Re:Focus

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?

The Best Thing You Can Have Is Bad Intelligence

During the Cold War, America would fly spy planes over the Soviet Union to count how many bombers they had. Knowing exactly what the Americans were doing, the Soviets laid out hundreds of fake, wooden bombers to trick the Americans into thinking that they had a much bigger capability than they actually did.  The problem was, America believed its own intelligence and built real bombers to counter the perceived Soviet threat. 

It wasn't until after the fall of the Berlin Wall did we learn that, if we ever had gone to war with the Soviet Union, we would have annihilated them because our resources vastly outnumbered theirs.  This massive unfair advantage would not have happened if it weren't for the good fortune of some bad intelligence. 

Believing that your competition is stronger and better than you will pushes you to better yourselves. Whether real or perceived, believing you have a disadvantage forces you to find new and clever ways to compete. It's always the organizations that are resourced constrained that come up with the good ideas to win.

You can save money on competitive analyses by simply pretending that whatever your competition is doing, they are doing it better than you. This works no matter if you're the leader or the challenger.  Instead of constantly trying to compare what you're doing to others, focus instead on constantly trying to improve yourself and the way you do things. You should believe, true or not, that there is always someone lurking on the horizon waiting to take advantage of you.

The greatest threat any organization can face is not its competition but its own success. With great success comes complacency - the false belief that you are the best and that you don't have to worry. The problem is, you'll only realize it's a false belief when someone else catches you by surprise. This pattern is repeated over and over and over. Wal-Mart, Microsoft and General Motors all believed that they were unbeatable...until a company who believed they were not as strong found a better way to compete with the 800lb gorilla.

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.

The Difference Between Direction and Directions

There is a difference between giving directions and giving direction.

Direction is the far-away destination to which you are heading and directions are the route you will take to get to get there.

As leaders and managers, we often forget the distinction.  When we want to tell someone to do something, we give them directions when we should be giving them direction. Great leaders do not get involved in the details of what route is taken, they focus on ensuring everyone is clear of the destination.

Once established, a leader needn't obsesses about the short-term gains or losses, but rather the long-term trend.  If a submarine commander, for example, says head north, he doesn't focus on the frequent course corrections, he just wants to feel confident that his ship is heading due north.  The same is true for any company or organization.

Any leader who spends too much time worrying about the directions instead of the direction risks destroying any morale, creativity and commitment they may have gained.  Worse, while looking down, they will miss what's far ahead.

Directions are instructions given to explain how. Direction is a vision offered to explain why.

Directions are given by teachers, of which there can be many. It is for you to decide which directions suit you best.

Direction is set by a leader, of which there can be only one. It is for you to decide if you want to go on the journey or not.

Direction must always come before directions otherwise how will people know where they are going?

The next time someone asks you "what do you want me to do?" Don't answer their question.  Don't give them directions.  Point and offer them the direction you want to go in and let them figure out the rest. That's what all the great leaders do.

Do You Know Why?

  Why are some people and organizations more innovative, more influential, and more profitable than others? Why do some command greater loyalty from customers and employees alike? Even among the successful, why are so few able to repeat their successes over and over?

 People like Martin Luther King Jr., Steve Jobs, and the Wright Brothers might have little in common, but they all started with why. Their natural ability to start with why enabled them to inspire those around them and to achieve remarkable things.

 Three and a half years ago I made a discovery. I discovered that all the most inspiring and successful leaders, regardless if they are individuals or organizations, regardless of their size or industry, all think, act, and communicate in the exact same way—and it’s the complete opposite of what everyone else does. I called this powerful idea The Golden Circle, and it provides a framework upon which organizations can be built, movements can be led, and people can be inspired. And it all starts with WHY.

Any organization can explain what it does; some can explain how they do it; but very few can clearly articulate why. WHY is not money or profit—those are always results. Why does your organization exist? Why does it do the things it does? Why do customers really buy from one company or another? Why are people loyal to some leaders, but not others?

Start With Why is a book for those who want to learn to inspire others and for those who want to find someone to inspire them.  Start with Why is available now at your favorite book seller.

Special Promotion: Buy two copies, give one away and we can inspire even more people...

TED Talk - Simon Speaking at a TEDx Conference in Seattle

We make assumptions about the world.  More importantly, our behaviors are often governed by those assumptions. But what if our assumptions are incomplete or wrong? This doesn't necessarily only apply to things when they go wrong...what about when they go right? Do you know why things go right? Most people would say yes - but then why is it so hard to repeat great success?  If we know why Apple is so innovative, for example, why can't anyone else do it? Don't you want to know WHY?

This is what I talked about when I had the honor of speaking at a TEDx event in Seattle this year. It was such a privilege to share the stage with some remarkable and inspiring people. Ed Visteurs, the only American to scale the 14 highest peaks in the world without oxygen, and Erik Lindbergh, Charles Lindbergh's grandson and an amazing human being in his own right, to name but two. (Click here for other TEDx talks).

The vision is that everyone knows WHY. To learn more about why you do what you do, check out Simon's new book, Start With Why. If you order a copy, order two and give one away to someone you want to inspire. The goal is to share the WHY with as many people as possible.

How Did That Idiot Get To Be My Boss?

As anyone who has every held a job can attest, at some point in ones career you will work for someone who clearly has less talent or ability than you do. On a regular basis you’ll ask yourself, “how is THAT guy my boss?” The answer has less to do with the poor sod who was promoted above you and more to do with how we view talent and reward performance in an organization.

The biggest problem is that companies often promote someone who is good at their job to being a manager. But doing the job well and managing others to do it well are not the same thing. In fact, they are completely different skill sets. A great salesman is just that, a great salesman. But a great salesman does not necessarily make a great sales manager. But very often, the top-performing salesman is promoted to sales manager not because he’s necessarily qualified, but because he did well at his other job. And it gets worse. Not only are we promoting people into the wrong jobs, we’re not even training them once they get there. I can guarantee that top-performing salesman was given tons of training to be a salesman. He probably even shadowed more seasoned veterans to learn the ropes. After he became sales manager, however, his training likely stopped. And he almost certainly never shadowed more seasoned sales managers to learn the ropes.

click picture to buy the t-shirt

When people are in middle management and below, we train the heck out of them. That’s because they are doers so, logically, companies train them so they can be good at their jobs. With all that training, they prove themselves and earn promotions. But then the amount of training plummets.

As people get more senior, they move from being doers to being thinkers and managers, but most companies don’t train people how to manage or think. If you make widgets – there is a training on how to make the best widget. Get promoted, and you’re left to figure things out by yourself. There are painfully few companies that train their managers how to manage or think strategically.

Being good at your job does not equip you to manage others, nor does being smart. Two men in recent history widely regarded to be some of smartest to become US Presidents were Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter. Nixon’s intellect, in fact, was said to be astounding. Yet neither of them had particularly remarkable presidencies. Smarts do not necessarily equate to leadership.

Leadership is a skill set that does not always mean you’re good at the job itself. Tommy Lasorda, the famed LA Dodgers manager was hailed as one of the great all time baseball managers. His own baseball career, however, was short and not so sweet. In contrast, Isiah Thomas was one of the great basketball players in the ‘80s. He eventually joined the management of the New York Knicks and he was an abysmal failure.

When someone got promoted because they were very good at doing a job, they feel they can do it better than those who now work for them (and maybe the can). The temptation to micromanage or to tell people to do it their way can be overwhelming. Sometimes their intentions may be good, they may be trying to teach, but other times they simply miss being in the trenches and yearn to get back in. Either way, it manifests as poor management. And poor management is to blame for a lot of the ills our economy is facing now. It's not that bad things were being done at the lower levels, it's that the people weren't managing properly.

Great managers, in contrast, are able to coach others to maximize their own potential and work to their own strengths. They give out responsibility instead of tasks and allow people to make mistakes. Great managers may even have an advantage if they are not good at the tasks themselves because it forces them to step back and rely on those around them. And most importantly, great managers are always aware of the big picture and the long-term strategy.  That, afterall, is their job.

American organizations need to change two things if our management is to become as skilled as our workforce.

1: Companies need to get better at assessing people’s skills before we simply reward good performance or big brains with promotions. The higher someone gets in a company, the better they are supposed to be at managing down. Instead, the Peter Principle rules – where we promote people to their highest level of incompetence.

2: If companies ignore this first requirement, then there is even more pressure to provide more training to people as they are promoted up the ranks. We teach technicians what to do, but we need to teach leaders how to lead. Management and leadership, like any skill, require learning and practice.

So the next time you get a promotion for a job well-done, ask for some training as you enter your new job before you find yourself as the idiot that people can’t believe they are working for.

Is your company doing any effective management or leadership training your company is doing? Please let me know in the comments.

Originally published on The Huffington Post

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.

It's Better To Be Given Than To Take

You arrive at a meeting but you forgot to bring a pen.  It's not the worst thing that could have happened, but it may be a little embarrassing. You get a break, however, the person with whom you are meeting excuses himself for a minute and leaves the room. There is a cup of pens on his desk, so you help yourself to one of them. They are not expensive pens, just your run-of-the-mill disposable pens that he probably picked up from the supply cabinet. You know it's not a big deal, it's not really stealing, he won't miss it.  You just need a pen.

The gentleman with whom you are meeting returns and sits back down at his desk and the meeting commences.  And there you are, with your pen, ready for the meeting.

But there's a problem.  The pen's not yours.  You took it. You're using it.  But it doesn't belong to you. Even though you know it's not a big deal, you KNOW it's not yours.  One of three things will likely happen:

1. Fearing that he will notice that you took his pen and say something that could create an awkward situation,  you take notes on your lap to keep the pen out of sight.
2. You take notes as normal, but you still hope that he doesn't say anything for fear of being caught.
3. You say something as soon as he arrives back. Something like, "I hope you don't mind, I took one of your pens." To which he will likely reply, "no problem, let me know if you need anything else."  Your guilt relieved, the meeting can continue in a more productive manner.

There is a difference between being given something and taking it.  When we take things, even if the item being taken is of no consequence, we know it does not belong to us.  Even if you left with the pen, you know it is still not your pen.  But if something is given to you, then that thing becomes yours.  You earned it and it creates the feeling of belonging.

The same is true for things bigger than pens. When we push others a side for a  job or to get recognition, we took the recognition, we weren't given it.  Even if we did the work required for it, the fact remains, we still took it. This creates the feeling of fear that others will know.  We may become a little defensive when others challenge us.  Worse, the fear of being caught may become the motivation for how we act moving forward. We've all worked for people like this. They may have achieved something but it's no fun for the rest of us

However, when we focus on the work at hand and not on the reward and are given a promotion or bonus as a reward, as a symbol of gratitude, then that bonus belongs to us.  We earned it.  We are less bothered if someone challenges us because we know that the bonus belongs to us.  After all, it was given and we didn't just take it. 

When we fixate on the reward, we will stop at nothing to get it.  But that reward will never really belong to us.  We just took it.  However, when we fixate on the reason we come to work, if we fixate on simply being the best at what we do, we do not set out to best anyone else but ourselves. Fear, as a motivator, declines and confidence goes up. We are better able to take joy in the success of others and feel vastly more fulfilled when we are given something. 

This dynamic exists in almost every situation where we can "get" something.  We can take clients by beating our competitor's price, for example, or we can be given the business because the client feels more confident working with us regardless of the price.  In both cases we get the bonus, the promotion, the job or the business, but in only one case does it belong to us.

By the way, I noticed you don't have a pen...please, take mine.

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.

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.

Write The Perfect Want Ad

Writing the perfect want ad has a structure and  it follows The Golden Circle.  Why - How - What. 

First I asked rhetorical questions trying to connect my Why with the Why of those reading the ad.  My Why is to inspire people to do the things that inspire them so that, together, we can change the world. Anyone who doesn't want to change the world and who doesn't believe in the power of inspiration won't like working for me.  The title of my ad alone will appeal to those who do.

With a quick nod to what the job is, I explain exactly what it's like to work for me.  I'm honest about myself because I don't want any surprises and I don't want whoever gets the job to get something they weren't expecting either. 

How I wrote the ad automatically screened out most of the "bad fits," so I wasn't overwhelmed with responses.  And for the bad fits who did reply, it was easy for me to screen them out myself.  Most importantly, the ad appealed to the "good fits," and all the candidates I met were amazing.  I ended up hiring someone in less than a week she is fantastic.

Remember - there's no difference between customers or employees - people will either believe in what you believe and want to buy your products or they will believe in what you believe and want to work for you.  That they are a customer or an employee is merely a behavioral difference.   Either way, how you write your ad matters.

Good luck and feel free to email if you have any more questions.

Here is the actual ad I posted on Craig's list to hire a new personal assistant.

Do you believe you can change the world?

Do you believe the world needs a little more inspiration in it these days?

Do you want to help make the world a better place?

If so – I might want to meet you.

I’m looking for a personal assistant to help me on my quest. Everyday I wake up to find ways to inspire people to do the things that inspire them. I teach leaders and companies how to inspire people. I speak about it and write about it. But I can’t do it alone – I’m an organizational disaster – so I need help so that I can be as efficient and effective as possible.

There is no office, so you’ll be working virtually most of the time. You’ll have lots of flexibility and freedom with your schedule, so you can do other things – but I am not interested in someone who is a personal assistant to other people.

I travel a lot which means there is lots of scheduling that needs to get done – so you should be a super organized person.

And, as my personal assistant, I might ask for you to help with some personal errands too.

In a nutshell – I need a right-hand man (or woman)...I need a babysitter...I need someone who will help keep me organized and work with me to make this world a better place.

Can you help?

If you’re interested, drop me a note – tell me a little about you and we can set up some time to talk more.

Whoever will help me, I guarantee will help make this world a better place.

Thanks.

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.