Moe's SOA & BPM Blog
My informed ramblings on making SOA & BPM work for you.
Some of these come from my infamous but now defunct Alphacourt blog.
Friday 3 April 2009, 3:25 PM
Blue Sky Thinking
The philosopher, George Santayana, wrote "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This is commonly misquoted as “Those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it”. The reason I bring this up, besides showing off my philosophical pretentions, is that I am still coming across people (well, consultants anyway, so quite low down in the food chain) who think we don’t need to worry why things are what they are, but we should just concentrate on the future. Invariably their drivel will at some stage include the phrases ‘blue sky thinking’, ‘best practice’ and ‘who moved my “Who Moved My Cheese?” book?’ On the last point, it is normally me binning their cod philosophy pamphlets as I slap them for every management cliché they spout.
My cynicism here is based not on a worry about competition (anyone who falls for their spiel deserves all the help they won’t get) but on half a lifetime of having to deal with their type, or more specifically both their types.
Type 1 is the young, bright MBA in their twenties working for the prestigious (i.e. expensive) management consultancies. They have had the best education (Oxbridge, Cranford, Harvard, etc.), have been brainwashed by their companies to believe they are Masters of the Universe, and are treated as such due to the frightening fees charged for them. They have picked up the theories and the catchphrases of their profession and communicate it with the confidence of youth. However, through lack of experience all they can talk about are the idealised states of being that few companies ever attain, let alone maintain. I have had the pleasure of getting rid of a number of these Androids (if you were around in the early 90’s you’ll know who I mean) at organisations who were too bewildered to question what they were saying. The look of disbelief on their faces was a joy all of its own. In some cases this turned to anger, and they would surprise me with their use of old English vernacular.
The Type 1s are both intimidating and exhausting with their boundless energy and enthusiasm, coupled with a normally frightening intellect. However, being smart is not just about knowing things. Somebody once said that the difference between knowledge and wisdom is this: Knowledge is the understanding that a tomato is a fruit; Wisdom is the understanding that you don't put tomatoes in fruit salads.
The Type 2s are completely different. They do have wisdom, but in limited quantity. A typical type two has grey hair (what is left of it), has been around the block a few times and has a stock of answers for all situations. They are very experienced, but tend to have a narrow range of experience. They have had success in solving specific problems, and are now touting their solution for a wide range of business ills. Again they are confident, based on past success, but tend to be more laid back, possibly involving afternoon naps. If you have the specific problem for the same reasons in the same market conditions as these Type 2s, they could well provide a proven solution to your problem. However, they will probably not succeed due as they forego the required due diligence to ensure this is the case. Remember the old proverb: ‘When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail’.
The Type 2s can be more difficult to counter as they will have picked up some life smarts in their long careers. They are also less threatening so are difficult to dislike, a bit like your aging relative that overstays their welcome at Christmas. However, they can be just as dangerous as the Type 1s if they lead you down the wrong path. Getting rid of them, though, feels like sending your granny to the old folks’ home.
The common thread for these two species is their lack of appreciation or interest in why you are where you are. Looking at the reasons for your current performance will ensure you identify the real triggers and causes, and prevent you making erroneous assumptions for the future state. This is not a contemplative navel-gazing exercise, but a rigorous examination of the current weaknesses with people, processes, systems and strategy for your organisation. In most companies the answers to the problems can come from within, at a much lower risk than someone else’s ‘Best Practice’. You will also find that the buy-in and take-up of internally derived future states is both higher and more productive.
The only problem with this approach is you don’t have anyone else to blame if it doesn’t work. However, you will find that if it is your own approach it usually succeeds. Funny that…
John ‘Bullsh*t Detector’ Moe
My cynicism here is based not on a worry about competition (anyone who falls for their spiel deserves all the help they won’t get) but on half a lifetime of having to deal with their type, or more specifically both their types.
Type 1 is the young, bright MBA in their twenties working for the prestigious (i.e. expensive) management consultancies. They have had the best education (Oxbridge, Cranford, Harvard, etc.), have been brainwashed by their companies to believe they are Masters of the Universe, and are treated as such due to the frightening fees charged for them. They have picked up the theories and the catchphrases of their profession and communicate it with the confidence of youth. However, through lack of experience all they can talk about are the idealised states of being that few companies ever attain, let alone maintain. I have had the pleasure of getting rid of a number of these Androids (if you were around in the early 90’s you’ll know who I mean) at organisations who were too bewildered to question what they were saying. The look of disbelief on their faces was a joy all of its own. In some cases this turned to anger, and they would surprise me with their use of old English vernacular.
The Type 1s are both intimidating and exhausting with their boundless energy and enthusiasm, coupled with a normally frightening intellect. However, being smart is not just about knowing things. Somebody once said that the difference between knowledge and wisdom is this: Knowledge is the understanding that a tomato is a fruit; Wisdom is the understanding that you don't put tomatoes in fruit salads.
The Type 2s are completely different. They do have wisdom, but in limited quantity. A typical type two has grey hair (what is left of it), has been around the block a few times and has a stock of answers for all situations. They are very experienced, but tend to have a narrow range of experience. They have had success in solving specific problems, and are now touting their solution for a wide range of business ills. Again they are confident, based on past success, but tend to be more laid back, possibly involving afternoon naps. If you have the specific problem for the same reasons in the same market conditions as these Type 2s, they could well provide a proven solution to your problem. However, they will probably not succeed due as they forego the required due diligence to ensure this is the case. Remember the old proverb: ‘When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem begins to resemble a nail’.
The Type 2s can be more difficult to counter as they will have picked up some life smarts in their long careers. They are also less threatening so are difficult to dislike, a bit like your aging relative that overstays their welcome at Christmas. However, they can be just as dangerous as the Type 1s if they lead you down the wrong path. Getting rid of them, though, feels like sending your granny to the old folks’ home.
The common thread for these two species is their lack of appreciation or interest in why you are where you are. Looking at the reasons for your current performance will ensure you identify the real triggers and causes, and prevent you making erroneous assumptions for the future state. This is not a contemplative navel-gazing exercise, but a rigorous examination of the current weaknesses with people, processes, systems and strategy for your organisation. In most companies the answers to the problems can come from within, at a much lower risk than someone else’s ‘Best Practice’. You will also find that the buy-in and take-up of internally derived future states is both higher and more productive.
The only problem with this approach is you don’t have anyone else to blame if it doesn’t work. However, you will find that if it is your own approach it usually succeeds. Funny that…
John ‘Bullsh*t Detector’ Moe
Previous
