Monday, August 28, 2006

"Play Nice: Creating the Collaborative Firm" -- new free seminar

"The One-Firm Firm", last week's free seminar in my Business Masterclass series, explored how businesses can achieve distinctive competitive advantage by achieving company-wide collaboration.

In this week's seminar "Play Nice: Creating the Collaborative Firm" (downloadable at no cost), I follow up with a more fine-grained examination of tactics for achieving collaboration.

The seminar explores the questions:

How do you make company-wide collaboration happen in all types of companies? What are the specific tactics that get people in multiple disciplines, industries and offices to work for the good of the firm?

This seminar is based on my article, "Managing the Professional Service Firm", and explores:

  • The Principles of collaboration
  • The 16 Top-tier tactics to promote collaboration (in order of effectiveness)
  • The incremental approach to increasing cooperation

You can listen to this week's seminar with the player shown just above, or download this episode directly to your computer. You can also receive new seminars automatically every week by subscribing to my Business Masterclass series with iTunes (or other podcast players). (Click here for step-by-step instructions on how to subscribe.)

The ideas in this seminar were further explored in these previous conversations on my blog:

Would you agree with the priorities I have given to the most effective tactics? Do you have an explanation as to why companies tend to use the least effective tactics first?

Monday, August 21, 2006

"The One-Firm Firm" -- new free seminar

This week's strategy podcast seminar, "One-Firm Firm" (downloadable at no cost), is based on an article I wrote Managing the Professional Service Firm.

Back then, I asked the question, "What do Goldman Sachs, McKinsey, (Accenture), Latham & Watkins and Hewitt Associates and other prominent professional businesses have in common?" (I referred to Accenture by the name of its predecessor firm.)

Besides being among the most profitable firms (if not the most profitable) in their respective professions?

And besides being considered by their peers among the best managed firms in their respective professions?

The answer I gave back then:

A commitment to a model of professional business management which stresses teamwork, collaboration and institutional loyalty, which I term the "one-firm firm" system.

This seminar is one of the very few I have written where I talk about specific firms by name. After all this time, I still feel that I chose the correct firms to discuss.

I am in the process of writing an update for this article, which will appear later this year. But since I think that the lessons still apply (and because these firms are still hugely successful) I decided to make a podcast seminar out of the original article, changing very little.

The seminar includes:

  • An analysis of what makes "one-firm firms" great
  • How the best firms generate loyalty and a sense of mission
  • The "open secrets" of great firms' strategy on hiring, mergers, compensation, and more
You can listen to this episode with the player above, you can download "The One-Firm Firm" here, or sign up to receive new seminars automatically every week by subscribing to my Business Masterclass series with iTunes or other podcast players. (Click here for step-by-step instructions on how to subscribe.)

The podcast draws from ideas I discuss in these 3 previous conversations on my blog:

  • What does it take to be truly great?
  • Can the good guys win?
  • Goldman's Secret

I also highly recommend "The Lessons of Andersen" by Brian Sommers -- presenting an ex-Andersen perspective on the Enron convictions.

What does your experience say?

Does the evidence really match my conclusion that the loyalty-based, real team-play organisations actually ARE triumphing over the decentralised, profit-centred, internally competitive and entrepreneurial organisations?

And if the "one-firm firms" truly are winning, why isn't their "one-for-all, all-for-one" approach more common?

Monday, August 14, 2006

"Values in Action" -- new free seminar

This week's new (free, downloadable) strategy seminar, "Values in Action," asks the question, "Why don't most firms actually live up to the standards and values espoused in their mission statements?"

The answer? Values are what not what you aspire to, but what you are prepared to enforce with consequences for non-compliance. It's one thing to say you believe in something; it's another to be willing to be held accountable.

It takes courage to actually live by the values that you say you believe in. More than the right choice of products, services and markets, strategic success is about living up to your values.

The seminar includes:

  • The right way to handle a "rogue elephant" who won't play by the rules
  • The missing business element: managerial courage
  • Two effective ways to enforce organisation values for long-term success

This episode was based on an article, True Professionalism: The courage to care about your clients, your people and your career. The article is a call to arms, to find the strength and courage to do what we know to be right. The article's lesson is clear: act like a true professional, aiming for true excellence, and the money will follow.

The podcast also draws from ideas I discuss in these 3 articles:
  • Why Happy Staff Are The Key to Success
  • The Only Competitive Advantage in Professional Services
  • Culture Drives Performance: Now There’s Proof

and in these 3 previous conversations on my blog:

How vigorously do you "enforce" your values? Do your people think you live up to them?

Tuesday, August 8, 2006

New Strategy Podcast Episode: "Strategy Means Saying No"

This week's podcast episode, the fourth in my 14-part series on strategy, is entitled "Strategy Means Saying No."

Based on my article of the same name, it points out that most businesses in an industry end up looking the same because they offer the same services to the same key clients, and stress the same client benefits.

They do so because they don't have the courage to accomplish a true differentiation by saying no to off-strategy work.

The podcast includes a discussion of:

  • The key to strategic distinction: the courage to turn away business.
  • Why saying No is hard -- and how to get past the excuses
  • The sincere leader's challenge: convince people you really want change

You can listen to this week's seminar with the player just above this paragraph or download this episode. You can also subscribe to the podcast at my podcast page, or with iTunes, Yahoo! Podcasts or Podcast Alley.

The podcast also draws from ideas I discuss in these 3 previous conversations on my blog:

Have you ever had the experience of working with a leader who had the courage to say no? Do you have any insight to offer as to how an individual OR an organisation finds the "courage to stay the course?"

Tuesday, August 1, 2006

An Entrepreneurial Journey

In early 2002, Geoff Considine resigned from the job he had held for two years:  VP for Advanced Solutions, a firm that provided software and related professional services to the energy industry.  He had previously worked on a trading floor developing and deploying software for trading energy derivatives.  Before that, he had worked for six years for NASA as a research scientist.

Having been trained as a scientist, the transition to the private sector required many major adjustments.  Learning the derivatives trading business had involved lots of new technical knowledge, but learning professional services required an entirely different set of skills.

Some of the most important things that he learned at this job were:

  1. There is a pervasive attitude regarding the primacy of the billed hour;
  2. Good behaviour is often secondary to billing as far as management is concerned;
  3. Clients love a highly responsive services provider; and
  4. Smart people do not necessarily make good consultants.

He was surprised (somewhat naively) by the short view towards maximising billed hours at all costs when firms entered professional services.  His boss at the time pushed him to bill as many hours as he possibly could.

Senior management sometimes rewarded billed hours at the expense of a healthy culture.  This was ultimately at the expense of longevity and health of the group.  This approach also led to the decline of client relationships over periods of years.

On the good side, he learned that clients love a highly responsive consultant.  He started to think about the responsibility of providing people with a high level of personal service (as well as smart solutions) as the ''concierge element'' of his job.

In March of 2002, he decided to leave his job.  The company had 60 or so employees at the time, some very sophisticated software products, and some very smart and dedicated senior people.  There was, however, considerable tension among the heads of the various practices, and Geoff was also stressed out beyond belief.  It seemed as though something needed to give.

He was approached by another firm in the same space.  During this same period, however, several clients that he had worked with contacted him and asked if he was available to work with them in some new capacity.  He had not contacted any of these client firms to tell them that he was leaving, so they really had to do some work to track him down.

This was compounded by the fact that someone at his previous employer had instructed the receptionist who answered the main phone to tell anyone who called that they did not know how to contact him.  He wondered if this was standard business practice.

The long and short of his new situation was that he suddenly had three projects available and a job offer.  Geoff decided to start his own practice (www.quantext.com).

During this period, Geoff ran across my Managing the Professional Services Firm.  This article was something of a revelation.  Further, I responded to emails and even sent a draft of some of my unpublished work.  What Geoff realised as he read my work was that there are certain common themes that run through much of the professional services world, and many of these resonated deeply for him.

The most important idea that Geoff gained in his first year was this:  ''You are there to help, not to be right.''

This single ''Woodism'' is one of the core ideas that Geoff repeats often to himself and when discussing professional services with others.  People hire consultants because they want help with some issue.  You don't need to prove that you are smart -- that is determined when they hire you.

One of the other key themes that Geoff learned from me is the importance of setting billing rates.  As a solo startup, it is tempting to price your services low.  You know that you can make a good living even at low rates because you have low overhead compared to a big firm.

My writing convinced him that this was a bad idea.  Further, because Geoff wanted to leave the door open to joining another firm at some future point, low billing rates would have made him less attractive.

The bottom line is that you have to decide whether you are selling Mercedes or Chevrolet and your price point communicates that.  Geoff chose a path in which he invested a lot of time in developing valuable and unique products and services and was compensated for this investment via keeping billing rates fairly high.  He has not regretted this approach.

My emphasis on always building new expertise and value to share with clients rather than simply selling an existing theme to death matched Geoff's inclination.  The shelf life of intellectual property is relatively short, and is getting shorter.

Trust is always a big theme in my work, and Geoff feels that this is one of the most important issues that I emphasise.  If you make a big sale but lose credibility as a person or as a professional, it will not be worth it in the long run.

Sadly, overselling is pervasive and many a client of consulting firms ended up with sub-par solutions in the last decade.  When Geoff was learning this business, he was told repeatedly that delivering and deploying software that had been not fully tested was simply a standard in Silicon Valley and that everyone understood this.

There are many pressures to get the widgets out the door -- especially in software -- but the basic rule that Geoff advocates is not to ship a software product in a condition that you would not want to be using yourself.  Think of software that goes out the door as having your name on it.

Similarly, he saw many cases where a client was told that a sophisticated analytical model would be used on their project when in fact the model was very simplistic.  While these may be common cases, they often lead to bad outcomes and bad feelings.  Common practice does not make this the right thing to do.

In Geoff's work, he has come to believe that there are three ways to do business.  There are people who are unscrupulous -- class 3.  These people will do whatever they can get away with.  If you sign a contract with these people and they think you won't sue them if they break it, they will break the contract as soon as it is to their benefit.

Many people think of this as shrewd business.  We think of it as wrong.  Don't do business with people you don't trust.  It is not worth the stress.

Next, we have class 2:  people who feel that anything is okay as long as it does not break the terms of a contract or the law.  These people feel that it is good business to push the boundaries of what they can get away with -- as if it is a game.

These are the types of people who will slip ''clever'' language and clauses into contracts to try to gain advantage.  There is nothing unethical about this, but clearly this type of behaviour does not build trust.  You can deal with these people, but read the contracts carefully!

Finally, there is class 1:  people who do business as they want to be treated.  These are people that you trust and will work with again and again.  In both Geoff's and my opinions, life is too short to choose a class other than class 1.

There are plenty of class 1 business people and everyone can probably identify these people.  Class 1 people inspire trust.  No matter how you were managed when you joined the business, the trick is make your own choice about the kind of professional, manager and entrepreneur you want to be.  For Geoff and for me, it's first class all the way.

As Geoff looks back, he finds that all of this common sense is not too common but it certainly has all been reinforced time and time again.  The demands for high quality professional services are such that Geoff feels these are the most important guidelines that he has learned -- often inspired by my work:

  1. Be worthy of trust.
  2. Everyone knows that you are smart -- don't try to prove it.
  3. You are there to help, not to be right.
  4. Be a concierge -- if it needs doing, do it.
  5. Know your business.  Are you selling Chevy or Mercedes?
  6. Develop services and products that are worth paying a premium price for.
  7. Think in terms of relationships developing over many years.
  8. Do business as if you were working with a good friend -- Class 1.

Geoff's firm, Quantext, has now been in business for more than four years.  Geoff's favourite thing about starting Quantext has been building a business around this philosophy -- although being able to ski 25 days a year has not been bad either.