Numbered because I suspect there will be more....

"What doesn't kill us makes us stronger." -Friedrich Nietzsche

My corollary, similar to that famous quote is, "Risk of being killed can have positive consequences".

Years ago when I was Director of Engineering for a division of Honeywell, I was curiously following a long-standing problem facing my colleague, Tom Armfield.  Tom was a seasoned manager who had just been promoted from field service manager to Director of Manufacturing.  (See "Production vs Prototype Sales" for more on Tom.)  The problem was with the work quality of the team that manufactured the electrical control cabinets was terrible and it was affecting the entire company. Continue reading...

Business in an era when 1+1 = 2 (not 3)

Most articles that discuss a company's mission, vision, strategy, or even marketing often cite Nike and their tag line "just do it". It is also well known that during an earlier time Nike had a different internal slogan of a completely different sort:  "beat Adidas". About the same time Nike had their aggressive slogan, the company I worked for had a similarly aggressive internal slogan of "kill Weston-Loral" (our geographically closest direct competitor).

Why is it that these old style, aggressive slogans, that target a competitor are now so rare? Why are aspirational slogans like "just do it" all the rage? What can we learn about the effectiveness of these slogans in their time? My thesis is that such slogans were the products of their market environments and that much of the same market environment has returned leading to the conclusion that slogans and their consequential real action need to change back to the old again. Continue reading...

Almost every external facing business relationship requires activation in the form of a negotiation and a contract..  When I see good deals stall on small details it is usually because the discussions were initiated on a poor foundation.  Getting the 'big picture' correct before getting involved in the negotiation and contract details  is critical:  Is this a win-win for both sides?  How will healthy, normal communications take place during the execution period of the contract?  What will happen when dissatisfaction, mistrust, or irrationality steps into the relationship?

This last question is rarely considered at the 'design stage' but it should be.  Far too many contracts amplify the smallest conflicts by giving enforcement powers and ultimatums to one side or another.  Look at the default terms and conditions from a big company like BMW and imagine that one or both sides are dissatisfied.  The lawyers usually have ensured that there are lots of 'sharp sticks' and other weapons because they want to have a good foundation for a lawsuit.  Courtrooms are  "the nuclear option" where there are no winners or losers; there are only losers and bigger losers at the end of any court case.   For this reason it is important that business people include a soft conflict resolution processes that will reduce tensions and that all 'nuclear options' in the contract have safety devices lest they be used too quickly. Continue reading...

In several other blogs, I have talked about the ethics of needing to bring value to your customer and discussed various components of what this value might be.  I have also discussed negotiation theory where we try to find out what value is most valuable to the customer.

In today's financial crisis (Q1-2009), I can be reasonably certain that your customer values cash management.  You also are likely faced with the same financial reality and also value cash management; consequently, this is either a conflict/deal breaker or an opportunity to investigate how not all cash is equal.  If cash is not the same to everyone, then we have the perfect opportunity for great negotiations. Continue reading...