When Less is More
A recent entry in one of Ecademy's clubs prompted me to write this entry. Nigel Dawes asked if intellect/knowledge ought to be valued so that it could be included on the balance sheets. To me, this is the wrong question. Just because it is possible to measure something doesn't mean that we ought to measure it. Of course, my viewpoint flies in the face of much of what is considered to be received management wisdom; but surely, all measurement must serve a useful purpose. Perhaps a better question would be "Do we need another entry on the balance sheet?" or "Would a measurement of intellect/knowledge on the balance sheet tell us anything useful?" I'm not convinced that it would. Ditto good will.
What is the purpose of any measurement? It's to indicate the degree of change. If you want to know to what extent your teenager is growing, you don't compare your grocery receipts from one week to the next. It's a measurement that you could make, but it wouldn't tell you how much he or she had grown. It would only tell you how much the cost of feeding your entire family had changed. Most people measure how much their youngster has grown at intervals that are long enough to give a meaningful value. While knowing that he or she is two inches taller than six months ago may satisfy your curiosity or confirm your suspicions, it still doesn't give you information that is useful. Neck, inseam, or foot measurements would be more meaningful because each of these determines clothing sizes. The result of these measurements, or better still, the rate at which your teenager's sizes change is a much more useful measurement because it enables you to anticipate when to buy bigger clothes.
Intellect or knowledge should be thought of in the same way. It is isn't the quantity of it or even the value of it that matters: It's the extent to which the value of the end-product or end-service contributes to the bottom line that matters. Just as the bolts and nuts of a machine are not shown on the balance sheet, neither is the organization's intellect or knowledge.
Good managers measure; but the best of them measure less.
Are Business Models Meant to be Flexible?
On Saturday night, I had dinner at Cafe Rouge in the town where I am staying. At the conclusion of what I can only describe as a delicious meal, I asked the waitress to bring each of us our respective bills. This request proved to be more than she could manage. Instead, she brought one bill and, after a lot more discussion than should have been necessary, agreed that we could divide it between ourselves and pay for it that way. Both of us reached for our credit cards. This meant that the waitress now had to - wait for it - divide £34.64 in half. This also proved to be too difficult. I informed her that we would each pay £17.32. Obviously relieved that she was not expected to do complicated division as well as take orders, she whipped out her portable credit card machine and punched in the numbers. Altogether, I think we spent about as much paying the bill as it took to eat our starters.
I have no doubt that, for that store anyway, the policy was that only one bill would be issued for each table. My question, of course, is "Why?" What is so hard, so complicated, so troubling to your accountant that you are unable to give a bill to each person at a two-person table? I couldn't tell you if the waitress was embarrassed. Confused? Certainly. Out of her depth? No question.
Such incidents should never happen in the workplace. Those people who face the customer day after day need to know how to answer questions, especially ones as obvious as this. It is the responsibility of the manager to make sure that those he or she supervises are not only trained properly, but also have the flexibility themselves to bend the rules in order to give the customer a better experience. Will I go there again? Doubtful.
Knowing What to Do or Doing What You Know
Which is the more difficult: Knowing what to do, or doing what you know. "That depends," I hear you say. Somehow, it always does. How many of us know we should exercise, but don't? How many of us know we should watch our weight, but don't? (My doctor said I should watch my weight, so I decided to get it out where I could see it.) How many of us know we should be courteous to others, particularly those that work for us and those for whom we work. Knowing what to do, it seems to me, is seldom the issue. The problem is doing what we know.
I have been reminded recently of another paradox, that despite the fact that breast cancer is the most common type of cancer among women in the UK, far too many of them die from what is a survivable disease. In the past 20 years, the ability to diagnose and treat cancers of all types have improved dramatically; but the key to surviving depends on early diagnosis. Your doctor can advise you on the most appropriate method and frequency for self-examination. I encourage you to make this a priority. I've reminded you of what you need to do. It's up to you to do it.
Here are a couple of lesser known website to visit on the subject: http://thebreastdiva.thepinkword.com and http://www.thebreastcancersite.com/
To Ski or Not to Ski. That is the Question
Recently, the BBC reported that while attempting to engage a ski lift at Vail, Colorado, the ski lift engaged him. A less than sympathetic journalist or tourist photographed the man hanging upside down by his ankles, his ski pants entangled in the machinery, and the region between there and his waist exposed to Mother Nature. According to the story, it took just over ten minutes for the lift operators to disengage the unfortunate skiier. Apparently, he was uninjured, except for his pride, though no mention was made of frostbite.
The last time I went skiing was when I was fourteen. On that occasion, I managed to collide with another skiier who had the misfortune to turn in front of me while I was travelling out of control. I don't know what happened to him. I came down the mountain, courtesy of the Monarch Pass ski patrol, spent 10 weeks in plaster and missed a whole semester of gym. That, plus being wheeled to the front of the school lunch line, were the only redeeming features of this experience. I tell you this, because I want to point out that the cock-up at Vail may not have been the fault of either the ski area or the skiier. Sometimes, things just happen.
Technology
Isn't technology great when it works?! I installed a 320GB hard drive this week. The sheer size doesn't seem possible. I remember when one a fifteenth of that size was considered all that was needed. How times have changed.
I'm also one of the comparative few who uses Vista and likes it. It certainly requires more horsepower; but if you have it, things usually work. On this occasion, however, I got an error message: no. 8072EE2. This error has acquired some notoriety for wasting people's time trying to solve a problem that is unrelated to the error. Whatever its cause, the error prevents Windows Update from working and makes the downloading or installation of just about any other software acquired from the internet impossible.
I have to say, however, that I was absolutely delighted to make contact with Mike Qu at Microsoft Support who provided no less than five options for fixing the problem. Fortunately, the first solution worked and, given the problems that others have faced, I'm reprinting that solution here. So grab your mouse, and let's get started.
1. Click the "Start" button, and type "msconfig" in the search bar at the bottom of the menu.
2. Press "Enter." (Click "Continue" if the "User Account Control" window pops up.
3. Click the "Services" tab, and check the "Hide All Microsoft Services" box. Click "Disable All" if it is not greyed out.
4. Click the "Startup" tab, click "Disable All," and click OK.
5. Restart the computer. If the "System Configuration Utility" window appears, then check "Don't show this message or launch the system. (In my case, this window did not appear.).
When the computer has fully rebooted, select "Windows Update." In my case, it worked the first time. If you still have problems, then contact Microsoft Support at http://support.microsoft.com/.
Failure to Notice
The BBC reported recently that workers cleaning up the grounds beneath a roller coaster at Alton Towers in England had found more than 1000 personal items whose owners had lost them while enjoying the ride. Among these articles were 800 pieces of jewelry, 237 mobile phones, 53 non-matching shoes and 604 watches. Perhaps the most interesting item of all was a prosthetic leg.
Most of us, I think you will agree, tend to notice little things like whether or not someone is hopping on one leg or walking on two. It reminds me of that sketch so brilliantly written and performed by Peter Cook and Dudley Moore in which Dudley, who only has one leg, shows up at an audition for the part of Tarzan. The issue here is not whether the customer had one leg or two; rather, it is that the person operating the ride failed to notice it. As Mr. Moore so courageously demonstrated, it is impossible to stand still on just one leg; and as his auditioner was quick to point out, he only had one leg to stand on where two were required.
How is it possible that something this obvious was overlooked by the ride operator? Among other things, I would say it was because he or she wasn't interested in what happened after the sale. Making the sale was the most important thing, the only thing, that mattered. A lot of companies think that they have this problem in the bag because they provide after sales questionnaires; but I've found that the questions usually ask for only the information they want to hear, not for what they don't want to hear. It's almost as if the questionnaire is being used to remind customers of what a great experience they had, a way to help them forget about all the personal items they lost along the way.
This story teaches us a lot about customer service. It reminds us that the relationship after the sale is as important as it is before and during it. It shows us that our customers have needs that we don't know about; and it proves to us once more that problems are easier to fix when they first occur than if we ignore them. Most of all, it demonstrates that often the best feedback is staring us in the face.
. . . Excuse me, sir, but have you lost a leg?
Hurricane Obama
Kenneth Timmerman on Newsmax.com reports that a lawsuit has been filed in Pennsylvania by that state's former Deputy Attorney General Philip J Berg, a "self-avowed supporter of Hillary Clinton," which alleges that Barack Obama was not born in the United States.
Similar lawsuits have been filed in seven other states: Hawaii, Washington, California, Florida, Georgia, New York and Connecticut. Berg contends that the failure of Obama and his lawyers to produce a birth certificate clearly stating his place of birth is an admission of guilt, and therefore makes him ineligible to be President of the United States.
Fight the Smears has posted what appears to be a valid birth certificate; but somehow this "evidence" has escaped the notice of the eight state and federal courts in which the lawsuits were filed. Curiously, the certificate number has been blacked out, raising further suspicions about its authenticity. Conspiracy theorists know the power of Photoshop.
My point, here, is not to pass judgment one way or the other, but rather to illustrate how easily an issue that may seem small to one person can be huge to others. Managers and employees make this mistake all the time. For example, managers expect employees to produce their best work day after day. Regardless of the personal problems that plague all of us, they want dependable workers, not unreliable ones. Employees, on the other hand expect managers to keep details of their private lives, however trivial, in the strictest confidence. If managers can't be trusted with the small things, why would anyone ever confide in them on something that was "really important?"
To Obama, missing the "federally mandated deadline" for producing a "vault copy" of his birth certificate may seem like an unnecessary distraction so close to Election Day; but to some members of the electorate, this is more than just a storm in a teacup: It's a Category 5 Hurricane. If he expects to weather this storm, then he would be wise to direct all hands to the pumps. Otherwise he may find that he's the captain of a sinking ship.
Managing a Difficult Boss
I've been busy answering questions submitted to me through AllExperts. One of the most common problems seems to be how to work with a difficult boss. When people start a new job, often they are anxious to make a good impression. This can be very difficult in those situations where their supervisor is an incompetent manager. There is much to be said about this problem, and I plan to cover it in an upcoming newsletter; but for now, I want to encourage all of you to focus on what you can do, rather than what you can't do. If you concentrate on the foibles of your manager, it will eventually affect your own performance. If you concentrate on your own work, you will not be distracted by what your manager does or does not do. By concentrating on your own work, you will get more done and your attitude will improve as well.
A Cardinal Rule
One of the cardinal rules in management is to praise in public, but criticize in private. It is remarkable, however, just how few managers actually practice this. In my experience, the majority make public criticism of their subordinates into an Olympic event, but are so embarrassed about offering praise that they not only just do it privately, in their offices or elsewhere, but give it sort of under their breath and without making eye contact. And they are just the ones that do praise others. A lot of managers just criticise, but never offer any praise. Their view is that 'no news, is good news.'
Well, let me set the record straight. Managers and aspiring managers, sit up and take note. Never criticize your subordinates in public. Don't do it. In most cases, whatever has occurred is not important enough that it can't wait for a private chat later; and even when it is, you can be sure the person responsible already feels about as big as a bug's whisker. There is nothing to be gained by crushing that person's ego in front of everyone.
I'll tell you something else I'll bet you don't know. The people that you aren't criticizing are listening. You can destroy their morale and your reputation as a leader or a manager by mishandling the situation. Once that happens, things will never be the same. It is almost impossible to undo the damage. From then on, people will be very careful around you. They'll be watching their backs, instead of their work.
Don't Believe Everything You Read on the Internet
You are probably thinking that it is the title of this entry is so obvious as to not need an explanation. Well, things are never that simple, are they.
About a week ago, I asked for some advice on AllExperts.com. The first reply I got was okay, but I wanted some additional clarification. The more I asked, the more facetious and patronizing the "expert" became. Not at all what I expected.
The problem, I think, arose when I started getting e-mails from AllExperts which said that the person who provided the advice wanted me to rate her answer. What I didn't realize was that this was a "trick" question. It wasn't that the expert wanted feedback; it was that AllExperts had generated the e-mail asking for feedback. Because I hadn't figured it out at the time, I was responded as if I was talking to a neutral third party.
My point is that when you are communicating with people you don't know on the Internet, you have to take extra precautions because things are seldom what they seem to be.
Maybe I just had a bad experience; but, I used this free "service" on the recommendation of someone else without checking the facts first. How often do you suppose this happens in organizations? Quite often, I think.. Does the squeaky wheel always get the oil? In other words, do the people who complain the loudest and most frequently always get their way, particularly at the expense of others? I hope not; but I can tell you that I have worked in organizations where I've seen this happen time and time again. It's a sign of weak management.
In the long run, it is worth taking the time to decide on an objective standard against which to evaluate the complaint and to gather the facts from as many different sources as necessary so that you have as near to a complete picture of the situation as possible before taking a decision. Otherwise, you might just shoot from the lip and regret it later.
Read the Fine Print
We all know that we should never agree to a legal document without reading the fine print, and I'm sure that most of you do this with contracts printed on paper; but, how many of you do it with online contracts? Maybe you're thinking, "I don't have any online contracts." Well, if you're reading this blog, then let me assure you that you do. In fact, you have several. Here's what I mean.
Everytime you load new software, you are asked to read the terms and conditions. Studies have shown that the majority of people don't read them; instead, they just click "I agree" and move on. I read recently that in an effort to get people to read their terms and conditions, they offered $1000 to the first person who e-mailed them at their special address. Eventually, someone e-mailed them, and they paid up. I wonder how many people missed out on the money-spinner.
Today, I was offered the opportunity to download some free search engine optimization (SEO) software. Of course, there were several upgradeable versions and analytics that cost real dough; but the basic level was free. At first, I was a bit dubious of downloading it. My SEO "mentors" Jennifer Grappone & Gradiva Couzin, authors of Search Engine Optimization: An Hour a Day,
Now, I'll admit it: I don't read every single word in these contracts. One is much like the other and usually along these lines: Company X owns the software not you; you can only download it to this machine; you can't sell it to anyone; you can't reverse engineer it; we will send you advertising e-mail from time to time that you don't want; and if anything goes wrong with your machine, it's not our fault.
Companies depend on this format to include things they hope we won't notice. I read quite fast, and so as I breezed through this one, a s word I wasn't used to seeing caught my eye. "Ukraine." Yep. The terms and conditions were subject to the laws of the Ukraine. I don't know what the extent of your legal expertise, but mine is limited to the US and the UK. Eastern Europe? Do they have laws? Have they been in force for any length of time? It's only been 20 years since the collapse of the Old Soviet Union. There was no way that I was going to put this software on my computer. The company offering it was based in Canada.
This anecdote illustrates how important it is to read the fine print. Various testimonials regarding the software included people who had badgered their CEOs until they finally gave in and let them get it.
How can this be a cock-up? You know already. Read the fine print. You don't want to receive a knock at the door from Big Brother because you didn't.