Posts Tagged ‘decisionmaking’

From the Mistake Bank: make a mistake, get promoted

Tuesday, April 20th, 2010

Mistake bank logo

This story is from William Johnson, the CEO of H.J. Heinz.

It was a mistake in this company that got me my first major promotion. We had a hot cocoa line called Alba. We had an underutilized factory in Iowa. I was a young general manager in the company, and I had been challenged with how to use this factory. What should we do rather than close the factory? Although [closing] it was the simple thing to do, long-term it wouldn’t create a lot of value.

We were actually in New York one time and looked up at Warner Brothers and saw Superman flying – I guess this was the time of the first Superman movie in the early to mid-eighties – and Superman had just been put on Superman Peanut Butter, which was selling like crazy. So, we literally walked in unannounced, went upstairs, walked in to the licensing department, met with the merchandising guy – the guy who had the licensing for Warner Communications – and asked if we could have the Superman license to launch hot cocoa, therefore going after kids. I got it granted right there; we only had to work out the details.

I went back to my boss at the time and said, “We have an idea. Give us six weeks, and let’s go play with it.” So we researched it – research said it would be a good idea – tested it with kids, developed the product, and were ready to go. I walked into my boss and said, “I want to launch this thing nationally.” He looked at me like I had two heads and said that we didn’t have enough research, that it was a big risk, and so forth. [He said,] “How about if we do it regionally?” I said, “Okay, we’ll do it regionally.” It failed miserably. We underestimated how the competitors would react.

Two months later I was promoted to vice president from my general manager position, and I asked my boss at the time why. He said, “Because in order to get ahead, innovate, and move the business forward, you have to be prepared to take risks and suffer the consequences. The fact that you took the chance, came up with the idea, moved it ahead, and tried to solve a problem did not create a problem because we cleaned it up without substantial costs. That says to me that you’re prepared to take risks, many of which are judgment calls. And sometimes you’re right and sometimes you’re wrong.”

Reprinted by permission of Harvard Business Press. Excerpted from Lessons Learned: Straight Talk from the World’s Top Business Leaders–Overcoming Obstacles. Copyright (c) 2009 Fifty Lessons Limited; All Rights Reserved.

“The Right Fight” shows that workplace conflict is essential for success

Wednesday, April 7th, 2010

right fightWhen I got out of engineering school, it was natural to take the competitive, intellectually show-offy mindset we all had in college into the workplace. I was developing software, and so there were constant battles to discuss how to design a certain piece of code or construct a test scenario. I remember these times fondly. The arguments were loud but respectful, and it seemed most of the time the right answer came out of them.

Then I got into management, and gradually it seemed that the competitive mindset that had worked so well for me as a technician wasn’t as useful. Arguments got bound up in power dynamics, and I ran into countless examples of unproductive rivalry among groups in the same company. “If only we fought the competition with the intensity we use to fight amongst ourselves…”

So I began to value collegiality, consensus, and getting along. It seemed if you were a senior leader you had a duty to be a team player. Of course conflicts played out, but they were behind the scenes, not discussed in the meeting but in the “meeting after the meeting.” Looking back on it, though the pay was good, it wasn’t nearly as much fun as arguing with John Cooper in front of a white board over a payment-assessment algorithm.

So when I read “The Right Fight: How Great Leaders Use Healthy Conflict to Drive Performance, Innovation, and Value,” by Saj-nicole Joli and Damon Beyer, it made me wish it had come out ten years earlier. Far from seeing conflict as vice and consensus as virtue, Joli and Beyer make the strong case that without conflict organizations cannot thrive and, furthermore, that management can create the right conditions for productive conflict.

One reason to shy away from conflict is the cost of being on the losing end of the battle. Joli and Beyer maintain that effective leaders create fairly-judged fights where misbehavior is punished and losers are given seats at the table and appreciated for their efforts. Most importantly, perhaps, the fights need to be about issues vital to the firm. The authors boil these ideas down into six principles:

Picking the Right Fights:
1. Make It Material
2. Focus on the Future, not the Past
3. Pursue a Noble Purpose

Right Fight Discipline:
4. Make It Sport, not War
5, Structure Formally, Work Informally
6. Turn Pain into Gain

It’s an important book on an overlooked (you might say “out of favor”) topic. But that’s what makes it worth reading right now. If all our company’s alignment and consensus is still leaving us underperforming, perhaps it’s time to start scrapping again.

Related post:
On “Senior Leadership Teams”

Customers are talking: the complex consumer “buyer”

Tuesday, January 5th, 2010

B2B salespeople are familiar with the concept of the “buying center” – a group of people responsible for reviewing, analyzing and recommending purchases. The best salespeople cultivate relationships with lots of important folks at the client. They know that focusing on a single decisionmaker is a prescription for a lost sale. (Yet the “decisionmaker” myth persists. Salesperson: “Did a product demo with XYZ corp today.” Boss: “Great. Did you talk to the decisionmaker?”)

Consumer purchases don’t have a buying center, do they? Well, I did a project last year that involved trying to understand why people calling into a telesales center didn’t end up buying anything. The most frequent reason for them saying no? “I need to talk about it with my spouse/mother/sister.” They couldn’t make a decision without the concurrence of someone else.

This has implications for consumer sales of any significant size. Consumer sales channels – especially virtual channels like call centers and websites – are focused on individuals, not groups. They don’t have any easy way of involving that other person who needs to say yes. This was the puzzle my client faced.

Perhaps it’s too complex for consumer marketers to worry about. But by ignoring the buying center, they run the risk that their “buyer” loses his/her energy and commitment between the time they are ready to say yes and the time they get the go-ahead from that other person. That equals lost sales, and lost sales are expensive.

The Best Business Books of 2009

Thursday, December 10th, 2009

In the wake of the worst US economic catastrophe since the Great Depression, everybody realized this: Making money is harder than we thought. So, this year, books on innovation had special resonance. Luckily, there were some great ones out there. So many, in fact, that this year’s best-of list includes two “companion volumes”–other good books from this year that cover similar material from another perspective.

These are the best books I read this year:

design-driven innovation1. Design-Driven Innovation – Roberto Verganti. A fascinating book that looks at companies that don’t merely create new products, but develop products and services that create new meaning for customers. Is that important? Well, companies that do it well avoid commoditization and generate outsized profits for long periods of time. Think Apple.

(companion volume: The Design of Business by Roger Martin)

Discovery-Driven Growth2. Discovery-Driven Growth – Rita Gunther McGrath and Ian MacMillan. Verganti’s book covers the more creative side of innovation, while McGrath and MacMillan discuss the process that established companies should use to improve their innovation efficiency–that is, bringing more successful products to market and spending less on the failures. The central lesson: do more work on paper, and scrupulously document & validate assumptions as you go.

(companion volume: Innovation Tournaments by Christian Terweisch and Karl Ulrich)

enterprise2.0

3. Enterprise 2.0 – Andrew McAfee. A clear description for the general business audience of how web 2.0 products, like social network software, wikis, messaging services, and the like, can be deployed to help corporations work more effectively. Excellent combination of case studies, theoretical models, and a clear-eyed assessment of the obstacles in the way of wide adoption.


4. Think Again: Why Good Leaders Make Bad Decisions and How to Keep it From Happening to You – Sydney Finkelstein, Jo Whitehead and Andrew Campbell. A timely book that shows how smart, experienced people can make terrible decisions, and what safeguards companies can use to improve their decisionmaking. Illuminates the many cognitive biases at work during the decision process, which helps the reader to understand why so many decisions that look atrocious in hindsight were considered reasonable and logical at the time.

Collaboration by Morten Hansen5. Collaboration – Morten Hansen. Discusses how collaboration in business works, and when it doesn’t work, then provides a map for companies to improve their collaborative behavior – including unifying your workforce, nurturing “T-shaped” management and using networks intelligently. Key message: collaboration has a cost, and you need to make sure the payoff of collaboration outweighs it.

Related posts:
Podcast: Sydney Finkelstein on “Think Again”
On “Discovery-Driven Growth”
Podcast: Roberto Verganti on “Design-Driven Innovation”
On “Collaboration”
Video Review of “Enterprise 2.0″

Shop Talk Minipodcast – Sydney Finkelstein on 4 Decisionmaking Red Flags

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

We talked to Sydney Finkelstein, co-author of “Think Again: Why Good Leaders Make Bad Decisions and How to Keep it From Happening to You” back in March. In this excerpt, Syd discusses 4 red flag conditions that could indicate faulty decisionmaking.

Minipodcast (4:59)

For more information, you can access a web site with more resources about “Think Again.” And you can find the complete 20-minute podcast here.

Customers are talking: Why do companies continue to do such dumb stuff?

Friday, August 14th, 2009

Two blog posts struck a chord with me this week. First, Bob Sutton posted on Wal-Mart’s decision to stock Girl-Scout-cookie knockoffs (the delightfully-named “Thin Mint-y Gate“). Then David Pogue provided an update on “Take Back the Beep,” his campaign to get wireless companies to stop playing lengthy introductory messages to callers trying to leave voice mail. Verizon’s ham-handed response fascinated me–especially considering the more mature and enlightened reponses of VZ’s competitors, and the high profile of Pogue’s campaign. Here’s how AT&T handled it, then Verizon:

Mark Siegel, AT&T’s executive director of media relations, wrote with some very encouraging news:

David: All the messages we got from customers really made us look again at how we handle voice mail, and we are going to make some changes. I commend you for raising the issue.

– First, we really appreciate hearing from the thousands of customers who have contacted us.

– As I know you know, any customer with our Visual Voicemail service does not listen to an upfront voicemail message. Today, our iPhone customers enjoy Visual Voicemail. In the near future, we will make Visual Voice Mail available on other devices.

– In the meantime, we are actively exploring how to shorten the voicemail message on our other handsets.

Verizon’s PR contact, Tom Pica, hasn’t responded to my request for a progress report.

He’s probably still irritated at me. When ABC News interviewed him about this campaign, he told them that customers can already turn off the instructions. Which isn’t true. So that night on Twitter, I said that he was lying.

He called me to let me know that he wasn’t lying—he was misquoted. What he said was that you can turn off *voicemail altogether* if you don’t like the 15-second instructions.

Besides the Schadenfreude factor, these stories are notable because they show how isolated large companies are from the outside world. In other words, they are able to take carefully-considered actions that, once revealed in public, are immediately ridiculed and seem perverse and self-defeating. “What were they thinking?” is the only sane response.

But there’s an explanation. Most large companies are hermetically sealed off from the outside world. Within the walls, these decisions don’t seem perverse. They seem sensible and logical. Verizon responded to Pogue’s campaign as an attack, not as a dialogue. They defended, counterattacked, and discredited. Pogue (who of course has the easier job here) retained his considerable sense of humor and used Verizon’s words against them. One can almost feel the VZ spokesperson’s frustration when he claimed he was misquoted–all his tactics conceived inside the company walls had backfired.

This bunker mentality infects companies when they deal with outside criticism. Wal-Mart has learned volumes of lessons on its responses to the environmental movement, union organizing, community protests, etc., and now much more sensitively deals with these outside critics (even learning from them!). However, Thin Mint-y Gate shows how inside-the-walls corporate strategy, obsessively pursued, can create “what were they thinking?” moments.

Sutton writes in his post:

The brilliance –and the Achilles heel — of Wal-Mart is that they talk and act as if the answer to every problem is to use their scale, bargaining power, and speedy implementation to tackle any problem by driving down the price they pay and pass it along to consumers.

Wal-Mart’s strategy has made them the largest retailer on Earth. So they apply it “to every problem” without enough reflection, questioning or dissent. Inside the walls, mint cookies are just another product, not a national symbol of the Girl Scouts.

Companies have increasingly realized that the outside world matters–whether in questions of sustainability, regulation, trade and economic policies, etc. They have groups that do face outward and deal with these issues. But the Wal-Mart case in particular shows that departmental approaches are insufficient.

It’s not enough to open the curtains in one part of the building to let the world (and all its messy opinions, obstacles and arguments) in, while leaving them closed in other parts. The light, too, must penetrate to the very center of the organizations, where people far from the customer, the press and the government continue to drive decisions that, when presented publicly, make their companies look stupid.

It’s time to bring the outside in, indeed.

Related post:
Why are companies so inwardly focused?

Shop Talk Podcast: Sydney Finkelstein on “Think Again”

Tuesday, March 3rd, 2009

I recently finished “Think Again: Why Good Leaders Make Bad Decisions and How to Keep it From Happening to You” and it is my favorite business book of the year so far. Sydney Finkelstein and his co-authors, Jo Whitehead and Andrew Campbell, systematically dissect why we sometimes make and carry through terrible business decisions–whether it’s a poor acquisition decision, an ill-fated product redesign, or even deciding to park our money with Bernie Madoff or Allen Stanford. Even better, they let us know how to create structures that identify possibly faulty decisions in order to avoid them or, at minimum, monitor their outcomes carefully so bad ones can be reversed as quickly as possible.

Syd is a clear, engaging speaker, and was a delight to have on the podcast. Listen in for a 20-minute lesson on how we decide and how we can decide better. The podcast file is here.

Summary:

0:33 – Why studying decisions gone wrong is interesting and useful

1:05 – How our brain’s evolution impacts sound decisionmaking

2:35 – Has the complexity of our businesses outpaced our brain’s ability to keep up?

3:38 – Four red-flag conditions indicating possible faulty decisionmaking

8:03 – Decision-affecting attachments to people, ideas, things

9:20 – Important decisionmaking process safeguards

For more information, you can access a web site with more resources about “Think Again.”

[Theme music: "Up the Coast" by West Indian Girl, from their album "4th & Wall."]

Sometimes crowds aren’t wise

Saturday, January 17th, 2009

I like Surowiecki’s book, a lot, and I have experienced many instances where the collective judgment of a group was far better than even an informed individual. But the “wisdom of crowds” catchphrase is dangerous–oftentimes crowds are not wise at all.

We are experiencing right now an era in which crowds are really dumb. I’m referring to the financial markets and the related economic recession. The financial markets and news affecting the financial markets have merged into a massive echo chamber, wherein bad news begets pessimism which keeps prices down which begets another cycle of bad news.

We’ve seen this in reverse, of course. Do you remember 1998-1999, during which time everyone was watching CNBC or checking Yahoo Finance all day long, in real time assessing the value of their stock portfolios? Oversubscribed IPOs begat good news, which kept prices high, which begat more buying, etc., until it all came crashing down.

I thought it was clear to everyone that market groupthink, which afflicts us in good times and bad, obscured the true value of securities, and therefore paying close attention to news items in order to make sense of the markets and our economy was, at best, a waste of time.

But no. Felix Salmon, in his Portfolio Market Movers blog, points to a Financial Times article introducing us to a service from Reuters that collects news items and alerts traders when news trends indicate potential market movements.

In other words, lean into the echo chamber, and listen real hard for signals you can use to make decisions. Um, it’s only January, but I will bet there’s not a stupider product idea introduced for the rest of 2009.