A630.7.4.RB- Mastering the Art of Corporate Reinvention

There are some remarkable CEOs who have accomplished great feats in the world of business. I recently viewed a video called CEO Exchange where two CEOs spoke at the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University. Gordon Bethune of Continental Airlines and Michael Bonsignore, who brokered the merger between Honeywell Inc. and Allied Signal to form Honeywell International, both called masters of corporate reinvention, spoke about a wide range of topics including customer service, mergers, workforce inspiration, crisis management, balancing long-term and short-term goals, and leading versus managing.

While I found Gordon Bethune to be positively interesting, I was very curious about the merger between Honeywell and Allied Signal. Both companies were quite prominent so the idea of both companies coming together sounds like a huge undertaking. While there may be many benefits to result in a merger, there are also challenging aspects that have to be dealt with before you can get on to the good stuff. Much like the formation of mountains, there is a lot of pressure and collision before the two plates buckle and fold to emerge into an imposing, risen peak. A concern of mine is a comment he made when asked about bring the companies together. He stated that the new Honeywell will not be an extension of the old Honeywell or Allied Signal.  Instead, he is creating a new culture that blends the best of the merged companies and will reward the people who look for best practices of both companies. Those who do not will be punished.

I perceived this to be a solid strategy up until the word punished. Perhaps he simply used poor wording, but alas, I can only take this comment at face value of what I heard. I agree rewarding employees is a beneficial behavioral strategy, which will motivate the people of Honeywell to reach the goals of the organization. Brown (2011) points out the behavioral strategies improves the use of human resources. Clearly the merger indicates a drastic shift in the structure of both companies and that “a change in one subsystem will have some impact one another” (Brown, 2011, p. 178). However, I am strongly opposed to the word punish. In a work place, I feel that there is an adult relationship between employees and the organization. You may not be rewarded and in extreme cases released from employment, but since this is not kindergarten in the south forty years ago, the idea of punish reminds me of paddling, discipline and control. I do not feel that image is okay and I know that personally I would not thrive in that type of culture. While some people are resilient in a way that pressure and the fear of punishment make a select few rise to the top, that is not a high enough percentage of an organization’s population to sustain a product atmosphere.

I received my bachelor’s degree in Paralegal Studies and worked in a wonderful law firm in Mississippi for a few years while I was in school. Unfortunately, once I moved back to Florida, I worked in more firms than I could count. I tried them all out before I realized I could not do it. The reason being is the use of the fear mentality. Not all law firms are modeled after the wonderful organization I got started in. It does not work for me, the idea of punishment. While I am a strong person, I shut down and quit trying to give the best of myself when that kind of negativity is forced on me. My personal philosophy is that if something makes you feel unwelcome and miserable it is best to part ways and leave it behind. My colleagues did not feel they could leave the legal professional because it was all they knew and a shocking amount revealed to me that they were on antidepressants to do the work. I simply do not consent to being involved in a place that wants me to be afraid for my job and knew I could do better work and actually contribute to others in a different, better environment. If that is what is meant for Honeywell’s new culture, it probably will not be successful.

In discussing the force-field analysis model, Brown informs on driving and restraining forces. A better idea, such as reward, is to employ driving forces. Wisely, Brown informs that “forces that put pressure on people (such as fear of losing their job) are increased; the tension within the system will also increase, possibly bringing about stronger resistance and unpredictable behavior” (Brown, 2011, p. 131). It would be preferable if the focus was primarily on the positive aspects. For example, Bonsingnore did mention that there would be compensation for meeting goals. No need to bring the fire, brimstone and doom out in public. If a relationship between the employee and organization is not working out, the clearly that would need to be discussed and handled privately. I was told once that you do not air your dirty laundry.

Another barrier I perceived from the video is that with any organization, especially an industrial conglomerate, facing major changes that behavioral, technological, and structural interventions would be requisite to see through the merging of two companies. Lots of things would be changing all at once. There have been times when Bonsignore admitted to missing the mark and the company faltered. To overcome the barriers and be successful, I think stream analysis would be ideal to keep a close eye on the complex variables. I think watching for second-order consequences is also paramount. If you plug one hole, make sure that three more don’t spring up. To get the company where it needs to be I think committing to a large scale intervention is the only way to see effective results. The use of limited or inappropriate strategies could be detrimental to the success of Honeywell International.

The best takeaway I received from this video is some of the wisdom imparted upon me by Gordon Bethune. I am on board with the idea that happy employees do a better job for the customers, which will ultimately boost the bottom line for the company. He also said that you cannot have a successful company if you do not have good products and people who like going to work. There is so much truth to such a seemingly simple concept. I wonder why more companies do not think this way. Maybe they have been conditioned to live in fear themselves and have passed that along through their work. Maybe they are so proud of their vision that they assume everything is swell. My biggest mission is to be happy and see that in others and support the concept of respecting and appreciating those who do the work from the bottom to the top because every person in an organization is important and I never want to see that to become a lost idea.

Reference: Brown, D. R. (2011). An experiential approach to organization development (8th ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall.

A630.6.4.RB- 50 Excuses Not to Change/The Tribes We Lead

I have a distinct inability to understand the word no sometimes. There is a joke for those in my personal life that know that telling me no is like inviting me with a yes. I hear: this is a challenge. Challenge accepted. I have been told I am terribly stubborn sometimes. I was warned when I was younger not to hurt myself with my stubbornness. I have been told in casual passing that “it” cannot be done and all that means to me is that I am going try it until I do it. Not one to completely rock the boat and make waves, after all I do not enjoy being antagonistic, but once I am locked in on a goal I go to my own little corner working the trial and error until I get the hang of it. Sometimes it is just a jar. Sometimes it is the principle of the matter. Perhaps this quality makes for an effective change agent?

As equally as I love conquering difficult things, I am also ruled by fear and no one prefers change less than I do. My early life was turned upside down in so many drastic ways that the shellshock of not being able to cling to my security blanket of safety unnerves me. Maybe I was too stubborn to change and still managed to remain in my preserved childlike state of wonder balanced by one part mischief. Regardless, “No” is an incomplete idea that really translates to “No-t yet.” I do not get upset when I hear others make excuses not to change. Everyone is on their own journey and not everyone will be ready or be on the same page at the same time. There are pioneers, early adopters, the bandwagon crowd, stragglers the indie folks and those who flat out, out right resist. There are probably a lot of other people in between, but I don’t have a name for them. I know that I can float between those identities so I get that sometimes people just have excuses to change. Instead of being upset, I use this as a secret, selfish opportunity to work on innovating ideas while no one is watching. There is much less pressure that way. If an idea is realized and it is good enough, I think people will follow. If you build it, they will come. That is what I heard anyway. Apple said that, right? Ah, I make jokes.

There are fifty reasons not to change, after all, but I would get greatly worn out from typing them all, so the following are some popular old standbys:

“Why change-it’s working ok”

“We have been doing it this way for 25 years”

“It’s impossible”

“We’re not ready”

“I don’t like it”

“Our competitors are not doing it”

 “[Insert name/title/department] will not like it”

For the follow up…

-It is working, but for how long? Can it be better? More fun? Faster? Easier?

-In the words of Jimmy Fallon: Ew! (This is the worst to me.) You are not using the same toothbrush from 25 years ago, right? If the practice is not useful and is just shrouded in ritual, it is time to renew.

-The word impossible is merely dressed up in disguise. It literally says “I’m possible”.

-In the tune of The Temptations: Get ready, because here I come!

-I dub thee Sam I Am, try it and like it.

-Perfect. You may pass go and collect $200. I am not saying Monopoly, but I am not not saying it, either.

-Let’s go ask and find out. If this is true, they can also be Sam I Am. Please try it and like it.

I suppose you could call them reasons for not changing, but it is just a euphemism for excuses not to change. Those responses are a bit idealistic, but it is a shift from the negative and embraces a carefree stance toward stop signs. I could have been the poster child for the resistance of change. Even if I do not say them out loud, I still say them to myself and the things that I think are far worse than what I hear from people that I have worked with and are not veiled without personalization.

I am afraid, I doubt myself, Can I even do it? What if I am not good at it? It is too much. This gives me anxiety. I hate change!

It is mighty odd to say, but I have been fortunate to learn about change. What do you do when everything changes? When you lose so much and do not want to let go? Part of my own battle that I walk everyday is that since I was quite young the things that you expect to be around just cannot be anymore. I can make an extensive inventory of all the things that have changed to dwell on and wallow about. I acknowledge them because I remember where I come from and how I have become who I am, but I will not be broken by change. It is far better to turn misfortune into strength and insight than be poisoned by opposition to change.

When I was little my parents died, this will shape a phobia of change like nothing else can. My childhood home is now an overgrown lot. My gymnastics studio that was my sanctuary is also a parking lot full of weeds. My high school is, too. Pets, friends, baby pictures all lost in time, gone. Some of things you expect and some you do not.

I found a quote credited to Lena Horne that said “It’s not the load that breaks you, it’s the way you carry it.” Sometimes overcoming a change is as simple as changing the way you think about it. I could have given in to these heavy burdens, just holed up and quit on everything merely existing day to day, but excuses are self-imposed roadblocks. I did not want to hold myself back. If you can learn to carry the big stuff, you can learn to leap over the smaller stuff. This is not to say I am not affected by my past. I certainly know how to have a knee-jerk reaction to upheaval with the best of them.

Brown (2011) lists restraining forces that block change, listing fear of the unknown and threat to security as major factors. I commiserate whole heartedly. I love a good comfort zone. But I feel like being thrown into dramatic change early on gave me a secret window into the pattern of life. It changes… a lot. The quicker you can learn adaptation the easier any transition will be when change does come, and it will come. It does not matter if you say no to change. It will happen anyway. The only thing you control is if you move forward or get left behind. Changes will happen all around us, to our environment and the people who surround us regardless of our protest or our desires. Some of my favorite imagery is things forgotten or left behind in time and overtaken by nature. I think this speaks to the power of change. Relentless forces are at work ad familiar comforts can easily disappear. Instead of a permanent vice grip on the past, I found taking time to be in the moment with the things you cherish most and doing so with an appreciation and knowledge of the precious fragility can help prepare you for the time to let go and move on. This goes for all things, both personal and organizational. Humans are creatures of comfort so this could be a breakdown over a favorite type of clicky pen (guilty!), a computer program you know inside and out, or a beloved colleague. It may even be in the form of department restructuring and office changes.

This is happening in my office currently. I love our Financial Aid Department, but without notice to the rest of the floor, they were moved to the floor below. I know it is just one floor, but it is still unsettling. Our department has been restructured and Centralized Scheduling is no longer with us and may be moved soon. Concurrently we acquired another department into ours that I cannot even recall their acronym, IDD, I believe. We have not met them and it has been a month or two now. We are constantly changing at work so I will enjoy what I have day to day and get prepared for whatever new adventure that presents itself.

I think change is scary, but you don’t have to face it alone. My work team tries to keep up with each other as we try new practices to see if we can get better results. We are constantly sharing and adjusting as we build on each other’s ideas. One of these trends lately is mail merge. When I was training I thought that I would never learn it. It is not required, but a helpful tool to have. I found out that the other team members were also reluctant because the mechanics were never used and forgotten. We were encouraged to retrain in this recently and received individual tutoring from our team leader. Some of the team has taken to it, others not so much. The most reluctant team member sits next to me and has slowly brought down the barriers to mail merge as I have been pulling out my hand written instructions and learning to conquer it. I think I get so excited when I successfully accomplish it that it bubbles over to her cubie, infecting all that it touches. Today, this very day, she made up her mind on her own that she was ready to try it and asked me to come help her. Sometimes together is better and I did not mind, I was proud to help.

 If you cannot think it through alone, having support, someone to talk to, and someone who will be opened-minded with you can make the difference. In my opinion, this relates very well with Brown (2011) that there are strategies to increase motivation to change. I believe that supporting each other can create a climate conducive to change. I also feel much better about change if I am told clearly and precisely what to expect and why the change has been brought about. A clearly articulated vision and effective communications can lessen resistant attitudes while one faces change (Brown, 2011).

It is no secret that I adore TED videos and blog about them often. Another interesting point of view comes courtesy of Seth Godin in his TED talk titled “The Tribes we Lead”. He articulates that we try to change everything. We find something that bothers us or that needs to be improved and we change it. There have been several ways during recent times that change was approached, but the evolution of it is not necessarily a big media campaign constantly in our faces anymore but through tribes.

Essentially tribes means leading others and connecting people through ideas created and then spread to likeminded others. It is kind of like a chain effect that one person reaches those around them, those people do the same until a movement has been launched. This reminds me of the recent ALS Ice Bucket Challenge. I think it would have been much less successful if it was all over the TV and radio as a general call to action. But being singled out by someone you actually know is really influential. Chances are you were picked because you were already close, trusted each other, and had the same ideas or perspectives. I think finding a way back to personalization in a time when you can connect distantly to anyone, strangers, is likely the next modern way to drive change.

My only hesitation to this idea is that while referrals and word of mouth are not new ideas, I wonder if tribes are as wholesome of a concept as it presents itself. What I mean by this is, it is easy to align when you have the same values. What happens when multiple change movements spring up but there is a conflict between the tribes? There are enough reasons for people not to see eye to eye and labeling your tribes and beliefs and encompassing only the population that feels the same may turn counterproductive. I understand that not everyone will feel the same about the multitudes of change ideas out there. I just hope that this does not lead to a harmful division between us. An idea about this that I am floating around is PETA versus those that hunt animals. There are radical extremes on both sides that sometimes cross the line to provoke each other. I love the idea of influencing those through the creation and spreading of any idea, but only if it can remain peaceful and more unifying instead of alienating.

References:

Brown, D. R. (2011). An experiential approach to organization development (8th ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall.

Seth Godin: The tribes we lead | Video on TED.com. (2009, February 1). TED: Ideas worth spreading. Retrieved September 15, 2014, from http://www.ted.com/talks/seth_godin_on_the_tribes_we_lead.html

A630.5.4.RB- NASA Culture Change

“Agency officials talked with NASA employees about plans to bring about proposed changes at the space agency that were called for by the Shuttle Columbia Accident Investigation Board. Topics included NASA’s “safety culture,” a survey that assessed NASA employees' opinions about their jobs, and needed managerial changes. After their presentations they answered questions from the audience of employees and, by remote connection, from employees at other NASA facilities” (NASA Cultural Changes, 2004, n.d.).

With organizations there is an underlying understanding that there are factors that are constantly bombarding it as a system that could possibly overwhelm, as change is inevitable. This could be due to internal or external factors. Brown (2011) makes clear that, “to be successful in the twenty-first century, organizations must have flexibility and the ability for rapid transformation. However, many organizations move along a well-worn path, and problems are often concealed or hidden” (Brown, 2011, p. 116). Brown further details that it is paramount that an organization is able to recognize symptoms and causes of organizational ineffectiveness. (2011)

In 2003 Space Shuttle Columbia disintegrated over Texas and Louisiana as it reentered Earth’s atmosphere, killing all seven crew members. This tragedy played out on a global stage leaving no choice for NASA to take a step back and thoroughly examine where they went wrong, how it got to this point and why. Behavioral Science Technology, Inc. (BST) worked alongside NASA to diagnosis these issues and this report is referenced throughout the almost hour-long video. I have been told that it is not really a question of if you make mistakes, but when you do it is how you handle them that are ultimately important. Thinking on that piece of advice, I carefully considered the actions that NASA incorporated into their plan to heal and move forward to repair its capacity to assess and change its culture. It was determined through the diagnosis process that NASA as an organization felt that there were two areas that required improvement, the respect for each other and the ability for upward communication and the practice of an exemplar safety culture.

Sean O’Keefe, a NASA administrator and part of the top echelon of leadership, addressed employees to describe the plan to bring about proposed changes to their culture.  This is a fundamental step for change, in my opinion. Once you figure out what happened and the diagnosis is complete, a plan is carefully selected. The first step forward is essentially to communicate it to the life force of the organization, the employees. O’Keefe said it best by disclosing in his address; this is a signal, get ready; it’s coming. Getting the word out allows for individuals to anticipate and prepare for change. I believe this untimely event likely had an emotional impact on those that worked toward the Columbia mission and may have even known the crew. I would venture there is a population that demand and expects action from leadership and are ready to get to work. According to O’Keefe, there is a lot of work to do and it begins with “we as colleagues, it begins will all of us.” Anyone remaining in the organization that would be subversive to the challenges ahead is essentially on notice. Announcing this to the entire organization and the public is a clear message that NASA’s core values will be the driving force from that point forward and there is an expectation and revalidation to uphold those values.

Noticeably infused throughout the presentation were the core values: safety, people, excellence, and integrity. The culture failed and the values seemingly loosened enough that major problems slipped through the cracks and NASA’s mission failed. How does anyone come back from that, how do you pick yourself up after a loss? Looking at those values and strengthening them is a way back to a better time for NASA. O’Keefe impressed upon his audience the need for best values, principles and practices. Through the analysis conducted by BST it became clear that management interference was unintentionally prevalent, there was a need to change and to improve upon the ability to communicate. All concerns needed to be heard so that a determination could be made if concerns needed to be resolved, an issue that caused NASA to fall down on the job. The opinions of the employees, represented through the surveys and interviews showed how they felt on these issues. When an organization does not live by the values that you purportedly have, the values begin to have no meaning. If you are not able to be true to your word, people lose respect for those words, it becomes noise and people withdraw. It is important to talk about values so that they can be learned and upheld.

Perhaps as eager as I am to be enthusiastic and positively promote the things that delight me with my cheerleading nature, I have an equally skeptical and suspicious side to me. I have embraced light into my life so I am not weighed down by the darkness, but chalk it up to a mixture of life experience and intuition, I am constantly silently observing things that I come into contact with and once I zero in on a even the slightest possible ripple or flaw I have to keep digging and picking at it. As polished and rehearsed as Sean O’Keefe seemed during his presentation I kept wondering about his believability. I also wondered if it matters. In good faith I will consider it plausible that during public speaking people are plagued with nerves. After all, it is one of the top fears that people can have. I feel like the opening of the presentation went well but was this because it was controlled and easier to be steady and practiced when you are still fresh in the early first minutes? I remember sitting in my Marriage and Family class my sophomore year of college that my professor said that in any relationship the longer you are involved, the more likely you will see the other person’s true self. I found it interesting that toward the end of the presentation is where my “spidey senses” started pinging.

There were many moments that I felt that there was true understanding that leadership has a responsibility to guide the way toward an improved organization, this begins from the top down. I even detected moments that seemed genuinely emotionally charged. However, during the question and answer session I felt there was a loss of congruence between the message and his actions. There were several quips and outbursts that got a little weird for me, I became a bit uncomfortable.

An employee was asking about the survey and trying to understand if contracted employees were represented in the data versus an employee at one of the centers. The point blank remark was “Get over it.” I think what he meant was that the lines should be blurred, there shouldn’t be a distinction, but this could have been softened and explained better. Another major issue I have is that O’Keefe said there is an invitation for questions and open communication. I infer this means from this point forward and then not long after, in a rather abrupt manner, he tells an employee that his question was already covered in the previous question. I suppose that it is not my opinion that matters regarding this believability, but the audience members.

If pictures are worth a thousand words, then when the camera pans to the crowd… that is priceless. O’Keefe was trying to keep up the momentum and bubbling about going forth with infectious attitudes. The audience ranged from smirking from the guy in the first row in the very first audience shot minutes into the presentation to a mixture of pursed lips and lifeless faces for the remainder of the video. I wonder how many people also perceived this and why the camera kept panning the audience. I found it enlightening to forming my opinion; it gave me some validation that I was not alone in my watchful monitoring.

I think there is some invaluable merit and insight to what I observed. What you say and how you say it are of equal importance. You can have the best intentions but your body language, actions, speech and tone all have to match. It may seem like a persnickety detail, but a precise and careful approach is often required. I have worked with people in various capacities and you can say all the right things at the right time, but if the person you are speaking with has their skeptic hat on that day, too; then you may defeat yourself before you can actually do any helping or improving.  Sometimes the only thing someone has to go on is what you show them. I think this is why people speak on values, why communication can be a barrier or a bridge, and why a specifically crafted speech outlining a plan is only as good as the follow up. You have to mean it, tell it the best way possible, and put it in place as quickly as you can. Grand ideas mean nothing if they merely exist in your head or on paper. As Sean O’Keefe said of NASA leadership, you have to get out there, out of your office and walk the talk. Walking the talk, that is living your values.

References:

Behavioral Science Technology, Inc. (2004). Assessment and plan for organizational culture change at NASA. Ojai, CA: BST Inc.; Washington, D.C.: NASA.

Brown, D. R. (2011). An experiential approach to organization development (8th ed.). Boston: Prentice Hall.

NASA Cultural Changes - C-SPAN Video Library. (2004, April 13). C-SPAN Video Library. Retrieved September 12, 2014, from http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/SACu

A630.4.4.RB- How Companies Can Make Better Decisions

Indecision… Yes, No, Maybe… Undecided it is, then. Indecision is the inability to make a decision quickly. I am riddled with indecision right now, stuck frozen in a perpetual standstill while life is whizzing right past me. What is there to say about making decisions?  It can be hard to make better decisions or any decision at all. I would like to say something really clever about the topic, but nope, I am sitting here at a loss and it is just me trying to decide something on my own and believe me, it is difficult enough. Add a second person into the equation and then pose the question: What we should have for dinner?  Forget about it, you could end up starving and hangry, or also known as angry from hunger. Let’s add on to this and get a group together and try to make a decision about what to do or where to go.  Two heads are better than one? Perhaps, unless you just do not have a meeting of the minds …then say hello to chaos.

This seems to be the fuel to most Fox News or CNN newscasts, the Republicans and Democrats cannot reach a consensus, no one thinks anyone does anything right. One side knows exactly what should be done, but the other is not listening and vice versa. This bleeds into elections when it is time to vote for city, county, district, state or national representatives. Ask a large group of people to decide on anything and there is so much perturbation that maybe nothing effective will ever happen. Now think about an organization trying to make decisions, or even your organization trying to decide what to do and how to do it. If the answer is, let’s do it the way it has always been done, I cry no! That is a dagger right to the heart of that organization.

 I think this should be the true mark to tell if an organization is effective or not, ask how good someone’s company is at decision making. If it is met with a scoff and an eye roll that organization is very well heading toward peril. If you say your organization is easy, breezy and doing fine, keep reading anyway, you probably can do even better. But don’t take my word on this; I am sitting in my pajamas because I couldn’t decide what to wear today. My Britney Spears t-shirt says hi. I found a great video from Harvard Business Review that asks the leader of Bain & Company’s Global Organization Practice how to put effective decision making at the center of your business.

Marcia Blenko details why decision effectiveness has a positive correlation with employee engagement, the impediments of good decision making, the four elements of good decision making and provides insight on the five steps to breakthrough performance in your organization from a book she co-wrote Decide and Deliver. She explains why the key driver of performance of an organization is decisions. The decision capability allows an organization to “cut through efforts while making an impact on the organization at the end of the day.” (Better Decisions, 2010) Companies will operate better, have a better metabolism and see better financial performance in result of decision capabilities. (Better Decisions, 2010)

To highlight the importance of employee engagement and the correlation of how decision making relate lets examine a hypothetical scenario. Take a single task and two employees with different departments and add the situational ingredients. The task is paper doll cutting. For Employee A the tools are provided, the instructions rendered, a work space is designated undivided from distraction. For Employee B the task is given, but they have to get permission to get scissors and are required to go multiple places to procure this tool. In addition another department will give the instructions, but Employee B needs to wait until that department is back from lunch. Once the instructions are obtained, unfortunately the work space has been reserved for another department and will have to wait until that meeting is concluded. Which employee will make better paper dolls? Employee A is happy and made precise, gorgeous model paper dolls. The few that Employee B made that was spared by the frustrated paper scrap massacre of 2014 are less than ideal. Happy people will do better, more consistent work. Blenko points out that the easier it is for decisions to be made, the more stimulating the work will be. I believe if it is harder for decisions to be made it forces the organization to work an uphill battle. If employees felt that they have the talent and capability to do great work but constantly got a stop sign but knew of another organization that gave the green light and made using their talent possible, what would stop someone from saying bon voyage and hang on to that organization?

Clearly having a successful organization is the goal or else why would anyone start a company in the first place? Since decisions play a large part in how well the machine is oiled, why isn’t it easier for good decisions that are effective to be made? According to Blenko there are four elements to good decision making: quality, speed, yield and effort. Quality is defined by making a good decision. So, it is not just making a decision, but a worthwhile choice. Speed is how quickly the decision can be implemented once it is made. If there is a hot trend that hits the internet, how quickly can your company realize the potential and beat the competition to carrying it out, this could be the determining factor of which organization can pull ahead? Yield is just as important, you made a great decision and acted fast, but did it turn out as you intended? Execution can make or break the decision. Rounding out the four elements is effort. Blenko likens this to Goldilocks. Is it too little, too much or just right? When it comes to cost and energy you better not put in too much cost and too little energy or the organizational ship may spring a leak and start sinking. I started to think how little four elements are and if there was anything missing from it. I feel like everything ties back to being a sub point to the main four. What if you have a bad idea?  Poor ideas tie back to the element of quality. The same can be true to your organization’s perception of the market not being accurate. In my opinion the elements flow from one to the other in a logical, linear fashion.

The true problem of how companies can make better decisions is the fact that there are impediments. Blenko points out that most organizational structures have become so complex that you cannot simply look at a work chart and distinguish who make the decisions. It does not matter if you have a great idea at the right time, if you cannot get it in front of the decision maker it will simply remain a great idea at the right time, a what could have been moment. I think other factors that I have dealt with in the work place are control issues. I have seen a single decision maker who did not allow outside influence and it was my way or the highway. I have also seen too many people involved that felt that they should be making the decisions their selves, on their own. Let go of the control, there is no one best way so let all ideas be heard. Fear and uncertainty impeded a quality decision executed properly with speed. I really feel it boils down to culture because culture touches all things inside of an organization. Blenko gives an account of multiple issues that clog up the elements of good decision making such as leadership behaviors. It is important to allow for constructive debate before and not after a decision is made. Sometimes it is not clear who makes the decisions or who should be involved. Also, there may not be the right talent in the decision roles (Better Decisions, 2010). Another insightful detail is that the obvious big strategy decisions are not the only decisions the organization needs to get right, but also the daily operational decisions that add up over time.

To sum up how companies can make better decisions Blenko quickly touched upon the five steps process from her book. The first is that a company needs to understand how well you are doing with decision making. Once you understand your challenges then you can work to correct them. The second step is to identify what the critical decisions are and what matters most. Next, set the decision up for success with the what, who, how and when. She says this frames us what the decision is, who is involved, how will it be carried out and to mark on the calendar when this is taking place. Her fourth point is making sure the organization supports the decision once it is in place. This reminds me of buying a heavy work of art and putting it on a table that is too weak and the legs give out. The culture, talent, technical systems need to be able to hold up this decision. Lastly and maybe most importantly, the decision needs to be embedded throughout the entire organization. Instead of putting a big heavy decision on a table to hold up, it is really putting it on the shoulders of those in the organization. If everyone is not holding it up, it may slip through the holes and fall down.

I have often wondered why some of the places I have worked have been so frustrating and I just could not put my finger on what was wrong, but I suspected something was amiss. Examining the culture of an organization and the decision making process this week was like turning on a bright neon sign pointing to the flaws. I was experiencing without seeing or understanding and I am only seeing it as it is for the first time right now. I loved Blenko’s interview with the Harvard Business Review because the ease of the delivery made me go, ah ha!

I think there is immediate take away of the four elements in my personal life particularly that I could apply to making the decision of when to sell my house. Quality, speed, yield and effort works with when to hit the housing market just as it would with working with my students as an academic advisor.  We have goals of being able to provide enrollment opportunities to our students each term. A course is only as good as those who benefit from it. If I do not afford the opportunity to my students to enroll, then the mission of the University, providing education is not being gained by those not in classes, at least in a formal sense. I need to make quality decisions for my students, but also since there is just one of me and four hundred and fifty students, how quickly I can provide my advisement is crucial. If I reach you a month before the term or a week before the term, that changes the chance of that student being ready to decide on a nine week commitment. Sometimes I have great intentions for an outreach, but if it doesn’t turn out how I planned, that changes the effectiveness. The same goes for my energy and the amount of time I can afford to put into my efforts. My effort has to be the right amount of “enough” or the other three elements will not be able to align and the decision won’t turn out to be good. The most significant part for me is taking something as common as decision making, which we do all day essentially, breaking it down in terms of a simple recipe and then practicing applying it to situations to see things be put together or break apart.

Reference: How Companies Can Make Better Decisions, Faster - YouTube. (2010) Retrieved September 6, 2014, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbxpg6D4Hk8&feature=player_embedded