Sometimes, during the normal course of business, things get a little harried. There are fires to extinguish, phone calls to address, and other people's crises to cure.
The Quarterly Report can be like an oil change.
You don't really need an oil change all that frequently. Today's cars can go 5 to 10 thousand miles without an oil change. But some cars still need a 3 thousand mile oil change.
So, what's the connection?
When you get your oil changed, there is more than a simple draining of the old and replacing with the new. That is part of it: draining out the accumulated junk from the past quarter and looking it over. There is also the review of progress and how we did: is there water in the oil, metal shavings in the oil, enough oil. Some people don't even open the hood of their car, so the oil change is a chance to look under there and see what is happening.
Also, not all cars can go 10 thousand miles between changes. If your company has management turnover, or you are in a period of growth or significant change, you will want to increase the frequency of reports. Many monthly, or perhaps even weekly. If you use weekly reports, you will want a quarterly report again to see what changes took place at the weekly level. This is like checking the oil level at each fuel up in case you are leaking oil.
If you don't change the oil, eventually the car will break. The lack of an oil change can cause the car to break in many different ways, but the car will break. This is the same for the quarterly report: the department can function without a periodic realignment of goals and assessment of accomplishments, but it will eventually stop working.
Periodic Reviews are kinda like oil changes.
-gs
Sunday, August 25, 2013
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Magic, Art and Science
I was having a little difficulty conveying the message of Continuous Improvement, and came up with this. I don't think I am the only person to come up with this idea, it seems very basic.
You can consider most processes to exist in one of three states of Control: Magic, where it just happens, Art, where it can be helped to happen, and Science, where it can happen the same every time.
Beginning with science: If you have a set of inputs, you put them through a process and get a set of outputs. If you adjust the process, the outputs vary in a known way. Math is a fine example. Driving a new car is also an example: you know that putting so much pressure on the gas will result in so much acceleration. Turing the steering wheel a bit will turn the car a bit. You are rely on the outputs to make decisions.
Art is knowledge and wisdom of the outputs of a system and managing to make adjustments to approximate those outputs. Our 2005 KIA Sedona has a couple quirks. The coupling on the steering sticks and the transmission is going out. When we drive, we approximate how much to turn the wheel then make adjustments until the van is heading in the direction we want. We also press on the gas pedal (or release the gas pedal) so the van doesn't gallop as it tries to shift gears. It is no longer science: I wouldn't be able to set just anyone to driving the van, the driver would need to be experienced with the quirks.
Magic is getting the desired outputs. Soon, the van will begin to fail in new and wonderful ways. Then simply getting the van to start will be magic, since I won't know all the things wrong with it. Another example is me in the kitchen. I can try to add a seasoning or two to the meal, but I don't really know how the seasonings will react. With magic, things become wonderful and unpredictable.
Occasionally, Art is a necessary transition. You'll want the craftsmen and artists around you to help identify how things work. However, this should be done with a scientific approach. You want to gain control over the process. You want to know how to utilize the process to get what you want every time.
Magic is seldom of benefit. Fun, or frustrating, but not a repeatable process.
A point of interest, and I quote Arthur C. Clarke here: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." You can have processes in your workspace that were once complete science. Here's a wordy example, in story form:
Kevin loves to tinker with tech stuff. He's got his i-devices all synced and his video viewing all configured. He's got the power to see what he wants on the internet, local television, movie service, etc. with a single device.
Susan loves to knit. She finds it calming and peaceful. She makes gorgeous afghans, shawls and blankets. Every year she knits both Kevin and herself a sweater. She knits as she and Kevin watch programs together.
Kevin has the operation of the devices down to a science: his one device sends the signal of each of the individual devices to make the video, sound, lighting, etc. all work. Tragedy strikes. Either Kevin is away on business for two weeks, or the device gets damaged, or something. Something happens that necessitates the use of the individual remotes. By Susan.
Susan has watched Kevin with his device, even used it herself. But the individual remotes are typically transferred by Kevin into his main remote and promptly stashed away. Now that Susan has to use these remotes, things start to regress.
First, the lights: The house lights are either on of off, and the wall switch is used.
Then the Surround Sound. It just stays off, the sound on the TV works (once Susan had the neighbor kid turn it off of mute)
Then the movie services.
In a short period of time, Susan is watching local TV and missing all her time with Kevin, growing more and more sad.
This story can happen at the office too. Some wiz kid creates a Business Intelligence reporting structure,... the wiz kid is called away and the Business Intelligence becomes Business Struggling. Some wonderful staff person orchestrates the delivery of mail to everyone in a special system,.... that person leaves and people have to go to the dock to get their packages again. I am sure you have a few examples of your own.
Think on this some, maybe just being able to recognize where magic, art and science life in your life will help you identify where you are setting in place improvements.
You can consider most processes to exist in one of three states of Control: Magic, where it just happens, Art, where it can be helped to happen, and Science, where it can happen the same every time.
Beginning with science: If you have a set of inputs, you put them through a process and get a set of outputs. If you adjust the process, the outputs vary in a known way. Math is a fine example. Driving a new car is also an example: you know that putting so much pressure on the gas will result in so much acceleration. Turing the steering wheel a bit will turn the car a bit. You are rely on the outputs to make decisions.
Art is knowledge and wisdom of the outputs of a system and managing to make adjustments to approximate those outputs. Our 2005 KIA Sedona has a couple quirks. The coupling on the steering sticks and the transmission is going out. When we drive, we approximate how much to turn the wheel then make adjustments until the van is heading in the direction we want. We also press on the gas pedal (or release the gas pedal) so the van doesn't gallop as it tries to shift gears. It is no longer science: I wouldn't be able to set just anyone to driving the van, the driver would need to be experienced with the quirks.
Magic is getting the desired outputs. Soon, the van will begin to fail in new and wonderful ways. Then simply getting the van to start will be magic, since I won't know all the things wrong with it. Another example is me in the kitchen. I can try to add a seasoning or two to the meal, but I don't really know how the seasonings will react. With magic, things become wonderful and unpredictable.
Occasionally, Art is a necessary transition. You'll want the craftsmen and artists around you to help identify how things work. However, this should be done with a scientific approach. You want to gain control over the process. You want to know how to utilize the process to get what you want every time.
Magic is seldom of benefit. Fun, or frustrating, but not a repeatable process.
A point of interest, and I quote Arthur C. Clarke here: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." You can have processes in your workspace that were once complete science. Here's a wordy example, in story form:
Kevin loves to tinker with tech stuff. He's got his i-devices all synced and his video viewing all configured. He's got the power to see what he wants on the internet, local television, movie service, etc. with a single device.
Susan loves to knit. She finds it calming and peaceful. She makes gorgeous afghans, shawls and blankets. Every year she knits both Kevin and herself a sweater. She knits as she and Kevin watch programs together.
Kevin has the operation of the devices down to a science: his one device sends the signal of each of the individual devices to make the video, sound, lighting, etc. all work. Tragedy strikes. Either Kevin is away on business for two weeks, or the device gets damaged, or something. Something happens that necessitates the use of the individual remotes. By Susan.
Susan has watched Kevin with his device, even used it herself. But the individual remotes are typically transferred by Kevin into his main remote and promptly stashed away. Now that Susan has to use these remotes, things start to regress.
First, the lights: The house lights are either on of off, and the wall switch is used.
Then the Surround Sound. It just stays off, the sound on the TV works (once Susan had the neighbor kid turn it off of mute)
Then the movie services.
In a short period of time, Susan is watching local TV and missing all her time with Kevin, growing more and more sad.
This story can happen at the office too. Some wiz kid creates a Business Intelligence reporting structure,... the wiz kid is called away and the Business Intelligence becomes Business Struggling. Some wonderful staff person orchestrates the delivery of mail to everyone in a special system,.... that person leaves and people have to go to the dock to get their packages again. I am sure you have a few examples of your own.
Think on this some, maybe just being able to recognize where magic, art and science life in your life will help you identify where you are setting in place improvements.
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
Infants on a Carpet
It's kinda like infants on a carpet.
If you've had, or seen, an infant in the early stages of mobility, they appear to be naturally drawn to little specs of fluff and other inconsistencies. Trying to keep these nuggets of grossness away from babies can be a real challenge, because we don't always notice the tiny specs in the randomness of the carpet.
For whatever reason, the little bitty people zero in on the things that don't fit in, the things that are different. Even on a deep pile carpet with all it's texture, they can still manage to easily locate the single un-popped kernel of popcorn that has eluded the vacuum for weeks.
Grownups with this tendency tend to take pride in their retention this ability. They will happily, and with great satisfaction, identify the "opportunities for improvement" and move on. Making others clean up messes they didn't know existed. The reluctant "parents" (occasionally management, frequently subordinates or fellow team members) are left to perform all sorts of urgent work.
This is, on the one hand, a good thing. These messes need cleaned.
It isn't good when the person thinks they are "special" or have a knack for identifying the wrong thing and just leave it at that, not assisting in solving the problem. Any baby can point out what is wrong, can identify the anomalies of a situation. It takes maturity to identify what the issue is, how to best address the issue, and how similar problems have been solved both locally and regionally.
The urgency created by these people can actually be harmful to the team.
With the popcorn example: the baby finds the unpopped kernel in the carpet of a friends house. Everyone is over for a social event and the babies are exploring. If the host has to clear the room, bring in the vacuum and address that kernel as well as any other kernel, the party is no longer a party. And, the next party will have fewer attendees. Do this more than once, that is address the urgency at an inappropriate time, and the ability to complete the base activity is taken away.
It is kinda like infants on a carpet, crawling around makes parents nervous and embarrassed, and every so often stinking up the room.
If you've had, or seen, an infant in the early stages of mobility, they appear to be naturally drawn to little specs of fluff and other inconsistencies. Trying to keep these nuggets of grossness away from babies can be a real challenge, because we don't always notice the tiny specs in the randomness of the carpet.
For whatever reason, the little bitty people zero in on the things that don't fit in, the things that are different. Even on a deep pile carpet with all it's texture, they can still manage to easily locate the single un-popped kernel of popcorn that has eluded the vacuum for weeks.
Grownups with this tendency tend to take pride in their retention this ability. They will happily, and with great satisfaction, identify the "opportunities for improvement" and move on. Making others clean up messes they didn't know existed. The reluctant "parents" (occasionally management, frequently subordinates or fellow team members) are left to perform all sorts of urgent work.
This is, on the one hand, a good thing. These messes need cleaned.
It isn't good when the person thinks they are "special" or have a knack for identifying the wrong thing and just leave it at that, not assisting in solving the problem. Any baby can point out what is wrong, can identify the anomalies of a situation. It takes maturity to identify what the issue is, how to best address the issue, and how similar problems have been solved both locally and regionally.
The urgency created by these people can actually be harmful to the team.
With the popcorn example: the baby finds the unpopped kernel in the carpet of a friends house. Everyone is over for a social event and the babies are exploring. If the host has to clear the room, bring in the vacuum and address that kernel as well as any other kernel, the party is no longer a party. And, the next party will have fewer attendees. Do this more than once, that is address the urgency at an inappropriate time, and the ability to complete the base activity is taken away.
It is kinda like infants on a carpet, crawling around makes parents nervous and embarrassed, and every so often stinking up the room.
Friday, August 9, 2013
A Stop Sign in a Field
Quick update on Decisive: they touch on some analogy concepts discussed by, I think Dunbar and Blanchette. The information is helpful, and an okay read. I thought I would mention it in case you are reading this to gain more Kinda Likes for your own use.
Possibly the most important aspects to keep in mind is the local, regional, and distant analogy concept. Most of the analogies and comparisons I outline here, as well as in my every day life, are Distant. I am comparing something very remote to a very general case. I imagine earlyday psychotherapists did this, writers of fiction do this, and parents can be the johnny on the spot when it comes to these. Its kinda like turning the radio dial and listening in to the music for a few minutes. First- how often do you still turn a radio dial? and second, why would you listen for a few minutes? But, it took your brain to a different place for a moment.
My intention, generally, is to pull people out of their scope and focus. I have people telling me that the pantone chip color is critical, but they don't have the information anyplace that anyone could access it. That document control is essential and password protecting a document so it can't be opened and share file protecting the storage location of the electronic copy - and having people mark up the printed copy with a pencil. I bring in Kinda Likes to help bring a general state that most people are familiar with to a more specific instance.
The other day I used the example of a stop sign. The sign is in the middle of a country road, vacant fields on either side. The nearest house is about 3 miles away. But, you still have to stop for the stop sign. Because there will come a day that Not Stopping can cause serious issues. That was the analogy for checking the correct materials were being supplied from the prior process. The process has nothing to do with driving, cars, fields, the color red, none of it. There is a slight association of the "ticket" concept, where the worker can be awarded a penalty if they process bad materials (run the stop sign with a cop watching) and are caught. But the gist was: Pay Attention. It worked for a couple days and they remember the words. Which is another part of the study - people tend to be able to remember those things.
more later
-gs
Possibly the most important aspects to keep in mind is the local, regional, and distant analogy concept. Most of the analogies and comparisons I outline here, as well as in my every day life, are Distant. I am comparing something very remote to a very general case. I imagine earlyday psychotherapists did this, writers of fiction do this, and parents can be the johnny on the spot when it comes to these. Its kinda like turning the radio dial and listening in to the music for a few minutes. First- how often do you still turn a radio dial? and second, why would you listen for a few minutes? But, it took your brain to a different place for a moment.
My intention, generally, is to pull people out of their scope and focus. I have people telling me that the pantone chip color is critical, but they don't have the information anyplace that anyone could access it. That document control is essential and password protecting a document so it can't be opened and share file protecting the storage location of the electronic copy - and having people mark up the printed copy with a pencil. I bring in Kinda Likes to help bring a general state that most people are familiar with to a more specific instance.
The other day I used the example of a stop sign. The sign is in the middle of a country road, vacant fields on either side. The nearest house is about 3 miles away. But, you still have to stop for the stop sign. Because there will come a day that Not Stopping can cause serious issues. That was the analogy for checking the correct materials were being supplied from the prior process. The process has nothing to do with driving, cars, fields, the color red, none of it. There is a slight association of the "ticket" concept, where the worker can be awarded a penalty if they process bad materials (run the stop sign with a cop watching) and are caught. But the gist was: Pay Attention. It worked for a couple days and they remember the words. Which is another part of the study - people tend to be able to remember those things.
more later
-gs
A simple example of something that didn't work
Today, as I drove home from work, I was listening to an audiobook. The book is good, it is called "decisive" and provides some modern, practical information on decision making.
In one segment, they are trying to make a point and throw in a quick comparison to Avian Bird Flu. It's like a quick left jab, and gives your brain a jolt. Similar to when a person uses your name if they see you start to drift off while they are talking to you. (Mom's are particularly practiced in this technique, dad's slightly less so.)
The problem? It's kinda like what I just did. The "quick left jab" made it a boxing metaphor. Nothing else I have talked about has anything to do with two men in shorts throwing punches at each other. And I followed it up with Moms? What mood am I setting for the listener?
I have a person example of this. I was attempting to use a kinda like in my early years as a manager. I was attempting to help a woman identify unfavorable behavior that was beginning to have a negative impact on her relationship with the client. Basically, she was being a whiny b**** and not doing what the client was asking her to do. I made a mistake of using an analogy about having dogs in an apartment complex that didn't allow pets. It didn't go great. She made the connection that I was calling her a dog, and that was it. The entire discussion deteriorated and I had a sobbing woman in front of me that clearly felt she deserved an apology and to be permitted to do the work her way in compensation for her being treated so poorly. Unfortunately, I wasn't the one dictating how the work needed to get done, so I couldn't alter the situation. Additionally, I had not called her a dog, I had likened the effect of doing something unacceptable to keeping dogs in a pet free apartment complex.
ugh, right?
So, be slightly careful with the Kinda Likes. Use them to help keep the interest of the audience and to help make the point. But make sure the point is central to the discussion, and that the Kinda Like is wrapped into the point enough times that there is no question about what is real and why it is important.
good luck!
-gs
In one segment, they are trying to make a point and throw in a quick comparison to Avian Bird Flu. It's like a quick left jab, and gives your brain a jolt. Similar to when a person uses your name if they see you start to drift off while they are talking to you. (Mom's are particularly practiced in this technique, dad's slightly less so.)
The problem? It's kinda like what I just did. The "quick left jab" made it a boxing metaphor. Nothing else I have talked about has anything to do with two men in shorts throwing punches at each other. And I followed it up with Moms? What mood am I setting for the listener?
I have a person example of this. I was attempting to use a kinda like in my early years as a manager. I was attempting to help a woman identify unfavorable behavior that was beginning to have a negative impact on her relationship with the client. Basically, she was being a whiny b**** and not doing what the client was asking her to do. I made a mistake of using an analogy about having dogs in an apartment complex that didn't allow pets. It didn't go great. She made the connection that I was calling her a dog, and that was it. The entire discussion deteriorated and I had a sobbing woman in front of me that clearly felt she deserved an apology and to be permitted to do the work her way in compensation for her being treated so poorly. Unfortunately, I wasn't the one dictating how the work needed to get done, so I couldn't alter the situation. Additionally, I had not called her a dog, I had likened the effect of doing something unacceptable to keeping dogs in a pet free apartment complex.
ugh, right?
So, be slightly careful with the Kinda Likes. Use them to help keep the interest of the audience and to help make the point. But make sure the point is central to the discussion, and that the Kinda Like is wrapped into the point enough times that there is no question about what is real and why it is important.
good luck!
-gs
Thursday, August 8, 2013
Bug Eyes
One of my favorites, that I tell myself internally but seldom share with others, is bee eyes.
I went through grade school in the 70's and 80's, and some of my education took place at some smaller institutions. The teachers were probably just as good (if not better) than the ones available in massive public school systems, but the resources were sometimes recycled and inaccurate. A particular e.g.: The definition of a Solar Eclipse in my freshman year science book: When the moon comes between the earth and the sun and casts its shadow on the sun. This sentence seems to imply the earth shines brighter then the sun.
Back to bees. I was taught that the multi-faceted eyes of bees produced dozens or scores of mostly identical singular images that overlap only slightly, making the eyesight of the bee more like a kaleidoscope. I thought this was pretty ineffective way to see things, but I learned it just like everyone else.
At some point after that, mostly by chance, I watched a PBS special on bees. This was sometime in the twenty-first century. They explained the eyes of bees, like many insects, are able to see polarized light due to the multi-facets of their eyes. And the program continued by giving a visual example of what a bee sees when it looks at a flower compared to what a plain ole human sees.
So, bees eyes. It is a pretty fair bet that the eyesight of bees didn't change from 1970 to 2010. But there wasn't a massive, all-human announcement about the error. It is plausible that I would still be propagating the misinformation of bees eyes today, if I hadn't stumbled across that program.
And, who cares about bees? Aren't they all dying anyway? The point is, sometimes we are wrong. We are wrong, and we don't seem to do a great job at correcting the mistakes.
more later
-gs
I went through grade school in the 70's and 80's, and some of my education took place at some smaller institutions. The teachers were probably just as good (if not better) than the ones available in massive public school systems, but the resources were sometimes recycled and inaccurate. A particular e.g.: The definition of a Solar Eclipse in my freshman year science book: When the moon comes between the earth and the sun and casts its shadow on the sun. This sentence seems to imply the earth shines brighter then the sun.
Back to bees. I was taught that the multi-faceted eyes of bees produced dozens or scores of mostly identical singular images that overlap only slightly, making the eyesight of the bee more like a kaleidoscope. I thought this was pretty ineffective way to see things, but I learned it just like everyone else.
At some point after that, mostly by chance, I watched a PBS special on bees. This was sometime in the twenty-first century. They explained the eyes of bees, like many insects, are able to see polarized light due to the multi-facets of their eyes. And the program continued by giving a visual example of what a bee sees when it looks at a flower compared to what a plain ole human sees.
So, bees eyes. It is a pretty fair bet that the eyesight of bees didn't change from 1970 to 2010. But there wasn't a massive, all-human announcement about the error. It is plausible that I would still be propagating the misinformation of bees eyes today, if I hadn't stumbled across that program.
And, who cares about bees? Aren't they all dying anyway? The point is, sometimes we are wrong. We are wrong, and we don't seem to do a great job at correcting the mistakes.
more later
-gs
A Tree
This one has been banging around in my head for a long time, and I think it is more complex than the initial read.
A tree. The seed starts, a few fragile green leaves and an easily bent stem start to grow. Over the course of a few seasons, the tree becomes more solid, sending out more roots and spreading branches. It becomes substantial, acquires visitors that may benefit (or harm) the tree, and grows. Over time, some branches die as they become shaded by the higher, more effective branches. Eventually, the trunk may begin to decline and "growth" changes from increasing the size of the structure and the resource collection to maintaining the size and replacing damages that occur each season. The tree may go hollow from pests and lack of protection of the core. The tree can sustain life for years simply maintaining its size. Eventually, an event or a stress will show the inherent weakness of the structure and the tree will break and/or die.
I first took this to equate to a city, with the hollowing of the trunk being the development of low income urban housing with high crime rates and low skill levels.
I've also seen this reflected in a small company, with the dropping of branches being an encouraging part of the growth, as long as the wound is sealed over by the bark and doesn't allow in parasites.
There is a lot to work with here, and nearly everyone has seen a tree in all the stages of life. Pretty powerful imagery. The city comparison works really well because of the immobility of a tree, comparing the life of a tree to the life of a person is more of a stretch. Easily done, but not as lasting in impact.
The growth of a community, or a culture, is kinda like the growth of a tree.
more later,
-gs
A tree. The seed starts, a few fragile green leaves and an easily bent stem start to grow. Over the course of a few seasons, the tree becomes more solid, sending out more roots and spreading branches. It becomes substantial, acquires visitors that may benefit (or harm) the tree, and grows. Over time, some branches die as they become shaded by the higher, more effective branches. Eventually, the trunk may begin to decline and "growth" changes from increasing the size of the structure and the resource collection to maintaining the size and replacing damages that occur each season. The tree may go hollow from pests and lack of protection of the core. The tree can sustain life for years simply maintaining its size. Eventually, an event or a stress will show the inherent weakness of the structure and the tree will break and/or die.
I first took this to equate to a city, with the hollowing of the trunk being the development of low income urban housing with high crime rates and low skill levels.
I've also seen this reflected in a small company, with the dropping of branches being an encouraging part of the growth, as long as the wound is sealed over by the bark and doesn't allow in parasites.
There is a lot to work with here, and nearly everyone has seen a tree in all the stages of life. Pretty powerful imagery. The city comparison works really well because of the immobility of a tree, comparing the life of a tree to the life of a person is more of a stretch. Easily done, but not as lasting in impact.
The growth of a community, or a culture, is kinda like the growth of a tree.
more later,
-gs
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Meetings
So, I've got this idea for a company. A service company that I think will help us get back on track.
But first, here's the kinda like (because I am not sure I want to share my company idea if it means I don't get to make money from it).
Having a meeting without an agenda, minutes, tasks, and a time aspect is kinda like going to the grocery store without a list. It's fine, the store has all sorts of options and you can spend hours in there and come out with enough things to make dinner, clean the house and clothe the family. But if you really needed to pick something up, odds are about 1 in 4 that you are able to successfully defeat the design of the modern grocery store, retrieve the two of three essentials, and exit with the rest of your money intact.
Breaking this one down:
The Agenda gives you a specific, targeted purpose for the meeting and allows people to come prepared. Do you expect to spend $20 or $50 at the store for the items on your list? Or is it a major day at the market (design or development meeting) with a $250 budget?
Timelines prevent extra items from creeping into the agenda. That bag of Oreos is on sale for just $2.50 today, and I think the cookie jar is low. Nevermind the diet, that is a deal! (The agenda also helps the person running the meeting say "no", or guide the meeting back on topic. Like the list helps when the children (or, in my case I, as the husband) see the Oreos and start in with the whining.)
Minutes show what you have accomplished. Checking things off the list as you go along and reviewing the receipt at the end of the trip. Who among us hasn't been to the grocery store to get food and been reminded in the moment by the child that some school essential was needed for gym, or a project, or music,... Of course the store you are in MIGHT sell the athletic cup or the particular type of poster board, but it wasn't a planned item. Minutes help capture the side items that need addressed.
Tasks. Here's a tough one. In the grocery list analogy, there is little in the way of comparison to tasks. The trip was a task, the collection was a task. However, you've just spent at least 15 minutes (more like an hour and fifteen minutes) wondering and grazing. Something should have occurred to you during that time, so you probably texted or called someone to let them know. So tasks are tough to relate.
However, tasks are essential to the team. There needs to be Someone that is assigned to do Something, or the meeting is more of a social event. And, if your meetings are like mine: typically held with a group of the highest paid people in the building, that's a pretty expensive water-cooler gabfest.
So, treat your meetings like a well organized trip the the store. You know you probably don't want to go there anyway, so make sure you get what you need (and what you want) and get on with life.
more next time,
-gs
(and nope, I've decided to keep my company idea. You might be able to tease it out of the topics above.)
But first, here's the kinda like (because I am not sure I want to share my company idea if it means I don't get to make money from it).
Having a meeting without an agenda, minutes, tasks, and a time aspect is kinda like going to the grocery store without a list. It's fine, the store has all sorts of options and you can spend hours in there and come out with enough things to make dinner, clean the house and clothe the family. But if you really needed to pick something up, odds are about 1 in 4 that you are able to successfully defeat the design of the modern grocery store, retrieve the two of three essentials, and exit with the rest of your money intact.
Breaking this one down:
The Agenda gives you a specific, targeted purpose for the meeting and allows people to come prepared. Do you expect to spend $20 or $50 at the store for the items on your list? Or is it a major day at the market (design or development meeting) with a $250 budget?
Timelines prevent extra items from creeping into the agenda. That bag of Oreos is on sale for just $2.50 today, and I think the cookie jar is low. Nevermind the diet, that is a deal! (The agenda also helps the person running the meeting say "no", or guide the meeting back on topic. Like the list helps when the children (or, in my case I, as the husband) see the Oreos and start in with the whining.)
Minutes show what you have accomplished. Checking things off the list as you go along and reviewing the receipt at the end of the trip. Who among us hasn't been to the grocery store to get food and been reminded in the moment by the child that some school essential was needed for gym, or a project, or music,... Of course the store you are in MIGHT sell the athletic cup or the particular type of poster board, but it wasn't a planned item. Minutes help capture the side items that need addressed.
Tasks. Here's a tough one. In the grocery list analogy, there is little in the way of comparison to tasks. The trip was a task, the collection was a task. However, you've just spent at least 15 minutes (more like an hour and fifteen minutes) wondering and grazing. Something should have occurred to you during that time, so you probably texted or called someone to let them know. So tasks are tough to relate.
However, tasks are essential to the team. There needs to be Someone that is assigned to do Something, or the meeting is more of a social event. And, if your meetings are like mine: typically held with a group of the highest paid people in the building, that's a pretty expensive water-cooler gabfest.
So, treat your meetings like a well organized trip the the store. You know you probably don't want to go there anyway, so make sure you get what you need (and what you want) and get on with life.
more next time,
-gs
(and nope, I've decided to keep my company idea. You might be able to tease it out of the topics above.)
Monday, August 5, 2013
Guts
In this example, we take a mid-sized company that has been doing pretty well and wants to make the jump. They've found investors, they have some pockets to dig into.
The investors are interested in one thing: Return on Investment. This is the only thing VC people are interested in, and this is a good thing. They have focus and purpose. The questions they ask are pointed and follow a consistent theme. The predictability is easy to understand, easy to prepare for, and easy to accommodate: Make Money and they are happy. Look Awesome so they can sell you for more money and you are a Rock Star.
A few things they will want to see:
1. Management. Like, a management team. I'll get to the kinda like about this inna minute.
2. Infrastructure. Like, shiny stuff that will make the next buyers go "ooh, ahh."
3. Execution. Nothing can slip during their watch. Slippage costs money. So, manage the hitting of the numbers with a shiny machine and your pockets get really deep. Miss the target, let the place get dusty, and those wallets are pretty flat.
the Kinda Like:
When you are encouraged to hire the management level resources to have dedicated bodies in the seats, you can expect to hire a Quality Manager, a Supply Chain Manager, someone to capture the metrics ("Business Intelligence"), and a cost accountant.
Now, the tricky part. You've been doing all these jobs good enough to survive in the past. You know how to google SPC, Kaizen, Turns, KOMs/KPIs, Cost Cards, etc. like a champ. You had to do this stuff in the past. These people you've brought on, some of which come with long resumes at a hefty (to you) price tag, are dedicated to their professions.
It's kinda like moving from simple to complex organism. The simple organism eats, digests, and moves along. The complex organism needs a vascular system, a respiratory system, all these "systems." And "cells" deployed for use in a "system" can't be deployed elsewhere.
How to deal with this? Recognize it is happening. Recognize that you, as predecessor and primary authority, have to provide the goal, resources, and direction for the systems to work. If you set a few million single cell amoeba in a jar, you won't get a frog. Not ever. Seriously. If you take pureed frog and put it in a jar, you won't get back a frog. Not ever. You can hatch a frog from an egg cell. The frog grows dedicated systems: the heart of the frog cannot be used to jump, it is busy pumping blood. The brain of the frog cannot digest food. The Stomach cannot directly induce motion.
It might be you don't think the heart and the stomach and the lungs should need told what to do. That's why you hired in all these "experts" in quality, business intel, and supply chain. They should know what to do. Except, it doesn't work that way. Each one of the systems needs to have definite boundaries, and needs to know what the demands are for production.
Growing from a simple little group to a larger company requires guts: you need your organs healthy and performing their dedicated duties.
The investors are interested in one thing: Return on Investment. This is the only thing VC people are interested in, and this is a good thing. They have focus and purpose. The questions they ask are pointed and follow a consistent theme. The predictability is easy to understand, easy to prepare for, and easy to accommodate: Make Money and they are happy. Look Awesome so they can sell you for more money and you are a Rock Star.
A few things they will want to see:
1. Management. Like, a management team. I'll get to the kinda like about this inna minute.
2. Infrastructure. Like, shiny stuff that will make the next buyers go "ooh, ahh."
3. Execution. Nothing can slip during their watch. Slippage costs money. So, manage the hitting of the numbers with a shiny machine and your pockets get really deep. Miss the target, let the place get dusty, and those wallets are pretty flat.
the Kinda Like:
When you are encouraged to hire the management level resources to have dedicated bodies in the seats, you can expect to hire a Quality Manager, a Supply Chain Manager, someone to capture the metrics ("Business Intelligence"), and a cost accountant.
Now, the tricky part. You've been doing all these jobs good enough to survive in the past. You know how to google SPC, Kaizen, Turns, KOMs/KPIs, Cost Cards, etc. like a champ. You had to do this stuff in the past. These people you've brought on, some of which come with long resumes at a hefty (to you) price tag, are dedicated to their professions.
It's kinda like moving from simple to complex organism. The simple organism eats, digests, and moves along. The complex organism needs a vascular system, a respiratory system, all these "systems." And "cells" deployed for use in a "system" can't be deployed elsewhere.
How to deal with this? Recognize it is happening. Recognize that you, as predecessor and primary authority, have to provide the goal, resources, and direction for the systems to work. If you set a few million single cell amoeba in a jar, you won't get a frog. Not ever. Seriously. If you take pureed frog and put it in a jar, you won't get back a frog. Not ever. You can hatch a frog from an egg cell. The frog grows dedicated systems: the heart of the frog cannot be used to jump, it is busy pumping blood. The brain of the frog cannot digest food. The Stomach cannot directly induce motion.
It might be you don't think the heart and the stomach and the lungs should need told what to do. That's why you hired in all these "experts" in quality, business intel, and supply chain. They should know what to do. Except, it doesn't work that way. Each one of the systems needs to have definite boundaries, and needs to know what the demands are for production.
Growing from a simple little group to a larger company requires guts: you need your organs healthy and performing their dedicated duties.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)