What are we working for?

Throughout my childhood I moved school every two years and so have attended nine educational establishments in my life. In each of these it was interesting to discover that although many things remained largely identical there were one or two slight differences which made the difference.

I have noticed something very similar in the working world, having worked for different organisations as an employee and then as a consultant. Largely companies appear very similar, but there are one or two subtle shifts which seem to make all the difference.

It has lead to this fairly self-evident observation, which is by no means new: People work towards what they perceive to be winning.

Interestingly this view of winning can be easily forced from outside and does not have to be entirely rational to start the herd mentality conforming with it. For example, a close female friend, Rachel*, has been working in a large British bank as a personal banker. In the personal banking world of this corporation you are awarded points for achieving certain things and are awarded a small increase in salary each year in line with the points you have accrued.

Now Rachel intends to leave within then next six months to train to be a social-worker, but still persists in attempting to gain points, even though these will never be of any value to her. She is finding collecting points difficult as she is still fairly inexperienced and people are refusing to help her.

Two observations from this are:
1. The point system is fundamentally flawed
2. Even though it is of no gain to her and actually harms her to push for points, Rachel persists in pushing for points anyway

The point system is fundamentally flawed

Now this point system could be easily refined so that it encourages training of others. This "viral training" is vital to the bank keeping its recruiting and training costs low, but is entirely unrewarded in their fundamental definition of winning: points.

This could easily be remedied by providing some kind of a multi-level marketting approach to points, whereby you achieve a percentage of those who count you as "influential" in their training, encouraging a more collaborative effort.

This new point system would also be flawed: any point system will always be flawed, but the weightings on this new system are much more flexible and encourage collaboration more fundamentally than the law of the jungle points system which is only likely to work in a Machiavellian hard-sale environment

Rachel reacts illogically and conforms with the point system anyway

Even though it would be more beneficial to her colleagues perceptions of her if she were to give her points to them and would not be even slightly detrimental to her prospects as she is leaving before they can be cashed in, Rachel still feels an emotional pull towards the built in definition of winning - to go where the group goes. And Rachel finds this very stressful.

Which leads to two questions, neither of which is particularly deep, but are simply these:

Firstly: Why do we let others' definitions of winning affect our behaviour so fundamentally without questioning them?

Secondly: When the definition of winning does so obviously affect how the vast majority of people act, why don't companies (and governments) ensure they keep them understandable, flexible and relevant to changing environments?

*names have been changed

Mastering the Corporation - the importance of forgetting

Published as a fairly obvious statement of corporate practice after being quizzed about this for the tenth time.

Assertion:

To do well in corporate life, it is essential that you can freely forget what you are doing without this being an issue. If you can not forget about the trivial tasks you will never be able to fully concentrate on the tasks you are currently doing

To be able to fully forget you have to have a fairly solid system that remembers for you. I believe that one of the most important thing any new employee can learn is how to keep a successful todo list and use the calendar functionality provided by the computer to remember for them.

Now, as with most of these observations, this is obviously not rocket science, but doesn't seem to be common practice either.

Consider James*, a new consultant for a top consultancy. James was doing a fairly solid job assisting his team, but was not keeping a regular todo list and so could not cope with taking on more tasks than he could realistically remember at any one time. In the meritocratic ranking system of the consultancy, James was not well ranked.

After being taught about a strict todo list format and note keeping he rapidly progressed and within six months was being ranked near the top of his peer group. James is not a-typical! The majority of recent graduates need to hear the same basic message.

Here is a very basic suggestion of how to keep a todo list:

1. Keep the list fresh
2. Ensure list items are 'bite sized'
3. Keep enough information on each list item to be able to do it a month later if needs be
4. Do not do anything which is not on the todo list
5. Make it easy to find todo items in other notes

Keep the list fresh
Start a new todo list each day and transfer the outstanding items from your existing list to the new list. This will remind you of what you need to do each day and ensures you have properly considered each item of work you need to do (it also stops you needing to think about your work at home).

Ensure the list items are 'bite sized'
If you todo list items feel too onerous, you will procrastinate rather than achieving them and it is very hard to know when they are finished. Bite sized todo list items give a continual sense of achievement as you can easily do the task in one sitting and sign it off. E.g. "Draft internal memo on performance reviews" rather than "Send out memo on performance reviews" if sending out a memo requires drafting, agreeing and then sending.

Keep enough information on each list item to be able to do it a month later
Your todo items should be totally self explanatory and include information such as who gave you the todo and when they gave it to you. If you have further notes which the todo is part of then the page should be referred to.

The difference between a reasonable employee and a good employee is the good employee will make sure that everything they have been trusted with gets done eventually. To be able to do this you need to be able to have totally forgotten what it is you needed to do and then been totally reminded by the list.

Do not do anything which is not on the todo list
This is pretty self explanatory. The point is that it takes discipline to stick to the todo list and if you do not universally put every item onto the list then eventually important items will miss the todo list and your faith in it being a substitute for your memory will be reduced.

Make it easy to find todo items in other notes
When taking notes you will want to mark out your 'actions' or 'todos' in context to where you were given them. These should also be transferred to the todo list. It will make it easier to find these items if you always mark them with a symbol at the same place in the page (e.g. I always draw a box in the left margin on the same horizontal as the note in the page).

Now this is all very much common sense, but that doesn't stop using these lists properly ridiculously powerful. You will be surprised how well people react to you telling them you have completed something succesfully for them which they forgot they ever asked you. How? The todo list!

*Names have been changed

Training your brain, strength of mind - if it works for fitness, why not intelligence?

I had the privilege of chatting with a good friend who is a phenominal athlete, having succesfully competed for his country on the international stage. He is now a successful management consultant with Accenture in the UK.

We were talking about the different dimensions of intelligence and how to train them. Most people accept that you can double your raw strength, flexibility, stamina, agility and other physical attributes through a focussed campaign in the gym. So why do so many people still regard intelligence and creativity as fixed?

We agreed that there is a rough parallel between intelligence and physical strength and that intelligence and mental ability can be trained.

These were our parallels from Physical - to - Mental

• Speed - Mental Arithmetic, Creativity,
  
• Stamina - Comprehensive thinking, patience, persistence
• Strength - Combatitative argument, Logical ability, Powers of persuasion
• Agility - Lateral Thinking, finding multiple solutions
• Toning - Well informed, past performance

I believe that like your physical strength, your mental strength can be trained and after just one year of working at it, it will be very obvious to everyone around you that you seem more intelligent. This is how...

1. Mental Arithmetic - Maths is simply the continued application of very basic components. I have taught maths to 13 year old deliquents and Cambridge University Students and the problem is nearly always the same - a lack of the grasp of the basics. If you want to improve your ability to manipulate numbers you must continue to practice the basics on small numbers
2. Creativity - As the numerous creativity seminars say: Creativity is about being able to link pieces of thought which are not usually linked. Your creativity will only improve as you deliberately expose yourself to different ways of thinking and ask yourself questions which force you to be creative "How could [bizaare idea here] help me with [thing I am working on]?"
3. Comprehensive Thinking - Deliberately and systematically try to break down a problem into areas which do not overlap but cover everything (Mutually Exclusive, Collectively Exhaustive as the McKinsey Way puts it[1]). There are a number of commonly used techniques to break things down: e.g. chronologically, categorically, through a paradigm (e.g. SWOT, five forces in business) using these will improve your ability to think for a long time about the same problem without wasting effort
4. Patience - Others have written far more wisely on patience than we can[2]... Patience is a virtue, possess it if you can, seldom found in woman, but never found in man
   
5. Persistence - This is the same for thinking as for physical exercise, you need to have a strong reason why you are doing what you are doing - why do you want to get there?[2]
   
6. Combatitative Argument - Combatitative arguments require the use of logic and facts under pressure and will build your skills while doing this. Formal debating is one way of doing this, but the pub is the preferred location of most!
   
7. Logic - Logic is a skill and can be learned. Learning to think logically requires a lot of discipline, but little natural ability. There are a number of moderately good web resources for critical thinking (example), recognising common logical flaws can only help. There are also one or two very easy to read introductions to logic for those who prefer printed material [7]
8. Power of Persuasion - To be viewed as intelligent you require more than just the ability to shout loudly and logically. Books such as "Getting to Yes"[3], "Getting Past No"[4] and "Crucial Conversations"[5] are all recommended for helping you see what is important and learning to deal effectively with different people in high pressure situations
   
9. Lateral Thinking - A phrase coined by Edward De Bono to describe the more creative and flexible thinking rather than the linearly logical mind[6]. It is not simply as narrow as being able to solve puzzles in Christmas crackers
   
10. Finding Multiple Solutions - This is simply personal opinion, but many of those who I regard as deeply intelligent have not stopped at the first solution that worked but carried on pushing until they got to the best they could (and then normally pushed some more)
    
11. Well Informed - However fast you think, your mind can only work with the information you have. Find ways of being interested in a variety of subjects and don't stop learning!
    
12. Past Performance - A large part of the perception of your intelligence is simply being consistent in your abilities.

Leisurely reading for the next year:

[1] The McKinsey Way, Ethan M. Rasiel (Amazon) - Consulting is all about rigorous thinking and this book gives a special insight into the way this works and includes a number of the thought processes consultants follow when breaking problems apart
[2] 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, Stephen Covey (Amazon) (Webpage) - An interesting look into the way that people think and operate. A classic with well over 10 million copies sold.
[3] Getting to Yes, Roger Fisher, William Ury, Bruce Patton (Amazon) - "Getting to Yes" is a book solely about negotiation and is heavily recommended reading in nearly all business schools
[4] Getting past No, William Ury (Amazon) - How do you get people to Yes if all they do is cheat and shout No? From one of authors of "Getting to Yes", this book deals with the problems of negotiating with difficult people
[5] Crucial Conversations, Kerry Patterson, Joseph Grenny, Ron McMillan, Al Switzler (Amazon) - This book was recommended by Stephen Covey and deals very effectively with understanding and controlling your emotions to reach an outcome you would be proud of in the important conversations in your life
[6] Anything by Edward De Bono who coined the phrase "Lateral Thinking". The six thinking hats (Amazon) is widely used from the civil service through to organisational thinking. Its use is subject, but the concepts are very strong (although you may find his writing style patronising!)
[Added Comments]
[7] Being Logical: A Guide to Good Thinking, D. Q. McInerny, Dennis Q. McInerny (Amazon) - This comes as highly recommended by the friend mentioned in this article as being a small, cheap and easy-to-read starting point to logic.

Why Some Technology Companies Just Don't Get It

In technology marketing there is the very useful concept of Early Adopters, Early Majority, Late adopters etc.

The idea being that a new product will at first be tried out by a small number of very technically literate people who always like to have "the latest thing" and then there is a gap in need before the early adopters move to the early majority (the mass market who would like to use the product to solve problems). This gap has been referred to as a Chasm[1], due to the number of products from both small and large companies which never make it to the mass market and fail

The thought for the day is quite simple and it is this:
Your first customers for a product want to think about the product. The market as a whole doesn't want to think about the product.

Just consider the success of Google:

The first users of Google were very excited about how clever the search facilities were and wanted to understand PageRank(TM) and how it worked

However, most people use Google because they want the information and don't want to think about how it works.

Consider the failure of most high-end mobile products:

Although the first users think the product is great and are quite happy with installing little programs on their phones, the mass market just doesn't want to have to learn something new which isn't going to obviously help their lives, whether that something new is how to install the software or whether that something new is how to use it and whether they need to worry about being ripped off.

Liam argues that technology companies main problem is not that their technology is not absolutely outstanding, but that their products require thinking about and the mass market doesn't want to think... Just a thought.

Possible areas where standard productisation may cause problems and where clever, minimum-think solutions could solve them:

• Current convergence products - convergence seems to currently mean finding and then learning to use another product on top of the ones you already have
• Digitizing Television Channels - Following this argument to its logical conclusion, part of the reason people enjoy television is because it gives you a very good excuse not to think for a long period of time. Channel hopping is OK, but if people are crying out for really interactive play lists in television media then why haven't the majority of people sorted proper playlists for their ipods?
• Mobile phone programs - Until an easy, generic way of getting new programs onto phones the only programs which will work in a big way are one of:
  
• massively time saving so people cry out to have them added and bother to learn
  
• already installed on your phone and sold through manufacturers
• aimed entirely at the early-adopter market
  

Interesting Reading:

[1] Crossing The Chasm, Geoffrey A Moore (Amazon) - This book is highly recommended to technology based businesses with limited marketing experience. Of course you could learn this the hard way, but for about a tenner and a weekend's reading you too will be able to absorb.

[2] Also worth considering - Confessions of an Advertising Man, David Ogilvy (Amazon) which is a very engaging and easy read. If you have no current experience of advertising at all, this is the ideal introduction. The down side is that it does not include any online techniques, so some have argued that it is becoming dated

[3] An article in The Register on the 30th May 2006, appears to back this point up:

Irish mobile operator O2 released results of its survey which it claims shows that "complexity turns business users off technology" and that many companies surveyed found technology "too confusing".

Welcome to the Daily Liam

The world is changing at an ever increasing pace. The challenges being faced are always new. Today we are truly standing on the shoulders of giants, taking for granted countless hours of human endeavor and intelligence. The incremental increases afforded by numerous individuals small contributions have allowed this advance.

The Daily Liam contains opinion which may not be the author's own and should certainly not be attributed to the organisation the author is working for. My opinions are based on the way I have perceived the world through my experiences, if you disagree, please feel free to write a short response stating why. Incremental increases from small contributions...