The Mu

Lou Gerstner, former chief of RJR Nabisco and then IBM, once said famously “People do what you inspect, not what you expect.”  By that he meant that whatever you’re emphasizing in your business by measuring it — that will be the area that improves.  This is a no-brainer in some ways, but the implications are more far-reaching than a passing glance reveals.

If you measure speed to market, you will get your products there faster.  If you measure quality, you will have a better product.  If you measure costs, you will have a cheaper product.  (We can lump services in with products just as easily on these points.)  Often these improvements will be made by well-meaning employees motivated by some sort of incentive (like a performance appraisal) that is tied to the metrics your business has put in place.  But just as often they will come at the expense of other aspects of your business.  Perhaps you’ll get better quality products that take longer to get to market.  Or cheaper products that lack quality.

In the old days, the points of cost, speed, and quality were plotted on a triangle that always retained the same area.  This implied that you could pick two out of three: improvement in one area always came at the expense of at least one other area.  Those days are gone.  Peter Sheahan, a young wunderkind in management consulting from Australia, says: “Good. Fast. Cheap.  Pick three and then add something extra.”

Project managers often want to demonstrate the value of the project.  They will take a baseline and then, during the project and as part of the closing, record the same metric over time.  They can show the (hopefully) positive difference their project makes.  But it is important to choose the metrics carefully.  At the very least, it is advisable to measure opposing things: demonstrating speed to market while showing that your quality and costs remained constant would be a much more compelling metric that speed alone.  But other managers have turned to more holistic and somewhat subjective measurements to demonstrate their project’s positive impact: things like stakeholder satisfaction.

Metrics are important.  But they sometimes drive unexpected behaviors.  While business endeavors will rarely travel an easy road, it is a smoother journey if you remember to expect what you inspect — and inspect the right things.

Lately I’ve been innundated with ideas about how to survive and thrive in the “tough times” we’re currently experiencing.

Key among them: determine areas of the economy that are not only counter-cyclical, but have the potential to grow exponentially for the next twenty years or so. Demographics are used to determine long term trends like this, because technology watchers have difficulty projecting beyond five years. General trends are predicated on: the aging population in North America, growing populations and economies in “developing nations”, and the combination of higher standards of living, abundance, and technological advancements.

Economists cite several results — however stereotypical they may be — of these demographic changes. Older people seek meaning as opposed to adding wealth.  Technical jobs traditionally done in North America can be done cheaper overseas.  Abundance in our society leaves us wanting very little in physical “stuff”, and again we search for more meaning and purpose out of life.  Technological advancements, while sometimes intrusive, have generally made our lives easier, and again we are left with time on our hands to ponder our existence — its true meaning and purpose.

Daniel Pink, in his book A Whole New Mind, calls the key trends “Abundance, Asia, and Automation”.  He asserts that the result of these demographic and economic pressures will be a “high concept, high touch” marketplace in North America.  Thriving in such a world will require more right brain thinking and behavior. Left brain contributions will remain important, but will no longer be sufficient.  His arguments are pretty convincing.

While describing how these new imperatives require right brain thinking, Pink points out that several multi-millionaires are dyslexic and some, like Richard Branson, directly attribute their success to their dyslexia.  The left brain is responsible for linear processing.  Math and science demand the powers of the left brain.  But dyslexics often have that linear and sequential comprehension disrupted.  Pink asserts that to compensate, dyslexics like Branson develop far stronger right brain acuities like synthesis and big-picture thinking.

Project managers are being taught about “strategic project management” or even “program management”.  Doctors are being taught “narrative medicine”.  Computer programmers are learning that user stories and iterative feedback from stakeholders drive higher quality into their code.  All of these are examples of greater right brain influence — the “emotional” or holistic side of the equation.

Slashdot recently had a piece called Coders, Your Days are Numbered. It emphasizes what Agile methodology and project management advocates have already been saying for years: strong communication skills are necessary for success in software development.  Good grammar and spelling are not enough either — the ability to synthesize, influence, and lead teams is also essential.  These are all enabled by the right side of the brain.