The PJ (poor joke) above might no longer remain a PJ if banana peel is replaced by a typical problematic situation one encounters in daily routine. The question remains unanswered then: Why do some people find it difficult to act beyond cure? They do think 'Prevention is The Best Cure' though! I was no different from them! But now my journey is gathering speed, hopefully in the direction that the blog is supposed to drive towards. Checkout my other blogs and work at http://www.worldOFkaizen.com/
Showing posts with label Result-focus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Result-focus. Show all posts

Sunday, 24 June 2018

Mission Zero-Plastic!

Are dustbin bags, sticky bags, half liter water bottle, etc. banned?

Political posters in flex material are not penalised! So does it mean flex material is exempt selectively? Or is political fraternity exempt from discipline?

Do you mean to say citizens should carry steel vessels to buy milk, meat, fish, etc. all the way to their workplaces so that they can shop on their way back home after a long day?

Don't you think exempting branded packaged goods and foods in plastic is discriminatory to small businesses?

Such and many other doubts began circulating on WhatsApp as the plastic ban was announced by the State of Maharashtra.

If such confusion was expected by design as a strategy then it's a good move by the administrators.

Good because such confusion forces people to think intentionally as it has happened already. As a result, people have at least begun thinking of alternatives out of fear of punishment though.

But targeting to achieve any (Zero-Plastic kind of) result measures without enabling the corresponding processes in place always have had serious implications with associated costs. Time and again this has got proven by itself.

In Nagpur, for instance, out of fear some people got rid of banned plastic bags by dumping them in rivulets.

If such confusion, however, is by chance then there's a bigger worry.

Bigger worry because it might mean, there's a lack of well-designed time-bound plan, also lack of the design to execute the ban itself holistically expecting it to aim Zero-Plastic target! In fact, adequate design learning from others (especially from countries successful in handling the plastic menace) is the first step in any such project. Bigger worry because lack of meticulousness in such initiatives usually leads to sub-optimisation harming the nobility of the purpose itself.

Unless every stakeholder gets mindfully engaged in averting the plastic-pollution-menace and the forthcoming disaster therefrom, the costs of the short term approaches towards it will get out of control. There's a need to take a relook at it in order to scrutinise the blanket-ban, if any, if not done so already.

Better also to be innovative on making the recycling more effective. Not only does the arrest of the plastic need to be at manufacturing level but also at desire-based or want-based consumption level. A pictorial do-don't will go a long way in preventing the confusion among the users and the administrators.

In any case the Zero-Plastic target is an arduous task at least in near future since for some applications cost effective substitute is yet to get invented.

Sustainability of the planet is the priority number-1 but the ban itself needs to be sustainable for that!

Here's my 140 character Tweet plan of action (POA) revolving around the Kaizen technique: *MISER!

Be a MISER stakeholder on Plastic!

MINDFUL of enabling process to evolve Zero-Plastic result!
INNOVATE packaging!
SCRUTINISE blanket-ban!
ELIMINATE production!
REDUCE, REUSE! Collect to RECYCLE!

(*MISER: Minimise. Improvise. Simplify. Eliminate. Reduce.) 

Saturday, 29 November 2014

Macro-Micro Syndrome

"You are too much into detailing."

Many might have heard this, mostly from bosses. Sometimes same bosses are heard saying, "you lack meticulous execution."

They tend to use former one if and when their macro vision is reasonably in control. They use the latter if macro vision goes out of gear. That's exactly isn't desirable: Choosing one over the other as a matter of convenience.

Generally for any success to be sustainable, both the macro and the micro are supposed to be complementary to each other. It's difficult for one to stand the test of time without support of the other.

It's difficult to reach a desired destination within a desired time with optimum efforts in absence of having a plan and a design in the first place. Nor is it easy to reach there without taking each step meticulously.

"When batting, I was only focused on the next ball — not on the scorecard", said cricketer Rohit Sharma on notching up the highest-ever individual score in one-day international cricket hitting a breathtaking 264 runs against Sri Lanka in Kolkata’s Eden Gardens.

The late JRD Tata had made commitment to make improvements even on cups and saucers used on his own airlines while on flight number 109 in 1955. 

Does it mean JRD and Rohit were too much into detailing: the micros? 
Does it mean they weren't focused on macros: their goal, target or performance level? 
They very much were!

In fact every successful person always has clarity on her vision and goal before setting out to execute it. It's just that thereafter they meticulously plan for resources and execute each step each day (Nichijo-Kanri as they say in Japanese Management parlance) inching towards their goal rather than bothering about the goal itself at each and every step.

Without detailed checking of condition and level of oil and water, condition of stepney, etc. setting out in a vehicle to reach a destination is not only foolish but is risky as well. Former is about setting the process right to get the result. The latter is about expecting result without putting in adequate efforts.

Former, the micro detailing, is about calculating and safeguarding against the probable risk factors in order to reduce their impact and the risk of failure, if any, while enabling to achieve the macro goals.

Hope meticulous execution doesn't conveniently get ridiculed for it's so-called 'detailing' nor does a typical macro visioning strategy get ridiculed for it's powerful imagination as "Daydreaming".

Also read a few relevant blog-posts hereunderPlease do consider leaving a comment or sharing this post.

Old-Problems, New-Reasons !
Ant Knocks Elephant Down 
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'
Who Comes First: Consumer Or Customer ? 

Monday, 7 July 2014

Be Bug-Be Or Big-Be ?

Overcome The Tyranny Of Small Minds 

While reading the above spiritual article, it occurred to me that there could be four kinds of people in the corresponding context.

1/ Big people with small mind: Bugger-Be !
2/ Big people with big mind: Bigger-Be !
3/ Small people with small mind: Bug-Be !
4/ Small people with big mind: Big-Be !

First category of people (read the corresponding blogpost on the link) is the one that is powerful enough but doesn't bother about other's presence. Bugger-Be doesn't make contribution to other's rightful needs nor to the societal ones.

Last category of people (the so-called small people with big mindBig-Be !) is the one that is not powerful at all. But it empowers itself in order to bother about other's presence. It also makes diffrence to the small world around them by contributing to other's rightful needs. Through their value adding actions, it makes others think and act!

It's actually the Big-people (the first and the third category) that can make significant diffrence to others and to the socio-economic needs.

Wheel-of-Worldly activity, however, is somehow getting managed because of presence of the last category of ('small') people. The wheel might run faster (and in a better fashion) if the quadrant of the first category of people reduces and the size of second category of people (Bigger-Be With Big-Mind) increases.

Easiest way for the Bugger-Be to turn into a Bigger-Be in this context is to copy actions of the last category: That of the Big-Be !

Big-people do have power to influence bigger circles of people at a bigger scale!!


Also read a few relevant blogposts hereunder:

Raam or Krishna-Shyam: Tell me Hey Raam!
Some Moron ! Some Great !!!
WOW Work-Culture: By Telling or Selling
Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy
Ridiculous Poison-culture versus Maverick Kaizen-culture
Taken-For-Granted ? You Deserve It !!
IQ-EQ-or-SQ: What-is-more-important?

Sunday, 9 March 2014

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'?

Friday, 28 February 2014

Suggestions On-Sale, None-To-Buy! Why?

Have you ever thought why suggestions  usually don't get 'bought' even if they are good? Even the ones given by bosses to subordinates get implemented half-heartedly, if at all.

The cause of this dilemma can be sourced at the top.

On 'hearing' about world class companies "topping the number of suggestions" with over "6 million" in Matsushita in so and so year or "over 53 suggestions implemented per employee in one single year" in Toyota (in 1987), typically the decision makers hastily installed 'suggestion-schemes'.

While number of suggestions in such excellent companies gradually increased, in 'hasty' companies the total system flopped. Blame was put on the 'prevailing bad culture here' while crediting the 'opposite there'. They even forgot 'which wall' their own 'suggestion-box' was hung. Some of them 'hung' another one during a new crisis.

Actually the real cause is that the 'hasty' managers didn't understand 'keys to success' of 'suggestion-systems' in such excellent companies and that they are much more than merely a 'box'.

Many didn't know that 'suggestion schemes' are called as Kaizen-TEIAN in Japanese companies. They got 'imported' with half knowledge. Naturally with their ill-effects they turned out to be a big flop as expected.

The way they were installed, rules themselves were 'killers of more ideas' than very few that were 'accepted': often a fraction of the total. The ones 'accepted' got disproportionately rewarded. At times the awardees were found to be same people year after year. In some companies these people even 'budgeted' their earnings. They knew when to 'create a crisis' and when to 'solve' it by their 'so-called suggestions'.

Kaizen-TEIAN system is exactly the opposite. In fact it means an 'implemented suggestion' or as a Kaizen as the world knows now. If generating suggestions or ideas is one side of the coin then implementing it is the other side. So a coin itself is a Kaizen or a Kaizen-TEIAN.

Role of the bosses or the idea-collectors is to involve subordinates in generating innumerable suggestions by training/retraining them on appropriate methods and then enabling them to implement all of those with resource verification as their own primary responsibility. In fact one of the performance criteria (KRA¹) of bosses is to 'make everyone a hero' by helping everyone contribute an idea and help him implement it.

There is no question of 'someone putting suggestions in a box' and then 'someone else assessing them' to 'accept' or 'reject' as was done by non-Japanese 'suggestion schemes' that revolved primarily around economic benefits and degree of it's creativity rather than 'motivation' of the Suggester.

Initial enthusiasm due to 'novelty' of such 'boxes' might attract novices to put an idea or two in it. But would you not be indifferent if yours get repeatedly 'rejected' due to it's 'smallness' or due to someone else's 'bigness'?

Or would it not be demotivating if it gets handled the way it does in a typical housing society where office bearers typically react saying: "talking is easy" or say: "you" do it rather than "let's do it together". Most often their body language not only 'repels' an idea but they see to it that it doesn't get implemented.

Under such circumstances leaving 'common-good' to it's destiny, people keep their brains under 'lock-and-key' while behaving in common places. After all it's 'your rule' not 'my idea': that's exactly the human psychology Kaizen-TEIAN system pre-empts.

In Kaizen-TEIAN there is no question of slapping or punishing a failure. It's about handholding subordinate to 'open  umbrella during rain' (an improvement action to tackle a problem) while giving credit of doing so to him.

This is where the journey of 'doing a Kaizen and reporting it with due credit and recognition to others' begins. With sustained and concerted efforts it accumulates into a 'million Kaizens'.

Without clarity and alignment on such key differences of Kaizen-TEIAN as above, fate of 'suggestion-schemes' will continue to stay doubtful.

Footnote-1, ¹KRA is Key-Result-Area

Also read a few relevant blogposts hereunder:

Big-Be Or Bug-Be !

Make It Simpler, Rest Will Follow

How To Make A Difference

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?

That's how some business partnerships work

Taken-For-Granted ? You Deserve It !!

IQ-EQ-or-SQ: What-is-more-important?

Do you exercise your choice meaningfully

Do You Ask Right Questions

Wednesday, 20 November 2013

Winning 2-Minutes To Customer

Just read in Loksatta about one Mr Chitale receiving compensation of Rupees 7250 directly transferred to his bank account y British Airways for wheel of his bag getting damaged in handling. Airlines' response was smooth and speedy he said. Airlines had tried to repair the bag through their supply-chain partner but in vain.

In 1997, I was in NewYork on a group-study-exchange mission organised by Rotary International. While traveling from NewYork to Orlando, inadvertently my bag reached to Chicago. I complained to the airlines office at the airport. They promptly sanctioned 100 Dollars to me against the bills for essentials like overnight clothes, toothpaste, etc. Being around Disneyland I was happy to buy a couple Mickey-Mouse brand clothes at the airport.

Next day morning I got a 'good-morning' call from reception desk saying my bag was already in the hotel lobby safe and sound. Not much trouble for me although the airlines did have an opportunity to eliminate the error in baggage handling.

In a stark contrast to such delightful experiences, in 1981 I had to run from pillar to post knocking doors and windows in vain for a broken bag and its damaged contents due to erroneous handling by Air-India. Since then I avoid flying on it: a customer-quit as they say.

I remember that painful experience even after decades.

What is the learning?

There might be some chance of a person forgetting a good experience but hardly any chance of a customer forgetting bad experience from a supplier.

In case of one airline it was about 'sensitivity' to customer complaint while dealing it with a 'sense-of-urgency'. In case of other airline it was about 'indifference' to customer.

Now a days the sensitivity has acquired some strategy and structure to respond to customer complaints as a part of excellence-journey of companies. 

A Structure To Respond To Customer

I had introduced a 2-2-2-2©structure in terms of a model to respond to any stakeholder in general and to customer in particular. It was first introduced in a Cummins group company: Fleetguard Filters Limited Pune.

It was later on institutionalised in Cummins group worldwide.

In the context of a customer complaint, the 2-2-2-2© model might mean 2-Minutes, 2-Hours, 2-Days, 2-Weeks time-bound response to  customer for a given level of performance strived for. The response is supposed to eliminate root cause/s of the abnormality within 2-Weeks rather than stopping at first-aid treatment that anyway must be given within 2-Minutes. A powerful review mechanism driven by CEO (with an escalation matrix that an aggrieved customer can access in case of non-compliance) is an integral part of the structured process in order to ensure the timeline and quality of it's compliance. 

In the context of various other business situations, the timeline may be different and must evolve. For instance for an emergency/crisis having high impact, it could mean 2-Seconds, 2-Minutes, 2-Hours, 2-Days.

There is an empowerment mechanism built into the structure. Timeline-based visible dimensions as above are the generic ones. Company specific visible dimensions may be some sanction limits such as 100 Dollars compensation or a freedom to handover gift for the hassles or the efforts taken by the customer to complain and so on.

More important are the invisible dimensions that result into the culture reflected in terms of the spirit, the body-language, the humbleness, the humility such as that I had experienced while the airline employees responded to the complaint in making it hassle-free and speedy. 

There is tremendous scope and choice for innovations in both in order to delight customer with differentiation. The invisible ones in particular are difficult to emulate. That's where lies the competitive advantage.

If such a structure is implemented effectively, the customer becomes supplier's advocate and it's rewarding in long run as well as in terms of short term sales and numbers. Such an advocate is much more effective than even a highly paid marketing manager.

A prospective customer is likely to believe and act more often if recommendation comes from the horse's mouth: The Word-Of-Mouth!

Sunday, 10 March 2013

Who comes first: Current customer or New customer?

Sometimes companies tend to forget remedying 'lost sales' in the 'current-market-current-product-current-customer' quadrant in their enthusiastic quest to get 'additional sales numbers' by trying to acquire new customers with new offering in current or new market.

It is like pouring in a pot from top that has a hole in the bottom.

I had two cellphone SIM-cards: one from company-A, the other from company-B.

After exercising 'mobile-portability-right' to switch over from company-B, I received not less than 8 calls from them. 

Half the calls received were from their marketing officer with an 'attractive' offer to switch over company-A SIM to (his own) company-B. Perhaps he was ignorant that I had surrendered my other (company-B) card due to their unsatisfactory service. Their market-intelligence' seemed to be smart though to have list of the competitor's clients.

Balance half calls were from their customer-care officer to find out why I had 'switched' from company-B. Calls were backed by an apology letter.

So on one hand marketing was busy working on acquiring new customers while customer-care department was making a failed attempt to 'retain' current one. On the other hand operations department seemed to complacently (mis-)handle existing customers inadvertently forcing them to quit.

No doubt that balancing the act of working on current and new/diversified offering, (for) current and new customers, and (in) current and new markets is really a complex and an intelligent process. 

But retaining a 'current customer' and hence 'current sales' is relatively a far easier and economically more viable strategy that should be perfected by plugging loopholes/deficiencies in services before applying 'Penetration', 'Product/market development', and 'Diversification' strategies.

While the 'current customer' provides cues for loopholes, the later strategies to acquire 'new customer' need at least 10 times more investment (in time, efforts and money) than the former. As a student, I had often felt disgusted when photocopier shop near my college used to keep my 200-pages running-order on hold intermittently in order to service a single-copy customer (jumping the queue).

The former strategy is a play in current known-terrain. A satisfied current customer is more likely to be a brand ambassador providing leads to prospective customers in new terrain (environment).

Doesn't a bird-in-hand need to be cared for before the two in the bush as goes the old saying?