Pearl Zhu's Blog, page 1394
October 22, 2015
Is BI a Project, a Policy, or an Ongoing Digital Capability
BI is a policy which companies are deciding to implement to manage data and an ongoing capability to capture business insight.
Business intelligence (BI) is the set of techniques and tools for the transformation of raw data into meaningful and useful information for business analysis purposes. BI complemented by Big Data plays an even larger role every year when in such domains as marketing have the right information before competitors is often crucial. But more strategically and specifically, is BI a Project, Policy or an ongoing digital capability?
BI is not a project, it is an ongoing digital capability. It is a fundamental change in an organization and will be only successful if people are not seeing it as a project with an end date. This means for sure that you need the buy-in from the top management because the costs for BI, especially for personal support and changes of the system will never stop. The licenses are most of the time the minor part of the investment. Implementing BI in an organization has a better chance to succeed when companies have installed a BI competence center which takes care about all belongings regarding this intelligence for all parts of the company. The BI competence center is the key initiative in an organization for the successful implementation and maintaining of corporate BI.
Mostly people who are involved in the BI project are from both sides of technology and business. You implement a BI strategy with a specific primary goal in mind, cost saving, identifying bottlenecks, and you build and validate your algorithms to reach the goal. All you need to do is pitch your solution successfully. Success in BI is meeting the business requirements. Easy access to data and should load fast. Empower end user to slice and dice the data the way they want it. Success lies in the high rate of adoption of your delivery/product/initiative. Consumption, decision making, and process implementations, as well as service improvements, are based on what is produced through BI. -Clear business objective (not detailed scope, but a few sample reports or types of information the business believes would add revenue or lower cost).-Solid, unified cross-silo core team with dedicated, not floating, resources.-Senior sponsorship.-Agreement within IT and business of its priority vs other projects.
Easy to deploy with flexibility and simplification is crucial for assessing BI success. Flexibility of a tech stack or implementation approach of the same with the aim to provide a business user, the capability of slicing and dicing of data and analyze data on various parameters is key. Often every business is dynamic and changes very frequently based on market needs. So if a business user needs to analyze data in a certain way due to change in business scenario and if IT team comes back and says.. "this change takes x days/weeks to modify this kpi/report /dashboard due to the involvement of various technologies..." Guess what, it irks user and the whole BI implementation is seen as a flop exercise. So making a change or analyzing data on a different set of values by the business user on the fly is key to the success of BI projects. In a nutshell, the end product should look like an Excel that is the tool every business user is connected with because of flexibility it offers and simplicity to modify the analysis on the fly.
BI is not a project, BI is a policy, which companies are deciding to implement to manage data. This policy consists of such elements like collection/gathering, storage, processing and publication of data. The policy is focused on supporting business processes. Whether the business process is effective or not, you have to measure it. It means you have to register all information, which are related to each task. Then you can analyze the process. BI policy implementation is about describing business processes. If you are aware how the process is conducted then you can deal with data. You can also ask what information is needed by operators at each task to make work more effective. Asking the right questions to the stakeholders upfront, and have the flexibility to pivot as the picture comes into focus.
Too often people over think the success metrics. Basically, you will see it in usage and people will talk about it. It is, however, critical that you know what the success factors should be prior to starting, otherwise it's pointless to deliver something for the sake of delivering it. Without business goals, you shouldn't have executed a BI initiative to start off with. If you don't scope it right with the end goal in mind, with all stakeholders fully aware of requirements and what will be delivered, it won't succeed or be adopted.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Business intelligence (BI) is the set of techniques and tools for the transformation of raw data into meaningful and useful information for business analysis purposes. BI complemented by Big Data plays an even larger role every year when in such domains as marketing have the right information before competitors is often crucial. But more strategically and specifically, is BI a Project, Policy or an ongoing digital capability?BI is not a project, it is an ongoing digital capability. It is a fundamental change in an organization and will be only successful if people are not seeing it as a project with an end date. This means for sure that you need the buy-in from the top management because the costs for BI, especially for personal support and changes of the system will never stop. The licenses are most of the time the minor part of the investment. Implementing BI in an organization has a better chance to succeed when companies have installed a BI competence center which takes care about all belongings regarding this intelligence for all parts of the company. The BI competence center is the key initiative in an organization for the successful implementation and maintaining of corporate BI.
Mostly people who are involved in the BI project are from both sides of technology and business. You implement a BI strategy with a specific primary goal in mind, cost saving, identifying bottlenecks, and you build and validate your algorithms to reach the goal. All you need to do is pitch your solution successfully. Success in BI is meeting the business requirements. Easy access to data and should load fast. Empower end user to slice and dice the data the way they want it. Success lies in the high rate of adoption of your delivery/product/initiative. Consumption, decision making, and process implementations, as well as service improvements, are based on what is produced through BI. -Clear business objective (not detailed scope, but a few sample reports or types of information the business believes would add revenue or lower cost).-Solid, unified cross-silo core team with dedicated, not floating, resources.-Senior sponsorship.-Agreement within IT and business of its priority vs other projects.
Easy to deploy with flexibility and simplification is crucial for assessing BI success. Flexibility of a tech stack or implementation approach of the same with the aim to provide a business user, the capability of slicing and dicing of data and analyze data on various parameters is key. Often every business is dynamic and changes very frequently based on market needs. So if a business user needs to analyze data in a certain way due to change in business scenario and if IT team comes back and says.. "this change takes x days/weeks to modify this kpi/report /dashboard due to the involvement of various technologies..." Guess what, it irks user and the whole BI implementation is seen as a flop exercise. So making a change or analyzing data on a different set of values by the business user on the fly is key to the success of BI projects. In a nutshell, the end product should look like an Excel that is the tool every business user is connected with because of flexibility it offers and simplicity to modify the analysis on the fly.
BI is not a project, BI is a policy, which companies are deciding to implement to manage data. This policy consists of such elements like collection/gathering, storage, processing and publication of data. The policy is focused on supporting business processes. Whether the business process is effective or not, you have to measure it. It means you have to register all information, which are related to each task. Then you can analyze the process. BI policy implementation is about describing business processes. If you are aware how the process is conducted then you can deal with data. You can also ask what information is needed by operators at each task to make work more effective. Asking the right questions to the stakeholders upfront, and have the flexibility to pivot as the picture comes into focus.
Too often people over think the success metrics. Basically, you will see it in usage and people will talk about it. It is, however, critical that you know what the success factors should be prior to starting, otherwise it's pointless to deliver something for the sake of delivering it. Without business goals, you shouldn't have executed a BI initiative to start off with. If you don't scope it right with the end goal in mind, with all stakeholders fully aware of requirements and what will be delivered, it won't succeed or be adopted.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Is the Best Customer Experience a sequence of Experiences?
The total Customer Experience is typically comprised of a complex set or series of interrelated processes or steps.
Digital is the age of customers. Customer-centricity is the description of the nature of the priorities in the organizations today. Each customer will have different needs and expectations throughout the basic process from shopping to delivery; from reporting the claim, appraising damages, and the acceptance or denial of the claim. Do you look at the entire experience as just a combination of experiences? Is there a specific journey that they are supposed to take and if they go off that path how do you handle it? Is the best customer experience a sequence of experience, if not, what is it?
Most of the time, Customer Experience is a sequence of events. But the sequence helps us understand the overall experience. The sequence is like the journey. The BEST customer experience leads to a positive emotional reaction, a WOW factor. One experience can be enough. After that you have to create a relationship, to maintain positive behavior of the client (loyalty, word of mouth, higher share of wallet, faster paying of bills and positive influence on employee engagement.) There is too much bias on terms like 'journey' or 'customer experience' or even 'sequence of experiences.' Often companies or organizations don't know how to develop a strategic plan based on how to create value for customers. If the sequence of events is based on "outside in" data and the end result is to transform the company or organization to increase its customer centric maturity and build a culture to focus on creating value for their customers... then let's call it a sequence of experiences or simply a strategic plan.
Look at Customer Experience from Outside-in perspective: Often organizations look at the Customer Experience from the inside out and there is nothing wrong with that as we are the ones that can change the inside. But The customer experience is about how customers encounter, observe, or under go a company's events or stages. We lay out a journey that we hope is helpful, positive, and shares experience with our customers. They may not like, appreciate, or really care about the journey or simply may not go through the journey in the "correct" way. Therefore, outside-in perspective means to collect customers feedback, understand their true feeling via empathy, and improve CE via digitizing touch points. Let the customer touchpoints land where they may to achieve the results. And beyond the emotional WOW, the experience is effortless (easy), productive ( achieved objective) and painless (frictionless). And there is consistency over time in the delivery of the experience.
Pay more attention to a very important factor which is a "Voice of the customer," or a VOC program where you do research into what the customer really wants. When you really understand (or attempt to understand) what the customer would say they want and what you found they actually want, that is when you can really develop an experience that fits them and their needs/desires. Being customer-centric is not just a few best practices, or even high level customer interface, it has to go deeper to integrate all key business ingredients in orchestrating a high mature business which has key capabilities to delight customers. Exert lots of intelligence, do data analytics, look for insights, use the imagination, but make validation, predictability, try to inspire everybody and fight to make your organization customer-centric but keep at profitable trail for the long run.
An effortless, productive, and painless/frictionless experience is the best. Invariably, the total Customer Experience is typically comprised of a complex set or series of interrelated processes or steps. The best customer experience occurs when an organization’s processes are so well integrated or orchestrated that the customer experiences or encounters a ‘near-seamless’ experience Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Digital is the age of customers. Customer-centricity is the description of the nature of the priorities in the organizations today. Each customer will have different needs and expectations throughout the basic process from shopping to delivery; from reporting the claim, appraising damages, and the acceptance or denial of the claim. Do you look at the entire experience as just a combination of experiences? Is there a specific journey that they are supposed to take and if they go off that path how do you handle it? Is the best customer experience a sequence of experience, if not, what is it?
Most of the time, Customer Experience is a sequence of events. But the sequence helps us understand the overall experience. The sequence is like the journey. The BEST customer experience leads to a positive emotional reaction, a WOW factor. One experience can be enough. After that you have to create a relationship, to maintain positive behavior of the client (loyalty, word of mouth, higher share of wallet, faster paying of bills and positive influence on employee engagement.) There is too much bias on terms like 'journey' or 'customer experience' or even 'sequence of experiences.' Often companies or organizations don't know how to develop a strategic plan based on how to create value for customers. If the sequence of events is based on "outside in" data and the end result is to transform the company or organization to increase its customer centric maturity and build a culture to focus on creating value for their customers... then let's call it a sequence of experiences or simply a strategic plan.
Look at Customer Experience from Outside-in perspective: Often organizations look at the Customer Experience from the inside out and there is nothing wrong with that as we are the ones that can change the inside. But The customer experience is about how customers encounter, observe, or under go a company's events or stages. We lay out a journey that we hope is helpful, positive, and shares experience with our customers. They may not like, appreciate, or really care about the journey or simply may not go through the journey in the "correct" way. Therefore, outside-in perspective means to collect customers feedback, understand their true feeling via empathy, and improve CE via digitizing touch points. Let the customer touchpoints land where they may to achieve the results. And beyond the emotional WOW, the experience is effortless (easy), productive ( achieved objective) and painless (frictionless). And there is consistency over time in the delivery of the experience.
Pay more attention to a very important factor which is a "Voice of the customer," or a VOC program where you do research into what the customer really wants. When you really understand (or attempt to understand) what the customer would say they want and what you found they actually want, that is when you can really develop an experience that fits them and their needs/desires. Being customer-centric is not just a few best practices, or even high level customer interface, it has to go deeper to integrate all key business ingredients in orchestrating a high mature business which has key capabilities to delight customers. Exert lots of intelligence, do data analytics, look for insights, use the imagination, but make validation, predictability, try to inspire everybody and fight to make your organization customer-centric but keep at profitable trail for the long run.An effortless, productive, and painless/frictionless experience is the best. Invariably, the total Customer Experience is typically comprised of a complex set or series of interrelated processes or steps. The best customer experience occurs when an organization’s processes are so well integrated or orchestrated that the customer experiences or encounters a ‘near-seamless’ experience Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
How Much do Senior Leaders need to support Change Management
With proactive support and full engagement of top leaders, Change Management can become an enjoyable voyage to discover the new landscape of business.
Change is a volatile subject, just like change itself. Everything changes continuously by following the laws of evolution, and the rate of change is accelerated. Corporate change can be a simple modification of strategy, a business process improvement or a more radical digital transformation. Generally speaking, how much do senior leaders need to support Change Management?
No doubt you need advocates at all levels, but the top is absolutely critical. Everyone has contributing value. We are all leaders and followers, managers and employees, staff and volunteers, men and women; regardless of the labels we are all one connected humanity. Being a genuine leader means that just because I have the power/authority, does not mean I have the right to abuse that power/authority. When we take away our titles, labels, degrees and certificates; we are just people coming together trying to make a difference in the world and want to be treated with integrity and respect. So "the leaders" need to model expected behavior and intentions every day because change doesn't keep a schedule. For a radical business transformation, Change Management must be sponsored from the top. It is a critical success factor in that attainment of the goals.
The weak support from senior leaders is the most common reason for failure. Sometimes key leaders actually do not support a change and actively undermine that change. More often than not, however, leaders do support the change but radically under-estimate the importance of their active and visible support for the change. Many seem to believe that if they make the decision to implement the change then the rest can be left to the project team. Nothing is further from the truth. Senior leaders need to understand that they must carry the brunt of the responsibility for communication with the organization. They must actively tear down barriers and secure necessary resources throughout the change process.
Senior leaders need to gain an in-depth understanding about changes, especially at the strategic level. Change is supposed to happen. Resistance is supposed to happen. However, many senior leaders honestly don't understand what their role is, don't want to discuss publicly due to the criticism they will get. This is not resistance. Likewise, senior executives that question the validity of a change or of the approach to change may not be resistance either. It may well be a lack of understanding. Often change leaders assume a key stakeholder is "resisting" when, in fact, they simply want to feel comfortable with the approach. When a remediating action is taken, the executive feels compelled to stop asking legitimate questions about the approach and the process ends up with groupthink. It is also important that attention is paid to the intrapersonal and interpersonal aspects of dealing with change. Technology is implemented by the teams working on the projects and if they are effectively equipped to deal positively with the changes taking place the process will be slow and could be much more painful than anticipated.
It is nevertheless true that the change itself has become unpredictable and evolutionary, as compared to treading through carefully laid down road-map - as it was done even a decade ago. A digital organization with strong change capability is an environment of growth and letting go, possibilities, chaos, solutions, innovation, creativity and change are interconnected. People, relationships, systems thrive in this type of environment, top leaders are change agent themselves, all relationships need to be cultivated continually, each day and every day. With top management’s proactive support and full engagement, Change Management can become an enjoyable voyage to discover the new landscape of business.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Change is a volatile subject, just like change itself. Everything changes continuously by following the laws of evolution, and the rate of change is accelerated. Corporate change can be a simple modification of strategy, a business process improvement or a more radical digital transformation. Generally speaking, how much do senior leaders need to support Change Management?
No doubt you need advocates at all levels, but the top is absolutely critical. Everyone has contributing value. We are all leaders and followers, managers and employees, staff and volunteers, men and women; regardless of the labels we are all one connected humanity. Being a genuine leader means that just because I have the power/authority, does not mean I have the right to abuse that power/authority. When we take away our titles, labels, degrees and certificates; we are just people coming together trying to make a difference in the world and want to be treated with integrity and respect. So "the leaders" need to model expected behavior and intentions every day because change doesn't keep a schedule. For a radical business transformation, Change Management must be sponsored from the top. It is a critical success factor in that attainment of the goals.
The weak support from senior leaders is the most common reason for failure. Sometimes key leaders actually do not support a change and actively undermine that change. More often than not, however, leaders do support the change but radically under-estimate the importance of their active and visible support for the change. Many seem to believe that if they make the decision to implement the change then the rest can be left to the project team. Nothing is further from the truth. Senior leaders need to understand that they must carry the brunt of the responsibility for communication with the organization. They must actively tear down barriers and secure necessary resources throughout the change process.
Senior leaders need to gain an in-depth understanding about changes, especially at the strategic level. Change is supposed to happen. Resistance is supposed to happen. However, many senior leaders honestly don't understand what their role is, don't want to discuss publicly due to the criticism they will get. This is not resistance. Likewise, senior executives that question the validity of a change or of the approach to change may not be resistance either. It may well be a lack of understanding. Often change leaders assume a key stakeholder is "resisting" when, in fact, they simply want to feel comfortable with the approach. When a remediating action is taken, the executive feels compelled to stop asking legitimate questions about the approach and the process ends up with groupthink. It is also important that attention is paid to the intrapersonal and interpersonal aspects of dealing with change. Technology is implemented by the teams working on the projects and if they are effectively equipped to deal positively with the changes taking place the process will be slow and could be much more painful than anticipated.It is nevertheless true that the change itself has become unpredictable and evolutionary, as compared to treading through carefully laid down road-map - as it was done even a decade ago. A digital organization with strong change capability is an environment of growth and letting go, possibilities, chaos, solutions, innovation, creativity and change are interconnected. People, relationships, systems thrive in this type of environment, top leaders are change agent themselves, all relationships need to be cultivated continually, each day and every day. With top management’s proactive support and full engagement, Change Management can become an enjoyable voyage to discover the new landscape of business.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
October 21, 2015
Is Innovation management a waste?
The purpose of Innovation Management is not to promote innovation, but to manage innovation as a process.
Innovation is to transform the novel ideas to achieve its business value. Innovation is not just about ideas or exchanging ideas, based on most of innovation models, idea creation is only one step of the innovation process. Therefore, in a basic view, innovation is a process and every process needs to be managed. But what’s the best approach to managing innovation? And there is the deduced question: Can you transform an idea into sustainable benefit without IM?
Innovation is absolutely a mindset; but via Innovation Management ( IM), you will create/enforce this mindset! People can learn tools to develop both their divergent and convergent thinking skills. They can learn to generate more novel and useful ideas in diverse teams. innovation is a mindset and a prerequisite to doing sustainable business these days. Innovation is more than designing new products, it is about establishing and nurturing a way of thinking where innovation is in every aspect of the business. Mindset leads to (innovation) culture, where the leadership has to understand that it is the process. As an organization, you need to manage your strategic directions, your process, capabilities of your people to create a much more innovative organization.
Innovation Culture (IC) is like Safety Culture. You have to live it and breathe it every day, otherwise you get injured. In the case of IM, you are really talking about how to manage resources (people, assets) to meet a new innovation objective. They are two very different things. IC is a mindset, a way of doing things, risk-taking, doing things differently, asking hard questions, failing and being able to fail again without repercussions. it is the organizational culture that you need as the grassroots of innovation. Management has to align its objectives with its culture, otherwise it is a lip service and no true innovation can occur. Also, innovation can occur anywhere in the organization, and frankly it has to occur in every aspect of the organization. People have to question why things are done a certain way, why people use products a certain way, what products the customer doesn't even know they want, why certain processes are done in certain ways, etc. Innovation cultures are behaviors towards innovation within the organization. CULTURE are the patterns of BEHAVIOR towards something: What is organization’s INNOVATION culture? Behavior towards innovation within the organization. At the 1st place, to what extent the innovation is (actively) embraced from every group of employees, whether C-levels allow and foster innovation (processes). In that respect, innovation “policies, programs and structures ” are the RESULT of IC. If IC is poor, innovation TOOLS will not be in place and vice versa. Organizations really need some kind of “spark” to initiate the seed of IC. The things are often missing in advocating are the CONSEQUENCES of poor innovation culture. So primarily you have to change the culture, then come "policies, programs, and structures "! And to change IC, you have primarily to change top leadership. How you intend to change policies that govern the innovation process, if C-levels are against? They will not allow to the internals to change anything and they will not hire external innovators! If you are not planning to use policies, programs and structures to change the culture, then what are you planning to use? These are the three tools that management has to create the desired culture.
IM needs to take a balanced approach: It is invaluable in the management of the innovation workflow, decision-making, and development process framework. IM is a way to manage the spend for R&D, just like stage gate and other project management and decision tools. IM is a set of tools for managers to oversee and report on product/process/idea development. IM needs to establish the framework to manage innovation in a systematic way. People can learn several things relating to creativity and these can come under the heading of innovation management. For example, people can learn a process to define the innovation challenge, generate and select ideas, plan for these to be implemented. They can do this so that better ideas get tested quicker and learned about faster. No doubt about it. Second, people can learn about their own problem-solving style. However, overly rigid IM processes kill innovation, because such management is about bureaucracy and innovation is about creativity. But if we say that IM is OPPOSITE to innovation and IM kills innovation, then it is the extreme which makes more harm than benefit! Take a balanced approach: provide maximal freedom for ideators, then straightforward process for converting an idea into an innovation. Maybe special attention has to be focused on idea assessment part of the IM process: if the process requests from ideators to elaborate on 20-pages form their idea, ending with SWOTs, feasibility studies, and business cases, then it is lousy IM process design! it is also impossible to make innovation at risk level reaching 0! And effectively, when IM is oriented like that, the only thing possible is to move backward. In fact, IM has to bring strategy to allow ideation and creativity growing unencumbered, and to pick up the ideas that will become innovations…
There are three factors need to line up for innovation to flourish: Innovation Management is a process tool which per se neither drives innovation competence nor innovation results. It is one of the 3 factors which need to line up for innovation to flourish. The other two: the existence of an explicit innovation strategy and a company culture which fosters innovation. All three factors need to have long term top management commitment and personal support. Delegation does not work here. Innovation management is not about generating innovation/ideas, but rather the processes to take ideas to value. In this process, certain ideas or opportunities will have more business appeal than others - and given that resources are limited. So the IM process 'should' enable focus on most attractive opportunities. If a company’s IM process is charged with 'creating the ideas,' it will likely become ineffective and stifling to the innovation mindset. If IM also provides a mechanism for the organization to freely express ideas and for these to be built upon, then this model can greatly enhance idea generation within the business.
It’s critical to strike the right balance between ideation and execution part of the innovation process. Far too many innovation management experts excel in helping their organizations to create ideas but come short in the other two phases of innovation. Before ideation, companies need to discover insights. After ideation, companies need to filter, prototype and validate their ideas. Far from stifling the production of ideas, managed ideation produces far more ideas than unmanaged brainstorming and thinking do. The quality of those ideas, however, depends on the insights that fuel them. The results of those ideas depend on the ability of the company to select the best ones, develop them and implement them. The true root of the challenge stems from either knowing or not knowing what you want to be to who! Companies or brands who understand and execute against that filter daily are far more likely to be successful in the long run.
It's a matter of measurement. The problem is that the KPIs to measure success in business have so often been predominantly financial in nature. The leading indicators for successful innovation are NOT financial, and most Innovation Management initiatives are not successful and are incredibly wasteful. The key is to properly measure, their success behaviors and hold them accountable. There is the standard way of measuring the innovation performance in the company: share of profit or revenue, generated from innovation. Of course, it is not easy to define how much was generated from innovation, but there are rough estimates: new products, improved products, cost savings due to innovation in internal processes.
If you don't have IM process in place, it is substantially harder and less likely to be an innovative company for long run. This means that your processes will be less safe and economic, products more expensive or with lower quality. Creativity results in ideas but until those ideas are actualized they will remain ideas. It is only after the ideas are implemented that they become innovations. That is innovation management.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Innovation is to transform the novel ideas to achieve its business value. Innovation is not just about ideas or exchanging ideas, based on most of innovation models, idea creation is only one step of the innovation process. Therefore, in a basic view, innovation is a process and every process needs to be managed. But what’s the best approach to managing innovation? And there is the deduced question: Can you transform an idea into sustainable benefit without IM?
Innovation is absolutely a mindset; but via Innovation Management ( IM), you will create/enforce this mindset! People can learn tools to develop both their divergent and convergent thinking skills. They can learn to generate more novel and useful ideas in diverse teams. innovation is a mindset and a prerequisite to doing sustainable business these days. Innovation is more than designing new products, it is about establishing and nurturing a way of thinking where innovation is in every aspect of the business. Mindset leads to (innovation) culture, where the leadership has to understand that it is the process. As an organization, you need to manage your strategic directions, your process, capabilities of your people to create a much more innovative organization.
Innovation Culture (IC) is like Safety Culture. You have to live it and breathe it every day, otherwise you get injured. In the case of IM, you are really talking about how to manage resources (people, assets) to meet a new innovation objective. They are two very different things. IC is a mindset, a way of doing things, risk-taking, doing things differently, asking hard questions, failing and being able to fail again without repercussions. it is the organizational culture that you need as the grassroots of innovation. Management has to align its objectives with its culture, otherwise it is a lip service and no true innovation can occur. Also, innovation can occur anywhere in the organization, and frankly it has to occur in every aspect of the organization. People have to question why things are done a certain way, why people use products a certain way, what products the customer doesn't even know they want, why certain processes are done in certain ways, etc. Innovation cultures are behaviors towards innovation within the organization. CULTURE are the patterns of BEHAVIOR towards something: What is organization’s INNOVATION culture? Behavior towards innovation within the organization. At the 1st place, to what extent the innovation is (actively) embraced from every group of employees, whether C-levels allow and foster innovation (processes). In that respect, innovation “policies, programs and structures ” are the RESULT of IC. If IC is poor, innovation TOOLS will not be in place and vice versa. Organizations really need some kind of “spark” to initiate the seed of IC. The things are often missing in advocating are the CONSEQUENCES of poor innovation culture. So primarily you have to change the culture, then come "policies, programs, and structures "! And to change IC, you have primarily to change top leadership. How you intend to change policies that govern the innovation process, if C-levels are against? They will not allow to the internals to change anything and they will not hire external innovators! If you are not planning to use policies, programs and structures to change the culture, then what are you planning to use? These are the three tools that management has to create the desired culture.
IM needs to take a balanced approach: It is invaluable in the management of the innovation workflow, decision-making, and development process framework. IM is a way to manage the spend for R&D, just like stage gate and other project management and decision tools. IM is a set of tools for managers to oversee and report on product/process/idea development. IM needs to establish the framework to manage innovation in a systematic way. People can learn several things relating to creativity and these can come under the heading of innovation management. For example, people can learn a process to define the innovation challenge, generate and select ideas, plan for these to be implemented. They can do this so that better ideas get tested quicker and learned about faster. No doubt about it. Second, people can learn about their own problem-solving style. However, overly rigid IM processes kill innovation, because such management is about bureaucracy and innovation is about creativity. But if we say that IM is OPPOSITE to innovation and IM kills innovation, then it is the extreme which makes more harm than benefit! Take a balanced approach: provide maximal freedom for ideators, then straightforward process for converting an idea into an innovation. Maybe special attention has to be focused on idea assessment part of the IM process: if the process requests from ideators to elaborate on 20-pages form their idea, ending with SWOTs, feasibility studies, and business cases, then it is lousy IM process design! it is also impossible to make innovation at risk level reaching 0! And effectively, when IM is oriented like that, the only thing possible is to move backward. In fact, IM has to bring strategy to allow ideation and creativity growing unencumbered, and to pick up the ideas that will become innovations…
There are three factors need to line up for innovation to flourish: Innovation Management is a process tool which per se neither drives innovation competence nor innovation results. It is one of the 3 factors which need to line up for innovation to flourish. The other two: the existence of an explicit innovation strategy and a company culture which fosters innovation. All three factors need to have long term top management commitment and personal support. Delegation does not work here. Innovation management is not about generating innovation/ideas, but rather the processes to take ideas to value. In this process, certain ideas or opportunities will have more business appeal than others - and given that resources are limited. So the IM process 'should' enable focus on most attractive opportunities. If a company’s IM process is charged with 'creating the ideas,' it will likely become ineffective and stifling to the innovation mindset. If IM also provides a mechanism for the organization to freely express ideas and for these to be built upon, then this model can greatly enhance idea generation within the business.
It’s critical to strike the right balance between ideation and execution part of the innovation process. Far too many innovation management experts excel in helping their organizations to create ideas but come short in the other two phases of innovation. Before ideation, companies need to discover insights. After ideation, companies need to filter, prototype and validate their ideas. Far from stifling the production of ideas, managed ideation produces far more ideas than unmanaged brainstorming and thinking do. The quality of those ideas, however, depends on the insights that fuel them. The results of those ideas depend on the ability of the company to select the best ones, develop them and implement them. The true root of the challenge stems from either knowing or not knowing what you want to be to who! Companies or brands who understand and execute against that filter daily are far more likely to be successful in the long run.
It's a matter of measurement. The problem is that the KPIs to measure success in business have so often been predominantly financial in nature. The leading indicators for successful innovation are NOT financial, and most Innovation Management initiatives are not successful and are incredibly wasteful. The key is to properly measure, their success behaviors and hold them accountable. There is the standard way of measuring the innovation performance in the company: share of profit or revenue, generated from innovation. Of course, it is not easy to define how much was generated from innovation, but there are rough estimates: new products, improved products, cost savings due to innovation in internal processes.
If you don't have IM process in place, it is substantially harder and less likely to be an innovative company for long run. This means that your processes will be less safe and economic, products more expensive or with lower quality. Creativity results in ideas but until those ideas are actualized they will remain ideas. It is only after the ideas are implemented that they become innovations. That is innovation management.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Three Es in Running a Digital IT
The ultimate goal for IT is to achieve the big E -IT EXCELLENCE via enablement, explorement, and effectiveness and Efficiency.
Although technology is more often than not, the disruptive force for business and industry innovation, IT organizations seem to have a tendency to align with the slow changing parts of the organization, so how shall CIOs prepare for the digital disruption and speed up accordingly? There is an “alphabetic soup” in running a digital IT which must lead in reaching high-level performance and maturity; besides triple “I”s - Information, Innovation, and Integration, triple “A”s - Automation, Analysis, and Agility, triple “C”s - Change, Collaboration, and Cloudification, triple “P”s - Principle, Process, and Performance. Here, we introduce the triple “E”s in digital IT:Enablement: Now we are living in an information explosive world where technology is pervasive and the masses are looking to their own experiences to introduce new technology into the business, corporate IT has to transform from a business controller to an enabler, IT needs to gain better understanding of the business and showing that knowledge by talking business to the business; at the age of IT consumerization, IT at all levels needs to understand how the business makes and loses money, and it needs to articulate solutions around this with business language. On the other side, businesses need to understand not only the power and the opportunity information could bring in, but also the potential risks they might get exposed to, so they will understand the criticality of IT governance and risk management approach. Some of the most difficult aspects of such shift is helping IT professionals truly understand that they need to change, establishing a new culture, communicating, and then engaging so that the old culture does not slip back in. After all, business and IT are all on the same team to ensure the organization as a whole can achieve an optimal business result for long term growth.
Exploration: IT is an important component in building differentiated business capabilities, which allow the organization to explore the new opportunities and unleash business potentials. From innovation perspective: IT mantra is shifting from “doing more with less,” to “doing more with innovation.” However, running an innovative IT doesn't mean IT will go “wild,” or "rogue"; more about IT should go smarter and flexible. In fact, creativity and process have to go hand in hand; without process there is chaos and from the chaos, it’s hard to be creative. It is practical to run a bimodal IT - IT still needs to keep the fundamental right - keep the light on to achieve the benefits of industrializing certain domains of activities and business’s bottom line. But IT should spend more resources and energy to explore the growth opportunity, to provide agile products and services, and to become an innovation engine to contribute to the top line growth of the business as well.
Effectiveness & Efficiency: Doing right things before doing things right. IT needs to shift from an order taker to an order shaker, A CIO is not a chief officer unless they are part of the senior leadership team to co-create business strategy, CIOs should be able to bridge the chasm between the operational aspects and the vision that they are creating for the business. To build effective IT leadership, CIOs must speak the language of the business. CIOs who are pure technologists will fail, but those who already speak the language of business value are at better place. From digital transformation perspective, the underlying point is that transformation is consciously changing the direction of a business (or part thereof), not a simple change and that a fundamentally different approach is required to standard projects. But most organizations fail to recognize the difference and thus, either fail or do not realize the full potential of transformational initiatives. After ensuring the effectiveness of IT change or transformation at the strategical level, they need to identify those individuals within the team who can carry their vision downwards to the team to achieve IT efficiency and agility at operational and tactical level. That said, the pair of effectiveness and efficiency is always critical to run a high mature IT.
The ultimate goal for IT is to achieve the big E -IT EXCELLENCE via enablement, explorement, and effectiveness and Efficiency. IT is the only entity in the organization supposed to understand business entirely and oversight organizational processes horizontally, IT needs to be able to provide an innovative solution or supply a differentiated capacity that contributes to both top line growth and the bottom line success of the organization. IT needs to become business enablers and innovation engine, rather than just tools or a back office service. IT must lead in reaching high-level performance and excellence.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Digital Transformation - Where do you start?
Start with the process or capability that is most critical (customer impacting) with the largest potential impact to the success of your firm.
Organizations large or small are on the journey for digital transformation. Audacious goals are absolutely important, but "boil the ocean" approaches seldom deliver expected results. So where do you start? And what’s the logical scenario to manage digital transformation seamlessly?
Start with WHY: As every successful change program, business transformation should follow the 'Golden Circle' starting with the WHY? (motivation), then addressing the HOW? (process) and the WHAT? (results) at the end. Do not turn it around if you want to setup for success. With a focus on the arrival point, success will be contingent upon culture, the state of the business, leadership (senior and positional influencers within the business), communication, team membership (internal and external), and the overall commitment to the goal. It is about the role of the "Problem Creator." A solution is nothing if the problem is not perceived, therefore, creating the awareness of the problem is the first step to making a solution be understood and accepted. How to identify where more specifically? - through internal (SWOT) and external assessments (benchmarks/consultations/customer feedback) of your baseline position and a joint position as to where you want to arrive (interim state/end state). Transformation starts with the realization that where you are currently no long can deliver the business objective and vision of success for your company and your shareholders. Determining what the future needs to look like (what the transformation must look like) is the next step. Having the most senior champion is critical - someone who will not only communicate what the transformation looks like and where people will fit in the new vision, but also be observed as the leader who is "marching towards" that transformational vision. That's the starting point.
And then, to explore the HOW: Start with the process or capability that is most critical (customer impacting) with the largest potential impact to the success of your firm. So many want results without understanding the process. It's a travesty of wasted human and financial resources, and leads to such unnecessary disillusionment and stress. Celebrate successes often and don't lose site of the "pulse" of the organization. HR needs to play an important role to 1) Involve, 2) Engage, 3) Emerge & Evolve 4) Evaluate and 5) Embrace the change. The vision and Idea of transformation should come from the highest chair with a timeline. Each department should have clearly defined goals. It is not a one-time activity. It should be an ongoing process. The process, change assessment, etc. are all tactics to get the organization there - but it all starts with the realization that "we can't stay the same."
Knowing when to applaud and when to keep moving: Digital transformation is a long-term journey, it has to be clearly understood in the map's vision to satisfy both short term gratification and long term outcomes. Whether they admit it or not, organizations must be sensitive to the desire for their people to see immediate results, HOWEVER, this desire must be tempered by the fact that true organizational transformation takes time. Often the instant gratification culture balanced against transformational change evolution is certainly a dilemma. Strategy is not instant and yet tactics along the way can be more reinforcing if they are put into the context of the overall journey. The journey is the thing, however, the milestones need to be celebrated along the way, without making them the destination, otherwise you delude yourselves into premature success and lose momentum and energy along the way.
Transformation is a journey rather than a destination: One issue is that organizations and people in them expect the change and the transformation to someday "be over"- it never is. If it was, the organization would simply stand still, never innovate and never make progress. The organizational journey is where the juice is in the organization, not just the destination. Destinations are for those checking in at arrivals and checking out at departures without enjoying the challenge and delight of the bit in between. Only with such understanding can timing be anticipated and incrementally/appropriately celebrated. Added to that the fact that the four basic Transformation phases 1) Denial; 2) Resistance; 3) Commitment; 4) Acceptance are not reached by team members at the same time. Eager anticipation enhances satisfaction as goals are realized, one ride at a time, one show at a time.
The key is having leadership understand the dynamics of Change/Transformation, and creating Change/Transformation Competency. Cognition, Resources, Motivation, Politics - the lack of, or complexity of each dynamic effects pace of transformation and timing of subsequent progress events. Leaders must not only have the road map but track the journey of each person along the way. Never leave people guessing. In doing this, the Transformation Journey is enjoyable, because the ports-of-call along the way are personally rewarding. Bridging the 'gap of opportunity' between where we are and want to become is a welcomed challenge.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Organizations large or small are on the journey for digital transformation. Audacious goals are absolutely important, but "boil the ocean" approaches seldom deliver expected results. So where do you start? And what’s the logical scenario to manage digital transformation seamlessly?
Start with WHY: As every successful change program, business transformation should follow the 'Golden Circle' starting with the WHY? (motivation), then addressing the HOW? (process) and the WHAT? (results) at the end. Do not turn it around if you want to setup for success. With a focus on the arrival point, success will be contingent upon culture, the state of the business, leadership (senior and positional influencers within the business), communication, team membership (internal and external), and the overall commitment to the goal. It is about the role of the "Problem Creator." A solution is nothing if the problem is not perceived, therefore, creating the awareness of the problem is the first step to making a solution be understood and accepted. How to identify where more specifically? - through internal (SWOT) and external assessments (benchmarks/consultations/customer feedback) of your baseline position and a joint position as to where you want to arrive (interim state/end state). Transformation starts with the realization that where you are currently no long can deliver the business objective and vision of success for your company and your shareholders. Determining what the future needs to look like (what the transformation must look like) is the next step. Having the most senior champion is critical - someone who will not only communicate what the transformation looks like and where people will fit in the new vision, but also be observed as the leader who is "marching towards" that transformational vision. That's the starting point.
And then, to explore the HOW: Start with the process or capability that is most critical (customer impacting) with the largest potential impact to the success of your firm. So many want results without understanding the process. It's a travesty of wasted human and financial resources, and leads to such unnecessary disillusionment and stress. Celebrate successes often and don't lose site of the "pulse" of the organization. HR needs to play an important role to 1) Involve, 2) Engage, 3) Emerge & Evolve 4) Evaluate and 5) Embrace the change. The vision and Idea of transformation should come from the highest chair with a timeline. Each department should have clearly defined goals. It is not a one-time activity. It should be an ongoing process. The process, change assessment, etc. are all tactics to get the organization there - but it all starts with the realization that "we can't stay the same."
Knowing when to applaud and when to keep moving: Digital transformation is a long-term journey, it has to be clearly understood in the map's vision to satisfy both short term gratification and long term outcomes. Whether they admit it or not, organizations must be sensitive to the desire for their people to see immediate results, HOWEVER, this desire must be tempered by the fact that true organizational transformation takes time. Often the instant gratification culture balanced against transformational change evolution is certainly a dilemma. Strategy is not instant and yet tactics along the way can be more reinforcing if they are put into the context of the overall journey. The journey is the thing, however, the milestones need to be celebrated along the way, without making them the destination, otherwise you delude yourselves into premature success and lose momentum and energy along the way.
Transformation is a journey rather than a destination: One issue is that organizations and people in them expect the change and the transformation to someday "be over"- it never is. If it was, the organization would simply stand still, never innovate and never make progress. The organizational journey is where the juice is in the organization, not just the destination. Destinations are for those checking in at arrivals and checking out at departures without enjoying the challenge and delight of the bit in between. Only with such understanding can timing be anticipated and incrementally/appropriately celebrated. Added to that the fact that the four basic Transformation phases 1) Denial; 2) Resistance; 3) Commitment; 4) Acceptance are not reached by team members at the same time. Eager anticipation enhances satisfaction as goals are realized, one ride at a time, one show at a time.
The key is having leadership understand the dynamics of Change/Transformation, and creating Change/Transformation Competency. Cognition, Resources, Motivation, Politics - the lack of, or complexity of each dynamic effects pace of transformation and timing of subsequent progress events. Leaders must not only have the road map but track the journey of each person along the way. Never leave people guessing. In doing this, the Transformation Journey is enjoyable, because the ports-of-call along the way are personally rewarding. Bridging the 'gap of opportunity' between where we are and want to become is a welcomed challenge.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
October 20, 2015
The Hot Debates of the “Future of CIO” Oct. 2015
The “Future of CIO” Blog has reached 1.1 million page views with #2269 blog posting in 59+ different categories of leadership, management, strategy, digitalization, change/talent, etc. The content richness is not for its own sake, but to convey the vision and share the wisdom, to inspire critical thinking and spur healthy debates.
Debating is a style of critical thinking activity, in order to win the debate, you would need to know more about your opponent and you would need to plan tactics and strategies to win the debate which would require applied critical thinking in order to discover and execute these things. We will share a set of hot debates about leadership and talent management here.
The Hot Debates of the“Future of CIO” Blog Oct. 2015Does Business or the World Really Want Transformational Leaders? We live at a time when organizational longevity has never been shorter and leaders have been born with limited life span. There’s a tough choice for leadership practice facing in business and society as well: do you prefer transactional leaders who care about the short term result or shall you advocate transformational leaders who articulate long-term vision and direction? Do you think that the majority of transformational leaders are "nuts," what do you mean? Do you see these as positive character traits that transformational leaders should have? In your experience interacting with transformational leaders who were "nuts," do you feel that they articulated the vision adequately? Do you have a positive experience with them? Are you willing and able to implement the changes they proposed? How often are you persuaded to support the changes they proposed? To put simply, does the business or the world really want transformational leaders?
Is Communication the Bottleneck in Decision Making? Communication is key to modern management. However, communication is not just the soft discipline, it’s both art and science, for example, there’re communication challenges between management and employees, there’s “lost in translation” in cross-functional conversation, how to overcome such challenges? Is communication the bottleneck in decision making, how to achieve the expected outcome? Understanding the logic behind these inquiries can untie the communication knots.
Is Culture Superior to a Strategy? Culture is the way, behavior; attitude or approach to work adopted by or embedded among a group of people in the conduct of business. Every organization has a culture - defined or not. Actual culture is a function of actual leadership, starting at the top. While the strategy is a set of choices set by business leaders, following with a series of actions to compete for the future. We all heard 'culture eats strategy for breakfast', does that mean culture is more important than strategy?
Why is Being Agile so Hard: Agile becomes mainstream software management philosophy and methodology. However, most of the organizations are at the stage of doing Agile, not being agile, doing agile is a set of activities; but being agile is the state of mind, the ongoing capability, and the culture adaptability. To dig through, why is being agile so hard?
Three Talent Debates: Touch Choice for the Future? The over-complex business eco-system, the hyper-competitive global environment, and the accelerated economic changes make talent management more strategic imperative than ever at the digital era in the 21st century. Character or skill, which one is more critical? Leaders, would you rather be liked or respected? What’s more important to CIO, technical skill or business acumen? Hopefully, all these insightful and paradoxical debates help spur the innovative thinking about future of talent management, groom more competent leaders with strong characters, inter-disciplinary skills, global cultural understanding and the long term vision.
Blogging is not about writing, but about thinking and innovating the new ideas; it’s not just about WHAT to say, but about WHY to say, and HOW to say it. It reflects the color and shade of your thought patterns, and it indicates the peaks and curves of your thinking waves. Unlike pure entertainment, quality and professional content takes time for digesting, contemplation and engaging, and therefore, it takes the time to attract the "hungry minds" and the "deep souls." It’s the journey to amplify diverse voices and deepen digital footprints, and it's the way to harness your innovative spirit.Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
The Top Traits of Leadership
Leadership is all about Future!
Leadership comes in all shapes and sizes. The practice of leadership also differs from individual to individual based on their character, temperament, thinking processes, or behavioural style, gifting or talent and, of course, their personality. All of these variations present us with a rich but inconsistent variety of leadership ranging from the highly successful to the sometimes quite incompetent. So what are the top traits of highly effective leadership?
Ability to Inspire - Encourage the team to take risks and try that has not been tried before. A great leader empowers others. Instead of saying 'go,' he/she says 'let's go.' Besides the five senses he/she needs to have the common sense to make decisions in the most appropriate manner according to the suitability of the situation.
Be authentic to be true to oneself and to the world at all times -To have the ability to know that nobody is perfect but can live a dream perfectly. To constantly unlearn and fight against conditioning and to respond creatively and uniquely at all times.
Be courageous to take risks -Creative leadership is the unique combination of leadership behaviours that develops and achieves high-quality results over a sustained period of time and risk tolerance.
Positive personal drive - this is the single biggest motivation for the rest of the team and it inspires better than anything else. have conviction and drive to pursue their goal irrespective of circumstances. If these qualities are strong enough, that inspires others to follow them.
Empathy is one of the most important attributes of being a great leader -have the ability think as if you were in the other party's position. Sometimes this attribute can get lost when hard decisions must be made, or conflict arises.
Being ethical is very important attribute a leader should have - If you’re not ethical, having good ideas, taking action, being a change agent will not matter to the teams you attempt to lead.
Character defines who we are -It encapsulates the attributes that we seek to embrace in ourselves and others. In the truest sense, it's what draws or attracts us to each other, more so than the likeness of seeing, being and thinking, during times of calamity and chaos; one's "true" character is exposed or discovered, even in the face of self-preservation! Contrary to conventional wisdom; adversity does not build character...it reveals character!
Transparency is a fundamental attribute that a leader should have -Telling your team exactly what you think of them, will not only garner the trust but also strengthen your leadership as people begin to trust you as a person and thus will respect you more as a leader.
Contextual intelligence - anyone can find themselves leading effectively if they find themselves in the right place, surrounded by the right people, at the right time and they recognise this and seize the opportunity.
Adaptability -In fact that characteristic makes someone better at almost anything in an ever changing environment. This doesn't mean changing things for fun or impulse but assessing an environment and adjusting to it (person, thing, event, etc.)
The top leadership traits are not limited to truthfulness, sincerity, generosity, flexibility, diligence, dependability, wisdom, enthusiasm, resourcefulness, initiative, decisiveness, loyalty, justice, listening, empathy, attitude, drive, risk taking, solutions (Problem solving), humbleness, integrity, perseverance, & many more.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Leadership comes in all shapes and sizes. The practice of leadership also differs from individual to individual based on their character, temperament, thinking processes, or behavioural style, gifting or talent and, of course, their personality. All of these variations present us with a rich but inconsistent variety of leadership ranging from the highly successful to the sometimes quite incompetent. So what are the top traits of highly effective leadership?
Ability to Inspire - Encourage the team to take risks and try that has not been tried before. A great leader empowers others. Instead of saying 'go,' he/she says 'let's go.' Besides the five senses he/she needs to have the common sense to make decisions in the most appropriate manner according to the suitability of the situation.
Be authentic to be true to oneself and to the world at all times -To have the ability to know that nobody is perfect but can live a dream perfectly. To constantly unlearn and fight against conditioning and to respond creatively and uniquely at all times.
Be courageous to take risks -Creative leadership is the unique combination of leadership behaviours that develops and achieves high-quality results over a sustained period of time and risk tolerance.
Positive personal drive - this is the single biggest motivation for the rest of the team and it inspires better than anything else. have conviction and drive to pursue their goal irrespective of circumstances. If these qualities are strong enough, that inspires others to follow them.
Empathy is one of the most important attributes of being a great leader -have the ability think as if you were in the other party's position. Sometimes this attribute can get lost when hard decisions must be made, or conflict arises.
Being ethical is very important attribute a leader should have - If you’re not ethical, having good ideas, taking action, being a change agent will not matter to the teams you attempt to lead.
Character defines who we are -It encapsulates the attributes that we seek to embrace in ourselves and others. In the truest sense, it's what draws or attracts us to each other, more so than the likeness of seeing, being and thinking, during times of calamity and chaos; one's "true" character is exposed or discovered, even in the face of self-preservation! Contrary to conventional wisdom; adversity does not build character...it reveals character!
Transparency is a fundamental attribute that a leader should have -Telling your team exactly what you think of them, will not only garner the trust but also strengthen your leadership as people begin to trust you as a person and thus will respect you more as a leader.
Contextual intelligence - anyone can find themselves leading effectively if they find themselves in the right place, surrounded by the right people, at the right time and they recognise this and seize the opportunity.
Adaptability -In fact that characteristic makes someone better at almost anything in an ever changing environment. This doesn't mean changing things for fun or impulse but assessing an environment and adjusting to it (person, thing, event, etc.)
The top leadership traits are not limited to truthfulness, sincerity, generosity, flexibility, diligence, dependability, wisdom, enthusiasm, resourcefulness, initiative, decisiveness, loyalty, justice, listening, empathy, attitude, drive, risk taking, solutions (Problem solving), humbleness, integrity, perseverance, & many more.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Three Change Principles
"Change" predictably involves numerous factors like Motive, Fear, Preference, Sensibility, Means, and Memory.
Statistically, more than two-thirds of change effort fail to achieve expected result. All efforts at having other humans act as you would like to depend in large part on circumstances, the number of actions/tactical moves, action sequence, and "action coordination" vary. Therefore, change is situational, these differences have to do with who the people are, what they plan, what and HOW they execute. Although there is no “one size fits all” formula for changes, you can set principles to make Change Management more effective and cohesive.
Communicate the values: Change is convenient, vastly general term that has both multiple formal meanings and - even more - differences in how people think and feel about certain particular changes. What distinguishes the changes that we a) make happen and b) develop support or opposition to has to do with our interior beings, specifically the values we hold. Progress is co-determined by them though we often think of progress as equally universal. Part of the imputed failure rate of change projects - by whatever name - is because those who lead and facilitate them fail to address, converse, and interact with others about the value needs to be met because they are almost always subsumed under the rubric of corporate business values. This is not to exclude or discount those values, but in many workplaces, people who work there need other values to be expressed. The really well-managed companies, the great places to work, can be largely identified by having employees who (mostly) share the same values.
Earn the trust: At any rate, "change" predictably involves numerous factors like Motive, Fear, Preference, Sensibility, Means, and Memory. We like to talk about Simplicity because we suspect that the enemy of successful change is Complication. But sometimes the enemy is simply that the value proposition of the change just isn't worth enough to the people being asked to buy it. all is a matter of perception. Nevertheless no matter how simple or complex change is people still keep missing something critical and keep missing something wrong when implementing change. Track record confirms that people don't go the extra mile for organizations, they go the extra mile for people and they only do this if they trust them. Trust is earned by leaders who act in the interests of their people, even when it is difficult to do so. So, change is easy to implement when there is trust between management and employees. When you earn the trust of the people that you are trying to "take with you," change is easy. Earning the trust is the difficult part as this requires the person leading the change to be doing it for the right reasons. The most effective way of making change happen is to take people with you by creating commitment and ownership." If trust is not built, the people you are trying to influence will intuitively know this and will feel as if they are there simply to help you achieve your goal and that you do not have their interests at heart.
Keep change elegant and measurable: The effectiveness and sustainability of change efforts vary with the degree to which methods are found to produce maximum effect with minimum effort and complexity. Why do you think so many Change decisions brilliantly made are wrongly implemented? Stakeholders/Sponsors can understand change, but it is not enough. Organization/People Change Readiness (Gap Analysis) should be diagnosed for organization alignment and establish performance reward management and feedback required to inhibit undesired behavior and reinforce desired/expected behavior.
Although there's no universal change solution. Besides three principles above, here is the one formula which does make some sense: People (50%) + Process (25%) + Tools (25%) (in that order) = Results. Sustainable results are much more achievable when people willingly drive processes and processes drive the tools, techniques, or actions that people employ. It is important to get the change right and manage change effectively.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Statistically, more than two-thirds of change effort fail to achieve expected result. All efforts at having other humans act as you would like to depend in large part on circumstances, the number of actions/tactical moves, action sequence, and "action coordination" vary. Therefore, change is situational, these differences have to do with who the people are, what they plan, what and HOW they execute. Although there is no “one size fits all” formula for changes, you can set principles to make Change Management more effective and cohesive.
Communicate the values: Change is convenient, vastly general term that has both multiple formal meanings and - even more - differences in how people think and feel about certain particular changes. What distinguishes the changes that we a) make happen and b) develop support or opposition to has to do with our interior beings, specifically the values we hold. Progress is co-determined by them though we often think of progress as equally universal. Part of the imputed failure rate of change projects - by whatever name - is because those who lead and facilitate them fail to address, converse, and interact with others about the value needs to be met because they are almost always subsumed under the rubric of corporate business values. This is not to exclude or discount those values, but in many workplaces, people who work there need other values to be expressed. The really well-managed companies, the great places to work, can be largely identified by having employees who (mostly) share the same values.
Earn the trust: At any rate, "change" predictably involves numerous factors like Motive, Fear, Preference, Sensibility, Means, and Memory. We like to talk about Simplicity because we suspect that the enemy of successful change is Complication. But sometimes the enemy is simply that the value proposition of the change just isn't worth enough to the people being asked to buy it. all is a matter of perception. Nevertheless no matter how simple or complex change is people still keep missing something critical and keep missing something wrong when implementing change. Track record confirms that people don't go the extra mile for organizations, they go the extra mile for people and they only do this if they trust them. Trust is earned by leaders who act in the interests of their people, even when it is difficult to do so. So, change is easy to implement when there is trust between management and employees. When you earn the trust of the people that you are trying to "take with you," change is easy. Earning the trust is the difficult part as this requires the person leading the change to be doing it for the right reasons. The most effective way of making change happen is to take people with you by creating commitment and ownership." If trust is not built, the people you are trying to influence will intuitively know this and will feel as if they are there simply to help you achieve your goal and that you do not have their interests at heart.
Keep change elegant and measurable: The effectiveness and sustainability of change efforts vary with the degree to which methods are found to produce maximum effect with minimum effort and complexity. Why do you think so many Change decisions brilliantly made are wrongly implemented? Stakeholders/Sponsors can understand change, but it is not enough. Organization/People Change Readiness (Gap Analysis) should be diagnosed for organization alignment and establish performance reward management and feedback required to inhibit undesired behavior and reinforce desired/expected behavior.
Although there's no universal change solution. Besides three principles above, here is the one formula which does make some sense: People (50%) + Process (25%) + Tools (25%) (in that order) = Results. Sustainable results are much more achievable when people willingly drive processes and processes drive the tools, techniques, or actions that people employ. It is important to get the change right and manage change effectively.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
October 19, 2015
Strategy Planning vs. Strategy Management
Strategic planning is the glove; Strategic Management is the hand inside the glove.
Strategic planning is the process of determining the strategy and how it will be implemented. Strategic management is the continuous planning, analysis, monitoring, and assessment of all that is necessary for an organization to meet its visions, missions, goals, and objectives. Strategic management can include strategic planning but also includes the actual implementation, evaluation, and modification of the strategy. There is absolutely no doubt that many people use the terms very imprecisely and that often blurs the lines between the words and results in confusion. In more detail, what are the differences between strategic planning and strategic management?
Strategic planning is the glove; Strategic Management is the hand inside the glove. And sometimes when strategies change, the hand adjusts the shape of the glove. Everything that we do, we plan, implementation, monitoring, assessment name it, it is planned. Therefore, true planning is the glove, management is the hand in the glove. What is the importance of managing strategy as against management of a strategic plan? It is more important to manage the strategy than it is to manage the plan. the strategic plan as merely the documentation of the strategy process. Thus, at the beginning of the implementation phase there should be no difference in managing a strategy and managing the plan. However, no plan is perfect. As the implementation proceeds, it is to be expected that some changes will need to be made in the original plan. If you are managing the plan, those necessary changes might not be made because if they were, then the plan would not be "the plan." However, if you are managing the strategy, then you will make the necessary changes to the plan in order to accomplish the strategic goals. More often than not, strategic management is an iterative continuum with nonlinear steps.
In many organizations, there is a discontinuity or even a chasm between ‘strategy’ and ‘execution’; between desired and delivered performance and results. In the respect of gaps between strategy planning and execution, the strategy is a statement of ‘higher intent’ but is not a detailed plan in itself. A strategic plan may outline the preferred course of action at the outset of implementing the strategy – provide direction – but this will inevitably evolve. If planned in detail as far ahead as the end state, much planning time and effort will be wasted. This performance gap is actually the result of the gaps caused by internal ‘friction.’ Strategy Management provides coherence between actual capability and the objectives that have been defined, and addresses in outline how the strategic objectives will be achieved, which includes exploiting your center of gravity. It provides a rationale and framework for operational and tactical actions. There is also the gap between desired actions and the actual actions of people at the front line. Since the actual actions of people are what lead to organizational outcomes and results, if there is a difference between actual and desired actions, especially in a dynamic environment, it is not surprising that there will be a gap between actual and desired results.
The operative phrase in Strategy Management is to "build the capabilities." The key here is engaging the whole organization in knowing and understanding the key strategies of the business and why the leadership has chosen them. Avoid these capability and culture gaps such as, an inability to build momentum and increase the tempo of operations; ·a waste of time, emotional energy and other resources invested in work that, while it may be well executed in itself, is unaligned to the bigger picture; the burnout of people; a cumbersome organization, lacking agility to thrive and survive. There is a logical scenario in building strategic capability/fulfillment into the culture of an organization:
-Communicate strategies in the connection of corporate goals and vision or objectives for the company.
-Enroll/name champions for each key (4-5) strategies committed to the outcome.-Create working teams for each strategy who determine what actions are required with "by-whens" promised by each member for accountability.
-Consistent meetings for progress, managing breakdowns, etc.
-Quarterly reports to the organization at large on each strategic initiative.
-Acknowledgments and celebrations for breakthroughs and successes.
Strategic agility can be achieved via well-integrating strategy planning and strategy management seamlessly, strategic agility means that strategy planning becomes a "living process" with regular evaluation, scanning, listening, revisiting and potential course correction. The forward-looking companies realize that the traditional management is marred by inherent strategic and organizational constraints, and they are looking for alternatives, therefore, the agile strategy is on the way.Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
