Your feedback
Widgets and links

Featured in Alltop

 

Top sales blogs award

Top sales blogs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Site management
Powered by Squarespace
Search
sizzle.jpgThe Sizzle is our blog - observations, thoughts and snippets related to quality, delivery and cost in enterprises; for a profile of the author go here
Monday
Jul052010

Machines should work, people should think

New Zealand is struggling to keep up with its peers in wealth generation and its leaders are struggling to understand the root causes and how to change them.

The easy measure of business activity is productivity - and business owners are often criticised for the lack of it. Does this mean we don't work hard enough? Are we complacent; settling for the "bach, boat and BMW" rather than striving for the national good?

My view is that, aside from our small local markets not offering the aspirations and hardening fire of strong competition, our productivity problem is a capital problem.  New Zealand's venture capital is broken, such that passionate entrepreneurs often have to seek offshore funding to grow.

Capital enables investment in machines, and machines work. Automation is what accelerates processing and output speed far more than flogging people - particularly in a country where skills are scarce.  The paradox, in fact, for people is that they will output more if given the chance and not treated like computers. Better to recognise the importance of thinking time and the process of creative focus - especially for people charged with making new things or solving problems.

The solution to our productivity problem is to invest in automation, to release our intelligence to focus on human touch-points and high return fixes by enabling machines to run the repetitive tasks. The challenge is our approach to investment; maybe there are big answers in our capital market system (med report - pdf), but at an individual business level, the answers lie in recognising the different time value of machines vs people:

Machines should work, people should think (IBM Pollyanna principle).  

Monday
Apr192010

flow: your happy place

the psychology of challenge vs skillConsultants: highly paid experts for whom time really is money. Consultants (incl. engineers and lawyers) are often called upon to complete activities that involve painstakingly following client policies and processes. These can be laborious, complex and time-consuming. If you think they'd be happy about this because it means more billable hours, I think you might be wrong.

Often maligned and usually misunderstood, people tend to think consultants are motivated by money. I believe instead they are motivated by fully utilising their skills to help clients. Knowledge workers like to think - to be challenged for their creativity and opinion - not to follow administrative rules. 

That is why consultants love productivity tools. Tools that speed up the repetitive elements of their work and free them to do what they are really good at. To better get them in the state of flow, a state when your skills are fully employed and your attention fully focussed. The buzz of flow is a consultants happy place. See the work of Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi for more on this theory. Don't be surprised then if your consultants are the first to embrace your process automation.

Monday
Apr122010

supporting Blue Smoke

Ezidocs supports the work of Blue Smoke Records in modernising the legendary Blue Smoke music of Pixie Williams. When this music hit the airwaves in 1948 it was an instant hit - only knocked off the NZ charts by Bing Crosby and something about a white Christmas. Blue Smoke was THE first NZ pop song - wholly, written, sung, and produced in NZ.

Today the team at BSR has reworked the original with the voice of modern blues artist, Shelley Hirini. It is a beautiful rendition, preserving the spirit of the music but bringing in a modern and high def polish. It is deserving of anthem status, I applaud the initiative and thank them for breathing new life to it to keep the memories alive and relevant to a new audience.

Sunday
Mar142010

left brain developing

When I finished my MBA in the late 90s I immediately took a class in drawing from the left side of the brain. I needed to rebalance things.  While the left brain - right brain theory can be criticised for its simplicity, it is a useful framework for appreciating that people do approach tasks from very different angles and with very different cognitive functions.  Right is about rationality: logic, detail, facts, words, math and science, order/pattern. Left is about feeling: perception, imagination, spatial perception and possibility. This may go some way to explain why most business documents are content driven and only superficially consider look and feel. It also suggests why visually oriented design tasks favour some people while others excel at pain-staking rules based tasks.

Web application development is one activity where both sides come together. It is rare to find a software developer who can create a visually appealing and intuitively good design. It is also rare to find a creative designer who can build robust and elegant functional code. How well the two marry is what makes or breaks a good application.

However, applications are like icebergs - most of the work is under the surface, hidden beneath the user interface. Changes to the interface can be relatively simple compared to functional changes to the underlying code. This is useful to bear in mind when selecting skill-sets for a build. After all, form does follow function.

Tuesday
Dec082009

grand plans vs quick wins

The time-frame for projects is, of course, dependent on scope (and budget and quality) but it is not uncommon for projects to require decision trade-offs between large, long term gains and smaller faster fixes, or quick wins.  There is no magic formula on the balance to strike, and certainly there are many examples where either:

  1. grand plans suffer from changing context, flagging confidence, shifting sponsor support, or increasing project risks and fail to deliver on expectations, while immediate issues have gone unaddressed; 
  2. quick wins "do it fast but don't do it right" - applying band-aid solutions to symptomatic problems while causal factors continue and ultimately lead to strategic failures.

These extremes, however, suggest oversimplification in the way scope meets strategy - a cause of tension in development projects. 

The trick is to assess potential deliverables on a roadmap against the benefits they offer and to tailor and prioritise the work programme accordingly. In principle, even "strategic solutions" should show reviewable deliverables in 6 -12 weeks and a working iterations in 18-24 weeks. Appropriately prioritised, these small steps should have big impacts while also progressing the strategic plan.

A well thought-out plan will consider time-to benefit, front-loading, and crawl-walk-run-lead aspects but also note that, in some cases (e.g. softening markets) even a delay may be the most economic option.

Maybe its about reaching for the low-hanging fruit, while ensuring you're at the right tree.