Mumblr

The Management Innovation Exchange or MIX is truly a great place for learning about innovative management practices and ideas for reinventing management. I highly recommend it if you have a passion for re-defining the ‘way things work’. In fact, I too contributed a “hack” to make people managers more accountable for their employees by building attrition costs into the managers’ P&L.

I am putting together a small list of hacks and stories which I found most interesting on the forum:

• Julian Birkinshaw of the London Business School writes a thought-provoking piece on “What is Your Management Model?” We have all talked about business models, but not much about the management model. How are we going to make choices about people, effort coordination, objectives etc.? How will we balance a traditional vs. a new-age management practice? Ultimately, what’s more important – the business model or the management model? Must Read.

• Jordan Cohen of Pfizer tells a great story about how to make people more efficient by taking out the routine work out of their work. Fascinating example of outsourcing low value-adding tasks.

• Matt Sholsberg asks us to reinvent the wheel. And for a reason – the wheel itself is over 5000 years old!

• So many organizations are still contemplating about social media. How to adopt? How to ingrain? How to measure success? Srinivas Koushik of Nationwide shares the story of how they built the social web into the very fabric of the organization.

• Chris Grams shares his experiences and ideas on how can organizations become “open” and engage their employees. Great ideas if you want to build an organization based on trust, transparency, openness and collaboration.

What are your ideas? Or if you like, “hacks” to re-invent management?

There are various areas in which organizations need to reinvent the way of doing things. But, to me, one of the most worrisome issues is the issue of rigid hierarchies, control mechanisms and collaboration. I believe these are critical barriers to maximizing enterprise performance.

Often I find that “information” is the key. It is one of the most powerful sources of individual competitive advantages in an organizational context. In most cases, we find that the higher  you are in the hierarchy, the more information you have. Authority is the mirror image of the information one has. In a way, how much should you know is dependent on where you sit across a range of job grades! And, we are not just talking about sensitive information like detailed financials or diversity reports (though I don’t feel these are sensitive!). We are talking the essentials – information about product / services, procedures, systems, repository of innovative ideas, best practices, customer insights or even people – as to who specializes in what or who is the “go-to” person for a particular issue. And, all this information is usually sitting pretty somewhere “up” there! Far away from people, who might need it the most!

If this issue is unchecked, often I see cases of “information hoarding”. As humans, we like to “own” things – put a seal on them – “mine”! It appears we sometimes do the same with information. Especially, when organization structures / practices / culture does not place enough emphasis (I am not talking about mere lip service) on sharing. Worst of all, the whole system sometimes ends up rewarding the ones who hoard information. After all, information is power and one can succeed with the right information. So, that becomes the norm. The message is out. “Hold on to the information. You are better off keeping it to yourself, rather than sharing it with everyone. You can get things done. Win that big bonus. Become a star. And you can outpace others in office.”

What does this lead to? Sooner, rather than later – poor enterprise performance. Let me give some examples, which you might be able to relate to:

• You call your bank’s phone-banking line because you have a wrong transaction in your account – nothing very major. The phone-banking rep puts you on hold to look into the manual on how to address the problem. Doesn’t find the right information and transfers your call to the “relevant” department. Again, no resolution. Looks like something is missing in the manual. Or maybe, some one sat there up in the corner office and designed it without knowing the ground realities. Finally, the call is transferred to the “manager”, who is able to reverse the transaction and closes out the issue. You look at your watch and realize that was 20 minutes of your time for a $10 transaction!

• You are attending an exhibition where companies are demonstrating some fancy manufacturing machinery. It’s a big event. You set your eyes on a piece of work, and you reckon it can improve your plant’s productivity by 10-15%. But, you are worried about energy consumption and ask the company’s reps “I know this machinery can be customized to a customer’s needs. Which specific components are most customizable from the point of reducing energy consumption, while maintaining productivity?” The rep looks at you, looks at his colleagues. Smiles. “I will have to get back to you.” Wonders to himself “Boss knows!”. And, you move on to talk to some of the other stalls at the exhibition.

• A customer calls you and asks you to come over to make a sales pitch on a specific subject, say business continuity services. Given the customer’s industry, you know that your colleague in another team had made a similar pitch a few years back. You go to her, ask for some materials that you can re-use. She says, “I am a bit busy. Getting on a plane soon. Will try to send something in the next 1 week”. Oh! The customer wanted the presentation tomorrow. And you get back to your desk and spend the rest of the day (and part of the night) in re-inventing something that already exists in a fine form. Talk about putting in productive hours at work!

The list is endless. And, the potential for productivity gains by addressing this area is endless too. I feel very passionately for this issue, since I have seen hundreds of people, including myself, being affected by this. And even more so, because now we really seem to have enabling technology to support information sharing like never before. And that is a very important development. But, technology in itself can never ever be the ultimate solution. It’s a tool, not an outcome. More importantly, it will have to be about imbibing the value of sharing, building a culture which supports and disproportionately rewards “information disseminators”.

We need to free up information. What has been your experience? How can we hack companies’ management practices and liberate the information to reach where it truly belongs – the people? How can we bust these islands of information? How can we build this component of “the ideal enterprise”. How can we do that? Tell me now!

Have you felt over-whelmed by the different types of job titles being thrown around in a company or the job market? I certainly have and have always felt that it is a lot to do with “dressing” up things. The Economist carries this interesting article about inflation in job titles.

When it comes to job titles, we live in an age of rampant inflation. Everybody you come across seems to be a chief or president of some variety. Title inflation is producing its own vocabulary: “uptitling” and “title-fluffing”.

And, it appears that title-inflation is particularly acute for titles which are a subset of  “president” (vice president, assistant vice president etc.) as compared to “chief”. Here is an outstanding piece of statistics:

The number of members of LinkedIn, a professional network, with the title vice-president grew 426% faster than the membership of the site as a whole in 2005-09. The inflation rate for presidents was 312% and for chiefs a mere 275%.

So, what’s happening? What are the reasons?

What is going on here? The most immediate explanation is the economic downturn: bosses are doling out ever fancier titles as a substitute for pay raises and bonuses. But there are also structural reasons for the trend. The most basic is the growing complexity of businesses. Many not only have presidents and vice-presidents for this or that product line, but also presidents and vice-presidents for various regions. Put the two together and you have a recipe for ever-longer business cards: vice-president for photocopiers Asia-Pacific, for example.

The cult of flexibility is also inflationary. The fashion for flattening hierarchies has had the paradoxical effect of multiplying meaningless job titles. Workers crave important-sounding titles to give them the illusion of ascending the ranks. Managers who no longer have anyone to manage are fobbed off with inflated titles.

Leadership in title inflation, as in so much else, is passing to the developing world, particularly India and China. Both countries have a longstanding obsession with hierarchy (fancy job titles can be the key to getting a bride as well as the admiration of your friends). They also have tight labour markets. The result is an explosion of titles. Companies have taken to creating baffling jobs such as “outbound specialist”. They have also taken to staging public celebrations of promotions from, say, assistant deputy director to principal assistant deputy director.

And, what are some of the possible implications of title inflation:

The snag is that the familiar problems of monetary inflation apply to job-title inflation as well. The benefits of giving people a fancy new title are usually short-lived. The harm is long-lasting. People become cynical about their monikers (particularly when they are given in lieu of pay rises). Organisations become more Ruritanian. The job market becomes more opaque…

And, far from providing people with more security, fancy titles can often make them more expendable. Companies might hesitate before sacking an IT adviser. But what about a chief scrum master? The essence of inflation, after all, is that it devalues everything that it touches.

What do you think are the implications of title-inflation? Is it worth it?

The ever-growing Employee Engagement Network has pulled it off again! It has created another free e-book on employee engagement. Here is an excerpt from the introduction of the book which explains what it is all about:

Too often we are in search of an easy answer. We hire experts to tell us what to do. We need to engage the question. Let us sit with the questions, voice our questions, and generate a range of responses rather than a simplistic easy answer to the complexity of employee engagement. I encourage you to read this wonderful collection of questions offered by 96 members of the employee engagement network. Engage the questions, generate responses, and create greater employee engagement for the benefit of all.

The book contains questions – questions for leaders and managers – questions that organizations need to think about. Provocative. Deep. Meaningful. Soul-stirring. A lot of credit goes to David Zinger for hosting the network and facilitating this great piece of work. You can read the book below or click here.

This is the third collaborative e-book I have contributed to (earlier ones are here and here). And I did have a few questions for leaders:

• When it comes to your company, what are the stories that come to your employees’ minds?

• What might be the top 3 unanswered questions in the minds of your people?

• If you are really serious, how would you prove that employee engagement is more than “lip service”?

What is your question? What do you want to ask your leaders, managers and organizations?

Managing Gen Y employees is a hotly discussed topics among leaders and HR folks. Much has been written about how they are different from earlier generations (Gen X / Baby Boomers) in their attitudes, behaviours, needs and disposition. BusinessWeek has put out a special report on the subject, which has a few articles that discuss some of the myths and realities of Gen Y employees. One of the articles contains research from a study by Corporate Executive Board covering over 400000 employees. The piece says that “gen Y is not so different after all” and attempts to bust myths like:

It’s all about money for Gen Y

Gen Y isn’t loyal

Gen Y communicates differently

Another article attempts to explore why Gen Y is the way it is. What has contributed to their collective programming?

What do you think? What approaches you are taking for managing Gen Y? Do you think you need we need different approaches for managing Gen Y or is it that intrinsic needs of employees (across generations) are the same?