Flexibility is not strategy (part 4)

27 05 2009

Flexibility – it can manifest in many forms and can quietly work against the soundest strategy.  In this, the nearly final installment, I’m going to talk briefly about dissemination and communication based on my experiences.

Many jokes are made at the expense of having consistent representation of a topic.  Being “on message” is corporate obfuscation and doublespeak, but its power can be used for the purposes of good.  Believe it or not, it is possible to be “on message” and also be transparent at the same time.

Bottom line: if you don’t have a communication plan around your new strategy, you’ve got a problem.

Water cooler messaging

Everyone’s reticent to learn the details of a new strategy.  So sometimes a 1 minute water cooler conversation is worth a 60 minute company address or a 10 page document.  Documents in particular have two major problems:

  • They probably don’t speak specifically to the reader
  • They require reading

Read the rest of this entry »





Flexibility is not strategy (part 3)

22 05 2009

A clear sense of purpose and a common understanding of that purpose seem like an obvious requirement to engender prosperity.  These elements are elusive because humans are not machines.  Creativity abounds, opportunities knock, tangents manifest, and allegiances are pledged. The confluence of these can help or hinder the evolution of companies and individuals.

Flexibility is the substitution of laissez faire for purposeful direction.  Unchoreographed dance or theatre may be expressive or interesting, but it’s not repeatable.  Good directors accept input, but in the end specify precisely what’s to be done for the entire piece’s overall impact – yet they don’t do the acting themselves. 

Actors and employees alike may not always be able to see how their specific role helps achieve the objectives, but leadership, transparency and ultimately trust resolves this.

Read the rest of this entry »





Flexibility is not strategy (part 2)

29 04 2009

I mentioned that by remaining open to everything, you risk accomplishing nothing.  The resulting dispersion of resources and effort can cause paralysis (or perceived stasis in your customer base).

So, what if you decide, like Hamlet eventually did after Act 3, Scene 1, to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing, end them?

Come together, check your weapons at the door

First off, nobody is too busy to participate.  This isn’t a one hour lunch time meeting where you order pizza and get through it before your next big conference call.

It is a time for commitment, honesty, speaking truth to power, and putting all the assumptions or corporate mythos into play.

You are in the “cone of silence” and the “truth circle”.  If you don’t trust your players, the process will be undermined and fail.

It has to be a safe environment to air legitimate concerns and defuse feuds between leadership or divisions.  Inside these sessions, you need to show your work and shred a lot of rough drafts.

Sensitive topics will be broached and in the process of tackling these perceptions (real or otherwise) is ugly.  The process is transient and understandings will forged and dismantled many times over.

The objective is to neutralize or plot a solution to counteract threats or weaknesses.  The words and work that are said during these sessions can potentially be used (in or out of context) as weapons that could decimate morale at large.

Mind you, being iconoclastic and cavalier about other people’s beliefs isn’t the same as being objective.  Like any relationship, there may be a role for a neutral third party to arbitrate pointed issues, take down all that is said, and offer guidance to becoming “unstuck” when the topics “rathole” into minutiae. Read the rest of this entry »