Pearl Zhu's Blog, page 1431
June 7, 2015
An Improving Mind
“If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid.” - Epictetus
The pursuit of self improvement is important and is second to none. Only if you improve, can you add value to the surroundings and its value makes a difference in results. But more specifically, how can an improving mind drive collective human progress and make the world a better place?
An improving mind is all about the desire to learn - if it's done right, learning should provide much fun and enjoyment as well as a sense of achievement and a little bonus of self worth. Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything. If you choose to do nothing about it, nothing happens, but if you start doing something about it, something happens. Be a believer then everything will happen. Always collect the feedback with good intention in order to make steady improvement, but do not waste time in worrying about any sort of criticism which only distracts you from what you are moving forward. Do best what you can afford and be ready to take own responsibility.
Progress represents change. Without change, one cannot even stagnate, she or he will be on a backward journey. Progress itself is a change, either by individual or group efforts or induced by environmental and cultural tangible and intangible forces. But sometimes progress is such a hard thing to assess. There are views that say every action has an equal reaction, and that for every action, there are a myriad of reactions, some good and some bad, we cannot know all the possible results. What is considered progress for one, is not progress for another, so sometimes progress cannot truly be considered "PROGRESS" for humans as a species unless it is helping a very large group. In order to know this, it cannot be deduced through rational thought. We have to trust our inner intuitive self too, a sense of wisdom and guidance from higher mind. Very few people can do this. Most of people are focused on ego needs and survival.
Progress is not hanging onto judgments from a way that does not apply. Insight is judging with an openness and understanding that your parameters for judgment are based on the past and not the future. Indeed, the moment one begins to work towards one's improvement, one attracts a lot of judgment and criticism. People want to hold oneself back, and that is the test, not to get trapped, and to continue with focus. Thinking of changing oneself must be reasoned, and the reasons must be firm footed. For a normal person, it must provide strong conviction to decisions. Only shaky people are procrastinated to make decisions and get into the pitfall of that. It takes time and patient that the truth of your ideas and contribution gets revealed, and even your critics begin to wonder and start talking good about you, and if you succeed wherever you go, they are the first ones to appreciate and talk high about you…
Embrace change wholeheartedly and make a life a progressive journey! A digital professional with an improving mind continues to make progress via self-reflection, lifetime learning and wisdom refining. Keep hungry, and stay foolish.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
The pursuit of self improvement is important and is second to none. Only if you improve, can you add value to the surroundings and its value makes a difference in results. But more specifically, how can an improving mind drive collective human progress and make the world a better place?
An improving mind is all about the desire to learn - if it's done right, learning should provide much fun and enjoyment as well as a sense of achievement and a little bonus of self worth. Progress is impossible without change, and those who cannot change their minds cannot change anything. If you choose to do nothing about it, nothing happens, but if you start doing something about it, something happens. Be a believer then everything will happen. Always collect the feedback with good intention in order to make steady improvement, but do not waste time in worrying about any sort of criticism which only distracts you from what you are moving forward. Do best what you can afford and be ready to take own responsibility.
Progress represents change. Without change, one cannot even stagnate, she or he will be on a backward journey. Progress itself is a change, either by individual or group efforts or induced by environmental and cultural tangible and intangible forces. But sometimes progress is such a hard thing to assess. There are views that say every action has an equal reaction, and that for every action, there are a myriad of reactions, some good and some bad, we cannot know all the possible results. What is considered progress for one, is not progress for another, so sometimes progress cannot truly be considered "PROGRESS" for humans as a species unless it is helping a very large group. In order to know this, it cannot be deduced through rational thought. We have to trust our inner intuitive self too, a sense of wisdom and guidance from higher mind. Very few people can do this. Most of people are focused on ego needs and survival.
Progress is not hanging onto judgments from a way that does not apply. Insight is judging with an openness and understanding that your parameters for judgment are based on the past and not the future. Indeed, the moment one begins to work towards one's improvement, one attracts a lot of judgment and criticism. People want to hold oneself back, and that is the test, not to get trapped, and to continue with focus. Thinking of changing oneself must be reasoned, and the reasons must be firm footed. For a normal person, it must provide strong conviction to decisions. Only shaky people are procrastinated to make decisions and get into the pitfall of that. It takes time and patient that the truth of your ideas and contribution gets revealed, and even your critics begin to wonder and start talking good about you, and if you succeed wherever you go, they are the first ones to appreciate and talk high about you…
Embrace change wholeheartedly and make a life a progressive journey! A digital professional with an improving mind continues to make progress via self-reflection, lifetime learning and wisdom refining. Keep hungry, and stay foolish.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Digital Master Tuning #95: A Bimodal Digital Organization - How to Strike the Right Balance between Agility and Stability
Change is not for its own sake, it’s means to the end, not the end.
Organizations large or small are on the journey to digital transformation, the paradox is that you need to keep the light on to maintain the stability, but also be adaptive to the changes caused by digital disruption with increasing speed. Hence, many businesses just have to run the bi-modal mode: the industrial speed to do what they always do, and the digital speed by leveraging innovation to experiment the new way to do things. But philosophically and methodologically, what’s the right balance between being quick to adopt new methods and risking them failing, and sticking with tried and tested ones and risking them becoming obsolete? Or more broadly speaking, how to strike the right balance between agility and stability?
"Test and Learn." Quickly adopt new methods till the time you have achieved a tried and tested method that meets the objective of what you are trying to achieve. And stop when new methods doesn't take you significantly closer to your objectives. It is ingrained into the business. So when you want to roll out economic transparency, which they eventually brand with committed engaged owners, you can try several pilot operations, testing the concept. You then refine the process from what you learn, and move ahead. This mitigates the risk, but also gets started right away, learning by doing.
To innovate an enterprise must be willing to fail. Decide whether the possible gains will outweigh the probable losses. If you don't cultivate an atmosphere that fosters some risks, then you will stagnate. It's never just the tried and learn, and it's never just the new and risky that works. It is insight and foresight and the ability to integrate knowledge from both. The thing to do is to drop the fear and grab the rope and swing out over the water and let go, have faith in your planning and execution, and the ability of the people you are working with to get it done and make sure in your planning, you have thought forward about the possible snags and planned accordingly. Some say the right balance is always an illusive thing. Sometimes things goes smoothly, other times not so much. Being willing to dive in rather than just dip your toes is sometimes needed even if you are scared. Fear of new things is often the biggest enemy. Most of people, including leaders, often find themselves playing it safe and spending too much time trying to weigh risks and outcomes.
Change is not for its own sake, it’s means to the end, not the end. Some things should stay. The old cliché of not throwing the baby out with the bathwater springs to mind. Some things should change. Rational people within the particular business should be aware of that, and always, always frame and ask the right question before embarking. Sometimes change becomes an end in itself, and the question, "Do we need this change?" is seldom asked. Largely through fear. Who dares question the inviolable mantra that change must happen? Incidentally, why do Change Managers always wear a synthetic, exaggerated, fixed smile? Is it part of the training process? Maybe that should change as well. The point is to keep in mind about the reasons behind the changes. "Do we need this change?" but also realize that necessary change is inevitable no matter how you feel. Often the balance lies between the control you desire to have and the willingness to take the leap of faith that might lead to even greater things.
For many businesses, especially legacy organizations, it is necessary to keep stable processes to run business as always. However, to move up business maturity from efficiency, to effectiveness and to agility, their focus should shift from process to execution via eliminating bureaucracy. So you even need more creativity - the innovative mode to provide agile and flexible products and service, and build up competitive uniqueness for business to compete in long term.
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 YouTube
Digital Master Fun QuizFollow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Organizations large or small are on the journey to digital transformation, the paradox is that you need to keep the light on to maintain the stability, but also be adaptive to the changes caused by digital disruption with increasing speed. Hence, many businesses just have to run the bi-modal mode: the industrial speed to do what they always do, and the digital speed by leveraging innovation to experiment the new way to do things. But philosophically and methodologically, what’s the right balance between being quick to adopt new methods and risking them failing, and sticking with tried and tested ones and risking them becoming obsolete? Or more broadly speaking, how to strike the right balance between agility and stability?"Test and Learn." Quickly adopt new methods till the time you have achieved a tried and tested method that meets the objective of what you are trying to achieve. And stop when new methods doesn't take you significantly closer to your objectives. It is ingrained into the business. So when you want to roll out economic transparency, which they eventually brand with committed engaged owners, you can try several pilot operations, testing the concept. You then refine the process from what you learn, and move ahead. This mitigates the risk, but also gets started right away, learning by doing.
To innovate an enterprise must be willing to fail. Decide whether the possible gains will outweigh the probable losses. If you don't cultivate an atmosphere that fosters some risks, then you will stagnate. It's never just the tried and learn, and it's never just the new and risky that works. It is insight and foresight and the ability to integrate knowledge from both. The thing to do is to drop the fear and grab the rope and swing out over the water and let go, have faith in your planning and execution, and the ability of the people you are working with to get it done and make sure in your planning, you have thought forward about the possible snags and planned accordingly. Some say the right balance is always an illusive thing. Sometimes things goes smoothly, other times not so much. Being willing to dive in rather than just dip your toes is sometimes needed even if you are scared. Fear of new things is often the biggest enemy. Most of people, including leaders, often find themselves playing it safe and spending too much time trying to weigh risks and outcomes.
Change is not for its own sake, it’s means to the end, not the end. Some things should stay. The old cliché of not throwing the baby out with the bathwater springs to mind. Some things should change. Rational people within the particular business should be aware of that, and always, always frame and ask the right question before embarking. Sometimes change becomes an end in itself, and the question, "Do we need this change?" is seldom asked. Largely through fear. Who dares question the inviolable mantra that change must happen? Incidentally, why do Change Managers always wear a synthetic, exaggerated, fixed smile? Is it part of the training process? Maybe that should change as well. The point is to keep in mind about the reasons behind the changes. "Do we need this change?" but also realize that necessary change is inevitable no matter how you feel. Often the balance lies between the control you desire to have and the willingness to take the leap of faith that might lead to even greater things.For many businesses, especially legacy organizations, it is necessary to keep stable processes to run business as always. However, to move up business maturity from efficiency, to effectiveness and to agility, their focus should shift from process to execution via eliminating bureaucracy. So you even need more creativity - the innovative mode to provide agile and flexible products and service, and build up competitive uniqueness for business to compete in long term.
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 YouTube
Digital Master Fun QuizFollow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Can HR Navigate the digital Disruptions via Deploying Talent Management Analytics
Being able to effectively analyze data is the key differentiator between a 20th Century and 21st Century.
Disruption is often defined as 'an event that results in a displacement or discontinuity,' 'disturbance or problems that interrupt an event, activity, or process,' and you easily see that events, activities, or processes have impact on other events, activities, or processes. It is a constant condition of change. Nothing stays the same. The rest is a matter of degree, not a question of whether it's change or not. Does change beget change? Can HR lead organizational changes by navigating the digital disruptions and deploying talent management analytics?
Disruption is a way of life. In fact it has started defining the way business works. HR is not immune to it. Does a change in the quantity of available HR data generate any other change? The implication is that it doesn't, or at least hasn't, and won't unless it's mere presence becomes disruptive and only then motivates a response. They need to embrace change wholeheartedly and align it to the business needs. Definitely disruption creates real change, Unfortunately HR practices evolution has been really slow in the last decade and HR analytics is still an empty marketing word for a lot of HR managers, many HR practitioners consider “data” to be a four-letter word and thus to be avoided. Even more unfortunately some HR practitioners have decided that lots of data is good to have and are expecting employees to provide it without considering what time that takes out of the working day or even what HR is going to do with the data once it is to hand. To drive change, you must have a sense of urgency! The greatest opportunity for HR is to understand the business and the data so they can embrace and champion change!
The change in the availability of data is going to be disruptive one way or another. Fast moving technology makes lots of new things possible. And lots of the new things that happen appear and disappear just as fast, so we shouldn't be dazzled by the marketing hype. Fear is a valuable marketing tool, but you need to use things that make a difference for you, not bend with the wind. HR will either ignore it until someone else reveals the value of it and disrupts HR from the outside, or HR will grab it and manage it properly and manage the disruptions that analysis generates. Said another way, if you don't disrupt your own status quo, someone else will. More data and the results of that data, face the same issue and ultimately the same question: "Will the data analysis get us from point A to point B?" Many HR departments devote a lot of resources to find results to issues that only they see as paramount to success. In the end they are still going to come across the same problem - getting buy-in for the practical application of data driven solutions. Disruption per se may have a rather detrimental impact on change, especially when it forces unplanned or untimely change. Good practitioners are ought to anticipate need for change before disruption takes place.
Being able to effectively analyze data is the key differentiator between a 20th Century and 21st Century. In the world of exponentially increasing digital disruption, change is inevitable, but you must know how far to bend. For HR professional, gathering data is the easy part, analyzing and extrapolating information that will push the business forward is the key skill that will set-apart the true HR professional and make a business case for avoiding outsourcing this vital function. People clamor for change, and they usually get it. But simply changing a thing doesn't mean that progress has been made. You have to engage the sixth sense to decipher when to make change, and to discern what to throw out and what to keep. But most important of all, you need to have a plan. Set out goals and work at them in a systematic way. Setting timelines, and sometimes resetting those timelines. Because people are not perfect and even the plans will need modification due to unforeseen obstacles. All in all change is good and you must embrace and adapt to it, because with change comes new innovations. If you have a good change and data analytics strategy in place, you should not be fearful to get disrupted, and adapt to change more seamlessly. However, if that is the case, it means that the change is warranted and in that case you just have to go with the flow.
Data is not the issue. Analytics just means asking interesting questions to produce new business or customer insights. Technological innovations are not disruptive in the same way as many other types of disruptions - their influence is much slower, almost evolutionary because the true changes come from a) the technology b) the human context and c) the factors that affect implementation. The role in HR as the front line is to help employees embrace and adapt to technological changes. If you can successfully navigate the "disruptions," you can lead the way. Disruption is not a new concept. Disruption is why there is any change, ever! You need smart data analysts to help make it work, but you need to be brave enough to ask the questions such as:-how do we know for sure our training makes a difference to people's performance?-how do we know for sure the people we call 'talent' are really that special?-how do we know we are eliminating unconscious bias at hiring process?-how do we know our online application tools aren't filtering out precisely the kind of new thinking that could reinvigorate our business?
Change can be an opportunity, but at the end of the day, it needs to be all about moving the business numbers upwards. For sure there are different speeds and different stages of capability maturity to deal with changes. It is very true that unless there is a disruption, people very rarely move out of their comfort zones. Growth is not possible unless we are willing to move out of our comfort zone. Hence disruption acts as a catalyst in growth by pushing us out of our comfort zones. It is imperative for us to keep pace with these changes that seem to evolve every day. The role in HR as the front line to help employees embrace and adapt to technological changes. If you can successfully navigate the digital "disruptions," you can lead the digital way.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Disruption is often defined as 'an event that results in a displacement or discontinuity,' 'disturbance or problems that interrupt an event, activity, or process,' and you easily see that events, activities, or processes have impact on other events, activities, or processes. It is a constant condition of change. Nothing stays the same. The rest is a matter of degree, not a question of whether it's change or not. Does change beget change? Can HR lead organizational changes by navigating the digital disruptions and deploying talent management analytics?
Disruption is a way of life. In fact it has started defining the way business works. HR is not immune to it. Does a change in the quantity of available HR data generate any other change? The implication is that it doesn't, or at least hasn't, and won't unless it's mere presence becomes disruptive and only then motivates a response. They need to embrace change wholeheartedly and align it to the business needs. Definitely disruption creates real change, Unfortunately HR practices evolution has been really slow in the last decade and HR analytics is still an empty marketing word for a lot of HR managers, many HR practitioners consider “data” to be a four-letter word and thus to be avoided. Even more unfortunately some HR practitioners have decided that lots of data is good to have and are expecting employees to provide it without considering what time that takes out of the working day or even what HR is going to do with the data once it is to hand. To drive change, you must have a sense of urgency! The greatest opportunity for HR is to understand the business and the data so they can embrace and champion change!
The change in the availability of data is going to be disruptive one way or another. Fast moving technology makes lots of new things possible. And lots of the new things that happen appear and disappear just as fast, so we shouldn't be dazzled by the marketing hype. Fear is a valuable marketing tool, but you need to use things that make a difference for you, not bend with the wind. HR will either ignore it until someone else reveals the value of it and disrupts HR from the outside, or HR will grab it and manage it properly and manage the disruptions that analysis generates. Said another way, if you don't disrupt your own status quo, someone else will. More data and the results of that data, face the same issue and ultimately the same question: "Will the data analysis get us from point A to point B?" Many HR departments devote a lot of resources to find results to issues that only they see as paramount to success. In the end they are still going to come across the same problem - getting buy-in for the practical application of data driven solutions. Disruption per se may have a rather detrimental impact on change, especially when it forces unplanned or untimely change. Good practitioners are ought to anticipate need for change before disruption takes place.
Being able to effectively analyze data is the key differentiator between a 20th Century and 21st Century. In the world of exponentially increasing digital disruption, change is inevitable, but you must know how far to bend. For HR professional, gathering data is the easy part, analyzing and extrapolating information that will push the business forward is the key skill that will set-apart the true HR professional and make a business case for avoiding outsourcing this vital function. People clamor for change, and they usually get it. But simply changing a thing doesn't mean that progress has been made. You have to engage the sixth sense to decipher when to make change, and to discern what to throw out and what to keep. But most important of all, you need to have a plan. Set out goals and work at them in a systematic way. Setting timelines, and sometimes resetting those timelines. Because people are not perfect and even the plans will need modification due to unforeseen obstacles. All in all change is good and you must embrace and adapt to it, because with change comes new innovations. If you have a good change and data analytics strategy in place, you should not be fearful to get disrupted, and adapt to change more seamlessly. However, if that is the case, it means that the change is warranted and in that case you just have to go with the flow.
Data is not the issue. Analytics just means asking interesting questions to produce new business or customer insights. Technological innovations are not disruptive in the same way as many other types of disruptions - their influence is much slower, almost evolutionary because the true changes come from a) the technology b) the human context and c) the factors that affect implementation. The role in HR as the front line is to help employees embrace and adapt to technological changes. If you can successfully navigate the "disruptions," you can lead the way. Disruption is not a new concept. Disruption is why there is any change, ever! You need smart data analysts to help make it work, but you need to be brave enough to ask the questions such as:-how do we know for sure our training makes a difference to people's performance?-how do we know for sure the people we call 'talent' are really that special?-how do we know we are eliminating unconscious bias at hiring process?-how do we know our online application tools aren't filtering out precisely the kind of new thinking that could reinvigorate our business?
Change can be an opportunity, but at the end of the day, it needs to be all about moving the business numbers upwards. For sure there are different speeds and different stages of capability maturity to deal with changes. It is very true that unless there is a disruption, people very rarely move out of their comfort zones. Growth is not possible unless we are willing to move out of our comfort zone. Hence disruption acts as a catalyst in growth by pushing us out of our comfort zones. It is imperative for us to keep pace with these changes that seem to evolve every day. The role in HR as the front line to help employees embrace and adapt to technological changes. If you can successfully navigate the digital "disruptions," you can lead the digital way.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
June 6, 2015
Do you Think Strategy as a Profession
Business strategy professionals have to continuously set up standards of competence and ability to enforce professional responsibility.
For the success of any organization in today's business world, there is need for leaders to think strategically and posses a knowing HOW of what strategic management is. Many organizations have also adopted a department of strategic planning to aid for the formulation and implementation of the same. So do you see strategy as a profession?
Strategy is both art and science. Strategic design is basically driven and fuelled by shareholders and C-levels’ visions, sometimes inspired by market surveys. Professional support is surely required to ensure that the said strategy is determined with all requested ‘dimensions’: financial results, market mix, performance, investments master plan, risks, competitiveness...and to design and build the 'management cockpit.' There is a definite science about the analysis of the situation and the environment scan (whether you call it a SWOT analysis, PEST, Internal Environment, External Environment, Five Forces, etc). However, the crafting of the strategies and the synthesis of the data developed in those previous analyses is definitely more art than science. It requires the ability to get outside of the box and be creative and innovative.
Strategic management requires specialized knowledge of multifaceted analysis: Strategic Analysis: SWOT, Strategic design, vision, mission, values, KSF, strategic objectives, goals, plan. Strategic Implementation: Building the organization, operational management, leadership, balanced score cards, feedbacks, surveys, interviews ,meetings, KPIs, leading indicators, lagging indicators, benchmarking, etc. Strategy requires some specialized knowledge, but is lacking the standards of competence and ability to enforce professional responsibility. Some think until standards and enforcement become organic to the discipline, strategic management will not be recognized as a profession.
Whether strategy is profession or not, strategists need to be professional: If one defines a "profession" as a paid occupation, especially one that involves prolonged training and a formal qualification, many of business professionals in the strategic management arena may not satisfy the criteria because there’s lack a formal qualification. There is also a school of thought that a "profession" stipulates a unique code of conduct. One should not get hung up on whether strategic management is a profession, but whether those of us in the arena are professional. Nonetheless, to answer the question, strategic management needs to develop a widely accepted standard and a code of conduct before you can seriously consider the strategy field of work a "profession."
A profession calls a set of skills, knowledge and competencies gained through training. Should strategy change to evolve from being a management practice to being a recognized professional discipline. There is no doubt that strategy becomes more important, not less in organizations large or small today, because of the fierce competition, rapid change and hyper uncertainty. Business strategy professionals have to continuously set up standards of competence and ability to enforce professional responsibility, with good intentions, not to gain a new title, but to groom more highly professional strategists with capabilities to make good strategies.Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
For the success of any organization in today's business world, there is need for leaders to think strategically and posses a knowing HOW of what strategic management is. Many organizations have also adopted a department of strategic planning to aid for the formulation and implementation of the same. So do you see strategy as a profession?
Strategy is both art and science. Strategic design is basically driven and fuelled by shareholders and C-levels’ visions, sometimes inspired by market surveys. Professional support is surely required to ensure that the said strategy is determined with all requested ‘dimensions’: financial results, market mix, performance, investments master plan, risks, competitiveness...and to design and build the 'management cockpit.' There is a definite science about the analysis of the situation and the environment scan (whether you call it a SWOT analysis, PEST, Internal Environment, External Environment, Five Forces, etc). However, the crafting of the strategies and the synthesis of the data developed in those previous analyses is definitely more art than science. It requires the ability to get outside of the box and be creative and innovative.
Strategic management requires specialized knowledge of multifaceted analysis: Strategic Analysis: SWOT, Strategic design, vision, mission, values, KSF, strategic objectives, goals, plan. Strategic Implementation: Building the organization, operational management, leadership, balanced score cards, feedbacks, surveys, interviews ,meetings, KPIs, leading indicators, lagging indicators, benchmarking, etc. Strategy requires some specialized knowledge, but is lacking the standards of competence and ability to enforce professional responsibility. Some think until standards and enforcement become organic to the discipline, strategic management will not be recognized as a profession.
Whether strategy is profession or not, strategists need to be professional: If one defines a "profession" as a paid occupation, especially one that involves prolonged training and a formal qualification, many of business professionals in the strategic management arena may not satisfy the criteria because there’s lack a formal qualification. There is also a school of thought that a "profession" stipulates a unique code of conduct. One should not get hung up on whether strategic management is a profession, but whether those of us in the arena are professional. Nonetheless, to answer the question, strategic management needs to develop a widely accepted standard and a code of conduct before you can seriously consider the strategy field of work a "profession."A profession calls a set of skills, knowledge and competencies gained through training. Should strategy change to evolve from being a management practice to being a recognized professional discipline. There is no doubt that strategy becomes more important, not less in organizations large or small today, because of the fierce competition, rapid change and hyper uncertainty. Business strategy professionals have to continuously set up standards of competence and ability to enforce professional responsibility, with good intentions, not to gain a new title, but to groom more highly professional strategists with capabilities to make good strategies.Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
How does IT Implementation Improve Customer Experience and Beyond?
IT is a business inside the business to provide business solutions, that's the way to go.
IT implementations are core to strategic changes today, but many fail to achieve the business objective. In very few implementations, IT organizations make effort ascertain how a "day in life" of any worker at any level (from labor to management) will be impacted due to the new IT initiative. No measurements are made and then it’s severely impact when you do a typical technical go live. So how should IT change management and project management go hand-in-hand, aiming at improving customer experience (ease of doing business) and optimizing overall organizational agility and maturity? Does it achieve the original objective? Does the customer experience actually improve significantly? And, how sustainable is the change or would it break down, has the entire organization embraced it well?
Leadership engagement: Particularly the leaders who really need the changes and have sponsored it throughout the journey is low or sporadic- either due to underestimation of the need to be involved or over estimation of the executor's capabilities. There should be enough collective wisdom and experience in any organization these days on change management to make these changes sustainable. In many circumstances, all along implementation, the same business user community puts its complete resistance as majority of the time, management has not made their clear intentions or goals while embarking on the IT initiative. There needs to have an uninterrupted channel which will keep explaining about management vision and expectations from this IT initiative. The channel should also enable training so as to make the change management process easier. However, for many of the IT initiatives, such channels do exist as a formality, but the messages are not communicated clearly, the deliverables must be driven by a leader who has vision, power, influence, and respect. The success of any implementation is in managing the change. This needs somewhat of a salesmanship to sell the product as the one which will solve the problems. Sometimes showing how an individual tough user's pain points are addressed and solved helps to get a buy-in from a group of hardcore pessimists and cynical user. Then they become your salesmen - project champions within the target group. When cynics converted to project champions and they are the best opinion makers. Of course that helps organizations to embrace the change better.
Every IT initiative is to solve business problems, not a pure technical challenge: Many IT organizations still run as a silo function and back office to “keep the business light on,” and running IT project as technical challenge only, the focus always remains on technicalities of implementation and preparedness of business / user community gets forced focus only at the end. So this one important aspect to engage customers and users earlier on is missed or overlooked majority of the time. Apart from the 'normal' best practices, the following two aspects differentiate a successful change from a failed one:(1). Clear understanding of the monetary benefits the customer is going to realize from the intended change.(2). More importantly, serious awareness of the adverse impact (monetary as well as brand value) due to the failed change.
Design, cost effectiveness and customer satisfaction are all have a big impact on the implementation success. The customer facing employees will be better suited to handle problems or issues, and suggest solutions to the satisfaction of the customers, since they will have a better understanding of the system and its capabilities. In today's world, if you can think that a product, be it hardware or software is a technical solution to a business problem, then you have achieved a great success of paradigm shift from the techies.(1) First question all structural inefficiencies; These lead to bad process which cannot be undone by automation (Customer, Product/Service, Organization, Market position...)(2) Remember constantly that the the tool and automation are not the goal - the operating model, structure, process, automation and tools are all means to something else. If you forget this your requirement set will be sub-optimal(3) Then balance costs - of the change to that of the post-change operating model. For example, if this exercise leads to a forecast that 'if we do not do this expensive customization, then the cost of operation will be too high ...', question whether you have violated #1 or #2, If not, then question if you have placed the function appropriately or using the wrong tool!
Pre-forecast and post forecast and track actuals against the forecast. every aspect should have a measure. How do you measure the success of the change - you have to be honest about it and should have the measures laid out beforehand to clearly indicate the extent to which the "why change is needed" is achieved through the change (not just the milestones of the change project).While some changes could be business critical, but without a measure the effort cannot be justified. At times you tend to conclude that measures are applicable only in operations world or sales and marketing world and so on, every project implementation should not just capture technicalities and high level functionalities, but also a measure of success and sustainability, keeping in mind the long term vision of the IT initiatives.
IT is a business inside the business to provide business solutions, that's the way to go. So, when IT reduces cost of doing business and delight the customers, it increases the margin. It is the time for business and IT to take each other more seriously, and ideally integrate as a whole, with the ambidextrous talent to achieve common goals and deliver high performance business result.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
IT implementations are core to strategic changes today, but many fail to achieve the business objective. In very few implementations, IT organizations make effort ascertain how a "day in life" of any worker at any level (from labor to management) will be impacted due to the new IT initiative. No measurements are made and then it’s severely impact when you do a typical technical go live. So how should IT change management and project management go hand-in-hand, aiming at improving customer experience (ease of doing business) and optimizing overall organizational agility and maturity? Does it achieve the original objective? Does the customer experience actually improve significantly? And, how sustainable is the change or would it break down, has the entire organization embraced it well?
Leadership engagement: Particularly the leaders who really need the changes and have sponsored it throughout the journey is low or sporadic- either due to underestimation of the need to be involved or over estimation of the executor's capabilities. There should be enough collective wisdom and experience in any organization these days on change management to make these changes sustainable. In many circumstances, all along implementation, the same business user community puts its complete resistance as majority of the time, management has not made their clear intentions or goals while embarking on the IT initiative. There needs to have an uninterrupted channel which will keep explaining about management vision and expectations from this IT initiative. The channel should also enable training so as to make the change management process easier. However, for many of the IT initiatives, such channels do exist as a formality, but the messages are not communicated clearly, the deliverables must be driven by a leader who has vision, power, influence, and respect. The success of any implementation is in managing the change. This needs somewhat of a salesmanship to sell the product as the one which will solve the problems. Sometimes showing how an individual tough user's pain points are addressed and solved helps to get a buy-in from a group of hardcore pessimists and cynical user. Then they become your salesmen - project champions within the target group. When cynics converted to project champions and they are the best opinion makers. Of course that helps organizations to embrace the change better.
Every IT initiative is to solve business problems, not a pure technical challenge: Many IT organizations still run as a silo function and back office to “keep the business light on,” and running IT project as technical challenge only, the focus always remains on technicalities of implementation and preparedness of business / user community gets forced focus only at the end. So this one important aspect to engage customers and users earlier on is missed or overlooked majority of the time. Apart from the 'normal' best practices, the following two aspects differentiate a successful change from a failed one:(1). Clear understanding of the monetary benefits the customer is going to realize from the intended change.(2). More importantly, serious awareness of the adverse impact (monetary as well as brand value) due to the failed change.
Design, cost effectiveness and customer satisfaction are all have a big impact on the implementation success. The customer facing employees will be better suited to handle problems or issues, and suggest solutions to the satisfaction of the customers, since they will have a better understanding of the system and its capabilities. In today's world, if you can think that a product, be it hardware or software is a technical solution to a business problem, then you have achieved a great success of paradigm shift from the techies.(1) First question all structural inefficiencies; These lead to bad process which cannot be undone by automation (Customer, Product/Service, Organization, Market position...)(2) Remember constantly that the the tool and automation are not the goal - the operating model, structure, process, automation and tools are all means to something else. If you forget this your requirement set will be sub-optimal(3) Then balance costs - of the change to that of the post-change operating model. For example, if this exercise leads to a forecast that 'if we do not do this expensive customization, then the cost of operation will be too high ...', question whether you have violated #1 or #2, If not, then question if you have placed the function appropriately or using the wrong tool!
Pre-forecast and post forecast and track actuals against the forecast. every aspect should have a measure. How do you measure the success of the change - you have to be honest about it and should have the measures laid out beforehand to clearly indicate the extent to which the "why change is needed" is achieved through the change (not just the milestones of the change project).While some changes could be business critical, but without a measure the effort cannot be justified. At times you tend to conclude that measures are applicable only in operations world or sales and marketing world and so on, every project implementation should not just capture technicalities and high level functionalities, but also a measure of success and sustainability, keeping in mind the long term vision of the IT initiatives.
IT is a business inside the business to provide business solutions, that's the way to go. So, when IT reduces cost of doing business and delight the customers, it increases the margin. It is the time for business and IT to take each other more seriously, and ideally integrate as a whole, with the ambidextrous talent to achieve common goals and deliver high performance business result.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
What are the Most Critical Qualities to a Successful Digital Leader
Leadership is about the FUTURE!
Leadership is about the CHANGE! With increasing change speed of digital dynamic and overcomplexity of business reality, what are the most critical qualities to a successful digital leader, and how should the leader cultivate these capabilities in order to lead their organizations more effectively?
Authenticity: A genuine acceptance of self - An acceptance of personal strengths and weaknesses; an acceptance of personal non-negotiable values; without a genuine acceptance of self, you may be intimidated when surrounding yourselves with people whose strengths are where your weaknesses lie. Without acceptance of self, you may back down in areas where you are strong and should stand strong. Without acceptance of your values, you may be swayed by the value of others. You will shift from leading to following. Courage is essential, to enable oneself to operate beyond ego-such as surrounding yourself with a diverse group of other leaders and followers that will provide you with everything that you do not innately posses yourself. Courage is necessary to allow oneself to fail, and learn and grow from failure. Courage is also necessary to take risks-trusting others being one of the most difficult ones, so that one can delegate.
Vision: Understanding vision is not a dream. There is also passionate connection to a vision. The vision needs to be a good metaphor - 'the guiding light' so that people can see themselves and their work reflected in it. When a vision is realized, people live with change. A vision is larger than a dream, it’s a responsibility. Leaders have to live and be the vision. If a vision exists only on paper, it is useless. It follows the wonderful quote, "We must be the change we wish to see in the world. A passionate connection to it doesn't mean you will always be excited about it, or "love" it. It means you will be willing to suffer for it as you realize you are responsible for the life changing effects of its realization - the world is waiting for it.
Character: Character is another fundamental and key component of successful leadership. Successful leadership demands integrity which is included in character. Yet, character leads back to integrity, which is a commitment to do the right thing for the right reasons. Will the leader hold it together when he/she is in the hot seat or facing a crisis? Integrity is included in character -- and that a leader's character should remain intact in every situation. Integrity ensures that these dynamics are channeled properly and used for the greater good. That good being is to serve, to inspire, to uplift and to unify a diverse group of individuals to work together in harmony towards a common goal.
Creativity: Creativity matters more than ever, because businesses and world today become overcomplex with rapid changes. Creativity is a type of "Out-of-Box" thinking to see things differently with new perspective, in order to solve problems more seamlessly. The purpose of "out of the box" thinking is to create things that will fit back in the new box more efficiently and effectively than the current arrangements. The creative leaders can also encourage subordinates to think out of the box and bring back new designs that they might not even recognize using the current context. But, when they examine them in the new context they may be a key element for building the new paradigms and contexts.
Decisiveness: Ambiguity is one of the most significant characteristics of digital age. Dealing with ambiguity is linked with decision making processes. And decision making is one of the most important responsibilities for leaders. Would you define ambiguity tolerance as the ability to patiently sort through confusion or transitions? If so, would you agree that ambiguity tolerance must be coupled with decision making in order to be truly valuable? They can be under conditions of uncertainty very fast (intuitive decision making) which reduces the ambiguity, or they are very slow ( analytical decision making) due to collecting lot of data, facts and figures. It depends on the complexity and the situation which cognitive mindset is the effective one. So digital leaders have to "Think Fast, and Slow" accordingly in order to make right decisions.
Adaptability and resilience: It is what leaders do in times of difficulty that truly demonstrates their character and worth. Leaders who keep people on the right path, especially when it's very tempting to do otherwise, are truly inspiring. Leaders must have learning agility to adapt to changes, in order to lead changes. A humble acceptance of a knowledge base that is lacking coupled with a desire to understand is greater than a desire to be right. This will keep the leader teachable and continually growing in effectiveness.
Influence: The qualities that most critical to being a leader are all associated with the ability to be one who can influence others to accomplish organizational goals and tasks. However, in order to influence others, one must have skills in implementing and character that displays high levels of ethics, responsibility, integrity, and empathy: (1).Constant and consistent Integrity, (2).Vision , (3). Congruent representation of executive authority, (4). Ability to analyze both fact-based and intuitive input, (5).Embraces inclusiveness and diversity, including different thinking-styles and cognitive difference, (6).Effective decision-making, (7). Excellence in communication-both interpersonal and organizational, (8). Ability to manage complexity, (9).Proactive motivator, and (10). Change agent.
The business is complex, the world is complex, and leadership is complex, the future of leaders have to deal with opposing views, cultures, constraints and competition. They are energetic, creative, influential, with multi-dimensional intelligence to tolerate ambiguity and make effective decisions. And they are the change agent to leapfrog their organization’s digital transformation.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Leadership is about the CHANGE! With increasing change speed of digital dynamic and overcomplexity of business reality, what are the most critical qualities to a successful digital leader, and how should the leader cultivate these capabilities in order to lead their organizations more effectively?
Authenticity: A genuine acceptance of self - An acceptance of personal strengths and weaknesses; an acceptance of personal non-negotiable values; without a genuine acceptance of self, you may be intimidated when surrounding yourselves with people whose strengths are where your weaknesses lie. Without acceptance of self, you may back down in areas where you are strong and should stand strong. Without acceptance of your values, you may be swayed by the value of others. You will shift from leading to following. Courage is essential, to enable oneself to operate beyond ego-such as surrounding yourself with a diverse group of other leaders and followers that will provide you with everything that you do not innately posses yourself. Courage is necessary to allow oneself to fail, and learn and grow from failure. Courage is also necessary to take risks-trusting others being one of the most difficult ones, so that one can delegate.
Vision: Understanding vision is not a dream. There is also passionate connection to a vision. The vision needs to be a good metaphor - 'the guiding light' so that people can see themselves and their work reflected in it. When a vision is realized, people live with change. A vision is larger than a dream, it’s a responsibility. Leaders have to live and be the vision. If a vision exists only on paper, it is useless. It follows the wonderful quote, "We must be the change we wish to see in the world. A passionate connection to it doesn't mean you will always be excited about it, or "love" it. It means you will be willing to suffer for it as you realize you are responsible for the life changing effects of its realization - the world is waiting for it.
Character: Character is another fundamental and key component of successful leadership. Successful leadership demands integrity which is included in character. Yet, character leads back to integrity, which is a commitment to do the right thing for the right reasons. Will the leader hold it together when he/she is in the hot seat or facing a crisis? Integrity is included in character -- and that a leader's character should remain intact in every situation. Integrity ensures that these dynamics are channeled properly and used for the greater good. That good being is to serve, to inspire, to uplift and to unify a diverse group of individuals to work together in harmony towards a common goal.
Creativity: Creativity matters more than ever, because businesses and world today become overcomplex with rapid changes. Creativity is a type of "Out-of-Box" thinking to see things differently with new perspective, in order to solve problems more seamlessly. The purpose of "out of the box" thinking is to create things that will fit back in the new box more efficiently and effectively than the current arrangements. The creative leaders can also encourage subordinates to think out of the box and bring back new designs that they might not even recognize using the current context. But, when they examine them in the new context they may be a key element for building the new paradigms and contexts.
Decisiveness: Ambiguity is one of the most significant characteristics of digital age. Dealing with ambiguity is linked with decision making processes. And decision making is one of the most important responsibilities for leaders. Would you define ambiguity tolerance as the ability to patiently sort through confusion or transitions? If so, would you agree that ambiguity tolerance must be coupled with decision making in order to be truly valuable? They can be under conditions of uncertainty very fast (intuitive decision making) which reduces the ambiguity, or they are very slow ( analytical decision making) due to collecting lot of data, facts and figures. It depends on the complexity and the situation which cognitive mindset is the effective one. So digital leaders have to "Think Fast, and Slow" accordingly in order to make right decisions.
Adaptability and resilience: It is what leaders do in times of difficulty that truly demonstrates their character and worth. Leaders who keep people on the right path, especially when it's very tempting to do otherwise, are truly inspiring. Leaders must have learning agility to adapt to changes, in order to lead changes. A humble acceptance of a knowledge base that is lacking coupled with a desire to understand is greater than a desire to be right. This will keep the leader teachable and continually growing in effectiveness.
Influence: The qualities that most critical to being a leader are all associated with the ability to be one who can influence others to accomplish organizational goals and tasks. However, in order to influence others, one must have skills in implementing and character that displays high levels of ethics, responsibility, integrity, and empathy: (1).Constant and consistent Integrity, (2).Vision , (3). Congruent representation of executive authority, (4). Ability to analyze both fact-based and intuitive input, (5).Embraces inclusiveness and diversity, including different thinking-styles and cognitive difference, (6).Effective decision-making, (7). Excellence in communication-both interpersonal and organizational, (8). Ability to manage complexity, (9).Proactive motivator, and (10). Change agent.
The business is complex, the world is complex, and leadership is complex, the future of leaders have to deal with opposing views, cultures, constraints and competition. They are energetic, creative, influential, with multi-dimensional intelligence to tolerate ambiguity and make effective decisions. And they are the change agent to leapfrog their organization’s digital transformation.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
June 5, 2015
Governance as an Enabling Professional Discipline
Good governance is less about structure and rules than being focused, effective and accountable.
Corporate Governance as a professional discipline has over recent decades been subject to numerous influences. Most directors accept that a soundly based and structured governance document is one of the most significant disciplines and corporate behavior enablers contributing to a company’s success. Gone are the days when a corporate “`Mission Statement “ was viewed as the guiding light which all corporate wisdom would be asked to worship. Gradually governance as a discipline has been accepted by most professional business practitioners as an enabling vehicle which provides a platform for determining sound corporate behavior and structured decision making.
It needs to be remembered that governance as a discipline is a living breathing entity. As the governance discipline has in the past continually changed its shape and matured, there is no doubt it will continue to do so as the winds of change in the corporate world blow across the business community. It needs to be remembered that governance as a discipline is a living breathing entity which continually requires stroking and attention, otherwise it will stagnate and lose its ability to be one of the prime enablers contributing to above average board performance. It presents there is a very real risk that governance as a discipline will begin to lose focus of its prime purpose if it does not address strategically important emerging issues. As a result, it risks being relegated in status to a simple process driven ideology rather than an enabler to address future pressures and provide the structured platform required to meet new challenges required by today’s market.
Governance as a discipline is naturally divisible into various sectoral accountability groups. Some of these groupings are entirely process driven with clearly identifiable boundaries, while others are more judgmental by nature, being influenced by experience and current market conditions, but still being applied within designated boundaries. It's important to accept that governance documents require continual review and refreshing in order to fulfil their purpose as one of the most important strategic enablers available to board members. Chairman demonstrate their leadership of the board in many ways including being the sponsor and controller of the governance document and as such providing guidance to the directors on the application and accountability of the various factors shaped within the document.
It is important to provide a structured communication bridge between shareholder/ investors and the board. Most current governance documents remain relatively silent on the key issue of shareholder communication. From the growing influence of the shareholder activist groups, this is an issue which won’t go away, and in some cases it is becoming a festering wound. Some suggest that within the governance document, there should be a highlighted section on how the board manage shareholder communication. Such detail on this extremely important issue will ensure the governance discipline can fulfill its purpose as a high level corporate enabler by providing a structured communication bridge between shareholder/investors and the board. Naturally there will need to be discussions with the major shareholders and agreement reached which would certainly take the distrust out of the current argument. In addition, it would cement in place the role of the governance discipline as a high level enabler towards achieving corporate excellence.
Good governance is less about structure and rules than being focused, effective and accountable. Structure and rules are tools to be focused, effective and accountable, but structure and rules are not good governance in and of themselves. The governance frameworks are needed, but more than anything, you need the right "tone at the top" - a tone which, like the Captain on his ship, is able to work the engine (actions) and rudder ( framework) to steer the vessel through choppy waters and reach the desired destination. Furthermore, if any company becomes an amalgamation of processes, eventually they may lose their way. While processes are important, they cannot navigate the course of a business. They are simply tools for navigating. In other words, the governance concern is that businesses will lose sight of their prime purpose. While ensuring a company or board has the right framework and governance structure is very important, it is relatively easy to accomplish. The more complex equation is getting the people, culture, accountability and performance right. In order to thrive, both elements are essential.
The core of the tension with many shareholder-owner relationships seems to come down to 'power.' That hubris and other similar attributes abound in the boardroom doesn't help either. To define how the board and shareholders should correspond and work together is one thing. To get boards and shareholders to comply is something else. There is a very clear division of labor between the owner, the board and management. You have to turn your mind to this problem of how to achieve the appropriate tone from the top, at the same time, there are many savvy shareholders who can be extremely valuable to management and the BoD. Therefore, it is in the best interest for boards and shareholders to have collaborative communication.
Otherwise, it can be hubris on the board’s part and an example of squandering critical intellectual capital. Therefore, governance as an enabling discipline is a high level enabler towards achieving corporate excellence.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Corporate Governance as a professional discipline has over recent decades been subject to numerous influences. Most directors accept that a soundly based and structured governance document is one of the most significant disciplines and corporate behavior enablers contributing to a company’s success. Gone are the days when a corporate “`Mission Statement “ was viewed as the guiding light which all corporate wisdom would be asked to worship. Gradually governance as a discipline has been accepted by most professional business practitioners as an enabling vehicle which provides a platform for determining sound corporate behavior and structured decision making.
It needs to be remembered that governance as a discipline is a living breathing entity. As the governance discipline has in the past continually changed its shape and matured, there is no doubt it will continue to do so as the winds of change in the corporate world blow across the business community. It needs to be remembered that governance as a discipline is a living breathing entity which continually requires stroking and attention, otherwise it will stagnate and lose its ability to be one of the prime enablers contributing to above average board performance. It presents there is a very real risk that governance as a discipline will begin to lose focus of its prime purpose if it does not address strategically important emerging issues. As a result, it risks being relegated in status to a simple process driven ideology rather than an enabler to address future pressures and provide the structured platform required to meet new challenges required by today’s market.
Governance as a discipline is naturally divisible into various sectoral accountability groups. Some of these groupings are entirely process driven with clearly identifiable boundaries, while others are more judgmental by nature, being influenced by experience and current market conditions, but still being applied within designated boundaries. It's important to accept that governance documents require continual review and refreshing in order to fulfil their purpose as one of the most important strategic enablers available to board members. Chairman demonstrate their leadership of the board in many ways including being the sponsor and controller of the governance document and as such providing guidance to the directors on the application and accountability of the various factors shaped within the document.
It is important to provide a structured communication bridge between shareholder/ investors and the board. Most current governance documents remain relatively silent on the key issue of shareholder communication. From the growing influence of the shareholder activist groups, this is an issue which won’t go away, and in some cases it is becoming a festering wound. Some suggest that within the governance document, there should be a highlighted section on how the board manage shareholder communication. Such detail on this extremely important issue will ensure the governance discipline can fulfill its purpose as a high level corporate enabler by providing a structured communication bridge between shareholder/investors and the board. Naturally there will need to be discussions with the major shareholders and agreement reached which would certainly take the distrust out of the current argument. In addition, it would cement in place the role of the governance discipline as a high level enabler towards achieving corporate excellence.
Good governance is less about structure and rules than being focused, effective and accountable. Structure and rules are tools to be focused, effective and accountable, but structure and rules are not good governance in and of themselves. The governance frameworks are needed, but more than anything, you need the right "tone at the top" - a tone which, like the Captain on his ship, is able to work the engine (actions) and rudder ( framework) to steer the vessel through choppy waters and reach the desired destination. Furthermore, if any company becomes an amalgamation of processes, eventually they may lose their way. While processes are important, they cannot navigate the course of a business. They are simply tools for navigating. In other words, the governance concern is that businesses will lose sight of their prime purpose. While ensuring a company or board has the right framework and governance structure is very important, it is relatively easy to accomplish. The more complex equation is getting the people, culture, accountability and performance right. In order to thrive, both elements are essential.
The core of the tension with many shareholder-owner relationships seems to come down to 'power.' That hubris and other similar attributes abound in the boardroom doesn't help either. To define how the board and shareholders should correspond and work together is one thing. To get boards and shareholders to comply is something else. There is a very clear division of labor between the owner, the board and management. You have to turn your mind to this problem of how to achieve the appropriate tone from the top, at the same time, there are many savvy shareholders who can be extremely valuable to management and the BoD. Therefore, it is in the best interest for boards and shareholders to have collaborative communication.
Otherwise, it can be hubris on the board’s part and an example of squandering critical intellectual capital. Therefore, governance as an enabling discipline is a high level enabler towards achieving corporate excellence.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Thinking Out-of-Box, What is your Box Though?
The "boxes" are the walls in your mind. Out of Box is a metaphor that means to think differently, unconventionally, or from a new perspective.
Every mind has certain box, some smaller, some bigger; the box starts set-up at a very early age, by your surroundings, the education you received, the people you interacted with and the standards by which you lived. The "boxes" are the walls in your mind. Walls in your mind are constructed by society's conditioning (rules imposed by parents, teachers, leaders, media, books, etc). When you allow information into being accepted as absolute "truth" without first using critical thinking, it inhibits your ability to also think creatively. So in order to think "out of box," you have to clarify what's inside your box though?
"The box" is anything that the average person would come up with after having spent too little time being creative. When someone asks you to "think outside the box" - they're telling you to throw conventional wisdom and pure linear logic out the window for a while, and to let the creative mind run free for a while. The resulting ideas wouldn't be completely usable yet - but would serve as a starting point for logic to return to see which ideas could be used. In short terms, this is "brainstorming on steroids." “The box" is a mental construct made up of personal (self imposed) and environmental (culture, parental influence, society) components that one operates within, so thinking outside "the box" means doing something outside of the confines of the construct.
More often, the box is your safety net and your comfort zone. The box is anyone’s comfort zone, that things are ok and everyone agrees and have the same or similar thoughts. It's a boring tiny space with very little innovative thought contained within the box. In fact, everything in the box is easy to turn stale and stagnant. Great things don't happen inside your comfort zone or in a box; typically, it's associated with convention within context. From organizational management perspective: In IT, it's proven methods of approach, in marketing, it's the tried and true solutions - the commonality is that "the box" tends to be what everyone with experience in the topic can identify as being "commonly known." It can also mean "solutions/answers I've already heard." But more often, the best practices are already out of dated, or the "commonly known" is already so yesterday, because the knowledge life cycle has been significant shortened at digital age. When a leader says "give me some out of the box solutions to this problem" he or she is also saying "I don't want to hear what's already been said."
“Outside the Box” format is to utilize “Lateral thinking.” (The term was coined by Edward de Bono), which is to solve problems through an indirect and creative approach, using the reasoning that is not immediately obvious and involving ideas that may not be obtainable by using only traditional step-by-step logic. According to de Bono, lateral thinking deliberately distance itself from standard perceptions of creativity as either “VERTICAL” logic: the classic method for problem solving working out the solution step-by-step from the given data, or “HORIZONTAL” imagination (having a thousand ideas, but being unconcerned with the detailed implementation of them), out of this format, managements consultants in the 1970s and 1980s gave to their clients puzzle whose solutions requires some “lateral thinking” or “Thinking outside the box” (also thinking out of the box or thinking beyond the box). This word is a metaphor that means to think differently, unconventionally, or from a new perspective. This phrase often refers to novel or creative thinking.
Thinking outside of box means you are at a continuous learning mode, also embrace critical thinking and creative thinking. When one leaves those thoughts and standards to seek additional knowledge and experience, they are stepping outside that box to unfamiliar territory. We all should broaden our points of interest and try new things to extend our thinking box. That leads to a better mutual understanding and more advanced society among all humans. Even sometimes 99,9999% of your outside the box thinking will turn out to be rubbish and worthless, but the remaining 0,0001% will probably mean a breakthrough for the human race. The problem is we don't know which is that 0,0001% and when it will hit us. But please don't stop speaking out what you are thinking outside the box and have fun doing it. If we all stayed in a box, and didn't believe things exist outside of our box, there's no room to broaden our thoughts. One would just take what’s in the box and live with it. No chance to expand. Hence, Out - of -Box is a progressive and innovative thinking mode to push human society forward.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Every mind has certain box, some smaller, some bigger; the box starts set-up at a very early age, by your surroundings, the education you received, the people you interacted with and the standards by which you lived. The "boxes" are the walls in your mind. Walls in your mind are constructed by society's conditioning (rules imposed by parents, teachers, leaders, media, books, etc). When you allow information into being accepted as absolute "truth" without first using critical thinking, it inhibits your ability to also think creatively. So in order to think "out of box," you have to clarify what's inside your box though?"The box" is anything that the average person would come up with after having spent too little time being creative. When someone asks you to "think outside the box" - they're telling you to throw conventional wisdom and pure linear logic out the window for a while, and to let the creative mind run free for a while. The resulting ideas wouldn't be completely usable yet - but would serve as a starting point for logic to return to see which ideas could be used. In short terms, this is "brainstorming on steroids." “The box" is a mental construct made up of personal (self imposed) and environmental (culture, parental influence, society) components that one operates within, so thinking outside "the box" means doing something outside of the confines of the construct.
More often, the box is your safety net and your comfort zone. The box is anyone’s comfort zone, that things are ok and everyone agrees and have the same or similar thoughts. It's a boring tiny space with very little innovative thought contained within the box. In fact, everything in the box is easy to turn stale and stagnant. Great things don't happen inside your comfort zone or in a box; typically, it's associated with convention within context. From organizational management perspective: In IT, it's proven methods of approach, in marketing, it's the tried and true solutions - the commonality is that "the box" tends to be what everyone with experience in the topic can identify as being "commonly known." It can also mean "solutions/answers I've already heard." But more often, the best practices are already out of dated, or the "commonly known" is already so yesterday, because the knowledge life cycle has been significant shortened at digital age. When a leader says "give me some out of the box solutions to this problem" he or she is also saying "I don't want to hear what's already been said."
“Outside the Box” format is to utilize “Lateral thinking.” (The term was coined by Edward de Bono), which is to solve problems through an indirect and creative approach, using the reasoning that is not immediately obvious and involving ideas that may not be obtainable by using only traditional step-by-step logic. According to de Bono, lateral thinking deliberately distance itself from standard perceptions of creativity as either “VERTICAL” logic: the classic method for problem solving working out the solution step-by-step from the given data, or “HORIZONTAL” imagination (having a thousand ideas, but being unconcerned with the detailed implementation of them), out of this format, managements consultants in the 1970s and 1980s gave to their clients puzzle whose solutions requires some “lateral thinking” or “Thinking outside the box” (also thinking out of the box or thinking beyond the box). This word is a metaphor that means to think differently, unconventionally, or from a new perspective. This phrase often refers to novel or creative thinking.
Thinking outside of box means you are at a continuous learning mode, also embrace critical thinking and creative thinking. When one leaves those thoughts and standards to seek additional knowledge and experience, they are stepping outside that box to unfamiliar territory. We all should broaden our points of interest and try new things to extend our thinking box. That leads to a better mutual understanding and more advanced society among all humans. Even sometimes 99,9999% of your outside the box thinking will turn out to be rubbish and worthless, but the remaining 0,0001% will probably mean a breakthrough for the human race. The problem is we don't know which is that 0,0001% and when it will hit us. But please don't stop speaking out what you are thinking outside the box and have fun doing it. If we all stayed in a box, and didn't believe things exist outside of our box, there's no room to broaden our thoughts. One would just take what’s in the box and live with it. No chance to expand. Hence, Out - of -Box is a progressive and innovative thinking mode to push human society forward. Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
How to Leverage Systems Thinking in Strategy Making
Systems Thinking allows to study "forest" in order to be able to see "the trees in their context."
Digital strategy is the dynamic planning with well set of guidelines to achieve coherent goals through a series of specific actions. This definition clearly suggests the value of Systems Thinking in devising such a strategy. With the dawn of digital era, there is an interdisciplinary convergence of diverse science, both “hard” and “soft,” as well as humanities essential to the evolution toward a circular digital economy. So when preparing business strategic plans, IT, marketing, sales, financials, HR, etc. are all needed to get involved, to be critical and creative: What are basic business 'assumptions' mostly flawed, invalid. And how to leverage Systems Thinking in Strategy Making?
In the business planning process, System Thinking helps make more logical “assumption.” When trying to determine the macro environment and how the factors there influence business strategy/plan one way or another, it is difficult to move away entirely from assumptions. Everything has more than one side and you have to master them all, including assumptions: You have to make them, but you will never have complete information, and if you try to only act on what you know by fact you are more likely to go wrong. Another label of assumption is "forecast." You can always put a semantic spin on the word and call them projections, but then again, those "projections" are very often based on conjecture or assumptions. But in the business planning process, assumptions should be kept at the minimum. The defining document of your business should not be based on assumptions. Of course, if you’re entering a space where there is no historical record of standards and procedure, it is acceptable to draw conclusions to some degree. But, keep in mind that every unsubstantiated element of your plan is a loose brick in the wall of success! In the case of your financials, "assumptions" should be thought of as qualified projections rather than a best guess. Business can be only done on facts and that too objectively assessed while business vision requires imagination power but the same needs to be validated at repeated intervals. If the assumptions are WRONG, the CONCLUSIONS also go wrong.
Define three changes enabling strategy implementation by leveraging Systems Thinking. Organizations must relate their current business environment continually to those assumptions made when the plan was first devised. If these are changes in the assumed conditions, you must ask how this affects the business currently and going forward. Business benefits arise when people act in new ways. Customers, staff, partners need to do something different to make business benefits to occur. Therefore, investing in business improvements often fail because you try to forecast the result only. The fact is, you need to define three "changes" to get reasonable control: (1). Enabler (2). Process change enabled (3). Results from process change. When you define these three kinds of changes, you need to find the KPIs to measure for each of them, and assign the change owners for them, Not doing this is the cause of all wrong assumptions.
Emergent strategy is nowadays a fact. Strategy is always 'emergent,’ especially at digital era with "VUCA" characteristics, Systems Thinking helps manage such Strategy-Execution dynamism more effectively. Even when you do a 'strategy exercise' and created a new strategy, it changed slowly and surely into something quite different within a year or so as you started implementing. And this happens because of two reasons. Environment is constantly changing forcing business to 'adjust,' but also because you cannot figure out the 'various possibilities' that may happen as you 'intervene' in the environment. Strategy in implementation is alive and therefore adapting and adjusting continuously to ground realities and the real world. Those who plan the solutions need to also be capable of implementing them. Only this coordination between plan and implementation can succeed. It needs to be done in real-time. And the problem solving and crisis resolution must be handled in real time by as many involved parties as possible. Therefore Systems Thinking and analytics is crucial for the success of strategy execution.
And the days when businesses spent months doing all sort of analysis and preparing detailed plans are gone. Today is about being prepared and having the organizational capability to deal with the unexpected digital disruption, without losing sight of the business objectives and priorities. Systems Thinking allows to study "forest" in order to be able to see "the trees in their context." Hence, it is critical to leverage Systems Thinking in digital strategy making, to make strategy execution an ongoing journey and dynamic continuum.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Digital strategy is the dynamic planning with well set of guidelines to achieve coherent goals through a series of specific actions. This definition clearly suggests the value of Systems Thinking in devising such a strategy. With the dawn of digital era, there is an interdisciplinary convergence of diverse science, both “hard” and “soft,” as well as humanities essential to the evolution toward a circular digital economy. So when preparing business strategic plans, IT, marketing, sales, financials, HR, etc. are all needed to get involved, to be critical and creative: What are basic business 'assumptions' mostly flawed, invalid. And how to leverage Systems Thinking in Strategy Making?
In the business planning process, System Thinking helps make more logical “assumption.” When trying to determine the macro environment and how the factors there influence business strategy/plan one way or another, it is difficult to move away entirely from assumptions. Everything has more than one side and you have to master them all, including assumptions: You have to make them, but you will never have complete information, and if you try to only act on what you know by fact you are more likely to go wrong. Another label of assumption is "forecast." You can always put a semantic spin on the word and call them projections, but then again, those "projections" are very often based on conjecture or assumptions. But in the business planning process, assumptions should be kept at the minimum. The defining document of your business should not be based on assumptions. Of course, if you’re entering a space where there is no historical record of standards and procedure, it is acceptable to draw conclusions to some degree. But, keep in mind that every unsubstantiated element of your plan is a loose brick in the wall of success! In the case of your financials, "assumptions" should be thought of as qualified projections rather than a best guess. Business can be only done on facts and that too objectively assessed while business vision requires imagination power but the same needs to be validated at repeated intervals. If the assumptions are WRONG, the CONCLUSIONS also go wrong.
Define three changes enabling strategy implementation by leveraging Systems Thinking. Organizations must relate their current business environment continually to those assumptions made when the plan was first devised. If these are changes in the assumed conditions, you must ask how this affects the business currently and going forward. Business benefits arise when people act in new ways. Customers, staff, partners need to do something different to make business benefits to occur. Therefore, investing in business improvements often fail because you try to forecast the result only. The fact is, you need to define three "changes" to get reasonable control: (1). Enabler (2). Process change enabled (3). Results from process change. When you define these three kinds of changes, you need to find the KPIs to measure for each of them, and assign the change owners for them, Not doing this is the cause of all wrong assumptions.
Emergent strategy is nowadays a fact. Strategy is always 'emergent,’ especially at digital era with "VUCA" characteristics, Systems Thinking helps manage such Strategy-Execution dynamism more effectively. Even when you do a 'strategy exercise' and created a new strategy, it changed slowly and surely into something quite different within a year or so as you started implementing. And this happens because of two reasons. Environment is constantly changing forcing business to 'adjust,' but also because you cannot figure out the 'various possibilities' that may happen as you 'intervene' in the environment. Strategy in implementation is alive and therefore adapting and adjusting continuously to ground realities and the real world. Those who plan the solutions need to also be capable of implementing them. Only this coordination between plan and implementation can succeed. It needs to be done in real-time. And the problem solving and crisis resolution must be handled in real time by as many involved parties as possible. Therefore Systems Thinking and analytics is crucial for the success of strategy execution.And the days when businesses spent months doing all sort of analysis and preparing detailed plans are gone. Today is about being prepared and having the organizational capability to deal with the unexpected digital disruption, without losing sight of the business objectives and priorities. Systems Thinking allows to study "forest" in order to be able to see "the trees in their context." Hence, it is critical to leverage Systems Thinking in digital strategy making, to make strategy execution an ongoing journey and dynamic continuum.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
June 4, 2015
Is 'Improving Customer Satisfaction' a valid strategic objective, or just a Performance Indicator?
Any KPI determined by the company is hopefully aligned with both creating operational efficiency and delighting the customers.
Being customer - centric is one of the most important business goals in any forward - thinking business today. Customer Satisfaction is a state where the customer perceives a business experience to be positive, but the event itself is not memorable. It is difficult to pin short or long term business performance solely on customer satisfaction. So is improving “Customer Satisfaction” a valid strategic objective or just simply a KPI?
Customer satisfaction, or some aspire to achieve customer delight is more a vision: Even that it changes often, which can be characterized through indicators in short term satisfaction, how they liked or disliked the process they just completed, long term satisfaction, more with product or service fit, form, function and aesthetics, and other elements of satisfaction such as price, available variation, service levels, and ease of use. It is also about loyalty, delight, experience as lead indicators. It is the indicators that you look at as business KPIs, which then have to be measured in a way that makes sense as relating to the value proposition, or at least what is valued by the customer. A customer objective should describe value in the eyes of the customer. Do customers really buy products or services to be satisfied, or is that a given or are they expecting a particular value experience such as inherent in the brand promise of the supplier, in many cases.
There’s business objective that relates to building or increasing customer loyalty, particularly in the private sector; because loyal customers, rather than satisfied ones, are required to help achieve objectives like increasing revenue by (1) growing the customer base, and (2) increasing purchasing $$ per customer. It can also include an objective and a metric related to customer loyalty because it reminds the organization that building customer loyalty, not satisfaction is a critical part of the overall value chain and strategy. A customer doesn't become loyal, just by buying. They become loyal when they have experienced something out of the ordinary. But remember, the customer needs and desires and consequently their satisfaction changes, which implies that the value proposition has changed in some way, which means the KPIs have to be readdressed often, so as to ensure they still align to that value proposition.
Strategy mapping allows you to first understand your customers and what they value; and then identifies how to best characterize that value through key indicators, and then define those measures appropriate to best assess the performance of these indicators, because they show you how well they satisfy or delight customers. It is also useful to think about the function that the customer requires; for example, Ford gave people cars rather than faster horses, because he recognized the function. When the value definition shifts, so does everything else. It could have argument that the objective could go into the financial perspective rather than the customer perspective (does the customer care whether you built loyalty - there are customer and company benefits to loyalty), but it makes better sense to the flow of their strategy story to include it, in addition to other customers in the customer perspective.
The fact is that KPIs are part of a conversation and not in themselves the conversation. Customer satisfaction to be a KPI and the defined area should possess a goal and measurement indicator stating that businesses are hitting or missing the objective. Some sort of client satisfaction measure should be defined, a goal around it and a way of improving and getting better at delivery of the component. Any KPI determined by the company is hopefully aligned with both creating operational efficiency and delighting the client. KPIs should both be defined by its meaning and relevance to the client as well as its ability to be executed by the company. Balanced Scorecard measures are all about improvement in relevant areas as well as its impact on both the customer and the business.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
Being customer - centric is one of the most important business goals in any forward - thinking business today. Customer Satisfaction is a state where the customer perceives a business experience to be positive, but the event itself is not memorable. It is difficult to pin short or long term business performance solely on customer satisfaction. So is improving “Customer Satisfaction” a valid strategic objective or just simply a KPI?
Customer satisfaction, or some aspire to achieve customer delight is more a vision: Even that it changes often, which can be characterized through indicators in short term satisfaction, how they liked or disliked the process they just completed, long term satisfaction, more with product or service fit, form, function and aesthetics, and other elements of satisfaction such as price, available variation, service levels, and ease of use. It is also about loyalty, delight, experience as lead indicators. It is the indicators that you look at as business KPIs, which then have to be measured in a way that makes sense as relating to the value proposition, or at least what is valued by the customer. A customer objective should describe value in the eyes of the customer. Do customers really buy products or services to be satisfied, or is that a given or are they expecting a particular value experience such as inherent in the brand promise of the supplier, in many cases.
There’s business objective that relates to building or increasing customer loyalty, particularly in the private sector; because loyal customers, rather than satisfied ones, are required to help achieve objectives like increasing revenue by (1) growing the customer base, and (2) increasing purchasing $$ per customer. It can also include an objective and a metric related to customer loyalty because it reminds the organization that building customer loyalty, not satisfaction is a critical part of the overall value chain and strategy. A customer doesn't become loyal, just by buying. They become loyal when they have experienced something out of the ordinary. But remember, the customer needs and desires and consequently their satisfaction changes, which implies that the value proposition has changed in some way, which means the KPIs have to be readdressed often, so as to ensure they still align to that value proposition.
Strategy mapping allows you to first understand your customers and what they value; and then identifies how to best characterize that value through key indicators, and then define those measures appropriate to best assess the performance of these indicators, because they show you how well they satisfy or delight customers. It is also useful to think about the function that the customer requires; for example, Ford gave people cars rather than faster horses, because he recognized the function. When the value definition shifts, so does everything else. It could have argument that the objective could go into the financial perspective rather than the customer perspective (does the customer care whether you built loyalty - there are customer and company benefits to loyalty), but it makes better sense to the flow of their strategy story to include it, in addition to other customers in the customer perspective.
The fact is that KPIs are part of a conversation and not in themselves the conversation. Customer satisfaction to be a KPI and the defined area should possess a goal and measurement indicator stating that businesses are hitting or missing the objective. Some sort of client satisfaction measure should be defined, a goal around it and a way of improving and getting better at delivery of the component. Any KPI determined by the company is hopefully aligned with both creating operational efficiency and delighting the client. KPIs should both be defined by its meaning and relevance to the client as well as its ability to be executed by the company. Balanced Scorecard measures are all about improvement in relevant areas as well as its impact on both the customer and the business.
Follow us at: @Pearl_Zhu
