Re:Focus

Two Types of Experts

There are two kinds of experts, academic experts and practical experts. One is not better than the other, but they are very different and each offers very different value. 

As its name conveys, the academic expert is just that - academic.  To become an academic expert takes years of studying. Academic experts are experts in how and what others have done. They use case studies and observation to understand a subject. Regardless if their expertise comes from quantitative or qualitative research, whenever they comment on a question they will reply with words like, "I have observed that..." or "in many cases..." or "the data shows."

The second type of expert is the practical expert. The practical expert gains his or her understanding for a subject by actually doing it. They didn't study what they did...they just did it.  When they answer questions, they often reply with words like "in my experience."

Academic experts may not be good at doing what they are experts in themselves, but they are good at explaining the subject matter to others. They write books,  teach courses and offer lessons and give steps others can follow.

Practical experts may be good at doing what they they know about, but they are not always good at explaining how or what they did in clear enough terms that others can can learn from or follow their lead. Listen to an interview with Richard Branson or Steve Jobs or Bill Gates and see if you can build a business based on the instructions they offer - it's damn near impossible.

Unlike academic experts, practical experts didn't set out to become experts, they set out to solve a problem and gained expertise in the process. Ironically,  most practical experts started with a total lack of experience in whatever they became an expert.   Just the three examples I offered - Branson, Jobs and Gates...as well as many other highly successful entrepreneurs...started their businesses when they were in their early 20's and knew very little about building a business let alone a huge corporation.  And that was their advantage.  Practical experts are unencumbered by what others have done or "the right way to do things." They were forced to figure things out themselves which is how they gained their practical expertise.

Constant observation is how an academic expert gains his or her expertise. They study those who have succeeded or failed. Practical experts, in contrast, try and fail more than they succeed, but their drive to never quit until they solve a problem is the defining factor that earns them their expert status.  Anyone else would simply be someone who tried and trying alone doesn't make you an expert.

The academic expert is not is not better than the practical expert, we need both.  The practical experts do the things that the academic experts can observe and translate into actionable lessons for others. But never has their been someone who was able to achieve great success by precisely following all the steps of any academic expert.  It just wouldn't be practical. The practical experts are driven by their gut. They trust their feelings and they "read" the situation and are driven by finding a solution. And whether they like to admit it or not, the work of the academic experts gives the practical expert lots of information to assimilate and adapt where they deem fit.  The difference is, the practical expert, as their name conveys, only takes or uses the parts that make sense them them.

Entrepreneurs must be practical experts. They needn't set out to be subject matter experts in what they do,  they must set out to solve a problem or pursue some cause or purpose greater than themselves. With a clear understanding of Why they are setting out they will take the practical steps to blaze new paths that others, with some academic help, may follow suit.

Slippery Numbers

There are two types of claims: those based on hard numbers and those based on slippery numbers. 

Hard numbers are facts that, when evaluated, lead to a logical conclusion...and a hard claim.  For example, the US Constitution is 222 years old and, as such, is the oldest written constitution still in use today.  Slippery numbers, in contrast, are used to support a claim that someone wants to make, regardless of the hard numbers. For example, George W. Bush was one of the most popular presidents in US history (when compared to presidents with under a 40% approval rating).  The claim is technically true...when based on slippery numbers. But the measurement is clearly manipulated to help make the claim.

Sadly, hard numbers and hard claims are often reserved for scientists and text books.  Slippery numbers, however, run rampant in politics and marketing. Here's a real ad that Continental Airlines is currently running as an example.  The headline says - "The newest jet fleet.  Not just a new paint job." The problem is, their claim is based on slippery numbers.  The fine print right beneath the headline says, "Continental Airlines flies the newest jet fleet among global airlines based in the US." (click here to see ad full size). 

They only compare themselves to US based global airlines.  In other words, they only compare the age of their fleet to American Airlines, Delta and United - the only other US based global airlines.  Their claim of "newest" is factually correct...when based on slippery numbers.  If you consider the hard numbers and the claim they are attempting to make, you'd have to compare them to all airlines flying in the US. The problem is, the truth would not be the version of truth that they like.

As consumers we have to look out for any company that claims to be the best, youngest, fastest, smartest or any other absolute.  Odds are, to be the absolute at something, they are using slippery numbers to make their claim. Slice the numbers a different way, and some other company can make virtually the exact same claim.

As companies, we need to be honest with ourselves about what's more important to us - manipulating numbers simply to appear to have an advantage that we don't really have. Or to be honest about the things we believe and the way we conduct business.  As the old Buddhist saying goes, "how you do anything is how you do everything." Any company willing to trick their consumers in advertising is probably willing to include hidden fees in their price, offer benefits that aren't really there and promise guarantees or protections that are hard to claim when you feel you deserve them.

By the way, Spirit Airlines has the youngest Airbus fleet in the Americas and AirTran flies the youngest all-Boeing fleet...and I write the most popular blog on the internet*

*comparison made to less popular blogs.

What The U.S. Special Forces Know That You Should Also

Somewhere a True Believer is training to kill you.  He is training with minimum food or water, in austere conditions.  He doesn’t worry about what workout to do – his rucksack weighs what it weighs and he runs until the enemy stops chasing him.  The True Believer doesn’t care “how hard it is”; he knows he either wins or he dies.  He doesn’t go home at 1700; he is home. He knows only the cause.

  Now, who wants to quit?   

These are  the words that hang on a nondescript door, in a nondescript hallway, in a nondescript building on a military base somewhere in the United States.  There is a small plaque next to the door with a room number embossed and the word: SOCom – military speak for Special Operations Command.   What the leadership of SOCom understands so well is that belief is more powerful than resources. Devotion is more potent than technology. And “the cause” is what inspires people to take extraordinary risks or suffer awful conditions for no other reason than to advance the cause.  

Business is no different. 

Apple, Southwest, Disney, Harley-Davidson, Container Store and the handful of other companies that seem to have mystical powers and unbalanced success all have something in common.  They are defined by their cause, not their products or technology. More importantly, they only want to hire “True Believers,” those who believe what they believe.  And for good reason. People who believe what you believe will work for you with blood and sweat and tears.  People who don’t believe what you believe work for your money. Customers who believe what you believe will pay you a premium, suffer inconvenience and give you a lifetime of loyalty.  Customers who don’t believe what you believe will demand that you offer them a cheaper price and even if you do, they’ll still never be satisfied.

A company of True Believers will always frustrate the competition, regardless of how well resourced the competition is.  Apple frustrates Microsoft.  Lexus frustrates GM. Google frustrates pretty much everyone.  And Obama’s grassroots $5 and $10 fund raising frustrated both the Clinton and McCain campaigns.

Being flush with resources does not guarantee success.  In fact, it seems the better resourced an organization is, the more its people seem to stop caring about the cause.  They become more concerned with how many hours they’ve worked, the size of their offices and the benefits they will get.  The huge advantage companies with a cause have over even much bigger competitors is that everyone who comes to work is there for the same reason - to be a part of something bigger than themselves. They have no resources.  They have no expense accounts.  They play the hand they are dealt and they will fight on for no other reason than because they believe. 

People who go to work to be a part of the cause don’t go home.  They are home.

Now - who wants to quit?

No One Has A Passion For Customer Service...So Stop Saying You Do

I love it when companies say things like, "customer service is our passion"...because it's a flat-out lie.

Our passions are formed when we're young and there is not a single person involved in customer service in any company today that dreamed of being in customer service as a child.  Not a single one was lining up their teddy bears pretending to help them fix a software issue, get their cable TV working or helping them return an item of clothing that they've clearly already worn.

The truth is no one has a passion for customer service so saying it lacks any credibility whatsoever.  It is totally inauthentic.

However...

There are lots of people out there who care about other people.  There are many people in the business world who carried their teddy bear with them where ever they went and tucked it in to bed at night.  Later in life, the teddy bear was replaced by people.  These same kids genuinely cared about other kids on the playground.  They made sure everyone got invited to the birthday party so no one would feel left out.

And as adults - those same people make the best customer facing employees - not because they have a passion for customer service, but because they genuinely care about people.

If you want to offer great customer service, then hire people who care about other people then give them the tools and the freedom to do it.

And if you want to tell people about your "passion for customer service," try saying this instead: "we only hire people who care about other people." And, if you actually do it, your customers will feel the difference.

Who Cares About Customers?

One day, when you get old, would you like your family to support you or would you like them to care about you?

If you're family supports you, that means they will pay the bills for the old age home, call you the prescribed number of times and visit you on your birthday. But if they care about you, they will visit you more often and not on any set schedule. They will bring the grand kids over and make sure you get an extra helping of marshmallow sweet potatoes (your favorite) at Thanksgiving.

No one wants to be supported, we want to be cared for. So why are so many companies so proud of their "customer support?" You see it all the time on websites...the link in the upper corner that says simply, "support." To most that means giving you the ability to send an email with your question.  Support means answering your questions and acting in the prescribed manner.  But "care," that's an entirely different standard. Care is human...like the customers.

There is power in words - just as you plainly understood the difference when I asked you if you wanted to be supported or cared for when you get old, so too does that word impact the behavior of the people we hire to support...er...care for...our customers.  Firstly, the department itself is usually called, "customer support."  It should be called, "customer care."  We tell those who work in the department to offer "customer support."  We should be telling them to "care for our customers."

We, as customers, can always tell the difference too.  A customer support agent who has been told to offer "support" tends to follow a script.  They tend to be matter-of-fact about things. And even if the problem is not resolved to your satisfaction, they will actually tell you all the things they've done to help you and that there is nothing more they can do. That is, by all fair metrics, good support.

But customer care agents who have been told to take care of the customer, will talk to you differently.  They have more patience.  They will go out of their way or even ask one of their colleagues for help if they don't know the answer.  There is no script.  They don't need one.  If you hire someone who likes people and you tell them to take care of other people, there is no special training required...just special words to inspire them to do the right thing...to take care.

Values Must Be Verbs

Corporate values are so often written as nouns: integrity, respect, innovation.  But for values to be actionable, for you to hold people accountable to them, them must be verbs.  Here's A clip from my recent interview with Capture Your Flag.

To learn more about how to manage the values in order to build a strong corporate culture, one in which innovation and trust are the norm, check out chapter 6 of Start With Why. It describes how to build trust in any organization.

Executives May Make Decisions, But That Doesn't Mean They Know The Answers

This weekend I walked into a Verizon Wireless store to pick something up. They had these fancy new tablet computers that the agents carry around the store with them. Apparently, some folks back at corporate decided that having the tablets was a way for their agents to spend more time face to face with customers instead of being stuck behind a desk.  Sounds like a great customer service decision, right?

Wrong.

You see, the executives who decided to put the tablets in the stores have never actually worked in the stores.  And no matter how many surveys they had their agents complete, there is no better learning than being in the trenches.

In the case of Verizon Wireless, when they used desktops, their agents had to be signed in - one computer for one agent.  But with the new tablet systems, they have to share the interface. If one agent has a lot of information they need to fill in about a customer, the other agents have to wait. I think this is hilarious. They want their agents to spend more time with the customer...so now, the agent and the customer can stand next to each other while the whole transaction takes longer than if they stood at a counter.  As a customer which would you rather have? Stand at a counter and get out quickly or be forced to make chit-chat while the transaction time is needlessly protracted?

It is for this reason that more companies are including front-line people on design teams or decision groups - because their insights are second to none. Boeing, for example, invited real flight attendants, pilots and passengers to help them design their new 787 Dreamliner. They boast that it will be the most comfortable plane for all those who have to fly in it and not just those who manage its numbers from far away desks. 

Including those who will be most impacted by the decisions in the decision process is much more powerful than focus groups.  Focus groups will simply report what they want or don't want.  What they like or don't like. And very often the requests or desires are unrealistic or financially impossible. But when they are on the actual design team, on the inside, they are subject to all the budgetary and production restrictions and are more likely to work with management to solve the problems and find the best solutions.

As for Verizon Wireless, this time, they got it wrong.  But next time, I hope they'll heed this advice and include some customer service folks on the team tasked with how to improve customer service. Can you hear me now?

How To Become A Legend

Usain Bolt knows why he needs to win races and shatter records. Though money and fame are nice additions, what drives him is something much, much bigger. It's even bigger than winning each individual race.

The 23-year old, gold-shoe wearing Jamaican track star became a household name after he shattered multiple world records at the 2008 Beijing Olympics. When asked what his secret is, he replies with surprising humility, "my secret's just hard work and dedication." Great advice, for sure, but it takes more than just hard work to become such a dominating force in sports...or in anything, for that matter. It takes a sense of purpose so big, it's  hard to measure. It may even sound like fantasy. And for Usain Bolt, he wakes up everyday to, as he puts it,  "become a legend."

It is this sense of purpose, the sense of WHY Bolt works as hard as he does that makes such a difference. Whereas other competitors train for a race or for an event, Bolt trains for something that he may not fully appreciate in his lifetime, because inherent in legend-status, is that it will outlive him.

Though each race he wins and each record he breaks matter, they are not the end goals. They represent the milestones he needs to pass to achieve his very big dream.

In our careers and in our businesses we often limit our ability to succeed because we set goals with relatively short time lines.  We work hard to achieve these goals, then set new goals the following year. But quarterly or annual goals are just too short. How many people or organizations are planning to achieve something that will be fully realized after they die?

A strategy of setting a goal, reaching it and working to achieve the next goal does not inherently prevent progress or success, but it limits the ability to make massive leaps. It also begs the question, why are those short-term goals important? "To be successful" or "to grow a business" are insufficient as answers. Everyone who races against Bolt is running to win races, but few, if any, are running to become legends.

Quarterly or annual goals should not be the goals, they should serve to mark the measurable progress we make on our way to something much grander.  The Wright brothers didn't set out to simply make a flying machine, they set out to change the world.  Steve Jobs didn't just want to build a successful computer company, he set out to, as he put it, "make a dent in the universe." That ability to see beyond the year, to see beyond the money and the profit, to see how the world will change because of what you achieve, is what makes legends.

Consider this analogy: If your goal is to drive 350 miles in one day, you may achieve your goal, you may even drive a little further. You'll be elated that you reached your goal or surpassed it.  Your victory may even encourage you to attempt to drive 400 miles the next day. But to become a legend, you need a lofty, almost unrealistic and quite bombastic vision of the final destination...not just one of the way points.  It's not about getting 350 miles in a day, it's about seeing yourself laying on the beach on an island in the South Pacific. In one single swoop, you see the 350-mile achievement as small and slow. You are instantly able  to see opportunities that others miss.  Where others see the need to drive faster, you see the need to jump on an airplane.

Usain Bolt doesn't run each race because he wants to win. He wins each race because he wants something so much grander. And it is this ability, to understand why each race matters towards achieving the grand plan, that he will indeed become a legend.

Click here to download a PDF of this article

Do No Work

I sat down with Mike Michalowiz, the entrepreneur's entrepreneur and author of The Toilet Paper Entrepreneur.  He's nuts and brilliant and understands better than most the things to do to build a successful small business (and how to keep it fun).

He was interested in my theory of going to work to do no work. 

Interview With Simon Sinek from Toilet Paper on Vimeo.

There Are No Mergers, There Are Only Collisions

50% of all corporate mergers completely fail. 

An additional 25% never achieve the ROI that was promised.  

That means 75% of mergers weren't worth it.  Can you imagine walking into a CEO's office and saying, "I've got a great deal, it's got a 75% chance of failure."  You'd be laughed out of the room. Yet CEOs initiate mergers and acquisitions all the time. And when their mergers fail, the first line of the article in the Wall Street Journal is always the same, "the two cultures didn't mix."

Months and months and often millions of dollars are spent combing through the books to see if all is in order, yet what CEOs forget is that companies are nothing more than structures...and those structures are filled with people.  What makes two companies fit well together is not their product lines - it's how their people get along. Sadly, this little detail is often completely ignored. 

Just because there is "synergy" (the rationale so often used to justify so many mergers in the first place) between product lines or marketplaces, doesn't guarantee any success.  That one company makes ink and another makes rubber stamps, for example, means little when it comes to two entirely different corporate cultures needing to play nice together. Unless the plan is to fire everyone from one company and completely rehire for all the new job openings with employees who fit one of the cultures, more diligence should should be spent evaluating the cultural fit before the collision...er...merger takes place.

The great irony is that the single biggest factor that contributes to the majority of merger debacles is amazingly simple to evaluate.  It costs neither millions of dollars nor countless of months to evaluate a corporate culture.  It takes about a day per company.  One day.

It begs the question, then, why is something so important and so crucial to the success of a merger so often completely ignored until it's too late?

The answer is uncomfortably simple: you can't see the culture. The product lines, the market opportunities, the balance sheets are all things that can be easily seen, and easily evaluated and tabulated.  The culture is not. A strong culture exists when all the employees within an organization share the same values and beliefs.  We can tell a company has a strong culture, not because we read it on a balance sheet, but because we can feel it when we walk the halls. There is an obvious camaraderie among the employees and a genuine desire to do good by the company.  In contrast, when we walk the halls of companies with a weak culture we feel cold...or worse, we feel nothing at all. People in a bad culture are more motivated by self-gain than by a desire to see their company...and their colleagues...do well. When we feel a strong culture, we sometimes wish we worked there.

The best part is, if you try to have this discussion with so many of the CEOs who initiated the mergers in the first place, they'll tell you that what you're talking about is fluff. But if that fluff is important enough to avoid a 75% chance of a collision, then maybe it's worth buying that model with the anti-lock brakes after all. 

Click to download a PDF version of this article

Why People With A Sense of Humor Love Southwest

As for companies who aspire to be loved as much as Southwest, the trick is to know what your personality is first and then hire people who represent it.  Don't just hire anyone, no matter how great their resume and try to force them to be something they are not. Herb Kelleher, Southwest's founder and former president, said, "you shouldn't  hire people for their skills you should hire them for their attitude, you can always teach them the skills later."  The problem is which attitude? It has to be the attitude that fits your company. When your employees belong in your company, when they fit your culture, then their ability to properly represent you will come naturally.

The Best Leaders Show Up For The Cause Not The Result

Offering CEO's big money to come and run companies does not guarantee great leadership. In fact, the practice may attract the wrong leaders altogether.

With banks failing, the auto-industry in a mess and Steve Jobs returning to work after his secretive liver transplant, it's a good time to raise the subject of succession again.  

Wall Street was quite upset that Apple was so close to the vest about Jobs's health.  And well they should be, the last time Jobs left in 1985, the company slumped and didn't re-emerge as the powerhouse they are now until Jobs returned to the helm a decade later. But Jobs's health is irrelevant. Cancer or new livers aside, the fact is he can't lead the company forever and knowing how to find a good leader to succeed him is important.

But Apple is just one of many succession conundrums.  Many of the banks are sailing rudderless into the future as are companies like AIG, Chrysler and GM. Rick Wagoner, for example, was ousted from GM for mismanaging the company, only to be replaced by a man who, well, lets just say he's not much of an inspiring leader. And given the desperate need for real leadership these days, there is an ongoing debate in boardrooms and on Capitol Hill about how much we should pay these leaders for their contributions. 

The argument is that companies can not attract the best leaders, the leaders they need, unless they are very well compensated. And that, believe it or not, is actually the problem.  The flaw in the logic is that the best leaders do it for the money, which they don't.  Great leaders show up for the challenge or the cause. The bad leaders show up for the money.

Instead of finding someone with an impressive resume who is willing to help if you pay him or her enough, imagine if the Obama administration made this appeal:

The recent economic melt-down has taught us a valuable lesson - that the way we did things in the past is not the way we can do things in the future. We may have enjoyed the short term riches of the past decade or more, but we have done so by weakening the very foundations of our corporations and indeed our economy.

Now is the time for change.  Now is the time for new ideas and new leaders to emerge to rebuild our economy and our nation so that we may, once again, be the beacon of how a great free market economy should run.

We are looking for the men and woman who want to help shape the corporations of the future and help build the new American economy. The salary will not be big. The challenge will be great. And the opportunity to influence the future of our county is real.

Are you up for the challenge?  If so, please contact President Obama and tell him you want to lead.

Such an appeal does not mean that prior experience is ignored, it just means it is considered second to the leaders desire to help.  If a leader shows up for the cause, they will work with blood, sweat and tears and they will inspire those around them to do the same.  If the leader does not believe in the cause, then they will work for the money.  The very fact that got us into this mess in the first place.

Click here to download a PDF version of this article

This blog also appeared in The Huffington Post

If You Want Your People To Perform, Don't Give Them Permission...Give Them Intent

David Marquet graduated at the top of his class from the Naval Academy.  After serving aboard submarines in the Atlantic and the Pacific, Captain Marquet finally earned something many officers dream of - his own command.  Marquet was handed the keys to one of the finest boats in America's fleet - the fast attack submarine, USS Santa Fe.  Stationed at Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, this was a great honor indeed. But there was a catch.  The crew Marquet inherited was the lowest performing crew in the US submarine fleet.

But it didn't stay that way.

In just a short period of time, things turned around.  A lot.  Very quickly Captain Marquet's submarine became the highest performing crew in the fleet.  Scoring the highest marks in a number of metrics, Marquet's crew went on to win a number of distinguished awards.

 All to often, those in leadership positions too quickly blame poor performance on the people around them.  That may be the true in some cases, but more likely than not, it's the leadership that failed to produce results.  In the case of Capt. Marquet, it was all about the leadership.  And what Marquet did was change the culture aboard his boat from one of permission to one of intent.

The Navy is a permission based culture.  Before a sailor performs any act he asks for permission.  For example, "permission to dive to 400 feet."  To which the captain will reply, "permission granted"  And the sailor will acknowledge the permission and perform the task, "Aye sir, diving to 400 feet."

Marquet completely did away with this.

Aboard his boat, his sailors didn't ask permission, they announced their intentions. "I intend to dive to 400 feet, sir."  The captain was still in charge and could still affirm or deny the intention.  The task was the same.  Everything that happened, in fact, was the same.  Except aboard Marquet's boat, every action was owned by the person performing the action.  He built in accountability.  And not in the traditional sense of setting a goal and a metric and making someone responsible for achieving that goal, but in a deeper, more personal sense.  The crew aboard the Santa Fe weren't just accountable for the results, they were accountable for their actions.

We don't think of businesses as permission based cultures, but they are.  Pay close attention how people talk to each other in status meetings or when they talk to their boss.  "What do you think we should do?"  Is a common question.  "Can I...?"  "Should I...?"  "What if I...." very often precede a thought someone has.  What if companies required all employees to announce their intention instead of passively asking permission?  Imagine a status meeting in which every person at the table explains their intentions not their plans.   "I intend to call this client to apologize for over charging them."  "I intend to get the website built by the end of the week."

Nothing at the superficial level changes.  The boss is still in charge.  The tasks are the same.  But everything changes in how people feel about their jobs.  With intent, psychologically every member of the team puts some proverbial skin in the game.  They are not just accountable to some arbitrary metric, they become accountable to themselves.  An employees ability to perform is now on their shoulders. 

Intend to try this and see what happens.  The effects are felt immediately.  And the results are profound.  David Marquet proved it.  With the same people, the same resources and the same tools, simply by allowing people to have intent instead of permission, you can completely turn the boat around.

Why So Many Successions Don't Succeed

There were three words missing from Bill Gates’ goodbye speech when he officially left Microsoft in July of this year.  They are three words he probably doesn’t even realize need to be there.  Three little words:

“I’ll be back.”

After abdicating his role as the head of Microsoft to Steve Balmer in 2000, Bill Gates has completely relinquished influence over the company he built so he can lend more time and energy to the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.  But Gates forgot to do one thing that would allow his plan to work. This one oversight could have a devastating impact on Microsoft and will require him to come back in 3 to 5 years to right the ship.

 Bill Gates is special.  Not because of his brain or his management style.  Though important, those two things alone are not the formula for building a multi-billion dollar corporation from scratch.  Like all visionary leaders, Bill Gates is special because he physically embodies what he believes.

When Gates founded Microsoft just over 30 years ago, he did so to advance a higher cause.  A noble purpose.  He believes that technology is the great equalizer.  Give people the right tools, make people more productive, and everyone, no matter their lot in life, will have an opportunity to achieve their real potential.  “A PC in every home and on every desk,” he envisioned (which is remarkable from a company that didn’t make PCs).  He saw the PC as the great equalizer. Microsoft’s most successful software, Windows, allowed anyone to have access to powerful technology. Tools like Word, Excel and PowerPoint, gave everyone the power to realize the promise of the new technology – to become more efficient and productive.  Small businesses, for example, could look and act like big businesses.  Microsoft’s software are the tools that helped Gates advance his cause to empower the “every man.”  It was Gates who is responsible for the advancement of personal computer.  Gates put a PC on every desk and in doing so he changed the world. 

Gates is important to Microsoft because he physically embodies his vision.  He is the “every man.”  He dresses like you and me.  He drives his own car.  He is understated.  He his not flamboyant with his wealth. Bill Gates is the original vision of Microsoft.

So what happens now that he’s gone?

Such a departure is not without precedent among companies with equally visionary leaders.  Steve Jobs, a man who personifies the notion of challenging the status quo, who is the physical embodiment of “Think Different,” left Apple in 1985 to start Next.  He left the company in the hands of a capable executive, Pepsi’s John Scully.  The problem was, Scully ran the company as a business and not as a tool to achieve a higher purpose.  The company thrived on Jobs’s fumes for a few years and then it started to falter.  Not until Job’s return in 1996 did Apple reinstate it’s power for innovation, for thinking different and to, once again, redefine industries.

Michael Dell had a cause.  One he didn’t effectively communicate before he stepped down as CEO in July, 2004.  And when the company started to weaken with him gone, he came back in fewer than 3 years.  In 2000 Howard Schultz resigned as CEO of Starbucks.  And for the first time in it’s history, Starbucks started to crack.  Schultz returned in 2007 to put things right. 

Jobs, Dell, Schultz and Gates are not God’s gift to management.  Their companies are thousands of people deep and they alone can’t pull all the strings or push all the buttons to make everything work properly.  They rely on the brains and the management skills of teams of people.  In this respect, they are no different from any other executive.  But what they all have in common, something not all CEOs have, is that they physically embody the cause around which they built their companies.  Their mere existence reminds every executive and every employee why they show up to work.  Put simply: they inspire. 

Like Bill Gates, these inspired leaders failed to properly articulate their cause in words that others could rally around.  And as a result, they are the only ones who could lead their movement.  But they still have the same challenge – what happens when they leave again? 

  

The best thing Dell, Schultz and Jobs can do while they are back is to make sure that everyone knows why the company was founded in the first place.  What’s the cause they are there to champion?  What movement are they leading?  Why should anyone care? 

Schultz hasn’t done it yet. He is back at Starbucks talking about coffee.  There aren’t many employees at Starbucks who are truly inspired by coffee.  In fact, if you go back to the history of Starbucks, it wasn’t even coffee that originally excited Schultz, it was opening coffee shops.  It was the vision of building a space between work and home that allowed Starbucks to single-handedly drive a coffee-shop culture in the United States. Talking about coffee will not re-energize employees at Starbucks and it will not drive innovation.  And, more importantly, it will not prepare the company for when Schultz leaves again.  Schultz needs to refocus the company around the coffee shop experience, not the product they serve.

Gates made the same mistake.  As the company grew, he stopped talking about what he believed and how he was going to change the world and started talking about what the company was doing.  Microsoft changed.  Founded as a company that believed in making people more productive so they could achieve their highest potential they became a company that simply made software products.  Such a seemly subtle change impacts behaviors.  It alters decisions.  And it impacts how a company structures itself for the future.  Though Microsoft has changed since its founding, the impact was not as dramatic because at least Bill Gates was there, the physical embodiment of the cause that inspired his executives and employees.
But now he’s gone.

Gates left to do something else that also embodies his cause – to use the Gates Foundation to help people around the world wake up everyday to achieve their potential.  The only difference is he’s not doing with software anymore.  Steve Balmer, a smart man by all accounts, does not physically embody Gates’ vision of the world.  Balmer is not seen as a humble man.  He is not “one of us.”  He has an image as a powerful executive who sees numbers and not people.  Like John Scully at Apple, Jim Donald at Starbucks and Kevin Rollins at Dell – all the CEOs who replaced the visionary founders – Balmer might be the perfect man to work alongside a visionary but is he the perfect man to replace one?  The entire culture of all these companies was built around one man’s vision.  The only succession plan that will work is to find a CEO who believes in and wants to continue to lead that movement, not replace it with their own vision of the future. Balmer knows how to rally the company but can he inspire it? 

Successful succession is more than selecting someone with an appropriate skill set, it’s about finding someone who is in lock-step with the original cause around which the company was founded.  Great second or third CEOs don’t take the helm to implement their own vision of the future, they pick up the original banner and lead the company into the next generation.  That’s why we call it succession, not replacement.  There is a continuity of vision.

Gates’ departure from Microsoft is no different from the founder/CEO departures at Starbucks, Dell and Apple.  If Microsoft does not clearly articulate the cause around which the company was built, then no matter who takes over, Gates will have to come back in 3 to 5 years.  Like the other examples, he will need to return to remind everyone the cause by simply being Bill.  If that cause is not clearly articulated and if Gates doesn’t come back, then Microsoft probably only has about 5-7 good years left before it starts to look like AOL, Netscape or Yahoo – other once-mighty forces who, after the vision left with their respective founders, floundered about only to become irrelevant in the long-term shaping of an economy.

Have fun in Africa Bill and see you in a few years.


This piece also appeared in The Huffington Post.

I Miss Starbucks

Want to know what's going on with Starbucks?  Like so many companies that achieve such levels of success, Why the company was founded in the first place has been forgotten.  The cause that drove them to change American culture has now become something much less inspiring - now, it's all about What they do.  A company devoted to "the third space" is now just selling coffee.

The following is a letter I sent last week to Howard Schultz, CEO of Starbucks (his version didn't have the picture...otherwise it's a carbon copy).

July 29, 2008

Dear Howard:

I miss Starbucks.

There was a time, not too long ago, that Starbucks stood for something.  There was an underlying cause, a purpose, a belief you had about the world.  It was that idea that I bought, not the coffee.  And it was inspiring.

But those days are gone. 

Now it’s about coffee and money.  Lets be honest, it’s an open debate if Starbucks coffee is really better (and even if it is, I can get about the same from someone else).  And the money?  Well, as soon as a company starts focusing on the money, they certainly can’t focus on the customer experience. 

It’s pretty remarkable.  Starbucks is signally responsible for creating a coffee shop culture in America.  Starbucks didn’t bring coffee to the United States – it brought the coffee shop experience – the third space, you called it.  The space between home and work. People bought into the Starbucks belief – I know I did.  Your cause was clear and your actions proved it.  But over time the cause has lost its clarity, and your actions prove it.    

There was a time when you invited people to spend time in the third space – giving those who wanted to stay a ceramic cup and ceramic plate.  But then a focus on the money started to erode that purpose.  Certain decisions started to muddy the cause...dilute the belief.  And paper cups became the standard.  Nothing says to a customer, “we love you now get out” like a paper cup.  It started to be about the coffee and not about the experience.  It’s no longer about the third space.

I hope you rediscover why you do what you do.  I hope you once again become a champion for your cause, not just a purveyor of caffeinated drinks.  I miss the third space.  I’m not telling you anything you don’t know, in fact, it was you who told me over the past 20 years what you believed…and I believed you.
I would love to help you rediscover your Why.  I would love to help you inspire people again.
Hell – I just miss you the way you used to be.  I loved that Starbucks.

With great respect,

Simon Sinek

Why Dreams Die

For passion to survive it needs structure.  But for structure to grow, it needs passion.

90% of all new businesses fail.  And most of the companies that don't fail won't become billion dollar businesses or change the world.  Why is that?

Ask those who didn’t make it and the most common answers you’ll get are: under capitalized, didn’t have the right people, bad market conditions or a combination of all those things. 

But there is a deeper reason.

Every single new business has something in common: they all started with an idea.  An idea fueled by passion.  This passion drove the excitement, the feelings of invincibility.  This passion and the feelings of world domination motivated “irrational” behavior like quitting a perfectly stable job with steady pay and benefits to set up a business in your basement.   The passion of the founder/s is intoxicating to some.  It encourages others to also quit their good jobs or pass up better paying ones to join up.  In itself, this is not a bad thing.  The problem is that though companies may be born of passion, "a company" in practice is a structure.  A collection of systems and processes, good companies run like well oiled machines.  Though they may have all the passion in the world, if someone doesn’t know how to build those structures and manage those processes (the stuff that will ensure income, the ability to navigate all market conditions and hire the best people (see excuses above)), then the company will likely struggle to stay afloat, survive only with continued infusions of money or just fail (remember the dot-com boom: lots of passion, not so much structure and processes).

For those passionate few who also have the ability to build the structure and implement the processes, for those that defy “the statistic,” they face another challenge: success.

Success can be the biggest challenge for a small business.  With success, focus can shift to managing the structure at the expense of managing the passion.  There are many owners of successful small and medium sized businesses that will say that the energy in their businesses is "not like it used to be."  They reminisce about the times of old.  It’s a paradox – so many successful business owners may be financially successful, but they don’t feel successful.  Whereas when the business was young, they felt successful even though they were broke.

Perhaps this explains why so many small businesses cap out at (if we’re really generous) between $50-$150 million.  Yes a company is nothing but a structure, a machine, and money may fuel the machine itself, but the company is also filled with people.  It is the people who drive the business.  And though financial incentives may help for the short term, it is passion and inspiration that fuels people.  If that runs out - growth is much harder to attain.  Structure is essential for a company to survive, but sustainable passion is essential for the company to enjoy sustainable growth.

No matter the size of the organization, fixation on the structure alone and failure to manage the passion, the inspiration within, will mean that that perfect machine won't have any fuel to go.

What's In A Why?

I recently had the pleasure of being interviewed by TrueNYC, a great company devoted to finding and sharing ideas for entrepreneurs. 

They asked me about how people and companies can find their Why and some of the ways it can be applied to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of a business.  The answers I gave have value for big and small companies alike. 

Enjoy.

Click here to see the interview.

How To Be Authentic

"Authenticity" is the big buzz word in corporate and political America these days.  "Be authentic" is the advice that gurus and pundits offer from afar.  But just instructing someone to be authentic is not actionable.  If you walked into your CEOs office right now and told him to be more authentic, what would he do?  If a CEO walks into the head of marketing's office and charges, "make our marketing more authentic," what steps would the marketing executive take to make that happen?

The advice  of "be more authentic" is just not actionable.

The best example I can point to of what it means to be authentic is what happened to Hilary Clinton in New Hampshire.  Here is a strong woman who has spent at least a career, if not a lifetime, acting strong.  Being perceived as strong.  Her whole campaign is about being experienced and strong and qualified.  The problem with that as a strategy is that it's unreal.  No one is like that.  Robots maybe. 

It takes more courage to be to be human, to be "authentic," than to act strong. Only because of complete exhaustion did Hilary Clinton, for the first time in memory, publicly let down her guard, brush aside her act and show us that she has self-doubt, she has fears and is indeed human...and it made her beautiful.  She didn't come across as weak for welling-up when she expressed what she believed.  In fact it made her seem stronger.  The folly is, all her advisers who tell her to be authentic tried hard to suppress the clip.  To hide  it from the world.  The one time Hilary was authentic and they panicked (I'd love to know what their definition of authenticity is).

Democrat or Republican.  Hilary supporter or not, when you see this video, you can't help but like her just a little more.  And so did voters in New Hampshire.  That's because being authentic works.

Here's what it takes to be authentic:

Being authentic is not difficult, per se, it just takes a lot of self-confidence (and not the "act strong" kind).  It means you believe in everything you say and everything you do.  It means that you always speak the truth and act in accordance with your moral compass at all times to all people: to your friends, your colleagues, to the public and to your customers.  No "pitching."  No "selling."  No little white lies.  No fear of what others will think of you, your brand or your company.  No acting in a way that you think others will like you more.  Complete and total honesty.  Nothing more.

The truth is, few of us, as individuals or as companies, have the courage to be completely authentic all the time.  This is why authentic people and companies are so attractive to us and why they are so few in number.

Lesson to be learned: It takes more strength to be authentic than it does to act strong.  And the more authentic you can be, the more people will like you, the more they want to vote for you or buy your products...and the stronger you will be.

Great Service - Bad Product

Just a short addendum to the piece to my last posting "The best customer service is no customer service."

T-Mobile is much lauded in the press for their superior customer service.  They have made customer service a priority and deserve great credit for their improvements.  BUT...why do they need great customer service in the first place?

"All they've got is great customer service because their product sucks," says Julie.  A T-Mobile customer who did not read this blog nor did I talk to her about my opinions.  She's been on the phone with their "great customer service" because something went wrong...as she says, "something always goes wrong with them."

Again - I am a great believer in great customer service, but it's even better if your customers don't need it.

Earlier in Southwest Airlines life, a company heralded for their great service, they didn't have a customer service department.   They didn't need it.  They didn't get any complaints.  Someone in the office volunteered to answer the occasional letter of complaint that would  come in now and then.  The reason they didn't need it was simple - because their product was excellent.  Their front line service was so good, there was no need for staff to deal with things later.

I applaud T-Mobile for making strides in customer service, and I'd be even more impressed if they had to shrink the size of their customer service department because they couldn't keep everyone busy.

If You Want To Be Innovative, Think Like The Military

I can sum up the secret to innovation in three words: good listening skills.

Over the past couple of years I've noticed a remarkable trend.  Those industries that are most open to new ideas and new thinking, those that are good listeners, are also the most innovative industries.   I've met so many people from so many different industries, I can actually rank, from highest to lowest, which industries are the best and worst listeners. 

At the top of the list: The military.

The people I meet in the military exhibit a genuine curiosity and interest  in ideas with which they are unfamiliar.  They ask lots of questions and really want to understand a concept to determine if and how they can take advantage of it.  But most importantly, they don't just ask questions, they listen to the answers.

A reluctance to listen to new thinking seems directly proportional  innovation and the ability to thrive in today's world.

So for all of you reading this, I thought I'd share  some of my observations about how the military thinks with the goal that you can do the same to help drive innovation and thrive. 

Pose A Challenge, Not The Solution.

When someone in business wants something, they ask for it.  "We need a new marketing campaign."  "We need a new photocopier."  "We want a new network."  A problem is identified, some decision maker determines the solution then they look for that solution at the best price with as many bells and whistles as they can get.

When the military procures something, they will often put out a statement that articulates an issue and wait for the market to respond with solutions, no matter what form they take.  Instead of a "new marketing campaign" they may ask for various parties to suggest "the best way to communicate with new recruits."  Instead of a photocopier, they may ask for "the best information sharing solution given X conditions."  Of course price, quality and service are all factors, but so is the nature of the solution.

Don't Challenge Ideas, Try To Understand Them.

The way the military asks questions is very different from how business asks them.  Businessmen often ask questions in a way that forces someone to defend their ideas.  Their questioning style attempts to debunk or disprove: "That would never work here." "It could not work like that."  The conversation dynamic is that of a client-vendor relationship.

The military wants to understand how something would function under different condition.  They seem to be gaming scenarios in their head when they ask questions: "What would happen if X, Y and Z were present?"  "What if you had A but not B, then what would happen?"  The conversation dynamic is more of a team than client-vendor.

Get Different Perspectives.

Focused on the issue rather than the solution, those in the military will ask different people for different perspectives.  They may even invite different experts from various industries to comment on a particular issue.  During the learning process, they are not looking to compare one solution to another, they are trying to understand all the dynamics at play.  This process alone enhances the quality of their questions and increases their ability to "game" scenarios.  The senior brass of the Air Force, for example, spent a day listening to communications experts from various industries to weigh in on a series of questions and issues they were facing.   

When exposed to  different ideas,  businesses, on the other hand, tend to compare one set to another, trying to determine which is best,  instead of taking it all in and processing it to serve the greater good.  Though some large corporations do invite experts to come in, rare are the times when a day is spent listening to a list of diverse perspectives.

Of course not everyone in the military is perfect and, of course, not all businesses treat all outside parties like vendors.  But I've been doing a lot of listening, and there is definitely a clear pattern.  If you want to test it, try telling someone in a company or industry that is struggling that you have an idea that might help them turn-around their business and see what kind of response you get.  Find out if  they are Military Thinkers.

 

If You Want Things From People, Rank Them

The modern adult version of "I'll be your best friend" is the MySpace "top friends" list.   "I'll be your best friend" is the highly effective negotiating tactic employed by generations of children to obtain a toy, cupcake or good will from their peers.   And, as any child who has ever handed over candy with the hopes and aspirations of actually being Adam Johnson's best friend can attest, it works.

Ranking our friends, as it turns out, is serious stuff.  Our real friends of course get a ranking, but the list can also be used to court favor with others.  A first date can appear in the ranking as part of the courtship process.  People can also be dropped from the list in a passive aggressive burst of disapproval or anger.

I was curious to see if the "top friends" of certain  more prominent adults could provide clues about from whom they are trying to court favor.  I've also included the tagline that MySpace allows its members to include next to their primary picture in hopes of understanding the belief or cause of these people.   

Here are some of my favorites:

Hillary Clinton (no tagline provided) has 19 top friends of which her number one pick, as it turns out, is herself.  The number two slot is also herself.  And number four is none other than herself.  Proving that one needs to believe in one's self to be the President of the United States,  Hillary has employed triple best-friend redundancy.  She can rest assured that she can count on a vote for herself in the Democratic Primary.

Barak Obama (tagline: "Join the Official Barack Obama Myspace Profile")  has 40 best friends.  His best friend right now is "Iowa for Obama" followed by "New Hampshire for Obama."  He's obviously trying to use the "I'll be your best friend" tactic to court favor in  two primary states. His fourth best friend is  Christina Cheatham, a psychology and political science major at Georgia College and State University. Christina enjoys psychological thrillers, singing and learning to belly dance.  That ranking worked, however, Christina donated $5 through MySpace to the Obama campaign.

John Edwards (tagline: "For America") has 24 top friends of which his number one is his wife, Elizabeth.   He posted a good video which challenges his critics complaints that he spent $400 on a haircut.  His 2nd best friend is a US soldier currently on deployment in Afghanistan.  His third friend is a volunteer from One Corps, Edwards' grassroots organization.  His fourth friend is Anael.  I don't know anything about Anael or what Edwards is trying to woo from him.

President Bush (tagline: "http://www.whitehouse.gov/") doesn't seem to have many friends.  He has a total of 86 friends of which he ranks only five as his top friends.  These include: Craig, a self-described, 26 year old self-deprecating mathematician from Ann Arbor, Michigan.   Saina,  a 27 year old Canadian, er, model.  Little Miss Moaner, a young woman from Devon in the UK and a gentleman from Los Angeles who says he's "just looking for the bar..."  I was going to make a witty comment about Mr. Bush's top friends, but I can't come up with anything better than his actual top five friends.

A very sporty looking Mitt Romney (tagline: "The Official MySpace Page of Governor Mitt Romney") is all about family.  He's got 23 top friends of which his number one is his wife, Ann.  Friends two through six are his five sons - Tagg, Josh, Matt, Ben and Craig.  And sneaking in at number 23 on the list is none other than the ubiquitous Tom.  Tom Anderson is president and co-founder of MySpace and is friends with everyone on the popular networking site.  You've got to give it to Mitt Romney, he's hoping his "I'll be your best friend" will court favor with Tom's 193,904,348 friends.

John McCain (no tagline) enjoys sports, hiking, fishing, boxing, basketball, football and history.  His favorite film is Viva Zapata!, a film about Mexican revolutionary Emiliano Zapata, who led a rebellion against the corrupt, oppressive dictatorship of president Porfirio Diaz in the early 20th century.  I applaud McCain's choice of film, it certainly helps us understand what he's passionate about.  Problem is, it's a film  from 1952;  Harry Truman was President and Barack Obama was 9 years old.

Joking aside, these examples show some good and bad uses of the popular community site.  Some are used as shameless sales pitches, which are no more effective than bad advertising.  And some are used to actually attempt to articulate a cause for us to believe in.  Of course, the most egregious example is George W. Bush.  It's obviously not a profile managed by the White House - once again proving, if you don't control what you say, someone else will.

Advice to would-be all political or corporate MySpacers:

• Keep your profile simple
• Try to communicate what you believe in clear and succinct terms
• And manage your top friends...you never know when you might need them.

 

 

Harry Potter and iPhones Can Bring World Peace

If companies all had a clear sense of a purpose, cause or belief, the result could be world peace.  You think I'm joking.  I'm not.

There is no difference between customers or employees...they are both groups of people.  If you have a clear sense of what you believe, you will attract people who also believe the same thing.  They will take your cause and make it their own.  Some might choose to work for you, some might choose to buy your products, others might just be fans.   But it is the common belief system that earns companies like Apple, Southwest Airlines and Harley-Davidson the most loyal customers AND the most loyal employees.  They are all aligned. They all believe what the companies believe.   

Imagine what Steve Jobs believes.  Now imagine what someone who works for Apple believes.  Now imagine what Apple customers believe.  All the same right?  They are all comfortable with the idea of challenging the status quo, they all like the idea of "think different."  It's no accident creative people are drawn to the brand, it reflects their own beliefs about the world. 

It is because of this sense of being a part of a bigger cause that some people choose to stand in line for 14 hours to be one of the first to get an iPhone or the new Harry Potter book. 

I went to the Scholastic store last Friday to see what all the hubbub was about.  I'm not a Harry Potter fan, but it was amazing.  People of all ages were there.  Many were in costumes.  The line stretched over five city blocks!  I walked the whole line and the energy from front to back was energizing.  People had been waiting for hours and they were still happy.  They were standing in line for a whole day and they were genuinely happy.  I can't stand in line at the bank for 10 minutes without hating everyone around me.

Now, I'm not saying that companies need to have big product launches all the time, but if they have a strong sense of cause, that element of optimism and happiness will come with every product they sell.  Do you feel happy when you buy an HP computer?  Eh.  But do you feel happy when you buy a Mac?  Yup.

Companies need to clearly understand and state their true and honest belief in the world so they can include a free bit of happiness with every purchase. 

Who knows...sell enough products with free happiness enclosed and maybe that's enough to bring about world peace.

Do You Know What You Believe?

I have a test for you.  Do you know what you believe? 

I'm being serious.  No matter if you're a company, a non-profit, an executive, a politician, a CEO or just an average Joe...do you know what you believe?  And I don't mean a list of things...I mean the one, overriding belief that guides all the decisions you make.

If your a leader of some sort and the answer is no, then how do you know who to hire?  How do you know what message to put out to employees to inspire loyalty?  What message to you tell your customers to inspire them to buy from you ?  How do you know when you're being authentic or not?

If you're not a leader, how do you know what job to take?  How do you decide what leader you should follow, to give your undying loyalty?  How do you know which companies truly have your best interests in mind?

It's pretty important to know, no?

Here's the test.  Grab a piece of paper and write a sentence that starts with "I believe..."

But there are some rules.

• You must only write one sentence
• And you may not use any of the following words:
  • Best (or similar qualifier)
  • Quality
  • Price
  • Service
  • Features
  • Innovation or innovative
  • and, most importantly, you may not mention what you do or any product or service you sell.

If you can write one sentence that feels right, then you're well on your way to knowing your Why.  And you're well on your way to writing a great vision statement. 

If you're up for the challenge and you'd like to email your results, send them  to Ibelieve@sinekpartners.com and I'll get back to you personally to help in any way I can.

p.s. I did the test...and here's my belief:  I believe that no matter how smart you are or how good your ideas are, the only way to thrive in the world is if you have the ability to inspire those around you.

The Effect of Why

I can't watch this video clip without crying.  It is the perfect embodiment of what it means to live your Why. 

People and companies alike are more focused on What they do (e.g. product features) or what people will think of them.  But those that wake up everyday driven by a purpose, cause or belief, their  Why, have a different presence in the world.  We are drawn to those with a strong sense of Why.

Here is an example of a humble man who works in a cell phone store.  By all outwardly characteristics - he is shy and insecure and his teeth are bad - we are not drawn to him.  Though he does not believe in himself that much, he does believe in the one thing he loves above all else - opera.

In daily life, Paul worries about what the world thinks of him.  But not when he sings.  When he sings, he stops caring about the world and gets completely lost in what he's doing.  He has so much love for opera that nothing, not even low self-esteem, can affect him. 

We are drawn to him.  Everyone is drawn to him.  We are drawn to his passion.  And at the end of his performance, all the things we smirked at - his teeth, his low confidence - vanish.  Paul becomes beautiful.

This is one of the most wonderful examples of a person embodying a Why I have ever seen.  People, companies and organizations are all the same.  Embody a purpose, cause and belief and people will be drawn to you...you might even give them goosebumps.    

Thank you to Seth Godin for posting this.

Write A Vision Statement That Works

Most companies' vision and mission statements are useless.  Where as a good vision statement can inspire loyalty, hard work and innovation, most of the framed statements hanging on the walls of businesses are nothing more than a description of what the company does.

The kind of "vision" statement to which I am referring usually look something like this:

...to be the leading supplier of [insert product or service] at the best possible price with the best possible service...blah blah blah value...blah blah blah customer satisfaction & innovation....blah blah blah leader in our industry.

I always ask companies with statements like the above what they think the vision statements on their competitors' walls say.  Eerily similar I imagine.   

A good mission or vision statement is just that, a statement of a vision - a look ahead into the future.  A vision statement is an articulation of a view of the world that your company and your people are working towards, not what they are expected to do now.

But the vision alone is not enough.  Given your vision of the future, how, specifically, will your company work to achieve it?  These guidelines or values should be written in a manner by which people, at all levels, can be held accountable.  "Innovation," "authenticity" and "integrity" are not measurable (and frankly things like integrity should be a given...anyone in your company lacking this quality shouldn't be given a mission statement, they should be given a pink slip). 

Here are some guidelines to writing a vision or mission statement that works.

 

Why do you do what you do?

• Begin your statement with "I believe..."
  • Your Vision Statement should start with what you believe, why you do what you do -- your purpose or cause on a level higher than what your company does or makes.  Try starting your statement with the words "I believe..."  or "I envision a world..."  You'll find what follows will be quite different than what you expect.   You can always take out those opening words later, if you want.
    

• Don't write more than two lines for what you believe.
  
  • This is not the place for long-winded descriptions about what your company does or its value to the world.  The opening of your statement shouldn't require more  than a line or two to capture the world you imagine.

• Leave what you sell out of it.
  • This is a statement of your vision, not what you do.  Nowhere in Southwest Airlines' mission does it say anything about being an airline.  What you do is important, but not at this level.

How do you do it?

• Explain How you think and act.
  
  • Now that you've articulated Why you you do what you do, it's time to explain how you do it.  There are probably two to five distinct characteristics or values  about How your company operates that makes you unique in the way you are going about realizing your vision.
  • These ideas  should not be amorphous.  They should be specific and actionable.  They should be written in a way that people can be held accountable.  "Innovative," for example, is hard to hold people accountable to.  You can't say to someone, "be innovative."  How do you know when they are?  But you can say, "always have options to any solution you offer,"  for example.

What do you do?

• What are you doing to bring your vision to life?
  
  • You've articulated your belief and how you go about doing what you do, now explain what you do - the things you sell that will serve as proof to the world of Why and How you do things.

Put your business goals on another piece if paper.

• • No matter how robust,  your business goals belong somewhere else.  They are the result of pursuing your vision and holding yourself accountable to your guiding principles or values.   Your goals may serve to motivate a few people in management, but most people are not inspired by financial objectives.  They are, however, inspired by a pursuit greater than any one person or product.

Only if you're interested, here's my vision statement:

I work to inspire people  to do the things that inspire them. 

And no matter what I do in order to realize my vision, I hold myself accountable to five guiding principles:

1. Be  unconventional:   Shake things up.  Offer new perspectives.  Only when you see or hear things in a different way can you see greater opportunities.
2. Keep it simple: If people can more easily understand something, then it's more likely to get done.
3. Collaborate:  Work with others, because they know more and have already made all the mistakes.
4. Silver-line it: Look for the silver lining in every cloud.  It's better to amplify what works than obsess with fixing what doesn't work.
5. Act!:  Action is always better than inaction.

To realize my vision: I write about how to inspire action.  I consult companies how build corporate cultures that  inspire their employees.   I guide companies how to create marketing and communications that inspire customers to buy from them over and over and over.  I speak to anyone who will listen.  I work to be my own best case study, practicing everything I preach.

 

Building A Corporate Culture

My good friend Jack Daly says it best, "You can have a culture by default or you can have a culture by design."

The fact is, so many companies do not design or maintain their cultures.  They simply expect their employees to work hard and perform.  That's like expecting to win a NASCAR race without looking after your engine.

MSNBC's highest rated show, Your Business, invited me back to talk about how to keep the engine of your company running smoothly.

Click on the link to hear more:

Listening to Financial Analysts Can Distract A Company From Its Vision.

A conversation I had this week motivated me to make some observations about the value of staying focused on a vision versus changing strategies at the drop of a hat...or in this case, an analyst recommendation.

Over the years I have had the privilege of studying and working quite closely with some amazing CEOs and equally amazing public companies. They have taught me so much about what makes a great business. No matter the industry and no matter the personality of the Chief Executive, all these companies have something in common: they are all obsessed with their employees, their customers and their vision. And shareholders should be grateful, for they have earned average-beating returns from these companies.

But you’d never see any of that money if you listened to half the analyst community. Sadly, my experience with these companies has taught me something else: how listening to analysts can do  damage to shareholder value.

Proof: Analysts See What They Want To See.

The most obvious case is Enron. It was a company built entirely on the salesmanship of Ken Lay and Jeff Skilling...and not real results...not even many real products. But few, if any, in the analyst community – those the investment banks pay to research the companies they track inside and out – failed to raise any flags. The kept recommending Enron as a strong buy. That said, Enron existed during the dot com boom and it proved to be the largest dot com out there. An empire built on the promise of future earnings. And, like pets.com and so many others, it imploded. So perhaps we’re all to blame for that one.

 

Proof: Analysts Don’t Run Companies Themselves.

In 2003 FORTUNE magazine ran an article comparing Costco to Wal-Mart. When the article was written, Costco’s stock was $33.54 where as Wal-Mart’s was at $53.70. The article reported how analysts “pounded” Costco to trim the company’s generous health benefits and to reduce labor costs. As one Deutsche Bank analyst was quoted, “Costco continues to be a company that is better at serving the club member and employee than the shareholder.” Clearly the highly paid Deutsche Bank analyst has never actually run a company himself and fortunately Costco did not heed his advice...and shareholders should be grateful.

 

As FORTUNE reported back in 2003, Wal-Mart had 70% more stores (Sam’s Club) in the

US

than Costco, but Costco had 77% higher sales per location, 60% higher sales per square foot. Costco’s investment in employees also seemed to pay off. They enjoyed 23% employee turnover per year vs. Wal-Mart’s 45%. And since the introduction of Costco and Sam’s Club in 1983, Costco has had 1 CEO to Wal-Mart’s 7. But the real shareholder value can be seen in the current day numbers. While Wal-Mart battles charges of sexism and racism, locking workers in stores overnight, mistreating immigrant janitors, abusive conditions for Chinese and Bangladeshi workers, paying poverty-level wages in the US, failing to provide adequate affordable health care and more, Costco has enjoyed a scandal free existence. But lest we forget, the analyst was saying that Costco was not worrying about the shareholder. Well, since Nov. 2003, Costco’s stock price is up 49% whereas Wal-Mart is down 8% for the same time period.

Proof: Some Analysts Don’t Do The Job They Are Paid To Do.

 I offer one more example that truly scared me. I worked with a client some years ago, a billion dollar public company and largest player in their category. My client invited me to attend their annual analyst meeting at which most of the analysts would be attending.

I watched presentations by all the C-level executives. They touted all the innovative initiatives in which they were engaged...some of them industry shaping. The analysts were all oohs and ahs. In fact, I would estimate that over 65% of the analysts in the room had no prior knowledge of most of this information. Let me be clear – 65% of a room of people paid to track this industry and this company specifically, the largest player in the category had no prior knowledge of publicly available information, much of which had existed for years. Most of the information was on the company’s website and every one of the executives was available to talk with the analyst community at any time. The company would love to have given tours of their facilities...if anyone asked.

But no one did.

But still, these analysts felt confident to issue buy/sell ratings day after day with, what seemed to be, barely an informed opinion. What were they basing their recommendations on? And what were they studying if they weren’t studying the largest player in the category they were paid to track?

Who to trust?

There are responsible analysts out there, I know that. But I point out these examples just to illustrate that great performance does not come from listening to the analysts. The analysts are not the ones with the vision. The companies and CEOs that are fixated on their employees and customers are the ones that excel in the long run – and I’m talking shareholder value here. And that’s what the analyst community should be reporting on. Or are their bonuses not based on that?

Golden Circle Goes National

As many of you know, I have been traveling the country speaking about and conducting Golden Circle workshops.  The Golden Circle is an incredibly simple idea that gives people, companies or organizations the power to communicate, spoken or written, in a way that biologically is more effective at influencing behavior.

The Golden Circle is just a tool, which means its applications are limited by your own imagination.

The most common application I've seen is marketing and corporate culture (internal communications and employee morale).  But I've seen some of my clients use it for operations, recruiting, to drive innovation and more.

The Golden Circle is currently by companies as small as 1-5 people and as large as AOL.  I've even done workshops with the US Air Force and the US Department of Health and Human Services.

To learn more about the Golden Circle, you can watch a clip of my appearance on MSNBC's highest rated show, Your Business.

And if you haven't seen a show, you should set your DVR and become a regular viewer, it offers lots of great and practical business advice.

Enjoy.

For the Your Business web site:  visit http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13561213/.

The Golden Circle Seminar

I was privileged to speak to some of the brightest entrepreneurs in New York at the monthly meeting of the New York chapter of EO.

As is my style, I don't like to simply lecture - it tends not to be very actionable for those in the audience.  And everyone who knows me knows I prefer action over theory.

The following is the audio file from my workshop with EO NY.  I've edited nothing except for my introduction at the beginning, so you can hear exactly what these companies will do to  enhance their marketing.  Though the companies did many different things - the issues they face are similar to most marketers out there,  big or small.

I showed the group the Golden Circle - a road map to developing communication in a way that directly influences  human decision making and purchase behavior.  In this session we applied the Golden Circle to marketing materials, but it has application in corporate culture, internal communications, product development and even operations.

I'll write more about the Golden Circle soon and how I've been perfecting the model with the world renowned neuroscientist Dr. Peter Whybrow.  The whole idea of the Golden Circle is that it guides a company to communicate based on how our brains receive information, process it and make a decision accordingly.  Fascinating stuff to say the least.

Enjoy.

MP3 File