The fallacy of bottom-up Lean initiatives – Part 3: top-down and bottom-up

the-fallacy-of-bottom-up-lean-initiativesIn the first post of this series, I explained why bottom-up Lean initiatives have little chance to succeed. In the second post I switched the point of view and discussed the top-down driven Lean rollout attempts and their pitfalls. Neither is easy nor a sure way to succeed.

In this third post it is time to bring the conditions for success together.

Guidance comes from above

The system owners or top management are the sole legit to set the system’s / organization’s overall Goal. It is onto the ways(1) to achieve that Goal that all Lean initiatives must align. This is known as the “True North”.

Lean itself is not the Goal, it’s the preferred framework providing a way of thinking, principles, methods and a toolbox to efficiently achieve the Goal.

The Goal must be stated with clarity in order to avoid any misunderstanding and the Goal should be compelling for to motivate the stakeholders to play an active and motivated role in its achievement.

The worst Goal statement I was confronted with was “Survive another year”.

Stating the Goal alone is not enough. Top management should also set a limited set of top level indicators. In Bill Dettmer’s approach using the Goal Tree, those few top level indicators are called Critical Success Factors (CSFs). They are top management’s dashboard and ultimate steps before achieving the Goal.

Those CSFs must be set by top management for at least three reasons:

  1. It would be weird that anybody else defines the indicators by which top management monitors the progress towards the Goal it is responsible for achieving,
  2. Critical Success Factors are most often dictated by strategical analysis or benchmark, which are top management’s responsibility,
  3. Critical Success Factors constrain how the stakeholders will contribute to achieve the Goal. By this third reason I mean remaining consistent with the organization’s purpose, culture and values.

Once the Goal and Critical Success Factors are defined, enough guidance is provided from the top and it’s the subordinate level to take on and propose ways to achieve their goals, which are the CSF. The same will repeat with the next level and so on.

Lean-aware readers will recognize the cascading principle used in Policy Deployment, also known as Hoshin Kanri.

Appraisal comes from above too

If top management provided guidance, its role isn’t over yet. It is top management duty to make sure the whole organization works towards achieving the Goal and to remind and reinforce this guiding principle: working on anything else diverting resources from the achievement of the Goal is waste and is therefore invalid.

Remember, opportunities to improve are always infinite, while resources and time come in limited number. It is therefore mandatory to focus on leverage points and make wise use of limited resources.

I particularly like the Goal Tree because its logical structure lets no room for irrelevant nice-to-have that are immediately visible and their discarding rationally explained.

Enlightened management is about knowing what to do and what not do. And enlightenment can use a little help from a logical tool.

Without promoting the outdated command-and-control model, direction must be set top-down as well as the periodic checking of the organization’s right trajectory.

Constant attention is required over time in order to avoid any drift, deviant behaviors or loss of focus.

Help comes from above. Sometimes.

It’s still not enough to give direction and check the progress towards the Goal. Management’s top-down support is mandatory. By support I mean advice and backup when tough decisions need senior management to give input or take the decision, especially when those decisions lay beyond the field of authority of the lower ranking staff.

Support is also required when a settlement between conflicting objectives must be found.

From the Logical Thinking Process (Theory of Constraint) Body of Knowledge we know that conflict resolution should not seek a consensus (often disguised as “win-win” solution), but a way to “dissolve the conflict so that nobody has to give up anything except their beliefs in false assumptions.

Yet beware of drilling holes into the pyramid (2), meaning do not do what your subordinates have to do.

It is commonly accepted I hope, that leaders have to communicate the “what to change to” (the Goal) as well as the “why” of Lean transformation. It is up to the lower ranking staff in the organization to figure out “how to change”.

Achievement happens bottom-up

Since Policy Deployment or Hoshin Kanri are around, the cascading principle of top-down Goal setting and corresponding bottom-up answers is known.

Just as Hoshin Kanri, the Goal Tree uses the same principle: when the lower objectives are achieved, the corresponding upper objectives are achieved, and so on bottom-up till the top most objective (the Goal) is achieved.

Each layer of objectives is a set of Necessary Conditions for achieving the objective above. And here again, the Goal Tree provides the rational demonstration why employees can’t freely choose to work and improve whatever they want, even it seems an improvement from their point of view.

This disciplined approach may sound very constrained and limiting compared to other approaches asking staff for whatever improvement ideas. Maybe it sounds disappointingly controlled and restrictive but it makes no sense to burn limited and precious resources to “improve” whatever is proposed.

The lack of focus leads to many critics about lean lacking noticeable results compared to the time and money spent to improve. In this “open” approach stakeholders may have had their moment of glory when their proposed idea was validated, but their “improvements” didn’t impress nor last.

Conclusion

Neither bottom-up nor top-down initiated Lean journeys won’t lead to a Lean transformation success. The approach most likely to succeed is a smart mixture of top-down guidance, monitoring and assistance and aligned bottom-up contributions focusing on specific leverage points.

While top management provides the Goal to achieve and the framework within transforming the organization, the lower ranking staff make things happen working on meaningful and contributive topics.

Even if this approach looks constrained, it is more likely to demonstrate real improvement and proven, lasting benefits. Ultimately, this disciplined way should provide more satisfaction to all parties involved.

This ends the series of posts about the Fallacy of bottom-up Lean initiatives.

Comments welcome. If you liked it, share it!

Footnotes

(1) Theory of Constraints’ Thinking Processes would refer to these ways as “tactics”, while the Goal is a strategy
(2) An allusion about another one of my tales of the pyramid: the Swiss cheese

5View Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn

Advertisements

How can Theory of Constraints help startups – Purpose, Goal and how to achieve it

I believe most entrepreneurs started with a brilliant idea, a new product, a smart solution, new services… and the underlying desire to write a story on their own, not for a boss.

The startupers then start up as the brilliant new offer needs funding and some structure to bring it to the world.

But how many entrepreneurs started with a higher Vision, a Purpose beyond their product, smart solution or new service?

Once the initial project gets some uplift and before the scarce resources are wasted on inadequate investments, a short pause to think about Purpose and Goal is recommended.

Entrepreneurs, what is the Purpose of your undertaking? What is your Goal?

Make money now and in the future” are probably chanting those who got their basics about Theory of Constraints, first edition.

I don’t think that making money is the main driver for startupers, because if it was, a majority would go for more secure ways to achieve their goal and startuping wouldn’t be that popular.

There must be others drivers, each personal to the entrepreneur. Whatever the Purpose is, it is a Goal that requires some Necessary Conditions to be fulfilled in order to achieve it.

And precisely here Theory of Constraints can help, providing guidance and a structuring process with the Goal Tree!

I described extensively Goal Trees already on this blog, but in short the Goal Tree is a logical network of nested Necessary Conditions, describing what is absolutely necessary to achieve prior to achieve the Goal.

Taking some time to verbalize the Purpose or Goal of the undertaking and listing the first Necessary Conditions will give guidance about what is required and what to focus on. With this high level description of requirements, the entrepreneur can wisely allocated limited resources to what is contributing to achieving the Goal and avoid wasting them on nice-to-haves or totally off-topic things.

The Goal Tree stands out among other tools and methods with its merciless necessary-logic base: whatever does not answer the “in order to achieve… we must…” in a robust and logically sound manner is to be discarded.

Besides its robustness, building the first, most strategic layers of a Goal Tree requires only about a couple of hours, provided the Purpose / Goal is clear…

Once the Tree is built and scrutinized, amended and declared satisfactory, it serves as a guiding map and a benchmark.

Over time, the entrepreneur should check how many of the Necessary Conditions have been fulfilled (turned Green) and what is still to be achieved to get closer to their Goal.


>Related: Goal-Setting Theory and Goal Trees


Bandeau_CH40_smlView Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn

Re-SWOT your business with 3D printing in mind – Opportunities

In a prior post of this series, I explained why it is wise to (re)SWOT your business with 3D printing* in mind and in another one I suggested assessing the potential Threats your organization could be facing. In this post, it’s about Opportunities offered by the new manufacturing ways.

*I use “3D printing” and “additive manufacturing” interchangeably

Reminder: with the recent progresses in 3D printing (and 3D scanning) with regards to materials that can be 3D printed, every business is potentially at risk to discover a 3D printed substitute offered by an unsuspected and probably unknown competitor.

Yet what is a threat to some is an opportunity to others. The ability to offer a faster, cheaper, highly customized or whatever new product or alternative offer incredible new opportunities.

3D printing may break many barriers to entry, opening wide the gateway to previously protected markets.

Any competitor should evaluate the emerging opportunities to redefine the rules in his/her business with additive manufacturing and the opportunities to diversify or expand into new markets.

Some questions to assess the potential Opportunities your organization could be considering

The intent of the following questions is to make you think about the potential opportunities of a 3D printed product. The list of questions may evolve and readers are welcome to suggest additional or alternate ones (please use the comments).

  • Can you imagine any way 3D printing being applied in your business?
  • If 3D printing would be used in your business, what would it be for?
  • Can you think about a (more) disruptive way 3D printing could be used in your business?
  • What 3D printable product or substitute, if it (would) exist, may give you a cutting edge competitive advantage?
  • Could you offer a 3D printed substitute to existing products? What would its advantages be? What new or additional value would it bring? Would your customers want it?
  • Can you imagine expanding your business entering a new market (or segment) with a 3D printed product?
  • Are there any barriers to entry to a protected market you’ve considered that could be taken down with 3D printing / additive manufacturing?

You may have noticed that these questions are very similar to those about Threats. It is no surprise as opportunities for some are threats for others.


If you liked this post, share it!

Chris HOHMANNView Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn

Re-SWOT your business with 3D printing in mind – Threats

In a prior post of this series, I explained why it is wise to (re)SWOT your business with 3D printing* in mind. In this post, I propose some questions to assess the potential Threats your organization could be facing.

*I use “3D printing” and “additive manufacturing” interchangeably

With the recent progresses in 3D printing (and 3D scanning) with regards to materials that can be 3D printed, every business is potentially at risk to discover a 3D printed substitute offered by an unsuspected and probably unknown competitor.

Some questions to assess the potential Threats your organization could be facing
The intent of the following questions is to make you think about the potential threats of a 3D printed product. The list of questions may evolve and readers are welcome to suggest additional or alternate ones (please use the comments).

  • Can you imagine any way 3D printing being applied in your business?
  • If 3D printing would be used in your business, what would it be for?
  • Can you think about a more disruptive way 3D printing could be used in your business?
  • What 3D printable product or substitute, if it (would) exist, may disrupt your industry / your market / your business?
  • If a 3D printed substitute suddenly appeared, could you offer the same?
  • Does your organisation have any knowledge about 3D printing? Any know-how? If not, how and where would you quickly get the capacity to propose the 3D printed product? (me-too offering)
  • Did you evaluate how much savings a 3D printed substitute could earn?
  • Compared to 3D printed part or product, what are the advantages of your traditional way of manufacturing?
  • Would your customers continue to pay for if they had the choice with a new 3D printed substitute?

It is possible that going through the questions above, you sense opportunities more or as well as threats. Fine! Opportunities are the next topic to explore.


If you liked this post, share it!


Bandeau_CH8View Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn

Re-SWOT your business with 3D printing in mind – Introduction

In a previous post* I assumed that 3D printing, general naming for additive manufacturing techniques, will revitalize strategic business analysis.

*Will 3D printing revitalize strategic analysis?

In this series of posts, I’d like to invite people in charge or with influence on strategy to reconsider their business with the new possibilities offered by 3D printing.

The incredible pace of innovations among which many real disruptions with 3D printing may surprise unaware business owners. On the positive side, they are many new possibilities to rethink and expand business. On the negative side, one may be put out of business by unexpected new competitors or shift in technologies or a combination of all.

What is it all about?

Additive manufacturing is totally different to traditional manufacturing. Material is “printed” thin layer after thin layer in simple or complex shapes and various materials until the finished 3 Dimensional part is finished on the printer’s bed. Those parts can even embed printed full functionally moving parts, like gears or ball bearings.

Traditional manufacturing cuts away material from a bigger rawling and usually requires many steps and different resources to get the finished part.

The advantages of additive upon traditional manufacturing are already tremendous and everyday new breakthroughs are reported.

Additive manufacturing needs no costly moulds nor toolings, fixtures or jigs, it does not even need skilled workers to operate the machines.

3D printing does not require minimum batch sizes, a tremendous advantage for short lead time and low inventories.

3D printing parts allows changes on the fly, which is top for highly customized production, inventory reduction, quick response to quality issues, and so on.

From this short list, by far not complete, everyone can sense the competitive advantages offered by these new technologies.

Now, it’s time for everyone to assess the current business with additive manufacturing in mind.

In the next post I’ll introduce SWOT analysis: Strength Weaknesses Opportunities and Threats.


Bandeau_CH4View Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn

Why you should (re)SWOT your business

There is barely a day without a new announcement about a 3D printing* breakthrough or new 3D printable material or finding 3D printing new applications.

*I use “3D printing” and “additive manufacturing” interchangeably

In most cases, 3D printing allows a totally new approach and reinvented value proposition, e.g. printing teeth, prosthetics, glasses frames, mechanical parts or fully functional systems, etc.

3D printing frees from many constraints, especially molds, complicated assemblies, other expensive tooling or multiple steps machining necessary to cut away material in traditional manufacturing.

It does not require to have huge series to ensure low unit cost and is “infinitely” flexible for design  changes and ready for almost any customization.

Additive manufacturing challenges former accumulated experience in traditional manufacturing and does not require expensive machines, thus breaks down many barriers and opens markets to new entrants.

As many applications of additive manufacturing already proved, there is virtually no business safe from 3D printing/additive manufacturing applications and the threat of new entrants.

Chances are that an unexpected competitor arises overnight with a revolutionary new approach to satisfy your customers, ruining years of investments, efforts and accumulation of experience.

The (potential) irony is that this new competitor can not only steal your business, but lock your company out of the market if it does not have the competences, know-how, agility nor resources to switch to the new manufacturing way.

Therefore it is wise for every – emphasize EVERY- business to SWOT-analyse itself from the perspective of the new manufacturing way.

Reminder: SWOT stand for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats, a strategic analysis tool to assess the company’s position on the market and compare it to existing and potential competition.

Should Weaknesses and/or Threats prevail, the company is possibly in danger.

Yet 3D printing can also help reinvent the way your company does business and exploit the Strengths and/or Opportunities going the 3D printing way.

One more reason for swoting your business.


You may also be interested in:

If you liked it, share it!


Bandeau_CH4View Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn


Minimum Viable Product or just crap?

Having started my career in the heyday of Total Quality Management (it brings us back to the early 1980s!) and being educated to worship customer satisfaction in the Lean way, I am not very at ease with the Minimum Viable Product concept.

A minimum viable product has just those core features that allow the product to be deployed, and no more. The product is typically deployed to a subset of possible customers, such as early adopters that are thought to be more forgiving, more likely to give feedback, and able to grasp a product vision from an early prototype or marketing information. It is a strategy targeted at avoiding building products that customers do not want, that seeks to maximize the information learned about the customer per dollar spent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_viable_product

Even so I fully understand and partly support the strategy, I am experiencing cases that keep fueling my distrust.

>Lisez cet article en français

The one that got me angry and triggered writing this post is about an app designed to manage social media.

I have several accounts within this app and to my surprise, the app has different behaviors and proposed features, depending the account I log in with.

This inconsistency is quite a surprise and does not suggest very good standards nor consistency in development strategy.

Over time, I experienced several bugs and even gave detailed feedback to help the developers’ team to improve. But it seems that every time they fix one, a new one appears. The latest denied me programming posts at desired time, which is the very basic function this app is made for!

I am using the free version and this is supposed to be the showcase for the premium offer. I’ll never go premium and I will quit using this app.

What I supposed to be ongoing improvement on a minimum viable product is just steadily proposing new crap. Hence my reservations about the concept, which is likely to be used to camouflage poor capabilities to deliver.

Any thoughts?


Bandeau_CH40_sml View Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn

Beware of bottleneck hunting!

In the following video interview, Philip Marris (answering Clarke Ching‘s questions) states that the five focusing steps of Theory of Constraints are wrong!

Well it needs some more listening  to understand the wisdom behind the provocative statement.

First, the five focusing steps (5FS) are basically ok. What bothers Philip is the fifth step after the first iteration.

In his view, accepting to go through the 5FS over and over is just bottleneck hunting and accepting the fact that the organization’s “strategy” is defined by the newest or the next bottleneck.

Philip is advocating to select the most suitable bottleneck, in order to keep mastering it, and surround this bottleneck with excess capacity resources. In this way, the bottleneck remains in one’s span of control, instead of moving upstreams to a supplier or to market’s demand, and keeps at the same point for a longer period of time.

If the 5FS are taken literally, this could lead to an exhausting periodic rearrangement around a new bottleneck, reshuffling the cards regarding strategy, sales, operations and so on.

Organisations need stability, especially factories. Therefore, this approach works well in operations.


Check out Marris-Consulting Youtube Channel for more


Bandeau_CH40_sml

View Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn

10 signs you need consider Logical Thinking Process

Here are 10 signs pointing to the need to consider using the Logical Thinking Process in order to help you solve your complex problems and structure your transformation plan.

Don’t know what The Logical Thinking Process is?
>The Logical Thinking Process in a nutshell

This article was originally written to promote the Logical Thinking Process training course with Bill Dettmer and Marris Consulting in Paris, an event I am involved in. I could not help but replicate it here!

The Logical Thinking Process is a great help if You:

  1. do not know how to properly state your Vision and Goal
  2. are unsure about what is required to achieve your Goal
  3. are afraid of costly and questionable “nice-to-haves” your staff is asking for
  4. have no benchmark for orienting and monitoring all efforts
  5. have no idea how far your organization is from the Goal
  6. are stuck with conflicting objectives or constraints
  7. do not know what to do to close the gaps and achieve your Goal
  8. are afraid about possible negative side effects and obstacles of your plan
  9. are uneasy about how to communicate the necessary changes
  10. would like to have a list of prerequisites for successful change

1. You do not know how to properly state your Vision and Goal

Surprisingly many employees, from shop floor to top managers, don’t know precisely what the Goal of the company is or have different views on it. How can they align their contribution if the Goal is not clear or understood in different ways?

The Logical Thinking Process starts with a clear and unambiguous Goal statement, an absolute must in order to meet success. A powerful multipurpose tool will help: the Goal Tree.

2. You are unsure about what is required to achieve your Goal

The Goal Tree describes all required Necessary Conditions to be fulfilled for achieving the Goal. These Necessary Conditions are listed from a sound and robust analysis using only “necessity-based logic”, in a scientific approach.

3. You are afraid of costly and questionable “nice-to-haves” your staff is asking for

With the Necessary Conditions listed, only those complying to the logical “necessity-based logic” will be kept. All others, not strictly necessarily will be discarded.

This is a very powerful means to filter out all the personal wishes and “nice-to-haves”.

4. You have no benchmark for orienting and monitoring all efforts

Once the Goal Tree is completed, it is a system-wide benchmark of what is required to achieve the Goal. The Goal Tree is then used to check the status of each Necessary Condition and the overall progress towards the Goal.

A Goal Tree is valid as long as the business environment does not drastically change, so the few hours investment in building the Tree is definitely worth it.

5. You have no idea how far your organization is from the Goal

Besides the Goal Tree, the Logical Thinking Process provides other tools among which the Current Reality Tree, describing the actual state of the organization in regards of gaps to the Goal.

The Current Reality Tree is built starting from difficulties and problems encountered by the organization and goes down to the very few root causes, discovered using the cause-effect logic.

Treating the few root causes will solve many problems at once as they are only multiple Undesirable Effects related to a same cause.

6. You are stuck with conflicting objectives or constraints

Among the obstacles on the road to the Goal, conflicting objectives or constraints are common. To tackle these conflicts, the Logical Thinking Process provides a tool called Conflict Resolution Diagram. Based like the other tools on logic, it helps to debunk myths and false beliefs as well as find win-win solutions to conflicts.

7. You do not know what to do to close the gaps and achieve your Goal

The Logical Thinking Process depicts the desirable future state with a Future Reality Tree in which the previously listed obstacles and problems have been removed or by-passed with appropriate solutions.

The “difference” between the Current Reality Tree and the Future Reality Tree are the gaps to fill in order to achieve the Goal.

8. You are afraid about possible negative side effects and obstacles of your plan

Simple elegant or sophisticated solutions may look good on paper but can mess up more than solve current problems. Fearing something could go wrong and lead to a worse condition can paralyze initiatives.

In order to prevent possible negative side effects, the Logical Thinking Process provides “stress test” and robustness assessments. Among them, any possibility for negative side effects to develop is scrutinized.

If one pops up, an appropriate preventative countermeasure is defined. At the end of the analysis, the robustness of the solution is guaranteed.

9. You are uneasy about how to communicate the necessary changes

The Logical Thinking Process and its tools provide robust and straightforward means to communicate what the necessary changes are, why and how to make the change happen.

As everything is based on sound logic, it is free from any emotional biases and verifiable by anybody, making the communication very robust and compelling.

10. You would like to have a list of prerequisites for successful change

Everybody wants a clear roadmap and concrete examples about what is to be done.

The Logical Thinking Process provides a logical Prerequisite Tree, listing all steps and Intermediate Objectives along the path to reaching the Goal.

The Logical Thinking Process is surely the most structured and robust way to lead the transformation of an organization, from its difficulties to its success.

If one of these 10 signs applies to your organization, you really should consider the Logical Thinking Process.


Bandeau_CH40_smlView Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn

12 tips for leading in a downturn

Slowdown, downturn, crisis, recession, words and condition that are around for some time now and for some businesses it seems to be the new normal.
I witnessed several companies’ and their leaders’ reactions when facing difficulties and I’d like to share my list of dos and don’ts.


Elevate your ambition

Chris HOHMANN

Chris HOHMANN – Author

When time is hard for business and everybody in the company gets anxious about the future, the ambition should be more appealing than the disappointing “live another day” and its variants. Yet how many times did I came across a similar sounding “ambition”! Frightening.

The leader’s skills, including inspire others, are supposed to show in troubled times. Gather your staff around a higher ambition, prepare all together the exit of the crisis and the turning of the vision into reality.

If the crisis is severe, people are more open to challenges and changes. Go for a leap, not a timorous step.

Focus!

When times get tough for your business, it’s time to (re)consider what your business is. instead of trying anything in order to meet the plan or budget, take a moment to (re)state what the purpose of your organization is.

With purpose clarified, the organization’s precious (and scarce?) resources can be focused on the purpose and deliver more, better.

I strongly believe that this exercise, in many cases, is enough to re-energize the staff and get better through the hard times.

Tip: with the Goal (re)set, the Goal Tree is a great tool to define all Necessary Conditions and on what to focus to achieve the Goal. Using the Goal Tree is a framework will help to break the new strategy down into concrete, meaningful and strictly necessary actions.

Search your blue ocean

The slowdown may be the result of recession and/or of competition. It may be the right time to question your offering and how it ranks compared to competition. You may be swimming with sharks in the blood-red ocean and then it is the right time to think about leaping into a quiet blue ocean, free from shark-like competition.

Make a side step, reinvent, do different

If you are to remain in the same business, and chances are you will, then what would distinguish your product, service, offering or company from competition?

Be bold. It’s about disruption, not small incremental change. You’ll have to surprize your customers, outmatch your competitors and inspire your staff.

So what sidestep would get you out of the war of attrition? How can you reinvent your business, products, services and get a wow effect in your market? What can you do different?

Ask your staff, all of them. Those closest to market and customers may have the right answers.

Sometimes brilliant ideas unexpectedly originate from people or departments you would not think about: accounting, finance, HR, delivery truck drivers…

Improve. Revisit your processes and create more value

In tough times customers are pickier, more demanding. They may be worried just the way everybody is but still have needs and problems to solve. Revisit your processes and improve in order to create more value for your customers.

Again, be bold! Competition may adjust to minor improvements and keep up. They may be afraid or unable to follow a bolder move.

Show confidence

Keep your worries for yourself or a very close circle. To all others, show confidence. Staff nor customers don’t like worried bosses/suppliers/partners. They are worried themselves. If you can’t show confidence in what you stand for, employees may seek more secure haven for themselves and customers will seek alternate suppliers or solutions.

Trust your staff, it’s not your enemy

Concentrate your energy to outmatch competition, not to harass your workforce. Too often worried managers turn their disappointment or anger towards their staff. Chances are few the situation is the staff’s fault, so why bother them?

Better build up a task force engage your team in finding and building a way out. Your staff is your ally, not your enemy.

So far for the dos , let’s see some don’ts

Don’t harass your staff because they have less to do in the downturn

When activity slows down it is normal to have more slack time. Consider using this freed time for training or creating new value for the customers, finding a way out of the crisis…

Refrain from micromanagement.

Constantly looking over the shoulders of your staff will not help getting out of the crisis, but will only stress your workforce more, show your lack of consideration and confidence.

Again, you cannot get angry with your staff just because business is not that good anymore.

Do not be unfair

If you are disappointed about some of your workforce not taking initiatives, first ask yourself if they ever were encouraged to take some or if this is a sudden expectation of yours.
Second, ask yourself if you gave enough insight and direction for people to understand where you want the organization to go, what the Goal and objectives are.
Third, if people are not the self starters you’re hoping, why did you / your organization hire them? What did you / your organization do to develop them?
If you objectively did everything to have autonomous self starters and they don’t behave like this, you may further ask questions about their attitude, by using the BlessingWhite X model for example.

Chances are that your workforce is nothing more than a representation of the general population, with some brilliant people, a bulk of average people and a some below average but still good enough for coping with their chores.
And chances are that your competition is not better off.

Don’t change direction every morning

In difficult periods doubt may surface about the strategy, the pricing, the customer relationship, about almost everything. Keep your cool and do not change direction too often. First because it will only confuse everybody, second because it will show your state of panic. Remember: people expect to have a self-confident leader.

You may conduct some experiments, but structure them with some consistency, show an overarching logic. If you can’t link the different ideas with some straightforward logic, some elements may have to be questioned.


Bandeau_CH36View Christian HOHMANN's profile on LinkedIn