How I Became One of the .004%

dreamstime_xxl_54050385.jpg

A few weeks ago, I was asked to blog about the patent using Lean Start-up, before @EricReis wrote his first book.  Thanks to @adamberk for the suggestion, and here we go-

Based on numbers publish by U.S. Patent office and Inc. Magazine, roughly 150,000 patents are issued within the United States each year.  Not shockingly given the current state of women in STEM fields, only 8% of those U.S. Patents are awarded to women.  This means only 12,000 U.S. women per year become patent holders, on a U.S. population of approximately 340 Million. Any woman issued a U.S. is part of an exclusive .004% club.   I became a member of this exclusive .004% club in both 2010 and 2016.

 

This patent was not the result of expertise, but the disciplined use of Design Thinking and Lean Start-up methods.

 

In 2010, and twice in 2016, I was awarded patents for the design of a glucose meter.  Unique as a commercial product, this glucose meter recommends custom insulin doses for individual diabetics, under the care a physician.  So, I must be an MD?  A medical researcher?  Surely at the very least, I must know a diabetic?  The answer to these usual assumptions is “No”.  I had exactly zero experience with diabetes, medical devices, and had never even worked in the general area of consumer products.  In fact, this wasn’t even the specialty of Menlo Innovations, the company I contracted with at the time. 

If it wasn’t expertise that put me in the .004%, then what was it?  This patent was the result was the disciplined use of Design Thinking and Lean Start-up methods.   These methods require high levels of empathy, creativity, low ego, and collaborative capabilities.  Companies are consistently winning with Design Thinking, Lean Start-up, so their use is gaining traction in the market.  These approaches were creating opportunities women even before the terms were coined.  Here is how it worked for me.

A client company had a vision of a world where diabetics could, under the care of a physician, get customized recommendations for insulin from a programmable glucose meter.  They contracted with Menlo Innovations to design and build a product that would fulfill that vision.  Along with a partner, I was given the task to figure out what we needed to do to gather the data we needed, then to use that data to design the glucose meter. With no prior knowledge, we didn’t have many assumptions about the lives of diabetics, or even what made for a good glucose meter.  We decided to go to the source and start learning from diabetics.   

Starting with empathy for our potential customers and the fact that all use glucose meters. We devised an experiment that would incorporate both. 

Starting with empathy for our potential customers and the fact that all use glucose meters.  We devised an experiment that would incorporate both.  While we went to local drug stored and purchased every available glucose meter, Project Managers worked to identify diabetics who would be willing to meet us at Panera Bread for an hour to talk to us about their experience as a diabetic.  Within 2 days, we had 10 diabetics and 10 glucose meters and were ready to run an experiment to determine what diabetics thought was the best existing glucose meter on the market.

First, we met our subjects at Panera Bread for a 90 minute session.  For a $25.00 Panera gift card, our diabetic subjects spent the first half our simply talking about their life experience.  One of us took notes, while the other asked questions and then, when appropriate, deeper questions about the challenges life as a diabetic.  This helped us build a well-rounded understanding of the challenges facing diabetic patients in general, but also allowed us a deep pool of data to pull from when fleshing out a full picture for others who would eventually help build out the product.

…we asked them to think out loud about the choices they were making.

Second, we dumped all 10 glucose meters out on the table in front of our users and asked them to place them from left to right.  To the left of the line were the “I hate this” glucose meters, and to right, the “I love this” meters.  While these potential customers worked on their subjective placement from 1 to 10, we asked them to think out loud about the choices they were making.  We were very surprised by the amount of thinking they did during the process and the passion they felt about their choices.  All ten participants shared detailed feelings and personal stories about features, shapes, feel, and even colors of the meters, sometimes in far more detail than we would have ever anticipated.

Both the rational and irrational seemed to inform each person’s decision about whether they would place a meter in the 4th instead of the 5th position, or in the 9th instead of the 10th.  This process looked very messy and seemed very personal, subjective, and multivariate.  However, over ten such interviews and experiments, a very clear picture began to emerge about where there was agreement and triangulation, versus when there was an outlier.

 

The fact that many established product companies spend millions implementing new products and features without a single experiment with customers is shocking.

 

Third, we combined the data into findings, collaborated in a group to determine what was similar and what was unique feedback.  Interesting, there was no emerging leader in glucose meters, there were only leading Features and leading placements of Features.   It was from this initial experiment, with less than 3 weeks of calendar time, that the prototype design for the 2010 patent was created.  We then pulled from Agile, continuing to learn and create iterations of the initial prototype,  then run more experiments.  All-in-all, by running experiments in iterations, I spent less than 6 months on a project that yielded 3 patents.

It’s amazing that such simple and seemingly non-scientific experimentation with potential customers can be powerful, efficient, and even patent-worthy.

It’s a little counter intuitive that such simple and seemingly non-scientific experimentation with potential customers can be that powerful, efficient, and even patent-worthy.  The fact that many established product companies spend millions implementing new products and features without running even one experiment with customers is shocking.  It’s worth mentioning that this patent was commercialized both domestically and internationally.  This effort resulted in a commercial product as well.  I thank Menlo Innovations for enabling such rewarding work – Rich Sheridan remains ahead of the market in leveraging Design Thinking and Lean Start-up.

I would love to hear from others in the .004% - I invite you to respond or comment with your story and perhaps we can find a way to increase these numbers.  Do you know a .004% member?  please forward this to them…I understand many have been so busy they haven’t had time to do the math!

Design Thinking? Use Power Personas

Justonedoesnotwork.jpg

Design Thinking is essential to creating the innovative products and services that now drive the Digital Economy.  Companies without the ability to imbed Design Thinking within their culture and processes will be challenged and ultimately disrupted, while those who embrace this client-centric and empathy-driven approach will be rewarded with increased market share and brand loyalty.  Knowing this, many companies have begun creating Personas as the way to stay focused on stakeholders, customers and users.

Personas were originally confined to marketing departments and mainly used to explain segmentation and brand strategy.  In 2004, Personas were introduced as a way to think about software design in Alan Cooper’s 2004 book, The Inmates are Running the Asylum.

Now that many leaders are aware of the importance of Design Thinking, Power Personas have made their way into the Innovative Enterprises and now inform everything from Enterprise Strategy and Pricing Models to Call Scripts and budget prioritization.  There is now a growing understanding that leveraging Power Personas can mean being first to market, attaining rapid customer adoption, capturing market share, and using valuable technology resources strategically.   Instead, those ignoring this vital component will likely experience increasing customer attrition, and market erosion.   

Many companies create Personas as an up-front imperative, but their power is crushed under the pressures of budgets, timelines, and resources. Typically, these Personas have not been created for Design Thinking, but were carefully crafted for an internal leadership audience –mostly by either Marketing or UX Design teams.  These Personas look pretty, play well to leadership to get budget approval, but have no power to help your organization leverage Design Thinking to assure customer centricity from concept to delivery.  These flat and lifeless Personas have no actual Power to guide Strategy, Product Development, or Customer Interaction.

As a leader, do you believe the answer in your organization to “Do you use Personas?” would be answered, “Sure, we created several last year and you can find them on the shared drive?”  If so, your organization does not use Power Personas.   More importantly, Design Thinking within your organization is likely stuck.  The risk of disruption is increasing.  Using Power Personas will begin to de-risk your organization.

If you aren’t sure how to get started with Power Personas,  follow this simple guideline to get started understanding Power Personas and how they are created for Design Thinking: 

Power Personas are:

 DATA-DRIVEN

Power Personas are created with data from the market, call center, feedback sessions, interviews, observations, click-through data and competitive research.  This data is collaboratively distilled into the Power Persona.  The data used reflects the importance of the Persona to the product or service, and is refreshed with the most relevant data to inform decision-making at every level from Strategy to Execution.  If Personas are created by a single person at a computer with Google Images and PowerPoint, it is simply a piece of a marketing presentation that was created as a check-mark for leadership.  It is NOT a Power Persona.  Take the time to get real data to support a real Power Personas and communicate that Data when collaborating to flesh-out your PPs.

ELABORATED

Power Personas feel real and evoke empathy, which is where Design Thinking starts.  By having this effect on Employees, Stakeholders, Product Management, and Technologists, they ultimately win very real customer(s) and stakeholders.  Power Personas always have real-sounding names, hobbies and families, hopes and dreams.  If not created with rich and believable backgrounds, a Persona is flat and lifeless and loses is Power status.  Any Persona that is created with a joke name (i.e. Mike Medic or Melanie Millennial), is rendered impotent when it comes to evoking Design Thinking.  When developing Power Personas, employ Lean Start-up techniques such as “Getting Out of the Building” to observe potential buyers and capture these personal anecdotes, sit with people who take customer calls listen in, shadow sales on visits, walk a day in the life of a customer to test the Power Persona against reality.

AGGREGRATES

Power Personas are aggregates that represent the right stakeholder or customer population, but are never represent to only one or two individuals.  Particularly loud or demanding stakeholder or focus group participants are temping to use as a basis and the data for them is easily acquired and familiar.  However, this inevitably leads to creating too narrow focus and stifles Design Thinking.   With data, collaboratively brainstorm as many Personas as you can, then pull characteristics from each before you settle on a base to elaborate.   Power Personas influence data gathering, market testing, physical design, and research you conduct and solution you ultimately provide to customers and/or employees.   As a guide, you should be able to start with 50 candidate Power Personas for any effort before collaboratively narrowing and condensing.

REFERENCED

Deep consideration and conversations about a Power Personas starts before a new Product, Service, or Enhancement idea is entertained for funding.    When prioritizing the relevant Power Persona is front and center in the conversation and referred to by name (i.e. “Explain why this would be good for Jenny” Is Persona data brought into decision-making sessions?  Arguments break out about whether Mike Jenkins (for example) will be happy with a given pricing model or feature.  Power Personas are posted where work is taking place.  Everyone from the CEO to the researcher, to the product developer talks about the Power Personas.   Is this the case with the Personas your company is using?  If not, check out your D, E, and A.  Chances are you have not created Power Personas in the first place. If your answer is yes to these questions, then please email me your company information; I want to invest! You are ahead of the curve and will surely outpace your competition.

 SIGNIFICANT

Power Personas are always play a significant role in enabling Design Thinking and thus move the needle in the market – but only if there is a market in the first place.  The good news is that the process of creating Power Personas reduces the risk offering the wrong product, service, or enhancement.  Gathering data to create Power Personas, leads to early indications of unprofitable markets, lack of desirability, and small stakeholder populations.  Ultimately, this process changes or even kills risky business models and ideas before they become a budget-breaking failure or brand issue.  Power Personas always represent powerful stakeholder populations -  you can’t substantiate a strategy, idea, product, or enhancement with a Power Persona, it’s time to change direction.

Remember that Power Personas are D.E.A.R.S. to make it further, faster with Design Thinking.  Later I will discuss using multiple Power Personas simultaneously to increase revenue and efficiency when pursuing complex markets.  Stay tuned if your business is serving Silent Generation, Baby Boomer, and Millennials simultaneously or trying to retain current customers while growing a different customer base.

It's Time for Product Craftsmanship

dreamstime_xxl_65460323.jpg

The biggest challenge for Agile is no longer establishing SCRUM teams or creating working software - the challenge in today’s fast-moving economy is releasing software that will move customers to buy and move the needle for business.    In Agile, we practice Software Craftsmanship, but now the new imperative must be Product Craftsmanship.  Here’s why:

To quote the first principle of the Agile Manifesto: “Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software.” If we deliver early and continuously, do we know that we are also delivering value?   I ask myself these questions: Why doesn’t SCRUM, Kanban, or Scaled Frameworks result in market success? Why are enterprises with high-performing Agile teams still falling behind the competition?

Should we be satisfied with “better ways to create software” as an end goal, or is now the time to aim for something more meaningful?

As the community of “guiding Agilists,” we are becoming the root cause of brand erosion and market disruption for our clients.  We continue to “help” our clients iteratively release software that no one will buy, no one will use, and may ultimately cost our clients their share of the Digital Economy.  Should we be satisfied with “better ways to create software” as an end goal, or is it now time to aim for something more meaningful?  We could be delivering a competitive edge, enabling enterprise success, and yes, even creating higher stock prices for our clients.

Those of us who have spent years working on Transformation know that success depends on more than the software development organization, yet I have heard many seasoned colleagues dismiss success with users or the market as a “Business problem.” We may have a product owner, but we are light on helping their leadership truly understand Agile or how to create a backlog.  This attitude leaves product owners and product management teams alone to struggle with prioritizing and what valuable and usable means.

With only rare exceptions, technology teams still claim success and move on to the next big thing.

These business partners and stakeholders are also the folks left to live with the product (and customer feedback) released by the “high-performance team."  With only rare exceptions, technology teams still claim success and move on to the next big thing. This trend makes Agile Transformation and even Agile adoption spotty, with stalls and resets rampant. We focus on Software Craftsmanship, when this problem can only be solved with Product Craftsmanship.

From the beginning, the Agile Manifesto valued minimizing waste through minimizing documentation while encouraging collaboration and communications.  Lean adds more language around minimizing waste. However Agile and Lean do not merely suggest minimizing waste in all of its forms, they also encourage understanding of customers and economics. For example: What is the cost of delay for implementing one Feature before another?

Some of the tools of Product Craftsmanship are already seeing success in Agile. Those who have spent any time with the Scaled Agile Framework or read Don Reinertsen’s book The Principles of Product Development Flow can see elements of planning and prioritization based on value.  Reinertsen suggests “taking the economic view,” and Leffingwell prioritizes based on “weighted shortest job first.” But sadly, Agilists in these scenarios usually end up coaching a planning processes and assume that software craftsmanship and product craftsmanship already exist in the organization.

We must start coaching and teaching both Software Craftsmanship and Product Craftsmanship,  otherwise we will lead clients to disruption. 

So, who are the Product Craftsmen? In the Lean Start-up community, Eric Reis and colleagues such as Steve Blank, Brant Cooper, Alex Osterwalder, and Yves Pigner seem to have Product Craftsmanship well in hand. According to that community, you need to test your assumptions (or Hypotheses) in real time while developing an idea. You then pivot as needed, change your business model as you learn, and constantly “get out of the building” to gather data and validate what will truly be successful in the market.

A perfect example of this is a scene in the movie The Social Network in which Mark Zuckerberg is racking his brain, knowing the product didn’t yet have what it would take to be a success. A classmate named Dustin runs over:

DUSTIN: “There’s a girl in your art history class. Her name is Stephanie Attis. Do you happen to know if she has a boyfriend?”

MARK: “Why am I being interrupted?”

DUSTIN: “Have you ever seen her with anyone? And if not, do you happen to know if she’s looking to go out with anyone?”

MARK: “Dustin. People don’t walk around with a sign on them that says—“

Mark stops and realizes what his product needs to be successful: a relationship status. The rest is history.  Mark was successful because he left his dorm room, went out into the world, listened to his users, and immediately changed the product based on what he learned.  Turns out Facebook was somewhat successful.

It’s very likely that if your business isn’t doing what Mr. Zuckerberg did as a way of working, you might as well burn your investment money - you won’t build the right product. The Lean Start-up approach works, and some smart enterprises are already adopting as many aspects of this system as possible. Lean Startup is a proven way to assure a valuable Product Model and it puts you on the path to Product Craftsmanship.

In the meantime, what is the Agile Community offering? We say the product owner owns the backlog and for the most part, that’s the full extent of our participation in Product Craftsmanship. Sometimes we might say something that sounds impressive, but is merely time-based: “You need to break epics into features and then break those down into stories that will fit into an iteration”.  Where is the value? Where is the guidance to assure that value is being created based on solid, client focused empirical data?

We must start coaching and teaching both Software Craftsmanship and Product Craftsmanship - otherwise we will lead our clients to disruption.  Or perhaps Agile simply becomes irrelevant.

 

Digital Transformation Changes the Game

dreamstimemaximum_87039633.jpg

I was working with a large company that had started piloting a Digital Delivery model in one business line.  They had co-located the business, technology, and support functions.  The pilot was a success – the team had delivered improved product line performance in less than 6 months.  They had even trained the call center and created a marketing campaign.  However, the rest company continues to use old PMO model of percent allocating resources to projects.  They were delivering more projects than ever…but with increasing client attrition.   

The COO had called a meeting with his direct reports to discuss expanding the teaming model, but had gotten push back from his leadership team.  They said they communicated the urgency of client losses to their organizations, and that pulling people away from active projects would cause disruption and delays.  

Next he called a meeting with me and here's an except:

COO: I don't get it.  How am I going to convince these guys that we need to rapidly expand the team model so we can release full solutions out to our clients?  They all know we have a big problem with client attrition.  They tell me they are communicating urgency to their people, but the first pilot team released a solution that stopped client erosion – and they did it 10 months early. 

Me: Think of it like this: Most of your employees are experts and excellent at the jobs they have today.  They are like professional-level bowlers who are awesome at bowling strikes.  All day, they get a ball, they bowl strikes.  The more strikes, the more your leadership is rewarding them.  Leaders and management communicate urgency, everyone says “You got it, Boss!” and start to bowl strikes faster. Now you are saying "We are all going to start playing BASKETBALL!"

COO: But this is what I want.  I want teams that can deliver on a common goal, working together - getting solutions out to market for our business and for our clients.  We can't have individuals bowling strikes with no understanding of what is happening on the 'other lanes.'

Me:  Yes!  Here is what is happening on the ground, though.  We say: "Today, we are going to start learning how to play BASKETBALL" and we hear: "GREAT... but can I still use a bowling ball?  See, I already know how to use a bowling ball, and it’s still a ball.  I’ll even call it a basketball.” We explain that people get hurt when they try to catch a pass if you use a bowling ball, and the next question is “Well, can I at least stay in this alley, it has hard wood floors? It’s narrow, and I can put up bumpers if I want to –”.  This conversation slows down any move to model we used with the pilot team.

COO:  And now, by communicating urgency to their people, my leadership team has basically told everyone “Bowl Faster!”

This is a common scenario.  Though every organization may have a different structure or business model when they start, Digital Transformation must fundamentally change the game you are playing.  Messages that your leadership sends through the hierarchy (or rumor mill) can make or break employee willingness change the way they work.  

How many of your company goals can be met if your Leaders communicate the same rules they have for over a decade, but with more urgency?   The answer is NONE.  Your Leadership’s understanding of this fundamental concept, as well as the communication of it to the rest organization is imperative. 

…and sports analogy usually helps. :)

Inside Menlo Innovations - an Intro From an Ex-Menlonian

I was in start-ups and being somewhat of a road warrior.  My own start-up won an Inc. Web Award, I'd been to Dubai, and then I had to get divorced.  Without going into much detail, what it meant to me was that I had to do something to support my family that didn't mean weekly travel.

Enter Rich Sheridan, CEO of Menlo Innovations.  At this point I can't recall who made that introduction, but I do remember what they said: "you HAVE to have coffee with Rich!"  There's something about a combination of passion and story telling ability that makes Rich one of the more captivating people to talk to.  He met me and then invited me up to see Menlo...I was instantly in love with the place.  The walls were full of paper, the air was a-buzz with the chatter of innovation.  I couldn't help but want to be a part of it.

You can't just pass an interview with Rich to have the opportunity to work at Menlo.  You have to go through an "Extreme Interview,"  This means a cattle-call style interview, at night, with (in my case) over 40 other interviewees all in the same open space.  Rich introduces himself, welcome's everyone, and advises those there to get work: "your job is to get the other person hired."  After that, it's pairing with three different people on three different tasks all while being watched by three different "facilitators" who are already do work for Menlo.

As facilitators, you look for things like sense of humor, ability to share the pen, accept ideas from their partner?  Are they overbearing or do they listen well to their partner?  How do they do under the pressure of trying to get progress on an hour long task when they only have 20 minutes to complete it?  At the end of the night, when candidates leave, facilitators gather for dinner, pictures of interviews are projected on a screen, and the three who observed the tasks vote with thumbs (up, down, or middle for undecided.   If there isn't a consensus, discussion, sometimes very passionate and spirited discussion ensues.   Successful candidates progress.

Because all team roles pair at Menlo, the next step is to pair in with different projects in one day, then 3 days, then a week, then three weeks if you are successful.  With feedback all along the way.  Success means that you are generally back on the schedule every week - as long as client work remains. 

I was lucky to be on that schedule for almost 3 years in the late 2000's.  Lucky because it allowed me to learn Agile from soup to nuts, lucky because it enabled me understand how Innovation and Lean Start-up work as a system, and lucky to work with passionate and brilliant fellow Menlonians.  Personally, those were the roughest three years of my life, but professionally I still pull from that experience at least weekly to inform the way I think about my company, my clients, and my work.

In my next Menlo related post, I'll talk more about Menlo's process, in the meantime you can read Rich's book, "Joy".

Personal Message from Holly Bielawa

sl11.jpg

My father was an astrophysicist and my mother had her own T.V. show when she was in her early twenties.  He was an atheist, she a devout catholic.  When I was 12, my father received a Fulbright Lectureship and moved the family to Sri Lanka.  As a result, I went through all of the awkwardness of puberty in a school where everyone spoke 3 languages...except, of course, for me. 

Our childhood experiences and our upbringing effect us well into adulthood, then go on to impact how we work and how we raise or own children.   I would encourage anyone to spend (even just a little) time reflecting on what key factors from those years effect your work, thinking, and interactions.  What did I learn from that kind of reflection?  Here are a few:

  1. You are never going to be the smartest person in the room...and if you are, you're in trouble - surrounding yourself with people you feel are smart is enriching, if a little tough on the ego from time to time.  The alternative?  Never learning from others, and running the risk of being ensnared by your own myopic views or, ego-driven delusions of grandeur.  Do I believe that you can learn from anyone?  Yes, but that's not the same as killing your ego and stretching yourself with every day interaction with friends and co workers.   It took me until after college to take this to heart.
  2. People with very different views can still agree on fundamentals - diversity of thought leads to creativity and good problem solving.  Is it always comfortable?  NO.  I think my parents were experts in navigating their differences in conversations about how to raise children.  They did disagree, but they also had and showed respect to one another.  Somehow they always ended up agreed and united - very inconveniently for me sometimes.
  3. Tolerating ambiguity can lead to better decisions and results - It's okay to be uncomfortable.  Sometimes you can be tempted or even pressured to make a decision just to feel better that something (anything!) was decided...when you don't have enough data.   YOU can AND SHOULD WAIT - When we moved to Sri Lanka, we landed with no place to stay and spent a full a week living at a YWCA.  It wasn't fun being a teenager and not knowing how long we would be living in one room with no air conditioning.  Under a lot of pressure from friends, parents, and their own children, they still flew us to a foreign country with no firm place to live.    It makes sense now but WOW, moving around the world with no promise of a permanent place to live was very uncomfortable for the whole family.  They couldn't trust that they knew anything until they were on the ground.  This was in the 80's -  no online reviews!  Do you need to make a decision right now? mDeciding to soon can cause permanent regret.
  4. Learning that constant failure doesn't kill you very advantageous - Anyone who got good grades and was rewarded according knows that the right answer is good, and not knowing the answer is bad.  You are a leader because you are smart and know the answers a lot of the time.  This paradigm is shifting FAST.  Unless you are a Marketer, Developer, HR Person, Compliance and Risk Expert, and Salesperson, other people have to make decisions and now about what you know, it's about how fast those you are leading can learn.  Now success relies on risk taking, innovation, and speed at all levels of the organization- Now you have to be the servant leader who actively enables fast, cheap failure.  Constant learning by EVERYONE is only way to adapt in the Digital Economy.  For me,  having a true rock scientist for a father and a bona fide TV star for a mother, immediate didn't happen much of the time for me.  I learned A LOT, constantly.   Seriously though, the basic understanding that I can always be proven wrong and that I had better be able to back myself up with data has been incredibly helpful.  Use Data, demand feedback, interact with customers, push decision-making down.  Make a hypothesis, test it.  Shrink the costs of failure...you'll success faster that way too.

Digital Mindset vs. Mergers and Acquisitions Mindset

In my career in start-ups and as an executive in the Digital Space, it's become very clear to me that leadership mind-set matters.  ALWAYS.   Everything from company strategy, goals, to culture are all set from the top.  Whether or not they are formally communicated, or left to trickle through the rumor mill,   the organizational ability to Innovate using Lean-Start-up, Design Thinking or even Agile relies on leadership's formal or informal point of view.  How does your organization rate on Leadership Mindset?  

I've worked with and for a variety of companies in "Growth Mode," but growing doesn't mean ORGANICALLY or with an innovation mindset.   Public companies are especially subject to Mergers and Acquisitions vs Innovation mindset, but here are some ways to tell whether your efforts in Innovation and Digital Transoformatin will get support, or be slow-rolled by leadership.

If you are already in the process of buying another company, this may be a tip-off but here are a few reasons that leadership may even be in the middle of an acquisition but STILL support a Digital Transformation:

  • They are buying a company that has a new technology it would take longer to build internally
  • An acquisition is successful in a key market that would compliment your company's existing buisiness
  • The employees of the Acquisition target possess skills sets that aren't present in house

 If any of these ring true that's great!  Many times, however, a company will be merge with a competitor to GROW SCALE.  This point of this is, generally, to keep from being disrupted by becoming a bigger player (too big to fail, anyone?).  This pleases investors, feels to leadership that they are building a company that can win on scale alone,  and increases market share and profitability without the need for Innovation, Product or Design Thinking.  This is the mindset that will kill (or at least slow roll) any Digital, Lean, or Agile mindsets that may have been forming within parts or the organization.  The mindset here will be integration and consolidation only - at least in the short term.

Keep this in mind and weigh how fast and where you start with Digital in your organization.  Start small with the willing, and have a lot of success to show leadership before expanding. 

Lean and Agile, or Lean vs. Agile? (hint: depends on why you ask)

When you've been through a Lean Transformation, you have probably started thinking about how technology fits into all of this.  I have been asked to speak on this subject several times, but reason organization ask for a session can be quite different.   One of the most common asks is very general, along the lines of "Can you come in and explain to our organization what the difference is between Lean and Agile?"   Below is a look look at some of the underlying questions that organizations face with regard to Lean and Agile Transformation, taking Lean into Technology Organizations, or communication between practitioners of "Lean" and practitioners of "Agile".

  • We use Huddle Boards, they have Stand-ups - can't we all just use the same tools and aren't the the same thing anyway?
  • Why won't technology understand the concept of standard work?
  • Agile looks a lot like Lean, so why is this a separate effort?
  • Lean is so much more powerful and proven valuable, why aren't is our company leveraging Lean more?

On a principle level, there is no difference between Lean and Agile.  Both are about leveraging data, respecting people, problem solving, and continuous improvement and both grew out of Lean Manufacturing (yep, Agile did too).  For years, Lean was used for problem solving in Manufacturing, whereas Technologists started leveraging Lean thinking to solve the much more constrained problem set of early and frequent delivery of valuable software.  Fair enough.  Right?  Not really.

Depending on how your Lean Implementation went and how any Agile Transformation is going, both your Lean and Agile work may get stuck at the team level.  Setting up in cross-functional teams saves time, people like it, and work is proven to get done faster, but it can also results in Lean teams (on the business side) and Agile teams (within technology) working separately, not having of view of why they exist.  We then choose a tool set,  a structure, a process, roles.  We stop at one M (in Lean terms), or SCRUM/Kanban teams (in Agile).  

If change efforts (whether Lean or Agile) are not rooted in delivering on Strategic BUSINESS Imperatives,  then expect to bogged down in roles, org structure, HR issues, and language wars.  Both Lean and Agile are both a means to an end and that end is the success of the company.  A well articulated and implementable strategy with success measures (KPI's, yes) allows your people to be principles based, success driven and enables employees to organize, collaborate, and prioritize to deliver to strategic goals - the results will be both lean and agile.

Cross-Functional Demystified

I was speaking at a conference a few weeks ago and got a question about Cross-Functional Teams.  The way he asked the question, it was clear what he meant - he meant "how do I get QA to work with my development team?"  It may shock you to hear me say that having a SCRUM team of Developers and Testers does NOT mean the team is cross functional.  I'll explain:

In football you have catchers, running-back, quarterbacks, defensive lineman, etc.   If the opposing team fumbles the ball right in front of a lineman what does he do?  Stand there and say "Where are they guys who are supposed to run this ball?  I don't run the ball.  HELP!!!"  No.  He grabs the ball and runs as fast as he can...sometimes even being responsible for the game-winning touchdown.  That's what we mean by being cross functional.  How does this football player know what to do?   He knows it's his responsibility.  He knows the rules of the game.  In addition to his squad work, he works with the rest of the team on real plays in true game scenarios.

So what am I saying?  Have the SKILL SETS on the team is one thing.  Having people who are given permission to, expected to be and TRAINED TO BE cross-functional is something else.  Cross-Functionality isn't just a skill set it's a MINDSET that breaks silos across disciplines and hierarchies.  It has to be taught, recognized, and rewarded because it isn't easy.   The risk of not being cross functional?  Bottlenecks and your organizational "dropping the ball" in the market, losing to competition, and falling behind on the innovation curve.

Check back for a post about how incentives can help.

Design Thinking? Use Power Personas

Justonedoesnotwork.jpg

Design Thinking?

Use Power Personas

Design Thinking is essential to creating the innovative products and services that now drive the Digital Economy.  Companies without the ability to imbed Design Thinking within their culture and processes will be challenged and ultimately disrupted, while those who embrace this client-centric and empathy-driven approach will be rewarded with increased market share and brand loyalty.  Knowing this, many companies have begun creating Personas as the way to stay focused on stakeholders, customers and users.

Personas were originally confined to marketing departments and mainly used to explain segmentation and brand strategy.  In 2004, Personas were introduced as a way to think about software design in Alan Cooper’s 2004 book, The Inmates are Running the Asylum.

Now that many leaders are aware of the importance of Design Thinking, Power Personas have made their way into the Innovative Enterprises and now inform everything from Enterprise Strategy and Pricing Models to Call Scripts and budget prioritization.  There is now a growing understanding that leveraging Power Personas can mean being first to market, attaining rapid customer adoption, capturing market share, and using valuable technology resources strategically.   Instead, those ignoring this vital component will likely experience increasing customer attrition, and market erosion.   

Many companies create Personas as an up-front imperative, but their power is crushed under the pressures of budgets, timelines, and resources. Typically, these Personas have not been created for Design Thinking, but were carefully crafted for an internal leadership audience –mostly by either Marketing or UX Design teams.  These Personas look pretty, play well to leadership to get budget approval, but have no power to help your organization leverage Design Thinking to assure customer centricity from concept to delivery.  These flat and lifeless Personas have no actual Power to guide Strategy, Product Development, or Customer Interaction.

As a leader, do you believe the answer in your organization to “Do you use Personas?” would be answered, “Sure, we created several last year and you can find them on the shared drive?”  If so, your organization does not use Power Personas.   More importantly, Design Thinking within your organization is likely stuck.  The risk of disruption is increasing.  Using Power Personas will begin to de-risk your organization.

If you aren’t sure how to get started with Power Personas,  follow this simple guideline to get started understanding Power Personas and how they are created for Design Thinking: 

Power Personas are:

 DATA-DRIVEN

Power Personas are created with data from the market, call center, feedback sessions, interviews, observations, click-through data and competitive research.  This data is collaboratively distilled into the Power Persona.  The data used reflects the importance of the Persona to the product or service, and is refreshed with the most relevant data to inform decision-making at every level from Strategy to Execution.  If Personas are created by a single person at a computer with Google Images and PowerPoint, it is simply a piece of a marketing presentation that was created as a check-mark for leadership.  It is NOT a Power Persona.  Take the time to get real data to support a real Power Personas and communicate that Data when collaborating to flesh-out your PPs.

 

  ELABORATED

Power Personas feel real and evoke empathy, which is where Design Thinking starts.  By having this effect on Employees, Stakeholders, Product Management, and Technologists, they ultimately win very real customer(s) and stakeholders.  Power Personas always have real-sounding names, hobbies and families, hopes and dreams.  If not created with rich and believable backgrounds, a Persona is flat and lifeless and loses is Power status.  Any Persona that is created with a joke name (i.e. Mike Medic or Melanie Millennial), is rendered impotent when it comes to evoking Design Thinking.  When developing Power Personas, employ Lean Start-up techniques such as “Getting Out of the Building” to observe potential buyers and capture these personal anecdotes, sit with people who take customer calls listen in, shadow sales on visits, walk a day in the life of a customer to test the Power Persona against reality.

 

AGGREGRATES

Power Personas are aggregates that represent the right stakeholder or customer population, but are never represent to only one or two individuals.  Particularly loud or demanding stakeholder or focus group participants are temping to use as a basis and the data for them is easily acquired and familiar.  However, this inevitably leads to creating too narrow focus and stifles Design Thinking.   With data, collaboratively brainstorm as many Personas as you can, then pull characteristics from each before you settle on a base to elaborate.   Power Personas influence data gathering, market testing, physical design, and research you conduct and solution you ultimately provide to customers and/or employees.   As a guide, you should be able to start with 50 candidate Power Personas for any effort before collaboratively narrowing and condensing.

 

REFERENCED

Deep consideration and conversations about a Power Personas starts before a new Product, Service, or Enhancement idea is entertained for funding.    When prioritizing the relevant Power Persona is front and center in the conversation and referred to by name (i.e. “Explain why this would be good for Jenny” Is Persona data brought into decision-making sessions?  Arguments break out about whether Mike Jenkins (for example) will be happy with a given pricing model or feature.  Power Personas are posted where work is taking place.  Everyone from the CEO to the researcher, to the product developer talks about the Power Personas.   Is this the case with the Personas your company is using?  If not, check out your D, E, and A.  Chances are you have not created Power Personas in the first place. If your answer is yes to these questions, then please email me your company information; I want to invest! You are ahead of the curve and will surely outpace your competition.

 SIGNIFICANT

Power Personas are always play a significant role in enabling Design Thinking and thus move the needle in the market – but only if there is a market in the first place.  The good news is that the process of creating Power Personas reduces the risk offering the wrong product, service, or enhancement.  Gathering data to create Power Personas, leads to early indications of unprofitable markets, lack of desirability, and small stakeholder populations.  Ultimately, this process changes or even kills risky business models and ideas before they become a budget-breaking failure or brand issue.  Power Personas always represent powerful stakeholder populations -  you can’t substantiate a strategy, idea, product, or enhancement with a Power Persona, it’s time to change direction.

Remember that Power Personas are D.E.A.R.S. to make it further, faster with Design Thinking.  Later I will discuss using multiple Power Personas simultaneously to increase revenue and efficiency when pursuing complex markets.  Stay tuned if your business is serving Silent Generation, Baby Boomer, and Millennials simultaneously or trying to retain current customers while growing a different customer base.