by Elizabeth Hines | Aug 28, 2014 | Blog, Leadership, Strategy, Talent
Most teams are able to fairly easily decipher what needs to be done. However, when it comes to the how, new or weak teams fall flat. Here is how you can optimize your team for success.
Define roles
Clearly define roles and make sure every team member understands not only their role, but the roles of others on the team. When roles are defined and understood the team can avoid overlap and can avoid the trap of “I thought someone else was doing that.” In short, by defining roles your team can be more efficient and more effective.
Establish a communication protocol
Take the time to establish a communication protocol. This protocol should not be a rulebook, but rather it should outline a set of decisions about how the team will message each other and stakeholders on the progress and needs of the team. If you leave this to chance you are, well — taking a chance. If you establish a communication protocol up front you will achieve better communication and it will be less likely the ball will be dropped.
Develop performance metrics
Develop performance metrics up front. If you don’t take the time to do this, how will you know if you are making progress? How will you know what to do if you are not making progress? How will you know when goals are achieved? How will you be able to reward team members? Take the time to develop performance metrics up front — and get everyone on the same page.
Provide your team with necessary tools
Provide your team with the tools that they need to succeed, or you will set them up for failure. For example, give them the go-ahead to make certain decisions without needing to go through 11 bureaucratic steps. Similarly, give the team access to the people and information that they need to get the job done.
By focusing on the best path forward, rather than the end goal, good teams can get even better.
A version of this post previously appeared on EBN.
by Elizabeth Hines | Aug 27, 2014 | Blog, Leadership, Strategy, Talent
Look across business, sports, entertainment, and the military, and identify the top performers. Next, take a step back at look at the characteristics of these individuals. What you will find is that there are at least three elements that they all have.
They know how to maximize through self-knowledge. Top performers have intimate self-knowledge. They know themselves — their strengths, weaknesses, challenges, and vices. They know how to use this knowledge to stretch and apply themselves. Furthermore, they know how to sustain themselves.
They know how to work with the environment. Top performers know and understand their environment. This enables leaders to work with and within the environment effectively, shape it, and be in tune with it.
They know (and use) the ingredients for a top performance. Top performers know what makes a top performance. They know that it requires planning, preparation, delivery, and evaluation. And they execute — each time.
They understand emotion. Top performers understand when and how to remove emotion from the equation. On the flip side, they know when not to table their emotions.
By focusing on these characteristics, you can be a top performer and encourage your team to do the same. In the end, maximizing the performance of each individual will maximize the performance of the team and, eventually, your company.
A version of this post previously appeared on EBN.
by Fronetics | Aug 21, 2014 | Blog, Leadership, Strategy, Talent
Want to advance? Stop whining. Whining won’t get you to the top.
Whining. Just writing the word makes me cringe. Whining is a truly unattractive characteristic. It is unattractive in children and it is even more unattractive when adults partake. One of the reasons why whining is just so unattractive is that it is ineffective and it can make a brilliant leader look like, well, like a blithering child.
Given this, why is there so much whining in the office? Ron Ashkenas, a senior partner at Schaffer Consulting and author of several books on organization change and effectiveness, wrote in a post for the Harvard Business Review:
The reality is that all of us whine, complain, blame others, and try to avoid responsibility. It’s part of the human condition. Nobody likes to clean up problems caused by others — or admit that they’ve created problems themselves. We also try to preserve a positive self-image and we go to great lengths to get others to perceive us positively as well. Given these basic human dynamics, most of which are unconscious, it’s often easier to talk to colleagues about what somebody else is doing wrong. At worst we’ll get sympathy. At best, we’ll convince someone else to take care of the problem.
Ashkens continued, noting that the current economic environment and organizational structures have made it so that “it’s tough to get things done — which leaves people feeling frustrated and in need of a sympathetic ear.” But let’s be honest. When your co-worker comes up to you whining (again) about this or her workload — do you really feel sympathy?
Let’s look a little closer at what Ashkenas said. Essentially, whining is used as a tool to “blame others” and “to avoid responsibility.” Neither blaming others nor avoiding responsibility are positive traits. Neither of these traits will get you hired nor will they get you promoted. The qualities that will get you that next job, which will get you recognized, and will get you promoted are stepping up, taking responsibility, and taking action — the antithesis of whining.
In his book The Last Lecture, Randy Paush astutely wrote:
If you took one-tenth the energy you put into complaining and applied it to solving the problem, you’d be surprised by how well things can work out… Complaining does not work as a strategy. We all have finite time and energy. Any time we spend whining is unlikely to help us achieve our goals. And it won’t make us happier.
Want to be taken seriously? Want to be effective? Want to be successful? Stop whining.
by Elizabeth Hines | Jan 22, 2014 | Blog, Strategy, Supply Chain
This post was originally published on EBN.
Packaging optimization is critical to supply chain optimization. To catch big advantages, change your mindset and make packaging a forethought rather than an afterthought.
In a Packaging World article, Elisha Tropper, president and CEO of Cambridge Seals Security (CSS), describes how packaging is typically thought of by manufacturers:
An afterthought… for most [manufacturers of industrial products] packaging is not a consideration. They are manufacturers; they are not packagers. They make an industrial product, and industrial products are dropped into boxes. But whether a box is an inch bigger or an inch smaller, what does it matter?
The truth is, it matters a lot. If you want to optimize your supply chain you need to optimize your packaging. This means changing your mindset when it comes to packaging — packaging needs to become an early consideration.
There are several components of packaging. For example, the product itself, the box or container in which the product is placed to sell, and the box or container the items are placed in for shipping. Each of these components are opportunities for optimization.
Package (re)design
A May 2013 industry study by Freedonia forecasts that pallet use in the US will grow 2.4 percent annually to 2.6 billion in 2017. The study also reported that demand for new pallets is expected in increased by 3.5 percent annually to 1.3 billion units.
The International Organization for Standardization sets the standards for pallet size; there are currently six pallet standards. The most common size used in the United States is Grocery Manufacturers pallet, which measures 48 inches by 48 inches. The dimensions of a pallet are not always considered with respect to packaging; this is a costly mistake.
Let’s look at an example previously highlighted in Supply Chain Digest. Adalis (now H.B. Fuller Adhesive Coated Solutions) worked with a telecommunications company to redesign their packaging to optimize pallet use. By reducing the size of each unit package by 1.5 inches in one dimension, the company was able to increase the number of units that could fit on the pallet by 150 percent (from 120 to 300 units). The result was a signification reduction packaging (materials) costs and transportation costs.
Product (re)design
Product design or redesign is another way to optimize packaging to optimize your supply chain.
Let’s go back to Elisha Tropper. Tropper was the former owner of a packaging convert and his packaging consultancy, T3 Associates, acquired CSS in 2010. When Tropper took over at CSS he challenged the company to take packaging optimization into consideration at the point of product design. The company took the challenge and redesigned the product. A significant reduction in package size and materials usage resulted. According to Trooper: “A standard pallet of our boxes can hold about 120,000 seals, while that same pallet will hold only about 80,000 of our competitor’s seals.”
Ikea provides another example, which Colin White outlines in his book Strategic Management. When Ikea first began manufacturing its Bang mug, 864 mugs could fit on a pallet. Ikea redesigned the rim of the mug so as to maximize pallet efficiency — Ikea was able to increase the number of mugs per pallet to 1,280. The company decided it could go further. Another redesign increased the number of mugs per pallet to 2,024. As a result of the product redesign, the company reduced shipping costs by 60 percent.
Outside the box
Ikea has taken packaging optimization for supply chain optimization even further and has created a system called OptiLedge, which eliminates pallet use. Retailers using OptiLedge have realized a savings of been $200 to $300 per container.
Major factors for cost savings include a reduction in man hours to off-load (a savings of between 15 to 23 hours or more of labor per container), space savings (one truckload of OptiLedges would be the equivalent of 23 truckloads of traditional pallets), and weight (OptiLedge weighs under two pounds as compared with the 50 to 75 pounds that a traditional pallet weighs). In addition, OptiLedge eliminates underhang and increases fill rates.
Too often, everyone thinks of packing as the thing that gets thrown away. Smart manufacturers, though, will ensure that good money isn’t tossed out with the box or pallet.
by Fronetics | Jan 14, 2014 | Blog, Leadership, Logistics, Strategy, Supply Chain, Talent
Hiring: Why you should try before you buy
Source: https://www.lethbridgemusicaltheatre.ca
I just finished reading a great post on hiring by Matt Mullenweg, founder of Automattic and the creator of open source WordPress software. The post focuses on the company’s “unorthodox hiring system” and how it has enabled Automattic to hire great talent and realize high employee retention rates. Although time consuming, I think Mullenweg and Automattic are on to something.
Before Automattic extends an offer, the candidate must first go through a trial process, on contract. The candidate is given real work and is compensated for doing the work. At the end of the trial process both the company and the candidate have a better picture of each other and if they are a good fit. Or as Mullenweg puts it: “There’s nothing like being in the trenches with someone, working with them day by day. It tells you something you can’t learn from resumes, interviews, or reference checks. At the end of the trial, everyone involved has a great sense of whether they want to work together going forward. And, yes, that means everyone — it’s a mutual tryout. Some people decide we’re not the right fit for them.”
Mullenweg acknowledges the “huge time commitment” of this process. But he points out the benefits and why they have not abandoned the system for an easier one: the process is able to identify great talent that works well within the company’s culture, the process weeds out candidates that are not a good fit before they become a part of the team, and the process had led to consistently high retention rates.
In my experience, too often both companies and candidates are guilty of moving their relationship forward faster they should – and regretting it later. For this reason “auditioning,” as Mullenweg calls it, or “try before you buy” as I think of it, is an hiring strategy that should be embraced more often.
What do you think of this hiring strategy? What are the advantages and disadvantages do you see?
