Pearl Zhu's Blog, page 1427
June 23, 2015
How to Assess and Develop Wise Leaders
Due to the increasing rate of change and over-complex business dynamic, organizations are desperately hunting for wise leaders. How can one individual accumulates knowledge and learn so that wisdom develops? If an organization is looking for wise leaders, how would they be able to choose? How can you build a structure, mechanism, evaluation or any kind of process that you would trust and believing it will draw out a wise leader? And how to continually develop more wise leaders in the organization or the business ecosystem?
To be wise is not to know particular facts, but to know without excessive confidence or excessive cautiousness. Wisdom is something we have by concentrating an appropriate share of our efforts in understanding what we don’t know about a situation, and keeping this in balance with working out what we do know. To be wise is not to know particular facts, but to know without excessive confidence or excessive cautiousness. Wisdom is something we have by concentrating an appropriate share of our efforts in understanding what we don’t know about a situation, and keeping this in balance with working out what we do know, and build a strong vision to help organization navigate through the future.
Wisdom cannot be forced either by accumulating knowledge or guessing. Forcing wisdom commonly leads to dogmatic thinking, ideology, prejudice and cognitive dissonance.If there is a teachable path to wisdom, it may be to learn Critical Thinking methods which require the person acknowledge their own biases and prejudices before considering the information, but even Critical Thinking is not a sure path to wisdom. Experience is not a guaranteed source either. Nor is the almost mystical references to intuition. Forming habits is certainly a good idea, but habits are as often unwise as wise.
Knowledge and understanding orbit around wisdom. While wisdom may be defined as the way of handling uncertainty, a great deal of work has been about being knowledgeable and understanding the context in order to make sound judgement. If you analyze understanding, you will find that it exists of two words. Under and Stand. Its origin is from a practical idea in masonry where the mason after finishing the first floor stands under the structure and decides if the structure is strong or has enough grip for additional floors. Perhaps a qualitative design perspective:-rich factual knowledge: general and specific knowledge about life and its variations-procedural knowledge: general and specific knowledge about strategies of judgment and advice concerning matters of life- span contextualism: knowledge about the contexts of life and their temporal (developmental) relationships-knowledge about differences in values, goals and priorities-knowledge about the relative indeterminacy and unpredictability of life and ways to manage.Practice leads to Mastery which leads to Wisdom which leads to more practice and more mastery...
Wisdom has something to do with contextualism and relativism: Contextualism implies an ability in the manager to make decisions in the context of the workplace environment. Balance in a given context is not a fixed point which is right, and all others are wrong, but some appropriate range in the continuum between extreme positions. Relativism implies an ability to balance other parts of the equation. An example might be that having considered the labour element to be highest priority, the manager must now wisely choose from the list of other priorities to bring the organization into the required balance, say reduced R&D budget. As with context, relativity concerns itself with balances.
Learning Systems Thinking does make a leader wiser: Uncertainty acknowledges that one can never know everything about a problem or an individual’s life. The manager is required to look beyond what might be the known facts to consider what is not known about the situation, as well as what is not known about the known facts. This is most likely the area needing greatest attention in management development. A wise leader would be labeled as such based on -the knowledge/insight/skills/capability/ actions/results (the past )- the level of understanding of the current leader "assessor" of performance and potential (the present )- the relevance of the past and present for the future desired transformation or outcome.
Wisdom has to do with soundness of judgment: Many people do wrong things not because of ignorance, but because of poor judgment, due to the lack of comprehensive knowledge, bias, or preconceived notions. So a wise leader can make sound judgement in decision making, leverage Systems principles in problem solving, and they can strike the right balance of confidence and humility, creativity and standardization, management and governance, local and global, and they are the one who never stop learning.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Is Vision Statement Overrated?
Vision Statement is a very brief summary to provide guidance about what core to preserve and what future to stimulate progress toward. It gives some sense of the two main points. First, it's doing it to having the conversations across the organization. Second, it's worth pushing to a level of specificity, which makes the desired outcome unarguably clear and provides a means of tracking progress. One of the key payoffs from this process is that it delivers the top team a single-page matrix of their current and future desired states. This becomes the starting point for their detailed planning - and, of course, some readjustments as they tested the various elements through detailed analysis.
Vision is crucial to your strategy. It will give direction, so your vision is your first step in creating your strategy. Then "baking in" your Vision into your DNA (culture) will be second step of your strategy. Therefore, strategy should always be incepted by a strong vision, a vision that makes a difference, not a mere tactic for temporally gains. To push to the next level of specificity in the following process: first, defining the key parameters (without any quantification) that would be useful in summarizing how they wanted the business to look. This might include parameters such as: product offerings, operating geography, revenue and gross margins, etc. But also the soft stuff of culture, etc. Second, quantifying or defining each parameter in terms of where the business is today, and then what the figures (or descriptions) would be for each parameter in, say, three years time. It takes a Vision Paper - about four or five pages of what you are doing, what has led you to it, and what the benefits will be in the far off future. Then you turn that over to those who would move that Vision into strategic reality, shape and form the strategy, and move it into action.
Vision statements are really what you see at the moment, and may change over time as you grow and learn. None of us are stagnant, we are continually discovering who we are and "who" we want our company to be. The leader of the group needs to be willing to put his/her vision out there, and be open and receptive to input from their team. This allows the team to openly debate their ideas and thoughts, aligning their own personal visions with the vision of the company. This is one step in creating the power of a team moving forward, taking all the steps necessary to create incredible results. A vision needs to adapt over time, since the world and our competitive environment doesn't stay still. But, the current vision needs to be the principal guide to high-level decision-making and resource allocation.
Vision is the unified view of the future: An organization is nothing other than a structure to support the collective ideas and actions of the people that are part of it. When the vision, purpose and values are clear, everything/everyone is aligned and employees know that they have the power to make decisions that are in the best interest of the organization, as well as share their ideas in an atmosphere free of fear, you will find an organization that has the ability to be successful. The process of developing the statement with the top team has the real value. It aligned them - and, to put it somewhat light-heartedly, it wouldn't have mattered what language the final statement is in. The key is the shared debate around what is important to the company and where they want to be in, say, three years time. And, this might cover things as broad as market position or culture, or as specific as core product or service offerings.
In order for a vision statement to be of value, everything in a company ought to flow to and from the vision statement. Vision statements that simply line the pages of a company's quarterly report, website and/or walls are extremely ineffective. People need to be selected, trained, coached, measured, rewarded and ultimately be held accountable for bringing the vision to life. When all of these elements are present, the vision becomes more than words on a wall or a leadership activity. Unfortunately many companies and leaders lose focus of the vision, and don't take the time to support it in everything they do. Empowering people to contribute ideas and operate in their giftedness is crucial to make vision as reality. If the vision statement is the result of a whole company introspection, then yes; they are effective because each and everyone of the stakeholders has "ownership" to some degree in the statement. If the vision statement is the result of a top management retreat, it will require a lot of selling and pushing it down the throat of all employees. it's an uphill battle, once top management relaxes the push, people tend to go back to their old ways.
Vision is required at any given stage of an organization’s life span. Vision Statement is very difficult to establish if the company doesn't have a Strategic Analysis, and the most important thing, a purpose of business. As the vision is like a destination of journey you want to embark on, but you would need the knowledge to implement, this journey roadmap is "strategy." Make it clear and meaningful so the organization you are leading know where it’s headed.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
The Principles and Practices to Improve Big Data ROI
The golden rule of analytics is the continuous learning and improvement.
“Big data” refers to the large amounts of information that has become accessible thanks to the Internet. Big Data is useful only if its information content is evaluated for accuracy, relevance, and timeliness. What used to be called “knowledge based enterprises” are designed to transform unevaluated information (raw data) into information whose accuracy and authenticity are verified, and then information is transformed to knowledge, and business insight as well. It is still a matter of manipulating information to make it usable. But with low ROI of Big Data investment in most of organizations, how to improve the way to manage it right?
The golden rule of analytics is the continuous learning and improvement: What needs to change is the desire for quasi-perfection, to solve every missing piece of data, to try and be as perfect as possible when building models. Nowadays tools and techniques exist to change the way we operate, to explore data, discover, and experiment on data driven ideas, quickly drop ideas that fail and exploit those that succeed. The new world of Big Analytics will be where strategic business questions are formulated first, data requirements are defined next, and finally, Analytical solutions are designed and implemented. A golden rule in analytics is the continuous learning and improvement available for all involved in the process from the data collectors to the analysts to the decision makers. Proper feedback mechanisms built into every analytical plan can be as informative as the results of the analysis.
1) Garbage in, garbage out; fighting for clean and the right data never ends
2) Brilliant analytics does not trump bad decision-makers
3) The only thing that is certain is there is no certainty, probably
Analytics is an ongoing business capability: Big Data Analytics shouldn’t be handled as one time project, but a continuous effort for long term. Well, there is entrenched idea that, given a specific purpose for data, we extract the data that is needed, the balance of the effort having no additional future value. There is no learning. This is because the data giving rise to insights is contextually constrained for a specific purpose. The pathetic organizational impulse is to discard the structural and relational bedrock - the part that adds meaning and relevance to the data for purposes outside the original parameters. It's an incredible waste of resources that occurs all the time, just like building a car to get to one destination; and then building another car to get to the next. The asset isn't the finished data at all, but the foundation that gave rise to it; speaking entirely in terms of data management, some effort is needed to preserve and enhance the value of original capital investment.
Intuition plays an important role in Analytics: Leverage human intuition to look at two or more levels of meaningfulness of data. Big Data can go beyond pattern recognition, recognizing patterns in the data, to noticing the possible relationships among diverse bits of data. One way of doing this is to look at data from two or more levels of meaningfulness. One help in doing this is to let the human's intuition get involved. Computers can help do this if multiple levels of meta-ness can be explored. Such has not been done because computers, designed to do arithmetic, perform very poorly when applied to complex, multi-attribute, multi-relationship networks of meaning.
Big Data deployment shows the overall trends of openness and inclusiveness: Data has the potential to make society more inclusive by giving voice to those that might otherwise be systematically disenfranchised. One way to remove people from a conversation or to limit their involvement is to take away information about them particularly in relation to the consequences of policies and decisions. In order to overcome barriers to sharing, it is necessary to create a valuation scheme for the data such that it carries inherent merit -In our world, people really do exist as data, and our systems are optimized to make life possible through the processing of information. The free-exchange of data represents a democratization of decision-making given that this is precisely what the data powers. The limitations we place over data has significance on the deployment of capital. There are a few interesting examples of some data bucking the overall trend to increased openness (companies attempting to buy crowd-sourced data organizations as an example). These appear to occur where someone has looked at the data and realized that is was significantly more "value-add" than supposed.
"Big Data" needs a paradigm shift to be fully utilized by changing mindsets (from linear to nonlinear, exclusive to inclusive), the way to do things (overcome "We always do things like this" mentality), and keep the end -business objectives in the mind. The overarching purpose of technology should be to empower people to transcend the current level of thinking that created the existing problems in the first place. So the domain logic of Big Data systems should account for this fundamental need rather than merely support status quo thinking. Climbing that great Big Data mountain has nothing to do with getting to the top, but embracing the changes and transformations made to overcome the challenge in building a high-intelligent and high-performing organization.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
“Big data” refers to the large amounts of information that has become accessible thanks to the Internet. Big Data is useful only if its information content is evaluated for accuracy, relevance, and timeliness. What used to be called “knowledge based enterprises” are designed to transform unevaluated information (raw data) into information whose accuracy and authenticity are verified, and then information is transformed to knowledge, and business insight as well. It is still a matter of manipulating information to make it usable. But with low ROI of Big Data investment in most of organizations, how to improve the way to manage it right?
The golden rule of analytics is the continuous learning and improvement: What needs to change is the desire for quasi-perfection, to solve every missing piece of data, to try and be as perfect as possible when building models. Nowadays tools and techniques exist to change the way we operate, to explore data, discover, and experiment on data driven ideas, quickly drop ideas that fail and exploit those that succeed. The new world of Big Analytics will be where strategic business questions are formulated first, data requirements are defined next, and finally, Analytical solutions are designed and implemented. A golden rule in analytics is the continuous learning and improvement available for all involved in the process from the data collectors to the analysts to the decision makers. Proper feedback mechanisms built into every analytical plan can be as informative as the results of the analysis.
1) Garbage in, garbage out; fighting for clean and the right data never ends
2) Brilliant analytics does not trump bad decision-makers
3) The only thing that is certain is there is no certainty, probably
Analytics is an ongoing business capability: Big Data Analytics shouldn’t be handled as one time project, but a continuous effort for long term. Well, there is entrenched idea that, given a specific purpose for data, we extract the data that is needed, the balance of the effort having no additional future value. There is no learning. This is because the data giving rise to insights is contextually constrained for a specific purpose. The pathetic organizational impulse is to discard the structural and relational bedrock - the part that adds meaning and relevance to the data for purposes outside the original parameters. It's an incredible waste of resources that occurs all the time, just like building a car to get to one destination; and then building another car to get to the next. The asset isn't the finished data at all, but the foundation that gave rise to it; speaking entirely in terms of data management, some effort is needed to preserve and enhance the value of original capital investment.
Intuition plays an important role in Analytics: Leverage human intuition to look at two or more levels of meaningfulness of data. Big Data can go beyond pattern recognition, recognizing patterns in the data, to noticing the possible relationships among diverse bits of data. One way of doing this is to look at data from two or more levels of meaningfulness. One help in doing this is to let the human's intuition get involved. Computers can help do this if multiple levels of meta-ness can be explored. Such has not been done because computers, designed to do arithmetic, perform very poorly when applied to complex, multi-attribute, multi-relationship networks of meaning.
Big Data deployment shows the overall trends of openness and inclusiveness: Data has the potential to make society more inclusive by giving voice to those that might otherwise be systematically disenfranchised. One way to remove people from a conversation or to limit their involvement is to take away information about them particularly in relation to the consequences of policies and decisions. In order to overcome barriers to sharing, it is necessary to create a valuation scheme for the data such that it carries inherent merit -In our world, people really do exist as data, and our systems are optimized to make life possible through the processing of information. The free-exchange of data represents a democratization of decision-making given that this is precisely what the data powers. The limitations we place over data has significance on the deployment of capital. There are a few interesting examples of some data bucking the overall trend to increased openness (companies attempting to buy crowd-sourced data organizations as an example). These appear to occur where someone has looked at the data and realized that is was significantly more "value-add" than supposed.
"Big Data" needs a paradigm shift to be fully utilized by changing mindsets (from linear to nonlinear, exclusive to inclusive), the way to do things (overcome "We always do things like this" mentality), and keep the end -business objectives in the mind. The overarching purpose of technology should be to empower people to transcend the current level of thinking that created the existing problems in the first place. So the domain logic of Big Data systems should account for this fundamental need rather than merely support status quo thinking. Climbing that great Big Data mountain has nothing to do with getting to the top, but embracing the changes and transformations made to overcome the challenge in building a high-intelligent and high-performing organization.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
What are your next Practices to Improve Big Data ROI
“Big data” refers to the large amounts of information that has become accessible thanks to services like the Internet. Big Data is useful only if its information content is evaluated for accuracy, relevance, and timeliness. What used to be called “knowledge based enterprises” are designed to transform unevaluated information (raw data) into information whose accuracy and authenticity are verified, and then information is transformed to knowledge, and business insight. It is still a matter of manipulating information to make it usable. But with low ROI of Big Data investment, how to improve the way to manage it right?
What needs to change is the desire for quasi-perfection, to solve every missing piece of data, to try and be as perfect as possible when building models. Nowadays tools and techniques exist to change the way we operate, to explore data, discover, and experiment on data driven ideas, quickly drop ideas that fail and exploit those that succeed. The new world of Big Analytics will be where strategic business questions are formulated first, data requirements are defined next, and finally, Analytical solutions are designed and implemented.A golden rule in analytics is the continuous learning and improvement available for all involved in the process from the data collectors to the analysts to the decision makers. Proper feedback mechanisms built into every analytical plan can be as informative as the results of the analysis.Garbage in, garbage out; fighting for clean and the right data never endsBrilliant analytics does not trump bad decision-makersThe only thing that is certain is there is no certainty, probably
Big Data Analytics shouldn’t be handled as one time project, but a continuous effort for long term. Well, there is entrenched idea that, given a specific purpose for data, we extract the data that is needed, the balance of the effort having no additional future value.There is no learning. This is because the data giving rise to insights is contextually constrained for a specific purpose. The pathetic organizational impulse is to discard the structural and relational bedrock - the part that adds meaning and relevance to the data for purposes outside the original parameters. It's an incredible waste of resources that occurs all the time, just like building a car to get to one destination; and then building another car to get to the next. The asset isn't the finished data at all, but the foundation that gave rise to it; speaking entirely in terms of data management, some effort is needed to preserve and enhance the value of original capital investment.
Leverage human intuition to look at two or more levels of meaningfulness of data: Big Data can go beyond pattern recognition, recognizing patterns in the data, to noticing the possible relationships among diverse bits of data. One way of doing this is to look at data from two or more levels of meaningfulness. One help in doing this is to let the human's intuition get involved. Computers can help do this if multiple levels of meta-ness can be explored. Such has not been done because computers, designed to do arithmetic, perform very poorly when applied to complex, multi-attribute, multi-relationship networks of meaning.
Big Data deployment shows the overall trends of openness and inclusiveness: Data has the potential to make society more inclusive by giving voice to those that might otherwise be systematically disenfranchised. One way to remove people from a conversation or to limit their involvement is to take away information about them particularly in relation to the consequences of policies and decisions. In order to overcome barriers to sharing, it is necessary to create a valuation scheme for the data such that it carries inherent merit -In our world, people really do exist as data, and our systems are optimized to make life possible through the processing of information. The free-exchange of data represents a democratization of decision-making given that this is precisely what the data powers. The limitations we place over data has significance on the deployment of capital. There are a few interesting examples of some data bucking the overall trend to increased openness (companies attempting to buy crowd-sourced data organizations as an example). These appear to occur where someone has looked at the data and realized that is was significantly more "value-add" than supposed.
"Big Data" needs a paradigm shift to be fully utilized by changing our mindset (from linear to nonlinear, exclusive to inclusive), the way to do things, and always keep the business end in mind. The overarching purpose of technology should be to empower people to transcend the current level of thinking that created the existing problems in the first place. So the domain logic of Big Data systems should account for this fundamental need rather than merely support status quo thinking. Climbing that great Big Data mountain has nothing to do with getting to the top but embracing the changes and transformations made to overcome the challenge in building a high-intelligent and high-performing organization.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
June 22, 2015
How to make Change Management Tangible rather than Fluffy
Change is the only constant, and Change Management is no longer just a one time project or business initiative, but an ongoing business capability. However, more than two thirds of Change efforts fail to achieve the expected result, especially for the large, legacy companies, what’re the causes to failure, and how to make Change Management tangible rather than fluffy?
Change management as a competency needs to reside in all areas of business where change happens. Change needs to be human-centered. People should know "where you are driving them to" and " what's on it for them." Therefore, besides a complete realistic plan, the KISS principle, you need to gain the important marketing skills before committing the Change Management Journey. From process and structure perspective, when you put Change Management in places like the PMO or Strategic Planning areas like Sales & Marketing or Finance or R&D, it seems they can just abdicate to those areas instead of taking responsibility for themselves and their own people. When the group being changed takes on the responsibility to understand and manage through it, the change goes much better and it has much more sustainability. People in the PMO today think that because they manage projects, they automatically know how to manage change. Change isn't managed through tasks on a project plan, although you have to have them, it is managed on the ground, every day, in every conversation and interaction. The PMO doesn't necessarily get to that level, nor should it necessarily, but someone needs to.
Measuring change right helps managing change more effectively. We can only manage what we measure. If part of the change includes reduced time or more inclusive decision making, then breakdown decision cycle time to customer and/or sales result. The system is then driven to consider how to keep those at parity, or reduced as part of the end result. Introduce the change and measure days to adoption, decision making (reduced cost, customer engagement, purchase capability) trajectory of productivity reporting, customer complaints, internal tickets. If a company wants to minimize the cost, then it is worth engaging those affected by the change, especially the customers (end customers and affected employees) as part of the overall program and success measurement planning.
Big Box Company looks at a Change Management practice that is a potential money maker. Often they declare themselves a player in the marketplace. But they lack the competency to "change" themselves. For a big company to declare that they can offer Change Management as part of their solution, without having any expertise in the practice, is simply a way of removing an objection to "selling" their solution and "driving" it throughout the organization. How do large companies get away with professing an aptitude for consulting in areas where they have absolutely no expertise? Worse, the area where they profess expertise could be an area where they are sorely lacking within their own organization. So the best way in which Change Management would help in a vertical sector (and would be tangible as well) would be to bring about technical changes in design (reduce complications for suppliers), effective usage of new supplier designs into the products to reduce cost (cost reduction becomes the tangible value), and develop a business process improvement initiative and incorporate change into it. Senior managers are more receptive to this because the benefits are more visible. Perhaps the only reason organizations fail to recognize the opportunities is fear and lack of interest to change.There are Little 'c' changes and Big 'C' changes, how to make both types of changes more tangible, rather than fluffy? Little c change - implement a new software tool, reorganize a department; or Big C change - radical digital transformation, merge organizations with overlapping or duplicate functions? Little c change requires tools, training and practice in order for the participants to feel comfortable that the service level they provide will continue or improve with the same or reduced effort. Big C change requires participants to understand the "why" and for leaders to clearly communicate the goals, expectations and success criteria and to hold managers accountable in order to make change more tangible and sustainable.Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
IT Skills Gap: How to Fill it
Hire mindset and capabilities, train for specific skills.
Due to the changing nature of technology and accelerating speed of business changes, among the most pervasive and persistent concerns or complaints from IT leaders is the skills gaps, such as their people do not have the right competencies; they can’t find the right skills to fill the positions, or their non-IT partners do not understand IT, etc. Are such problems an organization specific, or systematic? And how to mind the gaps and achieve business goals?
Hire mindset and capabilities, train for specific skills: The premise is that you should hire capability and intelligence, not just specific skills, as the skills change so rapidly due to the shortened knowledge and technology life cycle. While there are a core set of skills that are essential, there are clearly different considerations for entry level positions versus more senior level positions, as well as differences in more technical responsibilities versus more management/leadership responsibilities, and differences for IT versus non-IT professionals as well. While there are certainly a lot of IT people out there, there are a much smaller percentage who are really the "go-to" people, the ones who can work independently, have excellent problem solving skills, are disciplined, have a "customer focus," and communicate well. Organizations who focus on someone with a specific skills such as a language, infrastructure platform, or technology, and ignore candidates with less experience but possess intelligence, learning agility, excellent communication skills, and a "can-do" attitude may be doing so at their own peril. It is important to hire really bright, energetic, positive people who may have less specific skills, but have the traits described as intelligence, problem solving, communications, etc.
IT leaders need to do self-reflection first: One of the skill gaps is the lack of digital mindset and re-combinant capabilities in the CIO him/herself. Often times they look narrowly at specific problems and projects developed to solve those business problems, partly because that is the way funding is allocated, rather than having a broad view of their enterprise and the longer term strategy for the organization. They fail to keep up on standards within their domain that can lead to the holistic enterprise viewpoint, and execution of IT strategies that fit within that enterprise viewpoint. Often times projects are not cohesive and create more problems when done independent of the enterprise than they solve. To train up an intelligent staff, you have to start with looking internally to your own skill set. When the IT leaders don't really understand technology while pretending the opposite and doing all what it takes to protect the status quo to avoid any kind of disruption; that unwanted outcome becomes the output of simple logic based process. It is hard to be a CIO, focusing exclusively on your organization and lacking the time to keep up on the broader views of IT as it rapidly changes, thereby leading to knowledge stagnation.
The effective solution is to start educating by opening the doors to true knowledge. But to do so; the systemic fear must be disabled, and that can be achieved by having a new ice breaking change wave. But this time; it will not be about a new technology adoption, but about learning how to think right about technology itself. Because when you don't have the right thinking, you can't really understand it right, and that will be pushing you systematically to making bad decisions, leading to wrong actions giving you at the end the unwanted outcome. This vicious cycle can then be broken by education, the education of the IT leaders. But to be realistic, education alone is not enough powerful to drive that wave or awareness for knowledge acquisition, it needs a much important purpose to motivate the IT leaders to start learning. And that could be the organizational growth or cost optimization purpose, as this strategic objective will generate a greater fear than the fear behind the status quo protection, because now more often IT becomes the main cause to fail business. Keep in mind that the skills problem is not just with entry level people, mid-level and senior level managers and staff also have skills problem: -Technical skills - business/management, industry, thinking, learning, and interpersonal skills are fundamental -Vendor knowledge skill gap- the problem is also with service providers and vendors -IT-Non IT disconnect: Non-IT managers and executives need to understand how to leverage their IT investments across global scope.
Constructive Thinking about IT skills competencies by level: The problem of IT skill gaps should be seen as an opportunity, especially as more and more organizations are seeing IT as an enabler and driver of generating revenues. So the constructive thinking about IT skills competencies goes from the most knowledgeable to the less knowledgeable by level:a) Level 1: Science community professionals, the ones who create the main abstract concepts on which the concrete technology (software /hardware) is based on.b) Level 2: The vendors, as they are the ones who built their commercial products by being mainly based on the concepts above, but few invented their own original concepts as well.c) Level 3: The integrators or professional services providers, which are the business partners of level 2 and their mission is to selling the above.d) Level 4: The technology consumers’ organizations who are mere followers of the 3 levels above.
Knowledge (skills) acquisition issue is a systemic problem. So first, understand the problem by going to the root causes and then beyond the symptoms. This is because true understanding is a life changing for any decision maker. As when you do understand; you’ll know what you need (even if it-is a vague idea), and then what will be left is to mainly know how to get it, and then leadership can be applied concretely by showing the direction. If you only fix the symptom, not the root cause, then it perhaps cause more problems later. And that is why our world today; contains in reality more problems creators than true problems solvers, because trying to solve a problem, by nature will create others. And if you don’t have a sound solution to each newly created problem, you’ll have very little chances to succeed solving the main problem, because all is connected. The reality is that whatever something is complex (especially in IT), after digging enough, you’ll always discover that the heart is based on very simple but highly strategic abstract concepts (mainly logic-based). And when those concepts are served to the CIO in a simple manner, it-is a done deal, as reliability becomes on his/her side. When trying to provide such decision related help, you must also understand the initial psychological environment state; where the CIO is living, because what he/she thinks to being impossible, is rarely true, but he/she believes it because of the environment influence, so you need to find a way to help that decision maker to recalibrate his/her thinking about what is really possible.
Business benefit via minding the IT skill gaps: Overall, technology tends to be more dynamic in a company as well as across the industry, while leadership/management/industry changes more slowly. The key is to recognize that they both change and demand everyone to continuously maintain and grow their expertise/skills, and that the IT job market for candidates with the right skills is growing. What would be the impact of the filling the gaps on your organizational business? - Having the financial possibility to becoming truly innovative- Becoming a better competitor at the organization business domain level-Helping to maximizing the sales because of the above using technology-Helping maximizing the profits and long term growth of the organization.
Either IT or organization as a whole, needs to take the next digital practices of talent development and management, the responsibility to maintain and grow one’s expertise (technical and management/ leadership/ industry) has always largely fallen on the individual employee; albeit it is great when the organization provides support. While there are clear opportunities to better prepare HR partners, as well as IT managers, on how to more effectively manage talent life cycle, the digital principles include hiring mindset and capabilities (the digital version of hiring character and attitude), and train for skills.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Due to the changing nature of technology and accelerating speed of business changes, among the most pervasive and persistent concerns or complaints from IT leaders is the skills gaps, such as their people do not have the right competencies; they can’t find the right skills to fill the positions, or their non-IT partners do not understand IT, etc. Are such problems an organization specific, or systematic? And how to mind the gaps and achieve business goals?Hire mindset and capabilities, train for specific skills: The premise is that you should hire capability and intelligence, not just specific skills, as the skills change so rapidly due to the shortened knowledge and technology life cycle. While there are a core set of skills that are essential, there are clearly different considerations for entry level positions versus more senior level positions, as well as differences in more technical responsibilities versus more management/leadership responsibilities, and differences for IT versus non-IT professionals as well. While there are certainly a lot of IT people out there, there are a much smaller percentage who are really the "go-to" people, the ones who can work independently, have excellent problem solving skills, are disciplined, have a "customer focus," and communicate well. Organizations who focus on someone with a specific skills such as a language, infrastructure platform, or technology, and ignore candidates with less experience but possess intelligence, learning agility, excellent communication skills, and a "can-do" attitude may be doing so at their own peril. It is important to hire really bright, energetic, positive people who may have less specific skills, but have the traits described as intelligence, problem solving, communications, etc.
IT leaders need to do self-reflection first: One of the skill gaps is the lack of digital mindset and re-combinant capabilities in the CIO him/herself. Often times they look narrowly at specific problems and projects developed to solve those business problems, partly because that is the way funding is allocated, rather than having a broad view of their enterprise and the longer term strategy for the organization. They fail to keep up on standards within their domain that can lead to the holistic enterprise viewpoint, and execution of IT strategies that fit within that enterprise viewpoint. Often times projects are not cohesive and create more problems when done independent of the enterprise than they solve. To train up an intelligent staff, you have to start with looking internally to your own skill set. When the IT leaders don't really understand technology while pretending the opposite and doing all what it takes to protect the status quo to avoid any kind of disruption; that unwanted outcome becomes the output of simple logic based process. It is hard to be a CIO, focusing exclusively on your organization and lacking the time to keep up on the broader views of IT as it rapidly changes, thereby leading to knowledge stagnation.
The effective solution is to start educating by opening the doors to true knowledge. But to do so; the systemic fear must be disabled, and that can be achieved by having a new ice breaking change wave. But this time; it will not be about a new technology adoption, but about learning how to think right about technology itself. Because when you don't have the right thinking, you can't really understand it right, and that will be pushing you systematically to making bad decisions, leading to wrong actions giving you at the end the unwanted outcome. This vicious cycle can then be broken by education, the education of the IT leaders. But to be realistic, education alone is not enough powerful to drive that wave or awareness for knowledge acquisition, it needs a much important purpose to motivate the IT leaders to start learning. And that could be the organizational growth or cost optimization purpose, as this strategic objective will generate a greater fear than the fear behind the status quo protection, because now more often IT becomes the main cause to fail business. Keep in mind that the skills problem is not just with entry level people, mid-level and senior level managers and staff also have skills problem: -Technical skills - business/management, industry, thinking, learning, and interpersonal skills are fundamental -Vendor knowledge skill gap- the problem is also with service providers and vendors -IT-Non IT disconnect: Non-IT managers and executives need to understand how to leverage their IT investments across global scope.
Constructive Thinking about IT skills competencies by level: The problem of IT skill gaps should be seen as an opportunity, especially as more and more organizations are seeing IT as an enabler and driver of generating revenues. So the constructive thinking about IT skills competencies goes from the most knowledgeable to the less knowledgeable by level:a) Level 1: Science community professionals, the ones who create the main abstract concepts on which the concrete technology (software /hardware) is based on.b) Level 2: The vendors, as they are the ones who built their commercial products by being mainly based on the concepts above, but few invented their own original concepts as well.c) Level 3: The integrators or professional services providers, which are the business partners of level 2 and their mission is to selling the above.d) Level 4: The technology consumers’ organizations who are mere followers of the 3 levels above.
Knowledge (skills) acquisition issue is a systemic problem. So first, understand the problem by going to the root causes and then beyond the symptoms. This is because true understanding is a life changing for any decision maker. As when you do understand; you’ll know what you need (even if it-is a vague idea), and then what will be left is to mainly know how to get it, and then leadership can be applied concretely by showing the direction. If you only fix the symptom, not the root cause, then it perhaps cause more problems later. And that is why our world today; contains in reality more problems creators than true problems solvers, because trying to solve a problem, by nature will create others. And if you don’t have a sound solution to each newly created problem, you’ll have very little chances to succeed solving the main problem, because all is connected. The reality is that whatever something is complex (especially in IT), after digging enough, you’ll always discover that the heart is based on very simple but highly strategic abstract concepts (mainly logic-based). And when those concepts are served to the CIO in a simple manner, it-is a done deal, as reliability becomes on his/her side. When trying to provide such decision related help, you must also understand the initial psychological environment state; where the CIO is living, because what he/she thinks to being impossible, is rarely true, but he/she believes it because of the environment influence, so you need to find a way to help that decision maker to recalibrate his/her thinking about what is really possible.
Business benefit via minding the IT skill gaps: Overall, technology tends to be more dynamic in a company as well as across the industry, while leadership/management/industry changes more slowly. The key is to recognize that they both change and demand everyone to continuously maintain and grow their expertise/skills, and that the IT job market for candidates with the right skills is growing. What would be the impact of the filling the gaps on your organizational business? - Having the financial possibility to becoming truly innovative- Becoming a better competitor at the organization business domain level-Helping to maximizing the sales because of the above using technology-Helping maximizing the profits and long term growth of the organization.
Either IT or organization as a whole, needs to take the next digital practices of talent development and management, the responsibility to maintain and grow one’s expertise (technical and management/ leadership/ industry) has always largely fallen on the individual employee; albeit it is great when the organization provides support. While there are clear opportunities to better prepare HR partners, as well as IT managers, on how to more effectively manage talent life cycle, the digital principles include hiring mindset and capabilities (the digital version of hiring character and attitude), and train for skills.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
June 21, 2015
A Balanced Mind with Emotional Brilliance
Emotional brilliance comes because of balance, not extremes of any kind.
We have come on this lovely beautiful planet, Being human being is great. We can imagine, we can create and we can appreciate many things. We have so many faculties. It is a rainbow, full of colors and fragrances. However, the world is far away from perfect, and most of problems are caused by miscommunication, poor decision making, or dig more deeper, the unbalanced mindsets lack of Emotional Intelligence. So what’s Emotional Intelligence, and how to cultivate a balanced mind with emotional brilliance?
To live in balance one would need to balance one's own emotions. Emotional Intelligence is a tool to live life with a balance. Business is part of Life. “Emotional Intelligence is the ability to identify and manage your own emotions and the emotions of others. It is generally said to include three skills: (1) Emotional awareness, including the ability to identify your own emotions and those of others; (2) The ability to harness emotions and apply them to tasks like thinking and problems solving; (3) The ability to manage emotions, including the ability to regulate your own emotions, and the ability to cheer up or calm down another person.” (psychology.com) Only a balanced person can offer a helping hand and empathy towards others. Only a balanced mind can take tough decision and make better choices. Without inner balance of energies, one cannot achieve a perfect balance of emotions and logic.
Emotional brilliance comes because of balance, not extremes of any kind. Although it is a strong experience of illumination and insight. Emotional brilliance is most easily accessed through your higher mind, meditation, mental exercises and the subconsciousness which is the intuitive mind. Humans know it more as gut instinct which can save one's life in a moment of brilliant awareness--and is essentially the same thing. Emotional Intelligence is not metaphysics at all, it is more a sense of empathy, but is not accessible to all personalities equally, this is a sad truth of the human condition. Creative leadership does have a component of affiliative intelligence. Emotions make people move and hence channelizing them requires intelligence on the part of the leader. Intuition, idea generation can be in mind which is free of turbulence and has knack of achieving balance. Now with conscious thinking, tools and techniques, even emotion can be managed more scientifically. For that one would have to go deep within. Going deep would touch the metaphysical aspects of a human being.
Balance--Balance and balance: That is the knack we must build just like a "rope walker." This is all, whether you call it spirituality, metaphysics, Emotional Intelligence, leadership or any word that we choose. More of common sense to understand that emotions and intelligence are not business words. Though they can be applied in business because a human being runs a business. Most corporations are focused on profit and cash flow and business as usual, this is true; but it is the ability of the creative mind that can give the company innovations, that streamline production and improve quality and puts the corporation ahead of its competition. It is our creative mind that sets us apart from the animal kingdom and has given us technology to improve our lives. Creativity exists in all fields. Not all technology is constructive, however, just as--not all intelligence helps mankind or all emotions are positive, there always needs to be a balance. Empathy seems key to emotional intelligence. The conversation is also about emotional brilliance and how to achieve it, not just about how Emotional Intelligence is being measured in the business environment. Our work life influences our personal life and our personal life influences our work life, they overlap, and this is a new area of psychology that is being discovered and will be changing and evolving.
The leaders having a balanced mind with high EQ can take "tough decisions keeping their sensitivity intact." They will function with creativity, collaboration and would develop the skill to focus on their strength and excellence, rather than divert their energy towards negative competition. Such minds are more objective, accountable, empathetic, intellectual and progressive.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
We have come on this lovely beautiful planet, Being human being is great. We can imagine, we can create and we can appreciate many things. We have so many faculties. It is a rainbow, full of colors and fragrances. However, the world is far away from perfect, and most of problems are caused by miscommunication, poor decision making, or dig more deeper, the unbalanced mindsets lack of Emotional Intelligence. So what’s Emotional Intelligence, and how to cultivate a balanced mind with emotional brilliance?
To live in balance one would need to balance one's own emotions. Emotional Intelligence is a tool to live life with a balance. Business is part of Life. “Emotional Intelligence is the ability to identify and manage your own emotions and the emotions of others. It is generally said to include three skills: (1) Emotional awareness, including the ability to identify your own emotions and those of others; (2) The ability to harness emotions and apply them to tasks like thinking and problems solving; (3) The ability to manage emotions, including the ability to regulate your own emotions, and the ability to cheer up or calm down another person.” (psychology.com) Only a balanced person can offer a helping hand and empathy towards others. Only a balanced mind can take tough decision and make better choices. Without inner balance of energies, one cannot achieve a perfect balance of emotions and logic.
Emotional brilliance comes because of balance, not extremes of any kind. Although it is a strong experience of illumination and insight. Emotional brilliance is most easily accessed through your higher mind, meditation, mental exercises and the subconsciousness which is the intuitive mind. Humans know it more as gut instinct which can save one's life in a moment of brilliant awareness--and is essentially the same thing. Emotional Intelligence is not metaphysics at all, it is more a sense of empathy, but is not accessible to all personalities equally, this is a sad truth of the human condition. Creative leadership does have a component of affiliative intelligence. Emotions make people move and hence channelizing them requires intelligence on the part of the leader. Intuition, idea generation can be in mind which is free of turbulence and has knack of achieving balance. Now with conscious thinking, tools and techniques, even emotion can be managed more scientifically. For that one would have to go deep within. Going deep would touch the metaphysical aspects of a human being.
Balance--Balance and balance: That is the knack we must build just like a "rope walker." This is all, whether you call it spirituality, metaphysics, Emotional Intelligence, leadership or any word that we choose. More of common sense to understand that emotions and intelligence are not business words. Though they can be applied in business because a human being runs a business. Most corporations are focused on profit and cash flow and business as usual, this is true; but it is the ability of the creative mind that can give the company innovations, that streamline production and improve quality and puts the corporation ahead of its competition. It is our creative mind that sets us apart from the animal kingdom and has given us technology to improve our lives. Creativity exists in all fields. Not all technology is constructive, however, just as--not all intelligence helps mankind or all emotions are positive, there always needs to be a balance. Empathy seems key to emotional intelligence. The conversation is also about emotional brilliance and how to achieve it, not just about how Emotional Intelligence is being measured in the business environment. Our work life influences our personal life and our personal life influences our work life, they overlap, and this is a new area of psychology that is being discovered and will be changing and evolving.
The leaders having a balanced mind with high EQ can take "tough decisions keeping their sensitivity intact." They will function with creativity, collaboration and would develop the skill to focus on their strength and excellence, rather than divert their energy towards negative competition. Such minds are more objective, accountable, empathetic, intellectual and progressive.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Digital Master Tuning #99: How to Handle Uncertainty
The only "Certainty" or a "Constant" is "CHANGE." Uncertainty is a given, just as it has always been and always will be.
It is said that the only true constant is change, and in today’s world, nothing is changing more, or growing faster, than information. The estimate global Internet traffic has 21 exabytes—21 million terabytes in 2010. By the end of this year, global traffic will reach 1.3 zettabytes, Every day, 2.5 quintillion bytes of data are created. The ability of companies, much less individuals, to consume and make sense of the information that is available and necessary to make good decisions is becoming a nearly insurmountable challenge. Now the only "Certainty" or a "Constant" is "CHANGE." Business is only an extended part of our life and all businesses have to accept change to survive. So how can organizations handle such unprecedented uncertainty?
Organizations have to learn how to manage information life cycle more effectively and capture business insight: The problem to be solved is to deal with this mountain of information with both technology and human know-how, then to convert this information into valuable knowledge and gain business insight for longer term. A large part of the problem is that while there are both long and short term goals for business, far too often these goals are in opposition to each other. However, since the rewards are highest for the short term goals being met, the long term goals tend to suffer, and uncertainty gets blamed rather than that managers focused on the short term goals and the associated rewards. Uncertainty and ambiguity are a key challenge for business leaders today. In the past, many business leaders believed their organizations’ long-term goals could wait until they had dealt with the current crisis. In the current business environment, this is no longer the case. The rate of change has accelerated, indicating that business leaders must learn how to strike a balance between managing complex issues today and predicting the uncertain issues of tomorrow.
The business strategy management should be long term focus: The business starts with simple values and when it starts growing, to maintain their standards and brand image etc., they float with time and money, sometimes leaving behind their value systems and they don't maintain the same simplicity, also they forget long term. Even the speed of change is increasing, business still do have contexts of relative certainty, while simultaneously having contexts reflecting both complexity and chaos. Each of these contexts require a different management approach. Traditional scientific management theory still assumes relevance in contexts of predictability, yet complexity theory would appear to be more effective for dealing with emergence and uncertainty. A problem is the lack of management understanding of how to apply complex adaptive systems theory in contexts of unpredictability. History has evidence of this. Some key questions - how can the soft signals of contextual changes be best determined. How do you structure information systems to deal with uncertainty - note it’s era of Big Data and cognitive analytics, so when business people focus on business strategy management, and keep anticipating about future hurdles or complications, then they are more well prepared to deal with uncertainties. Most business strategies are based on a long term goal and several short term objectives to achieve it. Now with the uncertainty around with the volatile market situations, extreme competition, advanced technology, globalization and so many factors to consider, don’t you feel that although uncertainty is an opportunity, but somehow it’s affecting the short term objectives and are forcing the companies to act differently according to situations with the rapidly changing market scenario.
Digital leaders are system thinker and scientific guidance for growing individuals and business at the age of uncertainty. The uncertainty will characterize the future. The revolution caused by the new digital technologies on the one hand, but also the ongoing economic dynamic on the other hand will create such a uncertainty and volatility in the global economy, that will need a new model of leadership in which openness, flexibility, transparency, science and connectivity become necessary features. Improving communications requires to be always on and always connected. The amount of data to manage is huge and creates a lot of pressure. This requires an incredible ability to make decisions and to respond to and anticipate. The greatest indicator of success in the era of social technology will be an open mind control that let you go at the right time, to the right place, in the right doses. Who leads the organizations must find within him/herself the emotional stability and greater empathy because an open and global leadership first requires discipline, structure, constant effort. The change will be the new normality, and the leader must act with speed but quietly, he or she will need stability, confident and self-awareness. The leader of the future is no longer the charismatic prophet capable of seducing the masses, but a system thinker and scientific guidance for growing individuals and business. Science has created a world where individuals play the role that was once entrusted to the community. For the leadership of the future is not only natural talent. He or she must become aware of the resources, to achieve behavioral strategies effective and have a path of personal and professional improvement, a great preparation, vision, intuition, perseverance and the ability to work hard.
Strategy management and risk management goes hand in hand: Strategic planning is paramount but, in these uncertain times, this should go hand in hand with contingency planning around “what if” scenarios. Set Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that are useful and relevant to the organization. The crisis of our consciousness now consists in that, in fact, even technologically successful science is a double edged sword. For the allegedly useful knowledge science seems to provide for industries has side effects that, in the limited framework of, technological success, were not predictable, since even the possibility of undesirable side effects has not been in the focus of Newtonian mechanics that have fueled industrialization. It has taught us to view and organize nature, as if it were a machine. The miraculous technological success that this approach to nature has had, however, does not allow of the conclusion that it indicates knowledge, as its unpredictable and undesirable side effects (silo, hierarchy and slow to change, etc) show us. Of course, viewing human beings or living beings in general as mechanisms allows of an incredibly successful control of the functioning of those alleged mechanisms, with the exception of that transforming living beings into machines may result in diminishing them.
When business is people-centric, uncertainty is an opportunity; when people are for business, it causes a problem. This is where mission of the business at the core is tested, how much the team is aligned to the mission is tested. So for people-centric organizations, uncertainty is not a problem and is an opportunity enabling to foresee possibilities and probabilities that might crop in the way of progress. The way to effectively deal with uncertainty is to reduce it by getting information. That is why good strategic planning is based on good information about the customers, competition, internal capabilities and costs. While there is always some remaining uncertainty, reducing the uncertainty, particularly if one broadly involves the organization, leads to better decisions, strategic plans and better implementation. This does not ensure success, but it does raise the probability of success.
As we all know the only "Certainty" or a "Constant" is "CHANGE." Uncertainty is a given, just as it has always been and always will be. Business is only an extended part of our life and all businesses have to accept change to survive. Without a positive and proactive approach, there is no positive result. The task of business is to deal with the uncertainty while moving forward. Yes, the challenges, competition and complexities may be on the increase, but along with it there comes the increase in opportunity too and in the form of demand. Digital organizations are dynamic, organic, intelligent, and agile, with dynamic capabilities to deal with volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity.
Digitalization is like a flywheel, and Digital Masters are the one riding above it. Surf more Information about Digital Master:Digital Master Kindle Version Book Order URLDigital Master Book URLDigital Master Author URLDigital Master Video Clip on YouTubeDigital Master Fun QuizFollow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
It is said that the only true constant is change, and in today’s world, nothing is changing more, or growing faster, than information. The estimate global Internet traffic has 21 exabytes—21 million terabytes in 2010. By the end of this year, global traffic will reach 1.3 zettabytes, Every day, 2.5 quintillion bytes of data are created. The ability of companies, much less individuals, to consume and make sense of the information that is available and necessary to make good decisions is becoming a nearly insurmountable challenge. Now the only "Certainty" or a "Constant" is "CHANGE." Business is only an extended part of our life and all businesses have to accept change to survive. So how can organizations handle such unprecedented uncertainty?
Organizations have to learn how to manage information life cycle more effectively and capture business insight: The problem to be solved is to deal with this mountain of information with both technology and human know-how, then to convert this information into valuable knowledge and gain business insight for longer term. A large part of the problem is that while there are both long and short term goals for business, far too often these goals are in opposition to each other. However, since the rewards are highest for the short term goals being met, the long term goals tend to suffer, and uncertainty gets blamed rather than that managers focused on the short term goals and the associated rewards. Uncertainty and ambiguity are a key challenge for business leaders today. In the past, many business leaders believed their organizations’ long-term goals could wait until they had dealt with the current crisis. In the current business environment, this is no longer the case. The rate of change has accelerated, indicating that business leaders must learn how to strike a balance between managing complex issues today and predicting the uncertain issues of tomorrow.
The business strategy management should be long term focus: The business starts with simple values and when it starts growing, to maintain their standards and brand image etc., they float with time and money, sometimes leaving behind their value systems and they don't maintain the same simplicity, also they forget long term. Even the speed of change is increasing, business still do have contexts of relative certainty, while simultaneously having contexts reflecting both complexity and chaos. Each of these contexts require a different management approach. Traditional scientific management theory still assumes relevance in contexts of predictability, yet complexity theory would appear to be more effective for dealing with emergence and uncertainty. A problem is the lack of management understanding of how to apply complex adaptive systems theory in contexts of unpredictability. History has evidence of this. Some key questions - how can the soft signals of contextual changes be best determined. How do you structure information systems to deal with uncertainty - note it’s era of Big Data and cognitive analytics, so when business people focus on business strategy management, and keep anticipating about future hurdles or complications, then they are more well prepared to deal with uncertainties. Most business strategies are based on a long term goal and several short term objectives to achieve it. Now with the uncertainty around with the volatile market situations, extreme competition, advanced technology, globalization and so many factors to consider, don’t you feel that although uncertainty is an opportunity, but somehow it’s affecting the short term objectives and are forcing the companies to act differently according to situations with the rapidly changing market scenario.
Digital leaders are system thinker and scientific guidance for growing individuals and business at the age of uncertainty. The uncertainty will characterize the future. The revolution caused by the new digital technologies on the one hand, but also the ongoing economic dynamic on the other hand will create such a uncertainty and volatility in the global economy, that will need a new model of leadership in which openness, flexibility, transparency, science and connectivity become necessary features. Improving communications requires to be always on and always connected. The amount of data to manage is huge and creates a lot of pressure. This requires an incredible ability to make decisions and to respond to and anticipate. The greatest indicator of success in the era of social technology will be an open mind control that let you go at the right time, to the right place, in the right doses. Who leads the organizations must find within him/herself the emotional stability and greater empathy because an open and global leadership first requires discipline, structure, constant effort. The change will be the new normality, and the leader must act with speed but quietly, he or she will need stability, confident and self-awareness. The leader of the future is no longer the charismatic prophet capable of seducing the masses, but a system thinker and scientific guidance for growing individuals and business. Science has created a world where individuals play the role that was once entrusted to the community. For the leadership of the future is not only natural talent. He or she must become aware of the resources, to achieve behavioral strategies effective and have a path of personal and professional improvement, a great preparation, vision, intuition, perseverance and the ability to work hard.
Strategy management and risk management goes hand in hand: Strategic planning is paramount but, in these uncertain times, this should go hand in hand with contingency planning around “what if” scenarios. Set Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that are useful and relevant to the organization. The crisis of our consciousness now consists in that, in fact, even technologically successful science is a double edged sword. For the allegedly useful knowledge science seems to provide for industries has side effects that, in the limited framework of, technological success, were not predictable, since even the possibility of undesirable side effects has not been in the focus of Newtonian mechanics that have fueled industrialization. It has taught us to view and organize nature, as if it were a machine. The miraculous technological success that this approach to nature has had, however, does not allow of the conclusion that it indicates knowledge, as its unpredictable and undesirable side effects (silo, hierarchy and slow to change, etc) show us. Of course, viewing human beings or living beings in general as mechanisms allows of an incredibly successful control of the functioning of those alleged mechanisms, with the exception of that transforming living beings into machines may result in diminishing them.
When business is people-centric, uncertainty is an opportunity; when people are for business, it causes a problem. This is where mission of the business at the core is tested, how much the team is aligned to the mission is tested. So for people-centric organizations, uncertainty is not a problem and is an opportunity enabling to foresee possibilities and probabilities that might crop in the way of progress. The way to effectively deal with uncertainty is to reduce it by getting information. That is why good strategic planning is based on good information about the customers, competition, internal capabilities and costs. While there is always some remaining uncertainty, reducing the uncertainty, particularly if one broadly involves the organization, leads to better decisions, strategic plans and better implementation. This does not ensure success, but it does raise the probability of success.As we all know the only "Certainty" or a "Constant" is "CHANGE." Uncertainty is a given, just as it has always been and always will be. Business is only an extended part of our life and all businesses have to accept change to survive. Without a positive and proactive approach, there is no positive result. The task of business is to deal with the uncertainty while moving forward. Yes, the challenges, competition and complexities may be on the increase, but along with it there comes the increase in opportunity too and in the form of demand. Digital organizations are dynamic, organic, intelligent, and agile, with dynamic capabilities to deal with volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity.
Digitalization is like a flywheel, and Digital Masters are the one riding above it. Surf more Information about Digital Master:Digital Master Kindle Version Book Order URLDigital Master Book URLDigital Master Author URLDigital Master Video Clip on YouTubeDigital Master Fun QuizFollow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
June 20, 2015
Three Aspects of Human Capital
Human Capital (HC) is one of the constituents of Intangible Capitals (IC).
People are the most invaluable asset, and Talent Management is always one of the most important disciplines to manage business. There are quite a few terms that have been used. From personnel management to Human Resource Management to Human Capital Management of today. Whatever you use to refer to the people in the organization, there is an investment that is needed in order to achieve the business goal and this investment has various perspectives - one being the human perspective. So organizations need to see this as a critical aspect of growth and invest in their people, thereby taking the debate away from the term of reference to the reality of what it should be.
Human Capital (HC) as one of the constituents of Intangible Capital (IC). In finance dominant organizational culture, people have been called human cost, human resource, human asset and human capital. Human Capital does make sense within the context of the goals of a company especially when you consider Human Capital is the largest intangible asset of a company. Companies are usually very good at creating models around their tangible assets. Companies scale their growth around tangible asset models. With advancements in technology, industrial organizational psychology and expectations on people performance, the term Human Capital makes sense. To compete businesses rely so much on their people assets or human capital, to reach their goals and succeed. Here are the constitutes if Intangible Capital:- Human Capital: This includes all the talent, competencies and experience of your employees and managers.- Structural Capital: This includes all knowledge that stays behind when your employees go offsite at the end of the day. There is significant structural capital in today’s organizations including recorded knowledge, processes, software and intellectual property.-Relationship Capital: This includes all key external relationships that drive your business, with customers, suppliers, partners, outsourcing and financing partners, to name a few. This kind of capital also includes organizational brand and reputation. Due to the growing importance of networks in organizational structures, this is also sometimes called Network Capital.
There’s an argument of the term “Human Capital” as being “Inhuman” in certain way: It is understandable that the term 'Human Capital' is somewhat offensive, after all people offer so much value, it is a bit degrading to associate people with such a cold and calculating term, feels like a hollow attempt to sound more 'businessy,' capital and the management of it is more typically associated with buildings and equipment and things. When a company invests in an asset, it is written down over a number of years depending on its life expectancy/tax rules. When you invest in an employee, say, attending a course, its cost is written off as a cost in the accounts immediately. From an accounting perspective, there is no long term value. From a HR perspective, it may be huge for people development. Try applying pure accountancy treatments to other capital assets to employees and then you will see how they like being treated as capital.
The paradox is that If you cannot satisfy the financial criteria, then the additional things that people want out of a job simply cannot happen - you can't have the feeling of belonging, a sense of purpose, and something interesting to do unless you can keep the light on. It is also very important that data be used to enhance decision making and help lesson subjectivity. People are paid to perform for their business which benefits the enterprise. Data doesn't dumb down or change the relationship aspect of business and human interactions. Data and monetizing the value of people's contributions helps HR become a strategic leader and key stakeholder, not just a management force. Putting a price tag on the Human Capital is going to happen and it is a correct valuation of the abilities of people in terms of what they know, what they can do, etc.
HR has always evaluated people and performance. I/O psychology has been around as a science for over 100 years studying people performance via assessments, utility analyses and other methods which help companies evaluate the value they are getting from their people. Assessing job fit or competencies as they relate to performance is part of HR and human capital management. Talent managers should understand the concern that they should really treat people as ends in themselves, with respect, dignity, and kindness, but corporations are artificial organizations in which ROI is indeed a criterion and in which there is a fiduciary duty to be honored.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
People are the most invaluable asset, and Talent Management is always one of the most important disciplines to manage business. There are quite a few terms that have been used. From personnel management to Human Resource Management to Human Capital Management of today. Whatever you use to refer to the people in the organization, there is an investment that is needed in order to achieve the business goal and this investment has various perspectives - one being the human perspective. So organizations need to see this as a critical aspect of growth and invest in their people, thereby taking the debate away from the term of reference to the reality of what it should be.
Human Capital (HC) as one of the constituents of Intangible Capital (IC). In finance dominant organizational culture, people have been called human cost, human resource, human asset and human capital. Human Capital does make sense within the context of the goals of a company especially when you consider Human Capital is the largest intangible asset of a company. Companies are usually very good at creating models around their tangible assets. Companies scale their growth around tangible asset models. With advancements in technology, industrial organizational psychology and expectations on people performance, the term Human Capital makes sense. To compete businesses rely so much on their people assets or human capital, to reach their goals and succeed. Here are the constitutes if Intangible Capital:- Human Capital: This includes all the talent, competencies and experience of your employees and managers.- Structural Capital: This includes all knowledge that stays behind when your employees go offsite at the end of the day. There is significant structural capital in today’s organizations including recorded knowledge, processes, software and intellectual property.-Relationship Capital: This includes all key external relationships that drive your business, with customers, suppliers, partners, outsourcing and financing partners, to name a few. This kind of capital also includes organizational brand and reputation. Due to the growing importance of networks in organizational structures, this is also sometimes called Network Capital.
There’s an argument of the term “Human Capital” as being “Inhuman” in certain way: It is understandable that the term 'Human Capital' is somewhat offensive, after all people offer so much value, it is a bit degrading to associate people with such a cold and calculating term, feels like a hollow attempt to sound more 'businessy,' capital and the management of it is more typically associated with buildings and equipment and things. When a company invests in an asset, it is written down over a number of years depending on its life expectancy/tax rules. When you invest in an employee, say, attending a course, its cost is written off as a cost in the accounts immediately. From an accounting perspective, there is no long term value. From a HR perspective, it may be huge for people development. Try applying pure accountancy treatments to other capital assets to employees and then you will see how they like being treated as capital.
The paradox is that If you cannot satisfy the financial criteria, then the additional things that people want out of a job simply cannot happen - you can't have the feeling of belonging, a sense of purpose, and something interesting to do unless you can keep the light on. It is also very important that data be used to enhance decision making and help lesson subjectivity. People are paid to perform for their business which benefits the enterprise. Data doesn't dumb down or change the relationship aspect of business and human interactions. Data and monetizing the value of people's contributions helps HR become a strategic leader and key stakeholder, not just a management force. Putting a price tag on the Human Capital is going to happen and it is a correct valuation of the abilities of people in terms of what they know, what they can do, etc.
HR has always evaluated people and performance. I/O psychology has been around as a science for over 100 years studying people performance via assessments, utility analyses and other methods which help companies evaluate the value they are getting from their people. Assessing job fit or competencies as they relate to performance is part of HR and human capital management. Talent managers should understand the concern that they should really treat people as ends in themselves, with respect, dignity, and kindness, but corporations are artificial organizations in which ROI is indeed a criterion and in which there is a fiduciary duty to be honored.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Strategy Execution - How to Keep Focused
It is important to stress the importance of strategy execution and laser focus on achieving the strategic goals.
If strategy is more important because it directly impacts which direction should organization go, then execution is more difficult, because it takes time and business alignment to make it work. And there are many pitfalls on the way, also a lot of roadblocks to overcome. So focus, focus, and how to keep focus on strategy execution?
Focus on long term goals with some quick wins: Living in the world of "strategy execution," the dichotomy often exists between vision and "doing." Strategies need to be first and foremost long-term, specifically because they are directional and need to allow for the organization to knock the rust off and move coherently in the described direction. Secondly, strategies need to be descriptive, but prescriptive as well. Meaning, they outline the areas where possible conflicting priorities may lie, and outline how they are to be handled in the organization in terms of resource allocation (time, budget, people, etc.). Thirdly, strategies need to be game changers. They cannot be a cornucopia of "more of the same, keep the engine running, just a little faster.” They have to show that the organization is "playing to win" not just trying not to lose. Without this, they will never have resounding buy-in at the middle and bottom of the organization where execution really lives, and thus, conflict of priorities and silos will continue to hinder progress. In practice, this means a well defined and trainable approach to defining strategic goals and measurements, cascading them out to front-line teams, clear methods and personnel to effect improvements, and regular reviews to chart progress and fine-tune efforts.
Focus on removing the silos: There is no doubt that the chasm between strategy and execution is very complex in nature. It’s never a question of if these problems will happen, it’s a question of when and to what degree. The best way to remove these silos and problematic handoffs is to replace them with a many-to-many infrastructure. It’s all about engaging specialized talent so they can converse in ways they wouldn’t be able to on their own. This process should be intensive and highly effective – enabling an organization to get all the right people, tackling a challenge from all the right angles, all at once, which in turn results in the optimal solution. A silo approach doesn’t cut it, and business leaders need to find new ways to hasten their collective best thinking efforts – especially in larger organizations, where it is crucial that one does not exclusively rely on his/her own limited brain-power. Large groups can interact and be able to divide and conquer a complex challenge to accelerate your solution forming capabilities if done right.
Focus on building culture of improvement: It would have to be a culture that is open to change and innovation. It would have to be an environment where the leaders view improvement and change as their main focus and daily operations as secondary. Most managers have the opposite viewpoint. Strategy execution will almost always change the way the organization operates, in order to align it with the defined strategic direction. Such change will always provoke some measure of resistance, particularly if the organization is large, traditional, has enjoyed success in the past, and has strong bargaining power vis-a-vis its customers. The employees will likely question the wisdom of changing what they perceive to be the "formula for success." It will take a strong transformational leader to demonstrate that the status quo is not a viable option, to show a new path that will lead to greater success, and to model the behavior needed by the new way. It will take a lot of leadership for the pioneer executors who want to bridge the chasm. Extra-work, you not only run the project, but also find the time to quietly abstract and reflect, continue to keep the strategy update.
Focus on creating synergy between strategists and executioners: The most important thing when it comes to implementing strategy is to gain the buy-in, or understanding of those who will be affected by it. Organizations need to get away from letting things fall through, and start creating “integrated wholes” by utilizing the correct processes to solve these complexities - ultimately bridging the chasm between strategy and execution.The issue of the imaginary line between thinkers and doers, is that, neither of the two wants to cross, as people indulge in the comfort of their known scope of responsibilities and don't like to go in unchartered territory. It needs to have great teamwork and synergy between the strategists and executioners.. senior and middle management. Regular communication and update is a great way, as everyone knows, the finger pointing becomes a huge roadblock.
It is important to stress the importance of strategy execution and laser focus on achieving the strategic goals. Planning and execution are interdependent. Execution involves more people than strategy. It’s important to follow the logic steps, but be agile and flexible to adapt to the emerging changes for strategy execution.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
If strategy is more important because it directly impacts which direction should organization go, then execution is more difficult, because it takes time and business alignment to make it work. And there are many pitfalls on the way, also a lot of roadblocks to overcome. So focus, focus, and how to keep focus on strategy execution?
Focus on long term goals with some quick wins: Living in the world of "strategy execution," the dichotomy often exists between vision and "doing." Strategies need to be first and foremost long-term, specifically because they are directional and need to allow for the organization to knock the rust off and move coherently in the described direction. Secondly, strategies need to be descriptive, but prescriptive as well. Meaning, they outline the areas where possible conflicting priorities may lie, and outline how they are to be handled in the organization in terms of resource allocation (time, budget, people, etc.). Thirdly, strategies need to be game changers. They cannot be a cornucopia of "more of the same, keep the engine running, just a little faster.” They have to show that the organization is "playing to win" not just trying not to lose. Without this, they will never have resounding buy-in at the middle and bottom of the organization where execution really lives, and thus, conflict of priorities and silos will continue to hinder progress. In practice, this means a well defined and trainable approach to defining strategic goals and measurements, cascading them out to front-line teams, clear methods and personnel to effect improvements, and regular reviews to chart progress and fine-tune efforts.
Focus on removing the silos: There is no doubt that the chasm between strategy and execution is very complex in nature. It’s never a question of if these problems will happen, it’s a question of when and to what degree. The best way to remove these silos and problematic handoffs is to replace them with a many-to-many infrastructure. It’s all about engaging specialized talent so they can converse in ways they wouldn’t be able to on their own. This process should be intensive and highly effective – enabling an organization to get all the right people, tackling a challenge from all the right angles, all at once, which in turn results in the optimal solution. A silo approach doesn’t cut it, and business leaders need to find new ways to hasten their collective best thinking efforts – especially in larger organizations, where it is crucial that one does not exclusively rely on his/her own limited brain-power. Large groups can interact and be able to divide and conquer a complex challenge to accelerate your solution forming capabilities if done right.
Focus on building culture of improvement: It would have to be a culture that is open to change and innovation. It would have to be an environment where the leaders view improvement and change as their main focus and daily operations as secondary. Most managers have the opposite viewpoint. Strategy execution will almost always change the way the organization operates, in order to align it with the defined strategic direction. Such change will always provoke some measure of resistance, particularly if the organization is large, traditional, has enjoyed success in the past, and has strong bargaining power vis-a-vis its customers. The employees will likely question the wisdom of changing what they perceive to be the "formula for success." It will take a strong transformational leader to demonstrate that the status quo is not a viable option, to show a new path that will lead to greater success, and to model the behavior needed by the new way. It will take a lot of leadership for the pioneer executors who want to bridge the chasm. Extra-work, you not only run the project, but also find the time to quietly abstract and reflect, continue to keep the strategy update.
Focus on creating synergy between strategists and executioners: The most important thing when it comes to implementing strategy is to gain the buy-in, or understanding of those who will be affected by it. Organizations need to get away from letting things fall through, and start creating “integrated wholes” by utilizing the correct processes to solve these complexities - ultimately bridging the chasm between strategy and execution.The issue of the imaginary line between thinkers and doers, is that, neither of the two wants to cross, as people indulge in the comfort of their known scope of responsibilities and don't like to go in unchartered territory. It needs to have great teamwork and synergy between the strategists and executioners.. senior and middle management. Regular communication and update is a great way, as everyone knows, the finger pointing becomes a huge roadblock.
It is important to stress the importance of strategy execution and laser focus on achieving the strategic goals. Planning and execution are interdependent. Execution involves more people than strategy. It’s important to follow the logic steps, but be agile and flexible to adapt to the emerging changes for strategy execution.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
