How “Best Practices” kill productivity, innovation and growth – Start using Facebook, Twitter, Linked-in!


How much access do your employees have to Facebook, Twitter, Linked-in, GroupOn, FourSquare, and texting in their daily work, on their daily technology devices?  Do you encourage use, or do you in fact block access, in the search for greater security, and on the belief that you achieve higher productivity by killing access to these “work cycle stealers?”  Do you implement policies keeping employees from using their own technology tools (smartphone or tablet) on the job?

In 1984 the PC revolution was still quite young.  Pizza Hut was then a division of PepsiCo (now part of Yum Brands,) and the company was fully committed to a set of mainframe applications from IBM.  Mainframe applications, accessed via a “green screen” terminal were used for all document creation, financial analysis, and even all printing.  The CIO was very proud of his IBM mainframe data center, and his tight control over the application base and users. 

In what seemed like an almost overnight series of events, headquarters employees started bringing small PC’s to work in order to build spreadsheets, create documents and print miscellaneous memos.  They found the new technology so much easier to use, and purchase cost so cheap, that their productivity soared and they were able to please their bosses while leaving work on time.  A good trade-off.

The CIO went ballistic.  “These PCs are popping up like popcorn around here – and we have to kill this trend before it gains any additional momentum!” he decried in an executive meeting.  PCs were “toys” that lacked the “robustness” of his mainframe applications.  If users wanted higher productivity, then they simply needed to spend more time in training. 

Additionally, if he didn’t control access to computing cycles, and activities like printing, employees would go berserk using unnecessary resources on projects they probably should never undertake.  He was servicing the corporation by keeping people on a narrow tool set – and it gave the company control over what employees could do as well as how they could do it making sure nothing frivolous was happening.  For all these reasons, plus the fact that he could assure security on his mainframe, he felt it important that the CEO and executive team commit with him that PCs would not be allowed in Pizza Hut.

Retrospectively, he looks foolish (and his efforts were unsuccessful.)  PCs unleashed a wave of personal productivity that benefitted all early adopters.  They not only let employees do their work faster, but it allowed employees to develop innovative solutions to problems – often dramatically lowering overhead costs for many management tasks.  PCs, of course, swept through the workplace and in only a decade most mainframes, and their high cost, air conditioned data centers, were gone. 

Yet, to this day companies continue to use “best practices” as a tool to stop technology, and productivity improvement, adoption.  Managers will say:

  1. We need to control employee access to information
  2. We need to keep employees focused on their job, without distractions
  3. We must control how employees do their jobs so we minimize errors and improve quality
  4. We need to control employee access externally for security reasons
  5. We need consistency in our tool set and how it is used
  6. We made a big investment in how we do things, and we need to leverage that [sunk cost] by forcing greater use
  7. We need to remember that management are the experts, and it is our job to tell people how to do their jobs.  We don’t want the patients running the hospital!

It all sounds quite logical, and good management practice.  Yet, it is exactly the road to productivity reduction, innovation assassination and limited growth!  Only by allowing employees to apply their skills and best thinking can any company hope to continuously improve its productivity and competitiveness.

But, moving from history and theoretical to today’s behavior, what is happening in your company?  Do you have a clunky, hard to use, expensive ERP, CRM, accounting, HR, production, billing, vendor management, procurement or other system (or factory, distribution center or headquarters site) that you still expect people to use?  Do you demand people use it – largely for some selection of the 7 items above? Do you require they carry a company PC or Blackberry to access company systems, even as the employee carries their own Android smartphone or iPad with them 24×7?

Recently, technology provider IFS Corporation did a survey on ERP users (Does ERP Mean Excel Runs Production?) Their surprising results showed that new employees (especially under age 40) were very unlikely to take a job with a company if they had to use a complex (usually vendor supplied) interface to a legacy application.  In fact, 75% of today’s users are actively seeking – and using – cloud based apps or home grown spreadsheets to manage the business rather than the expensive applications the corporation supplied!  Additionally, between 1/3 and 2/3 of employees (depending upon age) were actively seeking to quit and take another job simply because they found the technology of their company hard to use! (CIO Magazine: Employees Refusing to Use Clunky Enterprise Software.)

Unlike managers invested in historical decisions, and legacy assets, employees understand that without productivity their long-term employment is at risk.  They recognize that constantly shifting markets, with global competitors, requires the flexibility to apply novel thinking and test new solutions constantly.  To succeed, the workforce – all the workforce – needs to be informed, interacting with potential new solutions, thinking and applying their best thoughts to creating new solutions that advance the company’s competitiveness.

That’s why Fast Company recently published something all younger managers know, yet shocks older ones: “Half of Young Professionals Value Facebook Access, Smartphone Options Over Salary.” It surprised a lot of people to learn that employees would actually select access over more pay!

While most older leaders and managers think this is likely because employees want to screw off on the job, and ignore company policies, the article cites a Cisco Connected World Technology Report which describs how these employees value productivity, and realize that in today’s world you can’t really be productive, innovative and generate growth if you don’t have access – and the ability to use – modern tools. 

Today’s young workers aren’t any less diligent about work than the previous generation, they are simply better informed and more technology savvy!  They think even more long-term about the company’s survivability, as well as their ability to make a difference in the company’s success.

In other words, in 2011 tools like Linked-in, Facebook, Twitter et. al. accessed via a tablet or smartphone are the equivalent of the PC 30 years ago.  They give rapid access to what customers, competitors and others in the world are doing.  They allow employees to quickly answer questions about current problems, and find new solutions.  As well as find people who have tried various options, and learn from those experiences.  And they allow the employee to connect with a company problem fast – whether at work or away – and start to solve it!  They can access those within their company, vendors, customers – anyone – rapidly in order to solve problems as quickly as possible.

At a recent conference I asked IT leaders for several major airlines if they allowed employees to access these tools.  Uniformly, the answer was no.  That may be the reason we all struggle with the behavior of airlines, I bemoaned.  It might explain why the vast majority of customers were highly sympathetic with the flight attendant that jettisoned a plane through the emergency exit with a beer in hand!   At the very least, it is a symptom of the internal focus that has kept the major airlines from pleasing 85% of their customers, while struggling to be profitable.  If nobody has external access, how can anybody make anything better?

The best practices of 1975 don’t cut it in 2012.  The world has changed.  It is more important now than ever that employees have the access to modern tools, and the freedom to use them.  Good management today is not about telling people how to do their job, but rather letting them figure out how to do the job best.  Implement that practice and productivity and innovation will show themselves, and you’re highly likely to find more growth!

New Decade – New Normal

HAPPY NEW YEAR!

We end the first decade in 2000 with another first.  In ReutersBreakingViews.com "Don't Diss the Dividend" we learn 2000-2009 is the first time in modern stock markets when U.S. investors made no money for a decade.  Right.  Worse performance than the 1930s Great Depression.  Over the last decade, the S&P 500 had a net loss of about 1%/year.  After dividends a gain of 1% – less than half the average inflation rate of 2.5%. 

Things have shifted.  We ended the last millenium with a shift from an industrial economy to an information economy.  And the tools for success in earlier times no longer work.  Scale economies and entry barriers are elusive, and unable to produce "sustainable competitive advantage."  Over the last decade shifts in business have bankrupted GM, Circuit City and Tribune Corporation – while gutting other major companies like Sears.  Simultaneously these changes brought huge growth and success to Google, Apple, Hewlett Packard, Virgin and small companies like Louis Glunz Beer, Foulds Pasta and Tasty Catering.

Even the erudite McKinsey Quarterly is now trumpeting the new requirements for business success in "Competing through Organizational Agility."  Using academic research from the London Business School, author Donald Sull points out that market turbulence increased 2 to 4 times between the 1970s and 1990s – and is continuing to increase.  More market change is happening, and market changes are happening faster.  Thus, creating strategies and organizations that are able to adjust to shifting market requirements creates higher revenue and improved operational efficiency.  Globally agility is creating better returns than any other business approach. 

A McKinsey Quarterly on-line video "Navigating the New Normal:  A Conversation with 4 Chief Strategy Officers," discusses changes in business requirements for 2010 and beyond.  All 4 of these big company strategists agree that success now requires far shorter planning cycles, abandoning efforts to predict markets that change too quickly, and recognizing that historically indisputable assumptions are rapidly becoming obsolete.  What used to work at creating competitive advantage no longer works.  Monolothic strategies developed every few years, with organizations focused on "execution," are simply uncompetitive in a rapidly shifting world.

And "the old boys club" of white men in top business leadership roles is quickly going to change dramatically.  In the Economist article "We Did It" we learn that in 2010 the American workforce will shift to more than 50% women.  If current leaders continue following old approaches – and generating anemic returns – they will rapidly be replaced by leaders willing to do what has to be done to succeed in today's marketplace.  Like Indra Nooyi of PepsiCo, women will take on more top positions as investors and employees demand changes to improve performance.   Leaders will have to be flexible and adaptive or they, and their organizations, will not survive.

Additionally, the information technology products which unleashed this new era will change, and become unavoidable.  In Forbes "Using the Cloud for Business" one of the creators of modern ERP (enterprise resource planning) systems (like SAP and Oracle) Jan Baan discusses how cloud computing changes business.  ERP systems were all about data, and the applications were stovepiped – like the industrial enterprises they were designed for.  Unfortunately, they were expensive to buy and very expensive to install and even more expensive to maintain.  Simultaneously they had all the flexibility of cement.  ERP systems, which proliferate in large companies today, were control products intended to keep the organization from doing anything beyond its historical Success Formula.

But cloud computing is infinitely flexible.  Compare Facebook to Lotus Notes and you start understanding the difference between cloud computing and large systems.  Anyone can connect, share links, share files and even applications on Facebook at almost no cost.  Lotus Notes is an expensive enterprise application that costs a lot to buy, to operate, to maintain and has significantly less flexibility.  Notes is about control.  Facebook is about productivity.

Cloud computing is 1/10th the cost of monolithic owned/internal IT systems.  Cloud computing offers small and mid-sized companies all the computing opportunity of big companies – and big advantages to new competitors if CIOs at big companies hold onto their "investments" in IT systems too long.  Businesses that use cloud architectures can rearrange their supply chain immediately – and daily.  Flexibility, and adaptability, grows exponentially.  And EVERYONE can use it.  Where mainframes were the tool for software engineers (and untouchable by everyone else), the PC made it possible for individuals to have their own applications.  Cloud computing democratizes computing so everyone with a smartphone has access and use.  With practically no training.

As we leave the worst business environment in modern times, we enter a new normal.  Those who try to defend & extend old business practices will continue to suffer  declining returns, poor performance and failure – like the last decade.  But those who embrace "the new normal" can grow and prosper.  It takes a willingness to let scenarios about the future drive your behavior, a keen focus on competitors to understand market needs, a willingness to disrupt old Lock-ins and implement White Space so you can constantly test opportunities for defining new, flexible and higher returning Success Formulas.

Here's to 2010 and the new normal!  Happy New Year!

PepsiCo update – doing more of the right stuff

"PepsiCo bids to buy its bottlers for $6billion," is the Marketwatch headline today.  Another big Disruption, this time at the industry level, orchestrated by PepsiCo's Chairperson/CEO Indra Nooyi.  Now that changes are being made with the product line, packaging and brands this latest move will allow Pepsi's beverage division to much more quickly implement changes to align with market needs.  While Coke is doing little, Pepsi is disrupting the industry organization changing the marketplace and placing serious challenges onto all competitors.  And without waiting for the recession to end.

Many leadership teams should pay close attention to what's going on at PepsiCo.  By moving fast to align with future market needs they are catching competitors unwilling to take action due to recessionary concerns.  Their Disruptions are creating changes that will help Pepsi return to the "muscle building" organization created in the days of former Chairman Andrall Pearson.  And the changes coming out of White Space are helping Pepsi to develop a stronger Success Formula for competing in the post-industrial age. 

Investors, employees and vendors should be encouraged by Pepsi.  Competitors had better be worried.  And all leadership teams can learn from the action being taken to gain share during this period of uncertainty.  As companies hit growth stalls the tendency is to "wait and see".  But winners react quickly to Disrupt and use White Space where they overtake delaying competitors – returning to the Rapids of growth and gaining share.

Rewarding performance, or luck? McDonald’s and Pepsico

"McDonald's CEO's compensation rose 44%" was the Crain's Chicago Business headline.  In this era of focus on CEO pay, the question should be whether this is pay for performance?  Yes, McDonald's has seen its business do relatively well the last year – but was that really due to the CEO?  Or did an incoming tide simply raise the McDonald's boat? 

The last year has generally been tough on restaurants.  But McDonald's competes in a narrow part of the market focused on cheap.  Like Wal-Mart, McDonald's is a huge corporation but its sales are closely tied to the performance of markets driven by low priceIt wasn't long ago (less than 8 years) that McDonald's was shutting stores around the globe because performance was so poor.  The company felt it had too many McDonald's.  So it sold Chipotle and other assets to raise the money for closings and buying back equity shares to hold off a corporate attack.  And it spent money to improve the marketing in stores, including refocusing on quality.  As a result, when the economy fell apart (globally) McDonald's was in the right place at the right time

There was nothing prescient about the decision-making at McDonald's.  Quite to the contrary, the decisions taken were all about Defending the old Success Formula regardless of where the marketplace was headed.  In fact, the toughest decision made during the last 18 months was whether to keep 2 pieces of cheese on the double cheeseburger or not.  And its decision to raise the price on the 2-slice burger while launching another 1-slice burger to remain priced at $1 was considered a big innovation by home town newspaper Chicago Tribune ("Launch time at McDonald's").  Fortunately, the biggest recession in 70 years has encouraged people to go down-market, to McDonald's, and thus helped the company maintain sales and profits.  Whether McDonald's will hold onto these gains or see them go back out with the receding tide when the economy improves is entirely unclear.

On the other hand, PepsiCo has taken a much more aggressive approach to growth in its soft drink businessChairman and CEO Indra Nooyi has never been the kind of executive to back off from pushing for change.  As a Boston Consulting Group Manager she ruffled many feathers amongst the conservative leadership in her efforts to make partner – to the point they recommended she find a career elsewhere.  And, never looking back, she went on to greatly exceed the expectations of her former bosses by rocketing through Motorola and later PepsiCo all the way to the top position.  Her willingness to Disrupt and implement White Space has created significant growth for the companies where she worked.

Now she's brought in Massimo D'Amori as the new head for Pepsi's soft drink business, and he's shown no hesitancy to follow her lead in Disrupting the moribund brands as detailed in the BusinessWeek article "Blowing up Pepsi."  Rather than waiting for the recession to recover, he's dived into the brands changing everything from packaging to logos.  He's personally been involved in the Disruptions, making sure people know that he sees now, while Coke is moving slowly and sales should be soft, to reposition Pepsi's beverage products in order to attract new customers and grow!  As the new head of brands said, it's time to "rejuvenate, reengineer, rethink, reparticipate."  When the economy caused weak performance quarters the anwer became "retool and reteam;" including changing more people on the senior team.

Will all this Disruption work? We know that White Space has flourished, so Disruption has taken hold.  Will the White space provide a faster growing and more profitable Pepsi beverage division?  We know that everything from logo design to bottles have been tested, tried and are being improved upon.  The early results look good, but it's still too early to tell if Pepsi has caught Coke flat footed.  But what we can be sure about is that Pepsi is doing everything it can to take advantage of the changing environment in order to be #1 in beverages – including vitamin water, sports drinks and juices  as well as traditional soft drinks. 

When talking about McDonald's and Pepsi it might all seem like much 'ado about nothing.  What's the big deal?  But reality is that size alone does not make either company immune to failure.  All businesses, no matter size or age, have to adapt to changing markets or risk becoming obsolete.  Polaroid invented instant photography, but has become nothing more than an historical name.  Last week the Wall Street Journal reported how "Vultures vie in auction for remains of Polaroid."  From 21,000 workers at its peak in 1978, the company has fallen to a mere 70 – and to a brand value of only $80million.  This sort of failure can happen to any company.

When we look into 2035, which, if either, McDonald's or PepsiCo is likely to be the next Polaroid?  We'd like to think neither.  Yet, history indicates that McDonald's constant unwillingness to move from Defending & Extending its hamburger business puts it at risk.  Of what?  Maybe the next Mad Cow disease.  Or the next diet craze.  Or the next economic shift that leads customers out of their stores and somewhere else to eat.  Or perhaps a "perfect storm" of all 3. McDonald's D&E management depends upon the future looking much like the recent past for the company to succeedIt is not really preparing for a different future.  And that cannot be said for PepsiCo – where under Ms. Nooyi's leadership we see a company obsessing about competition while working passionately to position itself for future markets and future customers needsPepsi's willingness to Disrupt and use White Space bodes very well for the likelihood of turning around the recent growth stall, and creating longevity for the company, its investors, employees and vendors.

About Adam Hartung

Adam_hartung_2

Adam Hartung helps companies innovate to achieve real growth. He began his career as an entrepreneur, selling the first general-purpose computing platform to use the 8080 microprocessor when he was an undergraduate. Today, he has 20 years of practical experience in developing and implementing strategies to take advantage of emerging technologies and new business models. He writes, consults and speaks worldwide.

His recently published book, Create Marketplace Disruption: How to Stay Ahead of the Competition (Financial Times Press, 2008), helps leaders and managers create evergreen organizations that produce above-average returns.

Adam is currently Managing Partner of Spark Partners, a strategy and transformation consultancy. Previously, he spent eight years as a Partner in the consulting arm of Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) where he led their efforts in Intellectual Capital Development and e-business. Adam has also been a strategist with The Boston Consulting Group, and an executive with PepsiCo and DuPont in the areas of strategic planning and business development.

At DuPont Adam built a new division from nothing to over $600 million revenue in less than 3 years, opening subsidiaries on every populated continent and implementing new product development across both Europe and Asia.

At Pepsi, Adam led the initiative to start Pizza Hut Home Delivery. He opened over 200 stores in under 2 years and also led the global expansion M&A initiative acquiring several hundred additional sites. He also played a lead role in the Kentucky Fried Chicken acquisition.

Adam has helped redefine the strategy of companies such as General Dynamics, Deutsche Telecom, Air Canada, Honeywell, BancOne, Subaru of America, Safeway, Kraft, 3M, and P&G. He received his MBA from Harvard Business School with Distinction.