On Wally and an Organization's "Busy Quotient (BQ)"

This post really started from a Facebook interaction with my friends about a Wally (from Dilbert Comics) joke that I think really holds true in Organizations today.

wally: i didn't do any work this week because my project will probably be cancelled in the next budget cuts.
pointy-haired-boss: wally, i don't pay you to do nothing.
wally: i'm pretty sure you do. but i understand your confusion. i too was surprised by the first few years of getting paid for doing nothing. in time, ...doing nothing became it's own sort of challenge. i'm like a ninja with no hopes and dreams.

While I found the joke to be hilarious and identified with it completely (based on my work experience so far), I had some friends commenting that it really doesn't hold true anymore. This set me thinking...Why is that work seems slow (and non-voluminous) at some work places and why it seems busy (and voluminous) at some work places... To that effect, I have tried defining a Organization's Busy Quotient (BQ) with some variables...

Busy Quotient (BQ) Variables:
1. Size of the Company (S) = Bigger the size of the company, the lesser dependencies it wants on individuals, the workload & worklist gets divided into smaller & smaller units (as size grows) such that the show will go on even if one individual goes missing in the chain. In smaller companies, it is often the reverse scenario where an individual often holds more than 2-3 distinct responsibilities and is therefore always on the run, giving the impression that he is more busy than the rest of the market. I am counting 'structure of a company' as a subset of this variable as well.  

2. Lifestage of the Company (L) = The longer the company is in business, the calmer it's daily life becomes. Start-ups usually start out busy because there is a lot to be done even in the Administration Department. I won't even mention the amount of work that goes into core functions like Operations, Marketing and Finance. So, there is going to be a difference in "busy-ness" between an individual who is joining a company on Day 1 and someone who is joining them after 3 years.

In fact I am even reminded of some Mgmt. Guru Insight (I think it was Marshall Goldsmith) that if an individual is always overworked and is doing longer hours everyday, it is a problem either with the organization structure or with the individual - that, it is not in synchronization with the stage of the Company.

3. Process in the Company (P) = The higher the process orientation of the company, the smoother the work flows throughout the chain. It is a simple truth that some organizations are methodical in their approach - about anything - and some are not. Lack of process orientation brings up many surprises, on a daily basis, where you end up doing more fire-fighting than value-added work. But, it still gives you the notion that you are doing a lot.

4. Culture in the Company (C) = There is a culture of "sitting late to look good" in some organizations and there is a culture of "only delivery matters" in some organizations. I am sure that companies which foster the 2nd chain of thought will easily be less busier than the other one. We all have heard about these reputations and we all have commented how the 2nd way is the way to live. Some organizations actually go ahead and do it (read: Best Buy's Results-Only-Work-Environment Story someday). Some organizations don't. They are not really interested in featuring in a "Best Places to Work" Magazine feature.

To summarize = BQ = S x L x P x C
I will spare us all into going for an exercise of assigning a computation methodology and coming up numbers. Then commenting on what's good and what's bad. I can tell you the summary without it as well, having worked with multiple organizations having multiple values for each of the variables above. And at different points in time.

The simple point is:
The more "Efficient Organization" will adjust the "interplay between these 4 variables very well" and come out less busy on an Average Day. And the Chaotic ones won't.
The operative word, at any given point in time, is "interplay". An organization is a dynamic organism and these 4 variables keep changing on a daily basis. A rapidly changing BQ only indicates inefficiency and inability to manage complexity. The trick is keep balancing them out 'consciously' day-in and out - to maintain a steady Busy Quotient over time. The focus to balance these out must have as much importance as one might have on the actual deliverables of the job. Why not!?

With whom does this ownership lie with? Every Individual. CEO as well as the Trainee.

"Social Shopping" is Here!??

I came across this article on Fortune Magazine:
http://postcards.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2010/02/23/google-vet-snags-a-ceo-job/

The company in focus of the Article is: Polyvore

• Polyvore invites users to assemble and display collections of items–clothing, shoes, home goods, and more–to see how they look together. For a Polyvore user, the transaction component–buying opportunity on sites like Saks (SKS) or Neiman Marcus or Net-a-Porter–is only a click away.
• The idea was to marry commerce and community, providing a better visual display than you can find on other websites. Some 6 million unique users visit Polyvore each month, he says, to mix and match items from any online store and create personal collections, or “sets” as the company calls then. Users create 30,000 new sets daily.

This is like "Threadless meets Facebook meets Amazon" to me.
Very Interesting Concept. Very Interesting Company that I will continue to Track.

"Open for Business" - Best Buy's Social Technology Strategy

Best Buy is one retailer that I truly admire and for a very simple reason:
They're really innovative, bold and quick to execute on their ideas, without being afraid of making mistakes. Just to name a few of their pioneering initiatives: Geek Squad, Multi Channel Retailing, ROWE (Results-Only Work Environment), Store-wise Profiling... they surely have come up with some of best ideas in the Retailing world.

On the same lines, check them out now discussing their "Social Media Strategy" on a Youtube Video: "Open for Business" - Best Buy Social Technology Strategy.

Seeing this, I can easily say they are miles ahead of anybody else in the Retailing World. And what is impressive is their philosophy behind it, nicely summarized in this Article here: Open for Social Business by Bant Breen. 

It says this about Best Buy:
Going forward, a key characteristic for successful business formation and development will be how a company flips over the sign on the door and shows itself to be open for social business.
Some Companies (like Best Buy) open access to management. Best Buy's CMO Barry Judge shares his thoughts, addresses customer ideas, involves customers on business activities and informs on company happenings of note on his blog www.barryjudge.com. One recent action of note was Judge's choice this past summer to invite his blog readers to participate in writing the job description for the Senior Manager, Emerging Media Marketing post. Socially open leaders are willing to be led and advised on the best solutions and the right path to take. Before it was CEO knows best, and now it's let's listen to my employees, listen to my customer, my detractors and my fans. In such a model, managers act as powerful filters of concepts, instead of innovation agents themselves.

When will Indian Retail get here? They ought to know that these initiatives are possible in real-time and can be executed in parallel with their "Brick-and-Mortar Plans" - Today.

Story of 3 Envelopes

I have decided to put this story on paper now for easy reference and fond recollection about our days at work. I realize that I have told this tale to so many of my friends already - especially when we are discussing the apathy shown by many Employees at many Workplaces.

I had read it long back in a Reader's Digest or something similar, and I think this approach probably holds true now more than ever - thanks to the dynamic job market, where getting another job is so easy. You just hang around at your current workplace as long as the patience & feel-good factor lasts - yours and theirs. When the going gets tough (i.e.tough questions start getting asked), you just move on.

Today, spending 3 years at a single organization is considered to be par for the course. Anything more than that and people (read: other prospect employers) begin to look upon you with suspicion. This is where the "Story of 3 Envelopes" actually helps. It tells you how you can play out these 3 years at work.

Here goes:
A fellow had just been hired as the new CEO of a large high tech corporation. The CEO who was stepping down met with him privately and presented him with three numbered envelopes. "Open these if you run up against a problem you don't think you can solve," he said.

Well, things went along pretty smoothly, but six months later, sales took a downturn and he was really catching a lot of heat. About at his wits's end, he remembered the envelopes. He went to his drawer and took out the first envelope. The message read, "Blame your predecessor."

The new CEO called a press conference and tactfully laid the blame at the feet of the previous CEO. Satisfied with his comments, the press -- and Wall Street -- responded positively, sales began to pick up and the problem was soon behind him.

About a year later, the company was again experiencing a slight dip in sales, combined with serious product problems. Having learned from his previous experience, the CEO quickly opened the second envelope. The message read, "Reorganize." This he did, and the company quickly rebounded.

After several consecutive profitable quarters, the company once again fell on difficult times. The CEO went to his office, closed the door and opened the third envelope.

The message said, "Prepare three envelopes."

Knowing & Understanding Business-Industry History

Working in the very nascent & just-born (5-years old I would like to estimate) Indian Retail Industry, I am increasingly running into the "Indian Retail Doomsday Predictors" everyday - within and outside of my own Workplace.

Typical Conclusions are:
- 3 Years on, What a Mess it is & How it is Not Going to Work.
- They should have done This and That and Even That.
- How the Likes of IT, FMCG & Telecom are doing so well (!)
- There is no Positioning & Strategy.
- And so on...
These conclusions could turn out to be right in the long run alright (yes, things are bad in Indian Retail at this moment), but it is frustrating to see how easily one can be so disillusioned & dismissive about a Sector one was so bullish just about a Year back.

The sense of Doom is accentuated just because 3 Things happened in the Last Year - No increments, No variable pay and Sad job market (which doesn't allow you to quit easily and move on). [As far as Retail Industry growth is concerned, it is still progressing as smoothly (read: slowly) as it was envisaged last year.]

• People loved it when despite being on "Zero" Revenue, Retail companies gave them "Awesome" Pay hikes, to join the Retail Bandwagon. And they loved it when the company gave them their 1st year Variable pay-offs in full - despite still being on Negligible revenue. This Sector rocked and held promise...
• But now that the Retail Environment has toughened and the Company cuts back (big-time) to manage Survival better, the Sector is headed for Doomsday...
• Comparisons are being made with the likes of IT, Telecom & FMCG (and whichever industry which gives out pay-hikes & variable pay) Sectors and I can probably even see regrets on people's faces, questioning the Choices they made and the Opportunities they may have missed elsewhere.

I have this thing to say: Know & Understand Business History.

1. Every "Brand New" Business/Industry goes through the "Up-Down-Up" Cycle:

• Irrational Exuberance about Business/Industry Potential,
• Overboard Vision,
• Too much Investment,
• 100 Models of Working,
• Glitches & Errors & Outright Mistakes,
• Learning & Rationalization,
• Moderated Vision,
• Re-organization & Improvization,
• Re-ignition & Renaissance.

Take any Industry (and the business leaders of their time) - Automobiles, IT, FMCG, Telecom, Oil, Manufacturing - and they will have gone through this cycle. Even Retail - in US, Europe & Asia-Pacific) - has gone through such a Cycle. Things don't Change quickly enough - for the worse or for the better. It takes Years of Effort - to fail at it or to make it work.

2. No "Two" Industries are the Same, nor are they Completely Different:

• Breakeven in one Industry may happen in 3 years and in some other still it may take 7 years. We cannot compare Apples & Oranges.
• A company in Industry A may take 3 Years to become a 'Leader', whereas a company in Industry B may take 7 years to become a 'Leader'. The important part is that both of them are 'Leaders' eventually. So, in the interim 4 year period, one simply has to be Patient.

3. There are No Absolutes:

• Good to Great & Build to Last Companies have failed (Circuit City in Retail, Motorola in Manufacturing) and Written-off Companies (Amazon.com in E-Business, Cisco in Telecom Hardware) have to come to rule the Businesses they operated in. And, within a decade of them having being written about either which ways.
• When any Company is in a Business with "Serious Intent", the time frames have to be measured in Tens of Years and not in Single Years. To specifically quote Retail Examples, it is worthy to note that the Walmarts & Tescos of the world became 'World Leaders' after nearly 20-25 Years of "Competitive Existence". They didn't start at # 1 and they did not make Zero mistakes along the way.

I hope this is not coming across like a sermon, but I have read a lot of Business Magazine "Archives" (Fortune, BusinessWeek, BusinessWorld, Forbes) in the last few months and I have seen how so many of today's favorite companies (as well as the industries they were in) had had it so tough during their 'initial' lifetimes. It was encouraging & insightful to evaluate them through the complete Cycles and understand that "Uncertainty" always prevails in a Business Environment - Be it a Brand New Industry or the Old.

"Brand New Industry" types can probably take heart from these Old Business/Industry History Lessons and stem a little of the Impatience that prevails in the Indian Retail context today. Walmart, and for that matter, Mr. Biyani's Future Group, wasn't built in a Day.

Go, Kiss the World

I just finished reading Subroto Bagchi's "Go, Kiss the World" and it turned out to be much better than my expectations. Especially appealing are his observations related to a person's Career moves. I have noted some of the gems as below:

§ It is not necessary that everyone has wanderlust in their soul like me. But it is important to know that quite often displacement is the key to progress, and we need to develop comfort with it. My early life experiences helped me build a high degree of comfort with displacement. Water in a pool is stagnant; only when it flows is it energized. The entire universe is in constant motion; even a moment of motionless is inconceivable in the cosmic state of things. Many professionals shudder at the thought of physical displacement, yet crave rapid mobility and growth in their careers. When you are continuously displaced, you make friends easily. You have low expectations from the unfamiliar; hence you are more pleasantly surprised than frustrated when faced with life’s many ups and downs. You explore everything around you, develop curiosity – new lands, customs, food, and ways of doing things begin to draw you in. You learn to survive on the strength of who you are, just for this day, today. You build ingenuity in order to survive. You trust strangers and, hence, strangers trust you. You build intuitive capability to sniff trouble – which can tell you when leave a bar! You become an interesting person, because you have lot of stories to tell. Finally, you learn to move on.

§ … I learnt that our achievements are only as good as the value they create for others.

§ There are two futures, the future of desire and the future of fate, and man’s reason has never learnt to separate them. – J.D.Bernal

§ (Someone once said) Most men take more out life than they give to it. A few give more to life than they take out of it. The world runs because of such men.

§ Our lives are like rivers – the source seldom reveals the confluence. Does a river fret over the long journey and about its end just as it is about to spurt? It simply does not do that, caring instead to flow, to begin its journey, and on its way builds a beneficial relationship with anyone who comes in contact with her.

§ Life sometimes deals you a blank cheque. However, it pays to defer its encashment.

§ Sometimes, in our moments of conflict, we come across a sign that, in a flash, helps us reach a decision which hours of frustrating reasoning cannot achieve. Almost magically, options become clear.

§ Sometimes success is just so close, it looks unreal.

§ When people make mid-career changes, I always hear them ask for a job that impacts corporate strategy, seeking a corner room with a large window, preferably close to the CEO, examining closely the organogram of the organization and hair-splitting on the exact nature of the job. No one says, ‘give me the challenge of a tough, dirty, and strategic role that no one is willing to take, something that may be keeping the CEO awake at night’. But when the outlook changes from ‘what is good for me’ to ‘where is the organization hurting and how can I make a difference’, your professional landscape changes.

§ Only when you are 120% loaded will you be 100% effective. – Azim Premji

§ While it takes time to build perceptions, it takes even longer for perceptions to change. – Sridhar Mitta

§ (Azim Premji) wanted to me stay back. I told him that one of my reasons for leaving was that we were very different people, we thought differently. He answered: ‘That is the reason we should work together’. When we look to hire people, we invariably look for sameness. It is so much more comfortable. But progress requires intelligent friction, push back, points and healthy counterpoints. The job of leaders is to build high personal comfort with contrarians who think differently, create alternative points of view and have the power to question the state of things.

How Tesco beat Sainsbury - 4

3.7 Lean Thinking
Retailer Share of UK Grocery Market
Year Tesco Sainsbury
1993 18% 19.6%
2000 25% 17.9%
2007 31.3% 16.5%

• The rise of Tesco over its rivals is often credited exclusively to its Clubcard Loyalty program launched in 1995. 1995 was the year when Tesco overtook Sainsbury to grasp the “No 1” supermarket slot in the UK.
• Few column inches have been given over to the fact that Tesco started to employ “Lean” experts earlier in 1995 to review their Supply Chain and Supplier Relationships.
  Insights from these “Lean Experts” were shared as early as 1996 in the book “Lean Thinking” and the techniques used in Tesco’s roll-out of the high street Metro stores are revealed in the publication “Lean Solutions”.
• Sir Terry Leahy of Tesco has even been quoted to this effect: Lean Thinking has been an enormous influence on my Business Thinking. It shows how you can fundamentally transform your business.

3.8 New Technology

• It was expanding Internet Shopping Services while Sainsbury's had just reduced its Online Stores. Tesco had even stolen a march on the Internet - offering free access to its Clubcard Members as part of a plan to create a successful e-Commerce website.
• (Sainsbury, however, was aiming to be first with a warehouse delivering goods directly to Online Customers.)

3.9 Growing Abroad

• Tesco had also broken the golden rule that UK retailers cannot successfully expand abroad. While Marks & Spencer and Sainsbury made a mess of their overseas expansion, Tesco had managed to avoid pitfalls into which so many of its competitors had fallen.
• Since its acquisition of the Quinnsworth chain in Ireland in 1997 Tesco has also expanded into Eastern Europe & the Far East (and, most recently, the United States).
• The cornerstone of its international strategy is exporting culturally customized versions of its marketing formula for hypermarkets, the popular department store–supermarket combination that sells massive amounts of food and household goods in a single store.
  Tesco is opting for depth — dominating in contiguous countries — rather than the global breadth Carrefour (and Sainsbury) had sought.
• By forming clusters of shared costs, Tesco hoped to build regional economies of scale. Geographic proximity maximized efficiency by enabling stores to share resources, even if they didn’t operate in the same country.
• Tesco stores in Slovakia and the Czech Republic, for instance, imported up to one-third of their products from each other.
• The company had also calculated that it needs 15 stores in any single country to be profitable. To offset the costs of localization, Tesco management has focused on standardizing management methodology to achieve gobal economies of scale.

3.10 HR Strategy

• With an enviable track record when it comes to HR and Leadership Development, it was arguably Tesco's investment in its People - its 'Every Little Helps' slogan summing up the sort of mentality it was trying to engender in its staff - as much as its ethos of 'pile 'em high, sell 'em cheap' that had been behind much of its growth in the past few years.
• “What really helped Tesco get off the ground in the 1990s was that it recognised that its staff were not as well trained as those at Sainsbury's,” commented Andrea Cockram, then Analyst at Verdict. “It put a lot of effort into that, and it paid off.”