In search of excellence in 2019

I recently read a great conversation on a LinkedIn post that asked people to consider which book they have read 3 or 4 times. I smiled at this and didn’t have to think twice. It is ‘In Search of Excellence’ by Waterman and Peters. I first read this book in the mid 1990’s when I was at the beginning of my working career. I bought my own copy of it in 2004 when I started a course and it made a lot more sense after a second reading. Since then I have read it whilst travelling abroad and I’m eternally grateful that one of my University assignments was on the book!

Shortly after seeing the post on LinkedIn about reading a book several times over, I decided I needed to read the 8 principles again. Before I opened the book, I started to think about the applicability of these principles in the modern world as they were first published in 1982. The main difference in those intervening years is the explosion of communication channels and speed that messages can be communicated around the globe. This has cut across many of the accepted norms in business, but many people have yet to adopt to the new challenges this creates. I’ll try not to mention this in each one of the points!

So here are my thoughts about what we currently deal with some 35+ years after these ideas were first conceived along with some questions for CEOs/CHROs about their businesses:

A bias for action, active decision making - 'getting on with it'.

Too many organisations are stifled by complex decision making processes. This still results in businesses missing opportunities both with their customers and with their people. In such a fast-paced environment, ‘getting on with it’ should be at the heart of a business’ ethos and is probably more important that 35 years ago. 

Challenge: Do you have true empowerment? Can your customer-facing people make a decision on the spot that truly transforms the customer experience? Do you recruit for bold leaders willing to make a decision?

Close to the customer - learning from the people served by the business.

In previous years, getting close to the customer meant someone travelling on a repeated basis to gain an understanding of what was needed by customers. Whilst we still have a need for face-to-face contact with our customers, we now achieve this through physical and virtual meetings. But more importantly, we can see through social media how our service to a customer can affect their customers. Waterman and Peters discussed Frito-Lay delivering potato chips to a store after a storm which made no financial sense However, the letters of appreciation received at the headquarters more than made up for the cost of the actions. Today, we see good and bad comments posted every hour about the actions of businesses. The result is the customer closeness has now become more important and more in the moment that previously considered. A stamp on a letter is now replaced by a tweet.

Challenge: Are you actively seeking feedback from your customers? Do you know what they are trying to achieve? Are you merely a supplier and happy to be so?

Long before the 20% time that Google talked of in their early days, people have been investing in ‘skunk’ works.

Autonomy and entrepreneurship - fostering innovation and nurturing 'champions'.

I opened my book to see that the first line I had underlined in this chapter read “The most discouraging fact of big corporate life is the loss of what got them big in the first place: innovation”. I get to work with some amazing clients and see the level of autonomy and entrepreneurship in some businesses. Equally, I see the opposite end of the spectrum and people simply doing enough to get to retirement. Long before the 20% time that Google talked of in their early days, people have been investing in ‘skunk’ works. It is this small scale, rapid development and release to the market that many have lost the ability to include in their traditional development cycle. 

Challenge: When was the last time you broke the mould to increase the speed of delivery? Do you reward the people that do this or simply introduce more controls so it can’t happen again?

Productivity through people - treating rank and file employees as a source of quality.

A few years ago, I worked with an engineering organisation who needed to see a huge amount of change to achieve an ever-growing demand in their output. From the outset of the project, the people charged with making the changes were the people themselves. They had some minimal assistance from an external Lean consultant and a few other external folks, but in the main it was down to the people that knew the business. The project allowed people to break to boundaries of hierarchy. It encouraged people to ask difficult questions. Resources were seen as shared resources for the first time. The examples given by Peters and Waterman included a case where the leader of a multi-billion dollar organisation dragged his middle-managers to have open meetings with every employee on a monthly basis. 

Challenge: We now have more channels than just town halls but is this happening? How are you getting the knowledge from your employees to your leadership teams to make decisions? Why are project with collaboration and empowerment not the norm yet?  

Hands-on, value-driven - management philosophy that guides everyday practice - management showing its commitment.

This is simply about leadership and the environment that is created by high calibre leaders. A hands-on approach is still required even in a globalised business where local leaders create the right environment for people to be productive. But the overriding requirement is that the business itself has the values to support such an approach. After many years of studying values, creating organisation values and consulting with companies who have a range of values, I see that this is an area that hasn’t changed much. Businesses can have a well written set of values but if the leaders aren’t willing or able to lead, the case studies that Peters and Waterman cite will remain isolated examples rather than a catalyst for others. 

Challenge: Do you develop your leaders and empower them to create a great working environment? How do you know where this is taking place within your business and can you export some of the goodness to other areas?

Staying with the business you know may now be a dangerous tactic as competitors seek to ensure their own future. 

Stick to the knitting - stay with the business that you know.

This is a difficult one. For many years, I’d have agreed that being strong in a product/service should be the focus for may businesses. The UK farming industry would disagree and point to diversification into yoghurt/cheese/butter etc makes the farm more financially sustainable as they are able to add value to their milk. However, making yoghurt is not for everyone as Cosmopolitan found out in the late 1990’s! This just caused confusion for everyone. As companies have sought to secure growth, diversification has been a tactic employed by many. Yet as some ventures failure, they retrench to their core offering until the next time. Global trade is easier than ever before. International boundaries are blurred for many business transactions and the opportunity to sell into a new country may require a wider portfolio. Staying with the business you know may now be a dangerous tactic as competitors seek to ensure their own future. 

Challenge: How do you assess the risks associated with broadening your range of goods/services? How do you take the lessons from previous project and ensure they are considered before the next attempt? If you’re going to stick to the knitting, are your competitors doing the same?

Simple form, lean staff - some of the best companies have minimal HQ staff.

This principle has only grown in relevance over the years. Whether you have 5 or 5000 people, the ability to react quickly to a changing environment is the key to business success. I mentioned earlier that global business is now easier and for many, the norm. That means that businesses need to look beyond their county and country borders to react to their competitors. At a time when outsourced production is lower wage economies is embraced by many industries, a competitive advantage in the UK can be assessed and developed by a production team in another country before the next dawn. The simple form is not just about an organisational structure but also in the way it operates through procedures. Businesses should be constantly challenging their overheads – and HQ staff are just that! Because of the disconnected approach this has caused, many have transferred previous HQ staff to divisions which gives a better understanding of the requirements or their customers, although it was needed many years ago. 

Challenge: Who do you define as your HQ staff? Does your structure allow for rapid review/development by a new project team? Do your project teams simply use the same people every time?

Simultaneous loose-tight properties - autonomy in shop-floor activities plus centralised values.

Peters and Waterman regarded this principle as a summary point. However, they were committed to the fact that having the structure to be agile (loose) whilst having the values and culture (tight) that guided people to deliver quality outcomes were necessary for a business to succeed. Along with some of the other principles, this remains valid in today’s workplace. Over the years, many authors have talked about individual autonomy (Pink, Csikszentmihalyi, Hodges) and how this is central to getting the most from employees. I have seen this in very limited examples and it is another area that Peters and Waterman may have been ahead of the business community in realising the power of such an activity. 

Challenge: Do you have the balance between loose-tight properties to make your people effective? To what extent do you encourage individual autonomy?

Summary

There are some great points that these guys made many years ago and are now incredibly important to the future of businesses. Have a look at the challenges at the end of each section. As a CEO or CHRO you should be able to answer these and apply the points to your business. I’d be delighted to hear from others who read this some years ago and what you think about it now. Please post your thoughts in the comments section of contact me directly.

#hr #excellence #leadership #business

(Massive thanks to Peters ad Waterman for writing such an amazing book!)

Andy Davies