Defining Business through a longer lens with Sustainable Capitalism...
Check out my first article on Irish Tech News as below:
Showing posts with label Planning. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Planning. Show all posts
Tuesday, 16 August 2016
Wednesday, 20 January 2016
Gifted with hope… The reward of the Continuous Learner
Learning becomes a vocation in life for those who
truly embrace it finding… the value of passion, understanding and purpose
When at school, my main
aim was always the gate, to get home in the evening, the summer holidays and of
course for my ‘education’ to be ‘over’! When I finally completed my secondary
education, I was relieved it was all over and was ready to be an
adult...woohoo.. I’m all “grown up!” <<sigh>> Anyway, I eventually become
a real adult and with it came maturity and perspective. The giddy hum of the
teenage idling mind became a curious, passionate and purposeful drive to find
out more about my place in the world and what my passion is... my “raison
d’etre” if you will. After the Military and Financial Management, I found
a deep passion for Technology and with it a natural curiously for how things
worked. If I had only connected with this sooner???
The irony of wasting
time on things we think others want us to do and then struck for time chasing
our true passions and place in life is nothing new. It’s something we all feel
and the opportunity cost can weigh on us in an unfair manner when we eventually
come to terms with it. At that point, we always look back on that part of our
lives with the clarity of hindsight connecting the dots accurately.
Needless to say, it’s not so easy to be that wise in the moment ergo the
challenge life has laid out for us on our path is duly set. So, how do we
overcome this conundrum and find our passion in what we do before it’s too
late?
After considering this
at length, I have come to some realisations as follows:
- It’s never too late to find your passion and start again. If you find your passion, remember it’s a key ingredient to your happiness.
- Society may expect a certain standard, if its your path to rewrite the book of standards, make sure it’s a good read and you fit into your own narrative.
- For every problem, there is a solution. As Lao Tzu said “a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step”. Analyse and develop a step by step plan to change career and/or occupation and/or lifestyle based on passion, ability and real interests.
- Learn to love the world you’re living in. Be bold and curious about the world and harness your remaining time in it to become richer in character for being here. It’s not enough to skirt past life hoping no-one will see you and/or will not like you... embrace your passion and the world around you with both arms. Without the negative, you can not really live in the positive.
Sources/Credits:
Pics;
Credits;
Wednesday, 6 January 2016
Welcome to 2016 - The 1st Centenary of the Irish Rebellion, but are we keeping up with the Times?
Bringing the best and leaving the rest at the door of
2016, the lessons from the Irish experience, which can be of benefit to all…
When I thought of 2016
as a year to come, the lotto gave way to wider thoughts about Irish society;
past, present and future. Given 2016 is the 1st centenary year of the 1916
Irish rebellion that started a chain of events leading to partial Independence
from the United Kingdom in 1921 and full independence as an Irish Republic in
1937, the lessons learnt from Irish tragedies and triumphs over the last 100
years came into focus.
Michael Collins was a
true Irish Patriot and a warrior for doing what is right both in war and in
peace. He had a vision for Ireland that certainly has not being realised to
date given the recently uncovered corruption and collusion between partners
best kept apart. This at times has risen to outrageous exploitation of the
ordinary citizen trying to put food on the table, maybe find a little happiness
and live their lives with a fair ounce of common decency. 10 days before he
died in 1923, Michael Collins said of the economy: “Our object in building up the country economically must not be
lost sight of. That object is not to be able to boast of enormous wealth or of
a great volume of trade for their own sake. It is not to see our country
covered with smoking chimneys and factories. It is not to show a great national
balance sheet, nor to point to a people producing wealth with the
self-obliteration of a hive of bees. The real riches of the Irish nation will
be the men and women of the Irish nation the extent to which they are rich in
body and mind and character."
This oratory hit home at
what it means to be Irish. He embraced our relationship based society
for its strengths and harnessed the protection of the longer term future even
at the expense of short term gain so that our children’s children may enjoy a
sustainable elevation in lifestyle, income, and quality of life in context to the Irish nation. His views had
a strong socialist orientation but were sharply prudent in fiscal matters along
with a mastery of economics that was not lost on his fellow Founders nor his
other contemporaries of the day. Fairness, equality, literacy, art, exploration
of knowledge through the sciences and international trade strongly featured in
the vision Michael Collins had for the the new Irish state and its future.
So, if that was the
past, it’s now fair to say we live in a present where many rightly highlight
the growing gap between rich and poor along with the slowing migration to the
middle class that would otherwise make our nation complete. They highlight the
catastrophic failures over the last two decades in particular that make 2016 a
year of remembrance of what our forefathers went through to make us custodians
of our own house. It also sets a challenge for us in the present to restore the
founder’s spirit and fair intent so that we all may see that fair future coming
down the tracks for our children to enjoy.
My own thoughts draw
many conclusions that are useful for the future ranging from learnt lessons at
a national and local level to a personal level. Here are my top 5 that all
could use wherever they are in the world:
- Integrity - Governments should recognise people as people, companies as companies and never ever mix the two when it comes to politics. As custodians of the public trust, lobbying companies need to take second place to the welfare of the people in all cases. ‘In the public interest’ needs to be reconstituted in this light so it rightously regains public trust
- Separation of Concerns - Private industry needs to remain private noting it must protect itself through 1st party means from market downturns and not rely on public money to “bail them out” ever again
- Productivity - Public industry needs to become owners of their own future and self motivated drivers of improvements from within so that in-house expertise is developed. This expertise then creates value so that every action at the very least negates waste
- Fairness - Those who give the most should not get the most, but get what is due. There is no point in being the richest man in the cemetery, especially when it is at the unnecessary expense of our fellow citizen. We need to accept the honour of creating value for our people that when we put food on our table, the fruits of our labour are efficiently redistributed to our kin who have not being as lucky as we have. If tweaked until done right, our public services can become a hand up and not a hand out for those down on their luck and in need of mother Ireland’s help.
- Culture - Our departure from socially conscious culture towards an ego centric culture is something we must reverse. The credit crises of 2007/08+ was not the shock, but an escalation of the shock that our fellow countrymen felt in the early 1990s when real money often in the form of credit was visited upon the real Irish citizen. Those in power need to protect those not able to do anything for them and ensure that they are not preyed upon by unscrupulous captains of villainy that hail from the four corners of Ireland and the globe. The ability of our culture to march forward with honour depends on a reassertion of our socially orientated culture. We need to do what is right bearing in mind the consequences for all in every decision.
I have passed many
homeless guys over the year just gone and apologised for not being able to
afford a few pennies to give to them knowing that the act of directly donating
such monies would not make a difference. However, the respect of apologising to
them may just may make a difference in their lives. Who is to say that the guy
begging may not connect with this real self and re-find his humanity through my
own by simply paying him the respect of talking to him? If our society moves in
that direction, we all can reconnect with our clan roots and just maybe that
guy begging could become something new and influence a positive change in our
future that no-one ever saw coming. If I have learnt anything in this life,
it’s that our future is not pre-ordained, its chiselled out by the characters
of those in the present. This fact can make the next 100 years a golden age for
Ireland, a nation that in 2016 is celebrating 100 years, yet going on 7000
years old. I think it’s time we acted our age! What do you think.. do you
agree??...
Sources/Credits:
Pics;
Credits;
Michael Collins Quote at
Rare Irish Stuff: http://www.rareirishstuff.com/collins-collection-limited-edition/michael-collins-portrait.5433.html
Quality of Life
Definition at: http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/quality-of-life
Tuesday, 3 June 2014
Giver/Taker Cultures... the misery trap hitting your company’s bottom line?
Attitude!!...
What inspires some is despised by others...
I always loved the motto in the
three musketeers movie “all for one, and one for all!!”… Hooray for good
ethics, collaboration and professional skill winning out the day!!... I cannot
say “the Cardinal of the Red Guard” character in the movie would agree
though!!... Apparently, in his world, collaboration and fellowship are ugly
words!
So, what is giver/taker culture,
why is it important for sustainable business and how can we manage the cultural
concepts? The Giver Taker culture is a
ranged cultural focus on collaboration and mutual assistance or self-interest and manipulation to
achieve goals and objectives in a group setting. In 2008, Bill Gates said, “there are two great
forces of human nature—self-interest and caring for others.” He was right as it describes the giver taker
culture, which has being defined after 9/11 to try and capture the reasons for
the US Intelligence failures that led to the single largest loss of life due to
a foreign attack on United State’s soil. The team of Harvard psychologists led
by Richard Hackman investigated the phenomenon and in their findings, the
“giver take culture" was born.
One of the more notable
characteristics of the model is its effective simplicity. The model is designed
into three main classifications as follows:
Giver (team
player/contributor/assist without expectation of reward/collaborative)
Matcher (will assist for equal reward or return assist/never gives more
then they receive/fearful to support any action against “taking” behaviour)
Taker (individualistic/always looks to take ungratefully/no feeling of
obligation to assist/self centred/autocratic)
The model based on the Harvard
research goes into to say that givers are recessive to the value exchange with
takers and thus become targeted by takers. It also says that givers do not do
well in a “taker culture” whereas takers tend to do well for a period of time
in a giver culture at the expense of givers, which can seriously damage and disrupt
a company with a giver culture. Matcher's tend to do well in a taker culture
given their adversity to team assistance for fear of being targeted by takers.
They also can do well in giver cultures given their more relaxed but matching
behaviours that provides limited team support based on the environment as they
see it.
 |
| Professor Adam Grant |
A foremost expert on giver taker
culture in my view is Adam Grant, a
Wharton Professor and Psychologist who said in a McKinsey & Co article
about giver teams “In the highest-performing teams, analysts invested extensive time and
energy in coaching, teaching, and consulting with their colleagues.” He is very correct, the human touch in
leadership, strategy and operations makes for the utilisation of employee
potential in a collaborative group setting leading to higher performance,
outputs and sustainable results over time. Conversely, a taker culture is more
inward and self-centred leaving little room for actions that don’t lead to gain
for the individual in a taker environment. This suits more hierarchy and market
based organisational cultures where taker cultures tend to be less focused on the person and more on
the vertical structure or the transaction. The giver culture on the other hand
is more relevant to adhocracy and clan
cultures where
collaboration and people are the cultural focus. The resulting cultural blends
lead to very impacting performance levels especially in organisations that have
service or quality aspects to their product range and/or internal infrastructures.
Shall we do some
research on your company to see if its giver or taker culture works in the
wider company culture? Ok, let’s do
this! So starting out does your company culture generally focus on:
- 1. Transaction processing by any means possible at lowest cost (Market Culture)?
- 2. Focus on process and one-way communication from the top down in a command in control type structure (Hierarchy Culture)?
- 3. Focus on collaboration and flatter structure of management with scope for project management being done efficiency (Adhocracy Culture)?
- 4. Focus strongly on people and relationships to the point where strong bonds of fellowship exist in definable social groups throughout the organisation (Clan Culture)?
No company just does one of the above;
it’s a game of averages in any estimation. However, if your overall sense of
what your company does fits into one of the above, then you are in business to
proceed to see how the human element inputs into the culture blend
[giver/taker]. So do you and fellow employees generally:
- a. Assist each other without thinking about what you get in return on a regular basis?
- b. Feel and display concern for your fellow employees seeing the business in people terms as much as process and results terms?
- c. Interact informally with ranks above and below you in a two-way communicative collaborative style?
- d. Resolve differences through mutual negotiation and respectful dialogue?
If the above answers to questions “a” through to “d” are positive and match your identification of your companies overall cultural focus in question 3 and/or 4, then there is a good chance you have good cultural alignment to people behaviours and thus can expect sustainability and productivity to be of a good standard. You enjoy a giver culture in a flexible, service and/or creative/innovative oriented industry. The biggest threat to a giver culture is takers. The best defence against takers whom can act like a cancer of negativity and distrust in a giver culture is exclusion. Keep them out at selection stage by developing a selection process that effectively identifies the personality traits through psychometric testing, competence based testing and at least 2 rounds of competence based interviewing. Scenario tests are recommended for selection testing in a giver culture, which should be led in a consultative manner in my view. Bear in mind “matchers” can also do well in the above setting.
On taker cultures, do you and
fellow employees generally:
- a. Wait for the boss on all “real decisions” whether big or small for fear of making a mistake or upsetting the boss?
- b. Rarely see each other as friends and bonds of fellowship, which are formed, are often founded on respect for negative actions to others in your career path? Is this seen as contributing to a ‘powerful’ reputation?
- c. Have little concern for the bad luck, plight and distress of others as it’s a “dog eat dog world”?
- d. Place greater weighing on what your boss tells you then what you did historically or how it can be done in a better and more efficient manner?
If the above answers to questions “a” through to “d” are positive and match your identification of your companies overall cultural focus in question 1 and/or 2, then there is a good chance your have good cultural alignment to a market culture and/or hierarchy culture which is focused on one way communication, command in control type tasking with your role being more a fulfiller rather then a value adder. This is suitable in industries that change slowly, are consolidated and have a high transactional focus in their day-to-day business, which can clearly be procedurally driven. Once again, selection processes for taker cultures can accept matchers as functional to the success of the organisation. Personality testing should be part of the process to ensure the balance between giver, matcher and taker is enough to add an extra layer of sustainability to the employee mix in your organisation.
In my article on Sustainable Capitalism, I talked about capitalism needing an upgrade to match the faster
moving environment of today and the refocus on people in context to the
organisation, which should be every company’s no 1 focus. This is relevant when
you think how the proliferation of “takers” in teams across the US intelligence
community led to information hoarding, inefficiency and mistrust that in
aggregate created a material breach in US national security and 911. Companies
face a similar sustainability threat from too many takers or any at all
depending on the overall company culture. With awareness of the above, the path ahead and
what they want to be as a company can be chartered making sustainable
capitalism an attractive proposition for the employee, not to mention the
company’s bottom line, longevity and top line growth into the future.
Wednesday, 21 May 2014
Organisational Flexibility, the rise of the Matrix Management Structure
Today's
silo, tomorrows competitive edge!!..
I once asked about the profitability of
a product when considering extra payment terms to indirect suppliers in a cross
functional meeting, and the Marketing Manager looked at me like I had just
killed his first born son! I thought I best not pursue the issue at the time
for fear that I be accosted by twenty sword yielding ninjas on my way home
making it an even fight!
Upon more serious reflection of such
defensiveness and numerous subsequent articles on Matrix Management structures, I have reviewed the core vertical
management structure/silo concept as established over time by classical management theory and wondered if a need for simple
accountability has become an inhibitor to organisational flexibility in today’s
increasingly dynamic marketplace?
 |
| Source: Vertex 42
http://www.vertex42.com/ExcelTemplates/organizational-chart.html
|
Considering this, it is not hard to see
why others have sought a solution to this problem, which has arisen in recent
years due to the rise in technology as an integrated platform operating in
business. Matrix management’s rise has also being aided by globalisation and
the integration of advanced marketing strategies into big data models
identifying market threats and opportunities much earlier then has been in
times past. The need for responsive change through project management has
become the norm in industries like technology, construction and government
agencies that have dealt with fast changing market places for some years prior
to other industries.
Matrix Management Structures have arisen initially through these
industries but as technology based disruptor's reach more and more markets, the
need to be more flexible in today’s marketplace creates a competitive edge and
can become a matter of survival if left too late to plan for and adopt
organisational structures like the Matrix Management structure. It makes vertical structures less ‘silo’ and
more ‘contributor’ to common goals set by the senior leadership in a dynamic
marketplace. Matrix’d management should be managed by a cadre of high calibre
functional and programme managers working together to common objectives rather
then at odds, which often arises when perceived centres of power are challenged
by often well-intended colleagues trying to do their jobs as they perceive
them.
It sounds simple right? Well when
thinking about the ‘vertical management silo’ we think of the following:
- · Good accountability
- · Good downward communication of goals, objectives and tasks
- · Good visibility of ‘vertical silo’ activity
When we think of ‘matrix management
structures’ we think of:
- · Good project charters and functional modus of operation
- · Flexibility to handle organisational and/or market change quickly
- · Close collaboration on a horizontal level with layered visibility from the top down
It is reasonable to think if we lay out
our expectations, the organisational benefits would be directly responsible for
a world-class organisation? If so, then why are so many struggling with the need
for more organisational flexibility and the matrix management structure as a
model? The reasons vary from organisation to organisation but I would offer the
following points to consider when looking at one’s company in a matrix
management model.
ü
People
make or break organisations, the matrix management model is people centric, so
consider the model in terms of talent management, corporate culture and how
accepting functional managers are to the influence and responsibilities a
project manager would have in any change initiative. Without awareness and acceptance by all parties, the matrix
management structure becomes dysfunctional and ineffective over time.
ü
Ensure
the whole organisation is on board, not just one silo or a group of silos. The
sponsor of a matrix management structure needs to be at the very top and the
follow through needs to be executed at the same level downwards to successfully
re-orientate the vertical silos to the matrix management structure in a planned
manner so everybody feels secure and accepts their organisational roles into
the future.
ü
Ensure
the programme/project management structures are appropriately positioned to effect
change and improvement in support of, rather then in conflict with functional
silos.
ü
Matrix
Management structures offer flexibility but make accountability difficult in
complex areas of the business. Make sure the accountability is executed
collaboratively using technological means to secure progress and milestone metrics
on project and functional areas of
operation. The synergy of accountability means projects are managed clearly and
collaboratively, as are functional areas. Change management from autocratic management
can be difficult but it’s necessary if matrix management structures are to work
effectively.
ü Never consider matrix management
structures as an end, but a means to a new modus of operation. The requirements
need to be carefully considered against internal readiness, market place
dynamics and the strategic plans for the future. Engaging matrix management
structures against a narrow window of project management need only will prove
problematic and subject to a very high fail risk.
The need to be focused on people in such
an increasingly dynamic marketplace has never being so apparent since the 1980s
when the last “big push” was on moving the landscape in business. This time,
its faster, more dramatic and more impacting leaving those whom balance vision
and flexibility with organisational dogma standing into the future. The key
always has and always will be people. To quote Debra J. Devine “If we are
going to live with our deepest differences then we must learn about one
another”. In order to do that we must saddle collaborative leadership practice
and culture with a customised matrix model transforming the way we live, work
and interact with each other building sustainable business into the future.
Monday, 5 May 2014
Entrepreneurship, there's no time like the present!
Entrepreneurs, a story of Innovation
and rebirth!!..
Our economic outlook after the epically
acclaimed banking crises along with subsequent economic “recessions” is
finally looking like it’s changing with a positive growth trajectories ahead in
key macroeconomic indicators across the globe. Business wheels of all sizes are starting to move a little easier and positivity is
creeping back albeit cautiously given the state of our world today.
Many successful people whom I respect in
business for their vision and achievements like Richard
- a Feasibility. Is my idea, product or service one that is commercially developable in a specific market niche? Is there a market for my end product? Am I a market disruptor? Is my product susceptible to market disruption?
- b Component parts of success. Is my business idea going to be ‘successful to market’ in the start up phase and if so, how? Will my success be based on what I put in place, or is circumstance affording me a lucky break? The former bodes well for a sustainable success story if predominant in ones conclusions. The latter will always feature in a success story, but if the predominant element, the story may well be short lived if successful changes/timely additions are not made/added to the business.
- c Internal engine. What will be the business model for my idea? Do I have a business plan detailing the product plan(s), organisational structures and business processes both now and into the future as the business grows? Are my growth projection metrics comparing reasonably to my competitors?
- d External structure. What will my enterprise look like 5 years from now? On envisioning size, will it be just 10 others, and/or just me or shall it be a national operation or international operation? The reasoning being that if one start’s with the end in mind, they will have chartered a journey that is a vision to be shared with those they bring on board. Early employ’s are critical to the success of a growing business especially when you share your vision.
- e Risk Management. Is there a clear understanding of internal risks, financial and non-financial along with external risks such as market risks, country risks, political risks, etc? A detailed and comprehensive risk register should be established in the planning stages, which should influence the strategy, internal structures and operational processes of the enterprise.
- f Values. Will what I am translate into a set of values for my enterprise? Only if one proactively thinks about it and maps it out. What values are kernel/core thus should be inserted as unchangeable into the business. I would also think about values in three areas, firstly the core/kernel ones that will guide the business to success or failure but will never change. The second being values that are not core or challenge core values thus are changeable to facilitate sustainable market success. Finally, one should consider how one imports new values and discards existing ones along the way. The two layers of values along with the process should form part of the enterprise mission statement.
- g Finance. What financing is best? A kernel question for the entrepreneur who should consider very carefully the above points and drill down into the detail identifying contingencies for funding along the way. In this process, one should think about all the elements (business size, scalability, product demand, market access, market penetration, organisational structure, future plans) and then look at the cost/supply side of the enterprise seeing what finance is needed, how it will be got (loans/overdrafts/government agency backing/ equity from operations/venture capital/private equity/etc.) achieving the best “financial fit” for the organisation. When dealing with finance, be very aware of the trade offs for finance both now and into future on the basis of what will it cost in finance and non finance terms like cost of finance through future growth phases, FX risk, loss of business decision making control, etc. Your conclusions should be compatible with your overall business model, values, strategic plans and approach to market both present and future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)