Waging the War on Bureaucracy: Is Management Obsolete?

Sorry if you choked on your doughnut while reading the title but, really, there has been so much written about CEO’s and their lack of ethics but their abundance of perks; about how leaders are failing every stakeholder they answer to and about how, like the dodo, management as a practice is becoming extinct.

How did things get this bad? Like Wile E. Coyote, didn’t we see Roadrunner aiming that anvil right at our heads?

Here’s my theory: we brought it on ourselves; we asked for the anvil. Why?

• We continue to hobnob with people who look like us and think just the way we do.

• We ignore social media as a passing fad or something IT needs to eliminate from employees’ Internet permissions.

• We haven't picked up on the fact that people are organizing online in communities that criss-cross time zones, date lines and borders to innovate, collaborate and create their own products and services. What's irrelevant are buildings and organization charts and titles.

• We talk engagement but secretly believe “they” are lucky to have a job.

• Change is for everyone else.

• We've been drinking the Kool-Aid of “shareholder value” as the only means to an end.

• And follow it up with a chaser of re-engineering as a synonym for de-layering, downsizing and off shoring (but, oh, that short term lift to the bottom line!).

• We are rock stars, aren't we?

I held management positions for twenty years; I know what it’s like to slog away and then be rewarded for my efforts with a fancy title and a fancy car. The problem is, the Roadrunner is on our tails, with a stick of dynamite.

I am really raving about this issue because there is so much more that managers can do not only save ourselves but also to make a difference in our companies and to the employees who report to us. For a less heated rant, I recommend an article titled, The End of Management by Alan Murray, which appeared in the Wall Street Journal on August 21st.

In my next blog, I may rant less and offer a few solutions to an issue I didn’t know meant this much to me – until now.

Strategic Decision-Making: Bottom-Up or Top-Down?

One of the many challenges facing business leaders when changing strategic direction or reviewing new opportunities is knowing how or when to involve the company at large in the process. It used to be that strategy was strictly for the Board of Directors or the most senior executives and it's true that the final decision -- the buck -- stops with the CEO and perhaps a few executives at the top. However, there is a golden opportunity to engage the workforce up front so that they know what they are going to execute and why. This approach also can make for better decision-making.

A few thoughts below on why gathering ideas and information as well as assumption-testing and implementation is a Bottom-Up process while the final decision is Top-Down.

Diversity of Thought: Once we get to the top of wherever we are, we tend to share the space with others who think like us. Introducing other people who are at the front end with customers and suppliers or who have a unique perspective like Human Resources, Marketing, etc. will provide a broad spectrum of information and insight that is invaluable when evaluating opportunities. Experience tells me that there is always at least one person who brings a point of view so different from the business leaders and so on the mark that it changes the course of strategy development for the better.

Utilize Bias: Rather than thinking of bias as a negative, consider it a necessary part of evaluating strategy and opportunities. Our experiences and the work we do shape our perspectives; we recognize other peoples' biases and tend to view them unfavorably unless they mesh with our own. The leader's job is to acknowledge the biases, including her own, balance them with good dialogue and help the contributors have their say without dismissing their ideas prematurely.

Use Scenarios: It's a rare thing to find that a strategic decision is correct 100% of the time. There are complex ideas, a lot of information and many assumptions that go into the process. There also is a need to avoid paralysis and make the best decision in the time available. That's why it's critical to have all assumptions documented with alternative scenarios or plans in the wings to course correct. The worst case is having the company execute the strategy, get a long way down the road before it's discovered that certain assumptions were incorrect and the strategy is flawed. Aside from wasted time and resources, employee could see the failure as their own and will be reluctant to get behind the next important decision. It's important to let employees know that testing assumptions is part of strategy execution and that raising a red flag is a critical part of their jobs. This is how successful strategies are designed: they aren't perfect 100% of the time at the outset but there is a process to modify and move on.

Make Timely Decisions at the Top: That's the job of the CEO. It's why they are called decision-makers.

Use Strategy Maps, Metrics and Scorecards: Translating complex ideas into visual representations and creating metrics that test the success of a strategy are both helpful tools for the business leader and employees who have to implement. It isn't necessary to invest in sophisticated technology. Below are a couple of examples using only the software on our laptops (thanks go to my business partner, Cathy Missildine-Martin, SPHR for creating these).

Scorecards should be created at the lowest level that can be properly measured and aggregated. Metrics are relevant to that level (can be aggregated or disaggregated) and are designed to help everyone understand what is being done, what they are responsible for and how they are contributing to the success of the company. Isn't that the definition of engagement?

So, the final decisions including those that pull the trigger or the plug as well as the tools and the responsibility for idea gathering is still Top-Down. Idea generation, testing assumptions and providing feedback on what's working and what isn't is Bottom-Up. It's a two-way street.

Better. Faster. Cheaper: The Evolution of Competitiveness

I've been getting ready for a webinar on how to design a winning strategy, which meant some research to emphasize the point that strategy isn't dead or even on life support. It's just that for some, the last decade meant getting real big (and rich) real fast; and strategy seemed so yesterday. Who had the time? Maybe if those responsible for two bubbles in the last ten years had taken time to figure out how to really create wealth and not play shell games, the global economy wouldn't be in a shambles.

When I first started in strategy development, it was called "corporate planning" and while it was valuable for decision-makers, it also had such a long cycle that the plan was out of date before it was bound (yes, we had nice binders). So, the planning part had to go away but in the process, the real substance of strategy got lost for a while.

I put my research into a timeline (see below) and it was impossible to lose sight of the enormous changes in the business climate since WWII. During each major cycle, lasting about twenty years, companies adapted to the forces shaping the economy and the climate for business. Each cycle was created by unique circumstances and the successful companies developed new strategy as well as tools and techniques that not only ensured survival but in many cases, created a unique advantage and wealth. Businesses were getting Better. Faster. Cheaper.

As the business climate entered a new cycle, what was a competitive advantage or a winning strategy had become at best, the cost of doing business and at worst, a commodity.

As we enter the 21st century, we've wrung the efficiencies from process reengineering; we've de-layered and downsized people; off-shored jobs and invested in the same technology everyone else has. Now what? Where is growth coming from?

I think companies will set themselves apart by living up to their Mission (Purpose) and by standing up for their Values. Their real competitive advantages will be people, even though the traditional workforce may not exist. Ideas will be the new currency and innovation the new capital. Even economists are using tools called "Behavioral Economics" to explain market forces instead of relying on traditional financial tools. Companies that develop strategies for this new cycle before anyone else will be Better. Faster. Cheaper. Then, I had an epiphany: this is what the Engagement Thing is all about. It's not a program or slogan or campaign. It's about design: integrating elements that are unique to you and creating a company that Engages. This could be your winning strategy for 21st century growth and business results.

Or, if you think it won't happen, sit back and watch what all of the burned out employees, self-starters, young entrepreneurs and Boomers looking for an encore career do with Engagement.

Is your business ready for this new cycle? How are you going to be Better.Faster.Cheaper. Is your company Engaging?

Skies Are Friendlier When People Are Engaged

I read a good article the other day by Mila D'Antonio called The Strategy That Fuels Customer Engagement. The article outlined so clearly how a good company can stumble and recover with a laser-like focus on the five key areas of any business: Strategy, Leadership, Culture and Employee and Customer Engagement. And, what JetBlue discovered along the way has added to its understanding of the direct and quantifiable impact of these elements on business results.

When a company blunders, as JetBlue did on Valentine's Day 2007 at JFK Airport in New York, when thousands of passengers were stranded for hours aboard planes, one course of action that has become popular is to not respond to the incident at all or respond only if pressed and, if at all possible, pass the blame to someone else. Instead, JetBlue took responsibility and created its Passenger Bills of Rights. Its founder and CEO paid the ultimate price with his job. But, dig a little deeper, as the article outlined, and you'll discover that JetBlue took a systematic view of the problems and, rather than engage in a short-term PR exercise, overhauled the way employees and customers viewed the company, for the long-term.


JetBlue's strategy is to differentiate itself through a customer-and employee-centric culture. Leadership would not tolerate any declines in employee or customer perceptions of the airline as a good place to work or a good flying experience. The changes started with a plan for improving employee engagement results as the thinking was, if the company improved those metrics, customers would receive great experiences (what we call the Spillover Effect).


What the JetBlue executives learned was:

• Engagement is highly correlated with the liklihood that an employee would recommend JetBlue as a good place to work.



• JetBlue's revenues are closely tied to engagement so small improvements in key driver metrics generate big results.



• Key drivers of crewmember engagement are pride/personal commitment, brand, crew leaders, executive leadership, team/people and work environment.



• These six dimensions of engagement are now mapped to revenue growth and shareholder value.

• Listening to employees in terms of what they like about JetBlue and their jobs has resulted in many cost-saving ideas and efficiencies.



• Data gathering is only part of the story. Real insight comes from taking the right qualitative and quantitative approach, including linking behaviors and outcomes to hard results like shareholder value and growth targets.



• Designing an engaged company is not an event or a rah-rah program but a systematic approach to questioning the status quo, learning and adapting in order to execute a successful strategy.

Leaders make mistakes; it's how you recover from them that people remember. The core elements of the business are interdependent and should be viewed that way because they impact your results in a big way.

What drives engagement at JetBlue isn't necessarily what drives engagement in your organization. What are your engagement drivers?

What is This Engagement Thing?

For about a year, I've been receiving Google Alerts with tags that contain the word 'engagement'. Sometimes the articles or blogs have useful information; sometimes they are just sales pitches.

Nevertheless, the concept of engagement in the workplace is fascinating because, for me, it's a "Duh" kind of idea. Isn't it common sense that when people are engaged in what they do, they perform better; they are more attached to the organization and they contribute at a higher level than less engaged people? Ah, but common sense isn't common practice.

We are complex creatures, we humans. We tend to be engaged by an idea or a cause that is meaningful, maybe bigger than ourselves and which enriches our lives. Unfortuately, in a lot of workplaces, work has been reduced to activities and tasks. Senior mangement may not even be recognized (see Undercover Boss) or is the sender of an occasional email. Financial performance is not shared or discussed widely and the company's Mission is engraved on a plaque in the lobby. Maybe it's time to connect the dots and see that for an employee to be engaged, the organization must be engaging. It's easier to see how the concept works in a model:

Vision and Mission: They are foundational elements of an engaged company. People know what you stand for and why you exist. Decisions are based on these elements and behaviors are driven by them.

Strategy: Engagement starts here. People see the "big picture" and hear about organizational strategy because it's part of everyday activity. They are part of something bigger than the jobs they are paid for and can see how their work fits in.

Leadership: Listens actively and communicates frequently. Leaders are trustworthy and believe evangelically about the potential of the company, the people who work there and the customers they serve.

Culture: The way things really get done in an organization; the stories and the rituals; the practices and the collective tone. If Strategy is the Head of the organizational body, Culture should be the Heart. Culture can deliver or derail any leader's strategy if it isn't designed to support it. Cultivating an engaging environment is a key priority.

Employees: The lifeblood, the true asset of every company. Most of us WANT to be engaged but our companies often don't give us sufficient reason. I agree with Dan Pink in his new book, Drive. People are motivated by Purpose, Autonomy and Mastery, assuming basic needs are met (Thank you, Abraham Maslow).

Customers: The reason we get up every day and go to work, remember? As Peter Drucker said so often, management is about knowing what your Purpose is, who your customers are and how you're going to make a profit. Designing an engaging customer experience is an Outside-In job.

So, engagement is not a slogan, a program or a one-time initiative. Connecting the organizational dots is what engagement is all about. What do you think?