|
WANTED: PROACTIVE, OUT-OF-THE-BOX
DOers!
Thinking "Out-of-the-Box" is good,
but it doesn't get anything done.
|
Selected excerpts from Fast Company issue 35 page 168, June 2000
Why Can't We Get Anything Done?
by Alan M. Webber
Stanford Business school professor Jeffrey Pfeffer has a question: If we're
so smart, why can't we get anything done? Here are 16 rules to help you make
things happen in your organization.
These days, people know a lot. U.S. organizations spend more than $60 billion
a year on training -- a large percentage on management training. In addition
companies spend billions of dollars a year on consultants. More than 80,000
MBAs graduate each year from U.S. business schools. Presumably these students
have been taught the skills they need to improve the way companies do business.
But all of that state-of-the-art knowledge leaves us begging the question:
Why can't we get anything done? It's a mystery worthy of a business-school doctorate
thesis. If we're so well trained and so well informed, then why aren't we a
lot more effective? Or, as Stanford professors Jeffrey Pfeffer and Robert I.
Sutton title it, The Knowing-Doing Gap: How Smart Companies Turn Knowledge
Into Action, Harvard Business School Press, 2000 ; they ask "Why is
it that, at the end of so many books and seminars, leaders report being enlightened
and wiser, but not much happens in their organizations?"
To address that question, Fast Company talked to Jeffrey Pfeffer,
53, the Thomas D. Dee Professor of Organizational Behavior at Stanford Graduate
School of Business. Dr. Pfeffer offers 16 rules to explain why there's so
little doing with so much knowing and, more importantly, what you can do about
it.
1. Doing something requires ... doing something!
Advocates of knowledge management as "the next big thing" have advanced
the proposition that what companies need is more intellectual capital. While
that is undeniably true, it's only partly true. What the advocates are overlooking
is that knowledge is useful only if you do something with it.
It's easy to fall into the Knowing-Doing Gap because doing something actually
requires doing something! It means tackling the hard work of making something
happen ... making something change! It's much easier and much safer to sit
around and have intellectual conversations, to gather large databases, to
invest in technical infrastructure -- and never actually make a change.
Compare all of this knowing with the good old Yankee ingenuity of the past
-- Edison Labs was a place filled with people who were tinkering and doing.
Thomas Edison did more than create inventions; he built a place where people
could test their ideas, occasionally blow things up, and then try again. Doing
something, day in and day out.
2. Would you let a great orator perform heart surgery on you?
Today, there are experts on everything except how to get things done. And we
reward that expertise -- in the stock market, in the academic world, and in
the job market. For example, there's no question that the stock market has had
an influence on the business shift from doing to knowing -- especially in the
IPOs of Hi-Teck Splash. The market has made it abundently clear that it is willing
to pay, and pay well, for ideas. Whether you can actually execute those ideas
or not is irrelevant. Today, there are countless companies that have come up
with great ideas but can't implement them. But the market still rewards those
companies.
The educational establishment must take some responsibility for this problem.
Think about what business schools "do": They train people to talk about ideas
-- slick presentations, advertising, hype, etc. But the one thing that business
schools don't do is train students to do anything.
Would you undergo heart surgery if the surgeon had been trained in the same
way that business-school students are trained? Imagine that the surgeon had
sat around in medical school discussing heart-surgery cases, watching heart-surgery
videos, and listening to great heart surgeons talk about what they did -- and
now you're lying on the operating table, do`you really want that surgeon to
cut you open???
One of the top jobs that business school students take when they graduate is
management consulting! You can be a plant manager -- actually have what it takes
to run a plant -- and make $60,000 to $100,000 a year. Or you can talk about
plant management and make twice as much. It would appear that it's more important
and more valuable to be clever than it is to have the ability to make something
happen.
3. Do you think that you can out-think the competition?
The good news is that companies are beginning to recognize that it's not only
critical to know; it's also very important to do. We've been through
the phase in which every company thought that it could out-think the competition.
And, in fact, companies were able to out-think the competition -- for a while.
But today, the advantage that you get from out-thinking the competition lasts
an incredibly short period of time. Put simply, the speed with which your competitors
can copy even the best idea has increased much faster than the advantage that
you get from having come up with that idea in the first place.
Look at what's happened with patents: The economic life span of most patents
has decreased. The time lag between coming up with an idea, introducing that
new idea to the market, and having it copied has decreased. Worse yet, assuming
you have filed for a patent, it can be "all-over-the-place" by the time the
patent is granted ... even before you have had time to file a brief for patent
infringement. And that's happening in a variety of industries, both in products
and in services. So while having knowledge is useful, it's not sufficient. It
gives you much less competitive leverage than it once did.
4. Doing means learning. Learning means mistakes.
If companies genuinely want to move from knowing to doing, they need to build
a forgiveness framework -- a tolerance for error and failure -- into their culture.
A company that wants you to come up with a smart idea, implement that idea quickly,
and learn in the process has to be willing to cut their people some slack. You
need to be able to try things, even if you think that you might fail.
The absolute opposite mind-set is one that appears to be enjoying a lot of
favor at the moment: the notion that we have to hold people accountable for
their performance. Companies today are holding their employees accountable --
not only for trying and learning new things, but also for the results of their
actions. If you want to see how that mind-set affects performance, compare the
ways that American Airlines and Southwest Airlines approach accountability --
and then compare those two airlines' performances.
American Airlines has decided to emphasize accountability, right down to
the departmental -- and even the individual -- level. If a plane is late, American
wants to know whose fault it is. So if a plane is late, what do American employees
do? They spend all of their time making sure that they don't get blamed for
it. And while everyone is busy covering up, no one is thinking about the customer.
Southwest Airlines has a system for covering late arrivals: It's called "team
delay." Southwest doesn't worry too much about accountability; it isn't interested
in pinning blame. The company is interested only in getting the plane in the
air and in learning how to prevent delays from happening in the future.
Now ask yourself this: If you're going to be held accountable for every mistake
that you make, how many chances are you going to take? How eager are you going
to be to convert your ideas into actions?
5. Have no fear.
One of the most pervasive emotions in the American workplace today is fear.
The reason that there is so much fear is that everybody wants to build a learning
organization, but nobody actually wants anyone to learn. Learning requires tolerating
people who make mistakes. Learning requires tolerating inefficiency. Learning
requires tolerating failure. Learning requires letting people try things that
they've never done before, things that they probably won't be very good at the
first time around.
6. Learning comes at a price. Pay it.
The truth is that there's no easy way to encourage people to learn. You have
to accept the fact that there's always going to be a trade-off between proficiency
and learning. Learners are never as proficient as experts. So learning comes
at a price. The price is that the experts might not get to use their expertise
and that the learners might make mistakes.
7. Who me? I saw nothing! Honest!
Another side effect of fear is that it absolutely retards the flow of information
inside a company. So you have this anomaly: Companies pat themselves on the
back as knowledge-management businesses, but because nobody wants to be the
bearer of bad news, nobody inside those companies knows what the hell is going
on. A famous quote by producer Sam Goldwyn sums up that point well: "I want
everybody to tell me the truth -- even though it costs him his job."
Yet another side effect is that fear causes individuals to focus only on
the short term and on their own survival. I used to teach a case study about
a company that made brakes for airplanes. The case described a chain of events
in which workers ultimately falsified the performance of the brakes: They filed
papers that falsely attested to the brakes' capabilities. I asked my class a
question: Why would you falsify documents when you know that there is absolutely
no chance of the problem going undetected? Sooner or later, somebody's going
to fly in a plane, the brakes are going to fail, and the problem will come to
light. It's inevitable! So why lie?
The answer is that if there's enough fear in the workplace, you don't worry
about what's going to happen eventually. You don't even worry about what's going
to happen tomorrow. You worry only about today: Can I get through today?
8. Talk ain't cheap. It's expensive -- and destructive.
Companies often confuse talking with doing. They think that talking about
doing something is the same thing as doing it! That planning is the same as
doing. That giving presentations is the same as doing. That making reports is
the same as doing. Or even that making a decision to do something is the same
as doing it. All of those errors occur with alarming regularity in companies
today.
Mistaking talk for action is worse than just a simple error: Talk can actually
drive out action. Studies about the way that meetings actually work demonstrate
that negative people are perceived as being smarter than positive people --
that is, being critical is interpreted as a sign of intelligence. You see this
attitude in business all the time: The fastest way for me to seem smart is to
cut you down. So you come up with an idea, and I come up with a thousand different
reasons why that idea won't work. Now everyone sees you as dumb and me as smart
-- and we've created an environment where no one wants to come up with ideas.
9. Decisions, by themselves, are empty.
The other trap that people fall into is confusing making a decision with making
something happen. First, we become obsessed with making the right decision --
which becomes a major obstacle to trying something to see if it works. Then
we forget a simple fact: that a decision by itself changes nothing. A decision
is the beginning of the process of doing, not the end of that process.
And so we work at making good decisions. Did we make the right decision?
Did we have all of the information that we needed to make the decision? Is it
possible that a better decision could have been made if better information had
been produced? Well, it's always better to make a good decision than a bad decision
-- but just making a decision doesn't change anything! Did you implement the
decision? Did you actually do anything?
10. Oh no! Not another program!
One of the biggest enemies of getting something done is the dreaded "P" word,
"program." Whenever you hear that a company is about to "roll out a program,"
it's not good news. It suggests that the company is about to spend all of its
time worrying about the content of the program, rather than learning by doing.
David Kelley, founder and CEO of Ideo Product Development, has it right: "Enlightened
trial and error outperforms the planning of flawless intellects."
No matter how smart you are, you can't preplan everything and then roll out
your program. What you want to do is to try some stuff and see what happens.
And by the way, "enlightened trial and error" is the perfect antidote to the
cynicism that exists in many organizations whose people have seen programs come
and go. I recently visited a company whose CEO is famous for coming up with
a new program every year. One year it's Six Sigma, the next it's Total Quality
Management, the next it's customer satisfaction. Every year, that company's
troops go through a bunch of plans and processes. And in the end, they've learned
to do nothing at all.
11. Why do we do it that way? Um ...
Another huge obstacle to doing in companies is corporate memory: The memory
of "how we've always done things around here" substitutes for "doing things
the right way around here." The root, again, is fear. People don't want to make
mistakes, and the best way to avoid making a mistake is to continue doing things
exactly as they've always been done. Companies get trapped in a kind of circular
logic: "We do what we do because it's the best thing to do. And it's the best
thing to do because it's what we've always done."
After a while, what was originally adopted as a means to an end becomes an
end in itself. There is no function that is more culpable in this regard than
human resources. In company after company, the human-resources department puts
into place a whole bunch of policies that undoubtedly started with good intentions.
But in time, those policies, which originally were just a means to an end, become
ends in themselves. And nobody remembers what outcome those policies were actually
intended to produce.
What you end up with are sacred cows -- things that you take for granted;
processes, practices, and rules that you think will help you get things done.
In reality, all they do is get in the way of getting things done.
12. Professor Otis Redding will now address the class.
There's an old saying in business: What gets measured is what gets done. What's
happening today is the flip side of that. Measurement has become a tyranny that
makes sure that nothing gets done.
I've developed what I like to call the Otis Redding Theory of Measurement,
which is named for his song "( Sittin' on ) The Dock of the Bay." In that song,
Redding sings, "I can't do what 10 people tell me to do, so I guess I'll remain
the same." That line sounds as if it could be about companies' misconceptions
about measurement.
Companies have managed to convince themselves that, since what gets measured
is what gets done, the more they measure, the more stuff will get done. Last
summer, I met a woman who works for a large oil company, and she told me that
the company has 105 measures for which she is responsible. So I asked her, "How
many of those 105 measures do you pay attention to?" Her answer? "None." Because
in the end, she's measuring so many things that she doesn't pay attention to
any of them -- 105 equals zero.
13. Sure, it's a measurement -- but is it important?
Here's another measurement problem: You can measure the wrong things. General
Motors is a perfect example of this; it's measurement central. GM can tell you
about everything having to do with a car's outcome: how much of every kind of
material went into a car's manufacture, how many defects it has, how many hours
of labor went into making it. The company has about 1,000 measures of outcome.
But what GM doesn't have ( yet ) are process measures. And without process measures,
you don't know where to intervene to change outcomes. Measurement can, in fact,
be crucial to achieving the right kinds of action -- but you must do the right
measurements.
14. Pogo would be proud!
Another piece of corporate behavior that prevents companies from implementing
good ideas is ugly internal competition. American business has fallen in love
with the idea that the best way to get people to do things well is to have them
compete with one another. That mind-set derives from a sloppy sports analogy:
People run faster if they run against someone else. That may be true for track,
but when it comes to learning, people learn best when they're operating in a
mode that is less competitive.
Companies that adopt internal competition as their operating style might
as well post as their corporate mission statement that famous saying from the
comic strip "Pogo": "We have met the enemy, and it is us." I remember talking
with the people at Southwest Airlines shortly after its leader, Herb Kelleher,
was the subject of a "Fortune" article on what makes a good CEO ( "Is Herb Kelleher
America's Best CEO?" May 2, 1994 ). The reaction inside the company was, Now
we're in trouble. Because when a company becomes that successful, people inside
that company start to pick at one another. And what Southwest employees ended
up saying to me was, "Thank God for the United Airlines shuttle!" It took a
little of that good old external competition for Southwest to remember that
the real adversary is on the outside, not on the inside.
15. What do I do? When do I get started?
So what's the remedy? The remedy is to do something! San Francisco 49ers head
coach Steve Mariucci once said, "I never wear a watch, because I always know
it's now -- and now is when you should do it."
If you want the future to be better than the present, you have to start working
on it immediately. Remember: What you want is better than, not optimal. Your
job is to do something today that's better than what you did yesterday. And
to do something tomorrow that's better than what you did today.
16. Make knowing and doing the same thing.
The challenge for companies -- and for individuals inside those companies
-- is to build a culture of action. The best description of the knowing-doing
gap that I've ever heard came from a woman in one of my executive programs.
She said, "Benchmarking is very popular today -- but companies benchmark the
wrong thing. They benchmark what other companies do, when they should be benchmarking
how those companies think."
In the retail world, companies benchmark the Men's Wearhouse. The Men's Wearhouse
pays people on commission. And if employees sell more than $500 at one time,
the company pays them a bigger commission. Other companies have adopted that
system. But what other companies don't do is look at the underlying thinking
that drives that system. Founder and CEO George Zimmer had a great insight that
is the key to the success of the Men's Wearhouse. He started with a question:
Where is the power in retail? Most people think that the power in retail is
in buying the merchandise -- that if you want to rise to the top of retail,
you need to be in buying. But Zimmer had a blinding grasp of the obvious: You
don't make money when you buy the merchandise -- you make money when you sell
the merchandise! If you adopt that idea as the basis for how you run your company,
what do you do differently? You put more emphasis on store operations. You put
more emphasis on training your salespeople. If you look at everything that Zimmer
does at the Men's Wearhouse, you'll see that it all connects back to one fundamental
idea: that in retail, selling is the key to success.
Here's another example. Southwest Airlines is premised on another blinding
grasp of the obvious: People do not pay to sit in the Dallas-Fort Worth Airport.
People pay to get from once place to another. It sounds simple, but it's very
hard to get people to have the courage, the wisdom, and the insight to see beyond
what everybody else is doing -- and to take notice of the obvious, unexamined,
and unacted-upon truths.
One final insight: For successful companies, there is no knowing-doing gap.
There is no difference between how they think, who they are, and what they do.
__________________________________________________________________________
- To learn more about Jeffrey
Pfeffer, go to http://gobi.stanford.edu/facultybios/bio.asp?ID=135
Parts of this page subject to copyright © 2004 Gruner + Jahr USA Publishing.
- Click HERE to read the full article and readers' comments (opens source
in new window).