With the economy recovering, now is the time when companies go about reorganising their various business units for accelerated growth. There is a certain merit in re-organising businesses to bring in new leaders with fresh ideas. But most often when very many business groups are re-organised it causes more harm than good.
Humans, by nature, prefer status-quo to change. With re-organisation comes change and with every change, people become more uncomfortable. Few heads will roll. While some of the leadership changes are needed, others become causalities through no-fault of theirs. When a change happens at the top, it takes some time before changes are made down the hierarchy. While the new leader takes stock of the situation, before restructuring the group, guesses on who would be axed becomes the hot topic of water-cooler discussions. Employee motivation is not at its best. Uncertainty and chaos, during these times, do not get the best out of the people. The constant fear about what would happen to the organisation, whether the projects would be cancelled etc., creates a negative feeling which is not healthy for any organisation.
Leaders existing in the middle rung -who are usually unaffected - face challenges of a different sort. The new leader he reports to may have come from a different domain and may not have a good appreciation for the work his team does. He has to establish a good relationship in his role and also re-establish the credibility of his team with the new boss. Remote teams in different geographies face greater challenges. They wonder if the new boss would support the remote team or not. Cultural differences also play an important role in the relationship.
The new boss may have a different approach and his expectations from the team may be different as well. The team has to adjust and get used to the expectations of the new boss. If his suggestions result in a better process than the current one the team benefits. But if the suggested changes are just a different way of doing things, then it causes more overhead for the people. Off-site meetings, new review meetings etc., add to the overhead and hamper the productivity of the group. Even the human resources (HR) team is not spared. Instead of their focusing on core HR functions, like talent development, they will be busy managing the communication and the outcome of changes.
Sometimes the re-organisation makes a few roles redundant. People in such roles have to put up with the embarrassment till they find a new job. Sometimes old peers may become your boss or vice-versa. One has to adjust to all such changes. Uncertain of their future in the group, employees look outside for better opportunities. These unnecessary uncertainties in the organizations cause potential attrition.
The effects of re-organisation are not limited to within the company. It impacts the external customer focus and relationships. It breaks the continuity. Changes bring in new faces and they have to re-establish relationships with the customers. Business opportunities have been lost due to issues in transition of customer responsibilities from one person to another. Long term goals are compromised for short term gains. The new leader is eager to show early wins and might make decisions resulting in the short term gains at the expense of long term returns.
Given these ill-effects, why do companies still go through restructuring? The fundamental reason for change is to bring a new person with a different perspective to improve the business. The issue is not so much with changing one leader with another, but making sweeping changes to the whole organization structure. If such a sweeping change is needed - it means that all the existing leaders were incompetent. The real issue then was the wrong choice of leaders to begin with. Changing leaders may not solve the problem unless they are the right ones. Rather a better solution is to work on the existing leaders and improve them. As a strategy, having a succession plan in every organisation to ensure the right number and competent leaders are identified and trained, would go a long way.
Sometimes I feel even the leaders at the top are not sure why they make these changes. Maybe they believe in Chaos. Create a chaotic environment and expect a solution to emerge out of it. May be they believe in Darwin’s theory that the fittest survive. If things turnaround, they can claim victory. If not, restructure again. If none of this works, the next economic downturn would provide yet another opportunity of restructuring.
Given that change is the order of the day, the best one can do is to adapt to it. Accept that restructuring is a norm and get on with your job. Focus on what is expected out of you and deliver it. Seek to make yourself better and critical so that these changes do not affect your job. On a positive note, with every new boss you expand your network. You have an opportunity to pick up the strengths of each boss and avoid their weaknesses.
Happy Reading.
-Ram
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Strategy for Successful Transition
You’ve taken a new role in a new organization. You have been promoted to a new leadership position. You’ve changed jobs. In all these cases, how quickly you manage your transition into the new avatar and add value in the new role, determine your success. In the book “The First 90 Days” - Michael Watkins lays out a roadmap for taking charge quickly and effectively during critical career transition periods. This book outlines strategies that will dramatically shorten the time it takes to reach, what Watkins calls, the “breakeven point”: the point at which your organization needs you as much as you need the job. In this blog I publish a few of these strategies.
Start with “Promoting Yourself”. It means making the mental break from your old job and preparing to take charge in the new one. Let go of the past and embrace the imperatives of the new situation thereby getting a running start. Everyone has an urge to work at one level below where they are now. You need to work where are you are, and not where you were. Assess your vulnerabilities and compensate it with self-discipline, team building, advice and counsel. The qualities that have made you successful, so far, can prove to be weaknesses in your new role. So, beware to not overuse your strengths. Transitioning into a new job may revive some deep fears about your capabilities that you thought you had long laid to rest. If you embrace the need to learn, you can surmount them. As you advance in your career, the advice and counsel you need changes. Promoting yourself calls for working proactively to restructure your advice-and-counsel network. Watch out for people who want to hold you back. Getting others to accept your promotion is a very essential part of promoting yourself. However, if you conclude that the people in question are never going to accept the situation, then you must find a way to quickly move them out of your organization.
“Accelerate your learning”. It is essential to figure out what you need to know about your new organization and then to learn it as rapidly as you can. Try to know the history of the organization. Beware of the near-compulsive need to take action without systematically learning about the new organization. The most destructive mistake to make is to come to the new organization “with answers” on how to solve the organization’s problems. What works well in one organizational culture may fail miserably in another. Identify promising sources that make your learning process more complete and more efficient. You need to listen to key people, both inside and outside the organization, and even old-timers as well. Talking to people with different points of view will deepen your insights. The best way to get a health-check of an organization is to have one-on-one discussion with the employees. Ask the same questions to everyone. This approach is powerful because the responses you get are comparable. This helps you gain insight into which people are being more open or less. It also tells a lot about the team and politics. Distill the discussion and feedback your impressions with questions to your direct reportees. Then invite some discussions.
“Match your strategy to the business situation”. Depending on whether the business situation is a start-up, Turn-around, Realignment or sustaining, the strategy to be adopted is very different. For example in a sustaining business situation, the challenge is that of living in the shadow of the revered leader and dealing with the team the he or she created. One has to find ways to take the business to the next level. However the advantage this situation presents is that a strong team may already be in place. Foundations for continued success may be in place. The leader has to invent challenges to keep people motivated. Gaining and displaying the understanding of what made the organization successful is a key to early win. One has to play good defense by avoiding decisions that cause problems. Compared to other business situation, the leader has little bit more time before he can call shots. He should avoid early mistakes that risk traditional strengths of the organization.
Securing early win is a critical factor in successful transition. Early wins excite and energize people and build personal credibility. Potential pitfalls to watch out for, in seeking early wins, is failing to focus, ignoring the business situation and not adjusting to the culture. Understand what matters to the boss and make sure that it is addressed as part of the early wins. Early wins should be consistent with the A-item business priorities – critical ones that have greatest opportunities for dramatic improvement in performance. These priorities should offer clear direction. As you make progress in getting connected, identify and act as quickly as you can to remove minor but persistent irritants, in your new organization. Focus on strained external relationships and begin to repair them. Cut out redundant meetings, shorten excessively long ones.
If you are inheriting a team, you will need to evaluate its members and perhaps, restructure it to better meet the demands of the situation. Your willingness to make tough early personnel calls and your capacity to select the right people for the right positions are among the most important drivers of success during your transition.
Finally you need to help everyone in your organization – direct reportees, bosses, peers – accelerate their own transitions. The quicker you can get your new direct reportees up to speed, the more you will help your own performance.
Start with “Promoting Yourself”. It means making the mental break from your old job and preparing to take charge in the new one. Let go of the past and embrace the imperatives of the new situation thereby getting a running start. Everyone has an urge to work at one level below where they are now. You need to work where are you are, and not where you were. Assess your vulnerabilities and compensate it with self-discipline, team building, advice and counsel. The qualities that have made you successful, so far, can prove to be weaknesses in your new role. So, beware to not overuse your strengths. Transitioning into a new job may revive some deep fears about your capabilities that you thought you had long laid to rest. If you embrace the need to learn, you can surmount them. As you advance in your career, the advice and counsel you need changes. Promoting yourself calls for working proactively to restructure your advice-and-counsel network. Watch out for people who want to hold you back. Getting others to accept your promotion is a very essential part of promoting yourself. However, if you conclude that the people in question are never going to accept the situation, then you must find a way to quickly move them out of your organization.
“Accelerate your learning”. It is essential to figure out what you need to know about your new organization and then to learn it as rapidly as you can. Try to know the history of the organization. Beware of the near-compulsive need to take action without systematically learning about the new organization. The most destructive mistake to make is to come to the new organization “with answers” on how to solve the organization’s problems. What works well in one organizational culture may fail miserably in another. Identify promising sources that make your learning process more complete and more efficient. You need to listen to key people, both inside and outside the organization, and even old-timers as well. Talking to people with different points of view will deepen your insights. The best way to get a health-check of an organization is to have one-on-one discussion with the employees. Ask the same questions to everyone. This approach is powerful because the responses you get are comparable. This helps you gain insight into which people are being more open or less. It also tells a lot about the team and politics. Distill the discussion and feedback your impressions with questions to your direct reportees. Then invite some discussions.
“Match your strategy to the business situation”. Depending on whether the business situation is a start-up, Turn-around, Realignment or sustaining, the strategy to be adopted is very different. For example in a sustaining business situation, the challenge is that of living in the shadow of the revered leader and dealing with the team the he or she created. One has to find ways to take the business to the next level. However the advantage this situation presents is that a strong team may already be in place. Foundations for continued success may be in place. The leader has to invent challenges to keep people motivated. Gaining and displaying the understanding of what made the organization successful is a key to early win. One has to play good defense by avoiding decisions that cause problems. Compared to other business situation, the leader has little bit more time before he can call shots. He should avoid early mistakes that risk traditional strengths of the organization.
Securing early win is a critical factor in successful transition. Early wins excite and energize people and build personal credibility. Potential pitfalls to watch out for, in seeking early wins, is failing to focus, ignoring the business situation and not adjusting to the culture. Understand what matters to the boss and make sure that it is addressed as part of the early wins. Early wins should be consistent with the A-item business priorities – critical ones that have greatest opportunities for dramatic improvement in performance. These priorities should offer clear direction. As you make progress in getting connected, identify and act as quickly as you can to remove minor but persistent irritants, in your new organization. Focus on strained external relationships and begin to repair them. Cut out redundant meetings, shorten excessively long ones.
If you are inheriting a team, you will need to evaluate its members and perhaps, restructure it to better meet the demands of the situation. Your willingness to make tough early personnel calls and your capacity to select the right people for the right positions are among the most important drivers of success during your transition.
Finally you need to help everyone in your organization – direct reportees, bosses, peers – accelerate their own transitions. The quicker you can get your new direct reportees up to speed, the more you will help your own performance.
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Art of Negotiation
My wife thinks I am good at haggling.I have to admit that I am a better haggler than my wife. It has nothing to do with any skill, but the fact that I am not embarrassed to ask for the lowest price. But the haggling most of us do is called as position based bargaining. When I haggle with the road-side or footpath vendors, my formula is to buy things at half the quoted price. So my low-ball number will be much lower than half-price so that when we finally settle at the half-price, I make it look like a fair deal for both sides. The truth is that even the vendor is aware of this and his objective is to slow down the rate at which he concedes. He starts reducing the price in smaller steps, extending the time taken to come to a conclusion, and thereby testing your patience. He will also use psychological tactics to make you feel embarrassed. The moment you walk away, he would drop the price steeper. He will be observing the pace at which you are moving away from him. The moment he realizes you are slowing down, he will stop dropping the price. Haggling is a psychological contest. Now you know why you should leave your shame at home before you go for shopping. You should be even more shameless to haggle in China. My h-constant (not the Plank’s constant, but the haggling factor) for shopping in China is 10 : to settle a price that is 1/10 the quoted price. You need to be extremely unemotional and fully shameless. I realized while shopping in China that the calculator is more than a number crunching machine. It acts as a translator. The vendor punches his price and you shake your head sadly, take the calculator and punch in your quote. The calculator changes hands back and forth till a final price is arrived at. The Chinese vendor uses another psycho trick, of raising the voice and keeps uttering the word “No Joking”. You should be impervious to all of this if you want the best deal.
But doing negotiation based on positions is not a recommended option in business. Any negotiation may be judged by three criteria: It should produce a wise agreement; It should be efficient; It should improve the relationship between the parties. Any negotiation based on positions does not meet these criteria. As the person’s ego is associated with the position he takes, it is highly unlikely that a wise agreement can be arrived at. The more extreme the opening positions and the smaller the concessions, the more time and effort it will take to discover whether or not agreement is possible. Positional bargaining becomes contest of will and thus strains, and sometimes shatters the relationship between the parties.
In the book “Getting to Yes”, the authors suggest that for a better result, one needs to focus on interests and not positions. The book quotes the example of Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty. Israel insisted on keeping part of the Sinai peninsula. Egypt, on the other hand, insisted that every inch of Sinai be returned to Egypt’s sovereignty. Negotiating on position did not lead to any amicable agreement. Looking at their interests, instead of their position made it possible to develop a solution. Israel’s interest lay in security and did not want Egyptian tanks poised on their border ready to roll across any time. Egypt’s interest lay in the sovereignty. Knowing these interests behind the positions, the two countries agreed to a plan that would return the Sinai to complete Egyptian sovereignty and, by demilitarizing large areas, would still leave Israeli secure.
Reconciling interests, rather than positions works for two reasons. First, for every interest there usually exists several possible positions, that could satisfy it. Secondly, behind opposed positions lie many more similar interests than conflicting ones. So how do we identify interests? Ask “Why?”. Put yourself in their shoes. Examine each position they take, and ask yourself “Why?”. You can also ask the other party, why they take a particular position. Make it clear that you are asking, not for justification of the position he made, but for an understanding of the needs, hopes, fears or desires that it serves.
Ask “Why not?”. Think about their choice. One of the most useful ways to uncover interests is first to identify the basic decision that those on the other side probably see you asking them for, and then ask yourself why they have not made that decision. Which of their interests stand in the way? If you are trying to change their mind, the starting point is to figure out where their minds are now.
Realise that each side has multiple interests. To understand that negotiator’s interests means, to understand the variety of somewhat differing interests, that should be taken into account. The most powerful interests are basic human needs like security, economic well-being, a sense of belonging, recognition and control over one’s life. These are easy to overlook. To sort out the various interests of each side, it helps to make a list. It will help in the quality of your assessment, as you acquire new information, and to place interests in their estimated order of importance.
If you want the other side to take your interests into account, explain it to them. Part of the task of impressing the other side, with your interests lies in establishing the legitimacy of those interests. You need to convince them that they might well feel the same way if they were in your shoes. Acknowledge their interests as part of the problem. If you want the other side to appreciate your interests, then demonstrate it\.
If you want someone to listen and understand your reasoning, give your interests and reasoning first and your conclusions or proposals later. Put the problem before your answer. Beware of arguing with the other side about the past, instead, talk about what you want to have happen in the future. Instead of asking them to justify what they did yesterday, ask, “Who should do what tomorrow?”
To summarise- focus on interests and not on position to result in a win-win solution. I wish I could use this learning to get an iPad with 3G and 32GB for $499 :-)
Happy Negotiating,
Ram
But doing negotiation based on positions is not a recommended option in business. Any negotiation may be judged by three criteria: It should produce a wise agreement; It should be efficient; It should improve the relationship between the parties. Any negotiation based on positions does not meet these criteria. As the person’s ego is associated with the position he takes, it is highly unlikely that a wise agreement can be arrived at. The more extreme the opening positions and the smaller the concessions, the more time and effort it will take to discover whether or not agreement is possible. Positional bargaining becomes contest of will and thus strains, and sometimes shatters the relationship between the parties.
In the book “Getting to Yes”, the authors suggest that for a better result, one needs to focus on interests and not positions. The book quotes the example of Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty. Israel insisted on keeping part of the Sinai peninsula. Egypt, on the other hand, insisted that every inch of Sinai be returned to Egypt’s sovereignty. Negotiating on position did not lead to any amicable agreement. Looking at their interests, instead of their position made it possible to develop a solution. Israel’s interest lay in security and did not want Egyptian tanks poised on their border ready to roll across any time. Egypt’s interest lay in the sovereignty. Knowing these interests behind the positions, the two countries agreed to a plan that would return the Sinai to complete Egyptian sovereignty and, by demilitarizing large areas, would still leave Israeli secure.
Reconciling interests, rather than positions works for two reasons. First, for every interest there usually exists several possible positions, that could satisfy it. Secondly, behind opposed positions lie many more similar interests than conflicting ones. So how do we identify interests? Ask “Why?”. Put yourself in their shoes. Examine each position they take, and ask yourself “Why?”. You can also ask the other party, why they take a particular position. Make it clear that you are asking, not for justification of the position he made, but for an understanding of the needs, hopes, fears or desires that it serves.
Ask “Why not?”. Think about their choice. One of the most useful ways to uncover interests is first to identify the basic decision that those on the other side probably see you asking them for, and then ask yourself why they have not made that decision. Which of their interests stand in the way? If you are trying to change their mind, the starting point is to figure out where their minds are now.
Realise that each side has multiple interests. To understand that negotiator’s interests means, to understand the variety of somewhat differing interests, that should be taken into account. The most powerful interests are basic human needs like security, economic well-being, a sense of belonging, recognition and control over one’s life. These are easy to overlook. To sort out the various interests of each side, it helps to make a list. It will help in the quality of your assessment, as you acquire new information, and to place interests in their estimated order of importance.
If you want the other side to take your interests into account, explain it to them. Part of the task of impressing the other side, with your interests lies in establishing the legitimacy of those interests. You need to convince them that they might well feel the same way if they were in your shoes. Acknowledge their interests as part of the problem. If you want the other side to appreciate your interests, then demonstrate it\.
If you want someone to listen and understand your reasoning, give your interests and reasoning first and your conclusions or proposals later. Put the problem before your answer. Beware of arguing with the other side about the past, instead, talk about what you want to have happen in the future. Instead of asking them to justify what they did yesterday, ask, “Who should do what tomorrow?”
To summarise- focus on interests and not on position to result in a win-win solution. I wish I could use this learning to get an iPad with 3G and 32GB for $499 :-)
Happy Negotiating,
Ram
Sunday, January 24, 2010
?B? - Question Behind the Question
Last week, I attended an off-site meeting of my group. One of the sessions, in the meeting, was to discuss “Personal Accountability”. We were asked to read the book “Question Behind the Question” by John G Miller. I found the concept explained in this book to be very profound. This blog highlights the summary and learnings from this book.
Anyone who has interacted with any government institution knows that, to get a job done one literally has to go from pillar to post. “It’s not my job”, “Go to that table”, etc., are the common phrases one hears. This problem is not restricted just to the government institutions. It can be seen in any organization. We call this malaise “passing the buck”. People take the functional boundaries very religiously and are not willing to go the extra mile, beyond the function to help others. These people do not have personal accountability. A few of the very many questions that can define lack of personal accountability are: “When is someone going to train me?” “Why do we have to go through all this change?”, “Who dropped the ball?”. The Question Behind the Question” (QBQ) is a tool that’s been developed and refined over the years, to practice personal accountability, by asking better questions.
The QBQ is built on the observation that our first reactions are often negative, bringing to mind incorrect questions, but in the moment of decision we can instead discipline our thoughts to look behind those initial questions and ask better ones (QBQs), the questions themselves will lead us to better results. One of the guiding principles of the QBQ is “The answers are in the questions”. If we ask a better question, we get a better answer. Here are the three simple guidelines for creating a QBQ.
1. Begin with “What” or “How” (not “Why”, “When”, or “Who).
2. Contain an “I” (not “they”, “them”, “we”, or “you”)
3. Focus on action.
Don’t Ask “Why?”. Why is this happening to me? Why am I not getting support? When one asks this question he feels powerless - like a victim. Questions with a “Why me?” tone to them say, I’m a victim of the environment and the people around me. Instead of “Why” question if you follow the QBQ guideline, the question can be rephrased as “What can I do to improve the situation?” “How can I support others?”.
Don’t Ask “When?” What we’re really saying is that, we have no choice but to wait and put off action until another time. Questions that begin with “When” lead to procrastination. Instead of “When will they take care of the problem?”, ask the QBQ “What solution can I provide?”. Notice the difference.
Don’t Ask “Who?” When we ask “Who” questions, what we’re really doing is looking for scapegoats, someone else to blame. Blaming others is always counterproductive. Instead of the question “Who made the mistake?” “Who dropped the ball?”, ask the QBQ “What can I do today to solve the problem?” or “What action can I take to ‘own’ the situation?”
Personal accountability begins with “me” not “you”.It is about, each of us holding ourselves accountable,for our own thinking and behaviors as well as the results they produce. This is why the second QBQ guideline contains an “I”,not “they”,”them” or “you”. Questions that contain an “I” turn our focus away from other people and circumstances and put it back on ourselves. We can’t change other people. We often can’t control circumstances and events. The only things we have any real control over are our own thoughts and actions. I can only change myself.
More often the term “we” is used to express the personal accountability. One should be careful not to mix-up personal accountability with team accountability. We can hide behind the team with thoughts – which become excuses- such as: “The team wasn’t given enough resources”. Personal accountability is not about changing others. It’s about making a difference by changing ourselves.
Practicing personal accountability calls for taking actions. If I don’t ask what I can do or make or achieve or build, then I won’t do or make or achieve or build. Only through action is anything accomplished. Action, even when it leads to mistakes, brings learning and growth. It leads us towards solution. It builds confidence. It is better to be the one who is told to wait, than one who waits to be told.
The spirit of QBQ is personal accountability: No more victim thinking, procrastinating, or blaming. I can only change me. Take action!.
Happy reading,
Ram
Anyone who has interacted with any government institution knows that, to get a job done one literally has to go from pillar to post. “It’s not my job”, “Go to that table”, etc., are the common phrases one hears. This problem is not restricted just to the government institutions. It can be seen in any organization. We call this malaise “passing the buck”. People take the functional boundaries very religiously and are not willing to go the extra mile, beyond the function to help others. These people do not have personal accountability. A few of the very many questions that can define lack of personal accountability are: “When is someone going to train me?” “Why do we have to go through all this change?”, “Who dropped the ball?”. The Question Behind the Question” (QBQ) is a tool that’s been developed and refined over the years, to practice personal accountability, by asking better questions.
The QBQ is built on the observation that our first reactions are often negative, bringing to mind incorrect questions, but in the moment of decision we can instead discipline our thoughts to look behind those initial questions and ask better ones (QBQs), the questions themselves will lead us to better results. One of the guiding principles of the QBQ is “The answers are in the questions”. If we ask a better question, we get a better answer. Here are the three simple guidelines for creating a QBQ.
1. Begin with “What” or “How” (not “Why”, “When”, or “Who).
2. Contain an “I” (not “they”, “them”, “we”, or “you”)
3. Focus on action.
Don’t Ask “Why?”. Why is this happening to me? Why am I not getting support? When one asks this question he feels powerless - like a victim. Questions with a “Why me?” tone to them say, I’m a victim of the environment and the people around me. Instead of “Why” question if you follow the QBQ guideline, the question can be rephrased as “What can I do to improve the situation?” “How can I support others?”.
Don’t Ask “When?” What we’re really saying is that, we have no choice but to wait and put off action until another time. Questions that begin with “When” lead to procrastination. Instead of “When will they take care of the problem?”, ask the QBQ “What solution can I provide?”. Notice the difference.
Don’t Ask “Who?” When we ask “Who” questions, what we’re really doing is looking for scapegoats, someone else to blame. Blaming others is always counterproductive. Instead of the question “Who made the mistake?” “Who dropped the ball?”, ask the QBQ “What can I do today to solve the problem?” or “What action can I take to ‘own’ the situation?”
Personal accountability begins with “me” not “you”.It is about, each of us holding ourselves accountable,for our own thinking and behaviors as well as the results they produce. This is why the second QBQ guideline contains an “I”,not “they”,”them” or “you”. Questions that contain an “I” turn our focus away from other people and circumstances and put it back on ourselves. We can’t change other people. We often can’t control circumstances and events. The only things we have any real control over are our own thoughts and actions. I can only change myself.
More often the term “we” is used to express the personal accountability. One should be careful not to mix-up personal accountability with team accountability. We can hide behind the team with thoughts – which become excuses- such as: “The team wasn’t given enough resources”. Personal accountability is not about changing others. It’s about making a difference by changing ourselves.
Practicing personal accountability calls for taking actions. If I don’t ask what I can do or make or achieve or build, then I won’t do or make or achieve or build. Only through action is anything accomplished. Action, even when it leads to mistakes, brings learning and growth. It leads us towards solution. It builds confidence. It is better to be the one who is told to wait, than one who waits to be told.
The spirit of QBQ is personal accountability: No more victim thinking, procrastinating, or blaming. I can only change me. Take action!.
Happy reading,
Ram
Saturday, January 2, 2010
India Shining - Breakthrough Innovation
I have the habit of roaming around book stores at any airport before check-in. Lately I have noticed many management books written by Indians. Subrato Bagchi, with his trilogy of books, has captured the attention of both Indian and foreign readers. One of the recent books, I picked up, was on "Making Breakthrough Innovation Happen" by Porus Munshi. It talks about how 11 Indians pulled off the impossible. A very refreshing read, it makes every Indian proud of the innovations that are happenning in India. If the last decade made the world notice "India shining", the next decade will be even more prosperous for India. I pick the strides made by Cavinkare as the topic for this blog. Cavinkare has innovated to take on giants like Unilever ( Hindustan Lever in its previous avtar).They break the myth that R&D and technology-led innovation can happen only in large organisations. They have demonstrated how entrepreneurs can create winning ideas, even in markets dominated by giants.As we begin the new year, I felt it is apt to share these learnings on Innovation.
CK Ranganathan who started Cavinkare came from the family that pioneered the satchet marketing revolution in India by introducing the famous Velvette shampoo. He branched off and setup his own company and produced Chik shampoo sachet to be sold at 1 Rs. In creating his marketing network, he decided to change the norms. He did not enter into arrangements with established players, but with stockists who had no prior experience in selling FMCG products. He did this so that the stockists would work on his terms. Though the Chik business grew, it did not command the share Velvette shampoo had. Ranga came up with an out-of-the-box strategy to make consumers come back again and again and ask for Chik shampoo. He came up with the innovative marketing idea : he would give one sachet of Chik shampoo free for every four empty sachets of any shampoo. This scheme was the first of the kind and it took the market by storm. Later he changed the strategy and began giving one free sachet for every four used Chik sachets. The sale of Chik shampoo soared and it became an established brand. It had become second-largest selling shampoo in Tamilnadu behind Velvette.
Ranga realised that the penetration of shampoos in India was only 14%. He found out the rest of the 86% were using soap. The strategy of educating the people of disadvantage of using soap and advantages of using shampoo was not helping. One of the insight he had was that, if the consumer believed strongly in something, then don't attack it. Instead find the barriers to their using your product. Indeed, he found price as the barrier. So he came up with yet another innovation of making a concentrated version of the shampoo that was half the size of the original Chik shampoo. The size perception would make the Rs 1 consumer feel that it was a small size, therefore not for him. The existing consumers would, he believed, continue with the Re 1 sachet, while hordes of new customers, who were earlier locked out, would come in at the fifty-paisa price point. The Rs 1 shampoo was improved to have more conditioning and fragrance. With these types of, and more innovations Ranga tapped huge untapped markets and increased the market share of Chik from 5% to 22%. Today it is the second largest selling shampoo in the country.
He further found out that there were many people who were using natural products like shikakai, hibiscus leaves etc., He then created the shampoo "Meera" which had reetha nuts and almond. It was an instant success and still sells at a premium. He then launched Meera with shikakai in Tamilnadu, with hibiscus leaves in kerala. Because of the innovative initiatives, Cavinkare is the largest overall hair wash company in South India. Hindustan Lever and P&G are behind them.
He then took on the "Fair & Lovely" fairness cream. This was the business with higher margins and was dominated by a single player - Fair & Lovely.He realised that he needed to build credibility in the minds of his customers and make his products appeal to them. He found that pregnant women were given saffron and milk as they felt this would make the child fair and healthy. He used this fact and created the fariness cream that has milk and saffron in it. He also wanted to position this cream as something that could help change one's life/future forever. So he branded the fariness cream as "Fairever" and priced the product at a premium, based on insights that told him that the customers were willing to pay more as they knew that saffron was expensive. Again Fairever was able to wrest upto 18% market share in the first year of its introduction in South India.
What learnings can one can take from the success story of CavinKare? Go beyond market segmentation. See how to grow the overall market share. Listen to the customers. If it is the high price that is the barrier then innovate and create products that are low in price and tap into markets that did not exist. Keep prototyping in real time: do limited launch, let customers use the product, get feedback, make changes and launch again. Prototyping is one of the highest forms of insighting. Co-evolve the product working with the customers. Playing fields of the giants can be leveled by using insights that lead to innovation.
Wishing you a happy new year and that it bring lots of opportunites for innovation.
Happy reading,
Ram
Thursday, December 24, 2009
Reflections, Priorities and Resolutions
Hey there ! ABABABAB…. . Oh what I meant was “Long time no see (C)”. The past weekends have been very busy for me - travelling on business and taking care of personal chores. However, I did not want to end the year without a blog. So here it is.
This is that point of the year, when an organization reflects on the year gone-by; what are the few best practices to continue onto the next year. More importantly, what are the practices that they would NOT like to repeat. The usual practice is to have a “lessons learnt” session and reflect on what went right, what went wrong - at the end of each project. However the year-end reflection, is more to take stock of the health of the entire organization. Usually reflection session are done off-site and preferably with an external leadership consultant who can observe the dynamics of the session and give valuable unbiased feedback.
Landing up in an offsite without an agenda for this session, can sometimes veer the discussion away from the main theme and may not conclude the session. Please note that the participants will be emotionally charged and want to let the steam out on the issues that have been brewing over the past year.
A formal pre-work including a frame-work to collect feedback, prior to the session will go a long way in having a fruitful session. The leader of the group has to be clear and state the objective of the session and let the external consultant moderate the discussion. Having the leader of the group as a co-participant, adds more veracity to the whole discussion. When the burning issues are debated, the leader may be tempted to defend it. But it is better to restrain from it, so that people can open-up and express their feelings and opinion freely. Based on the pre-work, one can have the team form into few groups to have parallel break-out sessions and discuss critical issues. The leads of these groups can come back and present the gist of the discussions and the actions they would like to take. The external consultant can then present his observations. The leader and the group together can prioritise the key actions.
One of the common mistakes made at this juncture is to have a laundry list of actions. Given that the following year will always be busier than the current one, it is best to take top three actions. To bring more accountability, it is advised that volunteers are sought to own these actions. If none volunteers, the leader can volunteer the owners for the actions. It is critical that the session concludes with a clear action plan and respective owners identified.
Some fun games can be planned during the course of the session to relieve the tension, if any and use this opportunity to further enhance the teamwork. Everyone likes freebies. This is the perfect opportunity to buy a book, relevant to the issues that the group is facing.
One of the follow-up of these reflections, which is usually missed, is the communication to the rest of the team, on what was accomplished in the off-site meeting. Remember that the rest of team knows that the leaders of the group were off for an off-site. If they do not hear from the leaders about what was accomplished, then they can ridicule the off-site meeting and will not be serious in implementing some of the actions that could percolate to them.
The other most critical follow-up of the reflection meeting is to tie-in the actions from the meeting to the next year’s priorities. This ensures that learnings from one year feed into the actions for the next year.
Talking about priorities, every company sets priorities every year. Similar to the reflections of a group leading to the actions/priorities for next year, a company does the same exercise with the top bosses of the company to come up with the priorities for the next year. Usually the priorities of the company are deliberately kept generic – For example Growing Market Share, this gives a sense of direction where the company wants to head.
The different business units and the sub- business units will have their own set of tangible priorities that will be linked to the company’s priority.
For nerd engineers, priorities may seem like yet another management fad. The responsibility to educate and lay emphasis on the importance of the priorities, lies with the leaders. They need to clearly communicate them so that every employee is aware of the company’s priorities and the group’s priorities. Visits by senior management of the company and the business unit to the local site are a perfect time for communicating about the priorities and reinforcing the same.
At an individual level, the leader or the supervisor has to set the priorities for the employee and show how it is linked to the group’s priority and to the business unit and company’s priority. This is very important and the employee needs to unambiguous on how his actions help meet a company’s priority.
At the turn of the new year, people talk about resolutions. Many of them make no resolutions finding the excuse that resolutions are meant to be broken so why set one at all. In the life of a person, if one takes every new year as a milestone, then these are valuable opportunities that can be used to set one goal at a time and become a better human being. These resolutions need not be big ones that are difficult to stick to. Instead of resolving to quit smoking, a person can resolve to reduce the number of cigarattes he smokes a day. May be, over a few years this will lead him to quit smoking completely.
As the new year dawns, be clear on your priorities, group’s priorities and the company’s priorities. Make and meet your new year resolutions and become a better person. Last but not the least, spend time with your near and dear. Convey your greetings to near and distant friends and family.
Wishing you all Happy Holidays and a very Happy and Prosperous New Year.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Accountability
Accountability is currently the buzz word in the corridors of an organisation. In a bullish market, the pressure on the managers to meet the bottom-line is less. However when the chips are down, the manager is held more accountable for the results and the bottom-line. Various metrics are created to evaluate the performance of the organisation. Everyone, at every level of the organisation, is held accountable for the results. It is unfortunate that importance to accountability is given only during these downturn times. Had it been given enough importance during the good times, we wouldn't be seeing bad times.
Accountability and responsibility are often assumed to mean the same thing. In contrast with accountability, responsibility is defined as an obligation that arises from tasks we assume, to accept the consequences arising from the results of our decisions, actions, or inactions. Being responsible involves the capacity to distinguish between right and wrong and to act accordingly.
As per Wikipedia's definition: Accountability is the acknowledgment and assumption of responsibility for actions, products, decisions, and policies including the administration, governance, and implementation within the scope of the role or employment position and encompassing the obligation to report, explain and be answerable for resulting consequences.
You often hear employees asking for more responsibility. What is less understood by people is that, with responsibility comes accountability. Being responsible is not just about getting the offical designation, but also delivering on it. If someone gives you a job to do, you can get it done by someone else, but you are still accountable for producing the results. If the job isn’t done right, the only person to blame is you, because - even though you’ve delegated the responsibility, you are still accountable.Unlike responsibility, accountability cannot be delegated or shared.
President Truman's famous quote, "The Buck Stops Here" is the most well-known statements of accountability ever made, and it leaves no doubt in anyone's mind as to where the ultimate responsibility lies. But, if you, even for a moment, blame any obstacles for your lack of success, then you've given up your accountability and you are "passing the buck".
Sometimes a very big deal is made in the organisation, when everyone talks about accountability. In my opinion,You are paid for the job you do, so it becomes your duty to deliver the expected results. Accountability in this sense is the basic expectation an organisation should have, from an indivudual. There is no shying away from it.
Stevel Covey says “Accountability breeds response-ability.” As an individual, you are accountable for making and meeting your commitments.You are accountable to abide by the values of the organisation. As a manager, you are accountable for delivering results of your team, for maintaining team work, for taking care of the aspirations of the employees. As a senior manager you are accountable for meeting customer demands, for meeting the expectations of the shareholders and stakeholders. There is no room for blame, excuses or "victim mentality" attitude.
Bringing out accountability in employees depends on the level of competence and commitments of the employees. The employees who are new in the organisation are very enthusiastic about the future and their own ability to deliver results. But they are low on competence. In such cases, the manager's approach should be directive. He should provide clear direction about tasks, expectations, responsibilities and simultaneously build a strong relationship with the employee.
Over time, the employee may become highly competent. Although competent, without commitment the employee often displays negativity and procrastination. The manager, in this case, should focus on rebuilding and restoring the relationship by using a "supportive" model of listening and engaging with the employee. The goal is to get the frustration out, so the energy can flow again.
Star employees bring experience and commitment to the job. They are able to set goals and deliver results. They are very self-motivated and self-directed.The manager, in this case, has to empower the star. Challenging goals should be identified and the employee should be given great latitude to design and develop his own approach. The manager only provides guidance when needed.
I would sign-off the blog with an excellent quote from Sir Josiah Stamp:
“It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our responsibilities.“
Happy Reading
Ram
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
