Too often there is a chasm between the technology design and the user need. Technology alone is not enough. Whether a business area or a consumer product, delight is a unique feature requirement. In 2011 Steve Jobs, hosted an iPad 2, special event and I take two great points within this three-minute and 11 second video clip: Technology married with the liberal arts or the humanities creates results that delight. Apple competitive advantage is that product architecture and the organization architecture that build the products align. Intuitive products rely on user objective, not technical wizardry. From an email to a presentation, we design for reaction, from communication to technology, the goal is reaction. Features and functions of the software, hardware, and applications need seamless integration to meet user objective, not technical architecture. The design function is the user objective. Function goes beyond the lab and into the environment objective. This video reminds me, again, about good design. Technology = liberal arts + innovation In your next technology discussion think about what, exactly liberal arts and the humanities has to do with user-centered delight? video source: youtube.com/user/danapeters/ Apple’s technology formula was last modified: August 20th, 2015 by Toby Elwin
New conditions demand new business management strategy. Technology enabled a disruption greater than any department or team level at a company can solve.
Customers severed the business message and took control of marketing channels.
Media lost privilege, marketers lost their minds, business lost their playbook, and customer’s rewrote the rules of engagement.
We need to reengineer marketing from the outside in and then align people, process, and technology from the inside out.
Bias derails evidence for perception and perceiving is most certainly not seeing.
Bias is both a decision shortcut as well as a communication wall.
Portfolio planning, from finance disciplines, presents projects as financial portfolio option mix to meet organization strategy. Project communication deserves risk and return criteria to project a financial portfolio, not bias.
People are born to inquire and to discover. Between two to five years old a child asks 40,000 questions.
Then we are taught to stop asking, stop seeking, and stop inquiring.
Questions are the fuel of curiosity.
Seems the concern is more about the answer and we have lost the patience for questions. Questions challenge authority. The impact: no questions, no innovation.
From the board room to a bored room, there is much to gain from Warren Berger’s new book, A More Beautiful Question.
Rule #1 in communication demands you know your audience. Since there is more than one corner office rule #2 states all analytics are not equal.
Corner Office Analytics (Infographic), presented by Deloitte, offers a guide to questions each CXO needs to be able to answer. If your CXO needs to answer these questions, you can be sure they expect you provide accurate context for connection.
When I hear capability model I think competence, competence naturally leads me to motivation. So, capability model, to me, represents a human capital knowledge, ability, and skills framework.
Enterprise, systems, or business architects, view capability models as what a company needs to do to execute strategy.
Any link is a system link and strategy is only as good as the ability to execute. Within the pages of The Capable Company: Building the capabilites that make strategy work, I intend to find capability model methods that identify business and technical details needed for strategic links to execute those capabilities.
Capability models are rarely an aggregate sum of individual, people capability. It is not that organization capability is sabotaged by people capability, but organization capability rarely covers the contingency of the unwilling, the unable, and the unmotivated.
Organizations are a product of social interactions, not industry feature the people that decide avoid each other or work together are the sum of individually-motivated competence, not organization capability.
In the quest to maximize returns to shareholders executive doctrine shifted from stakeholders to shareholders. In “How Shareholders are Ruining American Business”, The Atlantic’s, Justin Fox, calls out shareholder value ideology.
Fast start questions for anyone who is a shareholder or stakeholder.
Closing out 2013 I look back at the year’s most viewed posts with a chance to reflect on different blog topics that people most view, to include: change management, culture, project management, and mergers and acquisitions posts.
Did a topic near and dear to you finish in the top 10?
Identity shapes how people describe their world. The range of options that someone can identify and define their view presents little issue, until collaboration.
In our world of people, process, and technology, a single item can mean multiple things.
Many books attack the rational case for change, but often miss the crucial element to understand change: plans are rational people are emotional. In “Leading Successful Change” Authors, Gregory P. Shea, PhD and Cassie A. Solomon write change management continues to fail at a rate above 70% for 2 reasons.
The good news? Offered within are 8 solutions to turn your change efforts into success. The better news? You may only need 4 of the 8 to succeed.
Within is a review of their book, “Leading Successful Change, 8 Keys to Making Change Work”.
If George Washington had wooden teeth, little harm comes from people who believe this myth. People and any performance myth that a department or organization has around human capital, however, creates real impact on motivation and return on involvement.
Systems theory and systems thinking relies on interface, feedback, organizational goals, input, throughput, output, differentiation, and integration. You can not remove or modify items in a system without effect on other actors in the system.
When thinking through solutions, it seems we forget a team, a department, or a division is a part of a larger system. If you think in problem solving mode, then your diagnostic needs to account for undesirable behavior characteristics are part of the system structures that produce them.
The glass half full or glass half empty analogy presents a shortcut perspective to infer either an optimist view or a pessimist view of the world, respectively.
However, with an appreciative mindset the glass is neither half full nor half empty, the glass is full.
A full glass now provides a more complete perspective of possibility and a full view of Appreciative Inquiry options.