Time to spring clean our assumptions!

Reevaluation need not be a reaction to actual or imagined failure but can be a kind of organizational hygiene, a spring cleaning of assumptions.  ~Faisal Hoque with Drake Baer

It is approaching that time of year when we begin to think about spring cleaning.  Living in an urban environment there is another phenomenon that also reminds me spring is just around the corner, and I am desperately in need of those reminders this year. 

In the city, snow is pushed off the sidewalks to the edge of the street and from the street to the edge of the sidewalks.  This mound of snow continuously builds throughout the winter then begins to turn to an icy, mucky mess and finally begins to melt (a sign of spring!).  As it melts, it's fascinating to see what's revealed.  All of the cans, fast food containers, junk mail, etc. people have tossed thinking it would be hidden in the snow.  Along with items that have gotten caught up in the winter winds and of course what's left behind from pets that pet owners believed it was okay not to pick up since it would be buried in the snow.  Yes, it's quite a sight.  All of winter's messes revealed as spring begins to emerge.  All of what we assumed would be out of sight is now exposed.  A sure sign it might be time to spring clean our assumptions.

I think that's how we treat assumptions in organizations.  Because we haven't had a failure, imagined or real, we don't take the time to stop and reevaluate, we don't practice some highly needed organizational hygiene.  We assume we can keep tossing our unwanted items into the snow banks because they will remain hidden.

Assumption means hypothesis, guess, theory, conjecture.  We all like to think that we assume very little because we make decisions based on "fact" and "truth."  The reality is we can never know every facet and variable that might touch a situation, especially today.  We live in a more dynamic world than any time in history; something, or maybe everything, around us is constantly changing. 

We're coming out of decades where leadership success was measured by the ability to create sustainability through stabilization—living in a world of facts and truth.  Leadership success today, however, is and will be measured by the ability to create sustainability through learning and adaptation—constantly questioning our assumptions.

Here's an example in my world of consulting.  Management consulting has been the standard or typical assumed best approach for many years.  This means that an outside consultant comes into the organization, studies it, and then as the outside expert makes specific recommendations to be imposed upon the organization.  I believe that much of management consulting is going to be replaced by business coaching.  This means that the client is now the expert and the coach helps to create a safe but challenging space for both individuals and the organization to move from where they are to where they want to be.  The business coach approach aligns more with a learning and adaptation view of the world, while a management consulting approach aligns more with a world view of facts and truth.

This shift in thinking around how my work is defined was a result of some challenging spring cleaning of my assumptions about both what I do and what organizations really need. 

I love this idea of spring cleaning our assumptions.  It can be applied to our professions, our organizations, our relationships, and even our daily and mundane decisions.  Let the spring cleaning commence!

An empty mind is fertile ground for possibilities.

Erroneous assumptions can be disastrous.  ~Peter Drucker

I recently became aware of a book just published in January entitled, Everything Connects: How to Transform and Lead in the Age of Creativity, Innovation, and Sustainability.  The basic premise of the book is that we've shifted from a priority of optimization which implies rigidity, to a time of creativity, innovation, and sustainability in order to be continually adaptive.  One of the first concepts presented is the idea of a beginner's mind.  Here are a couple of paragraphs from the book to set-up this notion.

As a society of professionals, we've received educations previously reserved for royalty, made travels once only known to explorers, and developed skills in ourselves that are indistinguishable from magic.  However, all these concepts we've accumulated are more map than territory: if we fixate our conception of the world on the systems that we build to represent it, we can lose sight of the world.  Instead of seeing the world, we see only our ideas about the world.  Since we've established that we have all the insight, we don't allow more to come in. 

This is why we need to maintain a beginner's mind: a certain playful absence of assumptions.  As Shunyru Suzuki writes, "In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities, but in the expert's there are few."  And since innovation is the result of successive ventures into possibility, we're motivated to immerse ourselves in possibility, to, as Emily Dickinson wrote, "dwell in the possibility," for it is a "fairer house than prose." 

Beginner's mind, then, is the practice of approaching our experiences empty of assumptions.

Have you ever been in a meeting, afraid to make a suggestion or ask a question contrary to what's been proposed because you know, from experience, that you'll receive a litany of reasons why your suggestion isn't possible?  In other words, it's been established that we have all the insight and we aren't going to allow any more to come in.

A beginner's mind has a certain playful absence of assumptions.  Imagine for a moment if our nation's government went about their work with a playful absence of assumptions.  First wipe that smile, snicker, or smirk, off your face.  We lack an ability to move toward any innovative solutions, to find a third way, to allow for possibilities that just might be lurking outside of our own personal certainty.  What if both Congress and the Senate decided to immerse themselves in possibility?  Instead, each "side" has established that they have all the insight and won't allow more to come in.  We can all see very clearly how well that's working.

What if we showed up at our next meeting and approached it empty of assumptions?  We sat down at the conference table and we took everything we've assumed in the past (all the reasons why a project can’t possibly breakeven, all of our stereotypes about specific staff members, etc.) and came with a beginner's mind.  Might we uncover an innovative possibility that wasn't even considered in the past?  Maybe we'd hear about creative new ways to solve a problem?  Instead of starting the meeting with all of our assumptions (which is what we frequently do whether formally or unconsciously), we started that meeting free of any certainties, positive or negative.  

Or, we could bring the weight of all those assumptions, some of which are sure to be erroneous, and Drucker tells us the result of that kind of thinking – disaster.

What's the condition of your heart?

Leadership is much more an art, a belief, a condition of the heart, than a set of things to do.  The visible signs of artful leadership are expressed, ultimately, in its practice.  ~Max De Pree

In addition to having a number of Max De Pree's books on my shelf, I have a few loose connections to him.  So whenever I see something written by him, or about him, I'm intrigued to see what more I can learn, because I always learn a little more about leadership from Max.

This week it was an article I happened to stumble upon written by a university president back in 2000.  He wrote this about Max.

Several years ago Max De Pree came to speak to our university trustees.  Max, as most of you know, is a successful businessman and a prominent and wise voice on leadership.  The day after Max and Esther left, we received a call from the hotel manager where they had stayed.  This manager was amazed.  He said that Mr. De Pree had made a huge impact on his staff.  Everyone was talking about his kindness, about the generosity of his spirit.  This manager thanked me for sending this guest.  His staff would never be the same, he said. 

I want to learn better how to carry myself with the posture of Max De Pree.  Can we do this for each other, so that we experience the joy of love among us, but most of all can we do it to model grace and love for the world that desperately seeks a way out of its mean-spiritedness, its alienation, its viciousness?

This is probably not a comfortable question for any of us to answer, but when was the last time we stayed in a hotel and made such an impression that the manager had to call and thank someone for sending us to their hotel?  Well for me, never.

Not long ago I was at the doctor for a physical and was worried about the condition of my heart.  I was concerned for several reasons, one of which was an overly persuasive commercial that had convinced me I had atrial fibrillation or A-fib.  As I probed the doctor with more questions she could sense it was going to take more than a simple "you're fine" to win me over.  Finally, she replied, "If you had A-fib you would not have been able to come here today on your own effort."  Okay, got it! She had to show me that the visible signs were an expression of the condition of my heart, which really was just fine.

How we live our lives, day in and day out, is a visible expression of the condition of our heart.  Max simply stayed at a hotel.  He wasn't hired to provide leadership coaching or consulting, he wasn't sought out to give an inspiring speech to the hotel staff.  He just went about his ordinary routine, one that happened to be expressed through uncommon kindness, grace, and generosity of spirit. 

I may not have A-fib, but instead strive to have a condition of the heart that manifests in visible signs of another kind.  If the condition of my heart is truly filled with kindness and generosity, then I will see that expressed around me. The same way I would see my physical heart condition expressed in my physical capabilities.  Both are visible.  Both are very telling of the real condition of my heart.  

What’s the condition of your heart?

Necessary Endings

Endings: if you see them as normal, expected, and even a good thing, you will embrace them and take action to executive them.  You will see them as a painful gift.  ~Henry Cloud

In 2010, Dr. Henry Cloud wrote the book, Necessary Endings.  Henry is the author of more than 20 books and Necessary Endings is my favorite; The New York Times called it the most important book you'll read all year.  I'm not trying to promote Henry, but I do, very much, believe in the concept and practice of necessary endings. 

One of the chapter titles in this book is: "Normalizing Necessary Endings: Welcome the Seasons of Life into Your Worldview."  Henry says, "Even the most gifted people and leaders are subject to feeling conflicted about ending things, so they resist that moment of truth.  And not only do they resist, they sometimes cannot even see.  Thus they find themselves crosswise with the very nature of life itself."  He says that we need to "Make the endings a normal occurrence and a normal part of business and life, instead of seeing it as a problem."

I'm not sure I can explain why, but for me, I tend to view endings more as a failure instead of a natural occurrence.  And I don't think I’m alone.  Henry says that we have to accept life cycles and seasons, and accept that life produces too much life!  We need to accept that life produces:

• More relationships than we can nurture
• More activities than we can keep up with at any significant level
• More clients than we can service all in the same way
• More mentors who once "fit" but whose time has past
• More partners whose time has past
• More product lines than we can focus on
• More strategies than we can execute
• More stuff than we have room for and can store

We have to be in the letting-go phase all through life.  "One of the most important types of decision making is deciding what you are not going to do, what you need to eliminate in order to make room for strategic investments." (McKinsey Quarterly, March 2010).

Necessary endings are, well, necessary.  Whether it's purging unused stuff from your closet, laying off employees that you simply can no longer support, or cutting a product or program that is well beyond its prime.  Leaders could take a lesson from master gardeners.  It's only through careful and ongoing pruning that many plants are able to really thrive.  It's not only necessary; it's a normal and natural occurrence.  

What Chicago (the band) can teach us about leadership.

Leadership is not about titles, positions, or flowcharts.  It is about one life influencing another.  ~John Maxwell

In Chicago, the crosstown classic is a significant summer event: Cubs vs. the White Sox.  I've even seen stores and businesses close for this highly anticipated rivalry.   Last week I attended what I believe should become the musical version of the crosstown classic: Chicago (the band) with the Chicago Symphony Orchestra (CSO) at Symphony Center.

So what does this crosstown classic idea have to do with John Maxwell's quote?  Believe it or not, as I watched Chicago interact with the CSO this quote actually came to mind.  First, the band, Chicago, is truly a band.  They don't have a single, designated lead singer.  At least four different band members sang the lead at some point during the concert.  And a number of them played various instruments.  In other words, it really wasn't about their "title" or "position."  They were all band members allowing their varied talents to influence one another.

Then there was the interaction with the CSO.  I've attended a number of CSO concerts and they really are one of the best symphonies in the world.  Now, imagine, Jason Scheff, bassist for Chicago wandering back into the symphony to play alongside the CSO string bassists.  At one point I caught a CSO violinist bobbing her head to the driving pop sound of Chicago.  While Chicago performed a song without the CSO, the CSO conductor was slapping his thighs and clapping to the beat.  Later in the concert, the Chicago drummer and percussionist performed an intense rock-and-roll duel.  The CSO members responded with applause and bows tapping on music stands. 

This musical interaction was not about titles, positions, or even musical style or genera; it was about one life (or group) influencing another.  The interaction between Chicago and the CSO was truly a sight to behold.  Two Chicago musical icons of seemingly different styles coming together to influence one another for the evening.

Imagine a workplace where the culture isn't characterized by titles or positions, but by how one life can influence another.  Here is just one example.

Morning Star is a tomato processing company based in California, with revenues of $700 million and over 400 employees.  What makes the company remarkable is that it has no bosses, titles or promotions.  Staffing decisions are made entirely by colleagues working together.  There are no promotions: people take on greater responsibilities after persuading their colleagues they can deliver.

A key element in Morning Star's model is what is called the Colleague Letter of Understanding (CLOU).  Every employee negotiates his CLOU with all those affected by his work.  This letter sets out what each employee is to accomplish in a given year.  Similarly, the company's 23 business units negotiate CLOUs with each other.

I would suggest that Morning Star has shifted from trying to manage through titles, positions and flowcharts to leading by recognizing how one life can influence another.  It doesn't matter if it's Chicago, the CSO, or a tomato processing company; the bottom line of leadership is just as John Maxwell stated, one life influencing another.

What will you measure in 2014?

If you can't measure it, you can't manage it.  ~Peter Drucker 

Therefore, if you measure it, you are more likely to manage it.  ~Kathryn Scanland

I don't like to admit it, but I have found it to be quite true that if I measure something I'm more likely to manage it.  Here's a personal example.  

Several years ago I participated in one of my client's wellness activities and was part of a walking team.  Teams across the organization competed for six weeks; everyone wore the same pedometer and tracked their daily number of steps.  After six weeks of being very diligent about monitoring my walking, I assumed that because I had gained a feel for 10,000 steps a day I would be able to maintain that habit well into the future.  Well, this past fall I finally admitted to myself that I had gradually slacked off and my daily walking was likely no longer close to 10,000 steps.  So I ordered a good pedometer (mine from several years ago barely lasted the six weeks) and I have been wearing it for three months and plan to continue wearing it indefinitely.  Because I realized that if I'm not measuring it, I'm not managing it.

This was confirmed recently when I learned that people who wear a pedometer walk 27% more than people who don't wear a pedometer.  Interestingly, I have discovered that my average daily routine is about 7,500 steps, but my goal is 10,000 steps, a 25% difference.  So that silly little device clipped to my clothes every day significantly increases the odds of reaching my daily goal.  

What can be dangerous about this idea is the obsession to measure everything.  That's not what I'm suggesting.  I know of organizations that have hundreds of metrics, yet employees don't know if the organization is actually on-track or doing well.  The manifestation of measurement madness is not helpful.  Knowing what is truly meaningful and understanding what needs to be measured so that it's constantly managed, however, is critical.  In my personal example, what's most important to me is whether or not I'm managing my health, not the precise number of steps I take on a daily basis.  Measuring my steps enables me to manage my health.

This might be another way to look at it.  Within your organization (or life), what are the top three things that if managed extremely well, enable you to thrive?  How are you measuring those three things? 

Keep in mind that my reframing of Drucker's quote is "if you measure it, you are more likely to manage it."  If you are more likely to manage it that means it's also something over which you have control.  We could all measure the economy, but we have no control over it.  We can control our response to it, but not its actual fluctuations. 

Since it is still January and the most popular New Year's resolution is losing weight…how many of us avoid stepping on the scale?  Why?  If we did weigh ourselves, we might have to start managing our diet and exercise.  As long as we're not measuring it, we can also easily avoid managing it.

So I'll ask again, within your organization (or life), what are the top three things in 2014 that if managed extremely well will enable you to thrive?  How are you measuring those three things?

Got faith? Like MLK?

Faith is taking the first step even when you don’t see the whole staircase.  ~Martin Luther King, Jr.

Martin Luther King, Jr. is certainly a leader who practiced what he preached.  I'm assuming that as he embarked on his journey to seek change in our nation, he couldn't see the whole staircase, but with faith, he took the first step (and then some!).

Lately I've been contemplating how we go about strategy and planning in organizations (and maybe in life).  Because so much data is now readily available, are we relying on that data too much?  Are we assuming a much longer shelf-life for that data than what now exists in our very dynamic world?  Do we need to go about our strategy and planning with a little more faith?

Here are a couple of examples of what I mean.

It's becoming a holiday tradition for me to watch the Tom Hanks and Meg Ryan movie, You've Got Mail, which was released in December 1998.  I watch it because it's a holiday movie I enjoy, but it's also become a very stark reminder of how quickly, and dramatically, things change.  Two key trending businesses were highlighted in the movie: AOL and big box bookstores like Borders and Barnes & Noble.  A few short years later that landscape was radically altered in a flurry of change.

Amazon Kindle was released in 2007.  July 2010 Amazon reported that they sold more e-books than hardcover books in the first quarter.  January 2011 Amazon sold more e-books than paperbacks.  February 2011 statistics showed e-book sales had grown by 202.3 percent compared to a year earlier.  February 2011 Borders filed for bankruptcy.  At the end of the first quarter of 2012, e-book sales in the U.S. surpassed hardcover book sales for the first time.    

Even this past December, UPS misjudged holiday demand, significantly.  I'm guessing (couldn't find actual confirmation) that they projected demand based upon historical data and analysis (i.e., statistical trending). 

In the January/February 2014 issue of HBR, Roger L. Martin wrote an article entitled The Big Lie of Strategic Planning.  He suggested a number of perspectives that I found quite intriguing.  One of those suggestions was to focus less on what we've traditionally called an environmental scan (reams of data about trends that get us to the present day), and focus more on what we believe about our customers, the evolution or our industry, our competition, and our capabilities.  What we know may need to be replaced with what we believe in order to really create strategy.

As Martin explains, creating a detailed plan filled with what we know makes us comfortable, but comfort is not strategy.  Moving forward with a strategy that's based more on what we believe requires both risk and vulnerability. 

What Martin Luther King, Jr. did was risky and put him in a position of tremendous vulnerability.  Maybe our strategic planning in 2014 should embrace the faith of MLK from the 1960s, and we should take the first step even when we don't see the whole staircase.