Stop waiting - ask and you shall recieve

I've always wanted a mentor. You could say I have a father figure issue and I'd be the first to agree but it's not relevant. I've recently figured out that in the Theory of Constraints you may learn from the past but other than that you basically let it be gone. It doesn't make much difference how you got to where you are, the thing that's really relevant is how to get to where you're going. So, as I was saying, I've always wanted a mentor.

After I began writing in the TOC groups and in this blog I, subconsciously of course, started a waiting game. I was waiting for someone to pick up a cue of my need, step forward and offer to help me. Impudent, I know (oh, the wonders of retrospect), but I was terrified of asking. Why? basically a whole load of excuses, no real valid reason. I just felt I had no right, it wasn't polite and that kind of hogwash. I told you all I have are excuses. The only thing I can say is I was afraid of consequences without putting a moments thought into why.

Another thing I realize in retrospect is that I have been offered the help I wanted many times in the past. Thing is, just as my requests were not straightforward so were the offers. I was weary of asking straight out in case I would offend someone or be turned down. In much the same way the people who were reaching out to me did not state it straight out, probably in order to make sure not to offend me if they misunderstood. Well, I hope I'm done with playing that kind of immature game. Better late than never. This doesn't change the facts, though - I was stuck, not in a very good place and I was not liking it. Still, I waited. Still, I was afraid to change anything.

When I look now at Goldratt's 4 quadrants of change, I guess I was under the spell of "The Siren". Do you remember that, in some sea going folklore, sirens are mermaids that tempt the sailors and then drawn them?
Well, as I see it, this holds true in daily life as well. The "siren" is that comfortable settling for less, the place where fear of change glorifies the current situation way beyond its truthful value and at the same time vilifies the risks of change to the extreme. When the "siren" sings, the minuscule risk of getting a negative answer that will simply leave things as they are (=nothing to lose, no?) will seam unbearable, best leave things as they are and not risk it.....

There is a parable going around email kingdom. It is about a guru that forces his student to kill the only cow of a poor family. When the student returns, full of guilt, to right the wrong he has done at his guru's bidding, he finds the family became reach. The family explains that when they had the cow and it gave a little milk, they made do with what they had. One day the cow died and they could no longer make do, they had to figure out another way and when they did they realized they could do so much more and have so much more. So sometimes we are forced out of the spell of the siren, someone comes along and "kills" our "cow". That does not happen often.

My claim is that we should not let the spell of the siren control us. We should not wait helplessly for others to come and free us. If ever we are paralyzed by the idea of change or of taking a risk, if ever we encounter a rejection to a change we offer that seems to come from a place of paralysis, we need to use our logic, the analysis tools and a little courage and break free.

So I want to thank Jim, Lisa and the others for offering so kindly to help me out. Thanks Jim for all the help and for leading me to success. It was a lot of hard work but it was not hard as I made it out to be!!!

Have you ever struggled to overcome the siren? Please share your experience. Do you know someone still under the spell? Please send them this post.

Seeing The World Through Another's Eyes

TOC promises a lot of benefits to those who embrace it, be they individuals or organizations. Yet those promises can materialize only if change occurs. And we all know change is hard. We've seen and remember that people don't resist change just because it is change. If the change is right for them they embrace it. Yet, the fact still remains that changing is hard and considering 'no man is an island' (John Donne), this change is most likely going to require the cooperation of others. To get this cooperation 'they' will need to see how this change fits them, and it is 'our' job to show them, as this is 'our' change. Only after we have proven that this change truly fits, will there be a chance of 'them' taking ownership.

In order to get others to buy in to the change, clearly we need to see things from their point of view. We must look at the current reality and the proposed reality through their eyes. Understand what constitutes a valuable pot of gold for them not for me (or us). Understand what are their risks, not ours.  Find their mermaid and crocodile and understand the impact these have on them.  Not an easy thing to do. No sir.

Now, I know it is not easy to see the move to TOC through your team members eyes. These are people you know, people who have many similarities to you, people who communicate with you. So, if that's hard, how hard will it be to see things through your customer(s) eyes? Horrible, isn't it? Horrible, but essential if you want to develop an Un Refuse-able Offer (URO), if you want to create your Decisive Competitive Edge (DCE), even if you just want to improve sales.

Well, I'll admit it is not easy in any way, but I will also remind you that that's what the TP tools are for and that to make it a bit easier you can always start by deliberately analyzing your view point and then, once you've gotten that out of the way, you can concentrate on the more important 'THEM'.

Anyways , a few years ago Best Buy put out a campaign just before Christmas that, for me, epitomizes seeing the world through another's eyes. It seems clear to me that the ad agency behind this campaign truly understood Best Buy's customers and the people they buy gifts for. I hope you find this as inspirational as I do.

How We Communicate is Important

When  was in Kiev (yes, I know you know I went to the conference, but I WAS in Kiev when this happened) I kept thinking of you, the readers of my blog and how I will post this and post that. One thing I thought about was this advertisement clip. The post was clear to me, the subject, the connection to Theory of Constraints, everything. But by the time I got around to digging it up I could not remember what got me going in the first place. It still feels right, though.

I find this clip has a very powerful message about communication and conflict situations. I suggest you watch it first with the audio OFF! Now before you run it again with the audio on, let me tell you these two actresses are doing a great job here. Of course there is a catch, but I won't tell you what it is, turn on the sound and hear for yourself.

{BTW, I noticed a lot of readers view this blog through a translating site, so if English is not for your ears, I've added a transcript below for the translating tool, as the text is relevant}

Here's what I see here, when we find ourselves conflicting with others we many times get into a "fight" mode. Think back about arguments and fights you've had over the years. As soon as the disagreement starts we become entrenched in our own corner, defending our needs or wants or point of view with all our might. This is greatly intensified if, coming into the 'discussion', we predict the other side will not react as planned. We are armed and ready and so we are ready to misinterpret any of her reactions as a declaration of war. Now, as soon as we go into "fight" mode we turn off "communication" mode and thus we stop listening to others and start listening only to our inner voice. We hear only those things that can serve as "ammunition" in the next "round". Do you remember this Magritte painting?

Well, can you agree that an argument is not communication, then?

As stated here, the Theory of Constraints requires change and it requires cooperation from others. To get others to cooperate with the change offered communication must be used to get buy in and commitment. You can't argue your way into convincing them that you understand and that you have a valuable offer.

Using TOC while seeking a new job

After looking at the hiring process in the last 2 posts, I'd like to change my view point and look at the process from the other side. When a person is looking for a job – can TOC be of assistance?

First up is the realization that seeking a new position is a process of change and as such it would probably be beneficial to consider the 4 quadrants of change. Using the matrix can help a job seeker understand what special needs must be addressed during the process. Generically speaking these are the needs to reduce the risks inherent to the change and the needs to minimize or mitigate losses of parting with the current situation (losing the "mermaid"). It is important to remember that even when this change looks very appealing, an example could be a case of someone unemployed and in need of an income, the change does bring with it risks and losses which should not be ignored. Also make sure to consider both the employment side and the personal side of the change. Looking at the risk quadrant as an example – employment side risks may be "I will not succeed and this position will create a bad impression in my CV", personal side risks may be "I will have less available time to contribute at home which might create friction".

(continued)

Using TOC for a hiring process

Let us begin by defining the goal of the process as finding a good enough candidate for the job. This is how a "Satisficer" would look at this. An "optimizer" will look for the best candidate possible and thus will take much more time and effort to fill up the opening – is this beneficial for the organization? I dare say it is not, since not only is the job open for a longer time, meaning that required output is delayed, the recruiting team also spends more time on this task and thus is not available for other tasks.

To recruit a good enough candidate you first must define the characteristics of a good enough candidate. It is important to keep some slack in these definitions to allow for variability between candidates, so recruiters have a real choice. In order to get a good understanding of necessary characteristics, just get a good understanding of the job this candidate will be doing.

Adding a person to the company's staff is a process of change and should be handled like such (as discussed here). Hiring managers should consider all 4 quadrants of this change first at the general level of hiring someone and then at the specific level of hiring a certain candidate. Throughput considerations should be used.

At the general level consider:

	+	-
Hire new person (change)	"Pot of Gold" - increased throughput by manning position	"Pain" – losing throughput by paying more salaries (increasing OE) without sufficient return
Don't hire (don't change)	"Mermaid" – low OE, business as usual, no need to train and bring someone up to speed….	"Alligator" – overloaded workers, missing capabilities….

This would be valid even when the manager leading the process is very willing to hire the new person. Also notice that these are very generic possibilities and should be replaced with the specifics of each situation in real life.

At the specific level each candidate is different so a generic analysis is not relevant. One point to consider, though, is how would the analyses differ between a candidate that is an acceptable fit on all parameters and one that is a very good fit on some parameters but poor on others. Which parameters are the most important to your throughput?

Continued here

Overcoming Resistance to Change - Isn't It Obvious?

A lovely video by Goldratt's people. I truely found this to be an eye opener.

When you need to conduct a change - first analyse it from your point of view in all 4 quadrants, then try to understand the other party's point of view and figure out, in advance, how to minimize the risks and loses. While Dr. Goldratt has a book by the same name, the topic of this video is hardly covered in it.