I2I - Incentive Intelligence

Updates and Changes – New Date for Blogtalkradio Episode and New HR Examiner Article

Believe it or not I have a personal life and sometimes it actually takes precedence over my work here on the interwebs and with clients.  Today is one of those days.

I’ll be on the road traveling and won’t be able to be in front of a microphone for the scheduled blogtalkradio show “Influence Insider” with guest Sean Geehan, CEO/President/Founder of Geehan Group and soon to be published author.  The show has been rescheduled for September 15, 2010 at Noon EDT – I hope you can adjust your calendars and tune in.  Sean will be addressing what I think – as does he – the much overlooked ways we influence B2B channels.  I was really looking forward to the conversation but we’ll have to just give it a couple of weeks.

In the meantime…

But don’t fret – there is something for you to do today at noon.  You can jump over to the HR Examiner website and read my recent contribution – “Maintaining Human Machines.”

A taste of the article…

The industrial revolution elevated the machine over the “man.” The process, and the machines that chugged away within it, created the value for the company. People were extensions to the machine – the tail to the dog.

Value = People

But that changed about 20 years ago. Humans are now the nexus of value at almost every company. But most companies still manage their business and their people like Henry Ford did over 100 years ago.

That is the disconnect.

In the past HR was required to manage “human” resources in order to make the machines and the processes more cost effective.

The key today, and in the future, is to understand how to maintain and get the most out of humans in order to drive business results.

So – until I get back in front of the golden I2I microphone (or I find another bad incentive theory/practice to keep you from implementing) think about how you would approach human machines and ask - how you would write a maintenance manual for your people? 

The Goldilocks Incentive Program?

Incentives – especially sales program incentives – typically have a defined time frame, a defined award per “x” (“x” being a unit, dollar or something else over a goal) and a defined audience.  In other words… programs are “defined.”  

The traditional thinking is that you need to tell people what they need to do and then give them a reason to do it (assuming they are competent at doing it.)  Makes sense.  You can’t expect someone to hit a goal if they don’t know what it is.  And you can’t expect anyone to put out extra effort if there isn’t a little ‘sumptin, sumptin’ in it for the audience.  

The Expectancy Theory of Motivation is totally based on the fact that people will be motivated when they believe that putting in more effort will yield better job performance and better job performance will lead to organizational rewards, such as an increase in salary or benefits and these predicted organizational rewards are valued by the employee in question.

In other words – motivation (in this theory at least) is about knowing, and believing in, future outcomes.

That’s traditional.  And it usually works.

Parking In San Francisco

Last week I saw this article about how the city of San Francisco is experimenting with “Goldilocks” pricing to determine the appropriate price for a parking spot in the city.

The goal of experiment is to find the price point that allows the city keep the metered spaces and city parking lots almost full.  The price needs to be cheap to entice users, but not so cheap that spaces are entirely full, leaving drivers frustrated and adding to congestion as cars circle endlessly looking for a place to park.  Sophisticated electronics will monitor, in real-time, the parking spot utilization.  There will be electronic signs and web updates to help potential “parkers” determine if there are spaces and at what price.  Pricing will range from 25 cents an hour to $6 an hour.

Conceptually, when there are lots of empty spaces, it will be cheap to park. When spaces are hard to find, rates will be higher.  In other words – they are influencing the behavior of “parkers” through a variable, real-time, market-driven, pricing structure.

Just Right Incentives

My first thought was this could be a way to influence sales behavior and/or employee behaviors.  A company could, with sophisticated enough tracking, be able to  know what customers are buying, what the competition is selling and everything in between. Based on that information, they could create a variable incentive payout that adjusts at pre-determined times to drive behavior in one way or another.

Product “A” is selling like hotcakes but delivery times are extending because of production backlogs?  Bump up the incentive for product “B” and shift selling behavior.  Competition puts a push on our existing customers – ramp up incentives for connecting with customers and making sure your current customers don’t take the bait and switch.  

There is a part of me that likes the elegance of this idea.

A constantly adjusting program to drive behavior based on real-time, real-life data.  Sounds perfect.

Then reality sets in and I start to ask questions…

• Can people adjust behaviors that quickly?
   
• Is sales inherently a “longer term” proposition and less dependent on today’s conversations and more a function of all the conversations had with customers over time and therefore can’t be impacted in very short time-frames?  
   
• Do companies have the information necessary to accurately respond to changes in the market place?
   
• Does shifting behavior constantly create schizophrenia in the organization muddying the waters and making it hard for people to understand the real value they bring to customers?
   
• Do things change so quickly today that having real-time, self-adjusting program is a real benefit?  Or do markets and customers have a longer “change window” so that reacting in the traditional way (ie: new program in 2nd quarter focused on “product B”) is still effective?

I don’t know.

I do know this… I would love to do this as an experiment at least once.  I’m a big fan of markets, predictive logic, wisdom of crowds, etc – all the things that help make different (and many times) better decisions.  

I just don’t know if this is just a fun idea – or a really good one.

What say you?  Too variable?  

The Only Thing Employees Hate More Than Micromanagement is the Absence of Management Protection

(this is a rant bear with me…)

To be honest – that headline is a rewording of the sub-head for an article on Slate yesterday.  The article’s real subhead is:  “The only thing Americans hate more than big government is the absence of government protection.”

When I read the headline – even before I read the article – I had substituted the words employee and management and it made a ton of sense.  And that is a real issue for those of us who make a living aligning company goals and employee activities.  

Jump out and read the article – I’ll wait.

Okay – you’re back.  

Before I get into my rant here’s the question on the table…

Do you think our employees are similar?  Do employees want total flexibility and freedom without the attendant responsibly those benefits require?

My thinking…

Entitled?

Many of the posts and articles that I read concerning employee benefits, salary, raises, rewards, bonuses, etc., seem to have a “entitlement without responsibility” patina to them.  Many talk about what employees deserve with no discussion of the flip side of that coin – what they need to do.  

We argue over whether we should increase health premiums for those whose behavior (not DNA) causes health issues.  We chew on whether to pay someone the same for “similar” work – not exact work.  We discuss and lament firing “older workers” in favor of “younger workers.”

Don’t get me wrong – I don’t believe in discrimination in the health, sex or age arenas.  

I believe in working hard and earning your keep.  If you’re 55 years old (male or female, smoker or non-smoker) in a marketing department and don’t know a thing about blogging, twitter, facebook, linkedin or this crazy thing called social media – expect to get pushed out.  

Not ‘cuz you’re old but because you’re stupid.  You didn’t do what was necessary to earn the benefits your organization offered.

Just because you’ve been there 20 years doesn't mean the company owes you a job any more than just because you’re a citizen of the United States you deserve a retirement account that keeps you in your Lexus lease.  If you eat until you weight 400lbs – and it’s not a “thyroid” condition – that’s not your cube-mate’s problem and it shouldn’t be.  You need to take responsibility for that behavior through higher premiums or by letting someone else be the Mayor of Burger King on foursquare.  

You want to be promoted and earn more money?  Get educated.  Volunteer for more work.  Research something your company needs (or you think it needs.)  Work for the promotion – not wait for it.  

Employee Responsibility

I think employees have grown accustomed to a level of support and benefits that most people in the world would love to get in on.  At the same time they don’t really want to be held accountable for mistakes, issues, problems should they take risks and try something.  They want the freedom AND a firewall in the form of their manager in case something goes wrong.

Believe me – I’m a big believer in risk taking and innovation.  But I also believe that as an employee I’d better take “calculated” risks versus just jumping out and doing something wild.  If I did that and got fired – would that be my fault or the company’s?  

I think too often, employees want their management to have their back regardless of the outcome.  They want to be able to fail – even if it is spectacular (thanks @seiden) – and have no ramifications.

I’ve worked for big and small companies and I know there are a lot (if not the majority) of employees who want the security of their positions without the responsibility for continuing to earn them.  

Continuing to earn your position is your responsibility.  

There is Mismanagement

Before you classify me as elitist - I also believe we’ve got a huge “management intelligence deficit” in this economy.  We've over-promoted based on seniority and functional expertise.  We now have managers who know how to do the job they USED to have and none of the skills needed to manage, motivate, align and engage people.  

We have great doers – not great leaders leading teams.  And I think that goes to the top of most organizations – not just middle management.

Net-Net

I know this is a rant but as we design and develop reward programs it is becoming increasingly more difficult to identify activities worthy of rewarding especially anything that isn’t considered “fair” (and what they mean by fair is “available to anyone regardless of effort/ability.)  I’ve had people say they can’t run a sales incentive program because people who AREN'T in sales couldn’t qualify for the award.

Really?  Yes.  Really.

When everything is an entitlement how do you design a program that will foster greater performance?  How do you encourage smart, intelligent people to continue to be smart, intelligent people when stupid, incompetent people get the same benefits?

Just thinking out loud today.

  

Is the Anti-Maslow Movement Gaining Strength?

Loyal readers know I have an unnatural attraction to Abraham Maslow and his theory of motivation.

Not the positive attraction that is pretty common on the web in posts about motivation written by those selling a product and not really worried about motivation.  It’s a pretty negative attraction.  For those interested in history check the following links…all others jump to the next headline…

My anti-Maslow sentiment isn’t new.  I checked my blog history and I first posted October 2006 asking if Maslow was a non-issue in today’s business environment:

"My question is this... if we are outsourcing life maintenance, and some of the higher level things in our lives - does Maslow still apply?  Is the entire $29 billion incentive industry supported by a false premise?"

I then asked in February of 2009 whether readers thought Maslow was still a valid motivation theory – BTW 72% did.  A few days later with this:  “If Your Incentive Company Brings Up Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs – Fire Them!”

Maslow Is Out of Date and Out of Touch 

Yesterday, while checking twitter – Chip Conley –Founder and CEO of Joie de Vivre Hospitality and Author, PEAK: How Great Companies Get Their Mojo from Maslow, tweeted out a link to this article:  Maslow’s Pyramid Gets a Makeover.  

Some of the interesting points from the article include:

• The new pyramid is based on the premise that our strongest and most fundamental impulse, which shapes our day-to-day desires on an unconscious level, is to survive long enough to pass our genes to the next generation. According to this school of thought, backed by considerable — though not irrefutable — evidence, all our achievements are linked in one way or another to the urge to reproduce.
   
• Despite the pyramid’s (Maslow’s) continuing popularity, Kenrick and his colleagues — Vladas Griskevicius, Steven Neuberg and Mark Schaller — note some modern researchers consider it “quaint” and largely irrelevant.  
   
• But they also found several problems with the pyramid. We now know that needs, once they are met, don’t simply disappear; rather, they reappear when prompted by certain environmental cues. Watching a news report about a crime spree will trigger fears for our own safety, which can influence our opinions and behaviors even if that need is being effectively met. (More fancifully, Kenrick notes that many well-fed people love to watch cooking shows. Having a full belly doesn’t negate our fascination with food.)
   
• So Kenrick and his colleagues revised the hierarchy to reflect this selfish-gene hypothesis. While their bottom four levels are highly compatible with Maslow’s — immediate psychological needs, self-protection, affiliation, status/esteem — their top three differ enormously. They are mate acquisition, mate retention and parenting.

Connecting This to Your Employees

Now – while I’m a fan just because someone with more initials after their names also thinks Maslow needs updating – it also drew me in because I’ve longed believed that great managers think in terms the “family” dynamic and should engage, guide and discipline employees as they would a child in their own family (not treat them like children but use similar themes/tools to guide behavior.)

So I’m thinking this…

Once you have the basics out of the way – income, insurance, future retirement, environment, etc. you need to look at how you can help your employees begin to mentor and guide the behavior of others.  In other words – if in fact parenting (via reproduction) is a goal/driver of behavior - is the business analog to that being a manager?  Is it this drive to parent and perpetuate ones value in an organization that drives us?  

I’m thinking it has some validity.  How many employees would say – “I don’t want to impact another person in company.  Just let me sit here and punch through spreadsheets or shoot screws all day and leave me alone.”

I’m sure there are a few.  But the vast majority of employees want to be managers, supervisors, mentors, leaders – whatever.  And I’m guessing it’s not so much driven by the new business cards, or the money (they do have impact) but more so by their internal drive to propagate their knowledge throughout the company and to create a positive legacy.  

Isn’t that what all parents want?

Where I think There Are Flaws

Nowhere in the article do the contributors make any reference to differences in the theory relative to sexes (male vs. female.)  I think, from an evolutionary perspective, there would be some.  Men typically focus on trying to make as many offspring as possible (assuming they don’t have to care for them later), women are more concerned with taking care of the ones they have (limiting the number they would want/should have IMHO.)  So there needs to be some discussion here on that.

Second of all – not everyone wants to be a parent (maybe this is where the spreadsheet jockeys come in) and therefore it isn’t a motivational “Unified Theory” – but I’m convinced after 25 years doing this a unified theory doesn’t exist.

Net-Net

An interesting article that points out Maslow may have less relevance than we think and that if you are planning on designing any incentive and reward program you may not want to use “the pyramid” as your starting point.

What say you – any thoughts on “parenting” and “reproduction” as key drivers of behavior within an organization?  I’m thinking it could make for a very interesting work place.

Enough of the Platitudes – Answer the Rest of the Question (Social Media Rant Alert)

Paul Harvey had a popular radio broadcast back in the day.  I used to listen to it on WLW out of Cincinnati.  His unique voice and speaking style earned him quite a following.  He was probably best known for his interesting and quirky stories that usually began with:  

“You know what the news is, in a minute, you're going to hear... the rest of the story."

To paraphrase and twist that famous line...

"You know the platitudes… but I doubt you’ll hear the rest of the story.”

Are We Entering the Age of Deep Thoughts and Shallow Actions?

Twitter has taught me is there is no drought of platitudes, quotes, pithy sayings and deep thoughts.  Blogs (including this one at times) are overflowing with big ideas, lengthy prose and well-constructed sentences about strategery.  Mainstream journalism is filled with interviews with big thinkers and wonderful accolades for leaders who have “vision.”  Business books now follow a familiar formula, chapter by chapter – start with a story, add facts, add two images, close by connecting story to your point of view and ask a question.

It seems to me that with all of our social media and traditional media all we get now is an ongoing stream of quick quotes hoping to elicit that famous stoner response – “Wow man, that’s deep.”

But no one wants to address the rest of the question…

Examples:  Searching SHRM Tweets

To pick an area I have some familiarity with I chose “employee engagement.”  Doing a quick twitter search for “SHRM10” and employee engagement I pulled a this sample of tweets:

• Employee engagement is the holy Grail! Trust, pride in corporate symbol, opportunity/well being=3 main drivers
• Massive collaboration to initiate and integrate sustainability. Direct employee engagement at innovation rather than competition
• Al Gore at #SHRM10 "employee retention and engagement key to future of business”
• The number one engagement factor for employees is that "senior management cares about me as a person".
• Cross departmental teamwork is critical to overall engagement.
• Leaders must have a compelling, positive vision with clear goals to build engagement
• engagement requires commitment
• competence, engagement, and now contribution of heart and minds key to talent mngt.

You get the idea.  So based on this information I now know…

• Pay attention to your employees.
• Teamwork is important to getting work done.
• Engagement is important for business.
• Leaders must have a vision and clear goals.

Is this new to anyone out there?  I’m guessing no.  

Knowledge Is Good

I saw that quote on the bottom of the statue at the beginning of the Oscar worthy movie Animal House.  At the time I think I was the only one in the theater that laughed but it has stuck with me until today.  Too me, that statement sums up a lot of what I'm seeing in all the media - but more so in social media.

I think many of us (and now there are many more due to social media) think it is more fun (and pseudo-productive) to tweet and say and blog platitudes than to really answer the tough questions.

I don’t have all the answers, but I do know that telling someone “engagement requires commitment" is like saying people need air.  I get it that – now tell me how to DO it.  

Maybe, like me, they don’t want to give away their secrets – after all the “how” to do something is much more valuable than the “what to do” – especially if the “what” is something that we know intuitively, has been proven to work, and has been a staple of good businesses for many, many years.

I just find it interesting that there seems to be so much value in big picture statements that really don’t get us anywhere.

Are the rest of you feeling the same way?  Are we too focused on sounding smart versus acting smart?

And is social media creating the opportunity for this?

Or is that just a deep thought with no action?  I’m thinking it is.  Oh well.  Gotta go tweet that.

Don't Set Sales Goals in Your 2010 Sales Incentive

I don’t know if the economy is recovering or not.  Based on yesterday’s market performance (or the day before that – or the day before that – or the day … oh, you get the point) my guess is that we’re a bit further away from any big rebound than we thought a few weeks ago.  However, I have heard sales and marketing folks saying things are better in 2010 than they have been.  You’ll hear someone say things are good “compared to last year” or “compared to 2008.”

In other words compared to a two-year drop that was arguably the worst since the 1990’s or even 1930’s things are okay.  

So I ask this question…

"If you have sales people on bonus, commission or reward plans how are you setting their goals? " 

Goal Setting Ala Blake*

Most companies look to last year and put a “stretch” factor on top of those numbers.  If you sold 100 units last year – this year it’s 115.  200 units – target set for 230 – or some such process.

Some really, really hardnosed companies like Premier Properties* may even use the highs of 2008 as their starting point and basically say – “hey – your job is to sell – not my problem the economy tanked – you find the customers.  Someone is buying.”

So you have a choice, lower the sales base for setting goals or keep the goals the same as if the economy never moved an inch.  

During a downturn in an economy such as the one we’re in, selling is a tough, tough business.  Buyers are extremely risk averse.  Buyers are closing the windows, the doors, the doggie doors and the air vents to keep sales people at bay.  The sales people are desperate.  The buyers are scared and in many cased broke.  So why put ANY incentive in place for sales?  It’s a Sisyphean task to even attempt to hit goals in excess of last year or even the year before.

Another Approach

Here’s a thought to consider.  Use the down turn for upgrading the sales staff instead of berating them.

Don’t run a sales incentive at all.  

Run incentives geared to relationship building and skill development. There won’t be a better time to up your sales people’s skill levels and improve connections to their clients.

If I ran a sales organization of any size during this economy I’d…

• Train them on the new media options available for connecting to customers (twitter, linkedin, facebook, etc.) and reward them for using them.  Nothing too heavy – just enough to break their luddite inertia.
   
• Reward sales people for developing sales plans for the future – ask them – “What will you do when the economy starts to rebound for real?  What is your plan?”  Reward them for research and planning now.  Nothing beats a prepared mind.
   
• Get sales people to spend time with old customers and new markets without a requirement for a sale.  Convey that thought to the customers.  Tell them – “we WON’T sell you.”  Get your sales people to learn their customer’s business.
   
• Let sales people take on roles internally while the market is slow.  Let them work in customer service.  Let them work in the marketing department.
   

In other words… use this opportunity to reduce the stress on your sales people and at the same time get them more prepared for the uptick in the market when it occurs.

Who will win when the economy rebounds?  Those that kept banging on doors hoping to make a sale but simply made a pest of themselves or those that took the time to update their skills, update their understanding of their customers, update their understanding of their own company and research and develop a plan?

Who will stay with their company longer - Those that kept feeling the lash or those who were able to grow in a caring and understanding environment?

Don’t assume more pressure is the solution.  Less pressure may be what is needed right now.

Thoughts?

 

*if you know these references pop into the comments and let me know.

 

How To Spot The Manager You NEED To Work For

I posted recently on the bombshell (at least in the incentive industry) that Amazon.com was pulling out of the incentive merchandise fulfillment space.  This was huge news in our little corner of the world (for the history and impact see my post here.)

Amazon.com was going to change the industry.  Their purchasing power, the sheer volume of their merchandise choices, their fulfillment capabilities, their pricing - all pointed to more choice for participants at a greater value.  What client could argue with that value proposition? 

Not many.  Amazon.com capture a fairly big share of the market quickly.  I had heard they exeeded $500 million in sales within 2 years (don't have any hard data on that - purely anecdotal.)

Fast forward two years and - poof.  Amazon.com is gone.

Incentive companies and the Executives at those companies had two reactions to this...

1. Wow... that was weird.  Now, what did we learn from this?
    
2. Wow... that was weird.  I knew it wouldn't work.  Told you so.  Whew... we don't need to change.

Choose #1

If you work at an incentive company ask yourself which of these reactions came from your boss?  If it was #2 - get your resume ready 'cuz they aren't going to be leading your company into any new and interesting directions.  They are going to be scraping the profit off an old business model for as long as it takes until they can retire and leave you holding the bag.

#1 recognizes that the Amazon.com experiment generated a lot of buzz, a lot of business, a lot of clients.  In other words, they hit on something the market wanted.  

The market still wants it.  

And when a market wants something the market gets it.  

The market will not be denied.

Some Smart Guys...

I don't usually pimp for any incentive company on this blog but a couple of people caught my attention - and inadvertently created the idea of this post.

First was a comment from Hinda Incentives in their blog (written I believe by @drewhawkins )...

"Whenever a juggernaut like Amazon withdraws from a particular industry, it’s big news, especially after a relatively short time. While they lasted less than three years in the industry, they were a game changer. They made us better even with our 40 years experience in this industry."

Second was Kurt Nelson  ( @whatmotivates ) from the Lantern Group on his blog...

"While Amazon might be leaving, they showed that there was a desire in the marketplace for something like this.  I don’t think there is another company right now that could fill that role, but that doesn’t mean in the future there couldn’t be.  So, with that in mind, it is important to think about the next game.  What will this mean for the traditional incentive houses, for the mid or small sized performance improvement firms?  Will someone take that bold step to change the game and bring in a different set of plays and players or will they exhale a deep breathe, thankful the other team forfeited, and go back to their old ways of playing? "

These are guys that understand the need to question things and learn and grow.  Props guys...

You NEED To Work for A Great Manager

A great manager will look at these experiences as learning experiences.  A great manager will ask...  "what happened?"  A great manager learns from the experience and moves forward.

A poor manager let's out a sigh of relief when the challenge goes away and buries herself back in historical success.  The #2's of the world will continue to do what they've done and learn nothing from the experience.  The #2's will be surprised again.  The #2's will always have "hope" as a strategy.

Listen to how your manager addresses challenges.  Do they ask how, why, when, who?  Do they look for causes and reasons?  

Or does your manager find reasons why it won't work?  Does your manager assume they are right and the challenger is wrong?

Work for a manager that continues to explore and seek to understand.  

Great managers assume others are intelligent and competent - even their competition.

If your manager thinks they are the smartest guy/gal in the room.  They're not.

  

Age of Conversation Part Tres...

You may remember that we participated in a book project - a multiple author book project - called Age of Conversation 2.  Well - the trilogy is complete, or will be soon.  You'll notice in the right sidebar we have a new image linking to a page all about the Age of Conversation 3.

This time out it's bigger and better.  More authors and more wisdom on how to put "new marketing" to work.  We have a page in the "influence" section.  The book will be released in April some time but I wanted to make sure you started saving your latte change so you can immediately get your copy.

All profits and proceeds go to charity, just like before.  This time around we are contributing to "Make A Wish Foundation" - just think - get good and do good all in one fell swoop.

Take some time - check out the page by clicking on this link or the image to the right and get ready to be amazed.

I'll update you all when the book is for sale.  Start standing in line now!

My Mission & My Plan -- Making People Mission Critical

Since day one of this company and blog we’ve had one singular mission.

Make people mission critical.
  

Mission Critical

Over the years I’ve heard the words “mission critical” many, many times.  Almost always it was focused on software.  “Getting an ERP system up and running is mission critical.”  “We need a CRM solution – it’s mission critical.”

The phrase mission critical is thrown around a lot today but what does it really mean?  I found a site that referenced a survey done in late 2008 that reported that respondents thought 64% of their business applications were mission critical.  The point being – not everything can be mission critical.  When the majority of anything is “mission critical” you need to redefine mission critical.

From Wikipedia (you know you can trust this…) the term mission critical refers to:

“… any factor (equipment, process, procedure, software, etc.) which is essential to the core function of an organization. That is, it is critical to the organization’s 'mission'.

As a rule in crisis management, if a triage-type decision is made in which certain components must be eliminated or delayed, e.g. because of resource or personnel constraints, the mission-critical ones must not be among them."

Now, I’m not suggesting Wikipedia is the single, best source for this but I’m sure most folks would read that first statement and agree with it.

I don’t.
 

Stuff Isn’t Mission Critical

When I hear folks talk about mission critical I hear something they don’t…  

What They Say	What I Hear	What Usually Happens
We need an ERP System – it’s mission critical	We will have a new software system to manage our resources and getting people to use it is mission critical.	They install the software.  People complain.  It doesn’t fit existing systems.  Money is lost and adoption is long and costly.
We need a CRM system to track and engage with our customers to drive sales – it’s mission critical	We will have a new way of engaging with our customer and we need to get people to embrace the change and use the software that will support that effort.	Software installed.  Sales People rebel.  Old ways continue.  Money lost.  Customers upset/lost/ignored.
Innovation is mission critical.	We need to find a way to get people to think and experiment with new ideas and ways of doing business.	Training sessions on creativity.  Individual awards for idea generation.  People ridiculed for thinking “too far out of the box.”  Everyone thinks it’s a sham.
We need to cut our manufacturing costs by buying new production equipment.  Being cost competitive is mission critical.	We need to engage our people to help identify better, faster, cheaper ways of delivering on our customer promise.	New machines are purchased.  Costs inherent in the systems that support the manufacturing group continue to exist and get worse.

See where I’m going with this?

The only thing that is mission critical is how you influence the behavior of your people.  

People are – to use the new “it” word – the linchpin in your company.  

Without people - to quote Metallica - nothing else matters.

How would your efforts to drive success in your business be enhanced if every time you plan something that is “mission critical” you amend the discussion with … “and how do we create behavior change to make that pay off?”

Making Mission Critical Out of Mission Important

Everything that is “mission critical” is only “mission important” until you enlist the real levers of success – your people.  Don’t think that today’s employee will blindly follow orders and “get on board.”  There is too much pent up demand to have control and they will look for places they can exercise that control.

I’m asking for your help in making people mission critical in your business.

Once you do this then the techniques and tools that influence behavior become the most important thing you can bring to the table (other than bringing I2I to the table to help… wink, wink, nudge, nudge, knowwhatImean?)

2009 - 2010 A Temporal Boundary Condition

One of key requirement for getting people engaged and motivated toward a goal (IMHO) is to condense the goal or objective into something simple - something the person can carry around with them in their working memory and access as needed throughout their daily activity.

We all are too familiar with the experience of using a great computer program but for some reason it chews up too much memory.  It works great until you open another window or launch a new application (can you say Firefox or Tweetdeck? - both memory hogs.)  When that happens, nothing works.  Everything crashes.

Few Words - Many Thoughts

Great writers have the ability to condense very complex thinking into a few words and allow you to keep those words in your working memory and, in my case, haunt you. 

I have had in my Google reader a blog post from August 2008 simply because it had one sentence in it that I knew I could be use someday.  It is a great sentence.  It contains only eight (8) words.  Yet it stuck with me for 16 months and it informed much of what I worked on all year.

And now, as I cross the chasm of time from 2009 to 2010 I can use it.

The sentence is:

 “Human beings are naturally drawn to ‘boundary conditions.’"

Boundary conditions are those places where land meets sea.  Where mountains meet sky.  Boundary conditions are those places where one thing stops and another starts.  

Today is a boundary condition - albeit a temporal one.

Today is a boundary condition where what we've done connects with

what we can do

what we should do

what we won't do anymore

The turn of new year is another place where we can see the change between two things.  The person I was and the person I can be.  It is a boundary condition.  And we are drawn to it as if it were a beach house or a ski chalet.

As the calendar moves to 2010 tonight at midnight - revel in that moment where there is no 2009 and no 2010 - the point at which you are fully in the middle of the boundary and enjoy the fact that you are and you can be anything.

Happy New Year.