Category Archives: Organizational Change

Inclusion’s Ripple Effect

Posted by Judith Katz on July 29, 2011 None comments

A few years ago, when we at The Kaleel Jamison Consulting Group began thinking through the concept of Inclusion as the HOWSM, we could not have imagined how many dozens of business practices it might impact. Today, we don’t have to imagine it—we are seeing it happen.

Our clients are using Inclusion as the HOWSM in an ever-widening array of applications. Kaizens are incorporating the Inclusion as the HOWSM mindset to enhance the effectiveness of their teamwork. Global R&D functions, for whom communication from site to site can be a major challenge, are building online tools to foster greater awareness of people’s expertise—creating a global community, sparking collaboration, and increasing the speed of knowledge transfer. Manufacturing sites have brought people together to translate corporate strategy to their own specific operations. Supervisors and managers are listening to front-line people in the effort to identify pockets of waste and areas for innovation.

Inclusion as the HOWSM is becoming foundational in many day-to-day interactions—from one-on-ones, staff meetings, and yellow belt projects to tier meetings and town halls.  It is becoming a critical dimension in changing interactions within the organizations with which we work, accelerating results and performance.

Moreover, organizations have adopted Inclusion as the HOWSM to navigate traditional business milestones:

  • Emerging from bankruptcy
  • Merging with or acquiring another company
  • Closing plants and offices
  • Creating new ways of interacting with vendors, suppliers, and customers
  • Managing rapid expansion
  • Breaking through competitive barriers
  • Reinventing brand value propositions

These applications illustrate something we have always believed about inclusion: that, far from being a peripheral or conceptual tool, it is an imperative for how to do business, a new way to interact and lead organizations toward sustained success. Moreover, Inclusion as the HOWSM can serve as a fundamental mindset in nearly every aspect of business, in nearly every corner of the world. Almost any issue or change confronting the organization can be addressed more effectively by including the right people, at the right time, doing the right work.

When organizations approach Inclusion as a HOW to achieve organizational results, extraordinary things happen. Decision makers gain a 360-degree view of the issue at hand—a view necessary for making better decisions. Knowledge and success practices transfer rapidly throughout the organization, allowing good ideas to be shared and applied more quickly and eliminating the waste of reinventing the wheel. People feel safe enough to speak up and share their ideas and perspectives so that problems are solved faster. Individuals and teams are willing to make problems visible more quickly and identify innovative solutions in collaboration within and across business units. The entire organization can begin to perform at unheard-of levels.

Organizations using Inclusion as the HOWSM are experiencing these changes—which is why many of them have committed to driving an inclusion mindset throughout their systems. They stand as evidence of the power of Inclusion as the HOWSM to accelerate results and drive ever higher performance.

Get to Know Us

Posted by Corey Jamison on May 5, 2011 None comments

Do you sense a generation gap in your workplace? It may have less to do with the difference in generations than with tenure in the organization—and, more specifically, attitudes toward change.

In one corner are associates who have served the company for years, even decades. They have long since assimilated into the organization’s ways of working and interacting. Many of them see no reason for change and actively resist it. When approached with a new idea by someone with less experience, they might react with “wait until you’ve been here as long as I have, and then you’ll understand why we do things the way we do.”

In the other corner are change agents new to the organization. Often in the early stages of their career, they walk in the door, see the need for change everywhere, and press to make it happen. They are accustomed to the idea (from their schooling, their upbringing, or other influences) that they are entitled to start reshaping things in their environment from day one.  

Both groups are invaluable to the organization. Each brings a perspective that the other needs but does not have. Together they can move the organization forward far more effectively than each group could on its own.

What if they meet in the middle?

Those of longer tenure can, and should, honor the desire for change. Without change in this fast-changing marketplace, no organization can survive—and the perspectives of all associates, including new people, are needed to identify the changes necessary. At the same time, new people can advance the organization more effectively by supplementing their zeal for change with an ever-growing knowledge of the organization as it is. The more they know about the organization, the more aligned—and thus more relevant—their ideas for change are likely to be.

Many organizations fail to realize the importance of communicating this knowledge of the organization.  Often people learn their specific job tasks first and then, on their own, start picking up the ways of interacting that characterize the organization. If the environment were seen as part of the learning curve, new people might integrate faster into the organization and thus contribute more relevant ideas more quickly.

To longtime associates, the message is: welcome the perspectives of others. To new people, the message is: get to know us. Only when both happen can greater collaboration, meaningful change, and higher performance start to take place.

The Tale Behind the Tagline

Posted by Judith Katz on March 24, 2011 None comments

New taglines often come with fanfare. Behind ours is a story, and it speaks to both our foundational idea and the way we work.

Nearly all organizations are familiar with inclusion. Most of their people think of it the way they learned it: as an initiative or a program, something separate from day-to-day operations or core objectives, not related to the bottom line. That presents a problem in times like these, when—amid economic stress, intensified competition, and accelerating change—many organizations greatly reduce, if not dispense with, such initiatives to focus on what they view as the “essentials.”

When we worked with a leader in a Fortune 50 company in 2006, she described the creation of an inclusive culture as essential to achieving goals, a light went on for us. “Do you know what this means?” she asked her people after we began some education and strategy work with the senior executive team. “If we really embrace inclusion, it changes everything: the way we work, the questions we ask, the decisions we make, who we involve as we set objectives.”

We saw it too. It has led us to Inclusion as the HOWSM —not inclusion for inclusion’s sake, but inclusion as a tool for achieving higher performance. Hence our new tagline:

Inclusion as the HOWSM
Achieving Higher Performance
Accelerating Results

The fact that this latest thinking originated with a client speaks to the nature of our client partnerships. In a word, we co-create solutions. Our clients expand our thinking; we bring them fresh ideas from a new vantage point. In the process, we both learn and create new solutions together.  And we prepare them to continue to sustain the change long after we are gone.

Inclusion as the HOWSM is about enabling organizations to gain advantages amid fast-changing conditions. As the marketplace moves ever faster and becomes more complex, organizations must unleash the talents, experience, and knowledge of all their people to address the problems and opportunities that arise. This can only happen when people feel valued, heard, and empowered to bring their thinking, speak up, and be bold—when they have the supportive energy from peers and leaders to do their best work to achieve their own and the organization’s goals.

By including people across many differences—functions, departments, roles, as well as background, age, ethnicity, gender, race, and nationality—organizations build trust and gain a breadth of perspective they cannot get any other way. Broader perspectives lead to better decisions in a complex world. Greater trust eliminates time-wasting behaviors (e.g., information hoarding and protection of self-interest) and thus speeds knowledge transfer.

Broader perspectives, faster knowledge transfer and application, and better decisions deliver what every organization seeks: higher and higher performance that exceeds the desired results. That, as our new tagline makes clear, is what we continue to be committed to helping our clients achieve—greater results and higher performance through greater inclusion.

From Diversity to Differences

Posted by KJCG Webmaster on February 6, 2009 None comments

By Judith H. Katz and Frederick A. Miller 

The conversation about diversity has moved organizations forward in many positive ways, but recently the term diversity has lost some of the usefulness and power that it once held.   

The challenge today is that when people hear the term diversity they immediately think it is synonymous with representation, referring only to women and people of color. This has left many other groups, including white men, out of the picture. When diversity was initially framed and started to be used in the seventies, it was a reaction to the specifically targeted anti-discrimination legislation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The term was meant to be an inclusive term—meaning all dimensions of difference and identities. It was meant to differentiate from Affirmative Action, which targeted under-represented groups, mostly women and people of color. It was intended to focus on the myriad of differences that people have and the need to bring the mix of differences to organizations. However the more organizations and individuals began to speak about seeking a “diverse” candidate it became a code for Affirmative Action, and no longer a descriptor, of the differences all people bring.   

The reality is we are all different. Every one of us is unique. Each person has something of value to offer—a perspective that no one else has. Even people who grew up in the same neighborhood and are the same age, gender, and race, bring uniqueness and difference. Identical twins are not identical. So to define some individuals and some populations as “diverse” and others as not does not make sense.  

Also, over the past thirty years there has been a major shift related to how differences are seen and valued: We have moved from seeing differences that people have as negative (believing that people who were different from the mainstream were somehow deficient or lacking in skills and abilities) to neutral (the desire to be blind to difference as a way to counteract negative stereotypes) to now seeing and believing that differences are an asset. Now, many recognize the need for differences to provide 360-degree vision (Miller, 1921)—diversity of thought, background, approach, and experience as adding value to our vision, enhancing creativity, and solving problems. 

As the conversation and comfort with differences expands in organizations, it is time to let go of the vestiges of the past. Globally, “diversity” is still seen as a United States-centric issue because it is still laden with the race and gender associations when heard outside the United States.   

Using the word differences to describe people’s value-added enables all people to be seen and become part of the conversation.

As organizations reframe the conversation from one of Diversity to one of Differences, it does not take away from dealing with the challenges we face because we are not all the same, including the challenges on the individual level (you and me), the social identity group level (people like me and people like you), and the organizational level (the institutionalization of the isms). In fact, it calls out for attending those mindsets and behaviors that make it difficult for all people to do their best work and make a contribution.    Organizations must face the challenge of having the mix of talent, background, and skills they need for business results. They will need to talk about the differences that make a difference within their organizations and what differences are needed for success. And, everyone is in that game; no one is on the side line…everyone is or needs to be included. Sad as it is many people in organizations have felt excluded at times because of some difference they bring or represent in the organization. This hurts productivity, causes waste, and results in an underutilization of talent that no organization can afford today.    When people feel seen and valued for who they are and how they can apply their individual and social identity group perspectives, experiences, skills, and talents in ways that contribute to the success of the organization, then they have the opportunity to do their best work.  

The irony of this critical shift from Diversity to Differences is that when our work in this field began, the concept of leveraging Differences was rejected in favor of assimilation and integration, a push toward creating uniformity—the melting pot. Successful 21st Century organizations, though, must engage in “new thinking” and leverage the differences that people bring in addition to their race and gender. By leveraging these differences, organizations can hope to achieve the 360-degree vision necessary for more effective and efficient problem solving and decision making. This is a critical organizational competency to navigate the turbulent waters of today’s marketplace. 

FROM Scarcity TO Abundance

Posted by Judith Katz on December 14, 2007 None comments

katz_judith.jpgIs there a limit to how many ideas you can have in one day? To dreaming new dreams? How many ideas have you had today? In the last five minutes? Ideas are infinite – leading to innovation, greater creativity and new ways of doing things. The challenge, of course, is how do we create an environment in which people feel safe enough to “think” not just alone but together? How do we create organizational environments that can really capitalize on the intellectual genius of their workforce? That is the challenge for the 21st century; and we are still very much in the infancy of this major revolution.

In previous posts we talked about the shift from the Industrial Revolution—an age in which mechanization ruled and people were seen as little more than hands and feet. Organizations are now struggling to make the transition to this new age where a person’s value is measured by their intellectual contributions, of which there are no restrictions or boundaries.

We are transitioning from a model of scarcity—of old mindsets of limitations, production and control to a new mindset of abundance in which competitive advantage comes from individuals’ and teams’ ability to outthink their competitors if given the right supports, systems and processes. We are moving to an age in which our capacity to innovate, and the need for speed of knowledge transfer and application will determine the ability to succeed which means we must trust one another and successfully share ideas and thinking more rapidly. Clearly if there are no limitations to our ability to think then there is no limitation on our ability to be innovative and creative.

The challenge, however, is that while we‘re moving towards a place where our best asset is our intellectual capital, organizations haven’t figured out the many ways to capture and capitalize on it. Mass collaboration and Global Co-Creation enabled by social networking platforms and Web 2.0 technology are a start, but they need to become a way of life inside organizations to make a difference. Most of the performance management and reward systems, promotion systems and structures are not yet designed to embrace and support our ability to think and ideate in organizations. When was the last time you actually had thinking time in your day-to-day work schedule? When was a meeting structured in such a way that people were able to bring their best thinking and not just top-of-mind answers as they hurry through their day?

Ask yourself again, “Is there a limit to what I can think?” If the response is “no,” then in that answer exists the crux of this revolution of ideas and intellectual capital

There are many things that need to change within organizations to make sure it is safe enough for people to share their thinking, and to capture and best leverage this intellectual capital.

Where would you start?

The Game Changing Generation

Posted by Judith Katz on November 30, 2007 None comments

katz_judith.jpg“Over the next two decades, 76 million Americans will be retiring and only 46 million will be entering the workplace to replace them, according to the American Society of Training and Development. The vast majority of those 46 million workers will be from Generation Y, also known as the Millennial generation.” (from Management Techniques for Bringing Out the Best in Generation Y)


In the 1970s, organizations were beginning to focus on the need to be more diverse in response to consumer demands. Now more than ever, it is the marketplace of talent driving the need for diversity and organizational change. Because of the imminent talent shortage caused by the retirement of 76 million Americans over the next 20 years, the Millennial generation is in a position to challenge workforce conventions and make organizational demands that previous generations had no leverage to make. These demands include fast-track career positioning, greater life work integration , additional training and cutting-edge technology, but the demands don’t stop there.

The Millennial generation is working to change the rules. They see themselves as consumers in a different sense – they are CHOOSING where and how they are going to work. This generation is unwilling to be pioneers of diversity and inclusion. Many of them watched their parents play those roles and their expectation is that organizations have become more diverse, instituted workplace flexibility and removed the barriers that have been identified over the past twenty plus years. They know they are expected to deliver – and they expect organizations to live up to those same rules. They are ready to contribute.

A recent New York Times article discussed one such example of Millennial expectations. Stanford Law students have undertaken a project to evaluate and hold accountable the prestigious law firms for their results with respect to diversity (the numbers of women, people of color and gay lawyers who are partners) and inclusive practices (including workplace flexibility and the number of required billable hours) by handing out “diversity report cards” to the big law firms

Beyond refusing to accept positions at firms that scored poorly, these “best and brightest” students have bigger plans. They will be lobbying top schools and universities to restrict recruiting by firms who scored in the bottom of the rankings. The students also have plans to send the scores to the general counsels of all Fortune 500 companies with the recommendation that the rankings be considered when selecting lawyers and law firms.

This is the first generation who can say, “Here are the rules we want to play by, so if you want the best and the brightest you need to be positioned to utilize our talents.” For this generation, it’s not all about the money; it’s about a healthy life work integration, an inclusive environment that is conducive to collaboration and innovation, a culture that invites their voice, their input and their ideas and most importantly, it’s about feeling valued and able to contribute.

“Firms that want the best students will be forced to respond to the market pressures that we’re creating,” said Andrew Bruck, a law student at Stanford and a leader of the project. This is just one more example of how the game is changing for organizations, and for those that say they just need more time to make improvements, it just might be too late.

Elephants and Giraffes and Diversity in a Box

Posted by Corey Jamison on November 26, 2007 None comments

jamison_corey_web.jpgToo often, organizations conceive of their diversity and inclusion efforts as pre-packaged, isolated programs that will, in a few simple steps, make the organization diverse. From a consultant’s perspective, to be working at a strategic systems level and trying to have the right conversations is frustrating when an organization is mired in an event-based diversity mindset; when what the organization really wants is diversity in a box.

Just when I think the conversation about inclusion has finally progressed passed the insulting Diversity in a Box portion, I’m reminded that many organizations are still not only working within this framework, but certain that it is the right thing to do. One of those reminders came last week during a potential client presentation.

Upon arriving on site I was greeted by a member of the organization’s Diversity Council and I asked her how that day’s event aligned with and connected to the organization’s inclusion efforts and diversity strategy. I learned the organization used to have diversity awareness months during the year; each month dedicated to and celebrating a different group. For example: Hispanic Month, Asia-Pacific Month, Disabled Month, and GLBT Month. But if that wasn’t bad enough she told me that the organization recently consolidated all its diversity into one month.

Now intrigued I pushed and asked what other efforts had been made to work towards a more diverse and inclusive culture and was told associates participated in an exercise during which they wore blindfolds and earmuffs so they could better empathize with those who are blind and Deaf. During a similar exercise in futility the associates pretended they were elephants and giraffes and together had to figure out how to build a house that would accommodate both.

At this point I was in a surreal situation that epitomized every stereotypical “Diversity in a Box” effort there is. I often joke about organizations having ethnic food months; but they were actually doing it. How about a Diversity through Poetry Monthly Newsletter? They’ve got one. Just when I thought it couldn’t get worse; it did.

The Supervisor of the Diversity Council member with whom I was speaking walked up and introduced herself and I thought; “Now I’ll get the real scoop on what efforts are really being made.” After explaining to me how the firm has affinity groups that work with the Marketing Department to tell them how to market to their people (groan) she abruptly stopped and asked me, “Do you have any advice with what we should do with our Asian population?” What we should DO with the Asian Population? Beyond being speechless I was disheartened that this organization, one that is widely recognized for doing Diversity well, is still doing it in a Box.

Diversity is not a problem to be managed; it is an opportunity to be leveraged for business growth and performance enhancement. To approach it in a segmented fashion, with a numbers driven approach, is an approach that is doomed to failure and also illustrates a complete misunderstanding of the meaning of leveraging diversity.

A truly diverse organization moves well beyond numbers and pockets of effort; it explicitly ties the essence of diversity – valuing people – to its mission, vision and purpose. Diversity can not be reached through newsletters and ethnic food month and is not an end unto itself; it is a vehicle for invigorating the organization and improving it in every way.

Seven Things Organizations can do to Enable Women’s Success

Posted by Judith Katz on October 16, 2007 None comments

katz_judith.jpgRecently while reading an e-newsletter from a professional organization, I came across yet another article about a mentoring program for women in the workplace. Although the article itself—about an approach to mentoring women in the workplace—was useful, I found myself upset, not by the content, but by the underlying mindset and approach.

For over 20 years, organizations have been implementing mentoring programs to support women’s and people of color’s ability to succeed in the workplace. Yet it is still quite clear that women of color, white women and men of color have not attained the level of success of their white male counterparts. With all the effort, you’d think we would be doing better by now – and although women and people of color have had some success moving into more senior leadership roles, we are far from having equity in the workplace.

The real issue is that we continue to misdiagnose the problem, leading us to use programs and approaches that only address a small part of the challenge. You can’t stop a boulder with a pea shooter and in many ways that is what we have been doing as organizations have worked to address the “women” and “people of color” “problem.” Although this blog is focused specifically on the question of systemic barriers for white women and women of color much of the same could be said about the barriers that men of color experience as well.

I was pleased to see a recent Harvard Business Review article that spoke to this very issue. ”Women and the Labyrinth of Leadership” discussed the fact that calling the barriers that women experience a “glass ceiling” actually is a misnomer; that the real experience is a labyrinth—a maze in which every twist and turn presents challenges and obstacles to success. By mislabeling or misdiagnosing the issue, we have been formulating simplistic approaches to a much more complex set of challenges. Many of the approaches focus more on tactics organizations and individual women can use rather than addressing the systemic issues of organizational policies, practices and structures just don’t work to enable and foster women’s success. Combine that with biases about women’s leadership styles, the lack of flexibility in many organizations and a lack of recognizing the real barriers that still exist for women and a maintenance of systems that are mired in the past without much hope of real change.

While mentoring is important, mentoring is only a small part of the solution. Women’s roles, styles and leadership are still often relegated to second-class status in the workplace and mentoring simply will not change the systemic structures that perpetuate this disadvantage. While organizations do need to consider how they can allow, support and have the flexibility to value and recognize differences, the real question for organizations is “Are you really committed to having a more diverse workforce and making the structural changes needed to support women and people of color to succeed?” If so, it will take radical change and a very different set of assumptions about flexibility, what constitutes a career, leadership styles and contribution.

Here are seven things an organization needs to do if it really wants to enable and support women’s success

1. Focus on output and added value rather than on fitting in and face time. Evaluating individuals based on contribution rather than how well they fit or how much face time they can offer can provide the needed flexibility to enable women to excel and succeed.

2. Assure that policies and practices in place create flexibility. Flexibility can be increased through support for on and off ramps in one’s career; part time and job sharing positions while staying on a career track. Create policies that enable women to contribute while recognizing that, at different stages of their career and life, they may need a career track that enables them to address both work and life responsibilities.

3. Develop competent managers who know how to coach and mentor a diverse workforce. Ensure all managers have the skill set to coach, mentor and develop women in the workforce. This includes their ability to manage flexible work arrangements and to support individuals’ career growth in career paths that are cutting edge in the 21st century.

4. Make sure women are working with colleagues and leaders who actively support them. You know who your supportive of a more diverse workplace leaders are—make sure women in the organization are not teamed or paired with leaders who will not actively support them.

5. Broaden the perspective of an effective leadership style to include styles that foster teamwork, engagement and collaboration. Leadership styles need to recognize and reward the different style and approach that women bring.

6. Understand and address that women of color and white women have a differentiated experience. Assure that approaches to women’s success examine and address the differentiated barriers that women of color experience from those of white women.

7. Remove barriers and biases that impact women differentially than men. Some actions to overcome these barriers include ensuring that women receive “stretch” assignments at the same rate as their male counterparts; aggressively auditing women’s and men’s career paths to see if men are progressing more rapidly through the organization; and, auditing compensation to ensure women are receiving equitable salaries. Make sure there are no overt or covert biases impacting women’s success. For example, are women penalized for taking time off for maternity leave or family time?

The conversation about women’s success in organizations has been going on for over 30 years. Many organizations are moving along the path with respect to their desire to retain and promote women, but it’s time to both diagnose the challenges appropriately and to create comprehensive approaches to achieve real and sustainable change.

The Signs of Change: Small Actions Make A Difference

Posted by Judith Katz on September 5, 2007 None comments

katz_judith.jpgKJCG’s definition of inclusion is: A sense of belonging. A feeling of being respected, valued and seen for who we are as individuals; there is a level of supportive energy and commitment from leaders, colleagues and others so that we — individually and collectively — can do our best work.

Organizations that embark on specific efforts to build inclusive workplaces that embody the above definition often struggle to keep people engaged during the delay between the initial “talk” of the Inclusion Effort and when new inclusive culture, mindsets and behaviors begin to reach people in their day to day lives. Since the transformation of an organization cannot happen over night, demonstrating even the smallest inclusive behaviors on a daily basis can make all the difference.

For many people in an organization engaged in an Inclusion Effort, Inclusion may seem like an abstract term that holds little or no meaning. “What does it look like?” or “How do we measure it?” are questions that are commonly asked. However, the answer is simple “you know inclusion when you experience it!” This is why small actions make a big difference. By taking even the smallest inclusive actions, organizational leaders model the necessary behaviors that become a part of the competencies needed to create a culture of inclusion

Some of the small actions that can make a big difference are addressed in our 11 Inclusive Behaviors, such as greeting people authentically and saying “hello” and speaking up when people are being excluded. But what does this look on a day-in and day-out basis? Recently, we surveyed the Core Inclusion Partners (a cross-organizational group of people who have participated in in-depth education regarding inclusion concepts and assisted in building a peer-to-peer network for communicating these concepts throughout the company) in a current client about what they were seeing with respect to any new behaviors leaders and managers were demonstrating that could be attributed to the organization’s Inclusion Effort. Some of the responses were great examples of the small actions that managers and senior leaders in any organization can do every day to make inclusion more and more of a reality as the organization shifts its culture and mindsets to inclusion as a way of life.

1) Including Hellos at every meeting – One of the most powerful actions that leaders and managers began to implement was consciously beginning all meetings with simple hellos. This enabled everyone in the meeting to greet others–and to set the stage for more inclusive conversations and interactions in meetings. Saying hello lets people know that they are seen, and feeling seen is a first step to feeling included.

2) Senior Leaders schedule one-on-one meetings to get to know the members of their staff as individuals – Some of the leaders started scheduling one-on-one meetings with each member of their staffs to hear what was important to each person—their values, what they needed to do their best work—and to better understand each person’s frame of reference, At the same time it provided each person an opportunity to see the leader as a human being and more than a “title.”

3) Valuing people’s knowledge and abilities over rank and tenure – By genuinely knowing the people in their organization, leaders began utilizing a wider range of people for special projects, basing their actions and decisions more on people’s capabilities and knowledge rather than going to the same people over and over again, particularly people that are relied on primarily because of rank and tenure.

4) Leaders make themselves accessible to their people – In this particular organization, one leader blocked out time on her calendar once a week and communicated it to everyone to ensure that she would be in her office and accessible to her team. This is a far cry from a leader saying that she is available to her people, but never actually being in the office when someone knocks on the door.

5) Be open and receptive to new ideas and suggestions – Another individual described a leader who would always create obstacles that actually prevented projects from being completed. After an inclusion workshop, the leader became more receptive to suggestions and began calling this individual on a daily basis for updates and to offer assistance in completing the project.

The journey along the Path to an Inclusive Organization is one that may seem difficult to achieve, but demonstrating even seemingly small Inclusive behaviors on a daily basis, can make all the difference in ensuring that an organization continues to move toward this vision. Although Inclusion is the BIG idea, it cannot be achieved without the small actions. What are you doing today to demonstrate your commitment to creating an inclusive environment in your organization? What actions would you recommend to others to shorten the delay between the initial Inclusion Efforts and the realizations of a new culture and mindsets?

Three Profound Books

Posted by Frederick Miller on July 24, 2007 None comments

Fred MillerOver the last 25 years there have been three books that have profoundly changed the way organizations operate, the way they engage people inside the organization and how they collaborate with the global community.

Kenneth H. Blanchard and Spencer Johnson in The One Minute Manager (1981) discussed the traits and behaviors of successful managers, which include talking to your people, establishing challenging, but attainable expectations and rewarding individuals when they achieve those expectations. The aspect we tried to introduce to that thinking was diversity. It was, and still is, important to recognize that the people with whom managers speak will not always look like them, act like them or even come from the same cultural background. Managers not only need to communicate with their people, but they also must recognize the diversity of these individuals and appreciate how that diversity can influence the interaction and the individual’s success.

Thomas J. Peters and Robert H. Waterman in In Search of Excellence (1982) redefined the characteristics of organizational excellence. Based on a study of some of America’s best-run companies, it established the basic principles that when implemented would almost guarantee a higher probability of success. The fundamental message I took from the book, though, was the concept of zero defects and achieving higher levels of performance. At the time quality and excellence, to American companies, meant “good, but with acceptable defects.” The book challenged that norm and insisted that excellence meant “zero defects,” even pointing to Japanese manufacturers who were achieving this goal as an example. The sea change caused by this book resulted in “zero defects” being the only measure of organizational quality and a new standard for operational performance excellence in organizations. They established a new operational performance bar for organizations.

A monumental shift in how we as humans will interact differently than we have in the past and how this will change the way we do business was predicted in 2006’s Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything by Don Tapscott and Anthony D. Williams. Knowledge is no longer exclusively internal and organizations that do not tap the global knowledge existing outside their four walls will not survive in the 21st century, according to the authors. In this new era of innovation the concepts of open-sourcing, mass collaboration and co-creation are inseparable and can establish every business as a global business. In the past, the giants of industry could make it difficult and expensive for a start-up to establish itself, essentially blocking competition. However, the Internet has flattened the world and has become the key tool of globalization. It has so decreased the price of entry for businesses establishing themselves in the global marketplace that every organization must now operate as if competitors are being born every day.

The messages in The One Minute Manager and In Search of Excellence are as relevant today as they were 25 years ago while the projections in Wikinomics are as revolutionary and groundbreaking as any I have seen. If you are part of an organization that is ready to learn about the necessary mindsets, skill sets and competencies that will prepare you for the demands of business in the 21st Century, then I encourage you to pick up a copy each of these books.