Latest Event Updates
The Value Created by a Strong Team
I participated in an amazing team-building exercise as a Board Member for the Children’s Hospital Foundation of Wisconsin. We were heading down a path that would lead to a decision on whether to invest $150M in a new addition. The CEO at the time, Jon Vice, wisely determined that each committee needed strong teams to thoroughly vet the idea from every possible perspective.
The process started with being given a book to read (“Now, Discover Your Strengths” by Marcus Buckingham & Donald O. Clifton, Ph.D.) and then completing the “StrengthsFinder” assessment using a code provided in the book. The goal was to understand gaps in perception (how you view yourself vs. how others view you) so you could better understand your strengths and weaknesses. Then, teams were created with people having complementary skills to help eliminate weaknesses from the overall team perspective. The results were impressive.
Over my career, I have been involved in many team-building exercises and events – some of which provided useful insights. However, most failed to combine the findings meaningfully, provide useful context, or offer actionable recommendations. Key areas that were consistently omitted were Organizational Culture, Organizational Politics, and Leadership. Those three areas significantly impact value creation vis-à-vis team effectiveness and commitment.
When I ran my consulting company, we had a small core team of business and technology consultants and leveraged subcontractors and an outsourcing company to take on more concurrent projects, as well as larger, more complex ones. This approach worked for three reasons:
- We had developed a High-Performance Culture that was based on:
- Purpose: A common vision of success, understanding why that mattered, and understanding how that was defined and measured.
- Ownership: Taking responsibility for something and being accountable for the outcome. This included responsibility for the extended team of contractors. Standardized procedures helped ensure consistency and make it easier for each person to accept responsibility for “their team.”
- Trust: Everyone understood that to be effective and responsive, they needed to trust and support each other and trust each other’s judgment. If there was a concern, we focused on context and process improvements to understand what happened and implement changes based on lessons learned. We avoided personal attacks for the good of the entire team.
- Empowerment: Everyone understood that decision-making involves risk, while also recognizing that delaying an important decision could be costly and create more risk. Therefore, each member was responsible for making good decisions as needed and communicating changes to the rest of the team.
- Clear and Open Communication: The team was very transparent and honest. When an issue came up, they tried to resolve it with that person first, then escalated if they couldn’t reach an agreement and decided to seek the team’s consensus. Everything was out in the open and done in a constructive, collaborative spirit.
People who were not a good fit would quickly wash out, so our core team consisted of trusted experts. A friendly competition helped raise the bar for the entire team, but when needed, the other team members became a safety net for each other.
We were all focused on the same goal, and everyone realized the only way to succeed was to work together. Win or lose, we did it together. The strength of our team created tremendous value – internally and for our customers that we sustained for several years. That value included innovation, higher levels of productivity and profitability, and an extremely high success rate.
This approach can work at any level but is most effective when it starts at the top. When employees see their company leaders behaving this way, it provides a model and sets expectations for everyone under them. If there is dysfunction within an organization, it often starts at the top – by promoting or accepting behaviors that do not benefit the whole of the organization. With a strong and positive organizational culture, the value of strong teams is multiplied and becomes an incredible competitive advantage.
Good Article on Why AI Projects Fail
Today I came across this very good article focused on lessons learned, which could help anyone interested in these topics. It included a good mix of non-technical problems.
This is the link to the article, along with my commentary on the Top 3 items listed: https://www.cio.com/article/3429177/6-reasons-why-ai-projects-fail.html
Item #1:
The article discusses how the “problem” being evaluated was misstated using technical terms. At least some of these efforts are conducted “in a vacuum.” Given the cost and strategic importance of getting these early-adopter AI projects right, that surprised me.
In Sales and Marketing, you start the question, “What problem are we trying to solve?” and evolve that to, “How would customers or prospects describe this problem in their own words?” Without that understanding, you can neither vet the solution initially nor quickly qualify the need for it when speaking with customers or prospects. That leaves room for error when transitioning from strategy to execution.
More collaboration with Business likely would have helped. This was touched on at the end of the article under “Cultural challenges,” but the importance seemed to be downplayed. Lessons learned are valuable – especially when you are able to learn from the mistakes of others. This should have been called out early as a major lesson learned.
Item #2:
This second area had to do with the perspective of the data, whether that was the angle of the subject in photographs (overhead from a drone vs horizontal from the shoreline) or the type of customer data evaluated (such as from a single source) used to train the ML algorithm.
That was interesting because assumptions may have played a role in overlooking other aspects of the problem, or the teams may have been overly confident they could get the right results with the data available. In the examples cited, those teams identified the problems and took corrective action. A follow-up article describing the process used to determine the root cause in each case would be very interesting.
As an aside, from my perspective, this is why Explainable AI is so important. Sometimes, you just don’t know what you don’t know (the unknown unknowns). Understanding why and on what the AI is basing its decisions should help provide better-quality curated data up front, as well as identify potential drifts in the wrong direction while it is still early enough to make corrections without impacting deadlines or deliverables.
Item #3:
This didn’t surprise me, but it should be a cause for concern as advances are made at faster rates and organizations race to be first to market with an AI-based competitive advantage, potentially with less validation than ideal. The last paragraph under ‘Training data bias’ stated that based on a PWC survey, “only 25 percent of respondents said they would prioritize the ethical implications of an AI solution before implementing it.“
Bonus Item:
The discussion about the value of unstructured data was very interesting, especially when you consider:
- The potential for NLU (natural language understanding) products in conjunction with ML and AI.
- This is a great NLU-pipeline diagram from North Side Inc. in Canada, one of the pioneers in this space.
- The importance of semantic data analysis relative to any ML effort.
- The incredible value that products like MarkLogic’s database or Franz’s AllegroGraph provide over standard Analytics Database products.
- I personally believe the biggest exception to this assertion will be GPU databases (like OmniSci) that easily handle streaming data, can accomplish extreme computational feats well beyond traditional CPU-based products, and have geospatial capabilities that add an extra dimension of insight to the problem being solved.
Update: This is a link to a related article that discusses trends in areas of implementation, important considerations, and the potential ROI of AI projects: https://www.fastcompany.com/90387050/reduce-the-hype-and-find-a-plan-how-to-adopt-an-ai-strategy
This is an exciting space that will grow significantly over the next 3-5 years. The more information, experiences, and lessons learned are shared, the better it will be for everyone.
Apollo 11 50th Anniversary – Interesting photos & article link
I still remember my parents letting me stay up late to watch the first moonwalk. It was 9:30 pm, I was 5 years old, and we were huddled around an old “black and white” television with a circular viewing area. My parents tried to convey how important and monumental that moment was – telling me I would tell my children this story someday.
What I remember most was being amazed at seeing the astronauts hop around easily and not understanding how that could be. We had watched the launch on TV and were getting updates nightly from Walter Cronkite on the evening news. Normally my dad would sit at a TV table to eat dinner and watch the news as my mom sat with my sister and me at our kitchen table, but this week was different.
With all of the news this past week on the 50th Anniversary of the first moonwalk, it triggered a couple of memories. One of them was that I purchased a collectible item in 2005 at the annual Children’s Circle of Care leadership conference in San Diego, CA. A luncheon was held on the USS Midway Museum deck, and afterward, I took a tour. It is an incredible place to visit if you are ever near San Diego.
Before leaving that day, I went to the gift shop to get my wife and children a few trinkets. What I found was a beautiful display, which I immediately purchased and shipped home. This display was taken to school a couple of times for “show and tell.” It hung on my office wall for 3 years and then went into storage with other artwork. It then sat for the past decade, and I almost forgot it.
To me, this display is both beautiful to see and very inspirational. Human creativity is an incredible thing! As an aside, I have never seen anything like this display, so I thought I would share it with you.
Today I also ran across a good article regarding this event that provided information I had not seen before. It is very interesting and can be found here: https://go.usa.gov/xyVGh
Edit: This was another good article that discusses the advanced flight control computer used at the time – https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/apollo-11-moon-landings-fourth-crew-member-computer-far-fishman/
This anniversary is a great reminder of the power of individuals, teams, and partnerships when they are mission-focused. I find people like the men and women of NASA extremely motivating, and the few I have met have all been very friendly. They are the humble heroes!
Commentary on an HBR article about Start-ups & Entrepreneurship
A friend posted this article on LinkedIn.com. Because of character limits for comments, I decided to post my response here. Below is a link to the article referenced: https://hbr.org/2019/07/building-a-startup-that-will-last
The article is interesting, but emphasizing “second and third acts” assumes that the start-up will successfully navigate the first act. Even with addressing what the author views as key points, this is still a very big assumption. The reasons for Longevity and Success are far more complex and multi-dimensional, but it highlights some of the more important areas of focus.
Long-term success requires several things: The right combination of having a unique goal that has the potential to make a big impact (think “No software” from Salesforce.com); Innovative ideas to achieve that goal; A diverse team to build the product (a mix of visionaries, insightful “translators,” technical experts, designers, planners, adept doers, etc.); Very good sales/business development/marketing to describe a better way of doing things and converting that to new business; and ultimately a management team focused on sustainable and scalable growth.
The point about the need to “Articulate a value framework oriented toward societal impact, not just financial achievement” seems superficial and too tactical.
First, most new technologies have unintended consequences. Social Media is a recent example, but Genetic Editing and AI are two areas that are likely to provide more examples over the next decade. Not every societal impact will be positive, and having a negative impact could very well lead to the untimely demise of that company.
Second, the two ideas (societal impact and financial achievement) are not mutually exclusive. When I owned my consulting company, we aimed to fund $1M of medical research to find a cure for Arthritis. We allocated half of our net profits to this goal. Every employee was on board with this because there was a tangible example of why it mattered (my daughter). We invested $500K and helped launch a few careers for some brilliant MD/Ph. Ds, and at least one national protocol came out of their research.
Mission and Vision are important to a company, yet many fail to view this as anything more than a marketing effort. Those companies fail to realize that this is as much about motivating and inspiring employees as it is about grabbing a prospective customer’s attention. These should be inspirational and aspirational, such as the “BHAG” (Big Hairy Audacious Goals) Collins and Porras wrote about 25 years ago.
Regarding Endurance and the assertion that “…the best businesses are intrinsically aligned with the long-term interests of society,” my take is slightly different. The best businesses look for trends and opportunities in an ever-changing global competitive landscape instead of looking to their competitors and trying to ride on their coattails. Companies with a culture of fostering innovation as a way to learn and grow (Amazon and Google are two great examples) can find that intersection of “good business” and “positive societal impact.” It is much more complex than a simple one-dimensional outlook.
But it was a good article to help reframe ideas and assumptions around growth.
One Successful Approach for Managing Innovation
When I owned a consulting company, we viewed innovation as an imperative. It was the main driver of differentiation, credibility, and opportunity. We had an innovation budget, solicited ideas from the team, and evaluated those ideas quarterly.
Almost as important to me was that this was fun. It allowed everyone on the team to suggest ideas and participate in the process. That was meaningful and supported the collaborative, high-performance culture that had developed. The team was inspired and empowered to make a difference, and that led to an ever-increasing sense of ownership for each employee.
The team also had a vested interest in having the process work, as quarterly bonuses were paid based on their contributions to the company’s profitability. There was a direct cause-and-effect correlation with tangible benefits for every team member.
We developed the following 10 questions to qualify & quantify the potential of new ideas:
- What will this new thing do?
- Be very detailed, as this was used to create a shared vision of success based on the presented idea.
- What problem(s) does this solve, and how so?
- This seems obvious, but selling this new product will be an uphill challenge if you are not solving a problem (such as “lack of organic expansion”) or addressing an immediate pain point.
- What type of organizations have those problems and why?
- This was fundamental to understanding whether a fix was possible from a practical perspective, what value that fix might have for the target buyer, and how much market potential existed to scale this new offering.
- What other companies have created solutions or are working on solutions to this problem?
- The lack of competition today does not mean you are the first to attack this problem. Due diligence can help you avoid repeating others’ failures by learning from their lessons and avoiding similar pitfalls.
- Will this expand our existing business, or does it have the potential to open up a new market for us?
- Each answer has upsides and downsides, but breaking into a new market can take more time and be more difficult, time-consuming, and expensive.
- Is this Strategic, Tactical, or Opportunistic?
- An idea may fall into multiple categories. When the Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Act became law, we viewed a new service offering as a tactical means to protect our managed services business and an opportunistic means to acquire new customers and grow the business. While this is not true innovation, it was an offering that flowed from this defined process.
- What are the Cost, Time, and Skill estimates for developing a Minimally Viable Product (MVP) or Service?
- What are the Financial Projections for the first year?
- Cost to develop and go to market.
- Target selling price, factoring in early adopter discounts.
- Estimated Contribution Margin Ratio (for comparison with other ideas being considered).
- Break-even point.
- Would we be able to get an existing customer to pre-purchase this?
- A company willing to provide a PO committing to purchasing the MVP within a specific timeframe increased our confidence in the idea’s viability.
- What are the specific Critical Success Factors to be used for evaluation purposes?
- This lesson learned over time helped minimize emotional attachment to the idea or project and provided objective milestones for critical go/no-go decision-making.
This process was purposeful, agile, lean, and fairly aggressive. We believed it gave our company a competitive advantage over larger companies that tended to respond more slowly to new opportunities and smaller competitors that did not want to venture outside their wheelhouse.
With each project, we learned, became more efficient and effective, and made better investment decisions that positively impacted our success. We monitored progress on an ongoing basis relative to our defined success criteria and adjusted or sunset an offering if it stopped providing the required value.
The process was not perfect…
For example, we passed on some leading-edge ideas, such as a “Support Robot” in 2003, an interactive program that used a pseudo machine-learning algorithm. It would be trained using historical log files, tested quickly and safely in a representative pre-production environment, refined as needed, and ultimately validated and rolled out.
This automation could have been used with our existing managed services and Remote DBA customers to further mitigate the risk of unplanned outages. Most importantly, it would have provided leverage to take on new business without jeopardizing quality or adding staff – thereby increasing revenue and profit margin.
At the time, we believed this would be too difficult to sell to prospective customers (“pipe dream” and “snake oil” were some of the adjectives we envisioned), so it appeared to lack a few items required by the process. Live and learn.
In summary, a defined approach to something as important as business needs innovation to grow and prosper, as best demonstrated by market leaders like Amazon and Google (read the 10-K Annual Reports to better understand their competitive growth strategies, which are largely based on innovation).
Implementing this approach within a larger organization requires additional steps, such as securing buy-in from a variety of stakeholders and aligning with existing product roadmaps, but it remains key to scalable growth for most businesses.
Where Ideas, Experiences, and Lessons Learned Intersect 