Archive for the ‘Governance’ Category

Too Many Cooks

Saturday, April 7th, 2012

How many people are gathered around your senior management table? This is an important question in the effective operation of any growing organization. Having more managers around the table creates diversity of perspective (a factor in quality decision-making) and commitment cultivated through participation.  The downside, however, is the difficulty in developing consensus and making decisions. The risk, as Grandma might say, is that “too many cooks in the kitchen spoil the broth”.

This hazard is even greater in the absence of a common vision or clear strategy.  It’s tough enough trying to prepare a meal with cooks bumping into each other, but without a shared recipe it’s hopeless!  Sure, everyone gets to be in the kitchen where the action is, but nobody is having fun, and not much is getting cooked.

There’s a good reason that commercial kitchens employ a hierarchy of staff (sous-chefs and line cooks) supervised by a head chef.  When the heat is on and there are hungry patrons in the front of the house, clarity of purpose, well-defined roles and effective decision-making is essential to managing a complex, time-sensitive, production process. A ship has a captain, executive officers and crew for the same reasons.

A good chef, captain or chief executive frequently solicits the advice of trusted staff members but doesn’t allow consultation to obstruct formulating strategies or making decisions. Even in this age of social media and the democratization of ideas, the most successful companies, the icons of modern business, have been built not by broad managerial consensus but through the iron will of inspired leaders.  Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple have each had just one (or two) “executive chefs” setting direction and calling the shots.  Investors, the board of directors and employees invariably look to a compact C-level executive team to take ultimate responsibility for the success of the business.

So, by all means, foster managerial participation.  But be careful not to undermine the C-level leadership needed to move the business forward.  Most managers enjoy sitting at the table when it’s time to plot strategy and argue tactics. But their satisfaction will be short-lived if they find themselves mired in endless debate without making progress towards a common goal. Any cook would agree that there is no sense wasting time in the heat of the kitchen if the meal never gets served.  And your hungry clients certainly won’t wait around while you argue about what’s on the menu!

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Corporate Strategy, Decision-Making, Governance, Leadership, Management | Comments Off

Keeping your Innovation-Based Company Innovative

Saturday, October 16th, 2010

Your company was probably created and funded because there was an innovative technology or idea that led to the development of a unique product or service that satisfies your target market hopefully better than your competition.

Once its first product reaches the market, a company frequently enters a mode of feature enhancements, customer support and quality improvement. For small to medium size firms, these activities usually consume the attention of the entire R&D and product management team and that of the CTO. There is so much to do in order to meet customer expectations leaving little time to continue to innovate.

Beware!  It was Andy Grove, the CEO of Intel who said, “Only the paranoid survive”.  You need a healthy dose of paranoia that your competitors will continue to innovate and find the next gem that will transform your market landscape, overcome your strengths and surpass you.

If time is a problem, holding monthly lunch & brainstorming sessions with your team is a great way to find new areas to innovate. Invite all levels of the company including new hires.  They often have a different perspective on things, but may not feel comfortable speaking out just yet.

Remember, innovation is not necessarily something that requires a patent. It could be a more efficient way of testing, a cheaper way to design or a more efficient code implementation.  It could even be a better way to serve your customers.

Boards of directors of innovation-based companies should set innovation targets on a quarterly basis, similar to revenue targets, which will positively influence the company to maintain a culture of innovation.

A true innovation-based company innovates continuously. It does not simply accept status-quo or wait until a good idea presents itself.

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Competition, Governance, Intellectual Property, Management, Product Management | Comments Off

What Were You Expecting?

Thursday, September 23rd, 2010

The following article appeared in the September 20, 2010 issue of the Ottawa Business Journal

In a now-famous experiment conducted during the ‘64-‘65 school year, researchers gave teachers at Oak School a list of student names. They told the teachers that these students had scored in the top 10% of their class in a new, specialized test called the Harvard Test of Inflected Acquisition. They claimed that the Harvard Test measured intellectual capacity and predicted learning “spurts”.

In fact, the researchers had given the students a generic IQ test called the TOGA or Test of General Ability. Moreover, they had chosen the names on the list randomly, not based on the test results…sneaky researchers.

At the end of the school year, the researchers gave the students the TOGA again. They then looked for any correlation between the results and the names from the original list. What do you think they found?

You guessed it. The TOGA score improvements for students on the list were 50% higher than the rest of the class. In other words, those lucky students improved their IQs because their teachers expected them to get smarter.

Let me repeat that astounded result. Because the teachers expected certain randomly selected kids to learn faster – and for no other reason – those kids did in fact learn faster. This is called the Expectation Effect and has been demonstrated in numerous similar studies.

Here’s why this research is important to business. We often expect certain outcomes without realizing that our expectations are in fact contributing to the very outcome. There is a management maxim that says “you get what you measure.” I’d like to write more about that in a future article, but for now let me suggest another maxim: “you get what you expect.” Let me illustrate.

One of our clients at Stratford Managers asked us to help them find ways to improve their profitability. We looked at their business and concluded that the biggest impact would come from increasing their prices. They said, “Well, we don’t think our customers will pay more. In fact, we often lose business to our competitors because of price. We don’t really have much room to move.” However, some of their competitors were charging higher prices and were recording higher profits.

I think we were seeing the Expectation Effect at play. Our client expected that their customers wouldn’t tolerate higher prices. This belief stopped them from thinking about what they needed to do in order to successfully charge higher prices. Do you see the subtle but powerful force at play here? Our client had fallen victim to a self-fulfilling prophecy without even realizing it.

We see this happening in many businesses. Perhaps it is happening to you too. Here are some ideas for avoiding this trap:

  1. Spend some time benchmarking your competitors. Search for examples of the Expectation Effect in your company by looking at yourself through their eyes.
  2. Assemble a knowledgeable but independent board of directors or advisors and meet with them regularly. The reason it is hard to see the Expectation Effect in action within your own company is because the underlying assumptions creating the expectations are often not conscious. An independent board can challenge your assumptions and help expose the Expectation Effect.
  3. Write down the key targets and goals of your company. Make the key expectations explicit. Then challenge them.
  4. Hire people who by their nature will challenge the status quo. Listen to them.
  5. Get in the habit of asking “Why?” or “Why not?” This is a powerful tool to expose unconscious assumptions.

Growing a profitable company requires many skills. You have to get a lot things right along the way or your competition will eat your lunch. Occasionally the biggest risk is internal. It is in the way you think about your business and in the expectations you have for your business.

In a future article I hope to report that our client changed their expectations, increased their prices and grew more profitable. In the meantime, beware the Expectation Effect and remember the maxim “you get what you expect.”

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Competition, Governance, Human Resources, Management | Comments Off

Think Twice Before Going Public

Sunday, June 27th, 2010

This article is a companion piece to my March 29, 2010 post “Why IPO?”

With entrepreneurs once again having dreams of taking their company public and adding more cash into the bank, they should consider carefully the challenges of being a public company.

Once public, the governance structure of the company will require significant change, particularly if it was previously operated by a founder with little outside influence. As a public company, the entrepreneur will be required to establish a board of directors that will include a number of independent board members. Following the establishment of the board, a number of board committees will need to be created including an audit committee and a corporate governance committee. The board and the various committees will typically meet on a quarterly basis to review the financial results and operations of the company.

The financial results for the company, which were private in the past, must now be presented to the world at large including employees, competitors and customers. Each may use this information in different and unexpected ways. Along with the financial results, details of compensation levels for the top executives will also be made public as part of the annual filings with the securities commissions. The CEO and CFO will be required to certify quarterly that the internal controls were efficient and effective during the reporting period.

The filings as a public company will place an added burden on the finance team with the requirement for additional information such as the management discussion and analysis (quarterly and annually), the management information circular (annually) and the annual information form (annually). Filings will also be required for any material change to the business such as a significant contract, mergers and acquisitions, or equity offerings.

Other factors to consider are:

  • The increased insurance costs, particularly if you are listing on a US exchange
  • The challenge of short-term decision-making that may influence the stock price one way as compared to a decision having long-term benefit of the company that could influence the stock price in an opposite way. For example, many public companies are influenced by quarter end boundaries regarding product pricing and discounts
  • The management team, and in particular the CEO and CFO, will be working with a new group of shareholders and analyst who will require more attention and time than in the past.

Becoming a public company has many significant benefits but entrepreneurs need to temper their enthusiasm and carefully consider all aspects of the decision before taking this big step!

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Corporate Strategy, Finance, Governance | Comments Off