Judge If It's Paralysis-By-Analysis

A mother instructs her child not to run too fast, not to run outside the given track in the garden, not to run without sports shoes, etc. etc.

She'd seen the child injuring herself earlier in absence of observing the discipline of 'not-to' such as above.

Another mother sitting next to her appeared appreciative. She didn't hesitate to share her experience of how her non-observant son had damaged his hamstring muscles irreversibly. She was concerned that her son had been living with the pain since years.

The pathological and clinical tests, investigations, analysis and treatments are now companion for the lifetime, she said.

Question is, is the former approach, the 'nagging' one, correct?

Obviously, but not so obviously!

Former approach can be called as judgemental based on seed-stage deviations that probably were thought to lead to major deviations or crises if not kept under check. It's about commonsensical risk management.

Latter one, the one that involved accidents and treatments, is an analytical approach that reactively analyses major deviations already occurred.

Former one is based on real-time (genjitsu) observations of real-facts-and-conditions of things and people (gembutsu) at the real-place of happening (gemba).

Latter one usually needs extensive analysis. At times it leads to 'paralysis-by-analysis' that necessitates intervention of judgement in order to unlock the tie and move ahead.

Former approach is easy, fast and proactive although seems to appear like 'nagging'. Of course it is expected to incorporate factual learnings from past.

The latter is difficult, time-consuming and reactive one. It's usually a post-mortem that often necessitates involvement of specialist agencies. Most often it results into repentance of irreversible damage and costs.

Importance of structured analysis however can't be undermined particularly if it's for exploratory or descriptive research in order to study cause-effect relationship of an hypothesis on an observed phenomenon in real-time (genjitsu) or for future innovations.

Also read a few relevant blogposts hereunder:

Prevention: The Best Cure! ... Is it really so?
Treat Root-causes, Not Symptoms !
When Safety Becomes Sorry
Drove To Hell ... Almost ! 
WOW Work-Culture: By Telling or Selling
Take Habits For A Ride
How Many Times Do You Wash Hands
In a Problem?: No Problem ! Dwell A While !!
Part-1
In-big-problem? Wear-hats-to-solve-it! Part-2
How To Make A Difference
Big-Be Or Bug-Be !
A Ride To Hell
Make checklists your friends
Nauseous Communication Gaps
Do You Cleanup-After-Crisis
Raam or Krishna-Shyam: Tell me Hey Raam!
Will It Work Here? 
That's How Morons Work
You seem Reasonable if you appear Un-reasonable
Smart-Moron Who Breaks Your Glass 
Wish To Be Planet-Friendly?: Save! 
Waste-to-eat-sea-to-drink
Don't Save Water on Holi-day
Be Shame-less Or Water-less

Talent-Is-Latent: Enable It!

Business of the company that I went to assess was driven by research and development (R&D), high obsolescence of products and uniquely varying needs of customers.

High customisation was the order of the day. That in turn called for high level of customer contact and listening skills in order to capture voice of customer (VOC) precisely. This obviously calls for leadership skills to get it made in-house and get delivered before competition could do.

The need may appear unique to the company. But this in fact is the order of the day for most suppliers given the ever dynamic market place characterised by VUCA¹ and high level of competition.

While CEO of the company was keen to improve business processes to help retain their position externally, simultaneous concern was about 'attrition' he had been facing. Recently 'bought' talent also left, he complained.

Won't the training go waste under such circumstances, he feared.

Between the trained people leaving and untrained ones living (with you) for ever with their errors to annoy you, what is better?

Education, training and coaching builds people. Between 'Building' relevant skills captively versus installing 'Bought' skills as a foreign particle, what is preferable?

Companies need to understand that building pipelines of people is no less important alongside building the pipelines of products. In fact the former should be their prime agenda.

Why do people quit?
Especially those with high aspirations definitely do.

In fact, those without aspirations too move in absence of a conducive environment to hold them back. One of the major reasons of the other party leaving is indifferent treatment be it to people in general or to a customer in particular. 

So one of the most important portfolios of the CEO is not to leave HRD² to HR-D (HR-Department). Instead, creating culture that 'compels' people to stay back should be her hands-on agenda driven personally.

One can't ignore the fact that even seemingly dumb people have intelligence, so-called average though. It usually stays latent or dormant until challenged.

Leaving aside their own ego, superiors just need to facilitate unleashing it by making them feel confident and help them to realise their self-worth. They just need to be given an opportunity and a platform to shine. This can be done by encouraging them to express their thoughts, experiment corresponding changes in their work area without fear-of-failure.

It's a process of enabling³ people.

Once done, latent talent can be seen flowering and flowing-in smoothly. The pipeline of HRD can be seen getting 'built' that not only ensures employee retention but also creates a pull.

How to enable³ people?

First of all collect (Not Buy!) people who have fire-in-their-belly although with not-very-high aspirations and high-qualifications. Then enable³ them step-by-step. 

Step-1. Establish your credibility by demonstrating your actions on what you speak.

Step-2. Explain your expectations from them. Communicate your urgency and seriousness through complimentary evidences.

Step-3. Educate, train and coach them.

Education is to help them acquire goal specific knowledge.
Training is to help them acquire goal specific and industry-relevant, organisation-specific skills.
Coaching is to help them on 'Do-Why' and 'Do-How' in order to apply the knowledge and skills to enthusiastically achieve the goals of common good.

Step-4. Encourage, inspire & motivate to keep them engaged in the process. Give them a platform to showcase their talent and to shine.

Step-5. Empower them: Give them freedom-within-a-framework to experiment without fear of failures.

Step-6. Ennoble, means dignify them with high respect. Recognize & reward their achievements by actively listening to their efforts.

Step-7. Repeat the enablement cycle to take up higher challenges.

'Building' people rather than 'Buying' them is in a true sense creating a learning organisation as companies like Toyota do. It's their company level strategy driven by the top rather than merely a HRD² strategy left to the HR-D.

Footnotes:
1. VUCA: Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, Ambiguous. A term of military origin that represents warfare environment.
2. HRD: Human Resource Development.
3. Model 7-E© from Book "How To Enable A Change Process? Start-From-Self". Author: Shyam Talawadekar.

Also read a few relevant blogposts hereunder: Please do consider leaving a comment or sharing this post.

Taken-For-Granted ? You Deserve It !!
Strategise To Achieve Targets Daily
Does recognition really matter
IQ-EQ-or-SQ: What-is-more-important?
Do you know a Best-Career-Plan
Take your career in fast lane!
Succession-Plans In Fast Lane! 
Treat Root-causes, Not Symptoms !
Nauseous Communication Gaps
Do You Cleanup-After-Crisis
Raam or Krishna-Shyam: Tell me Hey Raam!
Will It Work Here? 
Some Moron ! Some Great !!!  
That's How Morons Work
You seem Reasonable if you appear Un-reasonable
Smart-Moron Who Breaks Your Glass 
WOW Work-Culture: By Telling or Selling
Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy
Can-changing-thoughts-change-a-nation
Ridiculous Poison-culture versus Maverick Kaizen-culture
Tolerate Once, Twice, Thrice?
Make checklists your friends 
Make It Simpler, Rest Will Follow
How To Make A Difference
Big-Be Or Bug-Be !
A customer gets what s/he deserves: Shoddy Quality!
Listen to iceberg of VOC to acquire customers

Do You Force Customers To Quit

Insurance policy of both my car and scooter was about to expire.

I'd sold off the scooter. So when my insurance agent called me to renew it's policy, I ignored it saying the new owner will take care of it.

After a couple of weeks, when my car went for road tax payment I realised that it's insurance policy had expired. Actually my insurance agent did call me to renew car's policy but I'd inadvertently ignored his reminder thinking it was for the 'sold scooter'.

Red-tape that followed was inevitable. The procedure explained to me by the insurance agent was:

Take the scooter to the insurance company.
They'll inspect it before issuing the policy
They'll charge fine for 'discontinuation'.

Making the job 3D: Dirty-Danger-Difficult for the customer. 

While the insurance agent refused to followup with the company, the road tax agent came to my rescue saying "don't worry". May be the former was lacking motivation due to 'smallness' of business while the latter was interested in acquiring a new customer: Market development strategy as the jargon goes in management world! Theory of relativity!

The road tax agent got the insurance done from another company. Everything home delivered at just ten percent charge of the total official receipt amount.

In fact the policy issued by the competitor was priced at almost thirty percent discount.

The indifferent procedure of the previous insurance company and the behavior of it's agent (the first touch-point as it's brand ambassador) to take the customer for granted costed them business.

The Cost-Of-Poor-Quality (COPQ) to them was not only the loss of business but also a permanent loss of customers. I said loss of customers because bad-mouth publicity by every dissatisfied customer takes away more than one potential ones.

What's the learning?

More than the hard quality itself of your offering, it's the lack of soft quality, your indifference, that forces customers to call it a Quit!

So better to be-aware of behavior!!

Also read a few relevant blogposts hereunder:

In-a-problem ? No-problem! Dwell-a-while!
Customer or Custo-Mer ? 
Experienced A Delightful Payment !
An Experience of Heart-and-Soul
Do you keep curing your brand ? 
A customer gets what s/he deserves: Shoddy Quality! 
Listen to iceberg of VOC to acquire customers
Less With More And More Gets Sore
Should one care for value ? 
Can-changing-thoughts-change-a-nation
Ridiculous Poison-culture versus Maverick Kaizen-culture
Tolerate Once, Twice, Thrice? 
The Business Of Businesses
That's how some business partnerships work
Taken-For-Granted ? You Deserve It !!
Strategise To Achieve Targets Daily
Does recognition really matter
That's How Morons Work
Simplicity Of Theory Of Relativity

Not So 'Raddi' Business Model

'Raddi' is a common term used in India for scrap papers that include newspapers. As a slang when someone says it's 'Raddi' it means it's rubbish.

But the business of buying-n-selling 'Raddi' itself isn't 'Raddi'. It's actually an evergreen business flourishing with an enhanced focus on Reuse-Recover-Recycle (3R).

With varying rates in various seasons, in monsoon it fetches the least price.

Like each business has it's tricks, the 'Raddi' fellow has not so 'Raddi' tricks in his Business Model. Can you spot one in the picture?

Leaning the 'Raddi' against legs: The trick is to support it so that it weighs less than actual.

He buys at ten (10) bucks per kilogram and sells at fifteen (15).
You think he makes five bucks profit per kilogram.
Gross profit of fifty (50%).

Wait a minute! There's something more to it.
The weight 'shown' to you on scale: ten (10) kilogram is false.
If you ask him not to lean the 'Raddi' against body, his trick number-one gets preempted.
Ask him not to hold the weigh-scale by two hands. Trick number-two gets preempted.

Minus his creative innovations (the tricks), same 'Raddi' weighs twelve (12) kilogram.
'Tricky' bonus of a cool twenty percent i.e. (12-10 means) two-kilogram extra material or 0.20 per Kg that fetches him rupees three extra.
So the 'real' profit is five bucks plus 'tricky' bonus of three bucks.

Earning eight (8) bucks over ten (10).
Gross profit of eighty percent (80%) almost.

Not very difficult maths.

'Raddi' Business, but not so 'Raddi' Business Model though!

Of course with an unethical side to it that's unacceptable!!

Also read a few relevant blogposts hereunder:  Please do consider leaving a comment or sharing this post.

Ridiculous Poison-culture versus Maverick Kaizen-culture
Tolerate Once, Twice, Thrice?
That's how some business partnerships work
Taken-For-Granted ? You Deserve It !!
Take Habits For A Ride
That's How Morons Work
You seem Reasonable if you appear Un-reasonable
Smart-Moron Who Breaks Your Glass 
Do You Ask Right Questions? 
The Business Of Businesses
Business Eco-rgonomics