Choice is a powerful thing

Judges.  They are all around us and we are also one.

We might like to think that we can affect, influence, and even control all of the stuff around us--and we can to a large part--but sometimes we can't have as much control and influence as we'd ultimately prefer.

Decisions start and stop all things.  Decisions can come from within us or outside of us.  In this way, there are two competing forces: us and them.  Everything boils down to decisions and it is decisions that are the things that are affecting and creating the workflows, processes, and policies that surround us.  Decisions are the things that ultimately set our course of action in life.

When a leader or person in a powerful position above us or in relation to our project makes a decision, all things are put into motion and dependent upon that decision or opinion.  As project managers we have to be very aware of the decisions and opinions being made around us and make our own decisions of how we'd like to react given them. 

There are several ways we can decide to treat these decisions and opinions being made around us: A) we can work in compliance and agreement with them, B) we can work around or be ignorant to them, or C) we can directly against and in combat of that decision. 

Working in compliance and agreement of the decisions is the preferred--don't rock the boat--way of doing things.  It's the easiest and probably the most effective.

Working around or ignoring decisions is another form of compliance but it is a bit more subversive.  It is passive-aggressive to know but not necessary heed the decision.

The third type of behavior in relationship with respect to a decision is total war against that decision.  When we get into this mode, we do not agree with the decision and will do everything in our power to fight or change it.

We all want control and on a day by day basis we make our own decisions about the decisions and opinions that are taking place around us and set our own path in the maze.

Name your price

An agreement on price lies somewhere but
make sure you're not compromising too much!!

If you ever find yourself in a situation where you need to name your price, I feel for you.  Sometimes it can be fun to name your price and drive a hard bargain but most of us are uncomfortable with this.  As American's we're typically not really barterers, but as business people we really have to be.  Maybe you've experienced this, too, where in business you have no choice but to talk about and deal with issues relating to price.  I guess my only tip is to buck up, be strong, and don't be afraid to drive a hard bargain.  You'll win some and you'll lose some but be fair, too.

Two views of Microsoft SharePoint

SharePoint can be viewed in two main ways: as a host of things and as a data collection mechanism.  I prefer to view it as the latter because I find that it is far more interesting and compelling that way.

Back in 2001 when SharePoint first came out, I was building web apps for Siemens and they wanted to use SharePoint.  I soon found out that SharePoint was great and offered value beyond the tools I could build.  I would still write custom apps and tools without SharePoint but SharePoint really took off within Siemens as a great data collection mechanism.  The Team Sites feature and all of the lists and modules and such really is the core of SharePoint.

SharePoint has come a very long ways since its early beginnings and added Records Management, Web Parts, Dashboards, and a lot of Business Intelligence features.

Yet some people see SharePoint today as a surface and host for things regardless of its complexity and value.  They see it as a container that doesn't do much.  I don't see it as this at all and am confused by people who think of it in this way.

So get a clue people, it's a database and a holding tank of data and other things; it's a framework.

You can still be an entrepreneur while working with someone else’s idea

Starting your own business is really hard.  I should know, I’ve started a few and failed (and still feel like I’m failing on the other ones I’ve started and am working on!):

• 1994: Tortizza
  • Why started: Dad suggested it was a good idea.  I was 17.
  • Mission: Make pizzas from tortillas, patent the name.
  • Successes: Made some tasty treats, met lawyers
  • Failed because: not interested, didn’t know how to patent.
  • What I learned: That patenting something isn’t a process I want to do.  Expensive, bureaucratic.  I hate bureaucracies (but want to create them!)
• 1996: The Computer Dude
  • Why started: I wanted to make money during the summer and had computer and marketing skills to offer.
  • Mission: Help people use computers.
  • Successes: Made money, met many interesting people and learned about their computing needs/interests, and environments
  • Failed because: Lost interest.  People are crazy.
  • What I learned: Good customer service and marketing skills.
• 1999: TheWesternChannel/CollegeUnderground/Bottlefed
  • Why started: Wanted to have an internet business with friends.  The thing we knew most about was our college and we had a strategy of getting a ton of content and expanding.
  • Mission: Make web sites for things we’re passionate about.
  • Successes: Very popular WWU website in 1999-2001, featured in campus and city newspapers.
  • Failed because: Had no real business model.  Geeked out on technology to much.  Wasn’t mature enough.  Got bored of college topics after college.  Needed real income after graduating from school.
  • What I learned: How to make very cool web products and communities.  Databases, systems.
• 2002: eServices
  • Why started:  Wanted to be able to do work for companies around the area via 1099.
  • Mission: Provide professional services to area firms for high wages (work 1099).
  • Successes: Worked for a former employer for the highest wage to date.
  • Failed because: Didn’t do any marketing.  Got wrapped up in a day-job and went back to school.
  • What I learned: Not much, never really pursued this much.

The following businesses I’ve started and am still (semi-actively) working on:

• 2006: Visualize Everything/PhatLibs
  • Why started: I love words and word games and technology and this to me is like the perfect blend.
  • Mission: Create an online word game that results in the worlds largest and most relevant database of phrases.
  • Successes: Created product.
  • What I’m learning: Launching requires money and time and energy.
• 2007: EfficiTrends LLC
  • Why started: Saw many opportunities in the “green” space.  Really liked the idea of doing green things and being in business but socially responsible/saving the planet.
  • Mission: Provide professional services, sell the value of ‘green’ and social responsibility.
  • Successes: Built brand, created web site, did a little marketing.  Have a framework about which I can speak.
  • What I’m learning: Don’t be idealistic, be realistic.  Sell your basic values, not ideals.
• 2011: AppsJack
  • Why started: Many opportunities in the mobile application development space.  Wanted to create a brand and market position in the space.  Know someone with a great product / process for building apps.
  • Mission: To create custom (mobile) apps for people.  Modern software development.  (And other services via EfficiTrends if necessary).
  • Successes: Created brand, met sales and technology partners, went on sales calls, built paperwork, systems, and legal framework.
  • What I’m learning: Pick the right partners.  Make sure you focus on the overall process and delivery.  Don’t be idealistic (again!).

I guess I have traction from these angles: I’ve done cool things for companies, I’ve been an employee, I’ve driven my salary up to a pretty good level, I’ve gotten grad degrees and a PMP certificate, I’ve joined companies, I’ve volunteered, I’ve built my resume and background, network.

It’d be ideal to me to have my own idea that I’m pursuing but sometimes that’s not in the cards.  Finding partners works both ways.

In order to get some traction given my current situation (employed), I’m going to try to support OTHERS in THEIR businesses.  I already do this as my day job as an employee and consultant, so why not do it also as an entrepreneur?  I don’t have to be the inventor!!! 

By doing so, the benefits are that I get to go further up the food chain (closer to owners), get good experience, have large scope, influence, and responsibility!

Technical and Non-Technical People; There’s a Big Difference

This is a huge distinction in people's minds in business. Technical people are the engineers, the doers, and often the coffee-getters of our organizations unfortunately. Non-Technical people wind up being the leaders and managers. But why?


In a way in business, it's a very large penalty to be capable of doing the work. Yes, there's an entire body of "work" in management but there are some people out there that really don't do shit and don't know shit; they don't add value. These non-technical people somehow find a way to become the managers and leaders of our organizations. But why and how?


In my opinion, you either know how to do the work or you don't know and you wind up telling people what to do. Business is a crazy world that's centered in strange ideas of power.

Don't Just Kick Butt...Kick Positive Butt

In this post, I explain my two core business principles: Kicking Butt and more importantly Kicking Positive Butt.  Briefly, the point is to do good work for the communities you care about but in order to do that, you have to get out there first.  I hope that me sharing my principles with you will help you better understand what your principles might be. 

My overall philosophy is pretty simple: Kick Positive Booty.  But this has a sub-part to it and is really TWO steps: Kick Positive Booty (principle 1) requies that you first Kick Booty (principle 2).  Together these principles focus and balance me toward getting things done.

1. Kick Booty - First you have to get out there and connect with people.  This means getting off your butt and taking charge of your life.  You have to be hungry, aggressive, and focused and ready to change things and take them as they come.
   
2. Kick Positive Booty - For me, I don't want to just "kick butt", I want to kick good butt.  A specific type of butt.  I want to do good for mankind and society first, and myself second.  I care fundamentally about myself and my situation but if I don't put others in front of myself and their needs in front of mine I will not be successful.  This is like having good customer service and not being too self-serving.

In summary, you learned that I'm not just about kicking butt but I want to kick positive butt and make a change to things that matter.  I hope that knowing this will help you think about what POSITIVE butts you are going to kick!

Be Versatile or Be Gone

One of the keys to being a high-functioning technology consultant is to be versatile in your role.  You have to be able to do a lot of things well to make the client happy.  Common roles you (should) have to play well are Analyst, Builder, and Project Manager.  Here’s a quick description of each:

Analyst - Understand and define the problem using your skills of interviewing, math, statistics, process flow, data and information analysis.
Builder - put the necessary pieces together to create the solution.
Project manager – Integrate and communicate what’s necessary about the related parts of the project such that the involved parties understand what’s going on and continue to want what's being produced.  

In total, you have to be willing to do whichever job is necessary to get the job done and make the customer happy.  This requires experience, risk-taking, research, and networking.

Refusing to Use the Tie-Breaker Role

My friend Bruce today told me about a book called The Seven-Day Weekend: Changing the Way Work Works http://www.amazon.com/Seven-Day-Weekend-Changing-Work-Works/dp/1591840260 and brought up an interesting point about systems that are "open" but also have a "tie-breaker" role (manager or authoritarian).  In the system that Bruce described in the book, although this role existed, the manager never used his power as tie-breaker and would always put it back onto the group.  I thought that was interesting.

Forming a Consulting Group (that is World-Changing, Profitable, Enjoyable, Sustainable, Continuously-Improving, etc.)

The world is full today with people in business who are doing good things and making compelling change to our organizations.  These people are not generally organized as a collective.  It's likely the goal for many of these individuals to find other like-minded people and establish "guilds" around their particular part of the technology and change delivery puzzle, be it sales, product definition, development, delivery, or support.  In total, our system today requires many quality professionals to deliver the services that it has; and the quality of these services and their density is highly variable and in some cases poor, some cases excellent.  The goal is to make high-quality products that the world needs and for which the market will be willing to pay.  "It takes a village" but this village that we will need for this change is smart, involved, well-organized, and planned.  This is not a government, it is an uprising.

What are the attributes of this village we require to bring about the quality products and services of tomorrow?  From where does this village come?  The crowd, I say!  From our networks; current and future.  In my opinion, it is possible to find and support--with the appropriate tools, incentives, practices, and resources--people willing to capably contribute to our current firms and to the firms that we need to bring about.  The goal for the support organization and consulting group would be to offer the training, staffing, and project/program/product services necessary to allow the resources we have today to turn out the products we need tomorrow as fast and at as high of a quality and leading to the greatest economic value possible. The technologies we have today are mature enough to support and sustain such a group.

Today's organizations are either A) antiquated B) outdated C) unprepared or D) non-existing.  Let's fix this!


Critical Components of the Consulting Organization (EfficiTrends):

• Sales & Marketing -- responsibilities are to build the network, filter associates/partners/relationships, educate and train our stakeholders and members.
• Operations & Delivery -- responsible for getting the job done as it's defined and communicating to others when things aren't going according to plan.
• Product Definition and Contracting -- responsible for strategic planning, fine-grained management of relationships, project/program/product management, and contracting.
• Product Support and Operations, Sustainability -- responsible for the ongoing "care and feeding" of completed products and services as well as the definition of new, more streamlined ways of providing those products and services at a lower cost.

Critical Inputs to the Process:

• People in jobs
• Make the most out of the person's role and support them with a great staff and "back office"
• Provide personal marketing, coaching, and resume services about what they're doing, how to market their strengths, develop their weaknesses, and work toward demonstrable results and efficient engagement
• On-site staff augmentation and support services to fill gaps within client team.
• Project and program management definition and sales -- how to "stealthily" grow the scope of the consulting group's influence at the client.
• Replacement services when the individual isn't the best fit
• "Graceful exit" services when the client or engagement should not be the focus of the consulting organization
• Leads, hiring managers, entrepreneurs
• Assist in the definition of programs and offerings
• Put consultants and partners in place
• Seek to define measurable results and a consistent, visible practice, and knowledge base
• Partner via Master Service Agreement (MSA), Joint Venture (JV), etc.
  

My Personal and Company's Mission Statement

"To provide the best ways for people to create the most productive communities and networks about their most critical interests using the most current communications technologies."

That's it.  Any thoughts?

Eric

Developing the Right Metrics Matters the Most

There are several ways a person could view an organization:

• As a collection of business processes (activities) that the business has to perform to meet its strategic objectives
• As a collection of IT applications that support the processes
• As a collection of people and suppliers who provide the resources necessary to achieve the organizational objectives
• As a collection of metrics or measures that describe the performance of the organization

Although each of these perspectives is equally real, only one is RIGHT in my opinion. Which one? METRICS, I say. Unless we boil our organizations into numbers and shared things that people can understand -- not complex and changing things like systems, processes, tools, and people -- can we really manage our organization as a program. I'm not making an argument for ACCOUNTING, per se, I'm talking about those facts and figures that tell us whether or not our business is being successful at achieving its objectives.

Therefore, it's my contention that a key part of the strategic planning and communications processes is to define and communicate about the key performance indicators (KPIs) of your business. KPIs are a bit of a cliche term but they're critical. The fundamental question we have to agree upon is, "How will we know that we are doing well?".

The more we develop this language of numbers and measurement, the more clear we will be together on our perception of what matters and how to allocate our resources and attention.

3 Keys to Making Your Product Development Effort Successful

Through Six Hour Startup--where a new web-based product is developed and launched by a team of 20+ strangers in six hours--I learned what it takes to lead in chaotic situations. At BluWater Consulting I was Scrum Master to three concurrent software development projects and learned that there are a few key principles required to succeed: strength, (team) commitment, systems thinking, and creativity. Based on this I define agility as “a willingness to seek, accept and integrate feedback as frequently and rapidly as possible”.

In my opinion, there are “3 Keys to Making Your Product Development Effort Successful”:

1. Develop relationships with key suppliers. Rely on your suppliers to coach you on the best tools and methods for your organization and situation. Invest the time and resources necessary to procure what’s required to lead the change you seek! At a minimum, put up a whiteboard to track each project and use “stickies” to track the work as it flows through the process. Ensure that there’s shared accountability within the team and the roles of shepherd, pairing partner, and QA are clear. Synchronize your stickie-note process with a powerful information system so you can get real-time statistics, detect, and analyze process variances.


2. Identify and establish the leadership required. The program will only succeed if you have the support and understanding of the right people. This requires persistence and a strong will! Seek to continuously understand who is in charge (the team) and govern as required. Make the roles of Scrum Master, Product Owner, etc. clear but don’t be surprised when they change.


3. Make sure that your team gets it. There are some critical things that your team has to understand before they’ll do well in an agile process. One example is understanding the difference between burning time “up” (tracking actual hours in the case of work that involves uncertainty or risk) and burning time “down” (tracking how much time is left against work that can be reasonably estimated). Make sure that your team has the training it needs to succeed, move forward, and communicate with each other effectively.

If you would like help getting your project or practice off the ground, I'm happy to quickly assess where you're at and help you get get to where you’d like to be!

It's Efficient, but for Whom?

One big problem with the "green" (environmentalism, efficiency, social consciousness) movement is that it is hard to know the truth about what is green. Hence the term "greenwashing" as in flubbing or lying about the greenness of one's product, company, or service. But is lying necessarily bad here? It could be.

It's the case in business and life that things can be "efficient" (defined by Answers.com as "Acting or producing effectively with a minimum of waste, expense, or unnecessary effort.") for one person but not another. In fact, that's the norm; there are system effects to improving one area of a process while not considering the others. There has to be a balance since there are many stakeholders and perspectives for anything we look at or touch. A simple example of sub-optimized efficiency is a company that dumps its waste into a local water supply, saving itself money but breaking the law and damaging the water supply. It's efficient for them but inefficient for the water supply, water users, etc.

Say things change and this same company decides to change its behavior and "go green". They promote how they reduced X, Y, and Z. This is good. All positive change is good, but it's still not enough. The company is not off the hook now for doing ONE GOOD THING!

The point here is that there are many SHADES of GREEN. Anything that is positive for people or the planet can be considered green but we have to be very careful what we call green or call good enough. What we should be shooting for is A BRIGHT GREEN THAT WE CAN MEASURE. That said, there's usually a the competing force of financial and economic greed. We can and do measure that well: it's called profit or loss. Where's the balance in a system like this? How would we know if we were doing the right thing? What if I made $1M from a business that hurt things and then reinvested that in saving children or streams? Am I bad?