Innovation: How to see the invisible problem.

Innovation: How to see the invisible problem.

Evolution has given us this ability to act on ‘autopilot’, or habit, while subconsciously remaining attuned to our surroundings. Our brains have limited capacity, so it needs to save as much as it can to allow it the space to deal with the unexpected, crises.

Our ancestor woman while walking to the stream on autopilot is thinking about getting the water, wondering what the hunters might bring back for dinner, and how to keep the kids in the cave. A slight rustle in the grass, will immediately focus all her attention on where it came from, adrenaline rushing, just in case it is a predator.

This autopilot mode is highly beneficial for efficiency. It is the way we evolved. It frees up cognitive capacity for more immediately important things, consigning to habit the things that do not require the effort of thought.

It also obstructs innovation.

In our modern world, the predators in the grass have been largely eliminated, so we are not subconsciously looking for them anymore, and our situational awareness has degraded, creating ‘blind spots’. This prevents us from seeing opportunities for innovation. The problems we learn to work around become invisible, and the solutions we become accustomed to seem unchangeable.

Take luggage as an example. For decades, travellers endured dragging heavy suitcases through airports. In two iterations, 16 years apart, two people, thinking from first principles which is often an antidote to habitual thinking, added wheels. Vacuum cleaners all lost suction as their bags filled, until James Dyson challenged the accepted norm. The QWERTY keyboard, originally designed to prevent mechanical typewriters from jamming, is still used today despite its inefficiencies for modern typing.

Seeing hidden problems that become opportunities requires intentional, conscious practice.

  • Regularly ask yourself, “Why do we do things this way?” Document even small points of friction. Observe how others interact with products or processes and take note of any struggles or workarounds.
  • Approach familiar tasks as though you are experiencing them for the first time. Seek perspectives from individuals outside your field.
  • Question assumptions, especially those that are widely accepted without scrutiny.
  • Step away from problems periodically and return to them with fresh eyes. Study analogous challenges in other industries. Try explaining processes to a child—their innocent questions often expose hidden assumptions.

To innovate effectively, we need to develop our ‘peripheral awareness’: the ability to notice opportunities on the fringes of our focus. This requires maintaining a state of relaxed alertness, where you are engaged in the present task but also open to noticing details that others may overlook. I use my phone and notebook to note interesting things on the go. I regularly transfer these cryptic notes into an ‘ideas bank’ kept in One-note on my computer.

Every major innovation begins with someone questioning the status quo.

The next time you find yourself thinking, “That’s just the way it is,” take a moment to challenge that assumption. You could be on the verge of a significant discovery. While our brain’s efficiency is a valuable asset, it can also limit our potential. By honing our peripheral vision for innovation, we can transform these mental shortcuts from obstacles into pathways for creative thinking and, hopefully, distinctive, and innovative solutions.

9 questions to avoid a poor hiring decision.

9 questions to avoid a poor hiring decision.

 

 

The cost of a wrong hire is huge, and for an SME can be devastating. Not only do you lose the money put into the process, but you also lose the time of those engaged, the opportunity to find that perfect candidate, and perhaps most importantly, the damage that a wrong hire can do for the implementation of the key activities for which they were hired to do.

The damage that a wrong hire can do to those remaining and the culture of the organisation after the problem is fixed can also be devastating.

There are a lot of fancy consultants out there with all sorts of testing regimes that claim to uncover the best candidate. They can add considerable value when used well.

However, we humans evolved successfully by being able to pick those with whom we could work harmoniously and productively, those who could earn our trust, and on whom we could rely. While we make mistakes, trusting our instincts drawn out by that most primitive of communication methods, talking, is the real test.

Over the years I have done a lot of recruiting for those for whom I worked, as a manager and advisor. Not all worked, mistakes are made, but a significant majority went on to add great value to their employers.  When you make a mistake, recognising it early, and correcting it quickly benefits both parties in the long run. However, there are a range of conversation starters, often called questions, which can reveal the ‘fit’ a candidate will have with, and the contribution they can make to an organisation.

Why are you here today? This can reveal the personal motivation of the candidate, rather than enabling them to just respond about the skills they bring to the role. It turns it around to look at the ‘why’ they are seeking a new job.  Having a real motivating driver is way better than just a general, ‘I need a job’ sort of response.

How would you like to be remembered? This can be asked in several ways, so that the response to those with whom you worked, and those to whom you were linked in more personal ways.

Would you rather be respected, liked, or feared? Often the response to this can reveal the leadership style they have, or believe they have. There is no right answer, but the ‘fit’ to the context of the role they may be walking into is important.

How would those around you now describe your personality and management style?

Very few are able with any accuracy to see themselves through the eyes of others. However, the response to this question can tell you a lot about their own self- image.

What would your current boss say if I rang him asking for a reference?

As with the question about how their peers would describe them, this question goes to their self-image. It also will provide cues about how they relate to the formal hierarchy

Tell me about the times you have failed? This question often puts people off, as they are cued into thinking about the success they have had, and how they might translate into the environment for which they are interviewing. Failing is a part of learning, and you can learn a lot from a conversation about the failures of a candidate, what led to them, how they responded, how they worked themselves out of the hole. And indeed, is it one of the failures that led them to be sitting in front of you now?

What did you want to be when you were a kid? This one can be a good conversation starter, and lead to discussion about the path towards where they are now, and why they took the choices they did along the way

Show me how you walk the talk. A conversation will always reveal what people want to be revealed, particularly the more personal things, hobbies, personal style, passions they may have commented on, so I dig into them. Once while interviewing for a plant engineer, I asked a candidate that question, and his response was along the lines that he was able to get people on the line to talk freely to him, to help him diagnose problems and opportunities they faced every day. Then he surprised me by saying ‘let me show you’. He stood up, grabbed a dust coat and hat from the stand in the corner of my office, and said let’s go. We walked into the plant where he demonstrates conclusively the ability he had just spoken about. He did a terrific job for a number of years afterwards, before being poached for a much bigger job, which he also did with distinction.

Can you tell me a joke? I would leave that to late in the day, but it can reveal how well they think on their feet, and communicate in an awkward environment, and connect to those with whom they are communicating.

 

Header cartoon credit: Dilbert’s mate aces an interview question: courtesy Scott Adams.

 

 

The critical trade-off made in a remote work environment.

The critical trade-off made in a remote work environment.

 

Amongst the tsunami of gratuitous advice on the web about how to manage remotely, whether you be the team leader, or a team member, there is a critical piece missing.

Depth of strategic thinking.

Regular and managed team video gatherings, as well as a range of individual catch ups for assistance, follow up, mentoring, and all the other things that go on, are tactical.

Particularly in times of crisis and high stress, it is sensible and natural to focus on tactical execution. However, tactical can only take you so far, and in the absence of a strategic framework, can lead you astray quickly.

Consider breaking out specific sessions for the discussion of the strategic issues and questions that emerge. They remain in place irrespective of the current crisis, whatever that may be.

Strategic depth is not something generated in a series of quick meetings. It requires data, forecasts, scenarios and deep discussion and contemplation by people who know the box from the outside, as well as from the inside.

These deeper questions of strategy usually reside in the ‘very important but not urgent‘ basket. In the absence of being addressed, they will be forgotten. Worse still, they will be over-ridden by short term tactical outcomes that would not have been allowed to evolve with sensible strategic oversight in place.

We are social animals, our best work is done when people get together, and together look to solve problems and pressure test assumptions. This takes time and human engagement.  Verbalisation of ideas, questions, and explanations is only a small part of ‘Communication’. Face to face, there are a myriad of non-verbal nuances and contextual contributors to ‘communication’ that are lost over Zoom or Teams.

Failing to accommodate these human interactions will destroy your capacity to generate the insight necessary for deep and productive strategic thinking.

Header credit: Tom Fishburne at Marketoonist. Thanks again for encapsulating a difficult idea in a cartoon.

 

 

 

The huge cost that never shows up in the accounts.

The huge cost that never shows up in the accounts.

Opportunity cost.

The mistakes you make of Commission are the ones by which performance is judged. They show up in a profit and loss and balance sheets of businesses. However, when you pass up a golden opportunity that turns out to be a winner, that ‘cost of potential profit’ does not show up anywhere.

It is a mistake of omission, not commission.

Those of us who failed to buy Apple shares when they were less than a dollar in 2003, and similarly, NVIDIA shares when they were $1.30, might see a missed opportunity. Both now trade at well over 100 times those prices.

However, such mistakes are acceptable when the opportunity is outside what Warren Buffett calls a ‘Circle of competence’. This is the area where you have the expertise to understand the opportunity being offered, but fail to accept it.

In the case of Apple and Nvidia, they are both outside my circle of competence. Therefore, I did not know enough to recognise the opportunity. Had I been immersed in the IT industry it might have been clearer.

Buffett’s seven rules for successful investing, summarised, are:

  • Hire only intelligent people with integrity.
  • Pay attention to facts, not emotions.
  • Buy wonderful businesses, but not ‘cigar butts’
  • Buy only stocks you understand.
  • Seize the opportunity.
  • Don’t sell because of price fluctuations.
  • Buy stocks below what they are worth.

Passing up an opportunity that turns out to be something you should have grabbed, with the benefit of hindsight, means you have failed to give yourself an adequate answer to one, or more, of three simple questions.

  • How much cash would the opportunity deliver to you?
  • When are you going to get it?
  • How sure are you?

Buffett and his late side-kick Charlie Munger are widely seen as geniuses. I suspect Mr Buffett would be embarrassed by that label. He might respond that all he did was follow the simple 7 rules, something most cannot do.

Is Institutional memory the critical component of future success?

Is Institutional memory the critical component of future success?

Today, September 1, 2024, is the 85th anniversary of the German invasion of Poland in 1939.

There are very few people left alive who were old enough at the time to remember that critical date that drove the world into an orgy of destruction, death, and depravity.

Over time we tend to lose the instinctive understanding of the context, circumstances, and drivers of events. This increases the risk that we fail to learn, so we repeat our mistakes. In short, our institutional memory fades, becomes distorted, and is often rewritten.

There is evidence of this all around us.

  • After the French conceded defeat and left Vietnam, the US went in, believing they could win.
  • The US again, (who deliver us numerous examples), thought their invasion of Afghanistan would work better than the Russian one. Like the Russians and British before them, they failed to have any understanding of the tribal, ethnic and historical context of Afghanistan, so were destined to repeat their mistakes.
  • Few saw the 2008 financial crisis coming, despite the intensively researched similarities to the lead-up to the 1929 crash.
  • The litany of failure of appeasement as a strategy to harness the aggression of regimes in Europe going back to the Romans. ‘Peace in our time’ sounded good on Chamberlin’s return from Berlin, but was empty hope.

We see it in our personal lives every day.

That bully in the schoolyard is not going to stop being a bully by having the tactic proving to be continually successful.

30 years ago, I left corporate employment, suddenly, after 10 years of accumulating market knowledge, experience, and ‘gut-feel’ insight. I was replaced by a group that had no such knowledge and insight, and who for the next few years made utterly predictable mistakes. This is despite the records left in a great big storage box filled as my former office was cleaned out, and in the heads of my former colleagues, but disregarded.

When we lose institutional memory, we are almost destined to repeat the mistakes of the past. This applies equally to individuals as it does to businesses, families, institutions, and countries.

So, how do we best avoid repeating the mistakes of the past?

Rely on data. This requires intentional and effective documentation and archiving of material. It must articulate the varying views and perspectives and their logical base, the hypotheses generated, tested, reviewed, implemented, and the outcomes of implementation tied back to cause-and-effect chains. In effect deliver yourself a searchable OODA loop for reference.

Leverage technology. The above step used to be a monumental undertaking, but current and emerging technology makes it not just easily doable, but a competitive and strategic necessity.

Knowledge transfer and mentorship. Culturally, there must be a recognition of the value not just of having the information but building on it and sharing widely. This takes a particular skill in leadership that builds a culture of learning and trust.

The successful corporations of the future will avoid repeating the mistakes of the past, which leads to erosion of their values and culture. They will see individual and group productivity and innovation as the two necessary sides of the same coin. They will navigate the tensions created by the order and repeatability of optimisation, with the messy and uncertain terrain of innovation.

They will not be able to succeed in the absence of that critical component, institutional memory.

Today is also Fathers day, a triumph of marketing by the Hallmark card company.

Lest we forget.

‘Nest’ your strategy for best results

‘Nest’ your strategy for best results

George Patton is reputed to have said ‘A good strategy today is far better than a perfect one tomorrow.

This is absolutely correct. However, any strategy is only as good as its deployment. This is always  best when it is clearly understood, consistently communication, and completely aligned towards the objective.

Business is all about making choices, from the c-suite to the factory floor, everyone is faced with choices. Those in the c-suite may be different to those on the floor, but they are nevertheless choices that together impact on the performance of the business.

‘I will do this, I will not do that’

While seeking rhythm and flow in a business, I also look for ‘strategic nesting’

How will the choices made at one level be understood and acted on at different levels in the business in a consistent manner, such that the outcomes do not create turbulence in the flow of activities that occurs.

The challenge of integrating ‘Flow’ into a smooth set of processes that merge at the points where they intersect is substantial. This is where the notion of ‘nesting’ comes into play.

Processes are ‘nested’ in sets of sub processes that are all ‘in synch’ and contribute to the end outcome.

Often this is called alignment, but just using the term without the further idea of ‘nesting’ misses the point. Alignment is one dimensional, nesting is multidimensional.

Effective processes contain sub processes that act in partnership creating synergy, and when done really well, compounding outcomes. Each part of the ‘nest’ is optimized, internally, and in relation to those external parts on which it depends. This enables the optimization of the whole to be compounded.

Effective processes, from the strategic development and implementation to the cleaning of the coffee machine, rely on the effective nesting of sub processes.

The implementation of strategy is always challenging. You are translating high level choices into sets of cascading targets in functional action plans with appropriate KPI’s and feedback loops for optimisation. There are multiple levels from a strategic plan to the execution of daily activities in the workplace for things to fall out of the nest.

The evolution of a ‘happy nest’ is an iterative process. It requires the input of those involved at all levels, and a leadership capable and prepared to adjust choices under new circumstances.

All the parts are moving at the same time, and they all influence each other. Iteration must be a multi-dimensional challenge, you can iterate up, down, and across functions, on the basis of feedback. The challenge is to get it all done without disturbing the flow of the processes.