Management Matters Blog

Does Good Design Matter?

By Mike Myatt, Chief Strategy Officer, N2growth

Let me make my position very clear: Design absolutely matters. Whether it is aesthetic, functional, creative, innovative, intellectual, technical, or concerns process and application; design matters. While I have heard many a professional downplay the value of design, it has been my experience that most business people that espouse this opinion are commenting on something outside of their domain expertise in an attempt to justify a competing agenda or a position of ignorance. While this position may seem a bit harsh, it is nonetheless true. In this week's column I'll examine why design matters.

What do you think when you experience the impact of poor design in your life? Are you likely to adopt a new software application that is poorly designed? When you are handed a business card that was printed at Kinko,s are you impressed? Are you likely to read a piece of collateral material that is poorly designed? If a newly implemented business process has design flaws will employees follow the process or circumvent it? Is poorly designed consumer packaging likely to attract your attention as you walk down the shopping isle? When it's time to purchase your next automobile would you give serious consideration to a poorly designed vehicle? I could go on ad nauseam with similar questions, but my guess is that you get my point…

Now let's examine the flip-side of the coin by looking at the positives associated with strong design. When you think of Apple you immediate think of a company that has built a strong brand around quality design. It started with the Mac, then came the iPod and now we're experiencing the impact of the iPhone. The iPod pioneered innovative design in the mp3 player vertical with great technical design, outstanding functional design and is in a class by itself with regard to aesthetic design. Largely due to the iPod's strong integrated design qualities it is the dominant brand in its class, commands a pricing premium and has developed an extremely loyal and satisfied customer base.

When you are evaluating vendors online and you land on a poorly designed website how long does it take you to click away from the poorly designed site in search of a better option? You can review virtually any industry, sector, vertical or micro-vertical and when you examine the dominant brands you'll find quality design at their core. While there are exceptions to every rule they are few and far between when it comes to design. If you try hard enough you can find an aberration in just about any rule, but it will simply be just that…an aberration.

Nowhere in the business world should design be better understood and more warmly embraced than in the world of real estate. Sadly, I question how often this is actually the case. Just hop in your car, drive down the street, look left and right and you'll be amazed at the poor building designs you see. Look at the floor plans of residential units, or the layouts of subdivisions and you'll quickly see that many developers only pay lip service to design. There is certainly a difference between value engineering and arbitrary cost containment.

The next time you hear someone question an investment into design solely for the purpose of reducing expenditures I would suggest that you think long and hard before doing so, as few things in business produce the return on investment that a reputation for quality design can yield. Great design attributes yield substantial pricing premiums which are often overlooked. Don't look to cut back on design, but to rather improve design to increase returns.

Think about the marketing and advertising campaigns that get your attention, the clothes you wear, the house you live in, where you office, where you shop, the cars you drive, the cell phone you carry or any number of other decisions you make and you'll find that design plays a key role in your decisioning. Design Matters!

If you wish to send a management question to Mr. Myatt, his email address is managementmatters.myatt@cpngroup.com. The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not represent those of CPN.

What Is the Difference between Vision and Mission?

A reader recently asked me if I could define the difference between vision and mission. Over the years I have witnessed many an executive confuse vision and mission to the detriment of their organizations because they simply wouldn't take the time to stop and understand the differences between the two. In this week's column I'll clearly explain the difference between vision and mission.

I developed a simple organizational framework several years ago which defines the order of operations surrounding management theory. It has been widely adopted by business schools and corporations alike and will serve as a useful backdrop to answering today's question. It goes like this: Vision dictates Mission which determines Strategy, which surfaces Goals that frame Objectives, which in turn drives the Tactics that tell an organization what Resources, Infrastructure and Processes are needed to support a certainty of execution. (Mike Myatt, 1988).

You see vision statements are design oriented while mission statements are execution oriented. In fact, it is the corporate vision that should determine its mission. The vision is bigger picture and future oriented while the mission is more immediately focused on the present. It is the vision that defines the end game and the mission is the road map that will take you there.

Vision statements as implied in the construction of the phraseology itself put forth a statement of envisioned future. This vision if successful must be underpinned by core ideology and then expressed with clarity and conviction. A non-existent, ambiguous or ideologically weak corporate vision is nothing short of a recipe for disaster. It would be akin to the proverbial ship without a rudder adrift without any direction or control.

As noted above mission statements should reflect greater focus on more immediate concerns that support the overarching vision. Mission statements tend to be more functional in nature dealing with touch points from pricing, quality, marketplace and other items throughout the value chain.

Lastly, don't get caught up in attempting to develop something catchy to be encapsulated within a piece of framed artwork that hangs in your reception area yet never put into practice. It is much more important that your vision and mission be understood by company employees and translated into the resultant authenticity of their actions. Your customers don’t care what you put on paper, but they care immensely about whether or not a company's vision and mission are reflected in a fulfilled brand promise.

If you wish to send a management question to Mr. Myatt, his email address is managementmatters.myatt@cpngroup.com. The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not represent those of CPN

Is an Org Chart an Asset or a Waste of Time?

By Mike Myatt, Chief Strategy Officer, N2growth

Over the years I've seen every type of 'org' chart in existence. Some have come and gone only to come again. Every year or two the latest revolutionary thinking in corporate organizational theory spawns a new form of charting. The dynamics of corporate organization are so revered by B-school professors and management consultants that an entire generation of corporate management has drunk the "org" chart Kool-Aid.  These managers often rush to adopt the latest thinking without any consideration for whether or not the new form of structure is even appropriate for their business. So powerful is this dynamic that entire companies and numerous products have been built to support these latest trends. In the time it has taken to author this week's column it wouldn't surprise me if Visio had a new product release (Okay, I’m stretching a bit).

So, is an 'org' chart a corporate asset or a waste of time? The answer depends on the purpose behind its creation, the process used to create it and the corporate purpose for the existence of the chart post creation. The following list contains my top 10 reasons not to create an organizational chart:

1. To give the CEO an opportunity to view his name at the top;

2. Because you need to beef up your management presentation and you have room for an extra PowerPoint slide;

3. Your management consultant told you to create one;

4. The business planning software you purchased has a template for one;

5. Your CFO just read a new article on corporate organizational theory;

6. You just attended an off-site where someone drew an off-the-cuff chart on a dry erase board and it looked good;

7. When reviewing your competitor’s website you noticed they had one and your website needed updating anyway;

8. There wasn’t anything better for the intern to do;

9. Someone got a promotion, and;

10.  It just seems like you should have one.

Putting the satire aside, a business should in fact have an organization chart. A sincerely motivated, properly constructed and actively implemented organizational chart can in fact help refine the operational aspects of any business. The development of an org chart should be a serious initiative born out of solid underlying business logic, process and methodology.  Culture and environment are considerations that are often times completely ignored in the design of and 'org' chart while perhaps representing the most critical architectural elements.

The most common mistake made by corporate management is that the organization chart is created way too early in the process before business rules and logic are aligned. Much like the order of operation principles that apply to an algebraic formula, if you get the sequencing wrong you can’t solve the problem.  An 'org' chart is not where you start the process, but is rather the culmination of many processes helping to insure a certainty of execution and clarity of direction by creating a roadmap to be followed.

There's an old joke in business circles that says 'every company has two 'org' charts…the one that's put into graphical form and incorporated in the business plan and the one that never gets published but is actually representative of how things really work.' The process of corporate organization is most succinctly and easily understood by using the following order of operation: Vision dictates mission, which determines strategy, which identifies goals, which creates objectives, which defines tactics, which in turn sets process. The 'org' chart should enter the organizational construction cycle as deep into the cycle as possible to avoid the joke that led off this paragraph. By not creating your organizational paradigm to soon there is a clear picture of who, what, when, where, why and how. It is only at this stage that you can properly align expectations, with process, culture and environment. It is then and only then, that you should address the need for, and deployment of, your human capital assets.

The bottom line is that I have observed all types of organizational structures (in vogue, antiquated and otherwise) succeed and I have also seen them fail. It is not the 'type' or the 'style' of chart used that works or doesn't, rather it is the process of design that was used in creating the 'org' chart that will determine its usefulness, functionality and adoption.

If you wish to send a management question to Mr. Myatt, his email address is managementmatters.myatt@cpngroup.com. The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not represent those of CPN.

 

Management Matters by Mike Myatt: Should You Play to Strengths or Shore Up Weaknesses?

By Mike Myatt, Chief Strategy Officer, N2growth

Should you play to your strengths or shore-up your weaknesses? If you pose this question to a group of professionals some will answer play to your strengths, some will answer shore-up weaknesses and others will answer both.

The truth is that they are all correct to a degree. The real answer lies in understanding context, environment and priority. Continued professional growth leading to increased performance over time is what separates the good from the great.Rapidly evolving marketsdemand that successfulbusiness peoplehave afluidity in their approach to professional development.

However, many executives and entrepreneurs focus on the wrong areas, at the wrong times and for the wrong reasons in their efforts to refine and improve their skill sets.In this week's column I'll share insights on how to prioritize your professional development efforts.

Focus needs to be applied to areas that can have the greatest impact on your performance. It is nothing short of foolishness to waste time, energy or capital on improving weaknesses that don’t matter. Unless a weakness createsa barrier between you and the completion of your mission, or impedes you from utilizing your strengths it is not really a weakness that needs to be addressed.

As an example, if you are a CEO with poor interpersonal communication skills that prohibit you from being able toarticulately and persuasivelysell the corporate vision, you should immediately go to work on improving your communication. By way of contrast, if you're a CEO who has poor administrative skills, who cares? It is likely that as CEO you have unfettered access to administrative support to which you can delegate activities that are not highest and best use to begin with, so why worry about how fast you keyboard or work the scanner?

It is critical that you understandit takes much more dedication, determination and energy to go frompoor to mediocre thanit does to move from good to great.It is also important to check your motivation and interest level in determining which areas you desire to improve upon. If you’re not passionate about something itisdifficult to be motivated and without motivation it is virtually impossible to maintain any interest.As a busy executiveor entrepreneur you only have so much time in a day so don't waste it on areas thatdo not add value or create leverage.

Those of you who are familiarwith my philosophy understand the importance offocus. Howeveras important as focus is, of equal or greater importance is what you chooseto focus on.As mentioned above focus needs to be brought to bear on issues that stand between where you are and where you want to go.Understanding how to identify barriers is mission critical to your ability to succeed in business. Barriers are best identified as things that can be removed though acquiring knowledge through training, continuing education, self-learning, and such; by improving skills with training, practice, focus; and by gaining experience by broadening roles, having more tenure, being mentored, etc.

Bottom line, then, is that focused professional development requires:

1) Motivation to improve

2) the ability toidentifybarriers

3)determining the proper method of removing the barrierby improving skill sets, acquiring knowledge or gaining experience

4)Conducting a cost/benefit and risk/reward assessment to determine whether the barrier needs to be addressed immediately, over the mid-range or thelong-term.

If you wish to send a management question to Mr. Myatt, his email address is managementmatters.myatt@cpngroup.com. The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not represent those of CPN.

Should you play to your strengths or shore-up your weaknesses? If you pose this question to a group of professionals some will answer play to your strengths, some will answer shore-up weaknesses and others will answer both.

The truth is that they are all correct to a degree. The real answer lies in understanding context, environment and priority. Continued professional growth leading to increased performance over time is what separates the good from the great.Rapidly evolving marketsdemand that successfulbusiness peoplehave afluidity in their approach to professional development.

However, many executives and entrepreneurs focus on the wrong areas, at the wrong times and for the wrong reasons in their efforts to refine and improve their skill sets.In this week's column I'll share insights on how to prioritize your professional development efforts.

Focus needs to be applied to areas that can have the greatest impact on your performance. It is nothing short of foolishness to waste time, energy or capital on improving weaknesses that don’t matter. Unless a weakness createsa barrier between you and the completion of your mission, or impedes you from utilizing your strengths it is not really a weakness that needs to be addressed.

As an example, if you are a CEO with poor interpersonal communication skills that prohibit you from being able toarticulately and persuasivelysell the corporate vision, you should immediately go to work on improving your communication. By way of contrast, if you're a CEO who has poor administrative skills, who cares? It is likely that as CEO you have unfettered access to administrative support to which you can delegate activities that are not highest and best use to begin with, so why worry about how fast you keyboard or work the scanner?

It is critical that you understandit takes much more dedication, determination and energy to go frompoor to mediocre thanit does to move from good to great.It is also important to check your motivation and interest level in determining which areas you desire to improve upon. If you’re not passionate about something itisdifficult to be motivated and without motivation it is virtually impossible to maintain any interest.As a busy executiveor entrepreneur you only have so much time in a day so don't waste it on areas thatdo not add value or create leverage.

Those of you who are familiarwith my philosophy understand the importance offocus. Howeveras important as focus is, of equal or greater importance is what you chooseto focus on.As mentioned above focus needs to be brought to bear on issues that stand between where you are and where you want to go.Understanding how to identify barriers is mission critical to your ability to succeed in business. Barriers are best identified as things that can be removed though acquiring knowledge through training, continuing education, self-learning, and such; by improving skills with training, practice, focus; and by gaining experience by broadening roles, having more tenure, being mentored, etc.

Bottom line, then, is that focused professional development requires:

1) Motivation to improve

2) the ability toidentifybarriers

3)determining the proper method of removing the barrierby improving skill sets, acquiring knowledge or gaining experience

4)Conducting a cost/benefit and risk/reward assessment to determine whether the barrier needs to be addressed immediately, over the mid-range or thelong-term.

If you wish to send a management question to Mr. Myatt, his email address is managementmatters.myatt@cpngroup.com. The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not represent those of CPN.