The Immediacy trap

“Immediacy” is perhaps the watch-word to describe the way in which our society works.  Communication is so instant that we expect reaction to the communication to be just as quick, and this expectation of virtually instantaneous reaction can be a death trap for those not adequately prepared for it.

Just think what would have happened last week had the MLA properly prepared for the predictable backlash from the 4 Corners program. Rather than a muted response, David Palmer (MD) and other stakeholders in the industry should have been out there, TV, blogs, twitter, U-Tube, et al,  with stories, pictures, and commentary that articulated the facts on a personal level, with emotion, and honesty.

There is an alternative view to the sensationally emotional 4 Corners story. There is a modest number of very good abattoirs that process a substantial majority of the animals sent to Indonesia, many of the smaller works, whilst not perfect, are working towards better standards, the local employment around the feedlots and works in Indonesia adds substantially to the local economy, the success of the investment MLA has made over many years to lift standards, the care Australian farmers and logistics suppliers take, and so on. Had this story been well told, we may not have had the level of knee-jerk we have had, and the attention would have been focused on how to improve the minority of the trade in Indonesia that is substandard, rather than a total ban which throws years of work, an important industry  in Indonesia and Australia, and the relationship with the biggest neighbor we have against the wall.

Even better, knowing it was coming, use all the electronic tools of the immediacy generation to get the message out there in front of the 4 Corners program going to air to further mitigate the dumb, emotional knee-jerk we are now seeing in the community. Whilst a bit was done, it is bland, unemotional, scripted stuff with no emotional connection, and clearly sets out to arse-cover, rather than tell the story in a memorable way. It failed at both.

What was delivered to our couches last week was pictures of the worst of the worst, highly effective, emotional shock tactics that achieved their objective. The lesson for the rest of us is to prepare for the worst, while  hoping for the best, because when the worst happens, your response has to be convincing and immediate.

Root causes of success

A basic discipline of Lean Thinking is the quest for the root cause of a problem, enabling a solution to treat the disease, not just the symptoms.

The converse discipline, seeking the root cause of success so that it can be understood, articulated and used to build repeatable processes is far less commonly used, but no less important.

Many years ago as a young product manager, I  was on the periphery of the creation of Meadow Lea’s iconic “you ought to be congratulated” advertising.  As the success of the advertising which emerged from a brave combination of consumer research and creative insight became evident, a lot of effort was put into assembling a detailed understanding of the dynamics at work that drove the success, so we could ensure it continued whilst being expressed sufficiently differently to remain fresh to consumers .

I have never forgotten the lesson.

Unfortunately, the more recent management of the current owners of the brand, Goodman Fielder, have forgotten the lessons if they ever knew them, proving again the value of corporate memory, and the effort it takes to institutionalise it, turn it into the culture of the place,  rather than allowing it remain in peoples heads, only to have them move on.

The thinking can be as important as doing

Consider, what the people on the production line are thinking about right now, finishing work, the fishing trip on the weekend, the necessity to get the car fixed and registered by next Monday, how can they pay that huge electricity bill, the game last night?

Think how much more productive it would be if they were thinking about how to do the job better, quicker, with less rejects, less risk of injury, to tighter more consistent specs?

And then consider weather or not it is a failure of the management culture that they are not doing so?

Googles 20% time, the famous 3M time, works for them, why not for everyone?

It is not easy to engage employees in this way, very few are able to do it, which is exactly why it is worth doing, as it delivers a huge advantage.

Agenda management

Setting an agenda for a meeting is a crucial but easily dismissed management tool, although the capacity of the chairman to stick to it plays a role in how effective the meeting becomes.

When setting an agenda, it is useful to consider the interaction of the thee basic reasons for having a meeting:

To impart information

To collaborate and build knowledge

To gain permission for a course of action.

Often meetings have these things mixed up, creating confusion, so being clear about the role of an agenda item, and grouping them together by their function can be extremely useful.  Better still, have three meetings, but often this is not practical, as in a board meeting, or complex negotiation, so create breaks in the proceedings as you proceed from one form to another.

 

 

“Five S” misused

The lean tool, 5s, is often a starting point for lean implementation. It makes sense, as on the surface, it is relatively easy, “straighten, sweep, set, standardise, and sustain”, but it is this last bit that catches people out.

A clean, tidy workplace with everything in its marked place is great, a good start, but in itself, it is a bit like having your 15 year old son clean his room, looks nice, but doesn’t  necessarily convert him from computer games to his poetry homework.

A lean implementation is hard, detailed, collaborative work requiring time, commitment and leadership, if it is to make an impact on work flow, changeover times, preventive maintanence programs, inventory management, safety, and all the other things that go to make up a lean workplace. Unfortunately, it cannot be sufficiently simplified to make any PowerPoint presentation any more than a superficial representation, an awareness builder. 

So next time someone pulls out a slick presentation designed to part you from your money, consider the  real work that needs to be done, and dismiss the hyperbole for what it is, hyperbole. You need to be prepared to knuckle down to some hard work to get anything useful and sustainable done, or just leave it all alone, save yourself some money and sweat, and just continue to bumble along.   

Something old is new again.

It is a bit ironic to think that in the midst of the information revolution that is surrounding us, that we are in some ways reverting to the ways of pre-agricultural humans.

Bit of a stretch? Just think, pre-agricultural humans lived by what they knew, where the water was, how to track an animal, then kill, dress, and cook it, which plants were edible, and so on. There were no personal possessions, everything was shared, and the group succeeded or failed  by group effort and their relative position in their environment.

We moved away from this collaborative model as we started to grow things and gain possessions, but in the information revolution we are going through now, perhaps we are going back to some of the foundations of what made hunter-gathers sufficiently successful to evolve into us. 

If this is the case, maybe we should be looking at the social and organisational behaviours that made hunter gatherers so successful. Forget the strategists, bring in the anthropologists.