Thinking about tomorrow, today!

This is just such a great deal...let's do it now!

How many times have you heard someone say that? And yes, often it is a great deal if all you do is look at the item at hand. But what is often forgotten is the cost of consumables, services contracts etc., not necessarily by procurement folk (although under pressure to "close the deal" they may sometime capitulate) but from those who can only see two feet in front.

If you look at some of the offers held out for consumers....there is not a great deal of difference on how sales folk wave the magic wand that eliminates rational thought.

Why are printers relatively low in price? Because the cost of the ink is where the most money is made.

Why do telcos offer "free" cellphones when you lock into three years? Because that $100 that you saved (and remember that is not their cost, that is retail price...their cost for the phone is a lot less) is going to make hundreds of dollars for them in revenue.

Extended warranties to protect you? That is the biggest cash cow for many retailers and suppliers alike...

So as always, it is buyer beware. The good deal is good for today. But if you haven't calculated in the tomorrow, chances are this is a wolf in sheep's clothing deal.

Olympics and the need for input

I have been watching the Olympics...cheering my country on and I've been known to yell at the TV every once in a while. Yet I'm not going to write here about the athletes or the medals...because from my perspective any athlete who has the skill and dedication to make it to the Olympics deserves a medal.

What I'd like to address is the insular thinking that seems to have marred some aspects of the Olympics...which is in my home country and thereby causes concern.

Yes, there have been glitches and quite honestly the Olympic organizers do not control the weather...although I think given the warmest winter on record some of them might have sold their soul to be able to do so...

What irks me is some more fundamental things that quite honestly have caused me to cringe to date.

The first thing was the opening ceremonies....I like our national anthem....so why did we allow a sixteen year-old singer to make it jazzy and provide her own rendition as opposed to belting it out...strong, proud and free! This is not American Idol, where you get praised for making it your own...this is our identity...what were the organizers thinking...oh well, let's just make the anthem a little more contemporary? We will show the world ...that hey, we don't really like our anthem...we will bastardize it to show we are hip? Strike one for the organizing committee...had they spoken to any regular folk they would have been told flat out that you don't mess with the anthem...

The second thing....opening ceremonies again....every stereotype that every one in the world has about Canada was reinforced....certainly there is the historic perspective and I am a big fan of showcasing the native culture in our country....but we have a multicultural mosaic second to none in the world...we are so inclusive and proud of that and we have amazing cities to showcase...not just the wheatfields and snow...come one...first you try to make us hip with the anthem and then you make it look like we are stuck in some sort of 19th century backwater...Strike two.

Strike three is the Olympic cauldron....the Olympics are to be about inclusion and harmony. So what do they do? They put the Olympic cauldron behind a ratty chain link fence...to keep the ne'er-do-wells away....reason...because they chose to put the cauldron in an area where they media has their outlets and as such it is a security perimeter...Huh? Why would they put it there and keep the key symbol of the Olympics away from the people....and the attitude from the organizing committee has been nothing short of arrogant in this regard....somewhat of the "too bad, so sad" attitude, until today...where they realized they had a mounting public relations disaster on their hand and needed to deal with it...But once again..had they asked the general public what they would like to have access to and see (that doesn't cost anything) it would have been the flame.

In reality this is also what happens in corporations....the "group think" from senior leadership that doesn't seek input from those most impacted by potential decisions. As I noted in my previous entry about the Undercover Boss series....same thing....wow, what a difference when the CEO sees what it is like to be on the ground...

Perhaps next Olympics...the organizing committee should team up with Undercover Boss and consider themselves as tourists...as opposed to putting something together that seems to smack of insular thinking.

Undercover Boss: Mandatory Leadership Training

After seeing my team the New Orleans Saints win the Superbowl last night, I though I'd watch the new CBS show Undercover Boss. The premise of the show is that the CEO/President of a major corporation goes "undercover" to act like a new employee, doing entry level jobs, and finding out what the reality is of the "workers" and how the decisions from corporate effect the workers.

I found the show quite interesting, because in this first episode you have the President of Waste Management, Larry O'Donnell picking up garbage, cleaning toilets, sorting recycling etc. What I found amazing (and perhaps I shouldn't have) is his constant statements of (and I might be slightly paraphrasing here) "I didn't know how my decisions at head office were affecting the workers. This experience has changed me."

Good for Larry, but the issue is that had CBS not come along with this show (and let's face it, the company probably agreed to it because realistically it was one hour of free advertising for Waste Management) Larry would still be making ivory tower decisions without a thought to the ripple down effect -- and of course there is no saying how long Larry's epiphany will in fact effect corporate directives.

I have often said that if you consider an organization like a bunch of cog-wheels...if you have a big one at the top, they make what they consider a decision that in the grand scheme of things they think is small. So this "big wheel" moves one click. The couple of smaller wheels below, end up clicking twice to keep up. Now if you think of the next row of wheels...they are clicking several times...and so on. By the time you get to the bottom "little cogs" they are just spinning trying to keep up with that one, "minor" decision that the upper echelon made.

We need, as leaders, keep in mind that every day we are dealing with people's lives...and not just theirs...all the other people that depend on them in their lives....for Larry O'Donnell to say "I didn't know about how my decisions impacted the worker" is a sad testament to top leadership. He should have known, and cared. (and by the way, it was interesting that none of the workers remotely recognized him)

Now I am realistic....the CEO can't know about every person's issues...but every corporation can set up some method to get input from every level. I used to have monthly coffee meetings with a cross-section of folk who worked at all levels, just to get them comfortable with me and having the opportunity to put forward issues/concerns. Also the opportunity exists to have facilitated sessions, again with all levels, to determine how decisions are impacting them, but also get their input before you even go down that path.

Every organization will have in its mission statement something about valuing people and people are our most valuable asset. Well, most corporations don't walk that talk. When the going gets tough, they usually downsize on the people part, heap more work on those remaining, and then say, "well you should be glad you have a job!"

Wouldn't it be better to be honest with the employees in a corporation and tell them you need them to give you ideas....you need them to step up to the plate to help reduce costs or enhance efficiencies, so no one loses their job?

It might take a little longer, but the changes would be sustainable over time and the loyalty you would buy from your team would be immense. As Undercover Boss showed....the top leadership doesn't quite know what is happening downstream....it is about time for corporate leadership to step up to the plate and recognize that they aren't the only one's with ideas!

STATE OF THE UNION -- COUNTRY AND CORPORATIONS

I was struck the other day by the visible partisan split during Barack Obama's State of the Union address. And what struck me, was that this wasn't about what was good for the country...it was about self-interest.

Now please understand, I am not here to make a pronouncement on either side of the coin...Democrat or Republican. I have been around long enough to know that making a political commentary in writing has very few upsides....but what I was struck with was how the "what's in it for me" as evidenced by the clapping or lack thereof during Obama's address, is very much what we see in corporations as well.

As a consultant, I bring leading edge ideas, challenge the status quo, show clients new ways of approaching old problems and the like. But you know it wasn't like I went into some sort of self-actualized metamorphosis when I became a consultant....I was providing the same insight and approach when I was an executive in corporate. Yet, as a consultant my ideas are readily accepted by all parties, and seen as a road map for the way forward.

While in corporate, as I said, I did the same thing...and yes, often times I was able to move an agenda forward because of following the same principles as I do in consulting. But, you know, it was never as easy. Because when you are working in the corporate environment as and "employee", your ideas are taken with a grain of salt, because others may believe that you have an "agenda", not quickly obvious to them, or, worse, that by moving forward on your proposal, even though it is better for the corporation, it may put you in the limelight and potentially, from this colleague's perspective, diminish them....or they see it as turf encroachment...or...or...or....

As a consultant, you are not a threat, you don't seemingly have an agenda and as such your thoughts and ideas are more readily acceptable.

But it causes one to wonder, if individuals in corporations, as well as the government, could put their partisanship aside and agree to a go-forward strategy, putting the business or the country ahead of their own egos and agendas, how much better both the country and those corporations would be!