My list of desert island books

Recently a friend asked me to list a set of management books I would want to read again and again. It is probably the influence of these books that it did not take me much time to make up this list. Here is a list of  must read and reread' books..in no particular order. Do note that my work as a consultant and business leader probably influenced these choices a lot

Name of Book	Author	Publisher	Year
THE PROFIT ZONE	Adrian J. Slywotzky & David J. Morrison	Crown Business	1997
MANAGING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICE FIRM	David H. Maister	Free Press	1997
MICROSOFT SECRETS	Michael A. Cusumano & Richard W. Selby	HarperColins	1998
HOPE IS NOT A STRATEGY	Rick Page	McGraw-Hill Companies	2003
LEAN THINKING	James P. Womack & Daniel T. Jones	Free Press	2003
POWERFUL PROPOSALS	David G. Pugh & Terry R. Bacon	AMACOM Books	2005
THINKING FOR A LIVING	Thomas H. Davenport	Harvard Business Review Press	2005
STRATEGY SAFARI	Henry Mintzberg, Bruce Ahlstrand & Joseph Lampel	Free Press	2005
INFLUENCE WITHOUT AUTHORITY	Allan R. Cohen & David L. Bradford	John Wiley & Sons	2005
ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE AS STRATEGY	Jeanne W. Ross, Peter Weill & David C. Robertson	Harvard Business Review Press	2006
BUILDING AGREEMENT	Roger Fisher & Daniel Shapiro	Random House Business	2007
THE OPPOSABLE MIND	Roger Martin	Harvard Business Review Press	2007
THE LORDS OF STRATEGY	Walter Kiechel	Harvard Business Press	2010
BUY*IN	John P. Kotter & Lorne A. Whitehead	Harvard Business Review Press	2010
BE EXCELLENT AT ANYTHING	Tony Schwartz	Simon & Schuster UK	2010
ESCAPE VELOCITY	Geoffrey A. Moore	Harper Business	2011
SLIDE:OLOGY	Nancy Duarte	O'Reilly Media	2011
PLAYING TO WIN	A.G. Lafley & Roger L. Martin	Harvard Business Review Press	2013
SIDETRACKED	Francesca Gino	Harvard Business Review Press	2013
THE HARD THING ABOUT HARD THINGS	Ben Horowitz	Harper Business	2014
THE INNOVATORS	Walter Isaacson	Simon and Schuster	2014

Consulting on the Cusp of Disruption

My key take away: Consulting on the Cusp of Disruption (Christensen, Wong, & Bever, 2013)

It is rare to find an article on ‘Consulting’ and that too in a widely respected magazine like Harvard Business Review. When it written by one of the living guru’s in management, Christensen; time to start taking notes

Here are my key takeaways and TO DO list based on the article.

In this article, the authors look at the consulting world from the lens of theory; especially around disruption, to see how consulting is changing and why. And their prognosis: the same forces that disrupted many businesses are starting to change the world of consulting. The author’s base this prognosis based on various leading indicators; the ever decreasing share of classic strategy work in traditional firms and the increased use of value based pricing being the top two. The authors argue that the two factors that made consulting immune to disruption – opacity and agility are quickly becoming irrelevant and hence leading to the coming disruption. Opacity refers to the client’s inability to judge the quality of a consultant’s work and agility is the ability of top consulting companies to move smoothly from one idea to another. The article then uses the example of the legal industry to support this argument.

The article goes on to recommends that traditional consulting teams significantly rethink their service models and experiment with new. The short list of changes that a consulting firm should act on include

·         The disaggregation of the ‘one stop solution shop’ into modularized services that clients can procure

·         The democratization of knowledge : the explosion of analytics and big data leading to ‘almost’ real time analysis and actionable insights

·         The growth of ‘asset based’ consulting : This is the packaging of ideas, frameworks, and analytics through a technology platform; many a time billed on a license based fee model

The article then identifies two alternate models to the traditional solution shops of consulting: Value added process business and facilitated network. The key differences between the three are summarized below

Solution Shop	Value- added process business	Facilitated network
·     Structured to diagnose and solve problems whose scope is undefined ·     Delivers value primarily through consultant’s judgment rather than through repeatable process ·     Customers pay high prices in the form of fee- for-service	· Structured to address problems of defines scope with standard processes · Processes are usually repeatable and controllable · Customers pay for output only	· Structured to enable the exchange of products and services · Customers pay fees to the network, which in turn pays the service provider   ( Examples provided are Open IDEO, CEB, Gerson Lehrman Group, BTG, Eden McCallum)

[Table is reproduced from the article]

The author’s list of implications to industry, as they provide the dire warning ‘Disruption is inevitable’, include

·         A consolidation will happen in the industry over time

·         It will be in the smaller clients that some of the new models will get proven

·         The traditional boundaries between professional services is blurring

·         Technology will play a key role in supporting consulting services

Interestingly the article also provides some insights into what needs to be done to make a change like this successful

·         An autonomous business unit (with all the functional skills to be successful)

·         Leaders with relevant ‘school of experience’

·         A separate resource allocation process

·         Independent sales channels

·         A new profit model

·         Unwavering commitment from the senior leadership.

Now, these are definitely elements that we need to work on. Else, as the authors point out; we may become victims of our entrenched success. The leadership team and I very interested in hearing your perspectives on the changes happening in ‘our’ world. Please look around your client environment to see how they are using consulting and advisory services. What services are being consumed by our (current) primary client; the chief information officer? What are our competitors offering that makes them more attractive to our clients. What more do we need to do internally to get ready to take advantage of the coming disruption?

Work Cited

Christensen, C. M., Wong, D., & Bever, D. v. (2013). Consulting on the Cusp of Disruption. Harvard Business Review, 2-10.

Strengthening leadership capabilities

There is this interesting HBR article [How to make yourself Indispensible –John H. Zenger & Scott K. Edinger HBR October 2011] which talks about leadership competencies.


Key conclusions

• 16 key leadership competencies correlate strongly with positive business outcomes.

• Each have a dozen ‘competency companions’ whose development will strengthen the core skill

Actions required to improve leadership capabilities

• Self analysis on the 16 competencies  described above

• Attempt an informal 360 degree feedback

o What leadership skills do you think are strengths for me?

o Is there anything that I do that might be considered a fatal flaw –that could derail my career or lead me to fail in my current job if not addressed?

o What leadership ability, if outstanding, would have the most significant impact on the productivity or effectiveness of the organization?

o What leadership abilities of mine have the most significant impact on you?

• Based on analysis of above

• Identify a strength to focus on by asking the following questions regarding the 16 leadership competencies

o Do I look for ways to enhance this skill?

o Do I look for new ways to use it

o Am I energized, not exhausted when I use it?

o Do I pursue projects in which I can apply the strength?

o Can I imagine devoting time to improving it?

o Would I enjoy getting better at this skill?

• From table below pick the complementary competencies that will help you strengthen the key strengths.

• Find ways to improve on them

Business Model Generation

First of all, a big sorry for the slumber..Trying to get back into some of the GOOD habits of the past !!

I recently came across the book , Business Model Generation, ( Wiley, Alexander Osterwalder and Yves Pigneur). The book provides a different perspective of  'what' an organization can potentially change.

The 100 Billion USD valuation on a 3.7 Billion USD revenue  of Facebook is a clear demonstration of what business model innovation can achieve.

After defining a business model as the rationale of how an organization creates,delivers and captures value the book describes the components of a business model





The Business model canvas (http://www.businessmodelgeneration.com/canvas) provides a handy tool for describing an organization's business model

• Customer relationships
• Customer segments
• Value propositions
• Channels
• Revenue streams
• Cost structure
• Key resources
• Key partners
• Key activities

Using these components the book identifies various patterns of business model innovation. The models that the authors have identified include

• Unbundling business models
• The long tail
• Multisided platforms
• Free as a business model and
• Open business models

Some variants and examples of each of these are also described. The book also provides a set of tools that can be used to design a business model.These include customer insights,ideation,visual thinking, prototyping,Story telling and Scenarios.

Change agents looking for 'what to change' will find the concept of business model and how it generates value and how the interplay of factors affect an  enterprise valuable.. as they identify what to chaneg

The DuPont Analysis

I realise that a lot of my focus in recent times has been on personal skills. Here is a post on a related topic , what to change

Dupont analysis is used to illustrate how different factors impact important indicators of financial performance. As such, this can be used to compare companies in a specific industry.This can also be used to conduct 'what-if' analysis.

A change agent starting of analysis on what to change can enter basic information in the model (e.g. sales,liabilities,costs,equity etc) and then get a basic view of current profitability.

This can then be used to identify where possible improvements can be made and their effects.

Celebrating 1000 visitors

A personal milestone. onimprovementmatters has finally seen 1000 hits. Not sure how many unique readers that made up the 1000 hits. Took me two years (!) with many gaps in between .Interestingly most visitors come based on web searches .. and seem to come from all parts of the world. Most read area is benefit-dependency model.



Another set of 'characteristics' for change agents

There is this fairly old book, by Robert E. Kelly "Star performers" (1998, Orion). Here is a list of characteristics (which are very relevant in a change agent context too)

• Initiative : Blazing trails in the organization's white spaces
• Networking:Knowing who knows by plugging into the knowledge network
• Self management: Managing your whole life at work
• Perspective: Getting the big picture
• Followership : Checking your ego at the door to lead in assists
• Leadership : Doing small-L leadership in a big L world
• Team work:Getting real about teams
• Organizational savy :Using street smarts in the corporate power zone
• Show and tell :Persauding the right audience with the right message

I am hoping to dig deeper into each of them in subsequent posts..

Buy In .. Kotter strikes again

Had this wonderful idea.. which never got implemented ? Got shot down by colleagues and friends whom you thought were allies ? Sure you don't want the experience to repeat?

John P. Kotter, in his latest book 'Buy in'( HBR 2010) gives some practical advice on obtaining buy in. Like one of his previous books ,' The ice berg is melting' this is also written partially in the form a story. The focus is on meetings and how good proposals get derailed.The author(s) hopes the book would enable a proposer to get people to buy into a new idea

Based on the ways people tend to behave Kotter has identified 8 'typical' characters and their approach in meetings

• Pompus Meani [ Self importance above being good-wants to show power]
• Heidi agenda [Has an undisclosed personal agenda for opposing]
• Avoidus riski
• Spaci Cadetus
• Allis Wellis
• Lookus Smarti
• Divertus Attenti
• Bendi Wendi [Blows with the wind]

According to the author these people kill ideas using one of the following tactics

• Fear mongering (raise anxiety)
• Delay
• Confusion
• Ridicule (or character assassination)

Kotter has characterised these attacks into 24 types and also suggested a response. See attached table

The authors suggest the following

• Don't be afraid of distracters.Handled correctly,they can actually help you!
• Don't scheme to keep potential opponents,even the sneakiest attackers,out of the discussion.Let them in.Let them shoot at you.Even encourage them to shoot at you
• Always respon in ways that are simple,straight forward, and honest
• Don't try to overcome attacks with tons of data;logic and yet more logic;or lists of reasons why unfair,uninformed,or sneaky attacks are wrong,wrong,wrong.Instead do what might seem to be the oppoiste
• Show respect for everyone
• Do not try to crush attackers with ridicule,counterattacks or condescension,eben when it seems as though people deserve it,even when a part of you really want to do just that,and you have the skills to do so
• Watch the audience(not just the people shooting at you)
• Anticipate and prepare for attacks in advance

P.S. All content in this blog is from the book. Copyright acknowledged. This is only a summary of the book

On taking decisions

In the past I have provided links to how great leaders arrive at solutions to problems that apparently had no apparent solutions. Being able to make sense of and take the most appropriate decision is an key change agent skill.

In his book ;"Why Great Leaders don't take Yes for an answer", Michael A Roberto talks about how leaders can enhance the quality of their decision making processes. According to him, leaders ( and in our context;change agents) must cultivate constructive conflict so as to enhance the level of critical and divergent thinking,while simultaneously building consensus so as to facilitate the timely and efficient implementation of choices that they make.

The author distinguishes between cognitive conflict     ( Constructive debate that can enhance the decision to be made) and effective conflict(when personality clashes emerge).Similarly consensus in more about every one understanding the rationale of the decision than uniformly agreeing to it. The author then build the following picture on decision success..

For a decision to be a success, it seems what is needed is a process.. a process that effectively balances conflict and consensus. The key elements to be considered in establishing a process of taking a decision include

• Composition: Who should be involved
• Communication:What are the means of dialogue among the participants
• Context: In what types of environment does the decision take place
• Control : How will the leader control the process and the content of the decision?

Many approaches ( e.g. Edward Debono's Thinking hats) have been recommended and practiced to enable organizations find the right balance.

Winning with integrative thinking

As people responsible to bring in change, we are sometimes faced with problems that seem unsurmountable.I have rarely come across directions on what could be called 'good' problem solving.

Roger Martin in his book 'The Opposable Mind' consolidates research he has done on how some of the most outstanding men and women of our century think (and solve problems). That the research included K V Kamath and (our own) Ramalinga Raju probably makes the book more interesting.

This is what Martin says

Most of us think and decide in almost a sequential manner: To quote the author "We arrive at our choice by considering a set of features we deem salient;creating a mental model of the causal relationships among these features;arranging those causal relationships into an architecture intended to produce a specific outcome;thereby reaching a resolution of the problem at hand". This approach is many cases lead to 'sub optimal' results.

The author then goes on to provide examples like how A.G. Lafley reinvented innovation at P&G to introduce the concept of integrative thinking. Integrative thinking is the ability to hold two opposing ideas in their mind at once , and then reach a synthesis that contains elements of both but actually improves on each.By refusing to accept unpleasent trade-offs and conventional options,integrative thinkers are able to find creative solutions to difficult problems.

Here is a list of take aways regarding integrative thinking that would be useful to us as we attempt to find solutions to problems

• Seperate (mental) models and reality
• The author talks about the 'factory setting' each of us have, which in turn means we think in a certain manner
• Dancing through complexity
• The need NOT to over simplify
• Mapping the mind

The author then goes about to talk of how 'integrative thinkers ' connect the dots or the leap of mind.,
The skills required include

•  Generative reasoning ( a form of reasoning that inquires into what might be rather than what is)
• Causal modeling and
• Assertive inquiry ( an ability to explore opposing models)

The author then goes on to talk about the personal knowledge system of an individual as what makes a difference.Time all of us build one, clear in the understanding that ; may be out there; there is an innovative solution to THE problem , that we just have not thought about..





















P.S. I attempted to put some of this theory into practice .. end result I started car pooling with some of my colleagues. While saving on fuel was defenitely a goal, what led us to this was too things : Pooling meant that we got out of our offices atleast two days a week on time and we got time to talk together

Reasons for a short break - Started writing again - will post by Nov 15 !

I was out in the field travelling till the 28th of May.Post which, some additional responsibilities and organizational realignment took up a lot of my time.

I also realised that while I met my 'quantity' targets of a post a week, I was not very happy with the 'quality' of my posts. I also saw myself repeating almost the same stuff

Please bear with me till I return with more detailed posts. My target date for the same is 15th of August

Deciding what to change: Role of a diagnostic

It has always been a struggle to me to clearly establish an approach to identifying what to change. Six Sigma has its X's and Y's; process consultants have their maturity framework...but how does a CEO decide what needs to be changed in an organization..

Though newly arrived CEO's probably don't ; most consultants seem to recommend some form of diagnostic as the first step to starting a transformation journey.

Mark Gottfredson and Steve Schaubert (of Bain), in their book 'Breakthrough Imperatives (2008,Harper Collins) recommend a three step approach. The authors divide the transformation into steps of

• diagnose the points of departure
• envision the point of result and 
• (build) the road to results

The authors build their diagnostic around the following defined rules ; 

• Costs and prices always decline
• Competitive position determines your options
• Customers and profit pools don't stand still
• Simplicity gets results

We will discuss building diagnostics around these rules in subsequent posts. Any diagnostic will need identifying appropriate measures or performance indictors, finding ways to know the existing performance and establishing some form of benchmarks

What has been your experiences with building a diagnostic

P.S. Apologies for the break of previous weeks. I had another 'writing assignment' for my organization !!

Lateral leadership : A'nother' key change agent skill

Another key skill that every person tasked with making change happen is Lateral Leadership. Roger Fisher (1998, Harper Collins) subtitles his book on lateral leadership as getting things done when you are not the boss. I am sure every 'change agent' can recognize the situation

According to Fisher one can achieve a high level of colloboration that produces high quality results through lateral leadership.This includes three basic steps

• Organize and sharpen one's  personal skills at getting things done by yourself
• Understand clearly your strategic goal of an organized way of getting things done with others
• Learning some tactics of participatory management

Personal competency model

Just came across this 'managerial'  personal competency model, published in some manner by the UK Govt., way back in 1997. The contents resonate with my thoughts on what makes one a succesful change implementor. Hence reproducing the whole table . One can use the table to evaluate skills and gaps and identify improvement actions.

The Change Monster : A mental model for org change

Every 'change agent' should have a perspective of the various 'theoritcal' frameworks that has been proposed around organizational change. A realisation of the diversity of the approaches and their conclusions will help a change agent frame his or her response to a situation. I intent to provide short notes on the various approaches in this and some subsequent postings.

One of the 'interesting' frames of references I have seen is that proposed by Jeanie Daniel Duck in the book 'the Change Monster'.( 2001,Randon House).

The Change Curve , as illustrated above, provides a map of the territory of change according to the author.The change curve suggests that every organization going through will change will go through the phases of stagnation( till it is pushed either externally or internally) and should then ideally go through the phases of preparation,implementation,determination and then fruition. 

Assuming that most of get to do things after someone has identified the need for change :-); here is a short list of does and don't in the various phases according to the author

Preparation

• 
  
  Gain alignment
• 
  
  Use anxiety effectively
• 
  
  It is not important that leaders like each other,but they need to be able to work together effectively
• 
  
  Group change requires individual change ; a behavioural contract is required from every individual
• 
  
  Alignment is not the same as commitment and commitment is not the same as getting energized
• 
  
  A ready-willing and able assessment tells us when we are prepared

Implementation

Some of the recommendations for implementation include the need to build leadership strength, the need for informal communications etc

Which other framework do you use ?

Process Vs Functional Organization

Organization structure is one of the key levers available to a leader wanting to make improvements in the organization.A key trend that we see today is the move to 'process based ' or even more a matrix organizations. In the case of matrix organizations also , process tend to be one of the axes.

I do a lot of work in IT function improvement.Many clients are today implementing ITIL as an approach to bring visibility and improvement on the support side of IT. When implementing ITIL, a key struggle has been deciding the balance between the existing functional roles ( say a help desk manager) and the 'newly' introduced process roles (say a incident manager).

In the book,'Designing organizations' ;Jay R Galbraith (2002 Jossey Bass) talks about the type of lateral processes based on management time and difficulty. He talks about various levels : Voluntary and informal group, e- coordination,formal group (ranging from simple to multidimensional and hierarchical),integrator (full time by roles or departments) and finally a matrix organization.

Organizations wanting to implement ITIL are also faced with similar choices. As shown in figure above, they need to make a choice on the level of authority for the newly introduced roles. From a simple  reporting (Weather station) sort of roles (which would then be allotted on a part time basis to an existing functional role) organizations mature and evolve to provide more authority and control to process functions. There exists no perfect answer to where the balance of power resides !


What does all your experience suggest?

Influencing : a key change agent skill

Another critical skill that every change agent should attempt to develop is the skill to influence. On most occasions change agents will have to work through project team members over whom they have no formal authority.

Allen R. Cogen & David L. Bradford in their book "Influence without Authority" (2005, John Wiley) proposes an 'Influence Model' .The influence model aims to provide direction on influencing others

According to the authors the influence model- a careful diagnosis of the other's interests,assessment of what resources you possess,and attention to the relationship-enables one to address 'difficult situations'

The key elements of the model ( see figure) are

• Assume all-the other person or group-are potential allies
• Clarify your goals and priorities
• Diagnose the ally's world-organizational forces likely to shape goals,concerns and needs
• Identify relevant currencies(what is valued): the ally's and yours
• Deal with relationships
• Determine your trading approach: make exchanges

Are there best practices when it comes to influencing? How can a change agent be more effective?

Competencies to enable change: Judgement

As I introspected on qualities that make up an effective change agent, I recognized 'Judgement' as one of the critical ones .Judgement is typically identified as a leadership quality. But given the similarity of the nature of issues ( though may be smaller in scope) that a leader and a change agent has to resolve 'Judgement' becomes critical to a change agent .

Judgement (Neol M.Tichy and Warren G. Bennis 'Judgement' ;2007 Penguin)  is defined as a contextually informed decision-making process encompossing three domains: people, strategy and crisis.

Like a leader,a change agent, entrusted with the responsibility to deliver an improvement in his/her organization must take decisions in the face of ambiguity,uncertainity and conflicting demands.Here is a short list of approaches that can lead to 'good judgement' If you are responsible to drive change through your organization, then, some of these are as much applicable to you

During the sense/identify phase

• Be able to identify the environment early
• Mobilize to act
• Be energized about the future

During the frame/name phase

• Be able to cut through the complexity and get to the essence
• Clearly set parameters of a problem
• Provides context and language

During the mobilize/align phase

• Identify key stakeholders
• Engages and energizes stakeholders around framing
• Taps best ideas from anywhere

During the call phase

• Exercises yes/no judgement
• Clearly explains judgement

As the execution phase

• Leader stays in the game
• Supports those making it happen
• Sets clear milestones
• Gets feedback
• Makes adjustments
• The feedback is continuos

The Six Sigma way to identify what to change

Six sigma practitioners have been pointing out six sigma also provides approaches to decide what requires change in an organization.

If one were to look at what Stephen A. Zingraf says in 'Six Sigma-The first 90 days' (2006,Prentice Hall) six sigma methodologies provide a quantitative understanding of the relationship between the process outputs and the process inputs. The output of a process is a function of a set of inputs of a process (Y=f(x's)). where Y is the output and X's are the inputs. This understanding can be translated into the strategic planning process

Y Return on investment =f(Profits, Investments)
    Y Revenue =f (Quantity Sold,Average Selling Price,Discounts)
         Y Profits = f (Revenue,Product Cost, Business Costs)
              Y Cash Flow = f( Profits,Working Capital)
                   Y Economic Value Add = f(Profits,Capital Charges)

The process of six sigma is designed to identify the most important inputs,optimize those inputs and then control them. In Six Sigma parlance the critical Ys  (big Ys) are a function of inputs.Projects improving those inputs will improve the performance on the outputs.

So an organization attempting to identify what needs to change can use an analysis of x's and Y relationship to decide what to change.
But how does one decide the big Y's that require focus. Do organizations stumble by picking wrong areas to concentrate improvement actions?

Business Model :Key to deciding what to change

As a response to my earlier post of how does one decide what to change in an organization, a colleague referred me to the book 'Confronting Reality'.

My colleague was  pointed out that a review of the 'business model' will enable one to identify what needs to be changed.

The authors ( Larry Bossidy and Ram Charan, 'Confronting Reality" 2005) define a business model as a statement of an organization's current reality and its likely-as opposed to hoped-for- future direction.
The business model ( see figure) has three essential components

• the environment in which the business operates
• the organization's financial targets
• Activities of the business:strategy formulation,operating activities,selection deployment,development of people, and organizational processes and structures

The authors believe the business model provides a blue print of taking action.Repeated review of the components of the business model till a harmonization can be achieved will throw up the factors that need to change..

Any thoughts?