What Can You Learn in 2 Minutes?

A CEO of a large public bank set up a meeting with our team because the bank was considering using social media as a tool to enhance customer relations.

The assistant to the CEO said "He is a two minute manager so you'll have two minutes to get to the point".

We met with the CEO and he said proudly "Give it to me in two minutes". I said how about one word. He smiled and said "OK, go". I said: Learn. He said "Learn what?" I said "The Emergence of The Relationship Economy". He said "What is that? I said: It will take more than two minutes to tell you so here is our book, read it when you can find more than two minutes to listen and learn.

What can we learn in two minutes? How not to learn.

What say you?

Have you networked with your spouse?

My wife, Kim, doesn't participate in social networks. She doesn't fully understand what I do all day: blogging, commenting, studying and connecting with people.When our book came out she did actually skim read it and her comment was "Looks like a good book for businesses to learn how to use the web but this whole thing about relationships isn't new or earth shattering"

I asked her what do you mean? Her response " The age old problem with relationships is largely a problem with communications. Your book talks about conversations and how conversations are exploding because of the web. My question is will the new web cause people to improve listening or will it just cause people to talk more?. And if more people are involved in online conversations what are they really saying?"

"All this stuff about social media seems like just new ways for marketers to sell me something by trying to have a conversation but no marketer really knows me enough to get my attention. Selling is one thing but building a relationship is another".

Now, as a male I sometimes (Ok, I admit a lot of times) do not hear the emotions of a conversation but rather seem to always look for the logic of the matter being discussed. My wife is very good at insuring that I am not always communicating with my head rather from my heart. She is able to influence my hearing, my learning and subsequently our relationship gets richer every day (not only my words but hers as well).

As I thought about her comments our follow on conversations got richer, deeper and enlightening. My wife knows nothing about the technology behind the web, very little about social networks and has little interest in either. However, she, as most women do, understands relationships and her comments and insights were profound.

So What is The Point of This Post?

As we endeavor to discover new found capabilities, knowledge and possibilities enhanced by the advancement of technology the true value rest in the relationships. While the technology affords us the reach the richness lies within the people. Men, women and children possess the collective power of change when the quality of the conversations enable us to unite with a purpose but without solid relations we cannot capture the essence, the value and the subsequent learning without first focusing on the relationship.

Subsequent to my conversations with my wife I picked up on a post from someone whose relationship I respect and value, Doc Searls. His post was titled "Who new?" and it pointed to a video. I watched the movie and then shared it with my wife and told her where I found it. Her response was "He gets it! Maybe I should go read his book". Go figure :) My wife, Kim, she gets it and insures that I do as well! Do you get it? See the movie below.

What say you?







The Break Up
by geertdesager

Management Dashboards

Management Dashboard – If you are not familiar with a management dashboard then you are certainly missing out. A management dashboard offers a simple yet powerful way for viewing all the important information contained in the databases of your corporation. Such enterprise dashboard solutions allow top management the ability to view business intelligence and other key information relating to business operations.

Because the ideal management dashboard can display the key information that drives your business it is easy to capture the big picture of your business along with the direction it is headed. Thanks to this tool management teams are able to minimize their time spent studying data and put more time into making the right decisions for the business.

Management Report - Management can also rely on thorough management reports to direct them in their decision making process. Top management typically receives various management reports from the lower level managers who work hands on with the core of the business. These managers help you understand what methods are successful, which products should be pursued, and how to use their employees in the most effective manner. When they write a management report addressing such key business factors the management team should pay close attention. Management should read and review this management report over and over again to ensure that they have a good understanding of the issues the company is facing.

Once the management report has been studied adequately the management team can integrate the information they learned from the report with the information the management dashboard presents to them. Relying on these two sources of information, the management team can then go ahead and make well informed business decisions.

In this simple manner top level management teams can take advantage of the tools and resources they have available to them. Certainly useful tools like a management dashboard have a proven track record and can assist management in making the proper decisions. Likewise, management should also tap into the sea of knowledge their lower level managers possess and relay to them through a management report.




ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Adam Smith is an information author for 10X Marketing, which specializes in Link Recruitment. To make the most of your management report by integrating information and data into your management dashboard , please visit Corda.com

Team Development

Dr Bruce Tuckman published his Forming Storming Norming Performing model in 1965. He added a fifth stage, Adjourning, in the 1970's. The Forming Storming Norming Performing theory is an elegant and helpful explanation of team development and behaviour. Similarities can be seen with other models, such as Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum and especially with Hersey and Blanchard's Situational Leadership® model, developed about the same time.

Tuckman's model explains that as the team develops maturity and ability, relationships establish, and the leader changes leadership style. Beginning with a directing style, moving through coaching, then participating, finishing delegating and almost detached. At this point the team may produce a successor leader and the previous leader can move on to develop a new team. This progression of team behaviour and leadership style can be seen clearly in the Tannenbaum and Schmidt Continuum - the authority and freedom extended by the leader to the team increases while the control of the leader reduces. In Tuckman's Forming Storming Norming Performing model, Hersey's and Blanchard's Situational Leadership® model and in Tannenbaum and Schmidt's Continuum, we see the same effect, represented in three ways.

tuckman's forming storming norming performing model - original model

The progression is:

forming
storming
norming
performing
Features of each phase:

forming - stage 1

High dependence on leader for guidance and direction. Little agreement on team aims other than received from leader. Individual roles and responsibilities are unclear. Leader must be prepared to answer lots of questions about the team's purpose, objectives and external relationships. Processes are often ignored. Members test tolerance of system and leader. Leader directs (similar to Situational Leadership® 'Telling' mode).

storming - stage 2

Decisions don't come easily within group. Team members vie for position as they attempt to establish themselves in relation to other team members and the leader, who might receive challenges from team members. Clarity of purpose increases but plenty of uncertainties persist. Cliques and factions form and there may be power struggles. The team needs to be focused on its goals to avoid becoming distracted by relationships and emotional issues. Compromises may be required to enable progress. Leader coaches (similar to Situational Leadership® 'Selling' mode).

norming - stage 3

Agreement and consensus is largely forms among team, who respond well to facilitation by leader. Roles and responsibilities are clear and accepted. Big decisions are made by group agreement. Smaller decisions may be delegated to individuals or small teams within group. Commitment and unity is strong. The team may engage in fun and social activities. The team discusses and develops its processes and working style. There is general respect for the leader and some of leadership is more shared by the team. Leader facilitates and enables (similar to the Situational Leadership® 'Participating' mode).

performing - stage 4

The team is more strategically aware; the team knows clearly why it is doing what it is doing. The team has a shared vision and is able to stand on its own feet with no interference or participation from the leader. There is a focus on over-achieving goals, and the team makes most of the decisions against criteria agreed with the leader. The team has a high degree of autonomy. Disagreements occur but now they are resolved within the team positively and necessary changes to processes and structure are made by the team. The team is able to work towards achieving the goal, and also to attend to relationship, style and process issues along the way. team members look after each other. The team requires delegated tasks and projects from the leader. The team does not need to be instructed or assisted. Team members might ask for assistance from the leader with personal and interpersonal development. Leader delegates and oversees (similar to the Situational Leadership® 'Delegating' mode).

Tuckman's fifth stage - Adjourning

Bruce Tuckman refined his theory around 1975 and added a fifth stage to the Forming Storming Norming Performing model - he called it Adjourning, which is also referred to as Deforming and Mourning. Adjourning is arguably more of an adjunct to the original four stage model rather than an extension - it views the group from a perspective beyond the purpose of the first four stages. The Adjourning phase is certainly very relevant to the people in the group and their well-being, but not to the main task of managing and developing a team, which is clearly central to the original four stages.

adjourning - stage 5

Tuckman's fifth stage, Adjourning, is the break-up of the group, hopefully when the task is completed successfully, its purpose fulfilled; everyone can move on to new things, feeling good about what's been achieved. From an organizational perspective, recognition of and sensitivity to people's vulnerabilities in Tuckman's fifth stage is helpful, particularly if members of the group have been closely bonded and feel a sense of insecurity or threat from this change. Feelings of insecurity would be natural for people with high 'steadiness' attributes (as regards the 'four temperaments' or DISC model) and with strong routine and empathy style (as regards the Benziger thinking styles model, right and left basal brain dominance).

Hersey's and Blanchard's Situational Leadership® model

The classic Situational Leadership® model of management and leadership style also illustrates the ideal development of a team from immaturity (stage 1) through to maturity (stage 4) during which management an leadership style progressively develops from relatively detached task-directing (1), through the more managerially-involved stages of explanation (2) and participation (3), to the final stage of relatively detached delegation (4), at which time ideally the team is largely self-managing, and hopefully contains at least one potential management/leadership successor.

The aim of the leader or manager is therefore to develop the team through the four stages, and then to move on to another role.

Ironically this outcome is feared by many managers. However, good organisations place an extremely high value on leaders and managers who can achieve this.

The model also illustrates four main leadership and management styles, which a good leader is able to switch between, depending on the sitution (ie., the team's maturity relating to a particular task, project or challenge.)

Situational Leadership® is a trademark of the Center for Leadership Studies, which represents the interests and products of Dr Paul Hersey. Ken Blanchard (who incidentally wrote 'The One Minute Manager') went on to develop the Situational Leadership® system into what he called Situational Leadership II®, and which now covers a range of products marketed by his organization, The Ken Blanchard Companies.

Radar Charts for Managing Critcal Issues

RADAR CHART/SPIDER CHART

What it is:

A radar chart graphically shows the size of the gaps among five to ten organizational performance areas. The chart displays the important categories of performance and makes visible concentrations of strengths and weaknesses.

When to use it:

A radar chart shows how a team has evaluated a number of organizational performance areas. It is therefore essential that the initial evaluation include varied perspectives to provide an overall realistic and useful picture of performance.

How to use it:

Create categories. Use headers from an affinity diagram or brainstorm major categories of organizational performance to be plotted. A radar chart can normally include five to ten categories.

Standardize performance definitions. Have all evaluators agree to use standardized definitions of both full performance and non-performance in each category so that ratings are performed consistently. Define the scoring range (e.g., 0 to 5 with 5 being full performance).

Rate each performance category. Each evaluator rates each category individually, and the team then develops an average or consensus score for each category. Alternatively, the team as a whole may initially develop an average or consensus score for each category.

Construct the chart.

1. Draw a large circle and insert as many spokes or radii as there are performance categories.
2. Around the perimeter of the circle, label each spoke with the title of a performance category.
3. Subdivide each spoke into the number of increments established in the rating scale. Label the center of the circle where spokes join as 0 (no performance) and place the highest rating number (full or exceptional performance) at the end of the spoke at the outer ring. (You may want to draw additional concentric circles linking equal values on each spoke.)

Plot the ratings. For each performance category, plot on the chart the associated rating. Then connect the plotted points on all the spokes. Highlight the enclosed central shape as necessary for ease in viewing.

Interpret and use the results. The resulting radar chart will graphically show areas of relative strength and relative weakness, as well as depicting general overall performance.

Management Constraints

There has been numerous advances in management practices and methods over the last twenty years. Many american industries have significantly increased productivity, customer and employee satisfaction as well as bottom line results. While there has been progress there is much more to improve upon and progress is largely a choice of management.

Our firm has worked in numerous industries including Healthcare, Wireless, Insurance, Financial, Technology and Education. In each engagement our team quickly does our own assessment of managements commitment to change. After a combined resource experience of over 60 years our findings are that less than 25% of the firms we've been engaged with are truly committed to making necessary changes in order for their organizations to succeed. Our collective analysis provides a series of factors that we believe are the major management constraints for organizational improvement. These are:

1) Resistance to Change
2) Personal Insecurities
3) Control and Command Mentality
4) Lacking in Profound Knowledge
5) Lacking in execution skills
6) Management Turnover
7) No Belief in New Methods will create improved results
8) Lacking in Leadership Skills
9) We don't have time to change.......
10) I don't believe the data!

Each these factors has behind them an understanding of the factor and the means to overcome them. In future blogs we will examine each factor in details and share methods used to overcome each factor or at least reduce its impact. All of these are human factors that boil down to individual assessments of security, education and leadership. It is ironic that companies will hire consultants to bring in new perspectives, new knowledge and methods but in the end many companies fail to execute once the consultants are gone. Even when the good consultants provide training and education on methods unless management is truly committed to change all efforts will fail.

This is a natural dynamic and evolution of business environments. However, if the evolution velocity can be increased and the dynamics changed through knowledge then business progress can be excelled for the benefit of all.

Management Tampering

Our firm has had a diverse experience in many industries. From Healthcare, Insurance, Wireless, Transportation and Real Estate we've seen over a hundred companies from the inside out. What is a repeated behavioral problem is "Management Tampering" which does nothing more than increase cost and create further problems. What is "Management Tampering"? It is simply coming to conclusion on a solution without throughly understanding the root cause of a problem.

In many of our engagements we've witnessed complex process problems that had driven cost up. Upon analysis of the problems we've consistently discovered that the problems were caused by previous attempts to solve problems. The attempts were nothing more than what we call "shot gun solutions" being someone, somewhere, at sometime simply though they had the best idea which they thought would solve a problem. The fact is that previous solutions only created further problems, increased cost and the ongoing "shot gun approach" created yet a another series of problems which only further increased cost. The cycle is a like cancer eating away at productivity and profitability. When will management STOP THE MADNESS?

The answer is only when they see and understand that problems are systemic and solutions need to be systemic as well. This requires an understanding of how things are connected, how the connection cuts across multiple processes, how interconnection relates to outcomes or results. Learning the "how" requires a change in mindset. Changing mindsets requires education but many managers already think they know it all and they are the Kings because of their title or position in a company. The biggest barrier to improvement is the "mindset" of management. We have found that employees, for the most part, want change and can contribute to effective change. There isn't a customer in any industry that would want better service, an improved or innovative product at great value and all at the lowest possible cost. So what is the biggest barrier to fulfilling these opportunities, Management!

What does it take to change "mindsets"? Sometimes it takes a shock treatment: loss of market, employee turnover, loss of profit etc etc. Even when these events occur sometimes it still doesn't create the awakening needed for change. Leadership is needed to set a new tone, a new direction and new mindsets.

The alternative is to recognize the need for change, learn new methods, adopt a new philosophy and gain new directions and new confidence. However, this is a hard road for entrenched mindsets and one that requires a recognition that new knowledge is needed. Where will the new knowledge come from? Who has it and how can it be gained, used and executed effectively? Until there is recognition of these issues progress cannot be made and repeated mistakes will be the method for going forward into chaos.

Personal change is a requirement of transformation. However it is the toughest challenge of all change initiatives.

Outside Perspectives

Many firms hire consultants who have experience in their industry. The premise is if a consultant has experience in my industry then they should understand our issues. True or Fasle?

The answer is both true and false. True, a consultant who is familiar with your business understands the "constraints" your business and the customer faces from an industry perspective. False. Those who are outside a "system" are most likely to see obvious "systemic fixes". Being to close to a "system" may in fact be a detriment to improvement. Sometimes being to close to a problem is in fact part of the problem.

Being to close to a "system" can create internalized beliefs about the systems capabilities and how it should work. Rather than using innovative thinking some consultants have "canned answers" as to what has worked for others. Every company has its unique "systemic" attributes. Issues like culture, size, demographics, market dynamics, human resources etc. All create a combined definition of "systemic attributes". Very few companies have the same "systemic attributes".

An outsiders who is grounded in the principals of "systemic thinking, understanding variation, the dynamics of psychology, and how technology adds value" to a "system" can be more effective than one with experience with a specific industry issues.

An example: Much has been written about "benchmarking against the best" While learning what the best is doing is a sound proclamation for learning, copying what the "best in class" do may not be a sound principle of improvement. Given that every "system" has its own unique attributes copying what others do may in fact increase cost and complexity.

Case in point: In the early 80's every major vehicle manufacturer adopted what Japan had instituted as "Quality Management". Deming even was called to all the major U.S. automobile manufacturers to teach what he had taught Japan. His first proclamation what "Management owes the system thus management must lead the systemic changes using profound knowledge". Now 20 years later has the leaders of American automobile manufacturers made the necessary changes? Market, economic factors and consumer satisfaction results led us to a simply conclusion. No they have not!

Consider Ford, GM, Chrysler and their current condition. Each tried to institute "quality". Each made some progress but simply not enough. All internalized "Quality" and each made it a department rather than a duty of leadership. In other words, their thinking was flawed.

So how can a qualified consultant add the greatest value to your organization?

First, they can provide an alternative view of what your company does and how well it does it without being invested in existing beliefs. Outside thinking can be the greatest value a consultant can provide.

Second, a good consultant will tell the CEO or Chairman the facts without fearing of repercussion. A good consultant will not base his feedback on opinion or politics rather he/she will be armed with data to prove an assessment which supports the very changes that need to be made, like it or not.

Third, a good consultant will make a commitment to help the organization through a change process by insuring internalize of the thinking behind the methods and processes that substantiate needed changes. Thus enabling the organization to sustain change by itself.

Fourth, a good consultant should always provide more value than clients expect. Value both in less cost than expected and in sound advice and recommendations that enable an organization to reach beyond its objectives without the consultant.

Finding a consultant can be easy but following these guidelines can help you determine if you've found the right one.

Knowledge Era Enterprises

Knowledge Era Enterprises by Daniel Burrus ©2004 - 2006 All Rights Reserved

Over the next 15 years, organizations worldwide will create new economic value by converting information into knowledge, sharing that knowledge internally to increase its value, and then selling it in non-competing industries to a global client base. Organizations will want their intellectual property (IP) formalized, captured, and leveraged to produce assets of a higher value. This shift in focus is already spawning a fast growing new industry that helps organizations do just that. Businesses of all sizes and from all industry segments will use Internet-based technology to leverage the talents, knowledge and wisdom of employees in new and exciting ways to create high margin products and services in this decade and beyond.

Three components are necessary to begin the process leveraging and profiting from IP:

Everyone in the organization must see the tremendous opportunity and added value in going beyond the current activity of converting data into information, to higher levels of value by creating and delivering knowledge and wisdom, which clients can quickly act upon.

Everyone in the organization must see that its technology infrastructure and organization are the keys to unlock the vast wealth the Knowledge Era has to offer, both for the organization and its clients.

Everyone in the organization must see the importance of his or her own participation as essential to building a strong foundation for the enhancement, sharing and delivery of knowledge.

Technology is no longer a barrier to creating a Knowledge Era enterprise. The key is to see the tremendous opportunity that exists right now, and take action.

written by Daniel Burrus
http://www.burrus.com/blog.html

Thought Leadership

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia we find a definition of Thought leaders as:

Thought leader is a buzzword or article of jargon used to describe a person who is recognized among his or her peers for innovative ideas and demonstrates the confidence to promote those ideas. The term can also be applied to companies.
According to commentators, a distinguishing characteristic of a thought leader is "the recognition from the outside world that the company deeply understands its business, the needs of its customers, and the broader marketplace in which it operates."

A web site titled "leadersdirect.com" defines Thought Leadership as

What is thought leadership?

"Whenever you advocate a new idea to your colleagues or boss, you show thought leadership. It isn't necessary to have inspirational influencing skills, which is necessary for senior executives because they need to win over the entire organization and beat off their internal competitors for top jobs. Also, to initiate organization-wide change, it helps to be inspirational. But a thought leader focuses on smaller scale changes - ideas for a new product or changes to an existing one. Thought leaders can persuade others using logic, evidence or an actual demonstration of a prototype to win support.

To be a thought leader, you need to immerse yourself in your professional domain and search for new things to say that add value to your organization's objectives. Traditional, top-down leadership depends on personal credibility or character because such leaders are asking people to join them on a difficult journey and they have a great deal of power over their followers. Hence, we need to trust them. Conversely, the thought leader could have weak interpersonal skills and an indifferent character. They could be loners or eccentrics. All that counts is the credibility of their new idea. This is why we can buy innovations offered by odd creative types who we would not entrust to manage any part of an organization. If you can demonstrate the value of your idea and explain it with conviction, you might not need inspirational influencing skills.

Thought leadership is based on youthful rebelliousness - the willingness to risk group rejection in the pursuit of a better way of doing things. Hence, thought leadership is not a learned skill. Only the content of your discipline or field is learned. Traditional, top-down leadership is portrayed as a collaborative effort between leaders and followers to achieve shared goals. But thought leadership has a more competitive edge. Thought leaders are saying, essentially, that they know of a better product or way of doing things than anyone else in the team or organization. Thought leadership ends when the target audience accepts the idea. It may be that you are using hard evidence to persuade others to avoid dumping a current process for a passing fad. In this case, your leadership does not result in any action taken. This is an important point because it enables us to define leadership as the initiation of new directions and categorize the implementation of new ideas as a managerial activity. This is important because we tend, traditionally, to focus on the PERSON in charge of a group as the leader who may both champion a new direction and implement it. Hence we think that leadership is about managing change. The real value of examining thought leadership is that it helps us to see that there is a critically important distinction between leadership and management. When executives move from championing a new idea to its implementation, therefore, they are switching hats from leadership to management. The bottom line is that leadership is about the initiation of new directions. Implementing them is a managerial undertaking."


Consider IBM as a innovative thought leader. Most of us would think of computers but when you look at IBM's revenue growth it comes from IBM Golbal Services not hardware and software. What has IBM done? They have harnessed a lot of knowledge about "how" people and companies use technology and they have instituted "consulting processes" to share that knowledge to the benefit of their customers. One example strategy is to expand tech’s borders by pushing users—and entire industries—toward radically different business models. The payoff for IBM would be access to an ocean of revenue—estimates suggest $50 billion a year —that technology companies have never been able to touch.” —Fortune

“Another example: Big Brown’s New Bag: UPS Aims to Be the Traffic Manager for Corporate America” —Headline/BW/2004. UPS is now offering Supply Chain Management services, not just brown trucks delivering goods

IBM released a study this year of 765 CEO globally and solicited their thoughts on innovation and thought leadership. go to http://www-935.ibm.com/services/us/bcs/html/bcs_ceostudy2006_flat.html for a full copy of their report.

The summary of their finds show:

• Business model innovation matters. Competitive pressures have pushed business model innovation much higher than expected on CEOs’ priority lists. But its importance does not negate the need to focus on products, services and markets, as well as operational innovation.

• External collaboration is indispensable. CEOs stressed the overwhelming importance of collaborative innovation – particularly beyond company walls. Business partners and customers were cited as top sources of innovative ideas, while research and development (r&D) fell much lower on the list. However, CEOs also admitted that their organizations are not collaborating nearly enough.

• Innovation requires orchestration from the top. CEOs acknowledged that they have primary responsibility for fostering innovation. But to effectively orchestrate it, CEOs need to create a more team-based environment, reward individual innovators and better integrate business and technology. In our conversations, we found a persistent, worldwide, sector- and size-spanning push toward a more expansive view of innovation – a greater mix of innovation types, more external involvement and extensive demands on CEOs to bring it all to fruition. Based on these CEOs’ collective insights, we offer several considerations that can help organizations sharpen their own innovation agendas:

• Think broadly, act personally and manage the innovation mix – Create and manage a broad mix of innovation that emphasizes business model change.
• Make your business model deeply different – Find ways to substantially change how you add value in your current industry or in another.
• Ignite innovation through business and technology integration – use technology as an innovation catalyst by combining it with business and market insights.
• Defy collaboration limits – Collaborate on a massive, geography-defying scale to open a world of possibilities.
• Force an outside look...every time – Push the organization to work with outsiders more, making it first systematic and, then, part of your culture.

The last point of the IBM study is revealing, Force and outside look...every time. So when you think about your business plans for 2007 and beyond have you engaged an outside look or are you just repeating traditional thinking processes as it relates to your own business growth and objectives?

Management Dashboards

Management Dashboard – If you are not familiar with a management dashboard then you are certainly missing out. A management dashboard offers a simple yet powerful way for viewing all the important information contained in the databases of your corporation. Such enterprise dashboard solutions allow top management the ability to view business intelligence and other key information relating to business operations.

Because the ideal management dashboard can display the key information that drives your business it is easy to capture the big picture of your business along with the direction it is headed. Thanks to this tool management teams are able to minimize their time spent studying data and put more time into making the right decisions for the business.

Management Report - Management can also rely on thorough management reports to direct them in their decision making process. Top management typically receives various management reports from the lower level managers who work hands on with the core of the business. These managers help you understand what methods are successful, which products should be pursued, and how to use their employees in the most effective manner. When they write a management report addressing such key business factors the management team should pay close attention. Management should read and review this management report over and over again to ensure that they have a good understanding of the issues the company is facing.

Once the management report has been studied adequately the management team can integrate the information they learned from the report with the information the management dashboard presents to them. Relying on these two sources of information, the management team can then go ahead and make well informed business decisions.

In this simple manner top level management teams can take advantage of the tools and resources they have available to them. Certainly useful tools like a management dashboard have a proven track record and can assist management in making the proper decisions. Likewise, management should also tap into the sea of knowledge their lower level managers possess and relay to them through a management report.


ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Adam Smith is an information author for 10X Marketing, which specializes in Link Recruitment. To make the most of your management report by integrating information and data into your management dashboard , please visit Corda.com

Consultant Myths and Truths

Ever been in a meeting and somebody said "let's just get a consultant in here to help us." Well bringing in a consultant might be a good idea, but then again it might not.

Statistics show that only 4% of buyers of consulting services can claim they are very satisfied with the results of the consulting engagement. That number is staggering when you consider that hundreds of billions of dollars are spent on consultants each year.

Buyers of consulting services have the power to help their consultants succeed. Matter of fact - the buyer is REALLY the key to a consultant's success!

The most common projects to fail are what I like to call the "knee jerk project." These are projects where clients are quick to jump and say "I want this fixed!" without fully understanding what needs to be fixed. Prior to hiring a consultant, the company should ask questions like is it really a problem, what specifically is the problem, can the problem really be fixed, what are some scenarios of potential solutions, and what does the end product/project look like? In other words, what do you want the consultant to accomplish?

Additionally, even when the project is well thought through, consultants aren't magicians who wave their wand and suddenly make all the bad things in a company go away. If there are internal barriers that would prevent a problem from being fixed, no consultant can fix it, no matter how much experience they have or how much they charge you.

Another project likely to end in failure is the "band aid project." Many companies are willing to spend a small amount of money on a consultant who can really only provide a patch, rather than paying more money for one who is tasked with providing a long term, sustainable resolution.

For example, don't pay a company to set up a lead management software program unless you are going to pay them to make that software communicate/exchange data with other pertinent company software programs and business practices. Short cuts may provide immediate gratification but their benefits are short lived. If you can't afford to do it right, wait until you can.

Finally, let your consultant do what they do best - their job. If you are constantly pointing out "this won't work" or "we tried that" then their ideas won't be fresh. First let them present the ideas then suggest improvements. They won't always be right on the money, but if you stifle ideas then there is no point in hiring them. Let them do the work and don't second-guess every step of the way. Be open-minded and more often than not they will slip in an idea you never considered.

Before you hire a consultant you need to make sure the objectives are realistic and achievable, that you both agree to a Statement-of-Work with set expectations and a communication vehicle for milestone tracking, and that all internal barriers are removed before any of the work begins. Don't waste your money if you are going to set your consultants up for failure.

Article written by Emarket.com
http://www.eworkmarkets.com

Balanced Scorecard

Does Your Organisation's Measurements Support Its Goals? by Samuel Okoro

Organisational Overview

In very general terms, organisations process inputs received from resources into outputs delivered to their stakeholders. For business concerns the inputs are capital, labour, materials and technology. These are converted into products and services for customers and financial returns for investors and other financial stakeholders. Follow link to see illustration.

http://www.leapfrogalliance.com/ezgrphx/biz.jpg

Systematically Decide What to Measure

The most obvious source of organisational performance measures are the stakeholders. In staking out a position in the marketplace, responding to competition and the environment, the organisation crafts and attempts to implement a strategy. Thus organisational strategy, missions and goals are another source of performance measures.

The procedure is to determine the critical business issues that are relevant to the satisfaction of stakeholder needs or successful strategy implementation. For these business issues determine the critical success factors. Finally metrics are chosen to measure these factors.

Example: A mechanic workshop might recognise customer service as a critical business issue. The critical success factors required for this business issue might include prompt attention, accurate diagnosis and repair and proactive service. Specific measures for accurate diagnosis and repair might include first pass yield (i.e. percentage of vehicles diagnosed and repaired "first time right" as opposed to those that have to be returned a second time). Measures so derived are results based and can be used to report performance, align effort and manage accountabilities.

Internally, the business is organised by function but, as we have repeatedly stressed, carries out the conversion of inputs to outputs (i.e. creates value) through business processes. Since the effectiveness of the processes determine all future results, measures of process effectiveness are required.

Further leverage over future results can be gained by managing organisational capabilities since they determine the effectiveness of all future processes in the organisation. To do this requires that measures of these capabilities are tracked.

Example: An entrepreneurial business school regarded as its main result measures the number of its graduates leaving school with a viable business plan and the number that established businesses that survived three years or more. For process measures, the number of open ended case studies solved, number of hours spent on interactive business simulations and number of internships were chosen. Capability measures included the number of active successful entrepreneurs, and board members on the faculty, and the number of businesses with which the school had a close relationship.

Follow link below for an illustration of the leverage principle.

http://www.leapfrogalliance.com/ezgrphx/lev.jpg

Lastly, the organisation must maintain a certain level of environmental awareness to avoid surprise changes that may result in significant negative impacts, or in missed opportunities.

Example: A bottle making company supplying the brewing and soft drinks sector with returnable packaging materials had been lulled into a false sense of security by consistently good financial results and a high customer satisfaction rating. It came as a shock to the CEO when demand flattened and then declined. If they had had measures for monitoring the external environment they would have noted two worrisome trends that converged to squeeze demand. (a.)The near total adoption among their customers of initiatives like lean, six sigma and TPM that drastically reduced breakages, and (b.) The growing preference for cans and cartons to bottles among their major customers.

Get a Balanced View with a Family of Measures

There is an African proverb which says that you cannot watch a dancing masquerade from one spot. A family of measures reflecting the various areas of organisational performance should be chosen. The balanced scorecard approach advocates measures to track financial performance, customers, internal operations and learning and growth. For each area, measures that drive present performance should be balanced with those to guarantee future results.

Achieve Vertical Alignment with Measurement Hierarchies

The concept of vertical alignment means that employees at different levels in the organisation are driven towards the same goals. For example, a measurement system which holds a production supervisor accountable for quality while his boss is rated only on production volume is not aligned and will drive inconsistent performance. In order for performance measures to be vertically aligned from the level of individual jobs to the organisational level, different degrees of detail of a particular measure of performance must be made available at different levels of the organisation. For instance a hotel chain will have measure of customer satisfaction for each hotel, with results rolled up and summarised for the chain. It must be possible for someone at a higher level to drill down to view details, otherwise the measures will not be actionable. Follow link below for illustration of measurement hierarchies.

http://www.leapfrogalliance.com/ezgrphx/hier.jpg

Comparative Measures

Measures as a means of tracking performance, diagnosing performance problems or decision making can only be meaningful in the context of relevant references and comparatives.

Baseline measures refer to the starting point. These are the values of the variables at the point of setting up the system, at the beginning of an improvement project or some similar event.

Trending measures show the chosen variable as a time series. This makes it easy to see the direction - improving, worsening or stagnant.

Control measures, generally used in combination with trending measures show maximum and minimum allowable values for the performance variable.

All the above are internal comparatives.

External comparatives might involve comparing your performance with competitors, industry standards or theoretical benchmarks.

In Summary: Effective performance metrics must be derived from critical business issues and their success factors. A balanced set of metrics which together form a family of measure must be chosen to reflect the multidimensional nature the business. The external environment must be tracked even if it does not currently affect the organisation's performance Achieve vertical alignment by creating a hierarchy of performance metrics Make use of comparatives to put measures in context

About the Author
Samuel Okoro is the CEO of Leapfrog Alliance Ltd, a management training and consulting firm that helps organisations to reduce costs and improve quality through better business processes. His personal passion is to help move Third World business to world-class levels. For further details please visit http://leapfrogalliance.com/resources.htm

Intellectual Property

Leveraging Intellectual Capital by Daniel Burrus ©2004 - 2006 All Rights Reserved

Working with executives at the Mayo Clinic in the early '90s, I asked them to do what I ask many of my clients to do today - and that is to look at what I call the Visible Future®. At that time, this was not something they wanted to do. Why? Because to them it was depressing. Indeed, their visible future included decreasing Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements and increasing losses in their emergency rooms. So my suggestion to them was this: "Why don't you sell your knowledge?"

The result was a CD which could be used by people any time, day or night, to determine, for example, whether their child's rash and fever required a trip to the emergency room or could be treated with aspirin. The Mayo Clinic put a $100 price tag on the product, and in the first year it sold 670,000 copies.

A side benefit was that, by expanding their services to offer a knowledge-based product, they began to develop a new and powerful 21st century brand in the marketplace. They not only created new value and new revenue, but with the subsequent advent of the Internet, their name recognition became international.

Are you leveraging the intellectual capital in your organization?

About The Author
Daniel Burrus is considered one of the world's leading technology forecasters and strategists, and is the founder and CEO of Burrus Research Associates, Inc., a research and consulting firm that specializes in global innovations in science and technology, their creative application, and future impact. Over the past two decades, he has established a worldwide reputation for his exceptional record of accurately predicting the future of technological change and its direct impact on the business world. He is a strategic advisor to executives from many Fortune 500 companies, helping them to develop successful competitive strategies based on the creative application of leading-edge technologies. He publishes the popular monthly Technotrends Newsletter®, now in its twenty-second year of publication, and is the author of six books, including the highly acclaimed Technotrends, which has been translated into over a dozen languages. He has been the featured subject of a PBS television special and has appeared on programs such as Larry King, CNN, CNBC, and Bloomberg, and is quoted in a variety of publications, including USA Today, Fortune, and Forbes. The New York Times has referred to him as one of the top three business gurus in the highest demand as a speaker. He is a highly successful entrepreneur who has founded and managed five businesses, two of which were national leaders in the United States in the first year.


©Burrus Research Associates, Inc.
557 Cottonwood Ave., Suite #106
P.O. Box 47
Hartland, WI 53029-0047
Phone: 262-367-0949, Fax: 262-367-7163

From Impossible to Possible

From the Impossible to the Possible by Daniel Burrus ©2004 - 2006 All Rights Reserved

A reporter was writing a story on my career as a technology forecaster and business strategist, and asked me why I have been so excited about technology all of these years. I explained to her that technology allows us to turn the impossible into the possible. Most of the things you and I do on a daily basis were, at one time, impossible. For early man, sitting in a chair was impossible; they would have to find a rock or a stump if they wanted to sit.

How have humans been able to redefine what is possible since they first set foot on the planet? The answer is, technology. Technology enables us to turn the impossible into the possible. History reveals that when a new tool is combined with a compelling vision, the world can be changed.

Imagine what it might have been like when some long-ago inventor showed off the first wheel. He or she might have said, "I'll change the world with this." As you might guess, word spread very slowly.

The telephone was another great invention, but just as inventions before it, word still spread slowly. Let's face it, who would you call?

Today Is Not Like Yesterday

When there is a tectonic shift out at sea that triggers an earthquake, tidal waves are created. Because of the great depths of the ocean, the waves are very small, yet the energy from the earthquake can cause the small waves to reach speeds of up to 500 mph. As the waves get closer to shore and the water becomes shallow, they slow down and build, often to great heights.

A few professional lookouts, in this case technology forecasters and futurists whose job it is to look out at the horizon, saw the approaching waves of technological change. Most of us, however, spend little time looking at the horizon. Instead we concentrate on avoiding the obstacles in our current path. Using this tidal wave metaphor, the dot com wave caught by many businesses and individuals by surprise and as the wave subsided, it washed many of the bad business models out to sea.

When a tidal wave strikes, it is usually followed by a few more waves. The next e-business wave of technology-driven change is fast approaching, and once again, few are ready. I would call this wave a "smart" wave because venture capitalists and stock market investors learned a great lesson from the first wave: a plan for profitability and an understanding of sales, marketing, fulfillment and customer service, among others are important.

The Quiet Revolution

Today, word spreads quickly! Customized news comes to us via many avenues, including television, PDAs and cell phones. Microsoft has recently introduced smart object technology that uses radio waves to broadcast news, sports, stock quotes and other information to everyday objects like a watch, bracelet or key chain pendant that have a smart object receiver.

When AOL introduced instant messaging many years ago, it allowed users to detect the online presence of buddies - people we may want to communicate with whenever they are online - and instantly communicate with them by typing a message. Instant messaging is no longer limited to typing short messages. The latest application of instant messaging allows you to talk with and even see the people with whom you are communicating. Even cell phones will allow you to detect when your buddies have their cell phones on so you will know that if you call, they will be there to answer.

When a technology satisfies a social need, a revolution is created. One of mankind's social needs is to communicate. Every time a technology like smoke signals, the telegraph, the telephone and the Web, to name a few, has allowed us to lift the bar on our ability to communicate, a revolution in how we live, work and play followed.

Real-Time Events

Thanks to the Web and other telecommunication technologies, new ideas and events spread almost instantly around the world. We have been watching events from around the world in real-time for over a decade. Remember the first Gulf War and seeing the live video on CNN of the bombs being dropped? Years later, I'll never forget walking into the lobby of a hotel in Brussels, Belgium and seeing a crowd gathered around a television with live video of the World Trade Center just as it collapsed. Now, that's instant messaging.

As our laptops, cell phones and PDAs become multimedia Communication Age devices, we will experience yet another shift in how we live our lives and conduct our business.

Should Is More Important Than Could

When I look beyond communication technology and look at nanotechnology, biotechnology and many others fields, I see that technology will continue to allow mankind to redefine what is possible on the planet, turning the impossible into the possible. We will discover many new things we can do. The key to shaping a positive future is to separate what we could do from what we should do. By focusing on what we should do, we can shape a better tomorrow for all.

About The Author
Daniel Burrus is considered one of the world's leading technology forecasters and strategists, and is the founder and CEO of Burrus Research Associates, Inc., a research and consulting firm that specializes in global innovations in science and technology, their creative application, and future impact. Over the past two decades, he has established a worldwide reputation for his exceptional record of accurately predicting the future of technological change and its direct impact on the business world. He is a strategic advisor to executives from many Fortune 500 companies, helping them to develop successful competitive strategies based on the creative application of leading-edge technologies. He publishes the popular monthly Technotrends Newsletter®, now in its twenty-second year of publication, and is the author of six books, including the highly acclaimed Technotrends, which has been translated into over a dozen languages. He has been the featured subject of a PBS television special and has appeared on programs such as Larry King, CNN, CNBC, and Bloomberg, and is quoted in a variety of publications, including USA Today, Fortune, and Forbes. The New York Times has referred to him as one of the top three business gurus in the highest demand as a speaker. He is a highly successful entrepreneur who has founded and managed five businesses, two of which were national leaders in the United States in the first year.


©Burrus Research Associates, Inc.
557 Cottonwood Ave., Suite #106
P.O. Box 47
Hartland, WI 53029-0047
Phone: 262-367-0949, Fax: 262-367-7163

Change Agents

Organizational Change Management & Business Process Improvement by Joe Rothman

The world doesn't fear a new idea, what it fears is a new experience. - Anonymous

Numerous studies have shown that many strategic changes fail to be implemented on time and within budget. For example, 50 – 75% of all implementations of integrative technologies or methodologies, e.g., CRM, Business Process Improvement, Lean Manufacturing, etc., fail to achieve the financial results which justified their investment.

Many organizations now believe that the ability to react quickly to change is critical to their survival. Yet, the inability to implement these changes, whether through cancelled projects, or projects that are late, over budget, or miss critical business requirements hinder the organization’s ability to keep pace with its competitors. The implications of these issues go beyond the obvious short-term, direct results of wasting resources and not achieving stated goals. As a result of these implementation problems, the organization may miss key financial or market targets which reduce its ability to invest further. Additionally, internal confidence and morale can weaken. Both of these lead to future difficulties in implementation.

At the same time, the pace of change is increasing. The technology landscape is evolving at an ever-increasing rate, with security, compliance, CRM and accommodation of mobile devices all being in the forefront in 2006. In addition to pure technology advances, organizations continue to reorganize and focus on improved or new business processes for greater efficiencies and effectiveness in a changing marketplace.

All of these projects share a common underpinning as involving changes in process, technology and people. A large number of research projects that have studied project success and failure come to the conclusion that the issue is usually not with the technology, methodology, etc. Rather, the direct cause for “failure” in many cases is the lack of planning for the human and organizational response to change.

The probability of successful implementation can be accomplished by utilizing a structured approach to the human and organizational aspects of change coordinated with the standard project plan. These structured approaches to change incorporate the same degree of attention and discipline which is currently employed with the technical aspects of these projects.

In many cases, the change management strategy that accompanies a business process improvement project is focused almost entirely on development of new documentation of procedures and training of personnel on the new process(es). While these components are of considerable importance, there are other key factors that should be addressed, including the following:


Sponsorship – Sponsorship is management’s visible and consistent commitment to the project. Many projects have encountered difficulty when management has not been aware that their role is central to convincing the organization that the project is key to the organization’s achievement of critical business objectives. Because sponsors are typically involved with many simultaneous initiatives, as well as their day-to-day operational responsibilities, it is common for sponsors to help kick-off a project, and then expect it to proceed smoothly without additional effort on their part. Good sponsorship, however, is exemplified by constant appropriate communication throughout the organization on the criticality of the project. Additionally, good sponsors ensure that their management team is all committed to the project, and that all required resources (people, time, money) are made available when the project requires them.

Change Agent / Project Manager – The past few years have seen an increasing appreciation of the role of the project manager, as evidenced by the creation of the Project Management Book of Knowledge and the certification of the Project Management Professional. One of the many roles that a Project Manager must handle is that of the Change Agent, the person responsible for ensuring that the people component of the project is identified and managed as part of the project plan.

Culture – For organizations with strong cultures, any change that runs counter to that culture will have additional barriers to success. A key component of any change program is an assessment of cultural barriers to success; if these are significant, it may be worthwhile to determine how to reduce the conflicts. If this is not possible, it may be necessary to address the cultural issues prior to undertaking the project.

Resistance – It is often difficult to accept that resistance to change is natural and inevitable. The most effective strategies attempt to understand the potential sources of resistance, create opportunities for people to voice their concerns, and effectively (and honestly) address these issues.

Perhaps the most critical lesson, however, is that change management is not an “add-on” or separate activity from the rest of the Business Process Improvement initiative. For greatest effectiveness, Change Management should be an integrated part of the project team, and the change management activities must be incorporated into the main project plan for execution and monitoring.

Back to the Future ?

If Japan can... Why can't we? was a white paper broadcast by NBC in 1980, credited with beginning the Quality Revolution and introducing the methods of W. Edwards Deming to American managers (producer: Clare Crawford-Mason [1], reporter: Lloyd Dobyns [2]). During the 1980's Japan was seen to be a manufacturing powerhouse and American Industry was struggling to keep pace. The release of the white paper showed everyone that in fact the techniques being used in Japan were espoused by an American W. Edwards Deming who had been largely ignored in American management until the white paper got everyone to sit up and listen. In the following years, it prompted a major change in the way many businesses operated. The report details how the Japanese captured the world automotive and electronics markets by following Deming's advice to practice continual improvement and think of manufacturing as a system, not as bits or pieces.

Move to 1991, Quality or Else: The Revolution in World Business, the 1991 PBS series and book, clarified the practice of the new methods. It reported that some U.S., Japanese, Korean, and European companies help employees improve themselves and thereby get their commitment to the organization's mission. This relationship was just as important as systems thinking, customer focus and databased decisions. The series also reported how this new management philosophy of continual improvement could be used to improve service, health care and educational organizations

At the same time, major companies prospered under visionary leaders into the 1990's and then slid back into old practices with corresponding loss of profitability and product/service quality.

Move to 2000 and beyond. The new era started out with the Dot.com bubble burst. Today much of the theory of "systemic thinking" have now become new initiatives with many different consultant labels. While "Quality" is still a component of major corporations the fundamentals have been loss and "Quality" has been delegated to a department rather than being practiced in the executive offices. While quality has improved in many industries its philosophy and practice at the top of organizations is no longer evident as a driving force of American competitiveness.

What are the factors that led to failure of the vital role of systems-thinking leadership?

1) Generational Changes: The leadership of many corporation, large and small, were in their 20's when Deming and his management theories appeared on the American business landscape. The leaders of the past have retired and today’s leaders have reverted back to traditional linear thinking when viewing and solving problems.

Traditional decision-making tends to involve linear cause and effect relationships. By taking a systems approach, we can see the whole complex of bidirectional interrelationships. Instead of analyzing a problem in terms of an input and an output, for example, we look at the whole system of inputs, processes, outputs, feedback, and controls. This larger picture will typically provide more useful results than traditional methods. Education of today's leadership is required to go "back to the future".

2) Management by Results: Today's manager is measured by financial results i.e. budgets, sales, headcount and other final outcomes. If the results are not what the "boss" expected then a simple resolution is to cut budgets, blame other people or hide expenses by shifting them over to other departments. This method brings no improvement rather further complexity and increased cost. What are the true numbers? Who would know?

Today's manager is also measured by monthly or quarterly results. A timing factor that does not allow a true picture as to how people, processes and customers are behaving over time.

System thinking helps us integrate the temporal dimension of any decision. Instead of looking at discrete "snapshots" at points in time, a systems methodology will allow us to see change as a continuous process. Systems’ Thinking is a worldview based on the perspective of the systems sciences, which seeks to understand interconnectedness, complexity and wholeness of components of systems in specific relationship to each other. Systems thinking is not only constructivist, rather systems thinking embraces the values of reductionism science by understanding the parts, and the constructivist perspectives which seek to understand wholes, and more so, the understanding of the complex relationships that enable 'parts' to become 'wholes'.

3) Short Term vs. Long Term emphasis: The stock market operates around quarterly results. Corporate accounting systems operate around monthly results. Many organizations are driven by their budgets, not by how to improve or innovate product and service thus increasing customer satisfaction and market share. Improvement drives down cost, creating market differential and increasing customer satisfaction drives up sales. Short-term thinking does not enable either to happen effectively.

4) Politics: Many colleges still teach organizational design by breaking the organizational 'whole' into components, calling them functions and departments, 'strengthen' each of these components, and hope that together they will produce the whole. We have seen many "unintended" but "logical” consequences of this approach in many organizations. One of them was that the departments conflicted with each other to such an extent that "internal politics" has become the cultural norm.

The Political factor drives many employees to focus on "how to keep in good standing" with their immediate boss. Never questioning his/her methods, always learning to give the "politically correct answers" rather than simply speaking the truths. Political factors are a dominant cultural trait of organizations that manage by results.

There are many other factors that have driven American Management back into old practices with corresponding loss of profitability and product/service quality. In order for companies to go forward they must go "back to the future" and learn from mistakes that are robbing their shareholders value, their employees pride and their customers satisfaction.

Management Priorities

After more than 20 years of consulting our team formulated what we consider "Managements Top Ten Priorities". This is a combinations of observations, others suggested critical factors and some basic common sense. The Top Ten Priorities are issues, actions and goals that any manager should strive for daily. Putting out fires, while may seem appropriate, is a distraction to dealing with the critical factors that drive success and allow management to continuously review the bigger picture.

1. Reduce Cost constantly and forever: The driving factor is by what methods? Simply cutting budgets is not reducing cost. The most effective method of reducing cost is by cutting out waste and rework. This method requires a new management purpose and use of profound knowledge as the basis of continuous improvement in product and service. Manage by Methods. Managing by budgets results provides no iumprovement in process or system capabilities.

2. Form strategic relations with your key suppliers: Minimize total cost from your suppliers. Move toward a single supplier for any one item, on a long-term relationship of loyalty and trust. Constantly changing suppliers increases cost.

3. Lead change: We're in a new economic age driven by technology and increased customer, internal and external, expectations. Management must learn to lead change by empowering their greatest resource, their people. The aim of management should be to help people use technology to do a better job.

4. Organize people and processes: To improve productivity, reduce cost and improve speed companies must organize people, departments, products and services systemically. Remove departmental barriers that create communications breakdowns, internal competition and delays in product and service delivery. Learn to think and organize systemically.

5. Listen!: Your people, your suppliers and your customers are the core of your companies success. Learn to hear what they see, experience and say is important to long term success. Many companies fail primarily do to a lack of hearing. Keep abreast of changes in the market, be prepared for change by hearing both the voice of the customer and the noise of your "system".

6: Expand your thinking: Think beyond your current business model. What product or service do your customers need but are not getting from your company. Focusing on financial results will not expand your thinking, it will suppress thinking systemically.

7: Measure the critical factors: What are the critical factors for your companies future success. Unless these factors are being measured the only measure factor you have is financial results....to late. Establish a balanced score card of critical factors and be prepared to change those factors as the market and the customer preferences change.

8: Move fast: There has been and will continue to be disruptive changes that have and will continue to reshape entire markets. These changes are happening primarily due to technological advances across all industries. A sense of urgency for change is needed. Embrace change, accelerate change and do so as quickly as possible.

9: Train & Educate: Training is one process, education is another. Institute training and education on critical factors throughout the company. Capture lessons learned for the benefit of education. Train people on process changes.

10: Be obsessed with learning: Success is a factor of wisdom. Wisdom is a factor of knowledge. Without learning knowledge cannot be gained. Without knowledge there is a lack of wisdom. Arrogance is the opposite of wisdom.