Today, my boss showed an interview of Jack Welch when he was on his book tour for his then-new book, Winning. The interview contained all of the Welch-like outlooks that anyone in business has come to know well; f nothing else, he is remarkably persistent and consistent. Though I disagree with some fundamental beliefs he has about managing a company, I do think he provides excellent food for thought for today’s business leaders.
Off the bat, I have to admit that I have experienced Welch-style management first hand. I interned at The Home Depot for my summer between my years of business school. And though Welch never worked there himself, one of his proteges, Bob Nardelli, was the CEO for over 6 years. We all know how that played out, and there are numerous articles that have been written about the damaging culture of that place.
Many of the troubles that The Home Depot is facing now have nothing to do with the housing market. They have everything to do with the fact that in 6 years Nardelli decimated the culture that made that company great. People were afraid of him. He had dirty stores with low service levels and focused on the large professional contractor, a customer who was never all that interested in The Home Depot. They consequently sold the business after Nardelli’s termination. While Nardelli tried very hard to play hardball the way Mr. Welch taught him to, he forgot the lessons of shedding what is not essential, focusing on others when you are in a leadership position (as opposed to oneself), and realizing that a great company never believes they are best so they continually seek to learn and improve.
Where I strongly disagree with Welch is in his philosophy that is the namesake of his book: winning. He says a company’s job, its only job, is to win. He goes on to say that from winning, all good things come. My question to him would be, “Do you win at all costs, by any means necessary?” There are a lot of companies that got very large, fantastically wealthy, by completely disregarding the environment, by squeezing every last drop of margin out of their suppliers, and treating their people with less than respect. Wal-Mart is a great example of all of these operating principles. Now they’re working hard to reverse their ways. They certainly won by Welch’s definition. But was it worth it?
I would amend the mission statement of a company by saying that it’s job is to win with integrity. And by integrity I mean that it must consider that the communities in which its employees, suppliers, and customers live and do business are also stakeholders in their business decisions, as much as its stockholders. If a company wins and puts the health and well-being of its communities at risk, then in the long-run we all lose.
Category: corporation
How to Be Smarter
The definition of intelligence, its measurement, and the belief that it relies more heavily on nature or nurture are all up for debate. In discussions on intelligence, there does seem to be general agreement that there are steps any person can take to make the most of the intelligence they have.
The New York Times ran an article this week detailing some of the methods of maximizing intelligence: exercise, a pursuit of lifelong learning, sufficient sleep, and challenging ourselves with riddles, puzzles, and mind-bending games. Though my favorite piece of the article involves its reference to the list Conde Nast released of the 73 top brains in business. And you’d think that list would be chocked full of Ivy-educated, fabulously wealthy finance types. And there are some of the those, though their number is surprisingly, and pleasantly, few.
The majority of Conde Nast’s list is dominated by people who go out of their way to think different, be individuals, people who recognize that differentiation, not assimilation, is the way forward in the world of business. The list includes a collection of people who don’t make headline news, but quietly, in their own way are simultaneously changing the world and building wildly successful companies.
This list gives us some profound food for thought: our education focuses on test achievement, elite school acceptances, and hitting numerical thresholds. Do we need to have a metric in place in our education system that captures a sense of confidence, an ability to look at challenges with new eyes, and have the courage to forge ahead against adversity, naysayers, and others who wish we’d just “be like everyone else”? Current business successes would suggest that the idea is worthy of consideration.
The goal of all designers: create conversations
Tim Lebrecht at frogDesign wrote a post earlier this week about the earliest stage of ideation. In this age of user-generated design, he questions whether designers are really going about their work in the correct way. He challenges designers of all levels to consider that whatever the end product of their design, they should seek to create conversation.
I was a bit confused by this for a time until I considered an art exhibit I saw a few years ago at the Phillips Collection in DC. The exhibit featured works by Joan Miro and Alexander Calder. The created their art as a conversation; this is largely because they did not have a common fluent language. Miro would create a piece; Calder would answer it, and then add another idea for Miro to comment on. And so it went, for many, many years. Across decades, across oceans. They transcended language with design.
So what if companies like Coca Cola or Target took the design POV that they were creating conversations with their customers, rather than creating products? How much richer and more relevant could their designs be? How much loyalty to their brands could they generate?
Pictured above is Joan Miro’s “Garden”
Living in an ecosystem
A few nights ago I went to a dinner co-sponsored by Shop.org (a retail trade organization) and Demandware, an e-commerce platform provider. They were kind enough to host a soft sell dinner for 50 retailers in New York City at Ruth’s Chris. While the dinner and networking were terrific, a researcher from Jupiter Research, Patti Freeman Evans, gave a brief speech on e-commerce, though her insights had much broader-reaching applications.
I have written often about the act of curation – in writing and in life. As a retailer, there is also a curatorial aspect to my company’s work. In our brick-and-mortar stores, we are constrained by the size of the box. Even on our website, there is just so much merchandise that any one Guest is willing to click-through. Navigation must be easy. Content must be relevant. Frustration, confusion, and wait time must be held to an absolute minimum from parking in our parking lot all the way through the Guest exit. As retailers, we are curators. Yes, the content matters, though the thoughtful edit matters even more. Or point-of-view and clear expression of it is mission critical. There’s no room in retail for “wishy-washy”.
It’s easy to have a POV about a store, or a chain or stores, or a website. But what about an enterprise POV? Much more difficult when there are parties of conflicting interest. Our business, like so many others, is currently siloed beyond belief. Many people see an ecosystem within their own microcosm. And you can’t build a brand that way. I am surprised every day at how many people drive their respective buses with blinders on. This is only complicated by the fact that we are a turn-around, so we are, as my boss likes to say “driving the bus at breakneck speed while also trying to paint it.” Again, if only I could draw…
What Patti Freeman Evans asked us to do, as retailers, is consider our entire business and indeed our entire industry, as an ecosystem. What we do in one store, one chain of stores, or on one site has an incredible effect on many other people and companies. And her thought provoking analogy of businesses being living, breathing entities offers us a chance to reflect on the question, “what would we do, in our businesses, if we were conscious at every moment that our decisions profoundly effect the lives of everyone we reach for years to come?”
Twitter: microblogging and its business implications
I have some friends who have started blogs and find them to be so much work to update that they simply abandon them after a while. To be certain, it takes discipline to writer regularly, and at the heart of it, if you don’t enjoy writing, you won’t enjoy blogging. But if you like the idea of sharing what you’re currently working on and giving people updates in short snippets is more your speed, Twitter might be for you. And that’s especially true if you are a company, as many user are likely to this connectivity tool to log a company’s missteps in customer service.
Twitter is about two years old and the only question it asks is “What are you doing?” in 140 characters, or less, you answer the question, from IM, from the twitter site, or by text messaging from your phone. I usually put up the URL of my latest blog post, and use it as a way to get the word out about my writing.
Rob Pegoraro wrote an article this past week in the Washington Post about Twitter, and other short update services available on sites like Facebook. Towards the end of the article, he mentioned that companies like JetBlue have a presence on Twitter and respond appropriately to customer comments posted there about the company.
Best of all, the log of follow-up by the company is available for viewing by anyone on the system – essentially a diary and timeline of how JetBlue has handled a customer issue that a customer felt strong enough to tell the world about. Afterall, when you’re given lemons….
You can follow me on twitter. Name = christanyc
Blogging the competition: adver-blogging
On frogblog today, Tim Leberecht discusses a small group of corporate blogs that we are now seeing pop up. Brew blog is one example. It’s run by Miller Brewing Company, and rather than promote Miller, the writers spend their time chronicling the fumblings of its biggest rival, Anheuser-Busch. Ick – is this what we’re going to do with our new connectivity tools? Use them and spend our time bashing one another? I’d be disappointed in any company who engaged in this kind of activity, and what’s more, I’d stop patronizing the brand doing the adver-blogging.
The theory of glass houses applies. I understand wanting to keep tabs on your competition. I understanding wanting to your own horn to drum up business. But just as it does so often with political campaigns, I think the people and companies doing the bashing will ultimately get bashed themselves, with a vengeance.
I hope that we don’t see this emerge as a growing trend. I’m much more interested in hearing a company’s own stories in their own words. See Tim’s original post at http://www.frogdesign.com/frogblog/adversarial-blogging-the-brew-blog-and-co.html
6 myths harmful to the creative movement
“Creativity requires the courage to let go of certainties.” –Erich Fromm
Though this article is a few years old, the principles of the study it describes still hold weight, and sadly the myths are all too prevalent – particularly at companies where old thinking reigns. Teresa Amabile, the author of a new study on creativity in the workplace, heads the Entrepreneurial Management Unit at Harvard Business School and is one of the country’s foremost explorers of business innovation.
In summary, she busts the following myths when discussing corporate creativity:
1. Creativity Comes From Creative Types
2. Money Is a Creativity Motivator
3. Time Pressure Fuels Creativity
4. Fear Forces Breakthroughs
5. Competition Beats Collaboration
6. A Streamlined Organization Is a Creative Organization
Read the full article from Fast Company at http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/89/creativity.html
What is good for the company?
I work a company that sells fun products and has a decidedly “unfun” corporate atmosphere. I am willing to toe-to-toe with anyone, and I mean anyone, who says otherwise. There is a completely lack of smiley-ness around the place. There’s so much grey and taupe that you begin to wonder whether or not color ever existed at all. When I come into work in the morning, I see employees marching toward the grey, 1970’s-architecture building with the same cadence of those in the movie Antz. It’s sad. Really sad….
I pride myself on having a colorful character – I’m also blunt and opinionated. Luckily, I work for someone who’s also blunt and opinionated and we’re starting to know enough to be dangerous. Dangerous as in we may be leading the Antz to some kind of colorful revolution. I am seeing signs of creativity and life pop up in unexpected places, and in fairly rebellious ways.
Our restrooms, like our offices, are grey and taupe. Today, I have found that several people must have gotten sick of no amenities in the restrooms and placed peach hand lotion in each one. On my way back to my office from the restroom, I passed by a cube that was in full view on the main drag with a very large banner that said in bold letters “What is good for the company?” The wheels of creativity and action are slowly, slowly beginning to turn. And then as I turned the corner of my desk, I saw people dancing, actually dancing, in their cubes. Finally, an outward expression of joy.
Organizations, particularly those with decades of history, have a tremendous amount of inertia. When at rest, they are difficult to shake into action. Luckily, once they are stirred up and in motion, they are tough to slow down. My hope is that by the time I leave the company, those wheels will be cranking full speed ahead. And hopefully, I will have been a part of a creative revolution. It will indeed be good for the company.
Christa Avampato 