What does great look like?

If  you were asked this question today by someone regarding your management team, your business, your clients, your products or services… how would you answer?

I’ve heard this question asked time and time again over the last few years specifically in corporate IT environments where the discussion was centered around product development. I don’t know the origin of this question, whether it stems from the world of IT or from one of the many process methodologies we use today in our world, i.e. agile, lean, etc.

I do know that it is quite a useful question. In fact, its simplicity is what strikes me most. Considering all the questions we ask when trying to perform our work, run our projects, manage our people and strive for excellence; there are just some questions we forget to ask and take the time to ponder. This is one of those questions.

The value of this question is that it can applied to nearly every area of our work and professional development. We often hear about reverse engineering and how we need to understand what we are trying to get to and then backtrack into what it will take to get us there. While this is a very good way to engage on any given activity, it still doesn’t answer the question we are asking here; What does great look like?

Having a vision or perceived view of an outcome isn’t necessarily the same as knowing whether it is great or good enough. In other words, a finished project or product may not necessarily be exactly what the customer or company desired even thought it may be good, it simply may not be good enough or even great. While this is not a profound explanation, I’d like to suggest that asking this question with a slightly different mindset is something we need to consider.

Putting the effort into answering the question forces a level of detail that sometimes gets missed in translation. Let’s take business development as an example.

The traditional path to business development is to go through a number of planning exercises. These include developing a target account list which might be sorted by geography, industry segment, company size and so on. Other activities include forecasting revenue, maybe forecasting bookings, agreeing on pipeline criteria such as number of opportunities and their total revenue vs. given quota. There will be others, all meant for us to have something to measure against at a future point in time.

If we take business development and look at it through the lens of the question we’re asking then it will force us to consider more detail. It is in fact that extra level of detail that we are seeking in asking the question.

One of the Innovation Games used to help teams think more clearly of where they need to get to is called Remember the Future. The main point of this working session is to get people thinking about what they will have accomplished at some point in the future vs. what they will have done. So, for business development it would mean asking “What was done to get those results?” vs. “What must we do to get those results?”

The difference being that we typically work off of the mindset of what we need to do; prepare a target account list, develop a forecast, build a pipeline, etc. Looking at it from the perspective of what we would have accomplished if all had gone the way we wanted gets us to look at it as something that has already occurred. This now helps us to consider how we got there and what would have changed from our traditional approach.

We are not predicting the future by using this technique, we are simply getting ourselves to look at the situation differently. We want to better understand our thinking around the topic and it’s success and how we got there. Taking all this into consideration let’s try this once more.

EXAMPLE: Business Development: What does great look like?

Maybe our first answer is whether we are aiming for business development or business excellence – a play on words? Perhaps, but does it strike a different note and cause us to consider the difference?

Because we are now looking at this as what we would have done, let’s take this calendar year as our example and state what would have happened

At the end of this calendar year, we reached the next stage of growth as an organization, this happened because we accomplished:

• An overall revenue increase of 30%
  • 20% resulted from 6 target companies in the Healthcare industry; 4 in London, 2 in Frankfurt
  • 10% resulted from 3 target companies in the Utilities industry: 2 in Toronto, 1 in New Jersey

We did this through:

• Active Business Development
  • We followed our timeline so that we understood how many meetings were required  and when in order to reach the target goal by end of year
  • We paired on major opportunities and went solo on secondary opportunities to increase efficiency
  • We completed 6 sales calls and 2 customer workshop sessions per month
• A well-defined pipeline
  • All major clients and the respective activities and data are accurate
  • We understood why we’ve won, lost and dropped opportunities
  • Pursuing the wrong opportunities was reduced by 75% by employing more rigor to our sales process
• Specific events and campaigns
  • 1 email campaign monthly on a specific industry topic with thought leadership and commentary
  • 1 executive forum quarterly focused on 25 attendees across three specific roles with a peer speaker
  • 1 white paper quarterly published and distributed to a targeted list

We will continue into next year through:

• Identifying opportunities in the existing customer base
  • We have identified 1 new opportunity in each existing customer to discuss in Q1
  • We have developed a pipeline of other possible opportunities in each customer
• An accurate list of 50 Target Accounts
  • Representing the 4 main industry segments we’ve invested in targeting: domain knowledge, experience
  • We know the top three stakeholders in each company that we must meet
  • We have a communications plan completed and ready to launch to schedule Q1 meetings of the following year

While all of the above is hypothetical, it represents what a more detailed business development (excellence) could look like if we were to ask the question from the onset and approach it with the mindset described.

Blanket statements

Maybe you know this person. You have worked with them and they also may be someone you know outside of work. When you talk to them they seem to insert sentences about other people you both know or events going on with the words “always” and “never” in the conversation. Perhaps you haven’t given this much thought but if the relationship is business related then maybe you’ve considered how those types of statements make you think different things instead of thinking something specific.

A core principle I’m learning and re-learning to employ in my personal and professional life is to “say what I mean and to mean what I say”. I emphasize “learning” since it is very easy to be vague and ambiguous about statements I make. It seems to come natural at times for all of us to omit details about a conversation or facts about another person’s actions or performance.

A key aspect of relationship management in business is this principle of being specific in what one says. It certainly relates to being truthful and to having the courage to say exactly what needs to be said but in the context of this article I want to emphasize the equally important part of being specific about the detail of the statements we make to our colleagues, our clients and to those we interact with in industry.

Blanket statements are never useful. They are nebulous and often send the wrong message. They seed doubt and mistrust and are usually intended to make a grand point about how right the person making the statement might be. They tend to be self-serving even when outwardly it doesn’t appear that way. In other words, we make blanket statements because we want to make a point that makes us look right and therefore look good in the position we are taking.

We have a rule in our home that says no one can use the words “always” and “never” when discussing or debating a topic where opinions and views are prevalent. This probably sounds a bit harsh but think about it for a moment. How often do we argue or debate with someone on a topic and say that they never do this or they always do that. Is that really true? You’re thinking, “absolutely”!

The reason we have this rule is because it forces a conversation to happen. It forces people to think about what they are going to say, how they are going to say it and why. Perhaps simplistic, we have found that is has changed the way we talk with each other and it has introduced a level of integrity into the conversation that doesn’t exist when we make blanket statements.

In business, blanket statements have an even greater danger of really messing things up. If we desire integrity in the business then it goes deeper than just maintaing accurate data and records. Integrity in the business starts with the communication and conversation that takes place between people.

Blanket statements create unnecessary questions. The benefit of having accurate financial information is minimized if senior managers then say things in meetings like “the salespeople always forget to update the pipeline” or “our delivery teams never capture accurate project information or produce the right content”.

These blanket statements make other senior managers wonder how we can then have accurate financial information. It also sends a message that we doubt the commitment and integrity of our salespeople. Are they trying to hurt the business? Do we need to hire new salespeople? Is the manager of the delivery organisation lazy and not bothered with ensuring we have the information we need?

How could these statements have been said differently? Perhaps a better way would have been to say “most of the pipeline information is complete enough for us to produce an accurate forecast but the field for required resources is not complete in the following opportunities so we need to check with the appropriate salesperson to get this information”.  On the other statement it could be stated as “We need to understand more about the projects we’re involved with. The information we have is helpful but we need to assess what else we might specifically need as a team so we are better informed”.

Maybe you’d make these statements differently than the example I provided but hopefully the point is clear. Integrity in the business means we have integrity in the conversation. It requires that as team members we are not lacking a spine. It means we care enough to get the facts right, communicate what is working well and not present our views as a slight on someone else or the company when in fact it might only relate to one piece of data missing or misrepresented.

Being factual, truthful and specific is hugely important to how we start, maintain and keep relationships in business and in life. People want to work with people they trust and the people they trust are those that present information with specificity and integrity especially when it involves others. It is a good practice to examine how we are communicating and whether we are prone to omit details in exchange for trying to make a point.

Say what you mean and mean what you say.

Luxury cars at the drive-thru

What I’m about to say in no way means that I’ve done extensive research on the subject nor that I have conclusive evidence. It is only an observation I’ve made many times that I’ve wanted to write about. I often notice that there are some really nice luxury cars sitting in the queue at the McDonalds drive-thru. Although I’ve been in the queue on occasion (for the grilled chicken sandwich, really), I tend to notice that some of the more expensive cars on the road are sitting there waiting to order.

The question is why is this even relevant. Don’t people with really nice cars have the same tastes as the rest of us? Are not people with an above average income allowed to eat fast food instead of always having to eat at finer establishments? The answers are of course “yes” to both questions but the truth is we do tend to notice when two things don’t immediately appear to go together.

The reason we do this is because we have a preconceived mindset and a set of expectations about how people should behave under certain circumstances and specific envinronments. Even though these may be unspoken or not even at the forefront of our minds, certain events trigger them. For me, and some others I’ve spoken to, it seems when we see a 7 series or an S class in a drive-thru queue we immediately wonder why this person needs to eat there, apart from loving that particular food, which is reason enough in itself.

I’ve heard several times that “you can take the man out of <insert country name here> but you can’t take <insert country name here> out of the man”. This is of course meant to say that people do experience change but very few, if any, to the extent where the core influences, culture, social impact and values they were raised with entirely disappear. In other words, we each have things we hold on to and never really expect to get rid of or even see any reason in doing so. It also raises many other questions on the topic of change and how change relates to expectations and perceptions we have about ourselves and others. The guy in the queue at the drive-thru in the 7 series may have grown up with that food as a staple part of his diet and may completely love it, therefore no matter how much he makes nor what he drives has any bearing on his desire to continue going there when he has a craving. Again, nothing wrong with that but some people do form opinions about how we live and what we do.

In business, I dare say that most of the major initiatives that organisations undertake have their success or failure directly tied to the extent of change that people will go through or are willing to go through. There is much emphasis on IT, business process, organisational design and this thing we call change management. The emphasis on these things often supersedes the reality of just how large the task is for people to have a different mindset about the work altogether. We spend an enormous amount of time drawing charts and diagrams, building project plans and creating lots of slide-ware; all to further the cause of the initiative. We spend less time asking the people involved important questions about their views, perceptions, expectations and even feelings.

We fail to completely understand the environment and it’s deep seeded impact on how people work and why they do the things they do. We make assumptions such as people will view things the way we do or since we went through this change in the past and have had similar experiences then others must come along the same way or even at the same speed of change. This can be seen in several types of organisations such as public sector or financial services or manufacturing. Each brings with it a unique set of cultural and operational values that are not often visible to outsiders, especially those tasked with helping introduce change and transformational type initiatives.

I pulled out some questions we’ve asked of people in the past in organisations where change programs were being introduced. Understanding those “unspoken” views of the people were critical to the success of the program. Some of the questions and answers we received included:

• Why are you not outwardly supportive and cooperative regarding this new policy the company has introduced?
  • I care so much about the company’s welfare that I am challenging the true benefit this policy brings.
  • I don’t need one more thing to do or to interrupt my routine, therefore even though the company needs to do this, it’s not working for me.
  • The policy is needed but I believe it can be improved and want to ensure my voice is heard so I and others who are mostly impacted by this policy can work with the company to shape it correctly for all of us.
• You were making progress with this new program but you seem to be defaulting back to what you were doing previously, what is the reason?
  • I’m struggling to learn and the path of least resistance is just easier but I’m afraid to admit that and ask for help.
  • I really don’t see the reason to change, my job is not at risk and I’m providing enough of what is needed doing what I’ve always done.
  • I never agreed with this new program and figured I’d go along until it became too much work.
• As a key stakeholder you are sending mixed messages to others on the team, is there a misunderstanding or blocker that you need to talk about?
  • My perception is that this type of company can’t really adapt to this type of change, they don’t really go together (drive-thru perception).
  • I want this to work since it is important for me personally but I really don’t care about the detail, I leave that to others
  • I have not invested the time to truly understand the full impact, risk and benefits so I need help doing that so I can be clear about messages I send.

To some extent, these and other questions do get asked but the frequency with which they are asked and how they are revisited is what can increase or decrease both the risk and speed of change. People have perceptions and expectations about what works, what goes together and what doesn’t. When we work with people to help them go on a journey where change will be uncomfortable, unnerving and somewhat onerous, we need to ensure that we are not placing our perceptions and expectations on them, assuming they need to come along the same way we would. Sometimes change programs are initiated with a group level mentality, meaning that we expect groups of people to come through the funnel and all come out the same way. People learn at the rate they are capable of and it is our role to help the people in organisations come along at the right pace, which will be unique to each person.

See you at the drive-thru.