« February 2011 | Main | April 2011 »

March 30, 2011

Soka Education

www.mixnerstrategy.com

Ikeda on the Soka brand of education (Ikeda, 127):

Soka is Japanese for "value creation." "The only value in the true sense is that of life itself. All other values arise solely within the context of interaction with life." ...The fundamental criterion for value ... is whether something adds to or detracts from, advances or hinders, the human condition.

The ultimate goal of Soka, or value-creating, education is to foster people of character who continuously strive for the greatest good - that of peace - who are committed to protecting the sanctity of life and who are capable of creating value under even the most difficult circumstances. 

Only a human being can foster another human being. It takes a truly humanistic person to raise a truly humanistic person. Schoolteachers and others dedicated to developing people carry out a task of immeasurable value. The effects of this task will last forever (Ikeda, 213).

Reference

Ikeda, Daisaku. Soka Education. For the Happiness of the Individual. Middleway Press. 2010.

March 28, 2011

Drucker on Dashboards

www.mixnerstrategy.com

Peter Drucker brought a case study to class (Cohen, 189). A CEO wanted to put together a Control Panel, much like the control panel of an aircraft, that would let the CEO know precisely what was going on with his company. Drucker asked his class to derive a list of what should go on the control panel. Then he asked the class whether a control panel was really a good idea. The results were almost obvious. The lists were long. Everyone thought a control panel was a good idea.

Drucker said it was a bad idea. There was just too much information for a CEO and her team to follow. An aircraft needs a control panel. The inputs are, basically, finite and easily demonstrable. A company is different. Focusing on what is, essentially, a short list may prevent the CEO from picking up on some other kernel of information that is crucial to her company. The CEO has a job to do that exceeds the capability of a computer to keep track of. 

Reference

Cohen, William A. A Class With Drucker. The Lost Lessons of the World's Greatest Management Teacher. AMACOM. 2008.

Grace Hopper - Then There Was Software

www.mixnerstrategy.com

Of course, during the forties and the fifties, there were lots of firsts. Before electronics dominated computer design, mechanical machines the size of buildings dominated. Engineers designed the hardward based upon the latest technology. Some of the technology was actually derived from machines created by Babbage in the thirties - the eighteenthirties, that is. The war drove initiatives to determine trajectories for artillery shells and shapes of aircraft wings. Human calculators gave way to mechanical calculators which in turn gave way to electonic calculators. As the engineers moved on to the next upgrade, they left behind the human calculators to figure out how to program the machines - the calculators - were supposed to work. Two philosophies developed, one saying that all software was custom, to be derived by the application, the other common in that certain sub-sets of ultimate programs were saved and re-used over and over again in all worts of applications. This re-use spawned the software industry.

Grace Hopper was there at the beginning. Most of the men had gone to war. A trained math PhD, she taught early on, then consulted in government, and then she ended up at Harvard, working on the large mechanical calculators - think building-sized - that the bosses seemed to think were effortlessly forced to calculate quickly and easily. They were wrong. Figuring out how to productively run the new machines was a long and arduous task.

It's a good story, one every technologist should understand. Let's fast-forward a bit to the time when things began to standardize. Early on, there were many types of calculators with all sorts of control parameters. They required engineers to run them. But because of the war, and because of the growth of the industry, there weren't enough trained folks to run and program the machines. Something had to give. Incremental changes in hardware and software design weren't enough. The industry would die unless something was done. Grace Hopper drove the standardization of the software industry by forcing the standartization of the software language and methods. Her invention was the process to create COBOL, one of the first high level programming languages that still serves as the back-bone of eighty percent of extant software. Yes, there were competitors. Yes, there were failures. Hopper lead the derivation of the standards that today drive the industry.

This brings up an interesting point. Early on, the assumption was that all software had to be custom to the job and the machine it was running on, a huge investment that was hard to recoup. Hopper's alignment and standardization of the software process led to growth in an industry that could have possibly failed.

Strategy is in the same boat, if you squint a bit. There are standard processes for strategy, but, honestly, they are whimsical, being based on the intuition and processes of individuals whether internal to an organization or external. There are twenty or thirty flavors of strategy. There is an opportunity to standardize things, much as COBOL standardized the software industry. What's the pay-back? Think about it.

Reference

Beyer, Kurt. Grace Hopper and the Invention of the Information Age. The MIT Press. 2009.

March 27, 2011

Rewilding

www.mixnerstrategy.com

Sometime around eight hundred years ago, man first arrived on the Hawaiian islands. While there is some question about what precisely happened next, it is clear that man's arrival was a very bad thing for the native flora and fauna. There were mass extinctions, some of them occuring very early in man's time on the islands, some of them later.

A scientist, David Burney, arrived to examine the Hawaiian islands in recent history. He had experience in using archelogical techniques, combined with advanced dating techniques and extensive experience in identifying extinct species of animals from their fossilized bones, and plants from their fossilized pollen. His biggest task was to locate a place on the islands with undisturbed soil stratas that would allow him to examine them to identify past species while at the same time carefully documenting the dates that plants and animals went extinct.

Now, let's combine the two data sets of extinction and identification into a new strategy for replacing lost ecologies. Digging in a relatively undisturbed cave on Kaua'i, Burney was able to place extinctions on a time-line and show a rough - exact really - correlation between the presense of first, initial explorers from other Pacific islands, and second, the first arrival of Western explorers. Now for the interesting part: Burney suggests that, using his data, he can suggest what plants to re-establish in Hawaii to recreate or closely simulate the environment before man arrived, including plants and animals. In fact, working with various agencies and land-holders on the island, he has begun work on re-introducing extinct species.

Obviously, there is a question of why this is important. It ends up that the older, now extinct, plants and animals are more sustainable. Keeping the gene pool dense with all the different species is easier to do in native habitats rather than in the green house. We can stop extinctions and environmental degradation, and provide a map for a future of newly introduced plants similar to extinct plants that will eventually be ecologically lush.

Reintroduction of extinct species into locales they were driven from is a possibility for large portions of the western United States because (and this is where it becomes interesting) some landholder like Ted Turner (who owns millions of wester US acres) wants to return his land to a "pre-man" state, or certainly, pre-whiteman state of ecological soundness and diversity. Using the methods of identification using archeology, etc. Turner is able to, with great assuredness, recreate sustainable environments soundly based on real historical data.

Re-wilding. A new word to add to the sustainability wars just kicking off because of global warming and the future necessity of replacing our oil-based energy economy with sustainable local "substitutes".

Reference

Burney, David A. Back to the Future in the Caves of Kaua'i. A Scientist's Adventures in the Dark. Yale University Press. 2010.

Bear Football

www.mixnerstrategy.com

College football has an opportunity to return to football the way it was in the fifties. It won't because the draw of the NFL is too large for universities and players alike. There's too much money involved. Bear Bryant liked it the old way, when there were smaller teams and smaller players. He didn't miss the segregation of football, especially Alabama football. And, yes, he did want to win. From his wallet (Barra, 503):

This is the beginning of a new day.

God has given me this day to use as I will.

I can waste it or use it for good.

What I do today is very important

because I am exchanging a day of my life for it.

When tomorrow comes, this day will be gone forever,

Leaving something in its place I have traded for it.

I want it to be a gain, not loss -  good not evil.

Success, not failure in order that

I shall not forget the price I paid for it.

Reference

Barra, Allen. The Last Coach. A Life of Paul "Bear" Bryant. W. W. Norton & Company. 2005.

Four Agendas for Four Kinds of Meetings

www.mixnerstrategy.com

Lencioni assumes that people hate meetings. No comment. He defines four kinds (Lencioni, 249): Daily Check-In, Weekly Tactical, Monthly Strategic, Quarterly Off-Site. They might be called "All the Meetings You'll Ever Need, in Eighty Hours Per Year" (Lencioni, 249):

  1. Daily Check-In last five minutes. They focus on schedules and activities.
  2. Weekly Tactical meetings last up to an hour and a half. They focus on activities, metrics, and tactical problems and issues.
  3. Monthly Strategic meetings are just that. They last from two to four hours. There is discussion, brainstorming, and decision-making on critical strategic issues.
  4. Quarterly Off-Sites may last two days. Strategy is reviewed, industry trends reported upon, competitors examined, individual and team training.

Having the first three carefully defined allows you to have productive Strategy Off-sites. Ignore these differentiators at you peril. The story is nice. The process is better.

Reference

Lencioni, Patrick. Death by Meeting. A leadership Fable...About Solving the Most Painful Problem in Business. Jossey-Bass. 2004.

Robert Kenndy in South Africa, 1966

www.mixnerstrategy.com

At a time when support of the black community in South Africa wasn't very popular, Bobby Kennedy spoke out (Isaacson, 292):

Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring, these ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance..."

Reference

Isaacson, Walter. Editor. Profiles in Leadership. Historians on the Elusive Quality of Greatness. W. W. Norton & Company. 2010.

Initiative-Based Communities Inside Your Business

www.mixnerstrategy.com

Your team has finished their strategy sessions. They have identified a couple major initiatives they want to roll out to the company as a whole. A simple question first. Is this a minor tactic or is it a major strategy. A test for a strategy might be that it addresses your colleagues, company stakeholders, business partners, maybe competitors all with the goal of achieving a company-wide success beyond what a single person is able to achieve by herself. Tactics may be easily iplemented at the individual or small team level because communication is easier and focus on the limited goal of the tactic is relatively simple. Things get done quickly. Strategies seem different since they are a level up from tactics in, apparently, complexity and time needed to accomplish them. Wouldn't be interesting, however, if we could make our strategies as simple as tactics and implement them "effortlessly" at the local level without the hoopla and pain of rolling out huge initiatives across your company.

If we assume, especially in a large organization (maybe even a global one), that smaller teams in local environments may address new strategies dissimilarly, we may be on to something. Not everyone has to do the same thing to get you the result you need. If you make smaller teams of colleagues, stakeholders, partners and competitors, it might be possible to get local results quickly and effortlessly, just like we said. Let them address what they consider to be important in the global strategy, but let them do it locally.

Kahan suggests some questions to get things rolling locally (Kahan, 121-122):

  • Ask people why they want to participate?
  • Do you want some sort of reward?
  • So far, have your received a personal reward from your participation?
  • What do you want to contribute?
  • What, practically, would you like to get from your small work group?
  • Tell us something extraordinary that you'd like to get out of what you do.
  • How do we engage others, outside our small group, in what we are doing?
  • Who's missing? Who should be add?
  • If you don't want to do this, if we changed something to be more enticing to you, what would it be?

Two things: Don't assume a global strategy has to be addressed globally and don't assume that participants may not change things to meet their needs. You might be wrong. There are lots of different to meet your goals. Take the risk of allowing local teams to figure out what works best.

Reference

Kahan, Seth. Getting Change Right. How Leaders Transform Organizations From the Inside Out. Jossey-Bass. 2010.

Reinvention of Your Brand - On the Web

www.mixnerstrategy.com

We all thought we knew everything there was to know about marketing and branding until the web came along. 1960 saw the creation of the Four Ps of Marketing, Product, Pricing, Place and Promotion. Those classic Four Ps have been replaced by the Four Es,

  • Experience (you have to be involved while the customer makes a buying decision),
  • Everyplace (you have to me communicating continuously, and modifying along the way, in order to figure out how to close the sale),
  • Exchange (yov've got to give more information - maybe, exclusive information like new product information before the launch, or maybe letting the customer actually design the product she buys) - to keep a customer) and
  • Evangelism (share an idea with a contact in such a way the he wants to pass it on, to share it with his friends - who become your friends) (Moffitt, 48-49).

The Four Es are great. And, as you can well imagine, there are strategic steps (really, just one step) you'd better take before you focus on the Four Es. That is to focus what you're about before beginning to build out your Four Es. In a way, the fun part of a web effort is just doing it. Ask two questions first (Moffitt, 90):

  • Just what is your focus, and, this is a new twist on things,
  • How do you focus on your customer before you focus on your company?

This last question isn't much different than normal strategy. You've got a couple more questions to answer (Moffitt, 92):

  • Where are you going? What are your business goals and objectives?
  • What are you values? Then, what are your customer's values, what is their lifestyle, and what are their desires?
  • What does your brand mean in the community, yes? But, what does your brand mean to you? The community is interested in commoditizing things. If you know your your brand and what it means to you first, that'll influence what the outside community thinks of you, and how they react to you.
  • What is the value you want to deliver to your new community, to your customers? Is it apparent in what you are offering? If you don't know what it is, you won't be able to deliver it, or your offering won't be interesting. 

One final question, or comment, really (Moffitt, 97): My bet is that the size of the community you end up building on the web really isn't that large. It's probably going to be less than two thousand members. If you decide to keep things small early on, you are able to build in the intimacy to what you are doing early on in the process. Make it focused enough on your community and you will be able to open a dialog that remains a dialog over a longer time frame, a good thing.

Reference

Moffitt, Sean and Mike Dover. Wiki Brands. Reinventing Your Company In a Customer-Driven Marketplace. McGraw-Hill. 2011.

March 04, 2011

They say it's disruptive...

www.mixnerstrategy.com

The Pepperdine Alumni Association recently hosted a series of c-level folks to talk about disruptive strategy at their companies. Here are things they mentioned:

  • Parker Aerospace developed a system to replace (the very explosive) oxygen in airliner fuel tanks with inert nitrogen. They are expanding the system into new markets beyond fuel systems.
  • St. Jude Medical has a new wireless patient monitoring system. Constant monitoring reduces costs by allowing them to focus on the patients who need attention at the time they need it. Other folks appear for check-ups, but not in an emergency situation only.
  • Yamaha musical products had a perfectly good digital replacement for their old analog mixers. However, their user base didn't like how it sounded. Yamaho replicated the look and feel of the old analog system over five years diode by diode, transistor by transistor, and then sold the system to the complaining users as a system that worked and sounded exactly the same, but was cheaper and easier to use.
  • Nissan has approached their new Leaf fully electric auto differently by attacking the infrastructure system at the same time they designed the car, so there will be enough "re-fueling" locations at the final launch of the vehicle.
  • Vizio figured out how to staff their $6 billion company (approximate) with only 175 folks by working very, very closely with their suppliers in Taiwan (one had to buy a $250 million piece of new equipment to make the new 3-D screens) to not only have them design the new systems, but have enough confidence in the ultimate success of  Vizio's market penetration to justify such huge production line innovations. Vizio has focused on making the consumer experience cheaper and easier - their 3-D glasses cost $1.50, not $150. The TV itself is hugely more expensive to produce, costs Vizio will recoup in expanded production over time.
  • Tesla owns their whole distribution system, ensuring - they hope - happy customers.
  • Epicardial Technologies has a new heart surgerly system. No more chest-cracking - they go in through small incisions.
  • Spectral Molecular Imaging has focused on earlier diagnosis of disease with an imaging system that focuses on the molecular level.
  • Origin Oil is figuring out how to use algae to generate oil.

The test book definition of a disruptive strategy is that the new product system is simpler, cheaper and not an incremental improvement on an existing product or service. Some of the systems above aren't simpler, for sure, but they are improvements. We'll see how they do in the marketplace.