The Quarterly:
What have you really learned—and how has that changed over time—from
the different management styles and the different types of companies you all
have owned?

David Rubenstein:
“You should be very careful about the assumptions, in terms of the economy,
that you get in.  One, you don’t really know how good a company is going to
be when you buy it. Ninety-five percent or more of the projections of what
you’re going to earn are wrong.

Secondly, when you don’t have a good manager at the outset, you need to
get one. And if somebody is not a very good manager in the first year or so,
he’s probably not—or she’s not —going to get much better, so you probably
should make a change… Buying companies that really have a good culture
is extremely important. Making certain that the people in your firm know
how to add value—that’s also very important.”

David’s observation is that if managers aren’t very good in year one, they
probably won’t be much different in year two - is striking.  Even as managers
we seem to follow a script.  Whether as individual managers, or as part of a
culture, we seem to make choices that reflect assumptions or continuity in 
a way that’s much more powerful than responding to feedback.  Even
our seemingly best intentions.

Scripts seem to get clearer in the midst of transitions.  Maybe they are more
obvious because in the middle of a transition we should be making some
changes and instead it becomes obvious that we are following an enduring script. 

We see it regularly when invited in to assist customers with the transition
involved in deploying ManagePro in their organization.  Even on a very basic
task management level, we find that scripts are enduring and can conflict
with stated purpose, ex:  

- If you don’t normally operate in an organized manner,
using our tools and setting up a database will expose
how unorganized some of your projects are, how they
don’t tie together and the absence of linking with a direct
strategy.  It may also expose how little patience you
have for the effort to do the work to get organized.

- If you are primarily an ideas person, wishing you could
get people to execute better; using our tools will probably
expose how much you don’t finish, follow-up and/or close
out your documentation.  Your database will look like lists
of titles with no content in the details field.  We call them
“naked” goals.

- If you are used to using lists, not plans, to get things done,
your database will look like it and expose that it will require
a shift to break the habit of organizing by jotting down to-dos,
instead of organizing yours and other’s work around desired
outcomes and the plan or steps to get there.

Bottom Line:  

We all seem to have a pattern or script for engaging with work, people,
right down to how we approach managing tasks and information.  A script
that is hard to break, even in the face of feedback and/or acquisition of new
management tools like ManagePro or MProLite, that presumably we could
use to get beyond our usual patterns.   

I’m curious about what has worked for you when it comes to recognizing
and getting beyond your scripts.  

Links:
Task Management, Technology and You

I know this may sound unusual, especially from someone who runs a software company.  But the point about getting the “right” work contract in place is really important, so let me explain for a couple of minutes… well let me first share a common story we see.

We sell ManagePro into organizations all over the world.  People like you and me buy it because they want their workforce to function more effectively, coordinate and collaborate better.  They want everyone to work in a more organized, head’s-up strategic manner.  You get the idea. 

And as you probably know, no software is going to make people work that way.  Software is an enabler, not the magic, silver bullet that suddenly transforms people’s work habits. 

So guess what happens when we deploy into an organization?  Some of the people we train aren’t prepared to practice working more effectively.   During the software deployment they begin demonstrating to us that an effective work contract isn’t in place, and it’s absence is holding up the growth of the company.   Although they are being paid by the company, they refuse to adopt more effective work habits and the supporting technology.  They hold management hostage with the combination of their value and non-compliance.

Sound familiar?  You may have people operating with dysfunctional attitudes about work in your company as well, and yes they will impede your ability to ride the next upswing.

Do you know what kind of work framework or contract I’m talking about?  I’m talking about something deceptively simple, but vital, and one that you would be willing to back up by telling people to get off the bus or move to the back if they aren’t willing to follow. 

That work agreement, the very same one that is going to position you to take advantage of the upcoming economic swing, looks something like the following 3 guidelines (by the way my favorite reference for this is Dibachi’s book Just Add Management).  Stop and consider how your team would rate:

THREE  POINT CONTRACT

1.   The Basic Deal:
             You get paid for… delivering timely results, do the work assigned and respect people (including authority;)…  You don’t get paid for “being too busy, rationalizing why you can’t, etc.

2.  The Basic Relationship:
              Someone(s) is your boss and that relationship isn’t equal.  That means that ultimately you do things according to their priority, follow their plan, use their suggestions, their tools, and do it right.

Bottom Line:

Don’t miss out on the upcoming economic swing.  One of the best things, if not the best thing, you can do in your organization to get ready to take advantage of the upcoming surge is to get the right people and the right work agreement in place.  Oh sure we want you to enable those people with our ManagePro – the ultimate work management software and MProLite technology, but you need to get the PEOPLE thing right.  Call us at … we can help you with both.

Ok, consider yourself updated.  Now go do something good for your self and your organization with it and enjoy the upcoming economic shift.

Links:
Being Strategic about the coming Upswing (1of2)
Comfort, Adaptability and Winning at Business

What do you need to have in place to take advantage of coming upswing…
to not miss it?  What I’m going to suggest is going to surprise you.

Let’s see now, what’s on your short list for not missing the coming
upswing? You might be thinking:
   1.  Getting the next product complete, or
   2.  Maybe it’s a new distribution channel, or JV partner, or
   3.  Maybe you’ve got your eye on an emering or under-served market

In fact, all those things can be critically important to take advantage of before they pass you by in a hungry world market, especially the
US market, that is going to jump at good news. 

Guess what, while those options can all be very appropriate,  
they all miss one very fundamental key.  They are all outward focused. 

So just in case you’re over-looking this area, I wanted to get this
update out to you in February, because it looks like things are already starting to pick up.

Here it is, in one word. 

The secret, the key, the ace in the hole, rocket you need in place, tuned up and ready to go…  is PEOPLE.

What?  That’s right, people.

More specifically it is this:

1. Get the right people on the bus, in place, focused on where
and how they deliver best, and

And this one is even more important…

2. Having the right work contract in place.

This second point is worth its own blog.  I’ll continue and write about what the right work contract looks like tomorrow… promise.

Bottom Line:
There is an economic upswing already developing and McKinsey’s research suggests that the biggest growth jump happens in the first phase – a phase you and I don’t want to miss out on.  One of the sleepers about being prepared for an economic upturn, is the people factor.  Not just having the right people, but having the right kind of work contract and culture in place.  More about that on the next blog.

Here’s a couple of thoughts on the role of comfort and how it
interfaces with our success at working strategically… which in turn often
effects our relative level of success… and ultimately how pervasive
comfort is in influencing our decisions and expectations.

One of my working definitions of comfort at the job is the following:

Comfort equals not being subjected to challenge.

Challenges get represented in all sorts of ways, both externally and internally.
We may bristle or become accommodating when we get challenged externally,
but one thing is for sure, we don’t experience the process as comfortable.
Whether the external challenge is poor results, or disagreement, disapproval
or resistance from a co-worker, or something else – it doesn’t feel good,
doesn’t feel comfortable.

Subjecting yourself to internal challenges, such as questioning your approach,
your process, your level of achievement and your basic assumptions is also
reported as an uncomfortable experience or feeling for most.  Although I
have to confess I sort of like going there.

Here’s one of my primary observations for this blog:

Maintaining Comfort doesn’t support working Strategically.
In fact, when I observe  in myself and others, the need to maintain comfort,
I notice it usually sets me off, consciously or unconsciously, working to
maintain what’s existing, what’s familiar.

Doing what’s most comfortable is not directly tied by validation to doing
what works best – another one of my definitions for working strategically.
But I notice we are all pretty good at rationalizing that there’s more of
a connection that truly exists.

Working strategically begins to look like regularly exploring the very things
that make us uncomfortable.  Whether that’s setting stretch goals, rethinking
assumptions, challenging accepted inefficiencies, challenging people and their
approach, contribution… even membership on the team.

I notice sometimes that when I set goals or build a plan I get more
comfortable.  It’s like starting something or purchasing something
makes me feel like I’m doing something about the objective.  But
if I’m not careful, my increased comfort seems to displace the
needed work and activity of “getting on with it.”

I continue to be amazed at how much we invoke comfort, plan around
it, and generally avoid disturbing it in our selves and others while
trying to get work accomplished.   We treat discomfort like a sleeping,
mean junkyard dog.

In our culture we over-emphasize comfort and as a result
pay the consequence, which in part is a lessening of our ability to
work strategically.

This is especially evident when you are intending to invoke some type of change, improve a performance process and/or deploy a performance management software like ManagePro.

Bottom Line:

If you want to work more strategically, if you want to work more effectively,
it is important to not give too much homage to comfort.  To develop enough
skin to manage challenges, using them to further your progress… not retreat
in a search for that quasi equilibrium of comfort.   If you had to look at the
trade-offs you made this week between comfort and working strategically,
which one won?

It made me wonder about the 30 minute time frame and why 30, versus 10
or 90 minutes or…

Look at just a couple of examples on the web:

You can get Rachel Ray’s tasty recipes, guaranteed to take only
30 minutes to prepare.

You can get a new body using Bowflex in 20 minutes a work-out
2-3 times a week.

You can get new backlinks for your website in only 30 minutes.

Personal brand building on Twitter in 30 minutes.

30 minute clutter control from Good House Keeping.

There’s even a “30 Minutes” song and ring tone you can have downloaded
to your cell which includes the lyrics

“30 minutes, the blink of the night
30 minutes to alter our lifes
30 minutes to make up my mind
30 minutes to finally decide…”

So two quick questions for you, and it won’t take you 30 minutes to answer…

1. So why the emphasis on 30 minutes?  Is that the emotional limit of what
we are willing to commit in terms of time, priority?  Is that the limit
of an “easy to sign up for” commitment?  Maybe anything beyond 30
minutes looks like work, a burden, something hard, tedious, ___
you fill in the blank?

2. What’s not in the tag line for all the 30 minute adds, is the reality that
you have to do it regularly. Nothing really changes in 30 minutes, unless
you do it consistently, regularly.

Bottom Line:
Maybe change is fundamentally linked to 30 minutes. You can change
anything you want to in 30 minutes, as long as you do it multiple times
a week. Even improving your management efforts or a business culture
with ManagePro. It’s simple, empowering and maybe also daunting.
Your thoughts?

Links:

Strategic Time

Be a Strategic Manager by Leveraging Your Time

First of all, MBOs are pretty common place.  We work with companies
all over the world, and most of them have MBOs in one form or another.
That is they typically have a list of goals, objectives and KPIs in a
powerpoint, a word document, maybe an Excel spreadsheet.

Here’s the truth about that.  Most of those MBO lists we see are what
we consider dead.  In all likelihood your list of Business Objectives is dead
upon review after the first management or board meeting.  Only to be revived
prior to the next review meeting, whether that happens quarterly or annually.

What do I mean by saying they are dead? I mean that for most of us,
MBOs are just a list, a list that doesn’t really have any life to it in terms
of the managing process.   

No one is looking at those objectives today and deciding how to prioritize
actions or resources to make sure progress is made towards those
objectives.

You see, for most companies, MBOs are really a form of a report,
not something that daily drives decision making and prioritization,
not something  effective in managing organizations.– and consequently
the benefits of MBOs or managing by objectives is lost.

So I’m doing this blog and video because I would like to help you if you are
interested in getting the benefits of MBOs in place and alive and well at the
organization you work at.

What we find is that in order for MBOs to be alive you need two things:

1. First, the right kind of technology, and that’s not a powerpoint document
in case you were wondering.  The right kind of technology, like our product
ManagePro, that not only identifies your MBOs but also tracks and links all
the projects and tasks that are supporting those objectives.

What that does, over something like a powerpoint or a spreadsheet, is that
it gives you big time visibility, which means you get an immediate jump in
transparency, accountability and ultimately results, not to mention sharply
reducing the time spent searching for key information and the risk of having
details slip through the cracks.

2. Secondly you need to do something really uncomplicated, but you need
to do it regularly.  What’s that?  You need to regulary hold people accountable
to those MBOs, by completing reviews of their projects that are supporting
those MBOs. 

It’s really a very disarmingly simple process of asking three questions,
“Where are we?” e.g. Give me a status update on progress todate and issues,
“What’s next?” e.g. What are the next steps planned, and
“What’s the score?” e.g. How do we know if we’re making progress.

Again we make all of that a snap in ManagePro, right down to setting daily
priorities.  Try out the 30 day demo of ManagePro, that’s available on our site
at www.managepro.com – and let me know what you think.  I would also
encourage you to check out the link to the article below on the history and
evolution of MBOs, if you would like to know more about how we employ
that 20th century concept in the 21st century.

Links: 

The History and Evolution of MBO

MBO Software

MBO Techology and Processes

Hints for using MBO

While on the road last week I was thinking that if you were ever in the position to launch software across your group of direct reports, or a team or a business group or division – you would probably want to know what are the two obstacles that most frequently trip up executives in this position.  Doing face plants are frustrating, expensive, embarrassing and no fun.

I see the same two obstacles emere over and over again, and I’ve run into them when doing launches for large organizations like the United Nations in Rome, international firms in Asia, as well as in small, owner operated businesses in the US. Funny how it is the same regardless of where I go in the world.

So let’s get into this topic.  Executive sponsored software launches get stalled or have a marginal success rate for one of two reasons. What would you guess?

- It’s not trying to find just the right software, that stalls the process before you ever get to a launch.

- It’s not software features, and it’s not training, interestingly enough.

The first obstacle is INTERNAL or resides within the executive sponsor – and it prompts a very avoidable mistake.  If you’re that executive you:

a) Underestimate how much effort it will take to launch the software. You’ve usually embedded some pretty significant culture change requirements in the use of the “new” software package and you’re in a fair state of denial about how much work it will take to get people to change their work style so that they can effectively use the new software.

We see this all the time with ManagePro. Essentially ManagePro requires that people document progress updates and to-dos in order to work in a more coordinated, collaborative manner. If your business group is used to doing very little documentation and handle most things by phone calls or meetings… adoption of a software product like ManagePro represents a significant change in the work culture. 

I don’t mean to represent that software adoption is something that most teams can’t accomplish – they can, you can. And it can generate very high returns, sometimes to the tune of millions of dollars in quick order, but you need to evaluate what degree of forward step it represents for your group. Instead of minimizing or under-estimating the required resources, you may need to “buckle up” before launching the program when it involves the stressors associated with CHANGE an innovation.

b) The under-estimating often seems related to how much interest you the executive have in the change process. If you don’t like that sort of thing, you’ll find that it can quickly get more time consuming than you enjoy or are prepared to give.   What typically happens next is that you get busy on “next” early in the software adoption process, lose interest as it “drags” on, and don’t keep actively sponsoring the adoption process and removing obstacles that emerge. Actually you may be rather bored with the whole change process which surfaces when you introduce new software.

We consistently find that if this is you, you, as a sponsor, run out of interest or attending before the launch of new software is securely established. You may assign the responsibility to someone else, typically someone who isn’t as invested as yourself in the outcome, and who may not have the resources to complete the task.

One final side note.  Many of the people in the launch recognize this on some level (recognize that the sponsoring executive or manager will run out of interest pretty early in the game), and mirror the executive in pulling back from the effort as well. There goes the launch!

Bottom Line:

Executives and Managers who sponsor software adoption launches are apt to run into two predictable obstacles that threaten the success of the launch. Here’s a summary of the first obstacle and briefly what to do about it.

1. The most prominent obstacle that lies within the sponsor is UNDER-ESTIMATION.   Under-estimating the amount of effort required to launch new software because of the change factor involved, and under-estimating of the strength of their own continued interest and active sponsorship. The resulting fall-out is a software launch that is under-resourced, and for which existing +resources are front-end loaded.

Suggestions: Plan and resource software adoption as the expensive and valuable process improvement project it is. Make sure you are not the only sponsor and that you have multiple, highly involved, powerful sponsors that will help you drive the process… unless you like to climb steep mountains all by yourself.  Make sure you have the resouces to go the distance.

Talk with you in the next blog – send me your reactions.

Links:

The Emotions Behind Decision Making

Politics, Emotions and Software Buy-in

I want to address the activity that constructs the 4th step or leg under the table in working strategically.  In so doing I’d like to respond to the question from the previous blog, “If you wanted your organization to use technology and manage information more strategically…  What are the simple, daily steps?

Traditionally, people call to mind the phrase “Ready, Aim, Fire” to think of acting strategically.  It’s also common to reverse the order of the last two words (Ready, Fire, Aim) to describe a non-strategic way of working.

These constructs work well and also miss a very important fourth step.  By-the-way, the fourth step can be different activities in different situations, but it always comes back to this core concept that there’s always something fundamental to do after you complete the action step of “Fire” or the 3rd leg under the table.

So what are you supposed to do after you complete the action step referred to as “Fire”?

Maybe I could refer to it as the “Clean-Up” step.  The fourth step can comprise activities such as: follow-up, check back, write an inquiry, document what happened, measure or verify results, confirm if it worked, check on the historical trends, compare to previous month or year, etc.   It varies widely based upon the work being done, and some times it’s just as the term describes, “clean up and put everything away to be ready for next”… but it always exists.

Three things that stand out to me about the “Clean-Up” step.  Well actually a lot stands out, but here’s three things to consider, especially as it has to do with working strategically:

1. Clean-Up invariably means documenting in some fashion, taking more time in the present to document information to create leverage (information re-use and analysis) and efficiencies for the future and often for others.

2. Clean-Up is invariably more efficient if completed closely after the Fire sequence when it comes to managing information.  Write it down while all that information is still floating around in your short term memory cells.

Look at this example from SeattlePi this year covering a successful improvement process by the Virginia Mason hospital in Seattle.
    “… instead of doctors waiting until the end of the day to go through a stack of patient records, they now write comments and recommendations immediately after seeing the patient before going to the next one.  The time saved increases the time a physician can spend with a patient.  Dr. Kim Pettenger, medical director at Virginia Mason Kirkland, said most of the cost of medical care involves clogs in the flow of informaton – paper forms, lab results, phone messages, often leading to irritated patients.  Working the backlog down costs more than if you never let things pile up in the first place.”

The article also adds an important side note about requiring people to complete the 4th step:…
    “He (Dr. Pettenger) said not everyone has agreed with the new system and a few physicians have left Virginia Mason because of it.”

3.  Clean-Up invariably annoys some people, and some people handle the annoyance by putting it off (for someone else to do or until there’s another fire), and then some people just refuse and would rather quit then complete the 4th step.  People who work strategically get tremendous pay-offs from the 4th step.  It’s where they move ahead, gain insights, cement relationships, and build a future instead of just deal with the present.

Bottom Line:  Working Strategically involves four steps, not three.  The four steps are “Ready… Aim…. Fire… Clean-Up”.  

The last and fourth step is a step of investment that seems to consistently differentiate people and organizations that work strategically.  So don’t fall into the group that puts off the 4th step, or worse gets annoyed by it, use it to get ahead!

Links:

Being a Strategic Manager, People, using Information and “Fast Food” Technology

Be a Strategic Manager by Leveraging Your Time

The Relationship between Being Fast and Managing Information

Here’s the interesting thing about strategic management, including the software to strategically and collaboratively use information. It requires thinking, always has, always will.

More specifically it requires the kind of thinking or cognitive processes that are described as: engaged, questioning, sorting, defining, analyzing, comparing, testing, and synthesizing. Notice that these words or observations all describe the opposite of what you think of when you imagine the cognitive processes involved in operating your refrigerator or toaster appliance.

So will the technology to assist people in managing and working strategically ever become like an appliance – in effect, easy to operate without having to think about it? I don’t think so, and yet we see many people in management hoping to extend technology that enables people to work more strategically down through the organization… and often surprised that people consider it too difficult to use, too much not like a toaster.

Furthermore we see many new users surprised that they have to put information into the technology to be able to get value out. Another unmistakeable indication of a drift towards a “fast food”, drive-up expectation and approach to technology.

Strategic managers can also buy into the easy, simple, “fast food” myth. Just buy it, install it, get it configured, people trained, and you’ve got a complete solution. What follows in the aftermath, in our experience, is that the majority of people in management don’t push their people to make the regular needed investment in managing information necessary to function strategically… because it involves a discomforting push, and it doesn’t fit with the easy, appliance-like mentality. People don’t have to get pushed to use a toaster!

The whole technology market is screaming adds that say “it’s easy to use” – and presumably that’s because it’s what the consumer market keeps saying they want. Not that it will help you the most, or let you do more. It’s as if the business culture is shifting to center around what’s easiest, not best, solutions. In short, is our business community in effect saying, “We want the best product for the lowest price – that involves minimal or no effort on our part to use”?

Have we already passed into Moore’s final technology life cycle phase? 
Does the current market demand that every tool should function like a
refrigerator; buy it, plug it in and just use it.  Who needs the instructions –
you don’t need to think about it?

When it comes to processing information, does your operate and have the
expectations of a fast food center?   Before I wrap up this blog let me
leave you with a question and an answer.

Questions:
1. If you wanted your organization to use technology and manage information more strategically, how would you define managing strategically and having a strategic operation in terms of technology and information sharing, collaborative tools?
2. What are the simple, daily steps that need to occur to function (with or without technology) in this manner?

Answer: I think of it in terms of the old “Ready, Aim, Fire” phrase +1. I’ll write more about this in the next blog, but the Ready has a lot to do with understanding the external world and demands well enough that one is reasonably sure where one can afford to Aim.

The +1 is the trailing book-end for the Ready concept. In a word it is Verify or Follow-Up. Without verifying or following-up, how do you know if you reached your aim? The Verify or Follow-Up is critical to utilizing and keeping up-to-date strategic management software. This is definitely not appliance-like or “fast food” in nature.
 
In part we see this as a cultural shift. The American culture, in particular, seems to be overwhelmed with information at work, and when confronted with the choice or raising their game on how information is managed, or staying within their comfort zone, choose the latter. The most common choice is to minimize any energy expended to learn new tools and adopt new behaviors. Maybe that says we’re all more tired that we know. Maybe it says that more than ever, we expect software to be like “fast food”.

It’s as if it is too much energy or too much risk for management. The temptation is to be strategic personally, but not push the majority of users in an organization to get beyond appliance mentality. Oh there’s plenty of push to control costs, get a lot done, get it done on time, stay late, etc… just not to make the regular investment in the thinking, documenting and monitoring required to be more strategic.

In part we see this as a cultural shift. The American culture, in particular, seems to be overwhelmed with information at work, and when confronted with the choice or raising their game on how information is managed, or staying within their comfort zone, choose the latter. The most common choice is to minimize any energy expended to learn new tools and adopt new behaviors. Maybe that says we’re all more tired that we know. Maybe it says that more than ever, we expect software to be like “fast food”.

It’s as if it is too much energy or too much risk for management. The temptation is to be strategic personally, but not push the majority of users in an organization to get beyond appliance mentality. Oh there’s plenty of push to control costs, get a lot done, get it done on time, stay late, etc… just not to make the regular investment in the thinking, documenting and monitoring required to be more strategic.

The whole technology market is screaming adds that say “it’s easy to use” – and presumably that’s because it’s what the consumer market keeps saying they want. Not that it will help you the most, or let you do more. It’s as if the business culture is shifting to center around what’s easiest, not best, solutions.

In short, is our business community in effect saying, “We want the best product for the lowest price – that involves minimal or no effort on our part to use”? Have we already passed into Moore’s final technology iife cycle phase with the demand that every tool should function like a refrigerator; buy it, plug it in and file the instructions, who needs them – you don’t need to think about it? Does your organization operate strategically or more like a fast food center when it comes to processing information? Before I wrap up this blog let me leave you with a question and an answer.

Questions: If you wanted your organization to use technology and manage information more strategically, how would you define managing strategically and having a strategic operation in terms of technology and information sharing, collaborative tools? What are the simple, daily steps that need to occur to function (with or without technology) in this manner?

Answer: I think of it in terms of the old “Ready, Aim, Fire” phrase +1.

I’ll write more about this in the next blog, but the Ready has a lot to do with understanding the external world and demands well enough that one is reasonably sure where one can afford to Aim.

The +1 is the trailing book-end for the Ready concept. In a word it is Verify or Follow-Up. Without verifying or following-up, how do you know if you reached your aim? The Verify or Follow-Up is critical to utilizing and keeping up-to-date strategic management software. This is definitely not appliance-like or “fast food” in nature.

Links:

Be a Strategic Manager by Leveraging Your Time
Strategic Time

Strategic Manager Software

Why is Executing a Strategic Plan so Hard for Management

  ]]> http://www.performancesolutionstech.com/being-a-strategic-manager-people-using-information-and-fast-food-technology/feed/ 6 http://www.performancesolutionstech.com/working-strategically-and-the-3-legged-stool-of-outcome-game-clock-and-value/ http://www.performancesolutionstech.com/working-strategically-and-the-3-legged-stool-of-outcome-game-clock-and-value/#comments Sat, 08 Mar 2008 00:03:58 +0000 RBrim http://www.performancesolutionstech.com/index.php/working-strategically-and-the-3-legged-stool-of-outcome-game-clock-and-value/ Working and managing strategically requires a developed scan as well as optimization of resources and options.

This blog is aimed at describing three practical techniques you can use to work more strategically. Techniques that focus on how and what you scan, as contrasted with working in a “heads down” style. For everyone who manages projects and people, think of working strategically as directly tied to or enhanced by your capability to balance what I call a three legged stool.

The legs under that stool are alignment with Outcome, Time remaining, and current Value/priority. I’ll be much more specific below. But I’m suggesting that when you keep all three in play in your perceptual horizon, you optimize how you manage tasks and people. Stop scanning any one of these processes and you sharply increase the likelihood that your work will miss one or more adjustments needed to keep it strategically fine-tuned and end up with the best results. Let me use the following illustration.

Whether I was at the circus or just reading about it in a comic book, when I was a kid, the “lion tamer” always had two tools for coping with the big cats in the ring. A whip and the three legged stool. When the cat was obliging, the stool not only served as buffer between the lion tamer and the cat, but also a balancing perch on which the cat sat in a controlled manner. Stools are an important tool to use in managing controlled chaos.

Imagine that every day at work, is a little bit like you at the circus in the big cat ring. That’s probably not too hard to imagine. Cats have big mouths and can consume a lot, including you and me. Being in control is always sort of a tenuous thing. The whip can be important, but it’s not something you want to use on the cat except as a last resort. So what does the stool represent and how do you use the stool to help you manage strategically in the ring at work?

Here’s what the three legs of the stool represent for me.

#1 Outcome – The first leg of the stool is an Outcome focus. I don’t want to do anything without knowing the intended outcome. Don’t want to start without knowing where I’m hoping to end up. But that doesn’t cover it all, there’s something more to get with this one.

Some people understand the outcome and then they just jump in. “Well let’s get started.” That usually means they don’t work very strategically or effectively. It’s much better to not start until you know both the outcome and have identified HOW you’re going to get there. This is even more important when you’re not sure of the How. Because instead of randomly trying options, which typically mean we use a familiar approach (versus what might be most effective), you want to enact a plan, test, then adjust and do again.

#2 Game Clock – When I’m playing music, I can suspend time, get lost in the music if I choose, even while paying close attention to the meter of a song. When you and I are working and managing in a strategic manner, we want to do anything but suspend time. If you don’t have a really strong internal clock ticking away in side of your head naturally, develop one or get your pc or watch to prompt you.

The Game clock, as it does in any athletic event, reminds you that you only have so much time left to get ahead, to reach your outcome. Working stratgic is paying attention to the time remaining and adjusting the pace and options accordingly.

It’s not working until the task is finished, regardless of the time it takes. It’s not working at a pace that isn’t consistent with the outcome and time remaining. It’s not whining and saying, “I did the best I could.” Working and managing strategically is constantly scanning the game clock and asking yourself these type of questions:

• Do we still have enough time left to finish?
• If not, what needs to change (our approach, our goals?)
• What needs to be reprioritized?
• Who needs to be notified, what needs to change in our estimating? Etc.

#3 Value-Add – The 3rd leg of the stool is the shifting, relative concept of value and priority. Working strategically means understanding that the value-add of whatever you are doing or managing is a constantly changing reference point. Something that is a strong value-add when you started, may change during the course of the day. What seemed critical to accomplish at 8am, may be of secondary value at 10am.

People who don’t manage strategically, don’t pick up or pay attention to the change in value-add. People who don’t work strategically typically need a crisis to readdress value-add changes. If you pay attention to the Outcome and the Game Clock, you keep adjusting the Value-Add and consequential reallocation of resources to use your resources and options optimally, strategically.

Bottom Line: Working strategically, being a strategic manager, is a heads-up, scan-based work style. Of all the different things you could focus on in your scan, emphasizing the Outcome, Time Remaining, and current Value/Priority are particularly important to helping you achieve your results in a rapidly changing world.

Links:
Being a Strategic Manager and Your Schedule
Tips to Up Your Game as a Strategic Manager
Strategic Time
The Relationship between Being Fast and Managing Information
Goals and Performance Improvement