Quality Counts

I had a great conversation with a client this week about Quality.

A team was given a task - to provide new technology to the field organization - by the company's CEO, and she wanted it done fast. The CEO had a clear vision of what she wanted and described it in detail to her team. She made clear what resources would be available to the team. And she gave them the deadline by which she wanted it in place and operating.

The team sprang to work. It knew it had a tremendous challenge on its hands. The time frame was extremely tight - call it too tight. The resources were extremely limited - call them too limited. And the CEO's vision of what she wanted was clear and ambitious - call it too ambitious. Something had to give. And in this case - it was Quality.

The team delivered on time - the technology got out into the field. The cost was within budget - there was no tolerance (nor availability) for anything more. And the scope - well, the technology was designed to do everything the CEO wanted.

You know the punch line: It didn't work.

You've probably seen the Scope-Resources-Time triangle. Many organizations have adopted it, with the mantra: Pick any two. The concept is simple. Management can fix any two of the three components, so long as the third can flex. Try it:

• Scope and Resources are fixed - The project may take longer than planned
• Time and Resources are fixed - The project may have less scope (functionality) than desired
• Time and Scope are fixed - You may need more resources to get the full functionality complete on time.

The triangle is very valuable - but as you can tell from the story (oh, and the title of this blog), it's not complete. The missing ingredient is Quality.

The fact is, you can fix three components: Scope, time, and resources. But what gives then is the quality. It's not tested, it's not right, it doesn't work.

Here's a simple example you can try on for size: Cooking a gourmet meal. (Have you ever watched one of the reality cooking shows?) Requirements (scope) are fixed - 3 courses, including certain key ingredients. Check. Time is fixed - one hour. Check. Resources are fixed - one chef plus kitchen equipment. Check. So, are the "True Goals" of a great meal always met? Of course not. The missing variable is Quality.

There are plenty of examples of failed execution because of failed Quality. Quality is hard to protect, frequently because it is "expected" and therefore not made explicit nor monitored and measured. We know what happens when something isn't measured, don't we? Right. "You want it respected? Then inspect it."

What happened with this CEO and her challenge? Well, it's in clean-up mode. More dollars (lots) and resources (ditto) have been thown at the problem, trying to fix it. Even worse, putting bad quality out in the field has major, long-term ramifications. You lose trust and credibility. The next solution will be looked at with skepticism and suspicion ("Hah, you think that's going to work? Don't you remember...?"). Fortunately, this was an internally focused initiative. Could you imagine the problems created if this had been client-facing?

It's not pick any two - it's pick any three. Quality is not a given - it is a choice. The commitment to Quality needs to be explicit. It needs to be monitored and measured. Otherwise, Quality can fail, like any other unmeasured metric. And if quality fails, you (and your initiative) will never Reach its True Goals.

True Goals

I spend a lot of time talking to people about "reaching (their) true goals" - but what does that mean?  

There are 4 components to reaching true goals:

1) Accomplish the objective.  Do what you want to do.  Get it done.  Succeed.  Reach the finish line.  Anyway you want to define it, it's all about figuring out what you want to do and doing it...

Umm - hey, Gregg.  You said there were 4 parts to "reaching true goals."  But number 1 seems to sum it up pretty well.  What are the other pieces? 

Easy:

2) On time.

3) Within budget.

4) And with the right level of quality.

It's a constant struggle.  True goals, done right, is defined in the context of all four quadrants:  What you want to accomplish, by when, at what cost, and with what level of quality.

Accomplishing any subset of those - by my definition - means you haven't reached your true goals.

Let me belabor the point for a minute to, well, make a point:

• I got what I wanted, but later than I needed.  True goals?  No.
• I didn't quite get what I wanted.  TG? No.
• Got it - but it cost more than planned.  Nope.
• Well, I got it, on time, within budget - but it wasn't as good as it should have been.  Strike 4.

Too many organizations take the easy way out.  They don't fully identify what they're trying to accomplish up front, defined by all 4 attributes of the Challenge.  That way, it's easy to claim that you've succeeded... even when you really haven't.

The best result?  Know exactly what your True Goals are before you start - defined as reaching the desired result, on time, within budget, and with the right level of quality - and then go get them.

It's Time to Finish the Job.

Welcome to 2009. Sitting at my desk a few days before the end of 2008, I find myself fully and unapologetically looking forward to the start of 2009.

I won't spend much time dwelling on 2008. The press and the holiday parties have that responsibility well in hand. My conclusions fall in line with others:

• The economy is bad and will get worse before it gets better;
• Consumers don't have money to spend. We will continue to see the impact in housing, automotive, and retail which, in turn, will impact nearly every other industry;
• We're in a downward spiral that will require significant government intervention and spending to break.

Yet, for all the negative news, I go into the new year remarkably optimistic. I'm not being a polyanna, nor ignoring facts. I continue to believe, however, in the ambition, drive, dedication, and determination of us.

RedZone Consulting is all about helping organizations "reach (their) true goals." To do so, we use a structured process, a methodology. And a critically important part of that process is at the very end. We call the activities: "Finishing the Job." It's a set of activities that you don't see in most (if any) other methodologies. And the concept behind "Finishing the Job" is what makes me optimistic about 2009.

You know the story. The first 80% is the easiest. The last 20% is the tough part. That's the "red zone" - the 20 yards before the end zone. But getting into the red zone isn't the goal. It's getting into the end zone. It's scoring. It's winning the game. It's finishing the job.

We use "Finishing the Job" in our methodology as a reminder, as an opportunity to revisit and confirm our original goals. And, if those goals are still valid, to re-focus our efforts on achieving those goals.

"Finishing the Job" is something we (collectively) do. Sometimes we need prodding or reminding. Thus, the activities in the RedZone framework. But, when reminded, we rarely say, "naw, I don't want to do that..." We get up and we finish the job. We get it done.

Consider 2008 our reminder. 2008 was the wake up call. 2008 was the kick in the pants.

So we head into 2009. Heads high. Determined. Focused. It's time to finish the job. It's time to get through the red zone to the end zone. It's time to score. It's time to win.

Happy New Year. Now, let's get it done.

Survival of the Fittest

Those of you following the markets - stop!  Those of you concentrating on your business - continue.  One of the core precepts of Strategy Execution is to focus on those things you can impact directly.  I won't say ignore those items you cannot affect, but you certainly shouldn't do anything more than monitor them from a distance.  

I tried to take my own advice this week - No shoemaker's child here!  (Ask me if you don't know that reference....).  I have always talked about two kinds of strategic changes - those a company chooses to undertake, and those forced upon it.  Over the last ten years, most companies have had the luxury of focusing on the former.  Today, almost everyone is dealing with the latter.

If you take a look at the RedZone Consulting web site (www.RedZoneConsulting.com), you'll see some pretty significant changes.   RedZone has always focused on helping companies successfully execute major change.  And we still do.  Historically, most companies we worked with were those that chose to undertake a new direction.  Not now.  Today, I'm seeing that most companies are being forced to change their strategy and operations to reflect an entire new economic reality, one that had not even been considered. 

There are few, if any, companies that today's economy isn't impacting. As a result, every company has one primary focus:  Cash.  With credit tight, customer behavior's unpredictable, business assumptions and projections thrown out the window, the first place every business must focus is survival.  

It's a pretty simple question:  Do we have enough cash?  It's one of the "let's pretend" scenarios that we walk clients through:  Let's pretend you have absolutely zero sales over the next six or twelve months.  How much cash will you burn?  What are the levers that allow you to save (or gain) cash if needed?  This exercise has very little to do with what the business is trying to accomplish, and more with a foundational issue:  If the company has no cash, it cannot survive.  If it doesn't survive, successfully executing its strategy is both impossible and meaningless.

Survival of the fittest today is all about cash.  Do you have the cash to deal with the unexpected twists and turns driven by this new, unpredictable economy?   If you can use discipline, clarity, focus to monitor and maintain your cash position, you'll give your company the opportunity to succeed in the future.