• Protip: Profile posts are public! Use Conversations to message other members privately. Everyone can see the content of a profile post.

? for you

Joined
10 April 2000
Messages
6,126
Location
Silicon Valley
what 3 things would you suggest your employer implement (at work) to improve your organization's performance & results over the next 90 days?

180 days?

1 calendar year?
 
Difficult question. What size organization and what industry?

Are you talking about your worker bees?
 
Less buzzing! Make more honey!!! :biggrin::wink:
 
1. Less Managers
2. Less "Status" meetings
3. More Workers
 
Difficult question. What size organization and what industry?
all sizes / industries replies are welcome.

(background: as i wrap up the latest major section of a book i've been writing (and thus moving to production release next month, followed by consulting engagements), i find myself thinking of "so what can the 'average' company do to make itself more productive and improve its results" in the time frames i defined.)

my experience is that when asked, most employees / contractors have a number of ideas worth discussing / considering... so i thought i'd put the question up for consideration / discussion here.
 
Last edited:
Can you give more details?? A vague/unspecific question + vague/unspecific responses = certainty in getting bad advice. :wink:
i intended it to be a open question... and heck, i'm not looking for advice, but rather hoping to stimulate conversation on what employers could do to improve performance / results.

(note: i've gotta run out for an appt so will pick this up when i return in a bit.)
 
Last edited:
Well, off the top of my head there are a few things that may apply to all size organizations...

1. Manage the information flow
2. Prioritazation
3. Training/education
4. Acknowlege employees
5. Monitor and measure customer service
6. Use technology to imporve efficiency
7. Set, plan and measure goals and share with employees (can't improve if can't measure), so measure everything
 
all sizes / industries replies are welcome.

(background: as i wrap up the latest major section of a book i've been writing (and thus moving to production release next month, followed by consulting engagements), i find myself thinking of "so what can the 'average' company do to make itself more productive and improve its results" in the time frames i defined.

my experience is that when asked, most employees / contractors have a number of ideas worth discussing / considering... so i thought i'd put the question up for consideration / discussion here.

What I've found - very consistently - across sub $500MM sized businesses:

1. Working capital is not managed as efficiently as it could. Improvements usually include implementing better systems for tracking AR, AP and inventory AND MORE IMPORTANTLY developing a culture within the finance dept of keeping NWC as lean as possible. See #3

2. Mgmt decision making is rarely good. For the "visionary" leaders, there aren't enough nuts-n-bolts execs to actually keep the ship running smoothly. Conversely, and more common, most businesses in this size range lack good LT strategic thinking. I haven't done much in the tech space though. BOTH are critical, unless the business is PE backed.

3. Incentivization is very very rarely used well. Compensating key execs and mgrs based on relevant KPIs is one of the key tools we use to improve our businesses. Equally important, clearly communicating to those managers exactly HOW and WHY they are being tracked and how they will benefit if they exceed their marks. Simplicity is usually best.
 
I think every company should look to offer flexable hours and work at home options for qualified employees.People work better when they feel like working and feel like they have some controll/flexability managing family/personal life with thier work obligation.Of course the usual caveats apply.
 
Well, off the top of my head there are a few things that may apply to all size organizations...

1. Manage the information flow
2. Prioritazation
3. Training/education
4. Acknowlege employees
5. Monitor and measure customer service
6. Use technology to imporve efficiency
7. Set, plan and measure goals and share with employees (can't improve if can't measure), so measure everything

thx for these, doug... i would certainly include all of these in any list of "gotta do's" i would create, too.
 
thx for these, doug... i would certainly include all of these in any list of "gotta do's" i would create, too.

Does this mean I can get back in the honey line?:confused:
 
What I've found - very consistently - across sub $500MM sized businesses:

1. Working capital is not managed as efficiently as it could. Improvements usually include implementing better systems for tracking AR, AP and inventory AND MORE IMPORTANTLY developing a culture within the finance dept of keeping NWC as lean as possible. See #3

2. Mgmt decision making is rarely good. For the "visionary" leaders, there aren't enough nuts-n-bolts execs to actually keep the ship running smoothly. Conversely, and more common, most businesses in this size range lack good LT strategic thinking. I haven't done much in the tech space though. BOTH are critical, unless the business is PE backed.

3. Incentivization is very very rarely used well. Compensating key execs and mgrs based on relevant KPIs is one of the key tools we use to improve our businesses. Equally important, clearly communicating to those managers exactly HOW and WHY they are being tracked and how they will benefit if they exceed their marks. Simplicity is usually best.
although i've spent the great majority of my career in <$100MM software companies, these 3 have been very near the top of my list, too. yesterday i completed a (very brief) overview on the value / benefits / how-to of 3 year strategic planning (and today need to wrap up the annual operational / individual planning overview.).

thx for the feedback, ski.
 
I think every company should look to offer flexable hours and work at home options for qualified employees.People work better when they feel like working and feel like they have some controll/flexability managing family/personal life with thier work obligation.Of course the usual caveats apply.
very good suggestion and one that i'm sure many companies are looking at these days.

when i was a manager, the basic guidelines i used for deciding who could work remotely were:

* assuming they currently meeting performance requirements, what will change + / - were they to begin working remotely? with each of the companies i've worked with, i've found it best to define a "trial" period that includes working remotely 2-3 days a week for a period of, say, 2 months. during that time, we continue with standard meeting schedule (whatever it may be) with working-remote topic included to ensure we're staying on track.

* how will their being remote + / - impact their ability to support our customers and our organization in achieving / exceeding their goals. in other words, working remotely, will they contribute / perform at least as well (hopefully better) as they are today.

* how well will our infrastructure facilitate the remote situation. with the many new technologies over the past few years, this is almost - but not quite - a non-issue these days. i find most emerging companies are now able to quickly adopt new infrastructure / technologies to facilitate (reasonably) secure remote-access / availability.

with the high cost of fuel these days, i'm sure more and more companies will be evaluating allowing employees to work remotely.

thx again for the feedback on this.
 
Does this mean I can get back in the honey line?:confused:

hahahaha, you're at the head of the line, doug. as a matter of fact, i think i hear some buzzing back there (i'm working from my patio now) that they've got something special for you when you visit :eek::eek::eek:
 
although i've spent the great majority of my career in <$100MM software companies, these 3 have been very near the top of my list, too. yesterday i completed a (very brief) overview on the value / benefits / how-to of 3 year strategic planning (and today need to wrap up the annual operational / individual planning overview.).

thx for the feedback, ski.

Happy to help.

On the *uh-oh* issue of forecasting: the most innovative concept I have picked up recently is in doing a rolling 18 month (or 12 or 24 month) forecast built bottoms up by department. A rolling forecast, that is (as mentioned) tied to compensation, can be really powerful. This kind of plan would, obviously, be much more relevant to certain types of businesses than others (manufacturing, businesses with very long supply chain lead times, etc.). I really like it though, overall -- it's a great concept for many reasons. Getting it right results in equity value.
 
Happy to help.

On the *uh-oh* issue of forecasting: the most innovative concept I have picked up recently is in doing a rolling 18 month (or 12 or 24 month) forecast built bottoms up by department. A rolling forecast, that is (as mentioned) tied to compensation, can be really powerful. This kind of plan would, obviously, be much more relevant to certain types of businesses than others (manufacturing, businesses with very long supply chain lead times, etc.). I really like it though, overall -- it's a great concept for many reasons. Getting it right results in equity value.

I agree. That's great concept. All too often organizations prepare the three program, which is a long forcast, have it go out of date in twelve months due to changing conditions, etc. and it sits on the shelf. The rolling forcast is really a "living" document.
 
I agree. That's great concept. All too often organizations prepare the three program, which is a long forcast, have it go out of date in twelve months due to changing conditions, etc. and it sits on the shelf. The rolling forcast is really a "living" document.

Yup.
Too bad you're retired, you might have been a great businessperson. :biggrin::biggrin: I jest. :wink:



Final thought on this thread Queen:
It goes w.o. saying, but it really shouldn't. Competent management will absolutely positively make or break a businesses. It is SOOO critical (and difficult to analyse frankly). Economy doing well? Good management should be able to capitalize. Economy weakening? Good management should be able to keep the ship afloat. In my experience, perhaps 5% of the CEOs that I meet for new investments really meet this criteria of competence. It's quite unfortunate, actually. On the bright side, it only gets "worse" outside of the U.S. -- finding a good CEO in Europe is like finding a Ferrari that doesn't break.
 
Happy to help.

On the *uh-oh* issue of forecasting: the most innovative concept I have picked up recently is in doing a rolling 18 month (or 12 or 24 month) forecast built bottoms up by department. A rolling forecast, that is (as mentioned) tied to compensation, can be really powerful. This kind of plan would, obviously, be much more relevant to certain types of businesses than others (manufacturing, businesses with very long supply chain lead times, etc.). I really like it though, overall -- it's a great concept for many reasons. Getting it right results in equity value.
i was introduced to that in '89 and its paid pretty good dividends :)
 
Maybe these are all cliche, but here goes:

1. Treat your employees well.
2. Do for your employees what you promised, don't say one thing and do another.
3. An HR department which actually listens.
4. Performance based compensation for top execs - no guaranteed packages or golden parachutes - they have to earn their way just like everyone else.

Ok, so that's 4. :tongue:
 
Last edited:
Yup.
Too bad you're retired, you might have been a great businessperson. :biggrin::biggrin: I jest. :wink:



Final thought on this thread Queen:
It goes w.o. saying, but it really shouldn't. Competent management will absolutely positively make or break a businesses. It is SOOO critical (and difficult to analyse frankly). Economy doing well? Good management should be able to capitalize. Economy weakening? Good management should be able to keep the ship afloat. In my experience, perhaps 5% of the CEOs that I meet for new investments really meet this criteria of competence. It's quite unfortunate, actually. On the bright side, it only gets "worse" outside of the U.S. -- finding a good CEO in Europe is like finding a Ferrari that doesn't break.
you're exactly right, ski... and it's not just the ceo, it's the entire management team and, as follows, the rest of the organization. during an "awakening" period at one company i was part of, we began focusing on "getting the wrong people off the bus and getting the right people on the bus." (we started with "refreshing" the management team, then hired under the "right people on the bus" mentality. it's the only way to do things, imho.)

good discussion, thx again.
 
Maybe these are all cliche, but here goes:

1. Treat your employees well.
2. Do for your employees what you promised, don't say one thing and do another.
3. An HR department which actually listens.
4. Performance based compensation for top execs - no guaranteed packages or golden parachutes - they have to earn their way just like everyone else.

Ok, so that's 4. :tongue:

4 is good, too :)

though some may call them cliches, i think of them basic guidelines and would include them in any good list i built.

i think everyone deserves the right to earn their way - no free lunch, period - over'n'out.
 
Back
Top