High performance professional

Working with sports for a long number of years, I could see the emergence of many champion athletes. I observed that they all achieved their success using the same components. I call them the Champions' key-factors. They are:

1. Planning: The beginning of everything; success in sport doesn't exist without good planning. Medals won at the Olympic Games were planned at least four years before.

2. Methodology: High performance sport doesn't happen without a methodology. There is method to everything: training, eating, competing, living.

3. Results measurement: Each training session,movement and performance is measurable. An athlete has to frequently measure their performance; it is the attest evolution of the athlete.

4. Focus: An athlete in preparation for the Olympic Games doesn't compete in all of the competitions. They choose those that help them achieve the most success.

5. Fail correction: Fails and weak points of the athletes are corrected during the preparation, and even during the competition. If they don’t do that, their opponent can gain a big advantage.

6. Commitment between athlete and coach: Total confidence in each other; complicity. Give it your all and believe that the other is doing the same.

7. Limits overcoming: An athlete has to really want to achieve success. This inside feeling is the one that will push them to overcome all the challenges and obstacles on their way towards great success.

Is pure positivity the way forward?

I’m all for having a positive mindset.

Turning problems into opportunities, looking for the best and not being dragged into a negative spiral. All agreed. However problems do occur and the best thing to do is investigate them and fix them as efficiently as possible to avoid it happening again. Well, that is what I thought but this event I attended last night seemed to teach differently. It was based around the evolution of a new Six Sigma approach which uses the ‘Strength based approach’.

The core message of the presentation appeared to be always looking for the positives and strengths of a situation. If a problem arises the key is to not keep digging to find a problem. When we do this, it starts of a negative spiral of thinking which creates a negative mindset. Instead we should be focusing on what went right in the situation and how we can improve. This positivity and energy is what will always take us to the next level.

Leadership – to change or not to change, that is the question

Photo: GETTY IMAGES

So David Moyes has departed Manchester United - not an unexpected result given the clubs performance this season. I have to confess to being a lifelong supporter and so I am dismayed at the change in fortunes in only one season, therefore Moyes leaving is no surprise and with a reported £5m payoff every cloud has a silver lining! Failure can be rewarding after all. Who was it said, "Gentlemen, we need to fail more often."?

Of course, it raises some interesting points on the subject of leadership. A number of pundits have claimed one reason for his failure was he wanted the team to adapt to his style of leadership rather than the other way around. It seems that whenever a new “leader” arrives they seem to want to stamp their authority and character on the team/organisation/company. Same in politics, new governments want to change whatever the previous lot did irrespective of whether or not it is needed.

So what should a good leader do?

You can’t change history

Another tax year has come to an end and, for many, it is time to take stock of the last year’s results. What will they tell you and what will you do with them?

Results are about history; we can’t go back and change what happened. What they tell us is about how well the business performed last year, and those results impact all kinds of decisions by all kinds of stakeholders The real value of results is not what they tell us about the past, what we learn from them to make a better future.

There is a simple cycle that enables organisations to become ever more successful; it is called PCDA, or plan-do-check-act. It is a principle that quality practitioners know well; it is most effective when used organisation-wide, an approach known as TQM (Total Quality Management).

#2 in How do we create a High Performance Culture?

So having agreed that valuing people is pretty important in bringing about a high performance culture, that is all well and good, but we need to put something tangible into our strategy. That usually means articulating some objectives, targets, expectations for the coming years. There could be sales volumes, increase in market share, increased profit (of course!) or maybe qualitative values around improved quality, or maybe reduced customer complaints. Whatever, there are usually some big numbers and all too often the strategy is short on detail. Very aspirational, but perhaps not a practical route to implementation on its own.

The problem usually comes in translating these aspirations into something relevant to the people who have to deliver on this strategy. All too often these “targets” are passed on down the line without any thought to what they actually mean to those on the shop floor. All too often they are told, “These are your KPIs”.

What distinguishes strong from weak leaders?

Having all the knowledge means nothing without the right types of people. One person can make a big difference. They can be someone who somehow gets it altogether and changes the fabric of an organization’s culture not through mandating change but by engaging and motivating others.

[But] for some leaders irritating people is not only a sport but it is their personal entertainment.

At the 2011 conference of The Association for Operations Management (APICS) where I was a presenter I attended a provocative talk by Alan G. Dunn, President and founder of GDI Consulting and Training Company. He questioned if leaders are born or can be grown. It is the classic “nature versus nurture” debate. It got me to thinking about whether business analysts within an organization can be more than a support to others. Can they be leaders? I share some of Alan’s thoughts.

What distinguishes strong from weak leaders?

#1 in How do we create a High Performance Culture?

 If we are agreed that the main characteristics of High Performing Cultures are: 

* The company has a vision which is articulated in the strategy, understood from top to bottom of the organisation and reflected in the values of the company

* Responsibility and accountability is clear from top to bottom and across the company – each team and each team member knows what is expected of them day to day, week to week, month to month and so on.

* People feel valued as a team member, but also as an individual

* Problem solving and providing solutions is from the bottom up. Problems are seen as an opportunity not failure.

* The organisation recognises that its employs are the route to success and change is through people, not in spite of them

How do we arrive at this position? What can an organisation do to develop and importantly, sustain a High Performance Culture?

Kpi’s are not targets, targets are not kpi’s

If you read my last rant you will know how the wrong use of words gets me going (well, I’ve lived long enough to have earned the right to be grumpy)! Having clarified the difference between equal and the same I now move on to explain why not understanding the difference between targets and kpi’s is downright dangerous.

We live in a target-driven society. Government ministers love targets; they don’t understand them but they love to invent them, move them and change them. They symbolise assertiveness; it is a very useful ploy, setting ill-conceived targets creates so much confusion and waste that they can distract attention from what really matters until it is time to blame someone else for the mess. (Oh dear, there goes Mr Grumpy again). Seriously though, it is a real pity when organisations don’t get it right; it gives the whole subject of setting targets and kpi’s a negative image, it makes setting out to do it right so much more difficult.

So, what is the difference between a target and a kpi, and what does it take to make them valid and useful? The answer is simple, I’ll explain with a simple analogy.

Do you belong to a High Performance Culture?

Do you think you are part of and belong to a High Performance Culture at work? In fact, what is a High Performance Culture?

A few hints:

1. You enjoy going to work each day!

2. You feel valued as a team member, but also as an individual

3. The company has a vision which is articulated in the strategy, understood from top to bottom of the organisation and reflected in the values of the company. If you were to stop someone in the corridor and ask them what the vision and values are they would be able to tell you. (Try it sometime!)

Price speaks!

I think it was a week ago, I saw a TV show about the fact that people relate a bottle's price with quality. The same product, when exposed with a higher price, sold more!

When we arrive at a hotel, and we see the prices of the things in the fridge, we may react in a number of ways:

- if it is much more expensive than in the supermarket: – these people are always trying to explore us! Dammit! I'll go and buy it in the corner's bar!

- if it is free: -they are making too much money with the room rate, otherwise they wouldn't cut us slack like this!

- if it is just a little more expensive than in the supermarket : - cool. These people are serious. They charge a fair price for what they provide!

Is it a good idea selling a bottle of mineral water for an amount three times higher than its regular price, and lose this message?

When a store puts 19.99 on the price tag, it is saying: I'm trying to fool you. I want to complicate your assessment. I'll do the same when I talk about the quality of my products!

I have learned the most delicious story about this game in Argentina. A company found out a way of replacing the copper-clad welding - very expensive - with a wire covered with a layer of colorless protection, much cheaper. The product's performance was practically the same.

If it was released it in the market with a lower price, it would deliver the message that it was an inferior product. The company released it with a price 20% higher than that of the copper-clad (similar to a copper coin), a SILVER ALAMBRE (wire) THAT IS ORO (gold).

It sold very well. A few weeks later, the company lowered the price by 10%. Sales skyrocketed. And the manufacturing cost was much lower than that of the copper-clad...