Strategise To Achieve Targets Daily

Lot of time and efforts get spent on strategy planning. 

Strategy sessions usually get organised away from workplace (Gemba). They often get glorified with team events, water sports, outdoor games around campfire, treasure hunts and so on. They give stylish titles to it. "Off-site", some say proudly after attending it.

Thinking that the 'so-motivated' lot might willingly accept appraisals, they try to manage by objectives (MBO). HRD managers (read 'people' managers) incorporate numbers into periodic (most often 'annual') performance appraisal systems. Some slogans complimentary to the initiative get hung on wall.

Only after failing miserably they realize that execution of strategy is much more than quarter-on-quarter (qoq) or year-on-year (yoy) appraisals or reviews. It goes beyond dusting the displayed-slogans periodically.

It's about eating-drinking-breathing the strategy announcements and talks in terms of actions. It's not merely about dreaming the distant vision. It's about living the dreams daily. 

Going beyond the "bird's-eye view" it's also about "worm's-eye view" at grass-root level (as Mohamaad Yunus creator of the Grameen Bank says about microfinance).

It's about management-OF-strategy, management-OF-objectives (MOO) or rather strategy deployment (Hoshin-Kanri) process. 

If MBO is equivalent to throwing (goal) balls over blind-walls among layers (hierarchies) and functions then MOO is equivalent to coaching to manufacture the balls (i. e. evolve goals) as also helping to catch them daily at tactical levels. 

MOO is like giving as much importance to single runs as much, say, a cricket match gives to a 'Six' on the first ball of the first over. It's about daily (Nichijo) management (Kanri) of strategy or of the policy (Hoshin-Kanri) with a sense of urgency. 

It's about recognizing heroes for their improvement efforts to overcome daily hurdles while playing for mini-goals as a subset of the strategic goals. It's about the culture of looking for as well as creating such heroes daily across the customer-supplier chain. 

Post such recognition, studying¹ of 'what went right' or 'what went wrong' as the case may be rather than mere review of the 'runs' taken for goal-making process itself is a daily affair. It's an on-going 'study' and enablement by corresponding on-going adjustments to the allocation of resources as per dynamic needs of business environment rather than doing it as 'qoq' or 'yoy' performance reviews. 

If formulating strategy is important then formulating strategy-to-execute it is more important characteristic of the MOO approach. 

Like winning a match; sales, other numbers, growth goals, etc. then get achieved as a bye-product resultant of leading and managing the above process intelligently!

¹ Called as hansei: a critical step in any process: the “check” phase of the famous “Plan-Do-Check-Act” cycle that Japanese business people use to govern any activity.

Also read a few relevant blog-posts hereunder: 

Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy
Comprehensive-Strategic-Audits
Will It Work Here?
Can-changing-thoughts-change-nation?
In-big-problem-wear-hats-to-solve-it
Ridiculous Poison-culture versus Maverick Kaizen-culture
WOW Work-Culture: By Telling or Selling
IQ-EQ-or-SQ: What-is-more-important
Talent-Is-Latent: Enable It!
Judge If It's Paralysis-By-Analysis
Will It Work Here?
Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy
Does recognition really matter
Who Comes First: Consumer Or Customer ?
Treat Root-causes, Not Symptoms !
ABCD of India Shining
Do You Ask Right Questions?
Am I 'Short-sighted' or 'Long-sighted'?

Aesthetics Spills-Over Function, Want Spills-Over Need (Part-2)

While I was forced to challenge aesthetic-design of the cup in Part-1 of this blogpost, incidentally I was heading to conduct a workshop on Value: Value-Engineering and Value-Analysis.

Value-Engineering And Value-Analysis

On one hand, increased cost to deliver same-or-reduced benefits-or-function in an offering implies that the value is reduced. On the other hand, offering the same-or-enhanced benefit/s-or-function/s at a reduced total cost to customer or end consumer means value is increased.

Making improvements with realisation of this re-actively (i.e. after the design is already in commercial use creating trouble for customer) though is about the concept of value-analysis. Realizing this proactively (i.e. making all-round improvements while testing the design itself keeping customer in the loop adequately) is about value-engineering.

Modifying the design of the cup after a customer faces difficulties (as in Part-1 of this blogpost) is about value-analysis. Launching an offering with well-tested trouble-free design by listening to unspoken voice-of-customer and the impact of the design on ecology is about the concept of value-engineering.

Both lead to enhanced value but the later generates more value by preempting the costs that otherwise tangibly incur in case of the former. The round shaped cup for instance preempts the COPQ (Cost-Of-Poor-Quality) incurred by the square-cup design (as in Part-1 of this blogpost).

Look at the shape of the ice-cream glass in the picture. It's an example of value-engineered judicious balance of the aesthetics-with-function. The value created in terms of the aesthetic shape of the glass without interfering with its function is designed-in into the offering.

Need Spills-Over Want

Function is a need: the primary requirement a customer expects an offering to serve.

Aesthetics is a want that is desire-based and is actually secondary requirement or in some situations even tertiary one as in case of coloring hair in VIBGYOR shades or colouring food-grains. I've seen color-coated groudnuts especially in some parts of Gujarat!

A judicious balance of 'needs' and 'wants' is the need-of-the-hour. Rather eco-friendly design of the offerings revolving purely around basic-or-primary 'needs' is actually the 'Survival-Need' of the warming-planet itself.

Most costs to the customer, society, and the planet get designed-in due to inadequate designs of products, services, processes, policies, etc.

So designers and leaders should value the value-engineering more. They should promote corresponding Kaizen improvements so that need for value-analysis at the cost of the COPQ incurred by the customer gets reduced if not eliminated.

In fact they should steer their organisations towards finding and marketing the 'needs' rather than 'pushing' consumerist attitude and habits towards desire-based 'wants'. Such leaders are the real friends of the planet. Those who nurture excessive wants are in a way a burden on the planet.

Greedy-wants push-up unnecessary human activities (non-value-activities). Unnecessary human activities be those at personal level or at corporate business level lead to over-consumption of resources. Over-consumption of resources is like raping the planet if I may say so!

An Exercise

Look at the picture for self-study at a little higher level of difficulty though.

It has five different designs (1, 2, 3, 4, 5) of a nose-mask. Different designs are expected to serve different functions in different situations. You may like to attempt answering following questions:

1/ Which product-design is designed to serve what function in what situation?
2/ Which product-design can serve what function in what situation as an alternative? Justify the "how?"!
3/ In that case, which product-design offers maximum Value? Justify the "how?" with its likely COPQ?
4/ Which product-design is a case of Value-Engineering and which one is of Value-Analysis? Justify the "how?"!
5/ What kind of greed-based 'wants' make the corresponding product a necessity?
6/ What are the 'needs' in the above context? And with what alternatives can we move towards satisfying the 'needs'?

What are the lessons¹?

1/ Let's change our mindsets to value 'needs' more than 'wants' while designing products, services, processes, and policies.

2/ Let's go beyond the myopic vision of running businesses for the sake of 'profit only' as its moto! Visualize the 'profit-for-planet' by viewing life-cycles of products, services, processes, and policies as subsets of the evolving need-cycles.

3/ Unnecessary aesthetic sheen while doing so is a want that does increase unnecessary cost. Enhanced cost does force a compromise on functional quality.

4/ Desire for Wants spills-over Needs and in turn spills-over the planet.

Aesthetics Spills-Over Function, Want Spills-Over Need !

Unwanted Aesthetic-Sheen

With a desire to be seen
Maketh a Person Mean 

Hi-Cost-Lo-Function: The affair routine 
Defies the very purpose of Lean
That of making the planet Green

Footnote-1: Reader may add tips and suggestions from own experience.
Footnote-2: The recommendation under Five-S's practice in Kaizen.

Also read a few relevant blogposts hereunder:

Do You Celebrate Mean-or-Green
Functional-Aesthetics

Aesthetics Spills-Over Function, Want Spills-Over Need (Part-1)

Aesthetics Spills-Over Function, Want Spills-Over Need (Part-2)

Should one care for value? 

Do you exercise your choice meaningfully

What You See Isn't What's Made

You seem Reasonable if you appear Un-reasonable

Wish To Be Planet-Friendly?: Save! 

Less With More And More Gets Sore

Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy

Can-changing-thoughts-change-a-nation

That's How Morons Work

Smart-Moron Who Breaks Your Glass 

WOW Work-Culture: By Telling or Selling

Eternally Happy

Eternally Happy: परमानंद

Aesthetics Spills-Over Function, Want Spills-Over Need (Part-1)

Look at cup in the picture carefully!

Can you see tea marks all along the rim? Can you guess the reason of the tea spilling over all along the rim? 

It was due to square shape of the cup that it's content tried to find it's way across the rim while trying to take a sip. In fact it spilled over my shirt since side of the square is longer than opening of the mouth. In case of a round cup however, the flow narrows down over smaller width.

As you may see, the soccer too is so shallow that cup finds it difficult to hold on to it's feet over the soccer. Cup ends up shaking as a result. 

I got delayed for my appointment due to spillage over my shirt that made me rework my 'make-up': a mini crisis!

The idiosyncratic miser in me tends to tangiblize everything specially in case of waste.

Why not? Time as also other resources are money! So the resultant COPQ (Cost-Of-Poor-Quality) of Poor-Design that resulted in such rework, that you may also be able to estimate, bring forward a few lessons.

What are the lessons¹?

1/ Designers should take care not to let unnecessary aesthetics spill over functionality unlike an interior designer for instance. In order to make a guest-room 'look' well-appointed, a poor designer doesn't allow labeling² of utility switches even if it means a guest struggling for the one s/he needs: be it a light, a fan, or hot-or-cold water-tap in a wash room. In fact, some fittings have so fancy looking designs that the user looks like a farm-fresh villager who struggles to use them.

2/ Aesthetic design short of adequate functionality may be able to generate  initial affinity towards a brand but won't be able to create brand-loyalty that is long-term. Although aesthetics may appeal emotionally, without functionality it won't be able to appeal to rationality of the buyer. S/he looses interest in the offering because it fails to deliver value that s/he was looking for.

3/ It's always a good idea to test designs in order to make them simple and user-friendly by seeking customer feedback.

4/ Merely pushing sales numbers by taking disadvantage of emotional behavior of buyer's desire to grab 'wants' is an age old marketing tactic. Marketers should reset their mindsets and refrain from such overselling.

5/ Buyers should counter marketing tactics by basing their buying decisions on rationality rather than emotionalism.

6/ Buyers should buy because 'it's good in serving their purpose' rather than because 'it's good-looking!'

The example that I began with in this blogpost looks trivial. But the message it gives is not.

In order to know the larger purpose that it serves, you may read Part-2 of this blogpost.

Footnote-1, Reader may add tips and suggestions from her own experience.
Footnote-2, This is the recommendation under Five-S's practice of Kaizen Culture.