Radical? It Really Should Have Been

“Just One More Thing…..”

In the classic 70′s American cop series Columbo, the eponymous detective was famous for his “one more thing” revelation of the perpetrator of whatever grizzly homicide he was investigating in that episode. Those eleventh-hour, seemingly ephiphanic moments of clarity, insight and eye-opening analysis are, in reality, extremely rare. In the eyes of successive murderers, Columbo’s seemingly uncanny ability to cut to the chase and mobilise an instantaneous last minute analysis of the evidence appeared to be miraculous. Of course it was no such thing; it was his wish for dramatic effect, to have lulled the murderer into a false sense of security that they had got away with it. Columbo was one of the greatest fictional detectives of his generation, he knew who had “done it” for some time.

This is the last in a series of five blogs exploring how radical plans can so easily  easily be derailed.

 5 Reasons for “the Radical” Becoming “the Ordinary”:

•  Diluting the Plan
• Avoiding Tough Decisions
• Inadequate Resource
• Needless and Avoidable Delay
• Beware Contradictory Last Minute Analysis

Beware Contradictory Last Minute Analysis

So what is my point? Why the scepticism of bolts of analytical inspiration just in
the nick of time? I always find it worrying when change resistant individuals in an organisation appear determined to unearth data to disprove a previously proven agreed course of action. Radical change requires courage and steadfastness; for the doubters any sign of weakness, hesitation or nervousness on the part of the instigators will be ruthlessly exposed.

I have witnessed perfectly valid decisions being consigned to the bin on the basis of some creative analysis confidently presented that somehow managed to germinate any tiny seeds of natural self-doubt and worry that may have been present within the decision making team.

Analysis of this type is at best selective and often dreadfully biased. The result is
the same, those who doubted the value of the plan will seize the opportunity to asphyxiate it and to retain the status quo.

A temporary feeling of relief may then pervade the boardroom; congratulation and joy on avoiding a close shave with disaster may give rise to a false sense of euphoria. The risk of fundamental, radical change has been removed, all can return to the familiarity of managing the business; difficult decisions have been avoided; the risk of failure in such a visible form removed: “the pressure is off”. “Radical” will be temporarily removed from the lexicon of the organisation; replaced with the more palatable “Evolutionary”.

Don’t get me wrong; there is a time and place for evolutionary or incremental change;
it is after all the norm. It is what the majority of managers rightly do day-in day-out; they have to possess the skill to continuously improve, to look for the + 1’s. But where radical change is required, where taking a calculated and meticulously planned risk is essential, losing one’s nerve is not only an abdication of responsibility but also a dereliction of duty.

And Finally…….

As much as there is a time for being cautious, for being risk averse, there is also a time where being courageous, confronting ones doubts and taking a calculated risk for the greater good is the correct thing to do. It is those very situations where the five pitfalls described in this series should be avoided, where resolute leadership is required to galvanise the organisation and to set it on an upward trajectory. You never know, it might result in the achievement of the fabled, and frankly overused, “Paradigm Shift”!

Neil Jones is founder and managing director of let’s implement limited.
His primary focus is to provide clients with the approach, tools and techniques to deliver implementation excellence throughout their organisation, thus improving ROI.

Neil achieves this by assisting organisations to create the required emphasis and behaviour surrounding the implementation of business initiatives and projects, ensuring that the enthusiasm for a plan, project or initiative is maintained until it has been fully and successfully implemented, reviewed and evaluated.  

neil@letsimplement.com                   07879 884140

Radical? It Really Should Have Been

When mañana, mañana just doesn’t cut it:

In this, my penultimate blog in the series exploring 5 of the reasons why radical plans often turn out as far from radical, why they can materialise as pale imitations of their former selves, I focus on the bane of implementation; needless delay.

5 Reasons for “the Radical” Becoming “the Ordinary”:

•  Diluting the Plan
• Avoiding Tough Decisions
• Inadequate Resource
• Needless and Avoidable Delay
• Spurious Analysis

On the basis that if you ignore something for long enough it will go away; delaying the implementation of radical plans because it is the easier option may seem like a reasonable and risk reducing course of action. Whilst it is impossible, so the saying goes, to avoid the inevitable, it is possible to avoid the imperative as there is always a legion of reasons why
there is something else that should be done first.

He Who Hesitates is Lost….

Fighter pilots have to make life or death decisions in a split second; they know what they have to do, what their mission is, what success looks like and how their mission is going
to be executed. If they lose their nerve or delay a decision they might not only fail the mission, but also lose their life.

The parallels between the military and commercial life are clear where opportunities for fundamental change not only require management foresight, single-mindedness and fortitude; it also requires willingness and an ability to identify the correct time to implement. Having a radical idea does not mean that those leaders are presiding over a radically minded management team or even one capable of radical change. The idea may indeed be radical, the plan may be ground-breaking, and the potential outcomes may be transformational, but if there is prevarication in delivery, the opportunity may be lost and the most breathtaking plan for the organisation consigned to the “what might have been” file to join the legion of other ‘never to see the light of day’ ideas whose time will never come again. Delays of this sort should not always be judged as indecisiveness, it may be a
case of simply not mobilising the organisation quickly enough. The result will
however be the same.

If the reason for delay is that the radical plan is the now the wrong plan. That the basis upon which the idea was created has proved to be erroneous, or the market or commercial
environment has changed significantly, then it should of course not only be delayed, but permanently shelved. To embark dogmatically upon a course of action that is fundamentally flawed would be foolish and irresponsible. However if the delay is for any of the following reasons, it should be whole-heartedly challenged by those who sponsor the plan.

• Nervousness of radical change
• Sudden, unexplained and unjustified changes in priority
• Incessant tinkering with the plan
• An unwillingness to focus on implementation
• A diversion of resource
• The project unexpectedly disappearing from the agenda
• Excuses for not implementing that are unfounded

If the plan has survived the decision making process and all indicators still point to the
solution, then it is highly probable that it is still the right thing to do: so in the much overused words of Nike “Just Do It!”

Neil Jones is founder and managing director of let’s implement limited.
His primary focus is to provide clients with the approach, tools and techniques to deliver implementation excellence throughout their organisation, thus improving ROI.

Neil achieves this by assisting organisations to create the required emphasis and behaviour surrounding the implementation of business initiatives and projects, ensuring that the enthusiasm for a plan, project or initiative is maintained until it has been fully and successfully implemented, reviewed and evaluated.

 neil@letsimplement.com                   07879 884140

Radical? It Really Should Have Been

 OK. So who knows how to make a silk purse out of a sow’s ear?

Rather prophetically as it turns out, I began this short series of blogs on how some organisations manage to transform the radical into the ordinary on Friday 13^th May. This phenomenon amounts to a kind of miracle in reverse…. Would so much have been made of the event if wine had in fact been turned into water? Or a feast fit for 5,000 ravenous souls was somehow to re-materialise (or is that dematerialise?) as five loaves and a couple of fish when they stopped to eat? Or Midas had reversed his touch? I somehow think not.

This is the third in a series of blogs exploring 5 of the reasons why radical plans often turn out as far from radical, as shadows of their potential selves. Previously I have highlighted
how diluting a plan just prior to implementation has a detrimental effect, and in the second of the series, how failing to bite the bullet on difficult decisions can reduce an organisations capability to implement change. This week I am focussing my attention on the importance of providing adequate resource to implement a chosen plan.

5 Reasons for “the Radical” Becoming “the Ordinary”:

• Diluting the Plan
• Avoiding Tough Decisions
• Inadequate Resource
• Needless Delay
• Spurious Analysis

Resource for Success

If a plan is to be far-reaching, if it is to fundamentally change the organisation or operation the planning has to be equally comprehensive. Not only does everyone involved need to know their responsibility, and timescales for delivery but there should be a sufficient
budget to successfully deliver the initiative. Classic, simple project management stuff you may say….. It is!

It is only natural, and indeed good business practice, to ensure that each and every project or initiative is delivered with the highest possible return. But therein lies the rub. The lowest cost option may not be the optimum solution; but whichever cost model is chosen it should be followed through. A deep budget cut prior to implementation, or even worse, mid-project once all the furore and high visibility has waned and where the hard work starts, is a trap that should be avoided. Without the requisite funding the project will predictably be compromised and will either fail to achieve the desired objectives, or the very objectives that were proven to be required may have to be substantially trimmed-back, further diluting the effect. A case of the “new radical” or “postmodern radical” taking sway, where the only thing radical is the amount of cuts made to the budget of  audacious plans leaving them with little or no chance of being implemented.

I deliberately exaggerate to make a point; that far too many superb and creative plans that could make a remarkable difference to the fortunes of organisations are neutered by not
being adequately resourced at the point of delivery. Business leaders and decision makers having taken the courageous step to agree a plan that could bring a step-change in performance should carry that conviction through to implementation, providing sufficient budget to make it happen as intended. I am not advocating a loosening of budgetary control, because therein lies disaster in a different guise: what I am suggesting is that the budget follows the plan once it has been agreed. If there is not enough budget to support a radical plan, do something else, don’t agree the plan and then pull the cash between decision and delivery.

Neil Jones is founder and managing director of let’s implement limited.
His primary focus is to provide clients with the approach, tools and techniques to deliver implementation excellence throughout their organisation, thus improving ROI.

Neil achieves this by assisting organisations to create the required emphasis and behaviour surrounding the implementation of business initiatives and projects, ensuring that the enthusiasm for a plan, project or initiative is maintained until it has been fully and successfully implemented, reviewed and evaluated.

 neil@letsimplement.com                   07879 884140

Reason 2: Avoiding Tough Decisions

Radical Plans Often Require Radical Decisions:

Last week I raised the spectre of commercial equivalent of “The Emperor’s New Clothes” where something originally heralded as radical materialises (pun intended) having as much substance as the clothes the emperor wore on that fateful and apocryphal day. I would advocate that all organisations need their very own version of the little boy who says it as it is, who will challenge even if he or she is a lonely voice amidst a sea of “loyal” subjects. Who announces to the amassed hoards that the “Emperor has no clothes”

The subject of last week’s blog was how radical plans can become diluted as the
doubters sway the decision makers. This week the second of the 5 Reasons is explored; namely how avoiding tough decisions can derail a radical plan.

 5 Reasons for “the Radical” Becoming “the Ordinary”:

• Diluting the Plan
• Avoiding Tough Decisions
• Withdrawing Resource
• Needless Delay
• Spurious Analysis

Biting the Bullet:

With any radical plan comes an array of difficult decisions that require careful thought and
handling, and without which the plan will not be delivered in the form intended.

New ways of working and a requirement for new skills and competencies often go hand-in-hand with the implementation of major change. Failure to address the competence and ability of employees is an all too common failure. Difficult decisions over the future
of a loyal, long-serving member of the organisation avoided even though it is patently clear that his/her skills fall short of the new requirements.

A combination of embarrassment, not wishing to pay redundancy, and the avoidance of conflict will put the delivery of the new initiative in jeopardy (which will be a great
deal more embarrassing, costly and difficult to explain than biting the bullet in the first place). Radical decisions sometimes require changes in key personnel; failure to take difficult decisions from the outset will compromise success. Clarity, honesty and doing what is right for the plan is called for as square pegs will always fail to fit into round holes however hard one may try to believe the contrary.

Too often decisions of this type are made once the plan inevitably hits difficulties, remedial action is often too little too late, more expensive, and demoralising for those remaining
with the organisation.

Neil Jones is founder and managing director of let’s implement limited.
His primary focus is to provide clients with the approach, tools and techniques to deliver implementation excellence throughout their organisation, thus improving ROI.  

Neil achieves this by assisting organisations to create the required emphasis and behaviour surrounding the implementation of business initiatives and projects, ensuring that the enthusiasm for a plan, project or initiative is maintained until it has been fully and successfully implemented, reviewed and evaluated.

 neil@letsimplement.com                                    07879 884140

Reason 1: Diluting the Plan

This is No Place for Management by Sound Bite – leave that to the politicians Radical; now there’s a word to conjure with…….. Radical thinking, radical plans and radical action manifest themselves in many forms; in various shades of grey from outright seismic change to the “So what?” heralded as transformational.

Radicalism is, in countless cases, coupled with other less worthy, and significantly more irritating business clichés such as “Blue Sky Thinking”, “Starting with a blank sheet of paper”, “Thinking out of the box”, “Pushing the envelope”, or indeed “Pushing the needle”, or perhaps even embarking on a course of action that will result in a “Paradigm shift”. This, of course, does not in any way devalue radical change, or suggest that it is to be sneered at. It can be the only viable course of action, it may be a commercial imperative, and circumstances may dictate that a more conservative, a less courageous course of
action is not an option.

So, if the so-called ‘radical’ solution is not the object of my disapproval, what is? It is where the opportunity for real and telling radical change is wasted. Too often all the hard work has been successfully done; the problem has been correctly identified; the scale of the change required accurately gauged and the organisation galvanised, enthused and not least of all primed for action but that sadly the implementation of the “radical plan” is flawed. Sadly in these cases the radical transforms into the moderate, the potentially extraordinary ends up very ordinary indeed.

In my experience cases of lost opportunity can be assigned to one or more of the five reasons highlighted below. This Blog is the first in a series of five that will consider
each reason in turn. “Diluting the Plan” explains how organisations often water-down radical plans as they approach implementation.

Reasons for “The Radical” Becoming “The Ordinary”: 

1. Diluting the Plan
2. Avoiding Tough Decisions
3. Withdrawing Resource
4. Needless Delay
5. Spurious Analysis

Who Changed the Plan? Why plans become diluted:

All the meetings have been held; from Board Away-Days to departmental meetings agreeing the plan. Everyone is decided; the only sensible way forward is to embark on a
course of action that can only be described as radical. At the eleventh hour the plan is reviewed at the highest level, a reasonable thing to do with fundamental change. An opponent of change who was, from the outset, against the plan but was placated during the approval process has once again voiced his concern. He manages to create an imperceptible level of doubt in the previously resolute forces for change. All the facts continue to point towards the need to adopt the radical plan, yet without warning the
plan is swiftly adapted, it is diluted to placate the doubters and “de-risk” the initiative. (An overused euphemism for losing one’s nerve)

When the plan resurfaces it is in all but name unrecognisable, a shadow of its former self
and highly unlikely to solve the identified problem. It is often more advisable, when faced with this situation, to start the process of problem resolution from scratch, to ‘can’ the entire project rather than to half-heartedly rework the original plan in a diluted form.

In cases where all the indicators continue to suggest the original plan was correct there is little excuse for “de-risking”.

The next blog in this series will consider how avoiding tough decisions has a detrimental effect on radical plans.

Neil Jones is founder and managing director of let’s implement limited,
his primary focus is to provide clients
with the approach, tools and techniques to deliver implementation excellence
throughout their organisation, thus improving ROI.  

Neil achieves this by assisting organisations to create
the required emphasis and behaviour surrounding the implementation of business
initiatives and projects, ensuring that the enthusiasm for a plan, project or
initiative is maintained until it has been fully and successfully implemented,
reviewed and evaluated.

 neil@letsimplement.com             07879 884140

]]>