Pearl Zhu's Blog, page 1415
August 12, 2015
Introverts, Extroverts and Ambiverts
Do not limit to your personality, but develop it to mature you as a great human being and an effective leader.
The term “Introverts” and “Extraverts” were introduced by the psychologist Carl Jung in the earlier 20th century. An extrovert is to describe a person whose motives and actions are directed outward. Extroverts are more prone to action than contemplation, and generally show warm interest in their surroundings. An introvert is to describe a person whose motives and actions are directed inward. Introverts tend to be preoccupied with their own thoughts and feelings and minimize their contact with other people. As many concepts introduced at industrial age, the focus is too much on the two polar sides of personality, with ignorance of the middle ground - Ambiverts, the emergent concept to describe the personality in between, which has both introverted and extroverted traits, but neither trait is dominant, as a result, they have more balanced or adaptive personalities to fit in different circumstances. From the leadership perspective, who makes the better leader and why? What do introverts need to learn to advance? What problems do extroverts have? Do ambiverts have a blended personality to become a digital leader with agility and balance?
Research has actually found that there is a difference comes from how introverts and extroverts process stimuli. The stimulation coming into our brains is processed differently depending on your personality. For extroverts, the pathway is much shorter. It runs through an area where taste, touch, visual and auditory sensory processing takes place. For an introvert, stimuli runs through a long, complicated pathway in areas of the brain associated with remembering, planning and solving problems. Introversion is turning inward toward the interior world of ideas, feelings, fantasies, intuitions, sensations, and other facets of subjective experience. Extraverts, on the other hand, live almost exclusively in and for the exterior world, deriving fulfillment from regular interaction with outer reality.
Extroverts need to experience the world to understand it. Introverts need to understand the world before they experience it. It's not that introverts can't display an extroverted behavior or vice versa, it's how they feel at the end of the day. There are many benefits to being an introverts and many ways they contribute to society. An extrovert may more sound like a leader, but introverts often have great perspectives on every topic, they think more like a leader, and they should not be underestimated. They are like paper bills, might not be as loud as coins, but may worth more than them.
Ambivert is a complementary concept to cover the personality spectrum between the two ends - introverts and extroverts: “Introvert" and "extrovert" are too simple groups to divide people into. Another misconception is that extraversion and introversion are general personality traits. One can be an extrovert, or more correctly, display extrovert behavior in certain situations while being introvert in other ones. All decent measures of personality traits are not black and white but allow for varying levels of traits to come forward. That’s why the concept ambiverts are emerging: Ambiverts move between being social or being solitary, speaking up or listening carefully with a thoughtful mind and passionate heart, with emotions to adjust to changes accordingly.
No person is pure introvert or extrovert. Some are louder; others are quieter; some act more; others think more; some enjoy parties, others prefer reading… The world is perfectly fine to have such diversity of personality; the point is, as a business leader today, in face of “VUCA” digital new normal, regardless of your nature personality, you need to think more profoundly before speaking louder or taking action; you have to show the balance of personality traits in order to adapt to the changes, and cultivate higher leadership quotients (Emotional Q + Strategic Q + Creative Q + Paradoxical Q + Insight Q., etc.). Do not limit to your personality, but develop it to mature you as a great human being and an effective leader.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
The term “Introverts” and “Extraverts” were introduced by the psychologist Carl Jung in the earlier 20th century. An extrovert is to describe a person whose motives and actions are directed outward. Extroverts are more prone to action than contemplation, and generally show warm interest in their surroundings. An introvert is to describe a person whose motives and actions are directed inward. Introverts tend to be preoccupied with their own thoughts and feelings and minimize their contact with other people. As many concepts introduced at industrial age, the focus is too much on the two polar sides of personality, with ignorance of the middle ground - Ambiverts, the emergent concept to describe the personality in between, which has both introverted and extroverted traits, but neither trait is dominant, as a result, they have more balanced or adaptive personalities to fit in different circumstances. From the leadership perspective, who makes the better leader and why? What do introverts need to learn to advance? What problems do extroverts have? Do ambiverts have a blended personality to become a digital leader with agility and balance?
Research has actually found that there is a difference comes from how introverts and extroverts process stimuli. The stimulation coming into our brains is processed differently depending on your personality. For extroverts, the pathway is much shorter. It runs through an area where taste, touch, visual and auditory sensory processing takes place. For an introvert, stimuli runs through a long, complicated pathway in areas of the brain associated with remembering, planning and solving problems. Introversion is turning inward toward the interior world of ideas, feelings, fantasies, intuitions, sensations, and other facets of subjective experience. Extraverts, on the other hand, live almost exclusively in and for the exterior world, deriving fulfillment from regular interaction with outer reality.
Extroverts need to experience the world to understand it. Introverts need to understand the world before they experience it. It's not that introverts can't display an extroverted behavior or vice versa, it's how they feel at the end of the day. There are many benefits to being an introverts and many ways they contribute to society. An extrovert may more sound like a leader, but introverts often have great perspectives on every topic, they think more like a leader, and they should not be underestimated. They are like paper bills, might not be as loud as coins, but may worth more than them.
Ambivert is a complementary concept to cover the personality spectrum between the two ends - introverts and extroverts: “Introvert" and "extrovert" are too simple groups to divide people into. Another misconception is that extraversion and introversion are general personality traits. One can be an extrovert, or more correctly, display extrovert behavior in certain situations while being introvert in other ones. All decent measures of personality traits are not black and white but allow for varying levels of traits to come forward. That’s why the concept ambiverts are emerging: Ambiverts move between being social or being solitary, speaking up or listening carefully with a thoughtful mind and passionate heart, with emotions to adjust to changes accordingly.
No person is pure introvert or extrovert. Some are louder; others are quieter; some act more; others think more; some enjoy parties, others prefer reading… The world is perfectly fine to have such diversity of personality; the point is, as a business leader today, in face of “VUCA” digital new normal, regardless of your nature personality, you need to think more profoundly before speaking louder or taking action; you have to show the balance of personality traits in order to adapt to the changes, and cultivate higher leadership quotients (Emotional Q + Strategic Q + Creative Q + Paradoxical Q + Insight Q., etc.). Do not limit to your personality, but develop it to mature you as a great human being and an effective leader.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Does Making Arguments Help Open One’s Mind
An argument opens new perspective; changing perspective will change your mind.
An argument, seeks to change a concept, perspective, idea and provoke action. With or without a final satisfying outcome! Some ideas may be worth spreading. The argument is an investment of time, by two contrasting sparks, positive vs. negative, right vs. wrong, good vs. bad, etc. Are there benefits of conflict? If so under what circumstance? In what arena? Thought? Communication? Is our necessity for agreement rooted in egocentrism. Or is dialog more effective when contrasted with opposing views? Can making arguments help open one’s mind?
We become argumentative when the beliefs we hold as our foundation are challenged. This is a sign that one is not adaptive; we should be open to new information or a different view. What if our stance is wrong? It is ok to be wrong, as long as we learn, but holding on too tight to our perceived truth is the difference between power vs. force. The power lies in a quest for truth, and your perceived power may actually come from force, which is trying to impose your truth upon another even if it is not absolute. If people argue over an issue, it doesn't mean that they are competing or that they have competing interests. One side may just think that doing something is morally disagreeable, and the other side may think it's fine. That would be missed if both sides or one side misinterpreted the argument as "competing interests." The good intention to make an argument is about understanding the other point of view and learn something from it.
An argument opens new perspective; changing perspective will change your mind. The truth is the whole coin. Perspective is looking at either heads or tails. A coin is an interesting metaphor as while your focus is on heads you can not see tails and while looking at tails you can not see heads. The secret lies in "imagining" a perspective of the whole coin as you aspire towards truth. Beliefs, perspectives, or whatever you want to call them, are those things that we personally hold to be true, but which cannot be conclusively proven. The gray area is because there are serious philosophical differences regarding what a proof consists of. Perhaps, unnecessary argumentation is in some way the result of the lack of sincerity in purpose, lack of clarity in communication, lack of openness towards viewpoints of others and the lack of humility in personality.
Perspective is a personal " truth," and an argument is based on a position of passionate belief in this truth. This is why arguments can be seen as aggressive as a passion has a strong emotional foundation. This is obviously a double-edged sword as emotions can cloud clear thinking, the benefit is that you will "fight" much harder for something you are invested in emotionally. The problem with looking too hard at concepts of truth, perspective, argument, etc. is that the deeper you look, the more likely you can turn into a cynic. It may be helpful to start by distinguishing p-argument -- the process of arguing -- and m-argument -- the messages exchanged during such events. From there: p-argument implies that the people involved in it want to achieve something: that is, some change in the other party's mind. That is why they are still talking, after all. Their purpose is, for the sincere use of p-argument, to show how the view proposed by one participant A is really supported by (ideally: logically deduced from) beliefs the other already holds or can be led to hold by providing evidence, or more arguments in their favor. Logic and rhetoric have studied what makes such arguments-m effective and trustworthy, valid, so that you can feel confident in accepting the conclusion.
Arguably, humanity argues as much or more about what we ought to do, but has not developed good tools for the evaluation of these kinds of arguments, no matter how sanctimoniously officials promise to 'carefully weigh' these pros and cons. Generally speaking, an argument opens new perspective, evokes paradoxical thinking, you don’t need to agree completely with the other side of viewpoint, but you can always gain empathy, insight, and new perspective to see things from the other angle, and open mind for information and innovation, that should be the positive driver for making an argument and learn something from it.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
An argument, seeks to change a concept, perspective, idea and provoke action. With or without a final satisfying outcome! Some ideas may be worth spreading. The argument is an investment of time, by two contrasting sparks, positive vs. negative, right vs. wrong, good vs. bad, etc. Are there benefits of conflict? If so under what circumstance? In what arena? Thought? Communication? Is our necessity for agreement rooted in egocentrism. Or is dialog more effective when contrasted with opposing views? Can making arguments help open one’s mind?
We become argumentative when the beliefs we hold as our foundation are challenged. This is a sign that one is not adaptive; we should be open to new information or a different view. What if our stance is wrong? It is ok to be wrong, as long as we learn, but holding on too tight to our perceived truth is the difference between power vs. force. The power lies in a quest for truth, and your perceived power may actually come from force, which is trying to impose your truth upon another even if it is not absolute. If people argue over an issue, it doesn't mean that they are competing or that they have competing interests. One side may just think that doing something is morally disagreeable, and the other side may think it's fine. That would be missed if both sides or one side misinterpreted the argument as "competing interests." The good intention to make an argument is about understanding the other point of view and learn something from it.
An argument opens new perspective; changing perspective will change your mind. The truth is the whole coin. Perspective is looking at either heads or tails. A coin is an interesting metaphor as while your focus is on heads you can not see tails and while looking at tails you can not see heads. The secret lies in "imagining" a perspective of the whole coin as you aspire towards truth. Beliefs, perspectives, or whatever you want to call them, are those things that we personally hold to be true, but which cannot be conclusively proven. The gray area is because there are serious philosophical differences regarding what a proof consists of. Perhaps, unnecessary argumentation is in some way the result of the lack of sincerity in purpose, lack of clarity in communication, lack of openness towards viewpoints of others and the lack of humility in personality.
Perspective is a personal " truth," and an argument is based on a position of passionate belief in this truth. This is why arguments can be seen as aggressive as a passion has a strong emotional foundation. This is obviously a double-edged sword as emotions can cloud clear thinking, the benefit is that you will "fight" much harder for something you are invested in emotionally. The problem with looking too hard at concepts of truth, perspective, argument, etc. is that the deeper you look, the more likely you can turn into a cynic. It may be helpful to start by distinguishing p-argument -- the process of arguing -- and m-argument -- the messages exchanged during such events. From there: p-argument implies that the people involved in it want to achieve something: that is, some change in the other party's mind. That is why they are still talking, after all. Their purpose is, for the sincere use of p-argument, to show how the view proposed by one participant A is really supported by (ideally: logically deduced from) beliefs the other already holds or can be led to hold by providing evidence, or more arguments in their favor. Logic and rhetoric have studied what makes such arguments-m effective and trustworthy, valid, so that you can feel confident in accepting the conclusion.
Arguably, humanity argues as much or more about what we ought to do, but has not developed good tools for the evaluation of these kinds of arguments, no matter how sanctimoniously officials promise to 'carefully weigh' these pros and cons. Generally speaking, an argument opens new perspective, evokes paradoxical thinking, you don’t need to agree completely with the other side of viewpoint, but you can always gain empathy, insight, and new perspective to see things from the other angle, and open mind for information and innovation, that should be the positive driver for making an argument and learn something from it.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Tuning Digital IT: How to Transform IT From a Business Controller to an Enabler
Run, Grow, and Transform! IT needs to well run a balanced portfolio to both ‘keep the light on’ and drive digital transformation journey.
In today's digital business environment, information is the lifeblood, and technology touches every phase and each corner of the business, IT running in an industrial mode as a business controller or a gatekeeper no longer fits in the fast changing business circumstances or volatile digital dynamic, how to run IT with the growth mentality at digital speed? How to improve IT organization's maturity, from a controller to an enabler; from a support function to an innovation engine; from monolithic technology-heavy to mosaic information-driven?
IT needs to transform from an order taker to an order shaker: First, IT needs to gain better understanding of the business and showing that knowledge by talking business to the business; and second, IT's ability to execute and communicate. If you cannot talk business to the business, or cannot communicate effectively about execution, you will leave others with no choice, but to order IT about which will be perceived as the only way to get anything done. 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. Some of the most difficult aspects of digital transformation 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.
IT needs to transform from a business controller to an enabler: Second, at the age of IT consumerization, 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. If 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, then we are also at a time when it is no longer acceptable for non-IT business people to plead ignorance or be exasperated about the issues of privacy, security, interoperability, etc. If you are savvy enough to be using cloud-based services, then you have to be savvy enough to at least understand that there are risks your company will take on as a result of your actions. So while IT must change in many ways, so must the business when it comes to accountability for technologies they want to introduce. The need for other areas in the business to change as well.
IT has to strike the right balance between innovation and standardization. It is important for IT to standardize the applications and devices customers use to keep support cost down and manage risks effectively. With the advent of web-based and cloud-based solutions, this is no longer a major concern. The user can use almost any client device to access information, so long as the target system is secure and maintained by IT in a consistent and standard way. The new focus and challenge for IT is enabling different user access via the use of different online devices in a secure way. Often there is a huge gap between IT-Business mutual understanding and trust. On one side, most of business managers still perceive IT organizations as support functions only, not inviting IT to brainstorm strategy; and IT leaders also say that they can't put together a strategic plan because the business doesn't have one. You need to see this as an opportunity - not a roadblock. So while the other areas of the business need to change, IT should ask itself how it can influence - and help - them to do that. 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.
At digital age, CIO needs to be a 'bridge' - a networker and communicator and lead his or her CxO colleagues on the digital journey. Enablement comes through being recognized as a trusted partner, and this trust does have to be earnt. The technical knowledge and experience is needed, but the days of the overly technical CIO are numbered, modern CIOs need to be business strategists, talent masters, customer advocates and governance champions. Daily execution must absolutely continue. It will take a focused effort to begin moving forward. It begins by addressing the department's culture and mindset. At the same time, work with the rest of the C-suite to build trust and rapport. As you do that, talk with them about their expectations and needs. Show them some of the other things happening in other companies and industries. Build a case with them for IT transformation and show that you are the one to help make that happen. It helps tremendously to have another set of eyes looking at things from a different perspective, and giving you a sounding board for your thoughts and questions.
Run, Grow, and Transform! IT needs to run well a balanced portfolio to both ‘keep the light on’ and drive digital transformation journey. Trust is an extremely important factor in this journey. And it takes very solid leadership, focus, and the ability to build strong relationships with all levels of the organization, IT has to become a business enabler to catalyze the change and improve organizational effectiveness and agility.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
In today's digital business environment, information is the lifeblood, and technology touches every phase and each corner of the business, IT running in an industrial mode as a business controller or a gatekeeper no longer fits in the fast changing business circumstances or volatile digital dynamic, how to run IT with the growth mentality at digital speed? How to improve IT organization's maturity, from a controller to an enabler; from a support function to an innovation engine; from monolithic technology-heavy to mosaic information-driven?
IT needs to transform from an order taker to an order shaker: First, IT needs to gain better understanding of the business and showing that knowledge by talking business to the business; and second, IT's ability to execute and communicate. If you cannot talk business to the business, or cannot communicate effectively about execution, you will leave others with no choice, but to order IT about which will be perceived as the only way to get anything done. 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. Some of the most difficult aspects of digital transformation 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.
IT needs to transform from a business controller to an enabler: Second, at the age of IT consumerization, 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. If 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, then we are also at a time when it is no longer acceptable for non-IT business people to plead ignorance or be exasperated about the issues of privacy, security, interoperability, etc. If you are savvy enough to be using cloud-based services, then you have to be savvy enough to at least understand that there are risks your company will take on as a result of your actions. So while IT must change in many ways, so must the business when it comes to accountability for technologies they want to introduce. The need for other areas in the business to change as well.
IT has to strike the right balance between innovation and standardization. It is important for IT to standardize the applications and devices customers use to keep support cost down and manage risks effectively. With the advent of web-based and cloud-based solutions, this is no longer a major concern. The user can use almost any client device to access information, so long as the target system is secure and maintained by IT in a consistent and standard way. The new focus and challenge for IT is enabling different user access via the use of different online devices in a secure way. Often there is a huge gap between IT-Business mutual understanding and trust. On one side, most of business managers still perceive IT organizations as support functions only, not inviting IT to brainstorm strategy; and IT leaders also say that they can't put together a strategic plan because the business doesn't have one. You need to see this as an opportunity - not a roadblock. So while the other areas of the business need to change, IT should ask itself how it can influence - and help - them to do that. 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.
At digital age, CIO needs to be a 'bridge' - a networker and communicator and lead his or her CxO colleagues on the digital journey. Enablement comes through being recognized as a trusted partner, and this trust does have to be earnt. The technical knowledge and experience is needed, but the days of the overly technical CIO are numbered, modern CIOs need to be business strategists, talent masters, customer advocates and governance champions. Daily execution must absolutely continue. It will take a focused effort to begin moving forward. It begins by addressing the department's culture and mindset. At the same time, work with the rest of the C-suite to build trust and rapport. As you do that, talk with them about their expectations and needs. Show them some of the other things happening in other companies and industries. Build a case with them for IT transformation and show that you are the one to help make that happen. It helps tremendously to have another set of eyes looking at things from a different perspective, and giving you a sounding board for your thoughts and questions.
Run, Grow, and Transform! IT needs to run well a balanced portfolio to both ‘keep the light on’ and drive digital transformation journey. Trust is an extremely important factor in this journey. And it takes very solid leadership, focus, and the ability to build strong relationships with all levels of the organization, IT has to become a business enabler to catalyze the change and improve organizational effectiveness and agility.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
August 9, 2015
How do You Well Tune the 'Change Management' Process?
Change is the new normal. However, more than two-thirds of Change Management effort fail to achieve the expectation. When would you communicate the change imperative to your employees and how would you ensure that they buy-in to this new directive? And how do you well tune the “Change Management” processes in managing change with efficiency, effectiveness, and agility?
Ownership and accountability of change management lie at the capable hands of the executive team. Change Management always fails when management thinks they get all the answers, and they come up with a plan in a vacuum and try to sell it. It’s important to have the team own a process by bringing them in early and getting their involvement in creating the process. Your job as management is to make the final call and make sure the team adheres to the process, and they know why it's needed and what it fixes or improves. And 'exceptional change leaders' need to ensure that they dilute change management principles and monitoring techniques at all levels down below until they reach the lower level employees.
It needs a solid organizational culture that is built on foundations of 'accepting change.' Not every management executive has a foolproof plan laid out. Even the management has a complete, realistic plan in place, who's to say that the employees will not show resistance to the proposed change? Business executives themselves cannot be the only people who can successfully transform the organization. In some organizations, the management team lives in an illusional world when they 'assume' that their employees will accept change in a gracious manner. Organizations are a huge melting pot of various personalities and depending on the generation the comprised employees belong to, 'change' is probably the last thing on their minds, regardless of how enthusiastic the management team is. Therefore, you need to gain all marketing skills been taught in the world before committing the change management Journey.
Make sure all of management is on board and educated well on the objectives and how to carry them out effectively. Often that works on a micro level should work on a macro level, you just need to have a strong team of middle managers to delegate to. How you do this will tie into the cultural and philosophical values you project to the organization as a leader. You need to not only sell policy but also sell values on culture and philosophy. Management needs to allow the community to have a voice for feedback, a much-needed mechanism to refine and fix a policy that is not functioning at an optimal level. As a leader, you must become an architecture of community creation, and then you need to be able to step back and allow the community to self-govern, this is what you must strive for. During the whole process make sure that all staff is aware of the plan and process, timely updated, and responsible for something. Make yourself accessible all the time in case there are questions from staff.
Following the scenario with logic steps to manage changes: In order to execute a successful change management process, there is a need to delegate roles and responsibilities of the process, and have a strong-honest communication plan in place. First of all, organizational managers should remind themselves that Change Management is all about balancing the following main elements impacting change: People ( most important one), Strategies, Procedures and IT. And you have to maintain and fix any imbalance in those elements by establishing a committee to involving the management in the HR, IT and operations. Secondly, you want to emphasize on the Human Resources role in the change management as people is always considered as the real axle for the organizational movement. Hence, people resistance could stop all other elements. Change Management part that is played by the HR is the factor number one for any successful organizational & Strategic Change Management. Thirdly, Change Management is leadership game, and leadership involvement is a must.Lastly, having Change Management agenda ready, with planned and ensured communication from top to down would highly help in building the new culture.
A systematic Change Management takes logic process and stepwise scenario, it is about leaders identifying their vision, strategy and approaching, make each feel responsible of the success of the plan, engage them actively and make sure that your new proposal solves their current problems and provides better working environment. It means change is not for its own sake, but putting people at the center of the change.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Three Aspects of Digital Balance
Nature and human society is a ‘complex adaptive system’ inhabiting interacting agents that adapt to each other and their environment. It is a nonlinear, dynamic and open system in a thermodynamic sense. Unlike closed equilibrium system, it hence spontaneously self-organizes; generates patterns, structures and complexity; and above all, creates novelty over time.
The balance of micro vs. macro perspective: The problem with micro and macro as a starting point is that it does not implicitly help people differentiate between "thinking about systems" and "thinking in systems." The universe is an inter-mix of micro and macro entities and every aspect of it is characterized by duality. The human thought process is controlled and limited by internal and external factors. When we do macro-thinking, we invariably leave out micro-thinking and vice-versa. It is possible to think about systems from a micro and macro perspective in a systematic fashion, you cannot observe what you do not know. Recognition cannot function without cognition. The problem is with having the ability to reflect over how you make sense of something - to reflect your process of sensemaking as a way to query the relevance and boundaries of the prejudice you have used in your judgement process.
The balance of leading and following: The very concept of 'leading' implies that leaders and followers are trying to move somewhere, with the leader making more of a contribution about the direction of that movement. Does this also imply that the direction: the vision is one the follower shares with the leader? With today’s uncertainty and ambiguity, the needs of the individuals participating and collaborating should somehow taken into account, but leaders should have abilities to discern, analyze & synthesize, and make fair judgement in order to make the right decisions based on the often overloaded information. And followers shouldn’t just ‘blindly’ follow their leaders, they have to practise independent thinking and critical thinking, actively participating and engaging in knowledge sharing, to be the leader in their own knowledge domains, to discover the purpose and master the expertise as well. If there is mutual respect, it makes a lot of difference. Most of the times, people are disrespectful because they themselves are not being treated with respect. If their opinions are valued, and if they get dignified responses to their suggestions, they too, will feel good about it. People can be creative and express themselves openly. For that, top management will have to proactively create such a culture.
The balance between orders (standardization) and ‘chaos’ (innovation): Organizations and their people learn through their interactions with the environment: They act, observe the consequences of their action, make inferences about those consequences, and draw implications for future action. The process is adaptively rational, it has to strike the balance of ‘keeping the order,’ and sparking the innovation. Requirements and process of implementation of innovation are: -Know yourself thoroughly. -Find the possible alternatives to be adopted.-Study the alternatives and select the best possible implementable alternative.-Formulate the strategy to implement, considering your present strengths and weaknesses.-Implement with full belief and faith in yourself. This also requires the strategy of do, check and do. This helps to avoid any unforeseen error.
This human virtue of adaptation and evolution and being ‘novel in finding solutions’ will see us through even for many more centuries. Life itself could be viewed as resulting in emergent means of reorganizing, refocusing and rebalancing resources. In fact, the need of the time is to “better understand evolution and harness its power to serve human purposes” and design the institutions and societies to be a well balanced system with abundance of energy and sustainable advantages.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
August 8, 2015
How to Help Functional Managers Think in a more Strategic Way?
Organizations have personalities in the same way that an individual does.
"Fire-fighting" is commonplace in management. The ability to operate in this mode to find and implement a quick solution is often rewarded because it is so visible. This quick solution is very focused on the specific problem, so the broader picture and potential impact on other things are not explored. However, such short-term focus mentality will stifle innovation and damage organization’s long-term strategic execution. As business executives or strategists, how can you help all functional leaders or managers think in a more strategic way? How to run an organization that the business as a whole is superior to the sum of pieces?
Business strategists need to help functional managers understand the benefits of taking the broader view before jumping into action. In many business environment that is due to 'the system' making a virtue of the ability to 'fire-fight,' and be very responsive to very short notice inputs. Because this has been 'the way we do business around here' for so long, it appears that many folks simply don't know what 'good' looks like when it comes to thinking in terms of the longer and broader picture and, even less, how to do it. This sort of mentalities and behaviors not only come from functional managers, even from senior executives. Hence, it’s a hard slog dragging these folks to the water when trying to get them to think strategically. So business strategists have to work through with the senior executive team in trying to build a future state blueprint for their improvement program, to create a target to focus effort and valuable resource. If this can become a habit replacing the adrenaline rush to fight the fire, it would be more advantageous in the long run. Another approach is to sell the benefits of thinking more broadly before jumping into actions, in terms that will grab their attention (maybe about cost efficiency, increased profit, bigger market share or just 'making tomorrow better than today').
Organizations have personalities in the same way that an individual does. Most often, an organization's personality replicates the personality of its leader, and that the personalities of the leadership drive the culture of the organization. It can be very disruptive for employees to find themselves under a change of leadership even though their job descriptions have not changed at all. There are different mentality either by nature or through training; some people may mentally be "planners" while others naturally "shoot from the hip." The ones that shoot from the hip tend to leave the plans on the shelf and never use them, while planners value the effort and thinking that went into that plan and ensured it is regularly used as a living document. In organizations that tend to "shoot from the hip," there is a lack of strategic and tactical plans for problem-solving, or the plan is written on high without employee participation. All too often, plans are written and stuck on a shelf. The result is an absence of guidance in daily problem solving. The most effective use of a plan of any kind is as a discussion driver. It doesn't even matter if it turns out the plan is all wrong for the company. By having discussions about the plan at all levels of the company, people learn how best to work together to serve the customer. Without that discussion, it may never be recognized that a plan is not workable. Every time an idea comes up, those who have been taught this process, work through the questions. It results in one or more people in the conversation facilitating both strategic and systems considerations of the idea. The use of open questions is very powerful. For example, exploring how the idea aligns with organization's vision and key strategies. Then looking at what impact it might have in a few year's time. And exploring what impact the idea is likely to have on other stakeholders - internal and external.
The best way to avoid the leadership gap is to have every employee write a section of the plan that pertains to their particular area of expertise. Building a business concept, developed in the company by top executives. It should be simple, well done and thought thoroughly while in construction. Everyone should know what it is for. Use it as a filter to evaluate initiatives. Refer to the business concept for guidance. They need to codify who their "suppliers" and "customers" are both inside and outside the company, by writing their personal business plans and communicating that plan to their "suppliers" and "customers," they help ensure that everyone they do business with on a daily basis understands how issue resolution affects them.
1) Encouragement: Push and encourage yourself and others to "think in bigger boxes" (think outside of your job description and consider company and industry and even societal impacts). 2). Creativity: Assume that every problem has multiple solutions and ask yourself and others for "three ways we might address this issue." (One may be much better than the others, but push for multiple solutions.) 3). Multidimensional thinking: Take the time to look at every situation from multiple points of view (customer POV, supplier POV, management POV, etc.).
It is important to train your managers and people think more critically, strategically, and systematically. Strategic and Systems Thinking generally, if not always, strives to find a simple solution. Critical thinking is also an important skill to have in this rapidly changing business environment. Recognizing the changing trends and needed corrections to a strategic plan is a huge asset to a company. Business leaders and strategists need to present the profound and clear example on how to gauge an individual's thinking style quickly and effectively. Functional managers have to think “big,” to understand that the business as a whole is more superior than any function, and employees should understand how they create value, and it will motivate many people and make them feel more engaged with their work.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
"Fire-fighting" is commonplace in management. The ability to operate in this mode to find and implement a quick solution is often rewarded because it is so visible. This quick solution is very focused on the specific problem, so the broader picture and potential impact on other things are not explored. However, such short-term focus mentality will stifle innovation and damage organization’s long-term strategic execution. As business executives or strategists, how can you help all functional leaders or managers think in a more strategic way? How to run an organization that the business as a whole is superior to the sum of pieces?
Business strategists need to help functional managers understand the benefits of taking the broader view before jumping into action. In many business environment that is due to 'the system' making a virtue of the ability to 'fire-fight,' and be very responsive to very short notice inputs. Because this has been 'the way we do business around here' for so long, it appears that many folks simply don't know what 'good' looks like when it comes to thinking in terms of the longer and broader picture and, even less, how to do it. This sort of mentalities and behaviors not only come from functional managers, even from senior executives. Hence, it’s a hard slog dragging these folks to the water when trying to get them to think strategically. So business strategists have to work through with the senior executive team in trying to build a future state blueprint for their improvement program, to create a target to focus effort and valuable resource. If this can become a habit replacing the adrenaline rush to fight the fire, it would be more advantageous in the long run. Another approach is to sell the benefits of thinking more broadly before jumping into actions, in terms that will grab their attention (maybe about cost efficiency, increased profit, bigger market share or just 'making tomorrow better than today').
Organizations have personalities in the same way that an individual does. Most often, an organization's personality replicates the personality of its leader, and that the personalities of the leadership drive the culture of the organization. It can be very disruptive for employees to find themselves under a change of leadership even though their job descriptions have not changed at all. There are different mentality either by nature or through training; some people may mentally be "planners" while others naturally "shoot from the hip." The ones that shoot from the hip tend to leave the plans on the shelf and never use them, while planners value the effort and thinking that went into that plan and ensured it is regularly used as a living document. In organizations that tend to "shoot from the hip," there is a lack of strategic and tactical plans for problem-solving, or the plan is written on high without employee participation. All too often, plans are written and stuck on a shelf. The result is an absence of guidance in daily problem solving. The most effective use of a plan of any kind is as a discussion driver. It doesn't even matter if it turns out the plan is all wrong for the company. By having discussions about the plan at all levels of the company, people learn how best to work together to serve the customer. Without that discussion, it may never be recognized that a plan is not workable. Every time an idea comes up, those who have been taught this process, work through the questions. It results in one or more people in the conversation facilitating both strategic and systems considerations of the idea. The use of open questions is very powerful. For example, exploring how the idea aligns with organization's vision and key strategies. Then looking at what impact it might have in a few year's time. And exploring what impact the idea is likely to have on other stakeholders - internal and external.
The best way to avoid the leadership gap is to have every employee write a section of the plan that pertains to their particular area of expertise. Building a business concept, developed in the company by top executives. It should be simple, well done and thought thoroughly while in construction. Everyone should know what it is for. Use it as a filter to evaluate initiatives. Refer to the business concept for guidance. They need to codify who their "suppliers" and "customers" are both inside and outside the company, by writing their personal business plans and communicating that plan to their "suppliers" and "customers," they help ensure that everyone they do business with on a daily basis understands how issue resolution affects them.1) Encouragement: Push and encourage yourself and others to "think in bigger boxes" (think outside of your job description and consider company and industry and even societal impacts). 2). Creativity: Assume that every problem has multiple solutions and ask yourself and others for "three ways we might address this issue." (One may be much better than the others, but push for multiple solutions.) 3). Multidimensional thinking: Take the time to look at every situation from multiple points of view (customer POV, supplier POV, management POV, etc.).
It is important to train your managers and people think more critically, strategically, and systematically. Strategic and Systems Thinking generally, if not always, strives to find a simple solution. Critical thinking is also an important skill to have in this rapidly changing business environment. Recognizing the changing trends and needed corrections to a strategic plan is a huge asset to a company. Business leaders and strategists need to present the profound and clear example on how to gauge an individual's thinking style quickly and effectively. Functional managers have to think “big,” to understand that the business as a whole is more superior than any function, and employees should understand how they create value, and it will motivate many people and make them feel more engaged with their work.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Leaders vs. Managers
The primary role of leadership is about creating change while the primary objective for management is creating order.
A fundamental purpose of leadership is to provide vision and empower change while a fundamental goal of a manager is to oversee the tasks and execution. Some great managers do lead well, and leaders manage well, but many do not have both skillsets. Some leaders manage badly, and many managers lead badly. What are the most important differences between leaders and managers? And how to cultivate more talents with both skillsets?
Leaders inspire people to think about and reach for what can be. Managers execute to what is. It is rare that any of us are pure leaders or managers, but we have to play both roles based on the team or organization's overall needs. Leaders invite debate and challenges from employees for innovative ideas. Whereas, the managers merely administer and execute the assigned functions with an aim to achieve targeted results. The problem is that if the manager gets stuck in the day to day activities and remain happy with compliance, then there is no room for creativity to do better than expected. If we don't take risks, try new methods and challenge the traditional approach and follow agile leadership, and then the task gets boring and not effective. Great leaders not only have great vision but are realistic towards making it happen, and have a great manager to compliment the execution process. You also need a great manager that understand the vision's prime directive and capable of ensuring a smooth transition during the execution phase towards a successful completion of the vision. Otherwise, it would fail in making it happen. Being a leader can on occasion feel isolating, however, by following your instinct, you will more often than not turn the situation around and produce a positive outcome. A great manager does need to lead "at times" and a great leader does need to manage "at times," however, at the very core, great managers and great leaders are both critical to every organization and we should respect both leaders and managers
The primary role of leadership is about creating change while the primary objective for management is creating order. Good managers discover and develop leaders in the team.Sometimes the manager will not be the leader of the team but if manage with intelligence can discover the talents and work to retain them and to direct each member's abilities to the best of the company. Leaders are great visionaries. They possess an innate potential to transform vision into reality and become the true source of inspiration and motivation for success. Effective leaders facilitate progress and encourage innovation. Great managers engage people with effective communication and utilize win/win strategies to overcome obstacles. To be a great leader you need to know how to manage as well. Management focus Leadership focus Task/Things Vision/PeopleControl Empowerment Efficiency Effectiveness Doing things right Doing the right things Speed Direction Practices Principles Command Questioning/Pulling/Communication
Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. When we try to neatly and distinctly package, characterize, and compartmentalize the traits, skills, competencies, IQs and EQs of leaders and managers we tend to oversimplify their purpose, role and function: What is more important: Having a catalog of traits or gauging the impact, the effectiveness and efficiency of leadership and management on followers and organizations? There is an obvious dichotomy between the two extremities of the scale, but most leaders have to learn to be good managers, and vice versa. A great leader can define and effectively communicate the vision, and good managers to help make it happen. To inspire one to take action in a common cause is a trait of leadership. To be memorable as the catalyst for concerted efforts to achieve a common goal or achievement is a trait of leadership. If leaders can be developed, there should be different levels of leaders according to their strengths. If there are different levels of strengths, leadership should be able to develop along their strengths and determine their competencies and accountabilities.
Leaders are the visionaries moving forward for growth, inspiring the masses for a common goal with innovative moves toward the future. Managers are the implementers, taking the visions of the leaders and implementing the actions actually to make the visions become realities. Leaders hold a long-range view. Good leadership is about doing the right things. Managers: 1+1=2, Leaders: 1+1=3. Leaders use influence to motivate and inspire others to follow and support them as they move the organization beyond its comfort zone. Challenging beliefs, ideas and strategies along with accepted ways of doing things are all hallmarks of leadership. In reality, leaders have to manage, and managers have to lead to a greater or lesser extent. So the goal is to cultivate talents that are fluent in both skillsets, they are not mutually exclusive.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
A fundamental purpose of leadership is to provide vision and empower change while a fundamental goal of a manager is to oversee the tasks and execution. Some great managers do lead well, and leaders manage well, but many do not have both skillsets. Some leaders manage badly, and many managers lead badly. What are the most important differences between leaders and managers? And how to cultivate more talents with both skillsets?
Leaders inspire people to think about and reach for what can be. Managers execute to what is. It is rare that any of us are pure leaders or managers, but we have to play both roles based on the team or organization's overall needs. Leaders invite debate and challenges from employees for innovative ideas. Whereas, the managers merely administer and execute the assigned functions with an aim to achieve targeted results. The problem is that if the manager gets stuck in the day to day activities and remain happy with compliance, then there is no room for creativity to do better than expected. If we don't take risks, try new methods and challenge the traditional approach and follow agile leadership, and then the task gets boring and not effective. Great leaders not only have great vision but are realistic towards making it happen, and have a great manager to compliment the execution process. You also need a great manager that understand the vision's prime directive and capable of ensuring a smooth transition during the execution phase towards a successful completion of the vision. Otherwise, it would fail in making it happen. Being a leader can on occasion feel isolating, however, by following your instinct, you will more often than not turn the situation around and produce a positive outcome. A great manager does need to lead "at times" and a great leader does need to manage "at times," however, at the very core, great managers and great leaders are both critical to every organization and we should respect both leaders and managers
The primary role of leadership is about creating change while the primary objective for management is creating order. Good managers discover and develop leaders in the team.Sometimes the manager will not be the leader of the team but if manage with intelligence can discover the talents and work to retain them and to direct each member's abilities to the best of the company. Leaders are great visionaries. They possess an innate potential to transform vision into reality and become the true source of inspiration and motivation for success. Effective leaders facilitate progress and encourage innovation. Great managers engage people with effective communication and utilize win/win strategies to overcome obstacles. To be a great leader you need to know how to manage as well. Management focus Leadership focus Task/Things Vision/PeopleControl Empowerment Efficiency Effectiveness Doing things right Doing the right things Speed Direction Practices Principles Command Questioning/Pulling/Communication
Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler. When we try to neatly and distinctly package, characterize, and compartmentalize the traits, skills, competencies, IQs and EQs of leaders and managers we tend to oversimplify their purpose, role and function: What is more important: Having a catalog of traits or gauging the impact, the effectiveness and efficiency of leadership and management on followers and organizations? There is an obvious dichotomy between the two extremities of the scale, but most leaders have to learn to be good managers, and vice versa. A great leader can define and effectively communicate the vision, and good managers to help make it happen. To inspire one to take action in a common cause is a trait of leadership. To be memorable as the catalyst for concerted efforts to achieve a common goal or achievement is a trait of leadership. If leaders can be developed, there should be different levels of leaders according to their strengths. If there are different levels of strengths, leadership should be able to develop along their strengths and determine their competencies and accountabilities.
Leaders are the visionaries moving forward for growth, inspiring the masses for a common goal with innovative moves toward the future. Managers are the implementers, taking the visions of the leaders and implementing the actions actually to make the visions become realities. Leaders hold a long-range view. Good leadership is about doing the right things. Managers: 1+1=2, Leaders: 1+1=3. Leaders use influence to motivate and inspire others to follow and support them as they move the organization beyond its comfort zone. Challenging beliefs, ideas and strategies along with accepted ways of doing things are all hallmarks of leadership. In reality, leaders have to manage, and managers have to lead to a greater or lesser extent. So the goal is to cultivate talents that are fluent in both skillsets, they are not mutually exclusive.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
August 7, 2015
What are the Best Medium or Channels to Capture Customer Feedback?
Most of the organizations are using the feedback forms or NPS forms to take the customer feedback and measure customer experience. Many organizations are incentivizing their customers in the form of lucrative discounts and freebies to fill in the feedback, but is it a right practice? Will the customer give candid feedback in this case? What are the best medium or channels to capture customer feedback which can truly help you improve customer service and overall experience?The challenge is to use a platform which should enable you to reach out to your customer in an effective manner to get the feedback. You need to avoid over surveying customers. Sometimes customers have a time constraint on filling in separate surveys, but asking customers questions at each stage of their journey can equally upset them. Collecting surveys from SMS and IVR etc. may just generate scores and not necessarily explain what action you should take on the back of those scores, which drives the need for a qualitative element of feedback. Incentives do not always increase the response rate to a survey. Also, if you deal with business customers offering incentives can run counter to companies accepting inducements to use a particular provider.
The real-time feedback can provide insights that can genuinely help operations teams to drive service over time. Real time feedback also has the advantage that you can set up satisfaction alerts to go immediately to customer management if a guest enters a response below a certain minimum threshold, an NPS score of 0 to 3, etc. Is there any other medium or channel through which feedback can be taken to improve the customer experience really depends on what is most convenient for your customers at a particular point in the journey. Generally speaking, gaining feedback from customers at the point of experience when customers or guests are most engaged with the business and are most inclined to give useful and accurate feedback. Also, if a customer is surveyed at multiple touch points and no action is taken on negative feedback, you run a risk of getting an even lower response rate as customers sense you are asking for feedback and not doing anything with it.
There are solutions providers that can help you collect feedback through any channel you care to mention. Don't forget also to augment your feedback with qualitative research, an ethnographic approach could work very well at the organization in order to understand your customers' needs and expectations more deeply. Some cloud-based service collect customer or guest feedback and sentiment that compliment NPS with 'stories" of why the user feels the way they do and how that supports increases and decreases in scores. Together and in balance you get a more holistic view of the real experience. There are many other things that you can do, automatically link positive open-ended comments to social media, also gathers a list of "VOC" clients. These are clients you meet at events, online discussion group and other avenues who are simply willing to talk to someone about specific product launch ideas, engagement initiatives - or anything for which you want a solid client opinion. It's a slower process to get this level of participation,
How to capture customer feedback is only one of many mechanisms organizations need to build in order to put customers at the center of how you run a business today. The good customer experience management is norm, but exceptional customer service and experience offers the 'WOW' concept as the necessary success factor to ensure you stay ahead of the game, particularly with your peers in business.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
How to Change the Culture - The Collective Habit Effectively
Culture = the collective habits of people.
To change your culture, it’s about changing the habits of your people. We all know how challenging would be to change a bad habit; at corporate level, culture eats strategy for breakfast, but changing the collective habit of people is one of the most difficult things in running a high performing business; and at national or global level, changing an outdated culture that perhaps existing for centuries is like boiling an ocean. It is a tough journey, but in order to make a collective progress and advance humanity, shall we or can we make it work?
The strategy is the direction of travel, culture is the mode of transport. If you can't change the habits of your people by encouraging the positive ones and challenging the negative ones, then there’s no way you can move up your organizational agility (change capability) and maturity. So the first step you need to change the people’s mindset, how do they think, and why do they think what they think. Or you have to apply scientific or Systems Thinking to perceive the soft, but the most invisible human factor like the culture which is not an isolated social phenomenon, but a collective minds and attitudes woven by many other elements based on psychology, customs, history, religion, or philosophy. When you understand the interconnectivity and root causes, you may well define a starting point to break it through, absorb the quintessential, but remove or discourage the negative mindset or attitudes.
Identify the change champions: It seems being who we are is essential to the way we do what we do and how well we do it. Culture supports self-actualization, aka Authenticity, will be a significant motivational force in meeting the challenges of business in the 21st Century; especially in managing the Millennials and today’s cross-generational and cross-cultural workforces. An essential first step is to find the people that already want to play the game change. You can never take everyone with you in a change. Even when the business has no other options, it is essential to have enough key people who are keen to take the journey with you. Mandating both the change and who's going to execute it, in disregard of individual autonomy, is a big part of what causes change initiatives to fail. This is due to the dependency on discretionary effort for change initiatives to succeed. The change to be made, the reasons for it, and the various roles in the change have to be properly articulated, and it is then up to the Change Manager to deliver it. In such situations, changing people’s mindset has been fundamental to changing culture and the success of the program - making change optional or only fixing the symptom, not a root cause, is a recipe for failure.
Leaders have to present the change agility in their professional or personal life in order to lead change or drive transformation effectively. The basis is a leader that is right for the job, which is often more about personality than degrees! The drive and the thinking of the leader will either be a driving force or a show stopper. With the right leader, the positive culture will develop and the negative forces will be limited. Bottom line: make sure you pick your leader that supports the way you want to develop the organization along the change journey. Sadly there will always be a few who are just not willing or capable of making the changes. One of the key strategies will be how to deal with them if they start causing problems. People, Process and Technology in that order with the right people you can get good results. Add good processes and the results get better. Add Technology to automate and the results get even better. But you have to start with the right people, which really means great culture and great leadership throughout.
No doubt that culture change is more complicated than any other types of changes such as software update or an organizational restructure. Culture change is a slow and complicated process. In other words, culture is more powerful than strategy if you are not able to explain the value capture behind it. And frequently people are not open to value capture because they are shocked, angry or something else not constructive. You need a winning coalition who will enable the spread of the faith. It can be a long democratic process or a tough turnaround. Still, even it’s like to “boil the ocean,” you have to think the most effective way to do it, for your organization’s long-term prosperity.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
To change your culture, it’s about changing the habits of your people. We all know how challenging would be to change a bad habit; at corporate level, culture eats strategy for breakfast, but changing the collective habit of people is one of the most difficult things in running a high performing business; and at national or global level, changing an outdated culture that perhaps existing for centuries is like boiling an ocean. It is a tough journey, but in order to make a collective progress and advance humanity, shall we or can we make it work?
The strategy is the direction of travel, culture is the mode of transport. If you can't change the habits of your people by encouraging the positive ones and challenging the negative ones, then there’s no way you can move up your organizational agility (change capability) and maturity. So the first step you need to change the people’s mindset, how do they think, and why do they think what they think. Or you have to apply scientific or Systems Thinking to perceive the soft, but the most invisible human factor like the culture which is not an isolated social phenomenon, but a collective minds and attitudes woven by many other elements based on psychology, customs, history, religion, or philosophy. When you understand the interconnectivity and root causes, you may well define a starting point to break it through, absorb the quintessential, but remove or discourage the negative mindset or attitudes.
Identify the change champions: It seems being who we are is essential to the way we do what we do and how well we do it. Culture supports self-actualization, aka Authenticity, will be a significant motivational force in meeting the challenges of business in the 21st Century; especially in managing the Millennials and today’s cross-generational and cross-cultural workforces. An essential first step is to find the people that already want to play the game change. You can never take everyone with you in a change. Even when the business has no other options, it is essential to have enough key people who are keen to take the journey with you. Mandating both the change and who's going to execute it, in disregard of individual autonomy, is a big part of what causes change initiatives to fail. This is due to the dependency on discretionary effort for change initiatives to succeed. The change to be made, the reasons for it, and the various roles in the change have to be properly articulated, and it is then up to the Change Manager to deliver it. In such situations, changing people’s mindset has been fundamental to changing culture and the success of the program - making change optional or only fixing the symptom, not a root cause, is a recipe for failure.
Leaders have to present the change agility in their professional or personal life in order to lead change or drive transformation effectively. The basis is a leader that is right for the job, which is often more about personality than degrees! The drive and the thinking of the leader will either be a driving force or a show stopper. With the right leader, the positive culture will develop and the negative forces will be limited. Bottom line: make sure you pick your leader that supports the way you want to develop the organization along the change journey. Sadly there will always be a few who are just not willing or capable of making the changes. One of the key strategies will be how to deal with them if they start causing problems. People, Process and Technology in that order with the right people you can get good results. Add good processes and the results get better. Add Technology to automate and the results get even better. But you have to start with the right people, which really means great culture and great leadership throughout.
No doubt that culture change is more complicated than any other types of changes such as software update or an organizational restructure. Culture change is a slow and complicated process. In other words, culture is more powerful than strategy if you are not able to explain the value capture behind it. And frequently people are not open to value capture because they are shocked, angry or something else not constructive. You need a winning coalition who will enable the spread of the faith. It can be a long democratic process or a tough turnaround. Still, even it’s like to “boil the ocean,” you have to think the most effective way to do it, for your organization’s long-term prosperity.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
How to Change the Culture - The Collective Habit
Culture = the collective habits of people.
To change your culture, it’s about changing the habits of your people. We all know how challenging would be to change a bad habit; at corporate level, changing the collective habit of people is one of the difficult things in running a high performing business; and at national or global level, changing an outdated culture that perhaps existing for centuries is like boiling an ocean. It is a tough journey, but in order to make a collective progress and advance humanity, shall we or can we make it work?
The strategy is the direction of travel, culture is the mode of transport. If you can't change the habits of your people by encouraging the positive ones and challenging the negative ones, then there’s no way you can move up your organizational agility (change capability) and maturity. So the first step you need to change the people’s mindset, how do they think, and why do they think what they think. Or you have to apply scientific or Systems Thinking to perceive the soft and invisible human factor like the culture which is not an isolated social phenomenon, but a collective minds and attitudes woven by many other elements based on psychology, customs, history, religion, or philosophy. When you understand these interconnectivity, you may well define a starting point to break it through, absorb the quintessential, but remove or discourage the negative mindset or attitudes.
Identify the change champions: It seems being who we are is essential to the way we do what we do and how well we do it. Culture supports self-actualization, aka Authenticity, will be a significant motivational force in meeting the challenges of business in the 21st Century; especially in managing the Millennials and today’s cross-generational and cross-cultural workforces. An essential first step is to find the people that already want to play the change game. You can never take everyone with you in a change. Even when the business has no other options, it is essential to have enough key people who are keen to take the journey with you. Mandating both the change and who's going to execute it, in disregard of individual autonomy, is a big part of what causes change initiatives to fail. This is due to the dependency on discretionary effort for change initiatives to succeed. The change to be made, the reasons for it, and the various roles in the change have to be properly articulated, and it is then up to the Change Manager to deliver it. In such situations, changing people’s mindset has been fundamental to changing culture and the success of the program - making change optional is a recipe for failure.
Leaders have to present the change agility in their professional or personal life in order to lead change or drive transformation effectively. The basis is a leader that is right for the job, which is often more about personality than degrees! The drive and the thinking of the leader will either be a driving force or a show stopper. With the right leader, the positive culture will develop and the negative forces will be limited. Bottom line: make sure you pick your leader that supports the way you want to develop the organization along the change journey. Sadly there will always be a few who are just not willing or capable of making the changes. One of the key strategies will be how to deal with them if they start causing problems. People, Process and Technology in that order with the right people you can get good results. Add good processes and the results get better. Add Technology to automate and the results get even better. But you have to start with the right people, which really means great culture and great leadership throughout.
No doubt that culture change is more complicated than any other types of changes such as software update or an organizational restructure. Culture change is a slow and complicated process. In other words, culture is more powerful than strategy if you are not able to explain the value capture behind it. And frequently people are not open to value capture because they are shocked, angry or something else not constructive. You need a winning coalition who will enable the spread of the faith. It can be a long democratic process or a tough turnaround. Still, even it’s like to “boil the ocean,” you have to think the most effective way to do it, for your organization’s long-term prosperity.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
To change your culture, it’s about changing the habits of your people. We all know how challenging would be to change a bad habit; at corporate level, changing the collective habit of people is one of the difficult things in running a high performing business; and at national or global level, changing an outdated culture that perhaps existing for centuries is like boiling an ocean. It is a tough journey, but in order to make a collective progress and advance humanity, shall we or can we make it work?
The strategy is the direction of travel, culture is the mode of transport. If you can't change the habits of your people by encouraging the positive ones and challenging the negative ones, then there’s no way you can move up your organizational agility (change capability) and maturity. So the first step you need to change the people’s mindset, how do they think, and why do they think what they think. Or you have to apply scientific or Systems Thinking to perceive the soft and invisible human factor like the culture which is not an isolated social phenomenon, but a collective minds and attitudes woven by many other elements based on psychology, customs, history, religion, or philosophy. When you understand these interconnectivity, you may well define a starting point to break it through, absorb the quintessential, but remove or discourage the negative mindset or attitudes.
Identify the change champions: It seems being who we are is essential to the way we do what we do and how well we do it. Culture supports self-actualization, aka Authenticity, will be a significant motivational force in meeting the challenges of business in the 21st Century; especially in managing the Millennials and today’s cross-generational and cross-cultural workforces. An essential first step is to find the people that already want to play the change game. You can never take everyone with you in a change. Even when the business has no other options, it is essential to have enough key people who are keen to take the journey with you. Mandating both the change and who's going to execute it, in disregard of individual autonomy, is a big part of what causes change initiatives to fail. This is due to the dependency on discretionary effort for change initiatives to succeed. The change to be made, the reasons for it, and the various roles in the change have to be properly articulated, and it is then up to the Change Manager to deliver it. In such situations, changing people’s mindset has been fundamental to changing culture and the success of the program - making change optional is a recipe for failure.
Leaders have to present the change agility in their professional or personal life in order to lead change or drive transformation effectively. The basis is a leader that is right for the job, which is often more about personality than degrees! The drive and the thinking of the leader will either be a driving force or a show stopper. With the right leader, the positive culture will develop and the negative forces will be limited. Bottom line: make sure you pick your leader that supports the way you want to develop the organization along the change journey. Sadly there will always be a few who are just not willing or capable of making the changes. One of the key strategies will be how to deal with them if they start causing problems. People, Process and Technology in that order with the right people you can get good results. Add good processes and the results get better. Add Technology to automate and the results get even better. But you have to start with the right people, which really means great culture and great leadership throughout.
No doubt that culture change is more complicated than any other types of changes such as software update or an organizational restructure. Culture change is a slow and complicated process. In other words, culture is more powerful than strategy if you are not able to explain the value capture behind it. And frequently people are not open to value capture because they are shocked, angry or something else not constructive. You need a winning coalition who will enable the spread of the faith. It can be a long democratic process or a tough turnaround. Still, even it’s like to “boil the ocean,” you have to think the most effective way to do it, for your organization’s long-term prosperity.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
