Project X Discussions

Whack a Mole Culture

I was reading an article about the danger of your hidden culture called "Executives Beware -- Your Culture May Be Deadly by Peter De Lisi.  If you recall the kids game, when the mole sticks his head up out of the ground, you try to whack the mole.  In many organizations, anybody who sticks the head up with an idea or concept which is outside the box is given a whack.  How many times in a meeting somebody asks a questions that we find challenging and the questions is push aside?  I think it is very easy for an organization to have a "Whack a Mole Culture." 

I find that the best way to stay engage in a meeting is to actively participate and ask questions.  I expect at times I get whacked and do not even notice.

I think this sort of culture develops in a very subtle fashion and really stifles innovation.  Notice at the next work session you attend, how few people ask the hard but obvious question or make a suggestion which is "outside the box."

Many subtle things reveal the culture and underlying assumptions of an organization.  However they are  very important and very difficult to change.  However with a concerted effort on the part of the group, they can change.  Often I think culture change is the reason a new CEO is bought into an organization from outside the industry.  The hope is that he might make a culture change.  Usually he has to change many of the senior team.  Even then these silent assumptions are very tenacious and hard to change.  Of course they are always replaced by new ones, maybe even better ones. 

Five Levers Model - Extracting Resources

In two previous post I have been talking about the book on innovation called "Dealing with Darwin".  One of the keys to innovation is extracting resources from Context to apply to innovation.  Moore comes up with five levers which are a sequence for management action for re-engineering mission-critical work to extract risk so one can extract resources.  These resources will then be used innovate in the Core.  You will recognize each of these levers because you will likely have been on the receiving end of some of them.

Centralize     A process that has been recognized as context, that is it is not a key differentiator, even though it is important, the first way to extract resources is to centralize.  Centralization eliminates management overhead and thus some resources for reassignment.  Often people cling to their processes (we can do it better) but in the relentless search for productivity the marginally better cannot  be justified.   An example might be moving all the billing processes under one central billing group.

Standardize    Now that the process has been centralized under a single point of control, opportunities to increase productivity can be identified.   Again using the billing example, many unique billing processes can likely be converted to a standard billing process.  These improvements can again reduce the resources required and even be done faster.   These two move things from a decentralize services model to a shared services model. 

Modularize      Once the service has been standardize one can then consider adopting best practices used elsewhere.  Radical different approaches have been taken by companies to change the way billing are done by looking at things totally differently.  Could the billing process be combined with an earlier step in the fulfillment process?  Many companies have look to other industries for ideas they can adapt to their industry.  For example maybe billing is unnecessary for some products. 

Optimize        Similar to the step above, taking a hard look at the way things are done can eliminate some major efforts.  Again looking at best practices and process improvement stories can free up needed resources for innovation in Core.

Outsource       Once you have taken all the risk out of this mission critical activity, now one can safely consider outsourcing.  One clearly needs to retain some resources to manage the outsourcer but clearly this can really create a resource pool of people and capital that can be applied to innovative core activity. 

The book deals with some of these things in more detail but I found these five levers a good model for thinking about how to free resources from context to apply to core.

Moore also deals with an associated problem that some of the people involved in context activity may not be suitable for core projects.

I found the book had many good ideas which is typical of Moore but much of the book is boring.  Moore has a gift for creating some neat mental models.  His presentations are much more entertaining than his books.

Innovation Value Networks

A couple of years ago I remember discussing Innovation Value Networks and how valuable they can be.  I was in a meeting recently that reminded me of that.

As a recap of IVN - Innovation Value Network
My idea of this was that this was a group of people both internally and externally (partners, customers, friends ...) who you are comfortable in collaborating with in a safe manner to look at breakthroughs on issues or operations.  Internally we often have groups or individuals who we gravitate towards because of familiarity or prior success - from familiarity, shared experience and common reference points.  We can often talk in a shorthand or feel more comfortable on the hairy edge with these folks.  Externally these are people you may have worked with in the past or partners, customers or vendors who have a different point of view and a shared interest in creating mutual value.

I myself am very lucky to have a wide variety of folks who I get to work with who are part of my value network.  They often help me put in context, challenge ideas, root myself or stretch me.  I am very lucky to have them care enough.

With the stability and common acceptance of social media we have new ways and abilities to leverage these value networks.  This makes it easier to innovate and collaborate.  Wikis, blogs and many other tools help us facilitate the open communication.  Heck the good old fashioned client working session or meeting can often open new ideas.  Isn't that cool?

Core or Context in Innovation

In a previous blog entitled "Evolution and Innovation" http://pxltd.typepad.com/project_x_discussions/2008/01/evolution-and-i.html  I talked about a book we recently discussed at our Senge Circle called Dealing with Darwin.   A very interesting distinction was made by Moore in the book between Core and Context.  Moore defines Core as things which differentiate your company from it's competitors and Context is all the important processes which are essential for staying in business but do not differentiate.  In introducing innovation the key to evolution is to innovate in the Core areas.  Context innovation will only make the more profit but will not help the company evolve. 

However innovation in Context can free up resources needed to innovate in the core.  For example, increased productivity will not cause the company to evolve but we free up people to work on a innovation in Core, like introducing a new product.  However the problem will arise that the people made available not be capable of working on an innovative product.  His solution is interesting.  He suggests that some Context people are also good change agents and others are more suited to processes in Context.  He suggests you move the people who like change and are capable of Core work into the new area and give the process people more responsibility in the Context work. 

I think this is a neat idea and I would like to give a concrete example.  A company needs more capital and some strong people to introduce a new product or service.  Lets take an insurance company for example wants to move into a new line of insurance.   They need capital and people to move into this new area.  They decide they will outsource some of their existing information technology which are very capital intensive.  They will use the capital freed up in the outsourcing process to introduce this new product thru acquisition.  They need new people to manage the acquisition and run the new processes.  Some of the people form the information technology organization are transferred to the new product and others are retained to manage the outsourcing project.   Some people will also be taken by the outsourcer as well.  The people the insurance company move to the new product will people capable of innovation and the process people will be retained to work with the outsourcer.

Now on the other side of the activity is the outsourcer.  If the acquisition of this business is Core for them and represents some innovation, we clearly have a win-win.

I recall many years ago CGI took over the IT processes for Cooperators Insurance.  It was a big deal and cooperators was paid in CGI treasury shares.  The stock market liked the deal and Cooperators Insurance ended up with a great capital influx.  CGI at the same time acquired a major piece of outsourcing work which was core to CGI's growth in the oursourcing business.  Clearly the deal was a real win for both parties.

I found this view of outsourcing quite informative for me.  From an IT perspectives, outsourcing often looks like a failure.  I always thought of the reason for outsourcing was to improve the service and observed that often there was little or no improvement.  I never appreciated that the principal motivation for outsourcing might be the freeing of capital which is desperately needed for the company's survival through innovation in the core.   

How neat is it to learn something that allows you to see something quite a different perspective!  I found it a profound reframing of outsourcing.

Evolution and Innovation

I am reading a book called "Dealing with Darwin: How Great Companies Innovate at Every Phase of Their Evolution" by Geoffrey Moore.   We are discussing the book in our Senge Circle.  The book is quite interesting but a bit tedious when he uses Cisco as an example through out the book.  However he does have a neat idea about how innovation helps a company evolve. 

The book is quite practical in helping one decide what type of business you are, IE Volume Operation or Complex Systems.  The next question is at  what the stage in the life cycle is your product.  Then some ideas about how others have dealt with the issue.  However like most business books he does not mention the failures only the successes.   

The last part of the book deals with Managing Inertia which is very difficult when you are milking a cash cow.  He talks about Cisco who knows the current stage of networks will end soon and the question is what is the next stage.  For Cisco they will have to make a huge gamble.

Some of the examples of managing innovation in mature markets are quite interesting.  Nokia went from a diversified corporation in pulp and paper, rubber and cable to cell phones.  Through the cable side they entered the electronic sector.  From there to mobile phones and the rest is history.   They clearly had to move out of their comfort area into a completely new world and shed the old facilities.

I think he makes it very clear that senior management must go through a process where they can clearly see that change is essential not just a good idea.  He suggest a process for such a transformation but as usual the senior fellow is the key.  I think it must be his number one priority if change is going to happen.  He must not drive the change into the unknown.   

I have found the model of evolution a neat idea.  I think however Moore's speeches are more entertaining than his book.  He is a great speaker at a conference and really gets the juices flowing.  He certainly does not mind naming names in his speeches.

Anybody else have opinions on the book.  We discuss it next week so I might add more after next week.

A Little Innovation for XMAS

So Jim did a post the other day on the use of the wii remote for new applications.  So those of you who know Graham and I we are HUGE fans of the use of whiteboards and such in the office. 

At one of our clients we are lucky enough to have whiteboard walls.  Sadly when working across multiple locations it is hard to have and share whiteboards in a cost effective manner.  So seeing the enclosed approach to whiteboarding I was pretty psyched.

So off I will go in the new year to try this out and see how it works (oh darn, I need to buy a wii - hee hee).  Then I will try it out with one of our team members who is often remote and see how we can leverage this.  What I would like to do is create a virtual room (offshoot of our corporate wiki) where we can do water cooler type conversations using whiteboard type interaction.

So take a look at how easy this is.  Hey Rex, want to try this out instead of just playing guitar hero 3?

Innovation - Time for Some Recognition

Well, it is not often you get an award from a client.  Well thanks to some hard work by Doug (one of our Senior Consultants) we/Doug received recognition on some work that was done.

The Recognition - "Exemplifying Breakthrough Innovation"

Well aint that a peach.  We are not allowed to talk about what Doug and the team he worked with did, but suffice it to say they turned a competitive situation for a client on its head to meet a business threat.

By focusing on the objective he worked within the system to do what normally would take months in less than two weeks with only one defect so far.

Great work Doug and the team.

CoffeeCAST #49 - Teradata Partners 2007 - Wednesday Closing General Session

Welcome to the 49th CoffeeCAST with Stephen Hayward of Project X Ltd. Live from Las Vegas.

Hello again from Vegas - baby.  We are coming close to covering the end of a great week at the Teradata 2007 Partners event.  The closing session was great, Graham and I continue with some discussion on the closing session.

This was an inspiring session which had the theme of innovation.  So before we go on to our last CoffeeCAST in regards to this event, here is the discussion that Graham and I had after the session by Dean Kamen (most notably known for the invention of the Segway, but the least of his advances)

1. Innovation versus Invention
2. Innovation is more about surprises (negative) what he refers to as rude realities of issues which are unforeseen
3. Seven Rude Realities
4. Three Suggestions
5. Introduction to Deka Research and Development Corporation
6. A very fast overview of FIRST - For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology a great and fast growing movement to bring the 'bling' into Science and Technology

Download 49_coffeecast_49_teradata_partners_2007_wednesday_part_1.mp3

Listen in and we hope you enjoy and more importantly, hope you join in the conversation.  So drop a comment in the blog or send me an email and share your thoughts on the topic.

The audiocast is available on iTunes (as a Podcast) or here for download.  Have a great day and join the conversation.

SOA Deployment Management

What's in a word.  In deployments the nature of the words you use can kill you.  SOA (Service Oriented Architecture) is living proof of this opportunity for confusion.

Remembering the fundamental guiding principles of SOA (see endnote below from wikipedia) we have an issue/opporunity around the concepts of interoperability, componentization, encapsulation and reuse.

To me this means that the service is independent in nature to the other services around it other than rules of interaction and to a lesser extend the platform.  So when you start talking about SOA deployment there is often confusion when reviewed or implemented by the school of thought of our old systems.

Since the systems are supposed to be independent entities that do not exist if not published in the registry, if I deploy a new service and don't tell anyone, do I need to test the whole system?  No!  If I add it to the registry do I need to test the whole system? No!

In the old world of tight coupling there were issues when you made even the simplest of changes which called for massive regression tests.

So when we think about deployment in a SOA world we need to break it up into different types:

1. Infrastructure
   • Upgrade/Add Hardware
   • Upgrade underlying enterprise platform that service lives on (BEA, SAP or Websphere)
   • Network
   • Location
2. Services Deployment - New
3. Services Deployment - Old - modifying an existing service, add elements or change business rules
4. New customers/consumers of our services

These to me are the main points of consideration that should drive behaviour, but choose your words wisely or you will spend so much time testing that you will spend more than your development budget and that defeats the purpose.

CoffeeCAST #43 - Collaboration in the Enterprise

Welcome to the 43r CoffeeCAST with Stephen Hayward of Project X Ltd.  I finally had a chance to catch up with Rex Lee who I have known for a while and have been bugging to come onto the CoffeeCAST and he finally submitted on behalf of the kids ;)

We took the time to talk about something which is top of mind to many corporations - collaboration in the enterprise.  Rex sets some framework on focusing on the client and then breaks it down into four components or success criteria:

1. innovation
2. speed / agility
3. holistic - end to end approach
4. employee engagement

In our discussion Rex mentions a couple of outside reference points:

1. McMaster World Conference on Innovation
2. IBM World Jam
3. Andrew McAfee

Download 43_coffeecast_43_collaboration_in_the_enterprise.mp3

Listen in and we hope you enjoy and more importantly, hope you join in the conversation.  So drop a comment in the blog or send me an email and share your thoughts on the topic.

The audiocast is available on iTunes (as a Podcast) or here for download.  Have a great day and join the conversation.