Where Is Your Next Buyer?

Where will your next buyer come from?

Sales happen at the intersection of what the buyer needs, what you offer to provide, and a connection between you both. This may be from a conversation across a desk; from an 'ah ha' insight in your blog or presentation; from a referral by another party; or from the other ways of talking your business.

Regardless of how these three elements converge – it is the engagement that's the catalyst for aligning buyer's needs with seller's solutions.

At a program by the Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland, Pamela Wagner, Vice President of W.R. Grace was speaking about the reduction of employee engagement worldwide and her thoughts on why.

While writing notes during the presentation, I realized that the same also applies to customers – current and potential.

Here's a formula Wagner offered to describe the engagement gap:

Volatile Economy creates insecurity

Plus

More Work with fewer employees and resources

Equal

Less Sustainable Engagement.

Uncertainty and stress are distracting – affecting employee involvement and the buyer's willingness to commit.

Since the environment is not likely to change soon, the key question is: how do we get ahead of the distraction?

Learning From Students

The Smith School of Business at the University of Maryland held 'mock interviews' and I had the honor of being an interviewer.

The students came eager to learn from this role-playing exercise. The 'interviewers' are seasoned individuals - most are Smith School Alumni - and well experienced in hiring superior candidates.

My 'interviews' found the 'applicants' well prepared, articulate in expressing themselves, offering direct answers to the questions, and telling stories of relevant situations from earlier part-time jobs.

What did I learn from the students? They are talking about the new normal in the past tense.

An accounting student commented on the radical effect of systems and digital files on the audit function – now requires a team of 2 instead of 10 associates – and felt that a second major in finance will help prepare her for the demands of clients for specific services.

Several other students were in dual-major programs as well – finance and accounting would be partnered with Information Technology – to be agile with both the knowledge and systems recognizing the evolution of these practice areas.

One individual, majoring in finance-accounting, finds math a rewarding exercise in solving puzzles, is a landscape artist, and an avid sports player – had marvelous stories to illustrate answers to interview questions from rich past experience.

Taken together, students are drawing from numerous resources to develop a pretty accurate view of the maturing changes of computerization on processes and practices. In addition, they find time to pursue other interests and gain other experiences – which gives them balance and well-roundedness while providing illustrations to help communicate ideas and concepts.

They are soaking in the various inputs and coming up with a new look of operations of organizations from the outside, while many of us in the working world are heads-down on projects – not seeing the changes around us. 

Jobs of the Future

When speaking with a current job-seeker, she said “while I was working, the working world changed!” This seasoned individual is finding her specific experience is not of interest to employers in today's job market. With a dozen years in responsible internal analyst roles, what arcane experience and skills are being ignored by potential employers?

She was one of an army of analysts who collect data from a variety of sources, do basic analytics, and create reports of the results to send on to another section for further processing and analysis – the role might be viewed as an interim consolidator and analytic reporter.

I also spoke with a guy working on a maturing grant, his role is 'critical checker' – data comes from four unrelated databases, is consolidated on a spreadsheet, with three think-tank analysis units manually transferring the data to word processing or statical software, reports and attachments from the units are returned in a similarly uncoordinated format. The critical checker verifies the data to assure it is error-free after being moved to a different platform. Imagine, a manual check of massive data multiple times because of work-arounds in using the technology. He does this data check at every stage out and back!

Jobs that consist of simply moving paper, or checking the computer's addition are evaporating – they are being replaced by technology. Systems and software handle more of the intake, data consolidation, basic analytics, report generation, and distribution. New approaches, like Big Data and Splunk, permit consolidation of data from multiple sources and formats, and related tools make even complex analysis manageable for us mere mortals. Long ago, sponge divers experienced a similar realization as the technology of the cellulose sponge replaced the natural sponge.

The Doers' Theorem says a person must update their experience portfolio and technical knowledge every three years to keep up with the job market – things are changing that fast!

What does the job of the future look like?

• It can not (yet) be done economically by computer or automation
• It requires a physical presence to accomplish results
• It adds value to the product or service produced
• It requires judgment, knowledge, and interpretation as critical inputs
• It embraces technology (not the equipment but how it is used) to achieve outcomes
• It is eternally assessing improvement for faster, better, more accurate results requiring less resources
• It directly satisfies the need or want of the customer/client, or is in direct support of the satisfaction thereof
• It is dynamic, not static – if you are not improving, you are slipping behind.

For example, today this could include people working with their hands – carpenters, plumbers; with their presence – care givers, clinical specialists and doctors; with their creativity – programmers and artists; with their vision and decision-making – leaders, department heads; with their commitment – the inventor, entrepreneur; to name several.

In a role where you are adding value - from areas such as your knowledge, insight, creativity, relevant experience, ability to translate the theoretical into the executable, your persistence in pursuing results – you are in a stronger situation as jobs evolve.

But – nothing is stagnant – no longer can you graduate from school and stop learning, or just attend a workshop every couple of years – the New Normal is about the evolution of technology and working roles...it's about applying new tools to reduce resources and improve accuracy and acceptable quality. It's about collaboration and working independently as an individual (like the two characters in Makers).

If you trade your car for a newer model with style changes and improvements in performance every few years, why wouldn't you upgrade yourself as often – new skills, new experiences, new knowledge.

And, if you are doing all this work on improvement, don't overlook the opportunity to showcase the 'new you' – update your LinkedIn, GovLoop, and Google Plus profiles to let the world know!

Lead the change – don't be caught by it.

What's your take on 'jobs of the future'? Care to add to the list?

Open Source – It's Not Just Software, Baby!

Initially, open source was an approach to developing software among coders, which was like Spanky, Darla, and the Our Gang kids “puttin' on a show.” Everyone contributed what they had (sharing resources) and did what they knew (collaborate) – and the show was always a success.

The open source approach is a philosophy, a culture, a means of tapping the doer's knowledge and experience without the complication of burdensome overhead.

It can be as simple as taking the path of helping a chronically tardy employee discover the effect of his lateness on coworkers, then giving him an alarm clock to acknowledge the commitment of being there on time.

In this environment, an audiophile can develop a hobby of finding old high-end equipment into a viable business by working with a warehouser and an eBay seller – a 3-person collaboration which is a poster child for the Makers Economy.

As agencies move further into government as a platform (GAAP) with information and answers easily available on-line, and reliable channels for filing required documents, the experienced 'live person' is available to work with the smaller percentage of unusual cases instead of reading to the general caller from the regs and procedures.

Open source leadership is recognizing the value of the knowledge and experience which resides throughout the organization and finding ways of applying it to get results.

The New Normal is the resulting change from traditional methods to address issues brought about by open source thinking. It's like having the doers and managers smiling at a problem and saying in unison “We've got an app for that!”

Business as usual is unusual – are you evolving or just waiting for it to return to normal?

Innovation – Big and Small

When in 6^th grade, on the walk home with friends, we would stop at a local store and buy a soda (for 5¢) - I'd often think how nice it would be to have an ice cold bottle of water instead of the sweet soda.

With the popularity of bottled water today, was mine an innovative idea? No – it was just a thought, because there was no action to bring it to reality.

When Alexander Bell (and others) perfected the telephone – that was innovative because the idea was developed and something new was introduced. When the rotary dial gave way to push buttons it was a feature change – just a now 'tool' to do the same job of dialing the phone – but when the wireless phone was developed, it dramatically changed how (and where) we used the telephone.

Likewise, making a mobile phone smaller or introducing the flip phone were simply changes in features, but the smartphone was a creative development that added something new – pocket-size access to email, text messages, and internet. - Innovative.

Sticky notes, non-stick frying pans, digital recordings and personal players, and Google search are all innovative. Each was a creative idea that was developed, introduced as something new, and permitted us to do something differently. Innovation 2.0 (further updates and changes) is often just adding features, not renewing or altering the original.

The formula for innovation is: Idea + Development + Introduction = Something New and Useful. Although successful market penetration is not specifically part of the formula (e.g., the Ford Edsel was quite innovative but was a dud in the market); innovation does offer the possibility for rewards ($$) to the innovator.

Today there is an additional – radical – kind of innovation which also has three elements:

• Take something now existing and eliminate all but the core functionality
• Chop the price dramatically
• Expand the market reach by 100X, or 1000X or more.

This is Disruptive Innovation.

Currently, we see this happening in cellular communications – new entrants into the crowded market are offering unlimited calls, text messaging, and data/internet, you buy your own phone, and no contract for $20-$30 per month. These carriers are selling via the internet, at Wal-Mart and similar places – not at free standing storefronts in malls and urban centers. The trade-off for giving up some 'cool' features and putting up with some limitation of coverage areas is deemed worth the user saving up to $1,000 per year in mobile phone bills.

Disruptive innovation has the potential to completely alter established markets and create new leaders at high volumes, lower prices, and profitable margins. The former leaders are forced to 'change or perish' – once begun, disruptive innovation eliminates “business as usual”. Later, as innovation 2.0 feature creep sets in for the new leaders, another opportunity may develop to do it all over again by another disruptive innovator.

Although I have used product illustrations, the concept applies whether product-based or service-based, for profit, non-profit, or government entities that can remove features to get to important core elements, reduce cost/barriers to access, and expand the user base.

As we are struggling with flagging sales, disappearing budgets, pressure from customers, users, and the public, and lack of desired results with past tactical changes, perhaps a disruptive innovation approach is a valid path to take. Get less frills, pay less for the result, and more will benefit through increased access.

Welcome to the New Normal!

What innovative approach could offer a solution for that vexing problem?

The Myths of Full Capacity

The concept of full capacity is a tool to estimate revenue for budgeting and a gauge for sales planning. Using sampling, full capacity projects output based on maximum use of existing resources with optimal availability of materials and logistical elements. Think of it as the optimistic average of what existed in the near past projected for the entire forecast period. Assumes optimal output with no disruptions or changes.

A simple illustration: sampling of production volume is 10 widgets per hour; the organization runs two shifts weekdays; 20 workdays per month – full capacity per month is 3,200 widgets (10 units x 16 daily hours x 20 workdays). If actual output is 2,500 widgets, they are at 78% of full capacity and up to 700 more widgets could be made and sold - theoretically. This can be a handy tool when viewed as 'here's what we can do in addition' – it is not so handy if viewed ' we cannot do more than this'.

Business has changed and continues to evolve (government is making similar inroads) – automation eliminates roles needing a live person, flexible staffing reduces fixed overhead, products and services are made new & improved by removing features and chopping the price.

The point is that the past is becoming less and less relevant as a tool for the future, but we hold on to several myths when looking forward.

Myth: presupposing full capacity is the maximum output of the organization.

An organization can adjust to meet higher production volume, when needed – add a 3^rd shift, for example.

Myth: sampling throughput gives a good estimate for projections of capacity.

Assuming each person works at their best pace for all hours on the job is unachievable in practice. Parkinson noted that work expands to the time available – and even NASCAR racers have pit stops.

Myth: all resources are being used fully throughout the organization.

It is unusual for all teams to be fully engaged at the same time. Starting up and winding down require different intensity and pace, than does the core activities of a project. Some functional roles are active at different time – like sales before the project and shipping at the end of it.

Myth: productivity is constant.

Experience boosts productivity – first time a person creates a website there's a learning curve to master; the second time it takes only about 60% of the original time.

Myth: history describes the future with gradual changes.

We are in a time of discontinuous growth – the era of 30-years and a gold watch is gone...now it's start-up + 4-years and sell. The New Normal is driven by agility, collaboration, and continual skill/knowledge development.

Sitting in the Big Chair, I can bring in collaborators to do what the staff can't because of lack of time or experience, when needed, or match up experienced with inexperienced Doers to develop future capacity.

In an environment where customers are reluctant to buy, or projects are awarded but not funded, full capacity is not as important as sufficient capacity and extensive external resources.

Business as usual is now unusual, and there's a premium on flexibility, innovation, and applying new equipment and devices to enhance the technology (how work gets done) within the organization.

The choice is stuck on full capacity, or adapt to the evolutionary changes afoot. How would you like to proceed?

What Happens When Leaders Ask 'Why Do We Do This?'

Young children are legendary for asking Why? Why? Why? when seeking to learn. Adults, however, tend to simply do what's been done before without asking – why do we do this?

An experience to consider. When appointed as head of operations years ago, I suspended a dozen reports compiled by the accounting department without announcing the change. Out of 200+ employees, one person called about not receiving a report. We continued that report and canceled the other eleven (which freed up ½ FTE in accounting as a result).

This brought into sharp focus the effect of doing something because: we've been doing it; it's a tradition; it's SOP.

A leader will not only question why but will also encourage the doers to ask 'why do we do this?'

Base evaluating why on:

• Does it directly create sales?
• Does it directly serve the customers' needs?
• Does it directly support operations and production?
• Does it directly advance the mission, vision, or progress to the goal?
• Does it exist in a different form – e.g., stored data – can it be accessible as needed instead of compiling a report?

A significant factor in the current turmoil in the labor market is the obvious becoming clear – the computer is now doing tasks and processes, and fewer people are needed. For example - when you check in at the kiosk in the airport, you get your boarding pass, the passenger list is updated, your seat is confirmed, your connecting flight is notified you are coming, food provisioning is updated, and the pilot and cabin crew are informed you are boarding.

Visualize the effect of multiple individual processing that was eliminated by sharing the check-in information – resulting in less airline employee gate agents and less passenger lines. Computer vs. people is occurring in all sectors – corporate, non-profit, government, and small business, with similar results.

Process automation frees up individuals to do something else; however, currently there is a limited amount 'something else' available.

To re-frame the picture of jobs and roles, a leader can ask - What would directly improve key areas in the organization. Focus on sales, results, customers, and effective production – bundle tasks and processes together to define new jobs and roles, then train people on the technology – not the equipment, but how to produce results.

Have a story about 'do it because we do it' work or innovative job creating? Please join the discussion.

Technology

Image courtesy of Idea go at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Technology is how we do things – not the things we do them with...they are simply the tools.

Image courtesy of digitalart at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

The Last Chapter

The last chapter of the book on our life has not been written yet.

We may feel that it won't be turning out as we had hoped or expected.

While we were working – the world changed!

• The Internet has evolved and many roles which were staffed before are on-line now;
• Processes which had required labor now use technology and fewer people with lesser skill and experience levels;
• Vast amounts of data, research, information, and content are available by simple searching through the browser;
• Entire professions have been radically changed by an 'in-the-box' approach – e.g., basic accounting, legal documents, family physician.

What do we do now, having seen the significant changes that have evolved?

One action not to take is 'wait it out' in hopes of a return to 1985 – won't happen! Holding on to this point of view is like retiring in place and not telling anyone.

Things have changed – now it's your turn:

• Learn new skills and techniques with application in the new economy – become a doer to get greater depth in what you are learning. Building a website teaches more about planning, design, layout, functionality, and connectivity than it does about writing code;
• Explore the new normal – going beyond the local newspaper or evening news. Read blogs and articles by a variety of writers with differing viewpoints – go to events and listen to the comments by the audience for a richer experience...develop your own assessment of 'what is' and 'what's possible;'
• Be open to a new approach – whether as a provider or a recipient – does the change provide benefit...value...efficiency...access? An example – you don't have two-hours for dinner at your favorite restaurant, so you order solo catering on-line and drop by to pick up your dinner (and all the trimmings) – hot and ready to eat at home...as a restauranteur or a diner, you win using a new approach;
• Find out what is needed and figure out how to provide it – do this as an employee and you may be on the way to redefining your job in a World 2.0 model; as a provider, offering what is needed is an evergreen business goal and a possible new line of service for you.

Even more so with the rapid pace of change today – we do not live in a stagnant environment. Change is dynamic. It is not practical to be in a dynamic setting, trying to remain static (unchanged) – imagine how much energy you would expend in a rowboat at the mouth of Niagara Falls, trying to maintain your position. We must continue to evolve in a dynamic setting – or go over the Falls.

The good news is – our last chapter has yet to be written and, by being engaged, we can greatly influence the story.

Got some stories to further the discussion? Please share.

Experiential Listening

Communication is an imprecise process – no matter how much effort and innovation we may put into choice of words, method of delivery, and focus on key points. Try as we will, the full transfer of knowledge from our mind to the listener happens only in the Vulcan Mind Meld. Typically a just a portion of what is said is actually received by the listener and a fraction of that is retained.

An analogy of how the mind processes new information that I like is of a mail sorting station full of pigeonholes for similarly addressed letters. When new information is received, the mind looks for bins of similar items to authenticate and store it. No bin of similar information but holds some interest – the mind retains it for a period of time as a data point; no interest: no processing. As additional data points are received, the mind may assign a bin for the topic. If not, the data points will be pushed aside for other active thoughts and ideas.

To illustrate - think back to the 1990's and the Y2K issue – when the issue was first mentioned there was little reaction or interest. Over time, with repeated mention and additional interpretation of the impact, it became a significant element of the coming of the millennium. To the mind it went from a data point to an issue.

As we listen, we are processing the information based on what we have been exposed to earlier – through reading, conversation, events, observation, and doing. When we actually do a task or project, we learn on several levels, including how skill and experience can influence an outcome. When I wanted to play tennis, I read a number of books about basics, strategy, and tips from the pros – but truly learned about the game once I stepped on the court to play.

When we listen through the amplification of our own experience, we deepen our understanding of the topic and benefit from the experience of the speaker as conveyed by their story.

Building a website, writing an article, making a table, or trimming a shrub provides valuable 'doer' experience to add to the current body of knowledge. Doing will broaden your perspective on a topic and will make you a more effective listener and learner.

While you may speak from experience, the listener who hears through their experience gets a richer benefit from the information.

Doesn't it make sense to seek projects and activities that expose us to new experiences – to keep current and to learn new things? Learning by doing is a requirement for the New Normal.

How has experiential listening helped you master a topic?

Project Management by Henry Ford

Imagine the situation as Henry Ford was planning production of the Model T : over 5,000 parts; multiple manufacturing vendors; skilled to semi-skilled production processes; and growing demand.

He addressed part of the production process by determining an optimal assembly sequence and moving the vehicle along to workstations which have the required parts, tools, and trained workers to do the next step in the process.

Contrast Ford's approach to the projects today: many parts or inputs; multiple vendors or suppliers; wide range of skills needed to deliver results – all still apply; and - a twist that Ford did not have to consider – multiple collaborating organizations, locations, time zones, and perhaps languages. The assembly line won't work here. As technology, communications, software, and economic conditions changed, managing projects has evolved in complexity and offered tools.

What has remained virtually unchanged is the need for rapid updates about significant elements of the project – about progress on the schedule, needed or excess resources, identified conflicts or barriers, and project against budget analysis. The changing reality is there are less resources available to process this information and less time available for operations resources to report it.

In this New Normal tools are being developed and refined to respond to the changes: meetings are being replaced by asynchronous communications; reports are changing to email, text message updates and video documentation; needed information is being targeted only to those who need it or want it instead of blanketing everyone (did you hear the one about a new president of the board who decreed all emails will be sent to all board members; killed all communication).

Are we getting better than Henry Ford?

What do you see?

Are you taking full advantage of your blog? Come to BlogLab - Improve Your Blogs! Thursday December 8, 8:30 am - 1 pm. Learn more at http://bit.ly/WMRBlogLab