Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Closing the perceptual gap in the organisation


As part of the struggle to communicate, what benefits a company will get if they engage us, we offer a
sample session. The hazard of this session – Business Facilitation- is in the initial phases of our engagement. The people in the organization tend to scrutinize / evaluate us to death. After every sessions of two hours the client has a sub-conscious tendency to look for’ what did we gain today?’ Or ‘did we get what we have paid for?’ ‘Did we get anything new?’ Etc.etc.

What we have observed is that always people crave for new knowledge, new ideas, new paradigms, new models. And the attempts for these cognitive acquisitions actually neither solve the issues at hand nor place the company in a better business position. If the participants do not get something new, they get disappointed and the halo about our services also gets affected. Actually our programs are not meant to teach or enlighten about new knowledge but to bring perceptual changes and shared understanding, which unfortunately is not observable, articulable but have significant effect on the collective efforts of the company.

Different groups within an organization can have sharply contrasting perceptions of organizational aspects. For example, while senior executives are twice as likely as any other group to view their company as “resilient,” nearly 60% of line managers, mid-level managers, and business-unit staff describe the same organization as unhealthy in some respect. And though senior managers tend to feel positive about their involvement in operating decisions, many junior managers in the same company feel that senior managers “micromanage” or “domineer.”

Such perception gaps pose a serious organizational climate. Yes, we all want confident, optimistic organizational citizens. But if people within a company can’t agree on the state of its affairs, they can’t accurately diagnose problems or design and execute solutions for them. In our initial phase of our engagement, we dig out the dirt in the organization and try to close the perception gap.

 We make them acknowledge that different people have different perspectives on the organization’s matters. We allow the participants from different groups / departments to share their views—and the reasoning behind them. Sharing their views with others, backing them up with the data they have used to form those conclusions etc.. Our goal is….to compile a more complete picture of the organization. Also encourage honesty and acceptance in the group. We help them describe what’s actually happening in their organization. This process brings into light the real naked issues of the organization. This makes them realize the wrong ride they are taking. We are sure that mere awareness about the prevalent conditions can help managers and staff form a more objective impression of the organization’s health and help them build readiness for change. This feeling is the most important to bring about changes in strategy and organizational development. But alas! The immediate effortless change in perception is not considered to be a gain and the human mind craves for more knowledge…

Contributed by Sasikanth Prabhu

Sunday, November 6, 2011

Killing Business Innovation

Innovation happens in most organisations on daily basis, but most of it is revolving around cost reduction or pricing tactics. Very very rarely do Business Innovation happens.


Business Innovation isn’t just a strategy – it’s a mind-set founded on the belief that a win for customers and employees is a win for the company. Unfortunately, most companies are unwilling to make the transformation from being product, geography, or function centric to becoming truly Business centric. With a decade of experience with many businesses, we have found six mind-sets that block business innovation.

1. Spends without focus. Firms pour money into traditional pockets.... training, sales promotions, advertisements, product / service development, but research shows that the market refuses to give them credit for this. Business owners make all kinds of excuses for this state of affairs –“We’re in a tough industry” or “All the Street cares about is short-term results”– but customers just aren’t buying it.

2. Makes budgets an entitlement. Senior managers who negotiate for funding typically make their decisions on the basis of the prior year’s budget or the company’s general cost concerns. At the same time, department staff view the budget funds as an entitlement (we ought to get this... attitude) rather than as a investment focused on the business. The result?  Business as usual, and the same (boring / off the shelf ) customer offerings.

3. Assumes people in the field know nothing. Most firms treat departments as seperate entities /functions run by people with respective special backgrounds. A typical business owner / CEO thinks, “Our technical people are in charge of product development – they have to develop and educate the sales people about the new product. Sales persons will never understand the complexities of engineering.” This mindset almost guarantees that products and services don’t properly connect within the organisation.

4. Puts Marketing, Finance, Administration etc. in different cubicles. These distinctly different functions are more or less autonomous. They rarely communicate, except to consider cutting budgets when overall business performance lags. Such disunity ensures that no one pays attention to business of what the customer needs and wants from the company as a whole.

5. Detaches Marketing from the customers. Marketing people can’t do much for customers beyond feeding them propaganda. For eaxample when premium resort customers often lack a decent meal or even a pillow, the poor folks in Marketing can only report on customer rage.

6. Don’t rock the boat ..attitude. Harmony is given priority than doing more business. Business leaders / top management shy away from organizing their businesses around customers' needs , arguing that doing so is “too complicated” or “too disruptive” for them. But for the organic growth of the business, shaking up is needed. Only then the sustainable benefits will flow to the customers, employees, shareholders and the economy as a whole.

We are exposed this kind of mindsets in our retainer engagements (DNA Crafting) and it frequently challenges us in various forms. With a balance of approaches we have begun to grapple with the situations. But we hold on to our methodology of 'Merciless provocation" though it is interpersonally risky, yet the only known effective method. Changing mindsets emerging to be our specialisation.

contributed by Sasikanth prabhu

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Visioning



Now we have facilitated visioning exercise of more than 50 small businesses. Recently we did visioning program for a Automotive parts manufacturing Company in Dewas (Madhya Pradesh). This company was introduced by our friend Yogesh Jain who also became an ardent follower of School of Strategy and he runs his organisation Niche Quality Solutions Pvt Ltd (http://nicheqs.com/), which has long experience in providing Six sigma, Quality solutions to organisations in and around Indore. An year's experience in strategy workshops have given him an opportunity to develop an unconventional perspectives on business growth. He says " I have attended many management programs organised by institutions such as IMA.... but the business strategy workshops are different and they really add value to the organisation. There is a sense of fulfillment in taking part in these sessions". It is wonderful to work with him now... ...

During the meetings with business owners the question that comes up a lot in the work we do is the difference between vision and mission. At times we come across companies which do not bother to distinguish them at all: but...They have a separate Values Statement (thank goodness), but if you ask them to tell their Vision, and then their Mission, they’ll give you the same answer for both questions. So what is . difference? Does it matter? Yes it does! we will see visioning here .
  • A strategic vision is usually thought to be solely future oriented. A vision provides an organization a forward looking, idealized image of itself.

  • Moves outside the usual assumptions.

  • Concentrates on the end goal, not the means to reach the goal.

  • Followers gain ownership by developing the means (action plan).

Another benefit when done together with the people in the organisation is shared vision, which includes a present component.
  • Vision is not a destination, but an intangible structure that surrounds us and guides our daily activities. From this perspective, a shared vision is a form of self-identity.
This definition of vision is a collective belief in what the organization can become. In this way it is similar to a truly desired wish for the future. If the vision is sufficiently broad it is enough for providing a framework for current decisions.

Regularly feedback can be employed for both corrective action and vision revision (interesting combination of words). If the feedback indicates a problem in the implementation and nothing amiss in the expected vision then the strategy and/or tactics can be altered to get back on track toward the vision. And if there is an indication that the vision is no longer realistic there is no problem with a shift in vision to a more workable vision. Normal planning cycles allow for such a step on an annual or half yearly basis.

ImplicationsWhat is unique about the organization's self-concept of itself? Something that would be missed if the organization were not to fulfill this vision.

What issues might arise among different stakeholders as this vision is realized?
Are organizational practices aligned with the vision? Are desired actions reinforced by performance metrics?

Putting an organization’s mission & vision in place requires working at all levels of the organization. Often, the effort is only made at the top of the organization with the expectation that employee commitment will follow. This assumption is far from true. It is recommended that a specific change program be put in place to develop a shared vision and common understanding of the organization’s vision and mission.