Telling It Like It Is

THE ENTERPRISE—WHERE HAVE ALL THE HEROES GONE?

THE ENTERPRISE—WHERE HAVE ALL THE HEROES GONE?

I once worked with a behavioral sociologist who would often ask,”Who screwed up that we needed a hero?”  This question made us all think hard.  Our conclusion was “maybe nobody ’screwed up,'—maybe someone just did something above and beyond—something really heroic.”  The three pieces below frame the subject of “heroes” in three different ways. (I didn’t cover “first responders" like police, EMT, firefighters, etc.whose jobs put them in heroic crisis situations.)

Today, far too often, we have replaced admirable heroes with celebrities. Role modeling is hard. Real heroes are role models—in that moment at least. “Sully," the pilot who safely landed a jet plane on a NYC river, was, in my book, a hero. The tragedy of 911 created many heroes, too many of them are no longer with us. Everyday people are heroes; maybe by saving a child or a dog from an oncoming car, or rescuing a person from a flaming auto crash or a frozen lake. 

Heroes exist in all walks of life, at all ages, and in all genders, races, and ethnic backgrounds. Take a minute right now and think of 2-3 real heroes you’ve known, seen or emulated.  Deciding who are real heroes these days is very difficult. Media's always-on coverage exposes many people to be neither as heroic or admirable as we might have thought. Fame is fleeting; so is misplaced heroism.

Who do you truly admire and tried to emulate during your life? If you can name a few (other than your parents or Jesus Christ) you are truly  fortunate. Think about people who inspire you to be a better person.

We need more genuine heroes these days. Our next generations desperately need people worthy of admiration and being role models. Being able to win, to run fast, throw or hit or catch a ball accurately, sing a song or play an instrument, or portray real heroes from history in dramas. That doesn’t make those athletes, musicians, actors or entertainers no matter how highly they might are regarded in their professions.  Ditto elected officials, business leaders, and other notables.

There is a depth to people who are true heroes—and it is no about being famous. It is more about being worthy of respect, admiration and an inspiration to others for what they do and why or how they do it.  So now tell me: Where have all the heroes gone? Who are yours?

===============

Where have all the heroes gone?  Perhaps business leaders can help fill the void.

©John Mariotti 1998

When I was growing up, the folk-singing group Peter, Paul and Mary had a hit song: "Where have all the flowers gone?" The melody is coursing through my head as I begin this column. Another thing I remember about growing up was that, back then, we had heroes. They were real people, but somehow larger-than-life figures whom we could admire and emulate.

Maybe it was the influence of being a post-war child that made it possible to believe in heroes–-at least some of them—like Sir Winston Churchill. You may remember his stirring admonition--"Never, never, never, never, never give up."

I remember heroes in sports. There were legendary figures like Joe DiMaggio, Jackie Robinson, Mickey Mantle, and Green Bay Packers Coach Vince Lombardi. We looked up to Presidents like Franklin Roosevelt, General Dwight Eisenhower, and John Fitzgerald Kennedy. 

Even business and congressional leaders commanded respect in days past--people like Thomas Watson of IBM, Alfred Sloan of General Motors, and Sen. Everett Dirksen.

Music and the movies created stars--not as role models for their own personal lives, but for those they portrayed.  What man hasn't at times admired "The Duke"--John Wayne--or at least the characters he brought to life on screen?

Today's young business people--the so-called "Generation X"--grew up in an era when their heroes inevitably were proven to be not only human, but fallibly so. With the assassinations of John Kennedy and Martin Luther King, our heroes began to die--although more often at the hands of the media than from an assassin's bullet.

Sports heroes fell victim to the excesses of their youth and riches. Meanwhile, business and government leaders lost their luster as inspiring figures. Often they were painted as the "Ugly American," "The Man in the Grey Flannel Suit," or "Barbarians at the Gate."

In the wake of all this disillusionment maybe--just maybe--things are about to turn around again. Perhaps a revival of the age of heroes can be built on the legacy of such people as the late Sam Walton, who was a hero to those who worked for him; or Michael Eisner, whose main asset is a big-eared mouse named Mickey; or even a wunderkind billionaire named Bill Gates.

Walton believed in his Wal*Mart "associates" and he treated them well. He also believed in giving Americans the best value for their money, and treating them like friends. While Michael Eisner is not as revered as Sam Walton was, he is respected by many for what he has done with the Disney legacy. With only a few exceptions (in the movies) Disney has done it with largely wholesome products.

Young people are incredibly computer literate today--and getting more so. They know Bill Gates, who recently was named by IW readers as America's most-respected CEO. Gates is young enough to be a real role model for the next generation. So far he has only been "exposed" as being brilliant, tough, visionary, and hugely successful.

I know who my heroes were. They are all gone now, but I really got to know three of the four--my mom and dad and "Mr. Sam" (Walton). The fourth was Coach Vince Lombardi. I could do worse than to measure up to them.

My dad was a talented professional musician who died when I was eighteen. My mom was my real mentor--a successful businesswoman in an era when that was very uncommon.

Lombardi was well known for his work ethic, his insistence on flawless execution, and his relentless pursuit of excellence (and winning). So was Sam Walton. I admired these traits. And I can think of literally hundreds of instances in my business career where hard work, superb execution, and high standards led to success.

What is it about heroes or maybe I should call them role models that make them worthy of respect? 

First and foremost, these role models have integrity, character, and principles. They invariably have a fire within them based on deep-seated beliefs and values. There is an almost-visible "aura" about them that makes people want to believe in them and follow their lead. And, finally, they have energy and enthusiasm for what they do and believe in.

We all need role models, a mentor, and some heroes. They don't have to be famous people--just someone we can aspire to emulate. It provides a foundation upon which to build the success of our country, our businesses, our careers, and our lives.

Who are your heroes? 

==================

Corporate Executives--Villains or Heroes—Can you really tell how compensation much anyone in "worth"

© John L. Mariotti 2002

Headlines lately have been vilifying corporate CEOs for their downsizing actions and large compensation gains. Is this right or wrong? I have been considering this dilemma and decided to share my thoughts here. Business leaders are not (categorically) villains. They are not ogres or mindless, heartless, evil people. They are usually hard working, God-fearing people trying to do the right thing. Only a small minority of business leaders deserves such criticism.

Businesses exist for the purpose of creating and delivering value, for which customers and consumers will pay money. This money goes to pay the employees and suppliers (and their employees) of those businesses and create wealth for those who have invested their money (at a risk) in the businesses. In free enterprise systems such as ours, the private sector--companies--are the only real source of wealth creation and employment. 

The government can create jobs. They certainly have proven that as employment in the public sector--U.S. government now exceeds the private sector.   Those jobs and the paychecks of those employees can only be paid from the revenue created by taxes. These revenues come from taxes on profits of companies and earnings of employees.

Raj Aggarwal, the Mellen Chair professor of Finance at John Carroll University reminds me that a business, which cannot earn a return on invested capital that exceeds their cost of capital, will eventually cease to exist. Some of the cuts in employment are made to reduce costs and generate a sufficient return to stay in business.  If competitors, particularly foreign competitors whose countries enjoy a much lower pay level and standard of living (such as China) choose to compete with U.S. companies, the jobs held by employees of those companies come under attack in a different way.  The result is the same.  Compete or cease to exist.

I am not a fan of downsizing. It hurts, often more than it helps. I just helped a corporate client go through it. They had to do it or go out of business.  In the U.S. alone, millions of lives have been disrupted, and whole communities damaged. The way it is done often seems heartless and even cruel. But is it so terribly wrong--or just painfully necessary? In nature, trees and shrubs require pruning. Dead wood must be cut out. 

The words from Star Trek ring very true. In these shows, Captain Kirk and First Officer Spock remind us "...the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one..." Many of the corporate layoffs are done to save the jobs of the many people by the layoff of "few." (While ATT's well-publicized 40,000-employee cutback was devastating, those cuts represented only a small percentage of their total employment.)

Productivity gains, which are critical to improving our standard of living, have another side to them. When population grows at 1-2% and industrial productivity grows at over 2% the total increase in output is 3-4%. If our economy is only growing at a 2.5%, then1% must be added to the rolls of unemployment (or underemployment--working for less pay). This is why the growth side of the equation needs attention. Controlling inflation by restrictive monetary policy (instead of fiscal responsibility--spending less than income) limits growth and adds to the dilemma. High taxes (especially on capital gains) consume investment capital that could be used for growth and channel it to one of our least productive sectors--government.

Corporate management usually does their best to make such painful cuts in the most humane manner possible. They will also continue unless or until we can grow our way into using our improved productivity.  Stephen Covey's research confirmed that as a country, we have created a generation or two of managers and executives who sometimes are misguided. They fail to create new value and growth, and thus must reduce costs (and people which are usually one of the highest "cost" items in the budgets of companies). This is wrong and can lead to what is called corporate anorexia.

What is the manager, executive and professional to do? First, understand that the market is the relentless predator of the weak. If corporate management doesn't do the necessary pruning, either the plant will die, or it will happen due to competitive pressures "clearing the dead wood." William Safire says it this way in his New York Times column; "You can't make a prosperity omelet without breaking some eggs." When this happens, many more who are undeserving will likely suffer.  Second, productivity gains must be made or the jobs will just as certainly be lost in even larger numbers. 

 Competitiveness is driven by constantly improving productivity.  Third, <i>don't let yourself or your department/function/team become technically obsolete--continue learning to be competitive.

Victims often choose to be just that. Be proactive about continuous learning.  Most companies encourage it and pay for it.

What about the conflict between the rights of shareholders to profits and the rights of employees, customers, suppliers, and communities. I contend they are not in conflict in the long run--just in the short run. Corporate executives are paid to look out for  all of their several constituencies:  Shareholders, Employees, Customers, Suppliers, and Communities. If they do not look out for the shareholders interests adequately, they are fired and replaced. If they do this well, they are rewarded, sometimes handsomely (or even excessively). But what about these exorbitant compensation packages received by CEOs.   Most of the "really big ones" are due to performance bonuses or appreciated stock options. This means they did what the shareholders wanted, and helped cause the stock value to rise. 

Why shouldn't they share in the rewards?  Think about some of our society. Mike Tyson gets millions of dollars for a few minutes in the ring.  Madonna and Rush Limbaugh make more in a year than a hundred working people make in their lifetime.  Stallone or Schwarzenegger make millions for mediocre, violent movies.  Twenty-two year olds receive multi-million dollar contracts in many professional sports.  Who complains about these as injustices.  How many jobs do they help secure?  Should we indict them if their teams lose, movies fail or attendance falls?  Or are they just being paid "competitively?'  The same could be said of CEO pay levels!

The solution to this dilemma is not simple.  What most of us can do is simpler--provide superior customer value and do it in partnership with suppliers, employees and intermediate customers.  This is the foundation on which to provide excellent rewards to shareholders and communities.  This is what the majority of these corporate executives are trying to do--not to be "villains, killers or hit men."  

They may not all be heroes.  A minority are selfish, and misguided, but don't let the few reflect on the many who are trying to do the right thing.  Do your share to help by understanding the competitive pressures of the marketplace, improving productivity, and staying personally competitive through continuous learning.   That is the best "job security policy" there is.   These companies and their leaders (with the exception of the misguided minority mentioned earlier) are the only source of jobs and wealth.  Let's start looking at the good they do instead of the harm.  We might be surprised.

=================

UNSUNG HEROES

©John Mariotti 1999

Every successful company has these “unsung heroes” – and no company can survive without them.They are seldom recognized, appreciated or properly compensated. They are not listed among the assets, or even itemized in the “goodwill” on the balance sheet. One hardly even notices that they are there, but without them the wheels of business slowly grind to a stop. Who are they?  They are the unsung heroes who make a business hum. 

• They are dedicated line employees who come to work every day, do boring and repetitive jobs over and over, and take pride in the quality and quantity of work they produce. 
• They are group leaders who risk ridicule and resentment from their peers and take the heat for decisions in which they had no input. 
• They are supervisors whose cars are the first in the parking lot and the last to leave, because they feel the responsibility for the company’s and the employees’ well being. 
• They are the maintenance people who work weekends and holidays so the plant can function at the optimum level during normal running hours.  
• They are the line engineers who labor long and hard to design and build increasingly efficient and profitable equipment. 
• They are customer service representatives who handle each customer’s concerns courteously and effectively, even though no one seems to notice or care. 
• They are truck drivers who leave their families on Sundays, drive on increasingly crowded highways to get product to ever-more-demanding customers, and try, by their example to sell the customer on the fact that theirs is the best company in the industry. 
• They are the accountants, clerks, middle managers, janitors, buyers, computer technicians, and ordinary people who do their level best to do a good job every day in spite of the fact that they are seldom asked for their input or given credit for their dedication and intelligence. 

God bless them all!

Without these unsung heroes, America’s unprecedented run of prosperity in the last couple of decades would not have been possible.  People who are visible and in the spotlight in their companies should make an effort to seek out these folks and, once in a while, give them a sincere face-to-face “Thank You.”  It costs nothing and means so much to the individual who contributes every day.  In our experience, executives who do this are seen as heroes themselves, because it is so rare for someone in the “visible” organization to recognize the people who make them successful. 

If you are one of the unsung heroes, give yourself a pat on the back, and accept a sincere “thank you” from one fellow American to another for your contribution.  You have made and are making this a better world.  If you are a “visible” person in your company, remember the efforts of all the people behind you who are making you and the entire economy look good.

=======================

 

NOW TAKE SOME TIME TO THINK ABOUT WHO YOU THINK DESERVES THE NAME “HEROES!”

JOHN

THE ENTERPRISE--ON THE IMPORTANCE OF CONFIDENCE & EXPERIENCE--KNOWING WHAT YOU KNOW & HAVING BEEN THERE BEFORE

THE ENTERPRISE--ON THE IMPORTANCE OF CONFIDENCE & EXPERIENCE--KNOWING WHAT YOU KNOW & HAVING BEEN THERE BEFORE

 

I’m a big fan of Ralph Waldo Emerson’s brilliant essay “On Self Reliance.”  You must find it and read it several times to get the full impact of what Emerson was saying. I’ll let you do that, but for those who want to be led to the conclusions, read on. Believing in yourself is an important realization that can grow with time and experience—as long as you first become convinced that you have “the right stuff” to begin with. There’s no faking it. Once you "get it,” you’ll see that.

 

I also hope most of you are familiar with the story of the Wizard of Oz. With all the media hype about heroic management, who somehow become less heroic when they must deal with adversity, I am reminded about the Wizard, and the illusion he had created, and the lessons learned by the characters in The Wizard of Oz. The moral of this timeless classic story is worth recalling whenever you (or others) go searching for those critical attributes of character and leadership you fear you might be lacking. Fear not—just look inward—you will be surprised what you’ll discover.

 

=================

On Self Reliance and The Wizard Of Oz—Often what we need is already inside us.

© John L. Mariotti 1996, 2001

One of the recurring themes of conversations with consulting clients and the people in those organizations who I am coaching or mentoring led to the title of this column.  Ralph Waldo Emerson is considered by many to be the first great philosophic mind created by the American Republic.  From his birth in Boston, one of the centers of the new republic, he seemed to strike chords in the hearts and minds of Americans with his writing.  One could almost say his ideas were at the root of the principles upon which this great nation was founded.

On the other hand, L. Frank Baum's story "The Wizard of Oz" (actually a series of stories) written in 1900 and made into a movie in 1939, has captivated the hearts and minds of children and adults for almost 60 years. The message of this heart-warming tale is not so different from Emerson's.  It is a message that every manager, professional, indeed, every person should take to heart.

Frequently, in the world of business we are like the characters in the Wizard of Oz, searching for the Emerald City and the magical, mystical Wizard who will solve all of our problems and bestow upon us all of the characteristics we fear we are missing.  The tin woodsman needed a heart; the scarecrow needed a brain, and the cowardly lion needed courage.  No doubt you can think of many companies with people who could use all three of these characteristics.  The truth, revealed in the end of the movie (I hope I'm not spoiling it for those who haven't seen it)--is that the journey to find the Wizard and the Emerald City showed each of the characters that what they were seeking was already inside each of them, and simply needed to be recognized, acknowledged and used.  Thus it is with all of us.

I could quote much of Emerson's wisdom from Self Reliance, but I have chosen just these four.  I think they will give you the essence of his timeless message:

"To believe your own thought, to believe that what is true for you in your private heart is true for all men, -- that is genius."

How often have you been guilty of saying (often only to yourself and closest confidants), "I knew that was what should be done," but I lacked the courage to stand up and say so publicly."

"What I must do is all that concerns me, not what people think.  This rule, equally arduous in actual and in intellectual life, may serve for the whole distinction between greatness and meanness."

"We pass for what we are.  Character teaches above our wills.  Men imagine that they communicate their virtue or vice only by overt actions, and do not see that virtue or vice emit a breath every moment."

A simple phrase I first heard from Stephen Covey and oft-repeated comes to mind here.  "Your actions speak so loudly, I cannot hear what your words are saying."  What I am saying, as "loudly" as the written word can convey, is this:  People will judge you by what you do and believe, not by what you say.  The truth will be conveyed by your actions.  Great leaders have an innate sense of this;  they have an aura about them that others perceive, even though they often cannot identify it in words.  Whether it is the brains, the heart, or the courage, you have it inside you, if you will only bring it out to be fully developed, appreciated, and used

"Nothing can bring you peace but yourself.  Nothing can bring you peace but the triumph of principles."

My first column this year was on "The Death of Ethics” and brought an encouraging response from readers.  Just as Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz only wanted to go home to Kansas, many of you only want to find a place where principles still rule over convenient, dishonest or unethical behavior. 

There are always a few people who will take the easy route, and blame their intransigence on others—or on circumstances.  Most people want to manage the right way, lead the right way and live by Emerson's "Self-Reliance."  You have the brains, the heart, and the courage inside you to make a difference in your place of work and in the world.  Go do it.  Life is too short to search for your own Wizard of Oz.

=============

“I’ve been there before, & I know the way out”

© John Mariotti 2001, 2021

I heard a story the other night on the popular TV show “The West Wing”, and it struck me as a good theme for a column.  The story goes like this: 

“A man was walking along the street and as he passed a construction zone, he fell in a deep hole, and he could not figure out how to get out.  He yelled for help and the first passerby was a doctor, who asked if he was injured.  After he answered that nothing was broken but he hurt all over, he saw a prescription come floating down into the hole and the doctor was gone. The next passerby was a minister.  After the minister asked if the man was alright, a prayer on a piece of paper came floating down into the hole.  The third passerby was a friend—and the man in the hole was jubilant—until the friend jumped into the hole with him.  The man asked his friend, ‘Why did you do that?  Now we’re both in the hole."  The friend answered ‘yes, but I’ve been down here before and I know the way out!”

Here we are facing the first big slowdown in the longest economic recovery ever, and the tone in many people’s voices is one of panic.  Like the man in the hole, they have never been down here before. I have!  And I know the way out!  And the next few columns will be all about “the way out” and what to do while we are “down here”.

First let’s consider what happened.  The Fed was concerned about the economy and the stock market getting overheated, and triggering a round of serious inflation, so the Fed tightened monetary policy and raised interest rates—not once, but several times.  This increased everyone’s cost of money, and cut into earnings.

Next, the administration and leading experts were not paying close attention to oil prices, and they shot up. Fuel costs more.  Petroleum byproducts cost more.  That made transportation and chemicals both cost a lot more.  Another hit to profitability.

There is latent over-capacity on a global basis for nearly all products—especially big-ticket ones like autos—thus prices of autos could not be increased to cover higher costs.  The consolidation of retailing made the big retailers very good at resisting price increases, so consumer prices couldn’t be increased either.  Mergers have made “mega-buyers” the rulers in most industries—and you guessed it—prices couldn’t be increased much of anywhere.  Another hit to profits.

Then there is the strong dollar, which hurt the profits of multi-national companies, and they lost money on exchange rates/currency translations.  The baby boomers are retiring, and the ‘baby bust”—a population shortage in the key employment ages of 25-44—is here and will remain for the next 7-8 years.  This made employees scarce and more expensive, thus another hit to profits.

Add all of these profit hits, include the collapse of several industrial behemoths—AT&T, Lucent, Xerox, Kodak, etc.—and you get a stock market that finds earnings missing estimates regularly.  Now top that off with the fall back to earth of the dot-coms and the irrational valuation of technology stocks, and consumers’ newfound wealth has evaporated.  So, consumers stop spending—which ripples through the economy another time.

So here we are, in the hole.  What do we do to get out? The answer is not simple, but many of the key elements of it are.  I’ll list the ten key elements of what to do here, and then follow up for the next few weeks with more details about how to do those things.

1. Don’t panic, you’ll only make it worse.Make your plans before “doing stuff”!  Flailing around wastes time, money & energy, and demoralizes the organization.
2. Don’t hack and slash blindly trying to prop up the next quarter, because this won’t get fixed in a quarter or two.  Look at taking your lumps now, and making things better next year.
3. Do study where you have added fat in the good times, and get rid of it.  Consolidate jobs, functions, eliminate the “nice but not necessary” things, and use the power of technology to streamline processes—don’t just cut people and expect fewer folks to do all the same work.
4. Do understand where you make your profit and where you don’t—and then get rid of the losers—that goes for products AND customers.  Consider the long-term competitive implications of these moves too. What you sell, to whom, and how is a critical decision.
5. Do know your costs—which are fixed and which are variable—then reduce the fixed costs to get your breakeven down where you can make money even in a down market.
6. Do watch your cash flow and your asset utilization.  Lack of profits will eventually kill you, but running out of cash kills you right away! (Ask any dot-com.)
7. Evaluate people with the thought that fewer, better quality are better than more, lesser quality. Cut fat, not muscle.  And don’t just use more early retirement programs.  Remember that the older workers are more expensive for good reasons—they know more, have more experience, and are usually more versatile.
8. Get closer than ever to your customers (and to your suppliers and employees, too!), because they are essential to getting out of the hole.  Get inside the mind of your customer, and serve them superbly.
9. Do plan to attack the competition and take share from them while they are in denial, saying “woe is me, the market is down and that’s why my sales are down.”  It’s a great time to gain share without giving up profit margin to do it.
10. Finally, above all remember the old saying, “united we stand, divided we fall”.  Pull together and eliminate any internal competition.  Focus on the outside competition and beating them—by serving the customers needs and wants better than ever.

================

See, that hole wasn’t so deep after all.  It always looks deeper when you are down in it than when you are out of it looking down there. Having been there before and knowing the way out makes all the difference.

NOW, GO OUT THERE AND ACT LIKE YOU “GET THAT."

JOHN

 

THE ENTERPRISE--FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL, (COMMUNICATING THE PLAN IS AS CRITICAL AS HAVING ONE)

THE ENTERPRISE--FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL, (COMMUNICATING THE PLAN IS AS CRITICAL AS HAVING ONE)

START AT THE BEGINNING—WITH A PLAN—AND DON’T FORGET WORKING CAPITAL NEEDS

This sounds so obvious, you might wonder why I’m just raising this issue now. I’m raising this issue because many people, many organizations, and far too many companies “start in the middle.” Someone has a good idea, translates it into a product or service, and discovers that idea “will sell.” Off they go, to sell it to whoever seems inclined to buy it. 

This idea grows and expands into related similar ideas. Before they know it, they have built a company around a single idea and all of its off-shoots. Inevitably, things get complicated, and finally, (you hope) someone decides to figure out what it was that made that product or idea attractive to which kind of customers. During this time, no one actually sat down and prepared a plan for the company: What is its purpose, and how can it be "most successful" (remember, it was “successful" to start with, but usually no one thought hard enough to figure out why!

This is the point where lacking a plan can become a very big problem. Theodore Levitt, in his great book The Marketing Imagination  wrote, “The purpose of a business is to create and keep a customer…”  Many companies did that but stopped reading the rest of what he said. To paraphrase in the interest of brevity, Levitt pointed out the necessity of financial viability—selling the product for more than it cost to acquiire or produce and deliver it—and doing that over and over. At that point financing rears its ugly head. 

The bigger a company gets, the more it needs working capital to bridge the time gap from ideation and creation, through procurement/production, marketing/sales and then delivery—until the time comes to get paid (collect from those who bought). Until then, all the money goes out and none comes in! That time can span months. Unless the company has made a plan to determine how much financing it will need to bridge that gap, it will predictably underestimate its working capital needs.

If or when a plan is made, then communicating it to the people who must execute it is essential. (How can anyone execute a plan if they have no idea what it contains, consists of or contemplates?) By now, I think you get it. Pasted below is a very simple article that was first written 20+ years ago, then evolved for decades (note ©dates).  On the subject of financing and working capital needs, the next column explains the “ins & outs” of capital...

Failing to plan is planning to fail.

Sharing the plan is as critical as having it.

©john Mariotti 1998, 2002, 2007 

Most people agree that a company should have a strategic plan.  After all, as Satchel Paige the famous baseball pitcher said, "If you don't know where you're going, any road will take you there."  Yet, amazingly, many large, sophisticated companies have complex, incomprehensible plans that fill binders and are never shared with the people who are responsible for implementing those plans.  (After all, this stuff is "sensitive, and confidential information.”)

The key to a good strategic plan is not bulk--it is clarity and focus.  The best plans are short, concise, and written in simple language.  Some plans are not "plans" at all; they are compilations of industry or competitive background information.  Sure, it is necessary to understand the history, market analyses, demographics, etc.  But having all of that does not assure either a good, clear, concise, or a well-communicated plan.  In fact, just the opposite often occurs.  The real essence of the plan is buried in reams of data, often self-serving in nature, usually far too internally focused, and frequently tucked away on a shelf of a locked cabinet (remember--it is "confidential stuff”).  There it resides, untouched, from the time one plan is done until another must be started.

Business changes too fast these days for that archaic approach.  If the plan can't be shared with those who must execute it, how do they know what to do?  If the plan document is so thick, detailed and complex that only the most tenacious reader can wade thorough it, what good is it?  Only a short, well-focused, and clearly understood plan, which is revised regularly, can keep up with the constantly shifting business environment.  The "shape" of the business situation is constantly shifting like a ship in a stormy sea. The plan is the chart that tells us whether we are on the course we have chosen.

Nobody has enough time these days.  Broad, effective communications of a strategic plan that fills an inch thick binder (or larger) is impossible.  It can't be done.  But a really focused strategic plan can be communicated clearly on about 5-6 pages, and understood by everyone from hourly workers to the board of directors.

The plan must contain:

1. What business are you in? How big is the market, how fast is it growing, and where; what is the scope of the part you hope to carve out for yourselves?
2. What is the competitive situation? In those target markets, who owns how much of them now, and what do they do that permits them to hold that share--and where are they most vulnerable (or strongest)?
3. What is your strategy?  List 5-6 one or two line, specific strategy statements that tell what you plan to do--and what you plan to get done.
4. How are you going to do that? For each of the 5-6 strategic points above, list 1-2 terse one liners about how you are going to do that, by when.
5. What are the critical assumptions? Invariably you made assumptions that underlie this plan, and which, if wrong, blow the whole plan to pieces.  What are they?
6. What are the critical unresolved issues? Certain events, some beyond your control, can make this plan sink or swim, and can only be identified now--list them!
7. What are the next five years high level financial projections? Only 5-6 lines: Sales, Operating Profit, ($ and %), Return on assets, capital required, and cash flow are the essential ones.  1-2 others may be uniquely needed for each business.

If written concisely, this will all fit on 5-6 pages.  If the language is not understandable by a tenth grader, it is too jargon filled or stilted.  Making a brief, concise plan like this will take the senior management of a company as long to do as the binder sized one. That's because this one requires real thought, clear focus and careful wording. 

Little of the actual development of the plan can be "delegated," but it must be a product of extensive listening to input from all levels of the company.  Then the final outcome must be shared with all levels, in varying detail according to their responsibilities.  Without these two steps, there will be insufficient "buy-in" by large groups of people in the company.  No buy-in, no success.  It's that simple.

As the old saying goes, "failing to plan may be planning to fail."

================

Watch the “goesintos” and the “goesoutas”.

© John Mariotti 1990, 2005

One of my former associates was a financial executive and his favorite phrases was the title of this column. Watch the “goesintos” and the “goesoutas”.  The “goesintos” are where money “goes into” the company—revenue and profits—from customers mostly.  The “goesoutas” are the many places where money “goes out of” the company—expense items, payroll, materials purchases, interest costs, etc.

During tough times, it is critically important to monitor the flow of money in and out of the company.  When lenders get tight and interest rates go up, just getting the necessary funding is hard enough, but using it poorly is doubly wasteful.  There is the waste of squandering valuable financing on things with poor returns, and the lost opportunity of good returning uses going unfunded.

At times like this, it is essential to understand where you make your profit and where you don’t—and then get rid of the losers—that goes for products AND customers. What you sell, to whom, and how is a critical decision.   You know that there are those low profit items that consume a lot of time and money, and go to a customer that is slow to pay, but fast to take a deduction for the slightest slip-up—real or imagined. 

Now is the time to streamline the product line.  Trim the marginal items and the loss leaders.  Sort the sales by product; list in descending order of annual volume and trim the bottom 1/3 of it.  Do the same thing with the gross margin by product.  Of course you must consider the long-term competitive implications of these moves too, but many of those products “we need to fill out the line” are losers.

Sort your customer-sales and margin lists in descending order of annual volume too.  Then find some other way to serve the bottom 1/4 of the customers without necessarily handing all that volume to a competitor.  Maybe you divert them to a “master distributor” or service them via the Internet.  For the few with the absolute worst profitability, the best thing you might do is to pass them on to the competitor.

In tough times, more than ever, you must know your costs and where they come from.  Old-fashioned direct-labor based cost systems will lead you down the wrong decision path more often than not.  It is also critical to know your breakeven point—the level of volume at a given customer and profit mix where you do not lost money at the bottom line. 

It is also critical to know which expenses are “fixed” and which are “variable”.  Fixed costs are usually incurred because of some management decision at a higher level or in a longer time frame.  Thus, the top management must review these fixed costs carefully and reverse or undo some of those decisions.  Only if you reduce the fixed costs can you get your breakeven down where you will make money even in a down market.

Finally, watching the “goesintos” and the “goesoutas” is really about watching your cash flow.  In many cases this is also about watching asset utilization—are you collecting Accounts Receivable effectively; is there bad debt exposure (downturns usually worsen this problem); is your inventory in line, or is it loaded with “slow movers?” 

Lack of profits will eventually kill you, but running out of cash kills you right away! (Ask any dot-com.)  That is why you MUST make cash flow projections for the next few quarters and monitor cash flow very carefully.  Cash is like oxygen, without it you die.  Profit is like food and water—necessary, but useless if there is no cash!

=================

IF YOU GOT ALL OF THIS, YOU WILL BE AHEAD OF MOST COMPETITORS… “FOLLOW THE MONEY” AND PLAN WHERE IT NEEDS TO BE MOVING…

JOHN 

 

PS: A colleague recently pointed out the competitive back and forth over technology capability, between China & the USA. China is gaining fast on the USA. Why? China has a plan. The USA, not so much/\. It just has a bunch of political proclamations with nothing much behind them. The same could be said if comparing thte USA to Russia (include Ukraine) or even the USA to the middle East (Iran & Syria are the biggies.) We both suspect that the US is so fractured, divided and polarized that any plan it has is now broken apart. I spoke with him about Technology, but we could as easily have been discussing Energy policy/plan—or several others. No plan yields no success. The plan alone is not the secret sauce. It’s the thought that went into the plan—the planning process. Now re-read the first article. Failing to plan is indeed, planning to fail.

THE ENTERPRISE--COLLABORATION IS ESSENTIAL, EVEN WHEN THE COVID ERA MAKES IT DIFFICULT.

THE ENTERPRISE--COLLABORATION IS ESSENTIAL, EVEN WHEN THE COVID ERA MAKES IT DIFFICULT.

 

Staying at home to avoid exposure to Covid means a lot of TV time. My favorite TV pastime is watching team sports: Football, Basketball and Hockey. There is a common misunderstanding that teamwork and collaboration are one and the same thing. That’s close, but not quite right. A couple of decades ago, I was asked by a publisher (Berrett-Koehler in San Francisco) to write a mini-book on Collaboration. Sounds easy, right? Not quite. Covering this kind of topic in 25 pages, is harder than writing a longer book.

Teamwork and Collaboration are different but interdependent parts of the same process. Good teams find ways to collaborate, to win. Great teams find ways to work together, that makes their performance through collaboration evident. Elite teams take collaborative teamwork to a whole new, almost instinctive level.

You can see that in football (Brady and Gronkowski) where a passer and receive seem to have a second sense about where to connect. 

In basketball, the fast break is the ultimate rapid collaboration, which results in such fast, effortless scoring that it demoralizes the opposing team. Only through careful collaboration, exceptional teamwork and lots of practice, can fast breaks look almost so easy and effortless.

In hockey, the Power Play attacks with a plan that has invested a lot of time understanding their roles, and how they can best collaborate to break down defenses—and deceive the goal tender—to score.

A former professor friend reminded me that in business (and lots of other areas) Covid has made the collaborative process much more difficult. Why? Because at its core collaboration is all about people, figuring out how to best work together, to accomplish a common, agreed upon goal. However, the lack of face-to-face contact removes much of the non-verbal communication and feedback necessary to resolve differences and arrive at the best way to collaborate.

Studies show that 70-90% of communication is non-verbal; body language, facial expressions, tone of voice (or silence, which has its own tone). Video conferences only show the head and upper torso, but not the way a person is sitting, leaning, shifting, squirming, or generally sending non-verbal signals about whether that person agrees, buys in, supports and will work toward the consensus based action. If participants don’t like the consensus at all, and don’t, can’t, or won’t  “say” (verbal) or show it, make obvious gestures or expressions that teammates and/or co-collaborators can easily recognize as disagreement and then discuss, argue and agree upon the result.

Since few people want to take the time to read a whole book these days, here are two pieces on collaboration The first was written as a brief magazine article. The second was lifted/excerpted from my book. The say largely, but not exactly or entirely, the same things. 

After you think about this whole collaborative/teamwork area, you’ll understand why changing just a single member of a unit: a basketball team, an offensive line in football, or a line in hockey—changes everything. (The coach is "that person in authority” mentioned.)

To succeed in the era of Covid, understanding collaboration is more important than ever.  Key point: it’s all about people and how they behave and react—and work together.

==================

Collaboration: Working together is more fun

©John Mariotti 2000

To get things done through collaboration, a group works together toward a common, agreed-upon set of goals.  Until the goals are agreed upon, there is a danger that the collaboration will be fragmented and not cohesive.  This wastes energy and demoralizes people.

Common, well understood and mutually agreed upon goals are essential to getting things done through collaboration.

 A group that wants to get something done must encourage collaboration by valuing the input of its members--even when that input does not appear to be immediately useful.  Managers, leaders and other people with authority can have one of two effects on collaboration--a stimulating one or a chilling one. 

The stimulation comes from cases when the person in a lead or authority position genuinely appreciates the input and attempts to use it --or at least incorporate it into their thought processes as the group moves toward decisions.  The chilling effect occurs when the person in authority acts with disdain, disinterest or open contempt of the ideas presented.  This is demeaning to the individual giving the ideas and chilling to the group's collaborative efforts. 

Positive reinforcement and support of the group by persons in authority positions is an essential part of getting things done through collaboration.

Smart people will try to use all the collaborative help they can get.  Smart workers will recognize the kind of manager they have and conduct themselves accordingly--this means active collaboration with a good manager, and cautious input with a poor one.  In either case, it is important to avoid becoming discouraged--even by a poor manager; they sometimes wake up and see the light as information accumulates and collaboration begins.

We are no longer in an age of bosses who can succeed by controlling and directing people.  Things are changing so fast that people want and need influence over their own destinies.  This means the opportunity for collaboration is great, but the leaders must change from old command and control behavior to the new one of leadership, motivation and involvement. 

The traditional way to control organizations was to have policies and procedures, which were followed and rigidly enforced

When conditions, circumstances and competition change rapidly, these old, rigid rules fail.  They become inflexible, slow, obsolete, and ineffective.  This is when collaborative groups of people can step forward to save the day.  Personal values and integrity will beat policy manuals every time for assuring that the right things get done the right way.  Collaboration will help to assure that the right things are getting done.

Unfortunately, unless there is open information sharing across all of the so-called “boundaries”-- between people, between departments, between offices or plants, and between customer and supplier companies, true collaboration is difficult or impossible.  Without sharing of information, the collective knowledge of the groups involved is not used to solve the problems.

A Checklist for Successful Collaboration

q   Form a group that is likely to cooperate first, then collaborate. 

There should be something in it for each member.

q  Make sure the current situation is clearly understood by all constituencies.

q  Establish the leadership and sponsorship of this collaborative group and identify the natural leaders.

q  Set group goals and objectives, and discuss potential outcomes, timetables, and resource needs.

q  Establish measures of progress, both tangible and intangible and measure results and review how the group is getting them.

q  Provide regular feedback and document progress and agreements. Keep records of disputed issues and communicate openly and often.

q  Identify known obstacles and challenges and seek help in eliminating them.

q  Build partnership relationships to gain help and sustain progress, but choose partners carefully

q  Concentrate on new learning through the collaboration. Apply collective wisdom of the group to test the outcomes.

q  Celebrate and share the knowledge gained about collaborative success. Leave a legacy of successful collaborators to seed new teams.

"The only one who likes change is a wet baby."

"There is no use whatsoever trying to help people who do not help themselves.  You cannot push anyone up a ladder unless he is willing to climb himself. --Andrew Carnegie (industrialist)

"Build for your team a feeling of oneness, of dependence upon one another and of strength derived by unity." --Vince Lombardi (football coach)

================

What is Collaboration?

An Excerpt from the book Collaborating for Success, ©2000, Berrett-Koehler. San Francisco. ©John Mariotti 2000

Many people would say collaboration is teamwork, and that is close, but not quite right.  Teamwork has become an over-worked word in America.  Teamwork is not always collaboration--although collaboration is usually good teamwork.  Let's start with a definition.

Collaboration is an act of shared creation or shared discovery.  At the heart of collaboration is the desire to create something, discover something, solve some sort of problem, or get something done. 

That should be the case with team efforts, but it isn't.  Too often, teams are formed by just assembling a group of people.  They are assigned a purpose that is sometimes unclear, and given a set of goals (if any are defined at all) that they had nothing to do with choosing and are a long way from a shared creation or discovery.  Maybe a problem solving effort is the team's purpose.  Even then they are supposed to figure out how to be good team members while they determine how to solve the problem.  The two challenges are not even related--the first involves interpersonal and group interaction, and the second requires problem identification and solving skills.

One part of collaboration is a relationship. 

Throwing together a group of people no more insures a relationship than dumping a bunch of ingredients in a bowl insures that a cake will result. 

Teamwork can become monotonous, because similar problems often require similar solutions and the team members will fall into familiar, comfortable roles.  You do this; I do that; someone else does something else.  This is not collaboration--it is simply a division of work.  This might have been collaboration the first time we went through it, but it is not any more.  Collaboration is original.  Circumstances are constantly changing.  Thus the team described above is not really collaborating--they are just going through the motions.

Don’t confine your definition of collaboration to a single group or team of people. That is not how it works in many cases.  The most powerful collaborations are spontaneous ones.  The people involved work together in a technical sense, but not necessarily in a literal sense.  When a loose-knit group of people from different areas or departments (or companies!) decide to collaborate, real breakthroughs can happen.

Another part of collaboration is a process

Let's consider a more complete definition:

Collaboration is the process of two or more people with complementary skills and/or knowledge interacting to create a shared understanding where none had existed, using understanding to create something, discover something, solve some problem, or get something done.

Nothing in that definition says these people need to be part of a team. They may not even need to be in the same place at the same time.  What is important is that they engage in a process--a series of steps in a defined order that will lead to a desired outcome.

Collaboration is the end of a series of steps.

A group must go through a series of steps on the way to collaboration.  Sociologists have a shorthand set of terms, which describe this sequence:

• Forming (getting to know each other),
• Storming (fighting for control, power, etc.),
• Norming (arriving at accepted group norms for how things are done and people behave),
• Performing (Getting on with the successful work).

Another set of collaborative relationship steps are shown in the table below.  It would be nice to jump right to Cooperation or Collaboration, but unfortunately, it is often hard to skip the earlier steps.

Relationship Stages of a Collaboration

Peer Relations     Stance                 Key Characteristics              

Combative            fighting                Aggression, resistance, damage

Competitive          striving                 Rivalry, mixed motivations

Cooperative          agreeing               Acquiescence, obedience

Collaborative         partnering             Synergistic, interactive

Source:  If Aristotle Ran General Motors, Tom Morris, Henry Holt and Company, New York, 1997

The best you can hope for is to move past each step of the way quickly and positively.  The important thing is to know about all these steps, and to avoid poisoning the relationships in their early stages.  It will be much harder to get to collaboration if the storming or combative stage becomes bitter and hurtful.

Constructive disagreement

There is a widespread misunderstanding that to be a good team member and a positive collaborator means to agree with the group or be quiet when you disagree or don't understand.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  Powerful collaborative efforts come from constructive disagreement.  Constructive disagreement is flexible, always trying to see other viewpoints that might change a person's perspective and position.  Destructive disagreement is a "take it or leave it" mentality, one which says, in effect, "I'm right, you're wrong, end of discussion!"  Failure to understand denies you the ability to be a collaborator.  The only dumb question is the one that is not asked.  Understanding allows everyone involved to pool knowledge and viewpoints.  Even if you have no new knowledge to apply to the solution, sometimes just a different viewpoint will expose new solutions. 

Four Powerful Questions to Build Collaborative Groups

• "Will you help me, please?"
• "I'm sorry, I don't understand."
• "I don't know, but I will find out and get back to you"--and then be sure to do it.
• The hardest: "I'm sorry, I was wrong."

Understanding the task is one of the most important ingredients in collaboration--what problem must be solved or what new discovery or creation is desired.  Another important part of collaboration is saying what you will do--and then doing what you said you would--because others are depending on you to hold up your end of the deal.

Collaborating in a crisis can happen faster than collaborating simply to generate positive change.  Crisis collaboration is also easier to get started, but harder to sustain, especially after the immediate crisis is resolved.  Many companies pull together when their existence is threatened, only to fall apart after they have weathered the storm. 

For real collaboration to occur, trust must exist.  Talking about collaborative behavior is “easy", but achieving true collaboration is “hard."

 ===============

NOTE: In the end, great teams learn collaboration—although the journey to getting there is often rocky.

In sports, the coach & staff try to enable the collaboration, but ultimately it happens when the team members settle into their roles and trust each other to do their parts. When you watch any team at work—in a game, in an office or on a Zoom call—test it to see if these conditions have been met. (You will already know by the results, but watching how it gets there will help you learn how to do it, over and over.

 

THE ENTERPRISE— A WALK AT THE MALL--SCARY--BUT PROPHETIC? CASH IS LIKE OXYGEN!

THE ENTERPRISE— A WALK AT THE MALL--SCARY--BUT PROPHETIC? CASH IS LIKE OXYGEN!

This edition was panned to lead into one of my most popular old columns—Cash is Like Oxygen— posted below. 

While I was thinking about what to say as a lead in, my wife and I decided to go for a walk in the Mall—specifically the Polaris Fashion Place Mall on the north side of Columbus, OH.  That started a sequence of events, that led to this long “current events” preamble:

1)  I was stunned by how empty & desolate the Mall was (more on that). Many stores closed or closing, or with totally new occupants—unproven upstarts?

2) When we went home, I exchanged emails with son Mike, who recapped a presentation by a Fannie Mae exec.

Being in construction, Mike is very interested in the future of housing, the recovery, and what Fannie Mae is doing/planning to do. The questions cited were: Will the vaccines Work? IF they do work, will consumers return to prior consumption levels?  What do you think? When?

3) Just today, less than a week after I started writing this, Polaris Fashion Mall missed its monthly rent payment. The company’s stock plummeted and the mall operator retained advisors to help review strategic options. (There’s a 30-day grace period to pay the rent—whether it can, or will, is anybody’s guess.)

My answers were:

1) Yes, the vaccines will work (pretty well), at least on known Covid variants. Better than Flu shots, not perfect, everywhere, for everyone.

2) If the vaccines work, will enough people get the shots to begin to reach "Herd Immunity"  (70-80%) ? Doubtful. Right now 1/3 of people are resisting the shots

3) This is like a place hit by a hurricane or a tornado. It will not be the same for years. First sign of real recovery: Sports and entertainment venues begin filling up.

We went for a walk at the Mall last week.. The photos are from Polaris Fashion Place Mall, a few miles from home—mid-afternoon on a week day. See all the people shopping there? (No?) The other large Columbus indoor mall, Tuttle Crossing, is reportedly in economic trouble too. With Sears is gone & Penney wounded & Dept. stores like Malls relied overbuilt/failing/consolidating, while full of unsold goods and empty of shoppers. Malls are hunting for any way to fill the unused space with something that can produce cash flow. 

No. I could have taken these at countless locations. There were a few people, but very few of them were carrying merchandise. Stores are open restricted hours 11-7 most days. Many are full of inventory (tying up cash) like in the aisle shot of a Macy’s store—goods that have been there for months. 25% of the former stores are GONE…another 25% are just hanging on. Half the places in the Food Court are closed. But no one was in them anyway. To add insult to injury an Outlet Mall opened just over a year ago, 11 miles north of Polaris.

I really don’t know how these companies & retailers can even stay in business. All their fixed costs continue, but their revenue based cash flow has been devastated.  A huge store might have a few (3?) people working in it…and not sell enough to even pay for them. Inventory, aging in style and seasonality ties up their (cash) working capital.  

A Lifestyle “Mall” (outdoor shopping areas) Easton Town Center is doing better—but not great.) Movie theaters are in deep trouble. Crappy movies. Quality is going to streaming. Restaurants that remain are down more than 20%, and many of them are simply closed—gone. Outdoor dining and takeout/delivery got them through summer & fall, with cash flow, but winter weather is coming  like a lion right now. Indoor dining is open, in some places, at a fraction of the seating, but even that is often not full.

People are shopping more on line, or at ”popular priced” big box retailers like Target, Walmart, Kohls, etc. Just look at the parking lots. Grocery stores are busy. Costco was full on Monday at mid-morning. Even drug stores are stressed, but less so; they're simply overbuilt; too many of them, too close together. 

Indoor dining will still be ailing until it warms up: May? Maybe. Bars may fill up as curfews are lifted. Will consumers return to prior consumption levels? No, not for at least a year or two. And then from a different array of stores and shopping venues. 

 

This is a massive structural dislocation. When will things come back? Who knows. Act too fast and you burn through precious cash. Act too slowly and you miss a chance to generate cash flow.  Watch to see when people feel OK about sitting shoulder to shoulder,  in a stadium, or a theater or concert, yelling or cheering. Maybe 2+/- years from now…Maybe? 

Key takeaways  from my exchanges with Mike.

• The pandemic has ACCELERATED traditional retail's demise. 
• Hurricanes stimulate the economy via repairs; conversely, the pandemic didn't do "physical" damage to be repaired.
• Government’s actions did psychological and economic damage—tough to repair.
• "Retail" will be re-born to match new lifestyles. ("Going-out" is not dead and gone, although it feels that way (in wintry Ohio).
• Consumption & shopping habits have shifted many times through decades (e.g mom & pop, discount & department stores, 1-800, TV, Big boxes, online, etc). 
• There will be more shifts of where/how $ are spent, and on what before it settles down…to a New Normal...someday.

By then the government will have dumped more than $5 Trillion (all borrowed or printed money), to fix the mess it made, and try to prop up the people it hurt. In doing so, handouts are destroying the people's "will to work” via too-lucrative unemployment and welfare payments. (Most people are saving more than ever of the government handouts. They are no fools; they know this is a temporary solution—and a very expensive one at that.)  Many parts of the trillion $$ handouts haven’t even been used and yet, more are being authorized. 

Why? They are trying to replace cash flow! No cash flow = no Oxygen. Cut off the oxygen to any living organism and it dies! 

Somebody has to eventually pay for all this welfare; welfare which kills the will to work, and the spirit of free enterprise and capitalism. (Socialism has been tried over and over. It doesn’t work. Someday, (as Margaret Thatcher once said) "other people's money runs out," and gratitude turns into resentment.)

 

Here’s what I wrote 25 years ago...

=============

Cash is like Oxygen.

Without it, you can't survive long enough to make a profit.

©John Mariotti 1995

Lately, I've encountered a number of companies who seem to be running short of cash. At the same time, cash flow appears to have fallen out of vogue as a hot measure for management theorists, being supplanted by economic value added (EVA)--a term coined by consultants at Stern-Stewart. Strong   Positive EVA measures depict a business that is earning returns in excess of its cost of capital.

This shift in the measurement emphasis may be creating a problem. While a positive EVA indicates good long-term business health, cash flow is the ultimate necessity for short-term survival.

Most business people are familiar with the income statement and the balance sheet. These two accounting stalwarts are where encounters with the IRS most often occur. As a result, most managers have learned to emphasize pre-tax profit and various balance-sheet ratios as the prime indicators of financial well-being.

Cash flow, the third major measure, is too often ignored. When you show a negative profit, but maintain a positive cash flow, life goes on--for a while at least. Run out of cash, and trouble brews real fast. Payrolls cannot be met. Suppliers cannot be paid. New products cannot be launched.  

My most memorable personal cash-flow crunch occurred just before I became a newlywed. The $100 deposit on a new apartment (this was a long time ago) was due. Since I was fresh out of grad school and hadn't earned a paycheck in over nine months, I was down to my last $50 in cash. The first paycheck in the new job was four weeks away. I was forced to humbly ask my fiancée to help. She didn't have much more than I did, but at least she'd been working. Together, we scraped up the $100.

Whether it is a personal or business crisis, that "out of cash" feeling is very unpleasant. When entrepreneurs start new businesses, they often go deeply into debt. Some max out their credit cards. Others mortgage their homes. Only the fortunate few find an "angel"--an investor who puts up seed money for a “modest” part of the equity in the business, in contrast to venture capital investors who want majority ownership. As these businesses grow, their margin for financial error is usually quite small.

Planning for cash needs is not all that complex. Yet many companies fail to do it properly. Often, they're misled by income-statement and balance-sheet projections that show the company will be financially healthy at the end of the year--if they get that far.

Astronauts who take off on a long space flight must take along plenty of food and water (their "healthy balance sheet"). If they happen to run out of oxygen any time between takeoff and landing, all that food and water is of no use to them. They will be goners. Cash is like oxygen. When it's there, it's easily taken for granted. When it's not, death can come quickly.

Why do many budding entrepreneurs overlook this simple fact? They fail to do an accurate, detailed, and realistic cash-flow projection on a month-by-month, week-by-week basis. The killer is usually working capital needs. To make a product, it is necessary to purchase raw material and parts, and to pay employees who convert that material into the product. You also have to pay for product designers, tooling, equipment, a sales force, marketing materials, travel expenses, phones, computers, etc. And those outlays must be made before the first product is sold. 

Keep in mind that "sold" doesn't mean you have an order. It means the product has been produced, shipped, and “paid for.”

If product design takes four weeks, and the lead time to obtain materials and produce the product is another four weeks--both unusually short periods compared with real situations--and if nothing major goes wrong, then at least eight weeks worth of working capital is needed for inventory, payroll, overhead expenses, and so forth. The payment terms--usually 30, 60, or 90 days--don't start until the product is shipped.

Since we started eight weeks in the hole, we may now be 12 to 21 weeks without any cash coming in!  Easily one-quarter to one-third of a year may elapse with all the cash flow going out, rather than coming in. At this point, the venture capital "vultures" may begin to look like friendly creatures.

It is hard to believe that a company with a great product, big potential profit margins, and strong market demand can still end in financial collapse. But it happens. And, ironically enough, sometimes the bigger the demand, the faster and harder the cash problems hit--all because inadequate attention is given to planning for cash needs.

Before you take off, be sure to check your oxygen supply carefully. You'll enjoy the journey more--and you'll still be around at the end of it.

 

BEST WISHES

JOHN

 

THE ENTERPRISE--HOW DID THINGS GET THIS WAY--PART 1? YOU MIGHT BE SURPRISED TO KNOW.

THE ENTERPRISE--HOW DID THINGS GET THIS WAY? SOME INSIGHTS…

 

WE ALL WONDER HOW MANY THINGS CAME TO BE…HERE ARE TWO OF THEM

I wrote these and many other columns you’ll read in THE ENTERPRISE twenty years ago—in the year 2000.

 

We forget that the USA’s mere 200+ years in existence is but a small part of history. At least 2000+ years came before the USA was even imagined. During a lot of that time, Rome was the dominant power in the world, and “horsepower” (not of the engine type) was the principal means of travel. 

 

We don’t realize that the Internet, the Telephone and Interstate Highways, made us forget predecessors like the Telegraph and Railroads.. Those were the big breakthroughs of the prior century, which allowed information to spread across the US faster than "the speed of a horse.” Before that, and the spread of Railroads paralleled by Telegraph lines, there was the Pony Express, delivering the mail—“ at the speed of a horse! 

 

(This past holiday season some USPS Mail behaved like the Pony Express, as Christmas cards mailed in December were delivered in late January!) 

 

Keep reading to learn how Roman chariots determined the design of US Railroads, and even the Space Shuttle. The title is a tipoff. Lots of things were determined before this country ever existed.

 

==================

How a Couple of Horses' Asses Changed the World

©John Mariotti 2000

There are a lot of people in a lot of companies that resist change.  “We’ve always done it that way, and it’s been good enough for years.” is the cry.  In the age of cyber speed, old ways of doing things die hard and the reasons for them are often lost in the annals of corporate history.  Well, here’s one that won’t be any longer.

The US standard railroad gauge (distance between the rails) is 4 feet, 8.5 inches. Why was that odd gauge used?  Because that's how they built them in England, and the US railroads were built by English expatriates.  But why that spacing?  Because the first rail lines were built by the same people who built the pre-railroad tramways, and the people who built the tramways used the same jigs and tools that they used for building wagons, which used that wheel spacing. If that’s so, why did the wagons use that odd wheel spacing?

Well, if they tried to use any other spacing, the wagons would break on some of the old-long-distance roads because that was the spacing of the old wheel ruts.  The first long-distance roads in Europe were built by Imperial Rome for the benefit of their legions, and used ever since. The ruts, which everyone else had to match for fear of destroying their wagons, were first made by Roman war chariots which were made to be just wide enough to accommodate the rear ends of two war horses!

The United States standard railroad gauge of 4 feet, 8.5 inches with which we all still live and use was based on a centuries old specification for an Imperial Roman Army war chariot—and based on the width of a horse’s ass—well, two horses actually! 

So, the next time you are told “we’ve always done it that way”, look around you.  There may be a horse’s ass or two involved in that reasoning.  And if you are inclined to go with the flow and not argue for the change—think about the implications. 

But, our little story isn’t even over. When we see a Space Shuttle sitting on the launch pad, we see two big booster rockets attached to the sides of the main fuel tank.  These are the solid rocket boosters (SRB), made by a factory in Utah.  The engineers who designed the SRBs might have preferred to make them a bit fatter, but the SRBs had to be shipped by train from the factory to the launch site. The railroad line to the factory runs through a tunnel in the mountains, and the SRBs had to fit through the tunnel, which is slightly wider than a (you guessed it!) railroad track.  Well, we all know where the width of the railroad track came from.

Thus a major design parameter of one of the world’s most advanced transportation systems was determined by a couple of horse's asses!  I wonder who will determine the critical decision points on your company’s next project.  

Hopefully, whoever it is will have heard and remembered this little story -- and make wise decisions based on good reasons—and understand the basis for those reasons completely!

=================

We just came through a political/election season that may well change the course of US history more than any other. Voting by millions of insecure, generic mail-in ballots were accepted and used (some say mis-used, which is probably true) The “stop" in vote counting in many battleground states (in the wee hours of election night) is believed by many to be part of a “reset” to see how many (insecure) votes needed to be “found” and added to Joe Biden’s totals, to overcome Donald Trump’s margin at the  polls and on secure absentee ballots. 

 

Believe what you want, the polarization in the USA, was fueled by the Mainstream media’s pervasive communications (formerly known as  “News”). The middle part of the USA is now known as “flyover country” because of where the media, financial and political power resides—on or near the “coasts.”

 

====================

The Coasts and the Chasm

©John L. Mariotti 2000

An alarming thought went through my mind recently.  What if the tidal pull of the earth’s oceans is influencing our businesses and society in ways we don’t even recognize?  As I looked through my pile of reading material, and then considered my investment portfolio, I realized that the vast majority of the information generated today in print and electronically either originates in or is controlled by people located within 100 miles or less of the ocean(s). 

Maybe there is some phenomenon bigger than the Internet at work.  Most major book publishers are located in New York, Boston, or San Francisco.  The same can be said for major magazines and national newspapers.  Ditto the headquarters for major TV networks—nearly all in or around New York or L. A.  Do "birds of a feather flock together", or is there some other, more mysterious force at work?

Then I realized that between San Diego, Silicon Valley and Seattle on one coast, and Boston to Washington, DC on the other, the coastal influence was even more striking.  Check the market capitalization of companies on the major stock exchanges and see where the headquarters of the biggest and most valuable are located.  Cisco, Microsoft, GE, Intel, IBM, Lucent, AOL, Time-Warner, and on and on—all are within 100 miles (or much less) of the oceans.

Of course it is a given that much of the nation’s policy originates in Washington, DC.  Most of the country’s financial wealth is brokered and traded on Wall Street, in NYC, where else?  Then consider that many of the legendary universities: Stanford, UCLA, Harvard, Wharton, MIT and many others are all located in these two narrow bands of geography. 

Is there anything wrong with this?  Maybe, maybe not!  There is not really a "chasm"--physical or intellectual--between these coastal bands of influence.  A lot of very important stuff goes on in the middle 2000+ miles of the U.S. A.  For starters, almost all of the food we eat is grown or raised there.  Nearly all of the "creature comforts" that aren’t made in the Orient are made in the good old central U. S. —the chasm.  It is often called the "Rust Belt" but it isn’t so rusty any more.

Try to do without furniture, carpets, beverages, automobiles, plastics, gasoline, steel, appliances, computers, pipes, wires, fiber optics, and the tools and machinery needed to actually produce all of this and much more.  The vast majority of these are made in the "chasm"-nowhere near the coasts.  People actually make physical things there, instead of just having ideas and reducing them to words on paper, policy in laws or digits in cyberspace. 

But much less is said or written about those who reside and work in the chasm, except in the media that is mostly regional, local or of a "controlled circulation".  This means they go primarily to the same people that they are created about and for.  Of course there are some national media in the chasm—WGN, Chicago’s TV super-station comes to mind, as does Turner Broadcasting in Atlanta with its CNN, TNT, TBS, etc.  MCI WorldCom is even a non-coastal company—for now anyway.  UPS in Atlanta and FedEx in Memphis deliver the goods and are "chasm dwellers". Dell & Compaq actually make lots of computers in the chasm.  But these are the exceptions, not the rule.  They (mostly) make things!

There are even real cities located in the chasm: Atlanta, Charlotte, Nashville, Dallas, Houston, Phoenix, Denver, St. Louis, Chicago, Detroit, Cincinnati, Columbus, Cleveland, Pittsburgh and lots more of them.  People from the coastal areas may know of them because their airplanes stop at these hubs when they can't go direct.  There are also some major sporting teams located in the chasm’s major cities.

Where am I going with this?  Here’s where.  Anytime the vast majority of the creation and communication of ideas is localized to a few cultural areas; it can easily become biased and ingrown.  That is decidedly NOT good.  If a (relatively) small cultural area influences most of the financial markets in the country (and maybe the world) that also is NOT good.

Diversity is what made this country great.  Diversity is what supports the richness of our social fabric.  Diversity of thought can be threatened by the concentration of knowledge, wealth, and most of all information influence in the "coastal" cultures.  If it isn’t about dotcoms or e-commerce, financial markets or stock prices, the Fed or the government, it isn’t news—at least not at quite the same level. 

If you disagree, fire up your computer, go to a newsstand, or stop at a bookstore and do a random check.  We are in danger of developing and promulgating a skewed, biased version of every kind of information, but especially that about our business world. Pick up 50-100 magazines that you recognize as the "biggies", and see where they are published—that means where the people live who decide what goes in them—and what doesn’t. 

Do the same thing with books.  Just choose 100 at random and look where the publisher's headquarters are located.  That is where the decision to publish that particular book, on that topic, by that author was made—and in a lot of cases that's where the author also resides.  Then check where the major TV networks and national newspapers originate.  Sure, they all have local affiliates and branch offices—and we all know how much influence they have compared to the "home office".

Thanks to the Internet, it is possible to break down this coastal cultural bias—but it won’t happen easily, if at all—because that is also where many of the powerful web sites originate, either at major publications and corporations or with portals like AOL/Netscape, Yahoo, MSN, etc. 

What must happen is for balance to be regained is for everyone in the "central chasm" to start taking a much more proactive role in ensuring the diversity, quantity and balance of information and perspectives needed to keep our country great.  That means, start generating good, insightful, interesting information and getting it widely disseminated.  Build the reputation capital of the chasm-based colleges and universities.  Take proactive positions and speak out.  Otherwise, we all better move to one of the coasts and either get a subway pass or grow a beard and lose our shoes.

=================

Please email: [email protected] with your feedback.

3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good 

Interesting                    3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good

Useful                          3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good

Worth Forwarding       YES           NO

 ==================

Thank you,

John

 

 

THE ENTERPRISE—MULTI-GENERATIONAL CHANGE—SHARE THIS WITH FAMILY & FRIENDS OF OTHER GENERATIONS: BOOMERS, GEN X, GEN Y, & GEN Z

I CAN’T KNOW WHICH GENERATION YOU BELONG TO. I ONLY KNOW THAT ALL “GENERATIONS" ARE SEEING UNPRECEDENTED, UNIMAGINABLE CHANGE
What differs is how they respond to the change. The quote below is important for all Generations to consider as we enter 2021:

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it! (George Santayana-1905). In a 1948 speech to the House of Commons, Winston Churchill changed the quote slightly when he said (paraphrased), “those who fail to learn from history’s errors are condemned to repeat them.”

Consider the various “Generations”—Baby Boomers born 1946-1964, Gen X born 1965-1979/80, Gen Y born 1981-1994/96, and Gen Z born 1997-2012/15+…and the placeholder for the youngest people. None of them have ever endured the magnitude of change in a single year, as we have in 2020.  And yet, as I looked through my old columns, I was constantly reminded about how much unimaginable change has happened in the past two decades. 

Who could have foreseen that we’d all be wearing masks, millions would have contracted this new virus and in America alone hundreds of thousands have died. Office buildings lie empty while Zoom (video) calls involve millions. Shopping centers no longer attract hordes of people, and vacant, failing stores are everywhere. Restaurants are failing equally rapidly. Big entertainment and sporting venues are largely empty. Few people have ever seen, predicted or endured anything like this. “Normal" social and commercial activities, (including travel) are unable to perform "normally.” 

 

(Many (most) people are hoping that the vaccine(s) now being introduced, will enable a return to something resembling “normalcy”—and maybe they will)

 

In future editions of THE ENTERPRISE I’ll share thoughts about Collaboration, a critical part of any successful organization or enterprise. The normal social events like weddings, funerals, celebrations and family gatherings have been totally disrupted. How much of this is temporary remains to be seen. One thing is certain: Change will continue to offer challenges—and opportunities—and how we adapt and evolve will be the largest challenge of coming years.

What will be critically important is how we respond and react to this “new (not-so) normal.” Past predictions don’t help. You can read now about how wrong they were in the past. 

 

See what I wrote about in 2002—almost twenty years ago. 

How we react as individuals, as organizations and as a society—that’s what matters.

===================

When Old Rules No Longer Apply

©2002 John Mariotti

 

The cry sounds out so often, “The Future…is uncertain”!  Few realize just how uncertain it is.  Predictions about the future are notoriously inaccurate.  Consider the statements by these four learned experts!

 

•     “The radio craze will die out in time.”  --Thomas Edison

 

•     “No woman in my time will be prime-minister.”  --Margaret Thatcher

 

•     “There is no reason for any individual to have a computer in their home”  --Ken Olson, CEO, Digital Equipment

 

•     “640K of memory ought to be enough for anybody”  --Bill Gates

 

Time has proven and nature has confirmed that change is certain!  If further confirmation is needed, just look at the change in the population that defines the ten largest cities in the US.  Comparing the ten largest going into the 2000 Census shows that only three of the ten from the year 1900—New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia—remain in the top ten.  The shift of population to the Sunbelt and West Coast of the US has completely restructured the population distribution of the country and along with it, is restructuring the social and political power as well.

 

The other fact we know to be true is that change is difficult—difficult to bring about and even more difficult to accept.  The risk to the change leader is enormous.  It has been so for centuries and was recognized by Niccolo Machiavelli in “The Prince”, published in 1513.

 

"It should be borne in mind that there is nothing more difficult to arrange, more doubtful of success, and more dangerous to carry through than initiating change.  … The innovator makes enemies of all those who prospered under the old order, and only lukewarm support is forthcoming from those who would prosper under the new.”

 

If we are to open our minds to change, we must learn from errors and successes of the past.  We must struggle to clearly understand the present too.  But most of all, we must commit to finding and creating a new future.  Sadly, we are so preoccupied with perfecting the present or protecting the past that we fail to work on finding the future!  But this has been the case throughout history!  What do these have in common?

•     The Dinosaurs
•     The Roman Empire
•     The American Bison
•     The Open Range Cowboy
•     The Sony Betamax

 The answer, of course is that all of these powerful forces fell to changes because they couldn’t or didn’t adapt:

•     Dinosaurs--a environmental event--a meteor hit
•     The Roman Empire--fell to personal strife & greed
•     American Bison--herd instinct = hunting with rifles
•     The Open Range Cowboy--technology/barbed wire
•     Sony Betamax--technology/more user-friendly systems

 

But the more telling question is which powerful forces fell to natural enemies?  The startling answer is “None of them”!  They all failed to adapt, to cope with or to capitalize on CHANGE!  Technology changed.  The environment changed.  They struggled internally or herded together and then fell to change!  Yet change presents a great opportunity.

 

Since denial is a natural human reaction to change, one of our favorite forms of denial is that “this time is different”.  But, is this time unique?  Perhaps every generation thinks this is the case.  Consider this:

 

“Over the course of a few years, a new communications technology annihilated distance and shrank the world faster and further than ever before.  A world-wide communications network whose cables spanned continents and oceans and gave rise to new forms of crime.” 

This quotation sounds like today’s claims about the Internet, doesn’t it?  Except this was said in 1840 about the telegraph! 

 

And so, is change a terrifying threat, or is it a wonderful opportunity?  How you answer that question is will determine how you behave!  To put it another way, are you spending your time and resources protecting the past, perfecting the present, or are you focused on finding the future?  You know which one you must do!  Do it!

 

===============

2021 HEADLINE IN COLUMBUS (OH) DISPATCH: LAST VIDEO RENTAL STORES TO CLOSE. 

 

I PURPOSELY USE THE TERM "DISRUPTIVE CHANGE.” 

 

CAN YOU THINK OF A MORE DISRUPTIVE CHANGE THAN THE CORONAVIRUS. 

Look at what COVID-19 has done in the USA alone, with over 300,000 dead and the toll climbing daily. 

(And many more globally.) 

 

When the late Clayton Christenson wrote his brilliant book “The Innovator’s Dilemma”  and coined the term "disruptive change” he certainly never considered a change as disruptive and deadly as the Covid virus. However, even in the face of such a deadly and daunting foe, the principles to consider and the actions to take are largely the same. 

 

1) Understand and define the problem, and 

2) Solve the problem. 

 

To do those successfully, you must understand and solve today’s and tomorrow’s problem—not yesterday’s. In business and in life,  denial can be deadly—just with a different set of consequences. 

 

The key to Finding the Future is to build new plans, based on new circumstances, keeping in mind what worked in the past—but not relying on that to work now, or in the future.  These are different times, calling for different plans and new solution, based on new realities.

===================

This is not so new if you consider that I wrote this twenty years ago:

 

Perfecting the Present vs. Finding the Future  ©John L. Mariotti 2000

Harvard professor Clayton Christenson created a stir in industry circles with his work on disruptive technologies and how these seemingly mundane approaches are undermining the positions of industry leaders.  

A few years ago, I met with and studied a prospective consulting client who was in deep denial.  His company was on the threshold of decline—and yet, perversely, it was doing great—at the moment.  He wanted to talk to me because I think he sensed that trouble was just around the corner, but did not want to admit it.

As it turned out, he did not want to face it either, (so I did not get the consulting assignment to help him).  Why should he seek help?  His company was an industry leader with over 50% market share.  It was multi-national, with almost half of its volume coming from outside the U.S.  And it was handsomely profitable, although not as much so as it had been just a few years earlier—and profits were trending downward.

This company made metal products, mostly using the same materials and equipment they had for years.  Their processes were poorly documented, but deeply ingrained in the minds and habits of a group of loyal employees.  Their cost and information systems were flawed—and they knew it—but margins were so good, it did not matter enough for them to change.  Although the CFO complained loudly about the need to change, the CEO would have none of it. 

The company had started a token venture into alternative materials applications for its products, but this was clearly a stepchild, staffed poorly and narrowly focused on the simplest current applications.  The top sales executive simply refused to answer my questions with any weaknesses or competitive threats—not because he was withholding information.  He did not think there were any!  Scary?  You bet it was!  This story is still unfolding, but at last check sales have stopped growing and profits continue to fall in spite of making internal operating improvements. 

The principle here is that industry leaders nearly always fall victim to outsiders because they are so deeply invested in the know-how or technology that got them to the top, they cannot admit that it won’t last forever.

Upstart competitors upset the market and knock off the entrenched industry incumbents.  In addition to Christenson, Gary Hamel (Leading the Revolution. Harvard Business School Press, 2000) has made a crusade of pointing this out to large companies but with only modest results.  It is so hard to leave that safe, comfortable place, even when the risk of staying there is greater than the risk of leaving!

Somehow, it is always easier to work on “Protecting the Past” or “Perfecting the Present” instead of “Finding the Future”.  Don’t fall into that trap.  Disruptive technologies are coming.  Is it your industry’s time yet?  Now that you know it, what are you going to do about it?  Don’t bother to ask loyal, entrenched incumbents—they, too are the likely victims.  Find a bunch of rebels, or a small upstart company, and hire them or buy it.  Cisco learned this lesson and “Finds its Future” exactly this way.  Will you?=================

PS: Here’s a useful formula I discovered many years later:

PP*2≠FF: Protecting the Past, while Perfecting the Present does not equal Finding the Future.

================

HOW WE ADAPT AND EVOLVE WHEN FACED WITH DISRUPTIVE CHANGE, LARGELY DETERMINES OUR FATE—AND MUCH OF THIS IS WITHIN OUR CONTROL.

 

Will you spend your mental energy and resources (time, talent and treasure) on Protecting the Past, and/or Perfecting the Present, or are you Focused on Finding the Future?   That recurring theme will appear in future editions of THE ENTERPRISE.

 

STAY SAFE AND WELL…AND BE POSITIVE…

JOHN

---------------------------------------

Please email: [email protected] with your feedback, & future topics to cover? 

RATE THIS ON ON EACH: Interesting, Useful, Worth Forwarding—(3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good) 

Thank you, John 

THE ENTERPRISE--I HOPE YOU WILL SHARE THIS WITH OTHERS: ON INFLUENCE, PERSUASION AND NEGOTIATION

I PROMISED TO SHARE MANY WHAT I’VE LEARNED DURING MY CAREER IN THE (NEW) ENTERPRISE. HERE ARE A COUPLE OF THE BEST, MOST IMPORTANT TOPICS, AND WHAT I LEARNED ABOUT THEM.

These should be valuable regardless of your age, job, profession or stage of life. All of life involves negotiating, persuading, and influencing others—or being persuaded, influenced or negotiated with by others.

I didn’t create this knowledge, or write the books. I learned from the knowledge of others. I hope that you and a large number of your friends, family and colleagues can benefit from these valuable  lessons—and the work done by others to validate what they say as true and useful. 

As you can tell by the copyright dates, I first found these ideas decades ago. As I used them and passed them on, I  rewrote them into what I could share in this form. (Remember, during those years, I was writing magazine and web columns that had to fit on a single page or two.)

=====================
Understanding Influence and Persuasion 
©John L. Mariotti 1990, 2000
Life as a manager is all about who can influence—or persuade—whom.  Convince someone to buy what you sell, or to change to the direction you want to go, and your likelihood of success improves measurably. Millions are spent on training people in persuasive negotiation skills. With all of this attention to persuasion and influence, by now we should understand the underlying forces in influencing others--and how we are influenced.

Quite by accident a couple of years ago, I found a remarkable book:
Influence--The Psychology of Persuasion by Robert B. Cialdini (Quill, 1984 & 1993). Cialdini is an experimental social psychologist who decided to study compliance and why people respond the way they do. His book is based on both experiments and extensive observation, and the findings are very revealing.

Only one major influence--that of "material self-interest," the good deal of getting the most and paying the least—is not included in Cialdini's list of influences, because while it is powerful and effective, it is also a more legitimate influence than the others.
The influences Cialdini describes create a powerful urge to respond, which the author refers to as a "click whirr" response that is automatic and almost irresistible--even when we know what is happening. For example:

--Reciprocation--the old give and take and take and take. This is the principle behind the Hare Krishna practice of handing out free flowers or books in airports, and the basis for the entire ad specialty business (free pens, coffee mugs, etc.). I give you something and you feel obliged to reciprocate. Nothing says the exchange must be fair or equitable; and the intent of someone using this to his or her advantage is that it won't be.

--Commitment and consistency--false hobgoblins of the mind. We make a carefully considered decision or analysis, and then make a commitment, perhaps in writing. Afterward, we have a very strong tendency to defend and reinforce that position consistently--regardless of how right or wrong it was. Think of the last car or computer you bought, and how strongly you became a vocal supporter of that brand or model. 

--Social proof--truths are us. This is the basis for the use of laugh tracks on TV, the Jonestown mass suicide, and the influence of mass behavior that allows a person be mugged in full view of a crowd; no one helps the victim, because no one wants to break out of the crowd. Studies from 1972 to 1976 proved that after every widely reported suicide, the U.S. suicide rate increased the following week. The publicized suicide had legitimized that suicide was O.K. by the doctrine of social proof.

--Likeability--the friendly thief. Physical attractiveness and likeability increase a person's influence. Thus the use of attractive models in ads and the friendly salutation of telephone solicitors. We also like people who are similar to us in interest, lifestyle, and culture—and they can have an even greater influence on us if they compliment us and are nice to us. This is the basis for the "good cop/bad cop" style of negotiation.

--Authority--directed deference. Uniforms are not a coincidence. They impart an unspoken message of influence based on authority, as do titles, offices, and other trappings. In an actual situation described in Cialdini's book, a total stranger dressed in a doctor's coat was allowed to change the medication of many hospital patients with no questions asked.

--Scarcity--the rule of the few. When things like stamps are misprinted or Beanie Babies are produced in limited quantity, their value goes up. Even the illusion of scarcity is very powerful. Realtors who have other (often imaginary) prospective buyers use this leverage regularly.
Learning to be honestly persuasive is a valuable management skill. Using all the tools at your disposal is often necessary. Defending yourself from wrongful influence is one of those critical skills. Even when you know about these six powerful influence principles, they are difficult to resist. When you're unaware of them, you are easy prey for the unscrupulous.
==================
A SUCCESSOR BOOK, 30 YEARS LATER, IS WORTH CHECKING OUT
Pre-Suasion: A Revolutionary Way to Influence and Persuade by Robert B. Cialdini  | Sep 6, 2016
The acclaimed New York Times and Wall Street Journal bestseller from Robert Cialdini—“the foremost expert on effective persuasion” (Harvard Business Review)—explains how it’s not necessarily the message itself that changes minds, but the key moment before you deliver that message. 
================== 

You don’t get what you deserve!  (You get what you negotiate!) 
©John Mariotti 1998, 2014

You often hear the complaint is “that isn’t fair!” Who said life had to be fair? It isn’t--at least a large part of the time. Anyone who expects everything to be nicey-nicey... and still hopes to win in today’s brutally competitive world is living in a dream.

All of life is a negotiation. Any one who is married knows that negotiation goes on in the best of marriages. Teenagers negotiate for the family car or extra spending money, or permission to go to that rock concert or party. Why would the world of business be any different?

In corporate life, the annual budgeting, getting business plans, goals and objectives approved, against which your success or failure—or even a career—depends are based on the outcomes of a series of negotiations. Perhaps the relevant negotiation went on far beyond your station in life, in some remote board meeting or corporate headquarters—but be assured—it went on somewhere.
The smart thing to do is to become an effective negotiator. Negotiation is a learned skill. Some people are naturally better at it than others, but everyone benefits from learning the principles of good negotiation. Reading one of many good books on negotiation is one of the ways to start learning.

A far better way to learn is to attend a negotiation-training workshop where role-playing is used. Decades ago, Dr. Chester Karrass started such seminars decades ago, and his firm has continued doing them. They were great back then, and I bet they are still valuable. (http://www.karrass.com)

Until you find time for this important personal and professional education, here are a few tips you will learn more about later.

• Aim high!: The more you ask for, the more you get, unless your demands are totally unreasonable. This has been confirmed by extensive research. Make a list of your goals and aspirations and set them high. (Just leave some room for concessions.)
• Do your homework: Whoever is best prepared has a big advantage. Study your negotiating “opponent,” background material, and evaluate the possible options--yours and his/hers both. What are the opponents’ aspirations, fears, desires? What are yours? Consider several possible outcomes, and evaluate them so there is no guessing under pressure.
• Know & control deadlines: Deadlines can work for you—or against you. Know yours, and estimate your opponent’s, and then manage them as best you can. Make yours as flexible as possible. Avoid hasty conclusion of negotiations to catch a flight—you’ll lose—and may miss the flight anyway.
• Try not to make the first concession: Whoever makes the first one usually gives away more than the other party. Make concessions small and slowly and make the opponent really earn them with lots of persuasion. Never make a concession without getting one back in return.
• Be prepared to walk away: Sometimes the desired outcome is just not achievable, so unless you must make a deal, you can walk away to try again another day. Try for a win-win vs. a win-lose outcome. Then both parties are likely to stick to the negotiated deal with fewer lawyers to assure it.
• Document what you agree on: Document what you agree on, but go over the key points one last time to avoid “informed misunderstandings”—that’s where you both know you really have not agreed, but neither wants to admit it! Offer to write the agreement—it gives you more control of how agreements are stated. 

There are lots more where these came from, but these are a good start. Two final warnings are very important.

1. Make sure the person you are negotiating with has the authority to commit to what you want--if they don’t, don’t negotiate. Otherwise, you can only give but they will take whatever you give, and cannot commit to give what you want. Discuss as little as possible—until the person who has authority to make commitments is present.
   
   
2. When in doubt--shut up! No one ever made a concession or gave away valuable information when they weren’t talking. The Russians were legendary negotiators because they simply wouldn’t say much. While the American negotiators kept filling the silence, they were giving away small (and sometimes large) concessions and valuable information too.
   
   

Also, in today’s global economy never assume the other side doesn’t (or does) understand your language and terminology—Americans are one of few global powers who are not multi-lingual. English is taught in most other countries as a required language, so your international negotiating opponents likely understand it, even if they do not speak it well, or choose to use interpreters.

There is a lot more to becoming a skilled negotiator than these few meager tips. Take the time to learn how to negotiate—remember you don’t always get what you deserve--you get what you negotiate!

===============

I hope you find these as useful as I did.
Best, JOHN
=============

Please email: [email protected] with your feedback. 

Interesting   3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good
Useful          3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good
Worth Forwarding  3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good

Best, JOHN

 

THE ENTERPRISE--THREE STORIES, THREE LESSONS, ALL ABOUT FROGS

 

I NEVER WROTE THESE IN THE ENTERPRISE—BUT I TOLD THEM MANY TIMES IN SPEAKING SPOTS.

The lessons are simple, but unforgettable. You may have heard one or all of them. They are relevant because the government is handing out more and more “created money to ease pandemic created hardships.” But a lot of the handouts aren’t aimed at the hardships. They are just handouts. Like dropping money randomly from a plane.

 

“Created money” is money that has not come in from normal tax or other revenues, but is printed (created) by the Federal Reserve with nothing at all backing it. Sooner or later it will create both massive debts someone will need to address—and inflation, where everyone’s money is worth less. (That’s how the "banana republics" in Latin America end up with useless currency, massive inflation and abject poverty.)

 

The other problem with handing out "newly created money" is that it totally destroys the will and willingness to work. If you get $300-$600/week ($7.50-$15,00/hour) plus your regular unemployment and welfare of several hundred dollars per week, why work? Good jobs for low-skilled workers don’t pay that much. You might as well stay home, eat, drink and watch TV or play video games.   Thus the labor shortage, amidst high unemployment.

 

Story No. 1: The Scorpion & the Frog

A Scorpion wanted to get across the pond but can’t swim. He asks the Frog to give him a ride across. The Frog says, “Why should I?” You’ll just sting me and we’ll both die!”  The Scorpion answers, “No, I won’t do that. I’d die too. Trust me.” So the Frog relents and lets the Scorpion climb aboard. Half way across, he stings the Frog and as both are going under, dying, the Frog asks the Scorpion, “Why would you do something so dumb as to sting me. We are both dying now.”  The Scorpion’s answer as he goes under is: “It’s in my nature; that’s what Scorpions do; they sting others.

 

NOTE: These aren't political lessons, but if you take them that way, you are forgiven.

 

Moral: When behavior is ingrained in a creature, it’s virtually impossible to change, even if not changing is fatal.

 

Story No. 2: The Fisherman and the Snake

A Fisherman was fishing in a boat, and felt a tug on his line. He reeled in his catch and found a snake on his hook. In the Snake’s mouth was a small frog—its lunch. Feeling bad for denying the Snake its lunch, the Fisherman removed the hook and threw both the Snake and the frog back into the pond. Soon he felt a couple of stronger tugs on his line. He reeled in his catch and found the Snake again. This time the Snake had two frogs in his mouth.

 

Moral: The behavior rewarded is the behavior repeated.

 

Story No. 3: A riddle:

Q: Three frogs are sitting on a log. One decides to jump off the log. Now how many frogs are sitting on the log?

A: If you said two, that’s wrong. The correct answer is still three. The fact that one frog decided to jump off, doesn’t mean it actually did jump off. 

 

Moral: There is a difference between decision and action. If a decision is made and no action is taken, nothing changes. Change requires action after the decision.

 

=====================

SIMPLE LESSONS BUT DEEP MEANINGS.

Only if you learn from these lessons, will you actually take action and make changes.  People who have reached adulthood, seldom change very much. Some believe that after their teen years they don’t change, but I think it’s somewhere after they’ve entered the world of work as an adult. Like the Scorpion, their behavior becomes ingrained in their nature. Then denial sets in and every bad incident becomes "someone else’s fault" (like the frog for being trusting). The bonus column, while decades old, identifies a few types of  “problem people” discovered over years of experience. 

 

Most people are basically good. Few of them purposely do the wrong things, and then, it’s usually driven by insecurity or past painful outcomes. A small percentage (1-5%?) aren’t “good,” with deeply ingrained negative motives and behaviors, and those people hurt everyone else. I call it “poisoning the well” —from which everyone drinks. (The “problem people" identified in the Bonus Column, may—or may not—be fixable, depending on what their underlying motivations are.)

 

Consider your decisions carefully. Once you have decided, take action. Don’t hesitate. Get rid of them. Waiting makes the problem worse, not better. It’s not mean-spirited to fire them. By removing one “bad actor” you do a big favor the the 20, 50, or more, good people. Maybe the ‘bad actor" will find somewhere else where they fit better. Or worse, maybe they’ll find more “wells to poison.” (In today’s conflicted world, this message applies to “bad cops,” "bad clergy,” and anyone else who "poisons the well' over and over.)

 

Now you know what to do. What are you waiting for?

 

Best, JOHN

==============

BONUS COLUMN

Four kinds of problem people  ©John Mariotti 2004

In the age of the Internet, the computer, and the most exciting advances in information and telecommunications technology in history, there seem to be few limits to what networked microprocessors can do to help humans and businesses. Yet, despite all this technology, things still go wrong. Why? Because people get in the way. Either consciously or unconsciously, people sabotage systems and thwart progress. Here are four kinds of problem people to watch out for:

1. The over-promise and under-deliver type--This person wants to please you, knowing that what you are asking for is important and needs to be done. So he or she says, "Yes" to every request, agreeing to do more than is possible. These people may not realize that they lack the time, energy, resources, or knowhow to make it all happen. So what gets done is late, and a lot of things never get done. Their credibility suffers, along with their relationships with all of the recipients of their broken promises. Apologies are followed by new promises that also end up broken, despite the best of intentions.

Favorite line: "I'm sorry. I sure intended to get that done for you" and "I'll do better next time."

2. The not-invented-here (NIH) type--This individual understands that there are many different ways to accomplish things. But he or she often refuses to accept proposed solutions that were not created in his or her mind, group, department, etc. This is frequently an experienced person who has seen and done a lot of things--including some that did not turn out well because "someone else" created problems. As NIH types see it, there is a right way (theirs) to do things and all the other (wrong) ways. Active NIH people openly tell others why alternative approaches won't work, while passive ones work "underground," quietly resisting, ignoring, or sabotaging others' ideas. Operating mysteriously in the background, the passives are the worst of the lot.

Favorite line: "We tried that before and it didn't work" and "I know, I told 'them' about that months ago!"

3. The information hoarder--This person is a human "black hole, "sucking in information from various systems, subordinates, and peers—but sharing it only when it is to his or her advantage. Never caught without an answer, but always protective of their sources, these people regard their hoarded information as a source of power. Even their bosses have to dig hard to uncover important information that they've squirreled away. Peers get information only when they have something to give in return, or when it boosts the hoarder's reputation as a fountain of knowledge. Indispensable in a micro sense and disruptive in the larger scheme, the Internet and e-mail are slowly wiping out this species. But many of them still exist.

Favorite line: "Didn't you get that? I was sure I sent that information to you!"

4. The "no bad news" carrier--This type can put a favorable spin on any impending disaster. They just hate to give the boss bad news. They even hate to give peers or subordinates bad news. Fearful that delivering distressing reports somehow will reflect badly on them, they bury the worst of situations under a veil of minor good news. Or they just clam up, letting the bad news seep out elsewhere like an insidious oil slick. Even with strong encouragement to "tell it like it is," they will dress things up, making the situation seem better than it really is. The result is that remedial action is delayed, safety nets and alternative plans are not prepared, and others are blithely led down the road to failure—smiling to the bitter end.

Favorite lines: "I've got some good news and some bad news. Let me tell you the good news first" or "Gee, I thought I told you about that."

Certainly, in the world of business and management, you'll find many other types of saboteurs as well. Some mean well. Others are malicious. But all can cause untold damage. Beware!

 

 

THE ENTERPRISE—IS BACK FOR A NEW YEAR AS THE (NEW) ENTERPRISE—HAPPY HOLIDAYS

 

INTRODUCTION:

PLEASE RESPOND (VIA EMAIL) WHEN YOU SEE THE (NEW) ENTERPRISE
I’ll send the first edition to you (twice), so you don’t miss it, and have a chance to respond.

I appreciate any feedback, especially if you find THE (NEW) ENTERPRISE interesting, informative and useful.

AFTER THE POLITICAL TURMOIL HAS SETTLED, I’M BACKING OFF POLITICAL ISSUES.
In fact, I intend to avoid the "political turmoil" as much as possible and take THE ENTERPRISE in a whole new direction..

WHAT IS THE NEW DIRECTION? I’M CALLING IT “THE LIFE OF BUSINESS AND THE BUSINESS OF LIFE."

Many people don’t know I did a one-hour radio show on the North American Broadcasting Network, (Two powerful stations Phoenix AZ and Providence RI). My show was titled The Life of Business and the Business of Life. Before that I had been writing bi-weekly columns for IndustryWeek, Forbes.com, FortuneSmallBusiness.com, the American Management Association, Management Centre Europe, Executive Excellence and more…  In fact, when I went back to find all of the ones I wrote, between 1995 and 2015, I found over 300 columns, articles, blog posts, and several (as yet unpublished) books and mini-books.

 

In 1995, John Brandt, the Editor in Chief of IndustryWeek gave me the first break, when he invited me to submit a few “ Management” Columns for IndustryWeek. I did and he decided to use them.  I’m going to share several of those—and many others—with you over the next few weeks/months, here in THE (NEW) ENTERPRISE. 

 

PS: FEEDBACK IS IMPORTANT

Please tell me if you like them, find them useful, entertaining or informative—OR NOT!  YES (LIKE THEM) or NO (DON’T)?

Also please tell me if I should continue sending them to you.—YES or NO?

=============================

 

It’s Christmas Day 2020, following a year of unprecedented turmoil, suffering and death, and yet, humanity continues on living, struggling, succeeding (sometimes) and failing (sometimes) only to try again and again. 

 

 I hope these two columns will be a Christmas Gift to all of you.

 

The pandemic simply emphasized how much life and work might be different.  This 20 year old Column speaks to the “ burning” question we all have: What do I want to do, now that I’m grown up—and will I be able to do that?

Have you seen your “burning bush?”

©2001 John Mariotti

It seems a lot of people are searching for “what they want to do when they grow up”.  This is especially true when the aging baby boomers reach that age where retirement is premature, but the life of “corporate slavery” is no longer an attractive one.

 What are they to do?  What should they do?  Where, how, why?  These questions, which once plagued only the youth who were embarking on a career are being posed by 50 and 60-year olds.  The 50-60 year old people have already worked 30 years or more, and may have amassed enough wealth to retire—at least until the stock market plummeted.

But, many people who are 50-60 are still too vital, too healthy and too mentally active to “retire” in the old-fashioned sense.  Retirement (with a pension) is a product of the industrial age, when people were used hard and tired out.  After 30+ years of old-style factory work, the human body (and maybe spirit, too) is tired, and more years of physically demanding work is not attractive.

The new baby boomer group is not so worn out.  They may be turned off, as a result of repeated re-engineering, downsizing, transfers, layoffs, and corporate mistreatment.  They are neither ready nor able to retire comfortably.  Even if they have the money, so much of their self-worth and identity is tied to what they were in their careers, that leaving it is traumatic.

These people, and an increasing number in their 30’s and 40’s need to find their “burning bush”.  The burning bush metaphor is a biblical one, in which God conveyed His mission intended for Moses—to lead his people to the Promised Land.  When people in all walks off life consider what they really want to do, they are figuratively hoping to see their burning bush.

Try this.  Sit down in a quiet place with no interruptions and think about what you are (or were) really good at—and what you really enjoyed doing most in your entire work life.  Write down a few things and then reflect on them—asking why you were so good at those things.  What talent did you have?  What passion did you have?  What made you so successful at the things you were good at?

How did I jump to the conclusion that you were successful at these things?  Because it is almost always true.  Nearly everyone is best at doing the things they love most.  Now think about how and where you start doing that again, preferably for pay—but even if not for pay, just for the fulfillment. 

Retirement is supposed to be about recreation and happiness.  What makes a person happier than doing something they love?  The word recreation is really two words: re—creation.  Being created all over again. 

The only way you will find your burning bush is to think about it and look for it.  When you have, work will be fun, and fun will be what you do for both money and happiness—not either-or. Find your burning bush and learn what God’s path, and your own is intended to be.

Start today and don’t quit until you find it.  Just like in the bible—it will keep burning until you do. 

Once you’ve considered what you want to be and do, it’s incredibly important to make sure it’s something you will find meaningful and rewarding—both financially and psychologically. Life is too short for work to NOT be enjoyable and satisfying. Find the answer to the question: do you work to live or live to work. (Clue: Both!)

Management's Search for Meaning

©John Mariotti 2000.

In 1946, Victor Frankl wrote his moving book, Man's Search for Meaning, in which he reflected on life in a concentration camp. The most memorable part of the book is his commentary on what "kept people going." Each torturous day--in unbearable conditions, facing unspeakable cruelty and the specter of death as a near certainty--these people clung to life, sanity, and hope.

This may seem a strange beginning to a column on management; but it suggests a parallel in the daily struggle for meaning that afflicts many middle managers, more than a few executives, and their families. Each morning they rise and go through the ritual of getting ready for work, then juggle the pressures of family, household duties, and their jobs.

Electronic communications has now made it possible for our workdays to extend--or perhaps I should say, “intrude”--into our home lives. Pagers, cell phones, email, the internet, voice mail, and even answering machines--which keep us more in touch and more productive than ever--also form a cruel coalition to steal precious moments from the time in which we struggle to be husbands, wives, fathers, mothers, sons and daughters, neighbors, part of the community or church, and last, but certainly not least, individuals.

We can hardly ignore or block out their insistent chirp, vibration, and simple omnipresence. What if the next message is an important one? How can you know unless you check? “It'll only take a minute,” you tell yourself. But that minute becomes five or ten; and after taking time to send answers, suddenly an hour has slipped away.

The children are ready for bed, the trash needs to be taken out, the laundry hamper is overflowing, and dirty dishes adorn the kitchen counter in testimony to a hastily eaten and thrice-interrupted dinner. Today’s pile of reading material lies untouched and spilling over those from yesterday and the day before. Each day it grows like a relentless organism, casting a pall of guilt if not dutifully shuffled through. Throwing some out is the only sensible thing to do--but which ones? The material you discard unread will certainly contain the information the boss refers to at the next staff meeting, where peers will nod knowingly and comment while you struggle mutely to look knowledgeable.

Is this what life in management has become? Somehow the parties at the country club, golf on Saturdays, the camaraderie of the occasional fishing trip, and family picnics on sunny Sundays after church never seem to happen. All of our energy is consumed by things that "have to be done,” from the 7 a.m. commute to the 7 p.m. return (on the good days) to the six hours spent at the office on what used to be short Saturday morning drop-ins. In addition, there is the email check each evening for messages from the West Coast or Asian offices, and an occasional pager call in an emergency. Work alone now occupies over 80 hours a week for most managers. Fatigue is a near-chronic condition. Laughter around the house is rare.

Life has to have meaning, but it is hard to discern when things are like this. At work, we talk about priorities, but what about at home? What about family? What about you? When do you get a little time of your own? What keeps you going? For Victor Frankl and his fellow concentration camp inmates, it was the hope of survival and life after the suffering. What sustains you?

Work is meant to be the means to earn sustenance, so life can be more pleasant. Work is meant to be a rewarding experience in which we gain fulfillment, a sense of achievement, and some recognition. But children grow up only once. Miss it and there is no recovery--no "undo" button.

Finding the meaning in life requires balancing the conflicting demands on our time, attention, and the emotional energy that makes us each special. I have struggled with this balance in my own life for over half a century--and I still do each day.

If this column does no more than cause you to interrupt the mindless drill momentarily to reflect and rebalance your life for a short while, to search for and find meaning again, it will have served its purpose.

 

Please email: [email protected] with your feedback. 3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good

Interesting                    3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good

Useful                          3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good

Worth Forwarding       YES           NO

I hope you enjoyed these first two messages of “timeless truths” from the past.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year—Stay well, and God bless you and yours.

 John

THE ENTERPRISE—IS BACK FOR A NEW YEAR AS THE (NEW) ENTERPRISE—HAPPY HOLIDAYS

INTRODUCTION:

PLEASE RESPOND (VIA EMAIL) WHEN YOU SEE THE (NEW) ENTERPRISE
I’ll send the first edition to you (twice), so you don’t miss it, and have a chance to respond.

I appreciate any feedback, especially if you find THE (NEW) ENTERPRISE interesting, informative and useful.

AFTER THE POLITICAL TURMOIL HAS SETTLED, I’M BACKING OFF POLITICAL ISSUES.
In fact, I intend to avoid the "political turmoil" as much as possible and take THE ENTERPRISE in a whole new direction..

WHAT IS THE NEW DIRECTION? I’M CALLING IT “THE LIFE OF BUSINESS AND THE BUSINESS OF LIFE."

Many people don’t know I did a one-hour radio show on the North American Broadcasting Network, (Two powerful stations Phoenix AZ and Providence RI). My show was titled The Life of Business and the Business of Life. Before that I had been writing bi-weekly columns for IndustryWeek, Forbes.com, FortuneSmallBusiness.com, the American Management Association, Management Centre Europe, Executive Excellence and more…  In fact, when I went back to find all of the ones I wrote, between 1995 and 2015, I found over 300 columns, articles, blog posts, and several (as yet unpublished) books and mini-books.

 

In 1995, John Brandt, the Editor in Chief of IndustryWeek gave me the first break, when he invited me to submit a few “ Management” Columns for IndustryWeek. I did and he decided to use them.  I’m going to share several of those—and many others—with you over the next few weeks/months, here in THE (NEW) ENTERPRISE. 

 

PS: FEEDBACK IS IMPORTANT

Please tell me if you like them, find them useful, entertaining or informative—OR NOT!  YES (LIKE THEM) or NO (DON’T)?

Also please tell me if I should continue sending them to you.—YES or NO?

=============================

 

It’s Christmas Day 2020, following a year of unprecedented turmoil, suffering and death, and yet, humanity continues on living, struggling, succeeding (sometimes) and failing (sometimes) only to try again and again. 

 

 I hope these two columns will be a Christmas Gift to all of you.

 

The pandemic simply emphasized how much life and work might be different.  This 20 year old Column speaks to the “ burning” question we all have: What do I want to do, now that I’m grown up—and will I be able to do that?

Have you seen your “burning bush?”

©2001 John Mariotti

It seems a lot of people are searching for “what they want to do when they grow up”.  This is especially true when the aging baby boomers reach that age where retirement is premature, but the life of “corporate slavery” is no longer an attractive one.

 What are they to do?  What should they do?  Where, how, why?  These questions, which once plagued only the youth who were embarking on a career are being posed by 50 and 60-year olds.  The 50-60 year old people have already worked 30 years or more, and may have amassed enough wealth to retire—at least until the stock market plummeted.

But, many people who are 50-60 are still too vital, too healthy and too mentally active to “retire” in the old-fashioned sense.  Retirement (with a pension) is a product of the industrial age, when people were used hard and tired out.  After 30+ years of old-style factory work, the human body (and maybe spirit, too) is tired, and more years of physically demanding work is not attractive.

The new baby boomer group is not so worn out.  They may be turned off, as a result of repeated re-engineering, downsizing, transfers, layoffs, and corporate mistreatment.  They are neither ready nor able to retire comfortably.  Even if they have the money, so much of their self-worth and identity is tied to what they were in their careers, that leaving it is traumatic.

These people, and an increasing number in their 30’s and 40’s need to find their “burning bush”.  The burning bush metaphor is a biblical one, in which God conveyed His mission intended for Moses—to lead his people to the Promised Land.  When people in all walks off life consider what they really want to do, they are figuratively hoping to see their burning bush.

Try this.  Sit down in a quiet place with no interruptions and think about what you are (or were) really good at—and what you really enjoyed doing most in your entire work life.  Write down a few things and then reflect on them—asking why you were so good at those things.  What talent did you have?  What passion did you have?  What made you so successful at the things you were good at?

How did I jump to the conclusion that you were successful at these things?  Because it is almost always true.  Nearly everyone is best at doing the things they love most.  Now think about how and where you start doing that again, preferably for pay—but even if not for pay, just for the fulfillment. 

Retirement is supposed to be about recreation and happiness.  What makes a person happier than doing something they love?  The word recreation is really two words: re—creation.  Being created all over again. 

The only way you will find your burning bush is to think about it and look for it.  When you have, work will be fun, and fun will be what you do for both money and happiness—not either-or. Find your burning bush and learn what God’s path, and your own is intended to be.

Start today and don’t quit until you find it.  Just like in the bible—it will keep burning until you do. 

Once you’ve considered what you want to be and do, it’s incredibly important to make sure it’s something you will find meaningful and rewarding—both financially and psychologically. Life is too short for work to NOT be enjoyable and satisfying. Find the answer to the question: do you work to live or live to work. (Clue: Both!)

Management's Search for Meaning

©John Mariotti 2000.

In 1946, Victor Frankl wrote his moving book, Man's Search for Meaning, in which he reflected on life in a concentration camp. The most memorable part of the book is his commentary on what "kept people going." Each torturous day--in unbearable conditions, facing unspeakable cruelty and the specter of death as a near certainty--these people clung to life, sanity, and hope.

This may seem a strange beginning to a column on management; but it suggests a parallel in the daily struggle for meaning that afflicts many middle managers, more than a few executives, and their families. Each morning they rise and go through the ritual of getting ready for work, then juggle the pressures of family, household duties, and their jobs.

Electronic communications has now made it possible for our workdays to extend--or perhaps I should say, “intrude”--into our home lives. Pagers, cell phones, email, the internet, voice mail, and even answering machines--which keep us more in touch and more productive than ever--also form a cruel coalition to steal precious moments from the time in which we struggle to be husbands, wives, fathers, mothers, sons and daughters, neighbors, part of the community or church, and last, but certainly not least, individuals.

We can hardly ignore or block out their insistent chirp, vibration, and simple omnipresence. What if the next message is an important one? How can you know unless you check? “It'll only take a minute,” you tell yourself. But that minute becomes five or ten; and after taking time to send answers, suddenly an hour has slipped away.

The children are ready for bed, the trash needs to be taken out, the laundry hamper is overflowing, and dirty dishes adorn the kitchen counter in testimony to a hastily eaten and thrice-interrupted dinner. Today’s pile of reading material lies untouched and spilling over those from yesterday and the day before. Each day it grows like a relentless organism, casting a pall of guilt if not dutifully shuffled through. Throwing some out is the only sensible thing to do--but which ones? The material you discard unread will certainly contain the information the boss refers to at the next staff meeting, where peers will nod knowingly and comment while you struggle mutely to look knowledgeable.

Is this what life in management has become? Somehow the parties at the country club, golf on Saturdays, the camaraderie of the occasional fishing trip, and family picnics on sunny Sundays after church never seem to happen. All of our energy is consumed by things that "have to be done,” from the 7 a.m. commute to the 7 p.m. return (on the good days) to the six hours spent at the office on what used to be short Saturday morning drop-ins. In addition, there is the email check each evening for messages from the West Coast or Asian offices, and an occasional pager call in an emergency. Work alone now occupies over 80 hours a week for most managers. Fatigue is a near-chronic condition. Laughter around the house is rare.

Life has to have meaning, but it is hard to discern when things are like this. At work, we talk about priorities, but what about at home? What about family? What about you? When do you get a little time of your own? What keeps you going? For Victor Frankl and his fellow concentration camp inmates, it was the hope of survival and life after the suffering. What sustains you?

Work is meant to be the means to earn sustenance, so life can be more pleasant. Work is meant to be a rewarding experience in which we gain fulfillment, a sense of achievement, and some recognition. But children grow up only once. Miss it and there is no recovery--no "undo" button.

Finding the meaning in life requires balancing the conflicting demands on our time, attention, and the emotional energy that makes us each special. I have struggled with this balance in my own life for over half a century--and I still do each day.

If this column does no more than cause you to interrupt the mindless drill momentarily to reflect and rebalance your life for a short while, to search for and find meaning again, it will have served its purpose.

 

Please email: [email protected] with your feedback. 3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good

Interesting                    3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good

Useful                          3=Good, 2=OK, 1=Not So Good

Worth Forwarding       YES           NO

I hope you enjoyed these first two messages of “timeless truths” from the past.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year—Stay well, and God bless you and yours.

 John