement at the most detailed level of execution.  Processing a new order or taking a customer service call are characteristic self-directed activities involving an individual or very small group.

Increasing collaborative execution of directed and self-directed activity is a critical characteristic of agile execution.  As collaborative execution increases and we get the self-directed activity right within a high-performance environment,  we can begin to reduce the number and size of directed projects- as the thousands of small adjustments have reduced the need for as many major directed corrections.  Less directed activity should allow leadership more time to lead.

Leadership Activity

In order to support the execution effort, both the directed and self-directed, enterprise leadership activity must change to create a collaborative and trusting environment.  Leadership cannot delegate the behavioral change toward collaboration; it must demonstrate transparency, openness to ideas, and broader  participation in direction setting.  Leadership must: drive decisioning and accountability down into the organization, ensure supporting capabilities are in place, and reach out to the fringe of the enterprise for customer and market information. These and other “musts” will create a set of leadership activities aligned with the market and supporting execution.  Creating this highly communicative and trusting enterprise does not happen overnight.  Leadership must model aspirational behaviors, advocate for change, etc., all the while, maintaining focus on business outcomes and performance- delivering on two fronts (see What we have learned- so far).

Architecture of Participation

Today’s business environment has passed the inflection point where knowledge workers now lead industrial workers as the majority of our workforce.  The way we work together, the way we knit together leadership activity, and self-directed and directed activity must change to follow suite.  Our view of the necessary architecture of participation includes three primary dimensions including the guidance we establish and receive, our routines, and our interactions… all requiring change from the traditional norms of participation.

People Enabled Network

Providing a foundation for the modern enterprise is what MIT’s Professor McAfee refers to as the “emergent social software platforms”.  We know them as Jive, SharePoint, SocialText, Moxie, Box, etc.  Add in people, relationships, and the data available on one of these platforms and you have what we refer to as the People Connected Network.  The platform’s easy to search, ask and share the right information with and from the right people, including subject matter experts, provides visibility to the links, connections and information to support today’s knowledge worker.

New skills

As we look into this new reality, there are a number of new roles and capabilities we feel will be necessary.  A few key resource focus areas are highlighted in the following.

  • Community management- A way of thinking, working and managing with others ranging from prescriptive to self-supporting; A way to organize people
  • Content curation- A way to organize and grow information; A way to consolidate an over-abundance of data, ensuring the latest, vetted information is easily retrieved
  • Individual execution acumen-  A way to develop individuals for success in an agile environment exhibiting situational awareness, the ability to influence without formal authority, the ability to commit and deliver (accountable) business determined outcomes; A way to organize individual development

Putting It All Together

Market-aligned agile execution with flexibility and responsiveness requires organizational capabilities and individual skills to work in a new way.  It requires supporting durable capabilities necessary for social business success (see The 5i’s). Enterprise-level change starts with a change in leadership, and is generally best accomplished through an evolutionary approach- a blended mix of traditional and community-based structure inside the enterprise.  And, as with all change, it begins with and is based on changing the behaviors of individuals.

Structure is not organization

Remember the opening quote?  Where the author explores the idea of structure not meeting the single-tool test with all the increasing complexity?  The quote is from a seminal work by Robert Waterman, Tom Peters, and Julien Phillips introducing their 7-S framework “for organizational thought” more than three decades ago (See Structure is not organization, Business Horizons, June 1980).

We are still working on getting it right, and it continues to be about more than structure.  It is about how to organize.

The post Agile Framework for Go-to-Market Execution appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/agile-framework-for-go-to-market-execution/feed/ 0 Durable Capabilities Required for Social Business Success (5i’s) https://nextforge.com/durable-capabilities-required-for-social-business-success-5is/ https://nextforge.com/durable-capabilities-required-for-social-business-success-5is/#respond Tue, 08 Nov 2011 22:12:58 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1089 We like to bend Professor Porter's phrasing on "sustainable" a bit to align with Warren Buffet's metaphoric moats of "durable" competitive advantage. Durable capabilities required for social business success include the 5Is: Innovation (e.g., Hamel's innovation stack), Information Bias, Informed Decisions (e.g., Bain's RAPID decision roles), Individual Acumen, and Integration.

The post Durable Capabilities Required for Social Business Success (5i’s) appeared first on .

]]> Faster, Better and Different!  Table-stakes in today’s competitive environment.

Your go-to-market delivery must be flexible and aspire to one-to-one marketing, sales and service- to meet your customer’s uniquely individual needs and preferences.  The hardened silos of the traditional enterprise, the management we all know from the industrial age, is not enough.

“The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them.”
Albert Einstein

Social Capabilities

To accommodate the tsunami of social-media driven change companies are experiencing in the marketplace, we have fused our 25 plus years of management experience- constantly seeking competitive advantage through business improvement- with the potential for employee and customer engagement made possible through the explosion of collaboratively enabling social tools.  We have worked with intrigued, forward-looking executives and their companies to learn what is required to bring “social thinking” into the enterprise.  And, we have spent more than 3 years studying and working with emerging methods and tools- to identify a set of capabilities necessary to be competitive now and in the future- defining social business inside the enterprise.  We have summarized these foundational capabilities in the “5i’s”.

  • Innovation
  • Information Bias
  • Informed Decisions
  • Individual Acumen
  • Integration

These capabilities are necessary at the individual, group and organization (iGO) levels throughout the enterprise.

Innovation

While there are thousands of books on innovation, few address multiple dimensions of innovation.  In a recent webinar, Gary Hamel presented an innovation stack, the idea of layers of innovation from operations to product to strategy to eco-system (enterprise network) to management innovation.  Each layer becomes less prevalent and more competitively enduring as you climb the stack from operations to management.

One of our key principles in bringing social transformation to the enterprise-level is the need for behavioral innovation at all levels, including leadership.  Broad involvement coupled with the appropriate environment can drive multiple levels and types of innovation.

Information Bias

A culture of fact-based action, leveraging transparency of information both in the marketplace and within the enterprise, facilitates rapid action and can be the basis of shared learnings throughout the enterprise.  Information about a network of individuals promotes efficient staffing and, when combined with time-shifting collaborative technologies, helps leverage the limited amount of an expert’s time.  Enterprise-wide adoption of collaborative technologies provides visibility at the fringe of the enterprise, and supports distributed decisioning.

Informed Decisions

A critical component of how we will work together in the aspirational enterprise, decisioning includes the processes, roles and routines, guidance and interactions necessary to distribute accountability down and out into the organization.  A well defined decision process, including clear roles, supported by social technologies can provide extreme flexibility and transparency at all levels- from above and below.

Individual Acumen

The social enterprise demands individual accountability and reinforced sensibilities of appropriate judgment in the use of, for example, company sensitive information.  One of the primary skills necessary within the architecture of participation (routines, guidance and interactions) is situational awareness in aiding decision making.  Individual acumen relies on each and every individual in the organization to bring the a basic set of tools, understanding and “business think” into their daily routines.

Integration

Pulling all the pieces together includes enterprise integration along dimensions such as processes, leadership and communication to reinforce consistent messages, not only internally, but out to the marketplace and customers.  When aligning and integrating the enterprise with competitive strategy, we believe it begins with the an understanding of customer needs, application of these capabilities to direct resources to create customer-centric value through agile execution to achieve customer fulfillment.

These base capabilities are critical to the future social business within the enterprise.  When focused through agile execution and aligned with marketplace strategy, these capabilities provide a strong, durable platform for business improvement and for competitive success.

The post Durable Capabilities Required for Social Business Success (5i’s) appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/durable-capabilities-required-for-social-business-success-5is/feed/ 0 New Reality- Organizing and Aligning in the Age of Everywhere Commerce https://nextforge.com/new-reality-organizing-and-aligning-in-the-age-of-everywhere-commerce/ https://nextforge.com/new-reality-organizing-and-aligning-in-the-age-of-everywhere-commerce/#respond Fri, 21 Oct 2011 22:31:20 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1129 During 2011 we were referred by a client to a digital marketing agency, Resource Interactive (now IBM iX). Resource asked NextForge to present our point-of-view during their annual conference iCitizen 2011 focused on “how to” organize and align the enterprise for digital marketing, including the use of social business (inside the enterprise). Our presentation was the closing keynote iCitizen presentation in Columbus, Ohio.

The post New Reality- Organizing and Aligning in the Age of Everywhere Commerce appeared first on .

]]>

NextForge advocates “agile execution” during iCitizen Symposium (2011).  See “Tom Reeder” bubble on right of summary graphic prepared by Resource Interactive

During 2011 we were referred by a client to a digital marketing agency, Resource Interactive (now IBM iX).  Resource asked NextForge to present our point-of-view on enterprise alignment supporting the emerging digital initiatives during their annual conference iCitizen 2011. 

The conference theme was Everywhere Commerce: From Shareable to Shoppable Moments.  Our presentation New Reality- Organizing and Aligning in the Age of Everywhere Commerce, was iCitizen’s closing keynote presentation in Columbus, Ohio, and focused on “how to” organize and align the enterprise for digital marketing, including the use of social business (inside the enterprise).

You can view a PDF of our iCitizen presentation deck by clicking the button below.

Tom Reeder presenting during iCitizen

Click here to see iCitizen presentation

Also see Resource Interactive’s blog about the iCitizen Symposium and NextForge’s presentation.

The post New Reality- Organizing and Aligning in the Age of Everywhere Commerce appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/new-reality-organizing-and-aligning-in-the-age-of-everywhere-commerce/feed/ 0 Bringing Social Business Inside the Enterprise: What we have learned (so far) https://nextforge.com/bringing-social-business-inside-the-enterprise/ https://nextforge.com/bringing-social-business-inside-the-enterprise/#comments Tue, 18 Oct 2011 14:46:37 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=1063 What we have learned so far about bringing social business inside the enterprise: 1) deliver on two fronts (committed results + capabilties); 2) build the new way into the approach; 3) blend traditional, proven tools and methods with emerging collaborative approaches; and 4) adopt a collaborative platform.

The post Bringing Social Business Inside the Enterprise: What we have learned (so far) appeared first on .

]]> We recently presented our point of view on how to align and organize for the opportunities and challenges facing companies as they implement digital marketing in this dawning day of everywhere commerce.  Most of the 300 participants at the iCitizen Symposium hosted by Resource Interactive are entirely absorbed with the customer touchpoints becoming more available to manufacturers and retailers through digital means, including social business outside the enterprise.  Like most improvement efforts today, the pace and complexity of change requires higher participation and higher ownership throughout the organization– something only achievable through a different approach.  We believe you need to bring social business inside the enterprise to be successful as we move into the new reality we all face.

Based on our work with a number of clients over the last several years, we have learned a few critical lessons– so far.

  • Deliver on two fronts (business outcome and social capability)
  • Build the “new way” into the approach
  • Blend traditional, proven tools and methods with emerging collaborative approaches
  • Adoption of a social enabling technology is critical

Deliver on two fronts

Business leaders must show a return on investment.  We face this value litmus test as often as every meeting of an engagement.  As you consider the value of increased collaboration, sharing, access to information, transparency and flexibility, benefits social business can bring, lead with a specific business outcome for your social business pilots.

With each improvement effort, build social business capability by, for example, seeding capability in initiative participants.  The benefits and skills of well executed efforts can be carried back into the organization for viral distribution.

Build the new way into the approach

You must make a commitment to the new socially-enabled approach, the new “normal.”  For example, get everyone on an engagement to capture their work product, revisions, etc., to a SharePoint site created for the team– where not only an expanded set of participants can access and update materials, but the sponsor can use the site to review and comment on work in progress.  Having a parallel effort, even if all the “extra” work is accomplished by analysts, will not work.

Blend traditional, proven tools and methods with emerging collaborative approaches

The enterprise is a large eco-system, and we are proposing new expectations for all levels of leadership, management and staff.  Take an evolutionary approach to change.  Find out which parts of social business fit your culture best now, and which may take more time to introduce to help bend the culture.  All improvement is based on behavioral change of individuals and not all individuals make all changes at the same pace.

Adoption of a social enabling technology is critical

In order to aid the social needs of search, ask, and share, you need to adopt a social platform.  We have worked with a number of these social environments, and for proof of concept it is not important which one– just that you support your initial team of evangelists.  We have stood up instances of technology inside and outside the enterprise in days and added social business value and understanding while accomplishing business outcomes.  Don’t get hung up on the best solution when getting started, just get started with a social business enabling system.

These initial lessons learned, based on reflection of our hard knocks, will help you begin adopting social business in your organization.  Get started!  Your competition may have already begun.

The post Bringing Social Business Inside the Enterprise: What we have learned (so far) appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/bringing-social-business-inside-the-enterprise/feed/ 1 A Management Renaissance- Innovating for the knowledge-age https://nextforge.com/a-management-renaissance-innovating-for-the-knowledge-age/ https://nextforge.com/a-management-renaissance-innovating-for-the-knowledge-age/#respond Fri, 15 Jul 2011 00:28:24 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=794 Managing in the knowledge-age requires a management renaissance based on a number of observations, including: 1) traditional management tools have become a commodity; and, 2) for our knowledge-worker workforce, emerging social tools eliminate barriers to collaboration and facilitate innovation.

The post A Management Renaissance- Innovating for the knowledge-age appeared first on .

]]>
de' Medici, Renaissance Patron- Wikipedia

We are a product of our our history, our environment and our aspirations.  Traditional management is straining under our current environment, and today, more than at any time in our professional careers, we have an opportunity to define our future- the future of management and the future of business improvement.

How ready are you and your organization?

First Observation: Traditional Management Tools Have Become a Commodity

All of us involved in management have and use our own management toolkit. We keep it close to us like a old friend.

We have selected these tools from our own education, books by management experts, published articles, posted content, other managers and employees, and consultants.  We have honed and fine-tuned our tools through our own experience, and, like a professional golfer, we pull them from our bag at just the right time- to produce the desired outcome.

We reach for these familiar tools and proven techniques when we are feeling the sting of the competitive environment or the blunt trauma of the business cycle.  Often we respond to the pressure of our fiduciary roles with the fluency of, for example, benchmark scores… a tool that has been a “top 10” favorite in the Bain & Company Management Tools survey for more than 17 years.

As a matter of fact 80% of the Bain & Company 2001 Management Tools “top 10” are still in the “top 10” for 2011 Management Tools, according to various Bain studies and reports (See our management tool overview).  These minor changes in popular use confirm our observation as a practitioner and advisor- management tools have become a commodity.  And we are not the only ones noticing this phenomenon.

In a recent video post, Gary Hamel, a leading influential business thinker according to the Wall Street Journal, talks about industrial-age management tools being at an inflection point.  The tools created out of the necessity to train and manage an agrarian work force to be cogs in a centrally managed enterprise organized by span of control has plateaued at the top of the s-curve.  Still others, have picked up on this concept as well.

Historian Elin Whitney-Smith has studied long-waves of disruption, and provides a point-of-view focused on information revolutions.  In a Booz & Co. published interview she articulates the revolution does not come from the stable status-quo, but rather from the edges- from people who are just gaining access to information for the first time.  Whitney-Smith believes organizations surviving the current digital information revolution will “involve more people at lower levels in decision making”.

Be it the “s-curve” of business management, the long-wave of information revolution and/or the lack-luster pace of recovery from the great recession, successful organizations need innovation, not best practices, to “leap” to the next s-curve of growth and improvement.

Is your primary focus innovation or best practices?

Second Observation:  For our knowledge-worker workforce, emerging social tools eliminate barriers to collaboration and facilitate innovation

Knowledge workers have high degrees of expertise, education or experience, and the primary purpose of their jobs involves the creation, distribution, or application of knowledge

Tom Davenport, Thinking for a Living

Source: http://dionhinchcliffe.com

Knowledge workers represent up to 75% of the workers in some industries, such as health care and education, and make up more than half of the total workforce. (See inset US Labor Force by Sector)

Source: http://andrewmcafee.org

Emerging social technologies support the knowledge worker.  Social software platforms can help eliminate collaboration’s historic barriers of time, location and privileged access to information.  According to Andrew McAfee, Principal Research Scientist at MIT’s Center for Digital Business, in its simplest form, social software platforms  focus on search, ask and share activities.

Creating a knowledge worker supportive environment can facilitate collaboration and help unlock what Robert Schaffer, The Breakthrough Strategy, calls the “hidden reserve” of workers available for focus within the enterprise or, most recently, what Clay Shirky, Cognitive Surplus, has popularized as the “cognitive surplus” of  individuals outside the enterprise available for more civic-oriented work.

What are the collaborative (social) requirements for your organization?

Implication:  Early Adopters- Innovators- Will Define the Next Generation Improvement Process

We must redefine how we work, how we lead and how we manage.

We must innovate workplace interactions and relationships- for individuals, for groups and for the organization (iGO).

We must provide a social environment, an enabled network- able to search, ask and share.

The path will not be a collection of industry best practices, but a tailored approach for each and every enterprise, integrating some of the traditionally proven management tools with emerging collaborative (social) platforms and applications focused on a more effective execution of strategy.  The “art” of success will be defined by adoption- balancing defined business outcomes with the strategic intent of iGO innovation, and creating a unique and highly flexible enterprise.

We see a very exciting future:

  • Organizations with a well defined network reducing the importance of the traditional organization structure
  • “Environments”, including guidance, routines and interactions, allowing, for example, decision making to be pushed lower into the organization
  • Collaboration supporting innovation, for example, of individuals through access to experts, communities and captured tacit knowledge

What are you doing to create iGO collaboration in your organization?

Have you integrated your operations to leverage these emerging technologies as part of your competitive differentiation?   … as part of your strategy?

We have begun this journey with a number of clients and discovered a short list of themes for success, including:

  • Start.  Start now
  • Involve and engage leadership early- even small steps demonstrate commitment
  • Tools are important, but don’t wait.  Contained social platforms, instances quickly setup behind the firewall, can provide rich new traditions and feed viral, organic adoption
  • Focus on achieving business outcomes, in new ways- not by creating “additional” work
  • Create a collaborative environment, including, as an example, a clear decision processes
  • This must be led- so start with your sphere of influence

You are not alone.  Here is a sampling of a number of companies publicly blazing the trail…

What is your point of view for innovating for the future of management in your organization?

 

The post A Management Renaissance- Innovating for the knowledge-age appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/a-management-renaissance-innovating-for-the-knowledge-age/feed/ 0 Management Tools: A 10 Year Overview https://nextforge.com/management-tools-a-10-year-overview/ https://nextforge.com/management-tools-a-10-year-overview/#respond Thu, 07 Jul 2011 00:25:51 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=831 We overview 10 years of Bain's periodic Management Tools survey (2011) through several lenses including stable, aggregated or moderately enhanced, economically cyclical, and emerging social. The top management tools like strategic planning and benchmarking did not significantly change during the first decade of the millennium.

The post Management Tools: A 10 Year Overview appeared first on .

]]> We have been following Bain & Company’s management tool survey and associated reports since the turn of the century.  As with their initial survey conducted in 1993, they have conducted research every few years since to identify 25 of the most popular management tools currently in use.  The following are our observations based on Bain & Company Management Tools 2000 research (2001 reports) and 2010 research (2011 reports).

Top 10 from 2001 have not changed much in 10 years

80% of the 2001 management tools top 10 are represented in the 2011 top 10.  The top 10 management tools in 2001 are listed in rank order and naming convention, with their 2011 ranking following in parentheticals.

  • Strategic Planning (2)
  • Mission and Vision Statements (3)
  • Benchmarking (1)
  • Outsourcing (5)
  • Customer Satisfaction (4)
  • Growth Strategies (not represented in 2011)
  • Strategic Alliances (9)
  • Pay-for-Performance (not represented in 2011)
  • Customer Segmentation (10)
  • Core Competencies (7)

Added in 2011 top 10 list

  • Balanced Scorecard
  • Change Management Programs

We have defined four categories of management tools

Our quick study of Bain’s published surveys of Management Tools have grouped the tools into the following categories to help us think about management tools with similar characteristics.

  • Stable
  • Aggregated or Moderately Enhanced
  • Economically Cyclical
  • Emerging Social

Stable Management Tools

The majority (15) of the 2011 tools are based on the tools of the same, or similar, content from 2001; while some have been enhanced, the original foundation remains. (2011 naming convention shown)

  • Balanced Score Card
  • Benchmarking
  • Core competencies
  • Customer relationship management
  • Customer segmentation
  • Knowledge management
  • Merger and acquisitions
  • Mission and vision statements
  • Outsourcing
  • Business Process Reengineering
  • Scenario planning & contingency planning
  • Strategic alliances
  • Strategic planning
  • Supply chain management
  • Total quality management

Aggregated or Moderately Enhanced Management Tools

Many of the concepts have simplified through use and embedment into other tools

  • Customer satisfaction measurement (2001) and One-to-One marketing (2001) are included within Satisfaction & loyalty management (2011)
  • Activity based management (2001), Cycle-time reduction (2001) and Pay for performance (2001) have been logically incorporated into Business Process Reengineering (2001, 2011)
  • Corporate venturing (2001) has grown into the more expansive Open innovation (2011)
  • Decision rights tools (2011) are required as part of Business Process Reengineering; Most likely identified as a  separate tool to support Bain’s excellent book “Decide & Deliver” (copyright 2010)
  • Change management (2011) emergence from behind curtain of the extensive 1990’s consultative focus on change; this is possibly an acknowledgment that the content is no longer “differentiable” knowledge

Economically Cyclical Management Tools

The use and popularity of a number of tools is most dependent on the macro-economic environment; these also have a long heritage, are still in use today, and likely will be more prominent in future business cycles.

More expansionary (2001)

  • Growth Strategies
  • Market disruption analysis
  • Real options analysis
  • Shareholder value analysis

More contractionary  (2011)

  • Downsizing
  • Enterprise risk management
  • Price optimization models

Emerging Social Management Tools (2011)

There are a few emerging management tools; all are focused on increasing the social capabilities of the enterprise.  We believe this is initial evidence of the innovation of a new s-curve, one that will drive business growth and improvement over the next generation.

  • Open innovation
  • Rapid prototyping
  • Social media programs

 

The post Management Tools: A 10 Year Overview appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/management-tools-a-10-year-overview/feed/ 0 Alignment- The concept of one https://nextforge.com/alignment-the-concept-of-one/ https://nextforge.com/alignment-the-concept-of-one/#respond Mon, 20 Jun 2011 16:55:46 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=773 When taking on complex projects, you can drive alignment by applying the Concept of One to a number of critical elements including by way of example: one mission; one integrated strategy (e.g., business & tech); one decision making structure and process; one economic model; one roadmap; one team; one organizing concept; one set of common methods & tools

The post Alignment- The concept of one appeared first on .

]]> Relatively early in my general management consulting career I gravitated to the complexity required for enterprise-level change.  Since then I have practiced and studied a number of the academics, the books and the techniques required to bring about change- large and small.  One theme common to all is alignment.

Alignment of the executives, sponsor and change team.  Alignment of the communications and plans.  Alignment of the various stream and work-package teams.  There are a number of dimensions and constituencies (See, for example,  Stakeholder Analysis- A Swiss army knife for managers).  A simple way to think about, and quite frankly communicate, alignment is something we have referred to for at least a decade as the Concept of One.

When taking on complex projects, you can drive alignment by applying the Concept of One to a number of critical elements including by way of example:

  • One mission
  • One integrated strategy (business & technology; marketing & operations)
  • One decision making structure and process
  • One economic model
  • One map (roadmap)
  • One team (as appropriate, Swift Teams)
  • One organizing concept
  • One set of common methods and tools
  • One communications plan
  • One implementation plan


 
It may also be easier to package these concepts of one as “focal points for success”, key success factors or a number of other common monikers.
 
 

Getting the buy-in to create the the softer concept of alignment, or common “language”, can sometimes be a little easier by advocating for the more concrete “Concept of One”.

The post Alignment- The concept of one appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/alignment-the-concept-of-one/feed/ 0 Can Social Media Drive Enterprise Change? https://nextforge.com/can-social-media-drive-enterprise-change/ https://nextforge.com/can-social-media-drive-enterprise-change/#respond Wed, 11 May 2011 00:36:59 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=757 We explore social media inside-the-organization's impact on the enterprise through its ability to drive business outcomes. "Adoption requires business relevance" Our research considers its importance from multiple perspectives and sources.

The post Can Social Media Drive Enterprise Change? appeared first on .

]]> RISING IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA

The pressures on today’s organization have been well documented; simply stated, the pace of change has begun to outstrip the enterprise’s capacity and capability to change.

  • Some 83% of CEOs expect to face the need for substantial change, not “single-axis” change, but complex change. These same CEOs report that fewer than half of projects are completed successfully. [IBM]
  • The always-on, multitasking expectations of individuals have become so distracting they sap productivity. [McKinsey]
  • The human brain appears to be “wired” for communities of only 150 people, sometimes called the Dunbar number, a small fraction of the typical Fortune 500 workforce and customer/supplier base. [WSJ]

It is no longer a question of “if” but of “when” an enterprise will adopt social media in order to overcome these and other challenges. Two-thirds of respondents to a recent McKinsey survey acknowledge using Web 2.0 tools in the organization today with 9 of 10 reporting at least one measurable benefit. Other documented examples include: increased revenues from new products, faster time-to-market, and staff productivity gains through access to expertise regardless of location.

However, the internal stresses on an organization create a false barrier to adoption of new, technology-enhanced behaviors of collaboration: existing operational demands, remediation and work-arounds, and the new workload of change programs.

  • Time/resource compression to conduct business
  • Limited cross-organizational sharing
  • Broken processes
  • Cycle of recurring performance breakdowns
  • Comprehensive set of change initiatives

 

New tools, technologies, and approaches can be applied to proven change management and behavioral change principles to reduce both the stress and risks of implementation. Projects can now deliver on two fronts: delivery of defined project elements and the development of the organization’s ability to change.

Established and emerging social media can overcome some of the success barriers encountered with the traditional approach to change, in particular: communication, collaboration, buy-in, and adoption.

CHANGE MUST (STILL) DRIVE BUSINESS RESULTS

We believe the application of social media to the change process should be focused on business outcome. First, in terms of defined project objectives, the effort should support an established business priority and demonstrate the value of a new approach, versus “selling” the new features of a technology. Second, in terms of building internal change capabilities, the effort should build a more collaborative community in terms of group interaction, participation, relationship building, and information sharing.

Changing behavior of the individual is central to changing behaviors of the organization. We believe the combination of individual skills, knowledge and abilities are the improvement building block for creating improvement acumen. Individuals with targeted improvement acumen understand the business context and demonstrate a bias-for-action to achieve results.

It is not easy. It is not fast. Adoption of collaborative behaviors based in performance acumen requires an environment to provide guidance, routines and interactions all supported by a technology enabled network.

  • Guidance directs individual work to achieve operational improvement through strategic and operational plans, guiding principles, policies, expectations and communication. Focus on business results.
  • Routines define support processes: decision making and community management, shared practices, techniques and tools, and measures. Refine supporting processes and build collective tool kits.
  • Interactions form and access relationships and networks, and create paths to more sources of information. Access knowledge and patterns.

Typically these elements require change to the way we lead, as well as the way we execute at the individual, group and organization (iGO) level. Resources are always required to execute and we believe the foundation for successful individual is the networked organization.

ADOPTION REQUIRES BUSINESS RELEVANCE

We recommend an approach designed for individual development in that adoption of new behaviors occurs in a series of steps, or waves. Much as in a marketing program, individuals must be encouraged to multiple trials before they become users, heavy users, and ultimately loyal followers. Social media can be introduced in three waves by using it to communicate, stimulate discussion, and ultimately foster collaboration.

There has been a great deal of work done in this area of adoption, and how/when/why specific tools should be introduced. [see SocialText footnote]

IT’S (ALSO) ABOUT TECHNOLOGY

A number of light-weight collaborative tools have become available. Fueled by the trend toward open source and open communication, simple, easy-to setup and use tools are changing how we interact socially and at work. These collaborative tools are providing a catalyst, and enabling, more “talent reach” within and across companies, both synchronously and asynchronously. Said another way, the tools enable more porous boundaries within our enterprise and supply chain. Additionally, these tools provide easier access to, development of, and use of, necessary information.

We are placing a moniker of “collaborative tools” around this group of existing and emerging tools based on their value to how companies work; published articles may refer to these tools as web 2.0 (consumer) or enterprise 2.0 (corporate). By example, SharePoint is a platform that includes many of these tools, with more recent releases having an expanded reach.

We believe there are opportunities right now to increase project and process performance. And, in the near-term, for example, as the boomers retire, we believe there is an opportunity for organizations to capture their learning, to codify the information they may take with them without proactive interventions. Furthering the example, there could be very simple structures to reach out to retirees as a directed community, at their convenience and interest to contribute to issues and questions of those currently manning the guns.

GETTING STARTED (“So, how do you do this?”)

Introducing Social Media capabilities into the enterprise change process requires consideration of a number of essential workplan elements, including:

  • Objectives – clearly define business outcomes and what is required within the organization to achieve these results, including individual skills, working environment, and enabling technology.
  • Readiness Assessment – understand the work done to date and the organization’s self-perception prior to engaging a larger population; identification and segmentation of stakeholder groups; test for leadership commitment to change.
  • Training & Promotion – follow a disciplined promotional approach (e.g. marketing funnel); develop program around business solutions; accommodate multiple learning styles and progression; integrate real-time project activities to leverage peer-to-peer knowledge transfer.
  • Communication Planning & Execution – introduce new communication methods, expectations, and behaviors in addition to a fully developed traditional communication plan; leadership role models new, desired open behaviors.
  • Community Management – build a discipline and capability to support diverse communities in different stages of development; includes alignment of objectives, foster development of new relationships and information pathways, build new processes to institutionalize emerging practices, encourage participation and trial, and monitor/guide community activity.
  • Collaboration Tools – introduce relevant technologies to support content development, increased network development and participation, and information sharing; manage and resolve technology issues.

Appendix: 6 Ways to Get Business Value from Social Software (SocialText, excerpt)

Enterprise 2.0 deployments across an organization have failed 70 percent of the time because vendors and service firms tried to muscle users onto the system rather than present people with an easy, universal use case that yielded employees and the company immediate business value. That’s because many pieces of social software, while easy to use, require a fair amount of content creation. Consequently, at the early stages of an enterprise-wide adoption of social software, we see the power law of participation play a prevalent role, much like the consumer Web.

This law states that a minority of people contribute the majority of the content. Initially, most people are passive readers of that content. For example, on Wikipedia, 500, or .05 percent of users, account for 50 percent of the contributions to the online encyclopedia, while the vast majority of Wikipedia users don’t make a single contribution. With social software in an enterprise, the same holds true; a small minority of people will perform active roles such as editing a page, writing a comment or penning an internal blog post for their colleagues to read. As social software platforms have evolved, new capabilities such as micro-blogging have a lower threshold for participating.

To turn more people into contributors who can share valuable information with colleagues, companies should take small steps that help their users get acclimated to the system. More important, those first steps should provide the users with immediate and clear business value, which would prompt them to use the social tools more deeply.

The post Can Social Media Drive Enterprise Change? appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/can-social-media-drive-enterprise-change/feed/ 0 Rapid Assessment Tool https://nextforge.com/rapid-assessment-tool/ https://nextforge.com/rapid-assessment-tool/#respond Fri, 17 Sep 2010 23:51:03 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=748 "This multi-level assessment tool can very rapidly provide a picture for leadership from different perspectives, including any misalignment between positional and/or functional groups. Results can be viewed in the aggregate or from any combination of demographic splits."

The post Rapid Assessment Tool appeared first on .

]]> We recently discussed our Rapid Assessment Framework (RAF), designed to be used early in the improvement process where there is a need to engage, align, and mobilize a large part of the organization. Here we will provide a more detailed view of the assessment process, which is primarily conducted on-line through a web-enabled tool. This broad, comprehensive self-assessment is structured on top of a root cause framework of 102 critical dimensions of enterprise health, with the objective of validating and/or determining where deeper, more objective (“focused”) analysis should occur. Key attributes include:

  • No pre-determined identification of performance barriers.
  • Solicit input from a cross-section of the entire organization.
  • Identify common areas of concern as well as any disagreements.
  • Based on objective, observable behaviors
  • Accelerate the engagement of the organization.
  • Develop a shared need for change.

As the RAF is based on a time-tested set of sources and causes of poor performance, and participant input is tied to actual behaviors, it should not be considered a “survey” where users are presented a superficial set of “how-do-you-feel” questions, and where individual scales of “good and bad” can vary.

Experienced consultants and clients alike will recognize this approach, historically applied through an exhaustive one-on-one interview process at the outset of a project. The table below highlights some of the enhancements to data collection that the RAF offers.

The underlying sources and causes framework consists of 14 major elements grouped by common themes: Leadership, Human, and Systemic. Each of the major elements is further decomposed into more tangible root cause drivers for a total of 102 sub-elements; performance for each sub-element is defined by a range of four observable statements of business behaviors (“best practice” to “no practice”).

Utilizing a browser-based polling technology, managers, employees, and other stakeholders record their observations of current and potential enterprise behaviors with a user-defined subset of the root cause drivers they identify as substantial barriers to business performance. Narrative comments can also be collected, and respondents are asked to evaluate the benefit and likelihood of realizing improvement.

This multi-level assessment tool can very rapidly provide a picture for management from different perspectives, including any misalignment between positional and/or functional groups. Results can be viewed in the aggregate or from any combination of demographic splits.

  • Statistical feedback (issues selected, priorities, current and potential behavioral scores, opportunity for improvement, chance of success)
  • Narrative comments submitted for each major element
  • Response rate (if by invitation); number of responses

Company- and industry-specific language can be added to tailor the instrument, and clarity can be validated by first conducting the assessment with a smaller sample (e.g. management team). Individual anonymity is assured, but all responses are tagged with identifiable position/functional groupings.

The post Rapid Assessment Tool appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/rapid-assessment-tool/feed/ 0 Why hire consultants? https://nextforge.com/why-hire-consultants/ https://nextforge.com/why-hire-consultants/#respond Wed, 18 Aug 2010 03:39:50 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=326 We share a set of practices on "Why hire consultants?" Topics include staff augmentation, perspective, roles, and internal barriers. The article also touches on traditional concerns about consultants, including over-reliance on third-parties to manage mission-critical activities.

The post Why hire consultants? appeared first on .

]]> We are often asked why anyone should hire consultants, especially given some of the negative consequences captured at the end of this post.  “What do you bring to the table, anyway?”


When considering outside resources, there are a number of time-tested value propositions with a solid rationale for bringing in third party experts.  Successful engagements begin with an assessment of “should we?” not “can we?” find someone to do this work: Are they the right experts in at the right time for the right reason?

Staff Augmentation

  • Short-term capacity – stretched staff cannot accommodate incremental work
  • Employment economics – finite scope/time of need does not justify new-hires
  • Skills – unique content, breadth not resident in the organization
  • Outsourcing – internal capability no longer considered strategic

Perspective

  • Experience – reduce implementation risk, accelerate program milestones
  • Proven methodologies – no experimenting, shortened cycle time
  • Objectivity / creativity – business results focus, innovative perspective
  • Credibility – internal and external confidence in direction and activities

Role / Control

  • Scope management – defined scope, schedule, cost, deliverables easier to delegate
  • Focus – staff can ensure critical, ongoing business activities are not disrupted
  • Mobilization – critical mass, unity of purpose accelerates engagement
  • Facilitation – unbiased consensus-building, mediation, and group management
  • Training / development – direct knowledge transfer and skills building

Internal Barriers

  • Management/organizational focus – regain traction while operating in crisis mode
  • Confidentiality – develop solutions for organizationally sensitive issues
  • Legal requirements – fulfill mandated requirements
  • Internal problems – work silos, conflicting objectives (political, emotional elements)

________________________________________

Complaints about Consultants?

Clients have shared their perspectives with us about “bad” consulting engagements, too.  In addition to well established benefits of utilizing management consultants, there are clearly a number of equally strident arguments against bringing in outside resources.

What drives these negative outcomes?  Most answers start with a myriad of situation-specific actions and responses that erode the client-first mission.  With complex and stressful change programs, a complaint or two is not unexpected, but if your projects frequently reflect the concerns identified below, there may be systemic issues in how your organization works with outsiders.  More commonly, the underlying cause is an over reliance on third parties to manage mission critical activities. 

  • Cost – exorbitant fee structure, individual compensation, over-resourcing; little history of attempts to reduce the cost of delivery
  • Project control – tendency to lead vs. follow (e.g. “the consulting firm’s project”)
  • Resource control – shifting resources (“A-team/B-team), individual resource performance, wrong expertise, lack of familiarity with industry/business/company
  • Politics – generate conflict as they seek to surface “issues”

The post Why hire consultants? appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/why-hire-consultants/feed/ 0 Over-Reliance on Outside Resources https://nextforge.com/over-reliance-on-outside-resources/ https://nextforge.com/over-reliance-on-outside-resources/#respond Wed, 18 Aug 2010 01:56:40 +0000 https://nextforge.com/?p=316 Large organizations are more capable at dealing with change than ever before, and they are able to do more of the “work” required of a change program. Yet dependency on outside consultants continues, in part, because of: organizational skill/experience gaps, leadership disengagement, and the expanding role of the consultant

The post Over-Reliance on Outside Resources appeared first on .

]]> Large organizations are more capable at dealing with change than ever before, and are able to do more of the “work” required of a change program. As they have typically implemented projects to improve business processes, install new technologies, and execute critical strategies, a large number of their employees have a reference point through prior experience of what is required; many firms have even added highly experienced change consultants to their management ranks.

Yet most companies continue to seek outside resources for help in managing change, often over the objections of those being supported. There are many good reasons to do so, but easy pitfalls abound as the consulting industry has not kept pace with the increased sophistication of their clients. The cost of consulting services has skyrocketed over the past decade, their participation is increasingly seen as disruptive, and the perceived benefits are declining along with the sustainability of their contributions to the effort. Top reasons to hire or to avoid consultants.

A broad survey of the reasons consultants are brought into the effort produces the expected contributions: to close both strategic and tactical resourcing gaps. What is interesting is what is often not mentioned: knowledge transfer, building the internal capability for change, and a process to reduce dependency on the outside consultant.

How does the traditional implementation model create a cycle of dependency? The underlying problems are a result of leadership and the organization taking the path of least resistance, by stressing the importance of short-term activities related to the defined initiative without investing a bit more in order to prepare for the next wave of change. Engagement and ownership suffer.

  • Avoidance of organizational gaps – External support was deemed necessary at the outset of the initiative, sometimes to meet temporary needs, but more often to meet longer term critical capabilities; instead of developing internal resources to meet this need, expedience dictates that the expert (consultant) should lead the charge. Areas most often hidden by this tactical focus are the leadership development of mid-level managers and the capability of employees to embrace change as part of their core job responsibilities.
  • Leadership disengagement – Once the “crisis is avoided” by the addition of fresh, committed, and knowledgeable resources, management often treats the initiative as an outsourced effort: they expect the work to “just get done” and are only passively involved with updates and decisions. Skills and knowledge are not transferred, and limited behavior change occurs at both management and worker levels.
  • Expanding role of the consultant – The nature of the traditional consulting business model is to “fill the void.” Client resources were stretched thin (the reason for external support in the first place), and are not able to be fully committed to the efforts; it is easy to fill the open resource slots will all-too-willing consultants. Then, once the initial phase of work is “successfully” completed, it is natural to extend the consulting relationship beyond the original scope to subsequent work; unfortunately, this work is often outside the expertise of the consulting firm (e.g. strategy to execution).

The post Over-Reliance on Outside Resources appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/over-reliance-on-outside-resources/feed/ 0 Swift Teams https://nextforge.com/swift-teams/ https://nextforge.com/swift-teams/#respond Fri, 21 May 2010 21:27:08 +0000 http://opsetup.amplio.us/?p=88 Swift-Teams(sm) exemplify the fusion of proven traditional change- and program-management techniques enabled by agile, collaborative tools and methodologies. Characteristics include: client led; collaborative; solutions driven; visible and transparent; and iterative and adaptive

The post Swift Teams appeared first on .

]]> We believe Swift-Teamssm exemplify the fusion of proven traditional change management and program management techniques enabled by agile, collaborative tools and methodologies, grounded in a “fail-fast-forward” philosophy.

As an engine for driving process and behavioral change into the organization, Swift-Teams provide short-interval deliverables, typically within three to four weeks. Each team’s work is sequenced with other on-going initiatives, and is managed via an integrated plan that lays out the scope and sequence of work/team modules.

The Swift-Teams are flexibly resourced from throughout the enterprise, supplemented as necessary with external experts, customers and partners. At the completion of each Swift-Team cycle (aka sprint, iteration), precious resource assignments and individual projects may be efficiently adjusted. Team characteristics include:

  • Client led
  • Collaborative (ValueRoleSM supported)
  • Solutions driven
  • Visible and transparent
  • Iterative and adaptive

Swift-Teams are applicable to both leadership-driven strategic initiatives as well as smaller, tactical efforts with little or no leadership oversight. The corresponding level of project management and program management is matched to a combination of task complexity, resource investment, and the implications of a Swift-Team’s failure to achieve their business objective/outcome.

Many organizations have had success with traditional cross-functional teams (e.g. Natural Work Teams), but consistency of implementation falls as the scope and duration of the team’s charter grows. For example, resources appropriate for the beginning of the effort may not be right for subsequent activities, “insider/outsider” perceptions reduce ownership of the results, and the results-focus is weakened by time and changes. The principle change with Swift-Teams is to design the work-break-down structure work packages with whole digit multiples of scheduled Swift-Team cycles (e.g., 3 weeks), to allow defined integration-points/milestones for hand-offs and resource adjustment.

The post Swift Teams appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/swift-teams/feed/ 0 Change Leadership https://nextforge.com/change-management/ https://nextforge.com/change-management/#comments Fri, 14 May 2010 21:40:38 +0000 http://opsetup.amplio.us/?p=99 Our approach to change is focused on delivering business outcomes and is steeped in practical experience of designing and managing hundreds of initiatives. While implementing change to achieve objectives with speed, predictability and control is complex, the elements summarized in this article are common to most strategic improvement efforts.

The post Change Leadership appeared first on .

]]> Our approach to change is focused on delivering business outcomes and is steeped in practical experience of designing and managing hundreds of initiatives. While implementing change to achieve objectives with speed, predictability and control is complex, the elements summarized below are common to most strategic improvement efforts.

Stakeholder & environmental analysis- Identifying and defining the needs and preferences of stakeholders is an increasingly important responsibility of leadership. Savvy management teams look for ways to group those stakeholders with similar-enough needs and preferences within the business environment and use these groupings to effectively and efficiently understand, inform and influence.

Change equation- All change occurs through changing the behaviors of people. And people, be they staff, customers, consumers, or suppliers tend to resist change. One way to think through the key elements of making change is analogous to an inequality:

Need for Change X Vision of Future X Steps to Achieve > Natural Resistance to change

Need for Change represents dissatisfaction with the present conditions; a compelling gap between “as-is” and the “to-be”. Vision of the Future represents a positive picture of what is possible in the future. Steps to Achieve the vision represents realistic actions and activities to reach the vision; requires both resources and approach. Resistance to Change represents the natural and normal personal resistance to change (e.g., loss of control, too much uncertainty, surprise, confusion, loss of face, real and perceived threats, post-change issues, past resentments, perception of more work, etc.). If any element of the change equation is not addressed through change management, the left side of inequality reverts to zero, and the inertia of your stakeholders’ natural resistance to change will overcome the change effort.

Clear roles and responsibilities- In order to manage change, all members of the change team need to know their role for each activity they are involved in, and recognize their role may vary from activity to activity. While there are a number of unique roles to strategic improvement initiatives including sponsor, once the key activities are determined, one of four generic ARCI roles discussed in the table, namely Accountable, Responsible, Consult and/or Inform can be assigned to key stakeholders and team members. A single position or individual may need to accomplish more than one role for a given activity.

Advocating for the vision, supported by a compelling, relevant and emotional story, similar to brand marketing’s tactics is critical to most strategic initiatives. Also, we recommend crisply defined and reinforced responsibilities to increase focus, integration and performance.

The post Change Leadership appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/change-management/feed/ 1 Risk Management https://nextforge.com/risk-management/ https://nextforge.com/risk-management/#comments Fri, 07 May 2010 21:43:32 +0000 http://opsetup.amplio.us/?p=104 As risk is endemic to business, we can never eliminate risk, but we can identify and manage risk through 5 generic approaches to quantified risk: avoid, transfer, mitigate, manage and accept. For project management a convenient frame is to consider the "iron triangle" dimensions (e.g., scope, schedule, cost) as drivers of project risk.

The post Risk Management appeared first on .

]]> We can never eliminate all risk, as risk-taking is a foundational element of business. Risk management is a disciplined approach to think about, identify, quantify and act to minimize the impact of uncertainty within the critical dimensions necessary to achieve a targeted objective.

Risk management process – Beginning with the objectives and working back to what is necessary to occur to ensure success of our effort, we start with identification to maximize what risks are to be managed – ranging, for example, from suppliers, the approach, the environment, etc. Following identification with quantification of the probability and the potential impact to the approach or outcome, and completing the process with resolution through one of five generic action plans.

For mission-critical efforts more structure can drive to scenario analysis – pairing high uncertainty with high impact on results – to drive one of five generic approaches.

Risk action plans – Acting on identified, quantified and prioritized risk to business, project and/or outcomes can be grouped into one of five generalized approaches. This choice is an element of decisioning, leadership and management.

  • Avoid the risk, by altering objectives or methods
  • Transfer the risk, although this may transfer only liability
  • Mitigate the risk, or reduce likelihood and impact
  • Manage the risk by increased control and vigilance
  • Accept the risk as a cost of doing business

Leadership alignment to the appropriate level of risk management, coupled with the management team’s commitment to a comprehensive risk management approach, and integrated with other on-going efforts are critical to success of the initiative and the investment in risk identification, quantification and resolution.

The post Risk Management appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/risk-management/feed/ 1 Pareto’s Lesson on “How” https://nextforge.com/paretos-lesson-on-how/ https://nextforge.com/paretos-lesson-on-how/#respond Sat, 01 May 2010 13:52:48 +0000 http://wpsand.amplio.us/?p=187 "While strategic and tactical projects need to be managed with regard for their size and potential impact, both need to incorporate a common, rigorous process for performance improvement that is endorsed by the entire organization...We recognize that the business benefits when it can effectively address both strategic and tactical opportunities within a common framework for change"

The post Pareto’s Lesson on “How” appeared first on .

]]> Over a century ago, economist Vilfredo Pareto introduced the Pareto Principle, a practical observation that 80 percent of results are driven by 20 percent of the efforts. The principle applies to many aspects of our professional and personal lives, from customer revenue/profitability, to personal income, improvement opportunities, and even in nature. [See strategic & tactical- Enterprise Improvement]

If the right action is to focus on the “critical few,” what’s a leader to do with the remaining 80 percent? Few businesses are willing to cede the largest portion of their customer base to the competition, yet when it comes to improvement opportunities, many organizations devote scarce resources and senior management attention to strategic initiatives at the expense of the majority of opportunities and employees.

The insight gained through Pareto Analysis is that groups of customers or improvement opportunities are different, and therefore must be managed differently. While an organization may already know which actions to undertake, Pareto analysis helps identify how to undertake them.

Both “strategic” and “tactical” improvements share core principles. Too often, organizations overlook this similarity and treat them differently. For big strategic projects, they create elite silos of people and activity, sacrificing broad participation for expediency, and sinking too much management time into the project. For small, tactical projects, they fail to pay enough attention because they perceive them as lower value. Employees fail to engage with the effort and the project simply falls off the radar screens of senior management. Neither methodology works well, so both strategic and tactical initiatives suffer and fall short of expectations, resulting in delayed implementation, lack of adoption, unintended consequences, non-sustainability, and scant capability developed to apply to future efforts.

While strategic and tactical projects need to be managed with regard for their size and potential impact, both need to incorporate a common, rigorous process for performance improvement that is endorsed by the entire organization. One recent survey indicates that only 27 percent of large enterprises even have a defined process.

We believe that efforts at both ends of the Pareto distribution depend upon common concepts, primarily broad participation, engagement, and contribution by the organization. We recognize that the business benefits when it can effectively address both strategic and tactical opportunities within a common framework for change.

Applying time-tested change management principles in conjunction with emerging collaborative tools allows us to maintain leadership involvement and commitment across diverse opportunities, while enabling more efficient use of management time, generating broader engagement within the organization, and building internal capacity for change that can accelerate realization of future opportunities.

The post Pareto’s Lesson on “How” appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/paretos-lesson-on-how/feed/ 0 Determine what is most important with the Rapid Assessment Framework https://nextforge.com/determine-what-is-most-important-with-the-rapid-assessment-framework/ https://nextforge.com/determine-what-is-most-important-with-the-rapid-assessment-framework/#comments Fri, 30 Apr 2010 19:53:44 +0000 http://opsetup.amplio.us/?p=34 We have developed an objective “root cause” approach to assess enterprise health against a prioritized short-list of 89 critical dimensions each with 4 observable behaviors organized into 14 elements utilizing a browser-based polling/survey technology. The tool is editable for language- and industry-specific vocabulary.

The post Determine what is most important with the Rapid Assessment Framework appeared first on .

]]> Determining “What is most important?” is critical early in any effort. Working with imperfect and incomplete information is a basic tenant of business management. We have developed an objective “root cause” approach to assess enterprise performance against a prioritized short-list of 89 critical dimensions of enterprise health. The approach can be conducted in a very short period of time, reaching a much broader representative base than traditional, qualitative interviewing methods, while adding a self-assessment and gap identification to initial issue identification and prioritization.

Business elements- Our base model consists of fourteen (14) elements, each containing a number of sub-elements defined by a range of four observable statements of business practice (“best practice” to “no practice”);narrative comments can be also be collected.

Business Elements (number of sub-elements)

  • Direction and management (8)
  • Community / Talent / People (10)
  • Strategy / Vision (3)
  • Goals and Objectives (4)
  • Process (6)
  • Systems / Tools / Technology (4)
  • Data / Information (4)
  • Organization (4)
  • Communication (9)
  • Culture / Core Value (5)
  • Environment (3)
  • Measures (4)
  • Investment Profile / Asset Management (8)
  • Relationships (17)

Technology- Utilizing a browser-based polling/survey technology, managers, employees and other stakeholders record their observations of enterprise behaviors with a user-defined subset of the 14 business elements they identify as substantial barriers to business performance. This multi-level assessment tool can very rapidly provide a picture for management from different perspectives, including any misalignment between positional and/or functional groups.

Company- and industry-specific language can be added to tailor the instrument, and clarity can be validated by first conducting the assessment with a smaller sample (e.g. management team). Individual anonymity is assured, but all responses are tagged with identifiable position/functional groupings.

The post Determine what is most important with the Rapid Assessment Framework appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/determine-what-is-most-important-with-the-rapid-assessment-framework/feed/ 1 Executive Alignment https://nextforge.com/executive-alignment/ https://nextforge.com/executive-alignment/#respond Fri, 23 Apr 2010 21:34:54 +0000 http://opsetup.amplio.us/?p=94 Executive teams must provide both the vision for change and “active management” throughout execution. But there must be more. With the explosion of information and the accelerated pace of change in the business environment, decisions must be pushed down in the organization. Noted tools include Execution Roadmap and Decision Map

The post Executive Alignment appeared first on .

]]> Executive teams must provide both the vision for change and “active management” throughout execution. Each leader must constantly work through political and emotional barriers to arrive at a rational consensus, and speak to the organization with a single voice. We support senior leadership teams with decision frameworks, problem solving tools, individual coaching, and a flow of “fact based” and validated data to facilitate timely decision-making and to mitigate risk.

But there must be more. With the explosion of information and the accelerated pace of change in the business environment, decisions must be pushed down in the organization. Instead of 5-10 strategic thinkers, there need to be 100. Instead of 50-80 key decision makers, there need to be 1000. The executive team must develop new management routines to enable them to remain current on business activities and to assess and manage business risks across the spectrum of strategic and tactical initiatives executed by their delegates.

Execution roadmap – With a shared focus on business outcome, all initiatives are integrated into a single, visual, and dynamic plan that identifies resource and input constraints along a common timeline. Key milestones are visible and published throughout the organization, and decision points and contingencies are identified. Common and shared support activities are consolidated and managed as an integrated effort.

Decision map – Management decisions are incorporated as part of the critical path schedule, participating decision makers are identified, and their individual data requirements to make corresponding decisions are defined. This decision support information is collected and presented as part of initiative management and is integrated into standard management routines.

Management infrastructure – Work product related to all roadmap activities and performance data identified as part of the decision map are made available to stakeholders on a common platform. Decision makers can review progress, completed work, and support data on a real time basis; they may proactively conduct targeted reviews, or be automatically alerted when new information is available or when milestones have been reached.

Clear executive sponsorship and commitment to results coupled with the management team’s commitment resources and eliminating barriers are the differentiating factors to a successful effort and achieving targeted business outcomes.

The post Executive Alignment appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/executive-alignment/feed/ 0 Responsibility Mapping https://nextforge.com/responsibility-mapping/ https://nextforge.com/responsibility-mapping/#respond Wed, 09 Sep 2009 15:17:06 +0000 http://optimuspartners.com/?p=147 This article is a perennial favorite of our site's visitors. Crisply defined and reinforced roles and responsibilities increase focus, integration and performance. The article defines generic roles for projects, processes, decisions, etc. RACI Framework of: Responsible (the doers); Accountable (the buck stops here); Consult before (see me first); and Inform after (keep me in the loop).

The post Responsibility Mapping appeared first on .

]]> Clarity of responsibilities…

…is at the heart of management, coaching, measurement, rewards, etc.  Crisply defined and reinforced responsibilities increase focus, integration and performance.  I cannot think of a more important layer to execution than making sure everyone knows who owns, who is supposed to do, who needs to review before an action, and those who need to be communicated to about the results. If you have any belief in meritocracy, this post is for you.

Who…

…is part of the 5 W’s (and one H).  Typically the first element everyone wants to talk about and one of the most important.  However, before addressing WHO, we should spend a little time talking about responsibilities in general and WHAT-and-HOW.

Generic Actions

For simplicity, let’s agree to reduce the WHAT-and-HOW discussion down to three types of WHAT-and-HOW actions.

  1. Project Task- Some level of work associated with a project.  The project could be a simple as Get lunch for the team, or as complex as Design evaporative water cooler. (We choose to ignore work breakdown structures for now)
  2. Process Step- Some amount of effort associated with changing an input into an output. For example, Develop trimester sales plan. (We choose to ignore process hierarchies for now)
  3. Decision-A mental process (we are, after all, dealing with WHO) of choice between multiple alternatives.  For this discussion we will also include process and project direction as a type of decision

If we did this right, we have a mutually exclusive and comprehensively exhaustive (MECE) set of activities representing most of the work activity occurring in most businesses.  Said another way, WHAT-and-HOW can be thought of as one of three actions: Project Task, Process Step or Decision.

Generic Roles

Now we can begin our discussion of the WHO with a similar effort.  I believe for any of the three WHAT-and-HOW actions, there are just four generic roles an individual, group, company, etc. can play.  These responsibility roles are broadly referred to as RACI or ARCI- Accountable, Responsible, Consult and Inform.  Broadly enough it seems, I have not been able to find attribution for the mental model.  I believe in the ARCI form, as it places the singular accountability as the first-letter of the acronym.  What follows is a the definition for ARCI I have used since 1997.

Mapping and Analyzing Responsibilities

Since we now know not all who’s are created equal.  For each project, process or decision map we can define and analyze roles of positions and the activity applied to each.

Task, process and decision analysis As you build a list of the project, process or decision actions in rows, you can also think of all the stakeholders. By adding a column for each relevant stakeholder, you create a responsibility matrix with each action-position cell able to be described by a generic ARCI role, if any, for the position.

Using the responsibility matrix, you can analyze a single action (e.g., task, process, or decision) by scrutinizing the action-position cells associated with an action.  For example, consider:

  • Singular Accountability (Only one “A”?)
  • Span of control (Too many/not enough  “R’s”?)
  • Mix of roles (Too many “C’s”?)



Position analysis For each position (e.g., individual), scan the action-position cells associated with a position.  For example, consider:

  • Workload (Too many “R’s”/Too few “R’s”?)
  • Bottle necks (Too many “C’s”?)
  • Delegation (Too many “A’s”? Too many “A/R’s”?)
  • Relevant role (Any generic role assignment?)

End Note

Formalizing responsibilities for projects, processes and decisions by this proven technique can bring you immediate and long-term impact.  I worked with several models for too many years, resulting in fuzzily defined roles.  When introduced to this simple framework, I found it intuitive and simple to explain to all levels of management and staff.

I believe you will find the crystal-clear role clarity these 4 generic roles (Accountable, Responsible, Consult and Inform) can bring will be extremely useful.  I believe when you couple the role definitions with the necessary work to affect buy-in by the people in the positions, you will really add some energy to your actions.  Many clients I have worked with, and organizations I have run, almost immediately adopt the “I have the ‘A’ “ culture.

 

The post Responsibility Mapping appeared first on .

]]> https://nextforge.com/responsibility-mapping/feed/ 0