Technology in Communication
Posted by chris in Uncategorized on February 24th, 2011 | No Comments »

SHE’LL SAY (Sr. VP spoken to her “coach”):

We had a number of discussions within the senior team about whether or not to bring supporting functions into a shared services framework. It was a really good exercise and we were able to clarify some important strategic issues.

For example, although we have been trying to do more work in Canada (with a recent focus on competing more effectively on public sector contracts), the bulk of our business comes from U.S. customers. One of our director’s is very quick to wax on about “selling the value” and that “objections on price are a cover something else.” That is all well and good, but when you largest customers dollar is in a pretty steady slide, it might be worth looking at price. This latter point was pushed by our CFO, who is not used to having to explain himself, but to his credit, he took us through the thinking, and even apologized for making it so basic.
The key measure for this project is profitability, and if it is implemented correctly, we will see a significant increase in profits even with steady or even slightly lower rates to our U.S. customers.
In the mean time, this gives us some budget room to build up some resources and make some very strategic hires that will help us compete for upcoming public tenders here and out West. The joke on our last bid was that we were in danger of being the dog that actually caught the car… Needless to say, we didn’t catch it, but we’ll be in a better position to in about 8 months.

HE’LL SAY (Department Manager, overheard at the water cooler):

First of all, if you are going to make a bad decision, why not get on with it. The hype around this “new direction” was unbelievable. Do you really have to have three “offsite strategy sessions” to figure out how to bury accountability for me and for my team? It would have been faster to say:

“Folks, a lot of people have been whining about how unfair it is to celebrate success openly, so we are going to put you all on the same team… and by the way, we are going to get into bed with some governments because they have the same view that we do.”

I have been running this division for 8 years, and for the last 7 we have put up the best numbers in the worst market. It took me a few years to get the team that I wanted, but right now we are a well-oiled machine, and we all love competition. For Pete’s sake, we are most competitive with ourselves. I am supposed to be happy reporting into a “shared services” lead that supports all markets. I can tell you right now who the weak links are, but this model is guaranteed to give the weak links better air cover.
I’LL SAY (to you in this post):

A common literary device is the split perspective. More than half a century ago, the movie Rashomon (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0042876/) tells the story of a rape and murder (or was it?) from different perspectives, all of which appear to be truthful.
In the above (very general) example, and constantly in very specific situations, the same thing happens. Such truths as “we will focus on public sector contracts” and “we are making changes to reduce expenses and help profitability” will be explained and recounted in different ways.

As alluded to earlier, no one perspective can know all the implications, so picking the actions is an important exercise that involved understanding strategic issues and opportunities. It is also safest to place these actions within a simple strategic storyline: “Our run-rate business is diminishing; we have to look for new sources of revenue.” At every opportunity, make obvious the connection between strategic story and the actions. Without a context, just like “HE SAYS,” people will fill in their own… and it may be very detrimental to your overall goals.

 

Leave A Reply
 
 
May 2013
M T W T F S S
« Feb    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031