 Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
Those who do not remember their past are condemned to repeat their mistakes.
Those who do not read history are doomed to repeat it.
Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of their predecessors are destined to repeat them.
Those who do not know history’s mistakes are doomed to repeat them.
Remember?
Remember when we tried to take the fat client app and do a limited browser version and called it a web app? Remember when we took our sloppy LAN “worst practices” and blamed the “speed of the Internet” for performance problems.
Remember when we tried to “evolve” OO to SOA yet we were still copying and pasting the same code all over the app. Remember when a web app was a marketing splash page. Remember when we thought about browser independence after the fact?
Remember how browsers and browser versions wreaked havoc on basic code stream and release management.
Remember?
We are doing it again. It’s just a phone now. A smart one, but still just a phone.
Technology is a thankless service.
Let’s try maintenance and support – the part most of us would rather be done by someone else. If we do our job correctly, we make it look far too easy and people rarely know it is happening. The business result of these efforts? Uptime and lots of it. Stability and reliability – how often do you think about breathing? The cultural results of these efforts? Well it would not be the first time that some CFO wonders what “all of those people” do down there all day.
Let’s try new functionality. Time to market is always longer than what someone wants it to be. Additionally, as soon as it makes production (70% of IT projects never make it to production) its resulting impact is typically not managed and measured thus its overall impact to the organization is typically not understood or realized. No wonder some organizations deliver the exact same functionality with 32 developers what other organizations deliver with 12. Who knows the difference?
You do.
Let’s not play the victim here. And please, let’s keep our professional immaturity in check. We are paid well for this “miserable plight” we are forced to contend with and we ought not need a pat on the back every day or exhaustive training to go along with our high salaries. 70% of the nation makes less than your average technician with just 3 years of experience.
The top and the best and the greatest are often led by an internal drive and driven by a force not clearly understood by others. Whatever you may want to call it (that in and of itself could raise a 3 hour debate with IS folks) re-capture, renew and re-energize more of it within yourself because you are going to need it. Don’t expect your boss to get what you do and don’t expect the CEO to value your contribution over the contributory efforts of the most average (defined here as the median not the emotional lexicon of average) salesperson.
 A colleague once called it dying from the “ism’s”: nepotism, seniority-ism, boy’s club-ism, best friend-ism and the like. I know you have seen it before. Organizations sometimes suffer from this cancer – undiagnosed in their self-diagnosis (outsiders can see it and call it fairly easily).
In amazement, I have watched a local not-for-profit organization suffer from these ills. At first I thought it was this strange lack-of-profit model and its inherent motivation (or lack thereof) that defined this organizations challenge. Until this weekend, when a CFO friend explained that the “Midas Rule – He who has the gold makes the rule” can apply to all organizations large and small, with and without profit goals.
I have watched as 2 guys have operated above the law and rule on decisions as long as it satisfies their own agenda as opposed to that which is best for the organization. I have watched as these two rationalized and justified each and every decision against each and every question or challenge to their decisions. I have watched them systematically eliminate anyone that would dare challenge their decision with the most innocent of reasoning shielding their true agenda – to rule; because it defines them; because without the ability to rule, they themselves become irrelevant.
Proper approaches, industry best practices and industry standards do not require a moral defense. Transparent models and exposed business practices do not need spin and rationalization. Fairness does not have any use for secrets and closed door shady deals.
Luckily, I have nothing to lose or gain in this equation. I am simply watching from the sidelines. But an entire community is losing and losing badly. When logic does not apply and reality is ignored and politics rein the organization and in this case the community it serves, is the one that suffers. And suffer for years. You see, a community does not have quarterly objectives to serve as traffic signals to where it is versus where it should be. A community does not cater to monthly profit projections as a warning sign of reckless leadership and boardroom ADHD. A community is not forced to publish an annual report such that its shareholders – its citizens – can reward great performance or opt for change. So it fails to notice as it slowly diminishes into a ghost town and a “remember what used to be there …” town.
Did I mention, the very purpose of this, organization (for lack of a better word), is to cater to the needs of about one thousand kids every year?
Your children.
The ism’s – are a cancer.
 A question was posed to me that this “consultese” was overused and lacked meaning. I was asked what it really meant; and what was the true, demonstrable and quantifiable impact on the delivery of technology to the hands of the business.
I live for this! Ok, I rather enjoy when posed with a seemingly indefensible position – a strategic approach indeed but mired in flaws as the question in and of itself wreaks of defensiveness and an inferiority complex. But what I enjoy is this – this question forces me to be exact, specific and avoid the shortcut – the quick answer.
The industry vertical: An app is an app is an app – or is it? There are many business scenarios to be learned from a multitude of industries. Working in the healthcare industry for 10 years writing stored proc after stored proc may or may not be as rich as writing in healthcare and in retail and in financial and manufacturing. There is a little something to be learned from actually performing in these varying industries is there not?
The SDLC horizontal: Be it waterfall or RAD or Agile or Lean or SCRUM (I know, I know – just trying to be buzzword compliant) there is a different set of related competencies at use in the varying phases of the SDLC. Can we not learn a little more about the depth of our industry if we spend some time learning and developing our capabilities in the scope phase or honing our skills in the requirements development arena (come on – what developer has not complained about requirements or the lack thereof)? Do we not enjoy the frequent and in-depth bashing of architects “not responsible for staying around and coding their lofty ideas”? Would we not learn a new appreciation from performing that role or would we “finally be the only one to do it correctly”? And clearly, beyond the development role, would we not understand the thoroughness of requirements traceability and could we not enhance the richness of our expertise by being the one responsible for those test scenarios? And who could forget the actual operationalization of the elegant code we wrote – would we not see things differently if we were the one responsible for turning it on and actually operating the P&L on a day-to-day basis with the actual tools just written by another competent developer?
The technological dimension: Where have I spent my one year? Have I spent it in the UI versus the DB or the services layer versus the infrastructural layer? Maybe I spent 1 of those years in the reporting area deploying the hard and fast parameter-driven reporting platform with a little BI embedding in the application itself. OR maybe I spent 10 years in the ETL layer bouncing translation files from app to app and from consumer to consumer and from subscriber to subscriber.
The business functional galaxy: If you know not a credit from a debit or the purpose of a clearing account how can you design and develop accounting solutions? Knowing the different drivers behind sales confidence and commission models may or may not enhance the ability to design and code lead management automation.
For me, I would prefer to cram as much in-depth richness and experience into ten years as I can. The more depth the more contributory value I can create and deliver to the organization. And in a results driven economy, delivered value is priced at a premium.
 I would not want to imagine a company with more than one of me. That would be – annoying. I was reminded yesterday of the many different differences between us all. And it is these very differences that make it all work. Could you imagine a world full of extroverts? No introverts to balance us out – that would be insane.
There is more at play here than a simple tolerance of differences. I am referring to more of a celebration of differences; an understanding that these differences are the “secret sauce” that should be embraced and celebrated. I would even go so far as to suggest the appropriate affection of these differences could make or break a project or even a company.
The next time you are faced with a guy that simply does not possess your appreciation for logic or the next time you are around a finance guy who does not share your passion – thank your lucky stars and trust the fact that these differences are the oil in the engine.
I was speaking with a colleague from Finance about Customer Service: yep – Finance … Customer service. She was remembering how her father had his own company and how they (the kids) were well trained on how to answer the phone politely and with respect and how her mother would be in the middle of “ripping them” (ripping is what parents used to do when parenting was the in thing) but quickly convert to Customer Service 101 when the phone rang. Just to proceed to uninterrupted “ripping” when she hung up the phone. I loved it and I loved from whence it came – Finance needs customer service too.
In technology we always have 2 sets of customers – internal and external customers. And if finance is working on their customer service skills then why not technology? Are we above the need to listen to our customers and exercise a little or a “lottle” patience and understanding when dealing with our internal customers? And why do we treat our external customers with such grace and finesse and tear apart our internal “children of a lesser god”? Is it beneath us to use complete sentences and elongated paragraphs when communicating with our customers? Is the extra time really that much of a drain on our overall productivity?
I have heard a lot of the “reasons” for how we treat our customers and the reality is this – if we don’t treat our customers like customers, someone else will and they will not be our customers anymore. And yes, that applies to our internal customers as well. It is simply blocking and tackling. I was watching the Monday night game last week and the announcers were discussing Bill Belichick’s practice and how they cover every detail. What does he get for that? 4 Super Bowl appearances in 10 years with 3 wins and the only team to ever go undefeated in the regular season – ever. Yes they did lose the Super Bowl that year but that is completely irrelevant – you cannot ignore the only team to ever go undefeated in the history of the NFL.
Customer service is like blocking and tackling – if you do it well – and by well I mean do a fantastic job at it religiously and fanatically – you will every opportunity to impress the world with your elegant technical architectural designs and efficient code writing and scalable infrastructure. If you do not do it well, no one will ever know how great you really are.
 I envy the Sports Industry. While no statistics represents an absolute (other than GPA + SAT pretty much = your academic potential plus or minus an essay here or there for college entry) the Sports industry has it a lot easier than we do. Let’s see the RBI for code delivered to production for an individual; or the rebounds per game for a Project Managers; or maybe the career scoring average for the COO?
Having been around this business for a while I think I have heard it from all sides: business leaders that just cannot understand why IT can rarely deliver projects on-time and within budget; developer ego that cannot understand why they are forced to worked with these incompetent business leaders who cannot make up their mind or define their requirements appropriately; QA caught in the middle who cannot understand why developers cannot write perfect code. And at the end of the day, it seems I must remind myself everyday that I am here solely to solve business problems and not to generate code for the sake of generating code. Now, not everyone struggles like I do. But look to your left and your right – it’s a lot of us.
So I was not entirely surprised when I was asked to join a meeting to help a colleague, and watched in amazement as a business leader discussed their “requirements”. They knew they wanted “agile” development. They knew they wanted Java. They knew they wanted a PM, 1 senior developer and 2 junior developers – to go – with a large fry. And I am certain, in the end, they probably got exactly that.
 Free Agency took on a whole new meaning lately. Did not Amazon re-define the way we see books? Did not Google re-define the way we see information? Did not Michael re-define the way the game is played? Introducing Lebron James – re-defining the way we attract and retain top talent.
The Decision and it’s resulting media frenzy not only gave us some insight but also taught us some lessons – if we were paying attention. There is no doubt Lebron is the most dominant player in the NBA (sorry Kobe – accept it). Additionally, will he not hold that crown for the foreseeable future? Everyone has an equal salary cap it is simply a matter of where to spend the money. 1 team attracted 2 players, convinced them to leave their own teams and come to Miami. Could not the Raptors had done the same? Why couldn’t Wade and Bosh move to Cleveland? Is it because Riley’s tossed his “bag” of 27 championship rings on the table and told Lebron to try one on (He has a gold, silver and platinum copy of each. What? He must match – right)? And how did Cleveland lose him and be the last to know? And finally, when was the last time this happened to you?
Lebron clearly had a well-planned and better executed contract renewal strategy. First of all he based his own individual assessment and development on the open market. He was not content to be the best at his company but the best in the league – the world. Next, he accomplished the stats the conference titles and the league titles (not the big one) to ensure everyone else knew he was the best. The rest is, as they say, history. What is your contract renewal strategy?
Are you comparing your talents to that of the open market? Are there 100 people working within 25 miles of you that make 20% less than you make yet have more capabilities and competency and have the stats and titles to prove it? Are you shooting 500 free throws a day after practice? Or, are you simply relying on your organization to train you and develop you?
The more you know, the more capabilities you have, the more intellectual horsepower you bring to the table the more valuable you are to yourself and to your company. In sales there is a great saying that if you do not develop the solutions required by your clients – your competitors most definitely will. The exact same principle applies to each and every one of us. If we are not growing and developing the skills required to take our organizations into tomorrow, someone else is and someone else will.
 Like all of you I have read and heard the overwhelming fear-based projections surrounding the next or the X or Y generation and their seemingly consistent … attributes (to be fair).
I was recently made aware of an applicant for a development position that declined the opportunity to interview due to the dress code (business formal) of the potential employer. It reminded of “this” generation and what I see as their simple lack of maturity. It also reminded me of every generation and our tendency to be narcissistic at times. In fact, it reminded me of me.
Here was a position that represented a developers dream. Or, at least what I would have constituted as a dream when I actually did the fun stuff – writing code. The position? First, the position involved full horizontal involvement and responsibilities throughout the entire lifecycle from vision to scope to requirements to BPR to design to development to UAT to deployment. Secondly, the position involved full vertical involvement and responsibilities throughout the technical spectrum from data integration/EDI to reporting and OLAP/MOLAP to UI technologies (the latest by the way) to middleware SOA development to database design/development. The intersection of these competency paths is pure gold. I would have waited overnight in line for this position – or would I?
The fact is at different stages of my maturity I probably made equally bad decisions. You could not have made me fly until I grew wings. You could not have made me think until I learned reason. Sometimes, looking for Ms. Right is a futile effort until you become Mr. Right.
From Lebron to the board room everyone is efforting to master the ability to build and manage the highest producing team. One of its core building blocks just may be the simplest (as in straight-forward as opposed to easy) of all – developing the professional maturity of the individual.
 It has been an interesting year for me – a learning year. To be honest I started off last year full of confidence in what I knew and how I planned to impact clients in a positive manner. Since then it has been an interesting ride as I have survived an onslaught of a gang of brutal facts.
It is said, one of the greatest tragedies in life is the murder of a beautiful theory by a gang of brutal facts. We truly do hold strong and fast to our way of thinking – human beings do not like change a whole lot. But, while the resulting growth is beautiful, the attack is intensely painful. My mentor once taught me companies fit into one of 3 levels of performance – 1) Doing more with less, 2) Doing things differently and 3) Doing different things. So lets look at the brutal gang of facts through the perspective of the first level of performance.
I find it hard to believe that Jamie Dimon is a genius – although I think a lot of his capabilities. But, surely if there is a billion dollars worth of fat laying around then someone else had to have noticed it. It is probably over-the-top to assume it was intentionally ignored but what is probably more accurate is the existence of a beautiful theory held onto tightly by a great many people. Someone was doing the best they could with what they had. Someone was making the very best decisions available to them at that point in time. And one would probably have had a hell of a fight on their hands to contradict those theories.
But in walks “the gang” to upset the apple-cart. The “more” part of more with less is not exactly what we imagined it would be. The changes we thought we needed were not necessarily the “pill” we asked the good doctor to prescribe. The “facts” present themselves as contradictory to our way of thinking as light to darkness.
If we allow this light in, the growth we experience and the lessons we learn can and will far exceed those old trivial goals of progress originally intended. Moreover, a new paradigm of performance can be achieved and what we may have thought impossible at one time, is suddenly in our reach.
Bring it on!
 In the year 2000, then Bank One posted $511 million in net losses as they hired Jamie Dimon to take over the reigns. Over the next 6 months Jamie Dimon cut $500 million in costs ($1 billion in his first year) in what was called “waste reduction efforts”. Can you imagine the comments when he announced his plan of action? I am sure he was called chicken-little, over-reacting and the other packaged responses typically used by those who lack action. Dimon pushed profit and loss reporting and analysis down through the organization to increase the understanding and change the management approach at all levels. He changed compensation structures to more appropriately align leadership decision-making with results. He walked away from non-profitable customers and even told long-time sacred cows to pay for their own Wall Street Journal. Many said he was the wrong guy for the job and was a prolific deal maker but that was the limitation of his talent. Boy were they wrong (remember, this is the guy that proactively and independently gave himself a 93% pay cut when he accepted the bailout funds). Hindsight is most interesting if we chose to view the past with objective lenses.
Stage 1: Define the strategy. Dimon could have asked for a 6 month analysis of where they could cut the “fat” or “waste”. Dimon could have sent out RFP’s to consulting companies for 6 months deciding which consulting company would execute a project to find the “fat” or “waste”. He could have then followed that up with a series of SWOT analysis on alternatives surrounding “how” to cut the fat. It could have taken 2 years. He knew there was inefficiency. He knew the inefficiency was fat and he knew he could get rid of it. Not everyone agreed – but he knew it. Go after the fat that you know exist and simply get rid of it. The developer that is counter-productive. The great developer that is ambivalent to estimation accuracy. The process rich with churn and low in productivity. If you know where it is – make a plan to go get it.
Stage 2: Just Do It! Imagine a “waste reduction” that will save the organization $10 thousand dollars a day. Now, urgency ought not be confused with recklessness or panic. But, delaying that gain by 2 weeks just cost the company $100 thousand dollars – the cost of indecision. Was the risk mitigated by the analysis equivalent to $100 thousand dollar exposure? Fear and hope are not proper leadership strategies and if you know it – just do it.
Some people see inefficiencies as a part of their core vision. They are just wired that way. It reminds me of the Matrix – they just “see it”. Obviously, all aspects of a process and impacts must be taken into proper consideration in order to mitigate risk. But sometimes “fat” or “waste” is relatively obvious. In consulting, did we not call that “low hanging fruit”?
The last time I checked, I think Gartner still indicates only 40% of all code actually makes it to production; only 40% of every IT dollar spent actually realizes ROI. There is enough inherent “waste” in our business – go after the “low hanging fruit” and increase your own individual numbers.
Working in the lawn this weekend I purchased some of the new (or at least new to me) instant, grow anywhere grass … patch … thingy. I have seen these things grow grass on concrete (marketing – GOT ME!). I literally laughed out loud when I remembered sitting in a meeting years and years ago – but more about that later.
I thought of the absolutely rich environment that must exist in that bag. The potential is stored in the bag and maintained such that when you pour the contents – anywhere – it grows. Wow! Perfect for someone like me who is – horticulturally challenged.
Now back to the meeting. This company had a time honored tradition of ideas presented to a committee in a meeting ironically titled the “Elephant Gun Meeting”. Conceptually, one would present their ideas and the committee would put the idea through the paces and if it – survived the shooting – they would pursue the idea. I am a metrics guy so I asked the percentage of presentations moved through to next steps. The answer was unknown but one member remembered an idea that “made it through” a couple of years before that meeting (I really don’t make this stuff up).
What kind of nutrients are stored in your bag? Can your ideas grow on concrete? Is your environment that rich with ideas and risk taking that ideas simply grow in all departments and in all circumstances? We all know the shades and sunny spots that occur in business; the rain and floods that come. The huge, seemingly immovable competitors that take aim at your market share. The new, quick and nimble competitors that crop up like weeds in your front yard. The M&A activity that makes many strategies a moving target. There are always many reasons to squelch and shot ideas full of holes.
The is only one reason your ideas are a rich green with deep roots that grow all over – because you create that kind of environment.
Back to the lawn …
 What are the most important keys to success in your organization?
I was in a discussion with a few colleagues surrounding the hierarchy of key performance indicators and someone introduced the KPI’s of culture. In this Six Sigma, management by metrics era we live in – one does not think of the KPI’s of culture. But, as my statistics professor used to say, just because you do not interpret the statistics does not mean they do not have meaning (if a tree falls …).
So lets try on a few just to hear the tree fall. Average length of tenure. If the average length of tenure is high it could mean a high degree of loyalty [great!]. It could mean a low degree of experience [1 year 10 times versus 10 years - bad!]. It could very well mean corporate leadership and HR are doing a fantastic job on the retain portion of “attract and retain” great talent [good!]. Or, it could mean leadership is resistant to change, prune or improve [GE bottom 10% - bad!].
And how about average training hours per employee per year? If this number is low it could mean people are repeating the same efforts over and over and expecting different results. It could be an indication that some much needed outside training and experience could increase the overall competency of the department or organization.
There are a number of weird and interesting data points that could really provide objective non-biased insight into the true culture of the organization as opposed to the stated culture of the organization – number of internal emails versus number of external emails, number of BCC emails, percentage of clients who answer feedback questionnaires, etc. If you really want to look into the mirror, a quick analysis of numbers could provide the evidence-based answers you are looking for. But be careful, many a man has stared into the abyss and left wanting!
 Some great quotes from Seth Godin (http://sethgodin.typepad.com/) are circulating on the web and one in particular struck me surrounding the room that great people need to become remarkable.
I was discussing the characteristics of “greatness” with a CEO last night and the two concepts collided as a reminder to me the importance of harvesting intellectual horsepower.
He shared with me his thoughts on the “strive for greatness” as something that could not be contained or isolated into a singular area. That the desire to be great makes one desire to be great at everything. That these individuals yearn to be a great friend and a great father and a great husband. That these people long to be a great worker and a great ball player and the best dishwasher ever seen. He thought that this drive for greatness could not be isolated to a relentless quest to be the great developer and share the same space as the sloth at home. It stands as a contradiction to the very fiber of greatness.
Now I don’t mean the arrogance of “look what I did greatness”. And I am not speaking of the greedy “pay me what I am worth” greatness. I am talking about the “up late at night and no one knows it” greatness. These talents and the intellectual horsepower they harness are not the gas that makes the engines go but the nitro that changes the game.
It is tough – no doubt – to manage these talents as they do not walk the normal path. The last thing you want to do with these guys and girls is treat them “different”. Moreover, they require the feel of the scorching earth the rest of us walk on to stay grounded. But grounded should not be confused with restricted in as much as risk taking should not be confused with recklessness.
Finding the best mechanism to attract and retain grey matter ought to be a priority. Freeing this talent of corporate politics and cultural anomalies should be a part of the daily process of providing the adequate structure, properly balanced with the freedom to become remarkable.
|
|
|
Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
