Each company on this planet has a culture, an 'ism' that becomes the road map and voice of those who would guide the company. Scott Berkun posted an interesting topic on his blog that made me think more on culture; "Google’s 10 rules compared to Microsoft".
The basic run down of the post is the comparison of the "Golden Rules" of business each company Google and Microsoft use as a road map, but mostly the post is how the compare. But this got me thinking of my own set of rules or culture rhetoric I believe in and use to guide my company. Wow, it's hard to believe but true, I'm now a Vice President and I help shape the company in my own way, wow. But on to Scott's "Golden Rules" compared in the post:
- Hire by committee.
- Cater to their every need.
- Pack them in.
- Eat your own dog food .
- Encourage creativity.
- Strive to reach consensus.
- Don’t be evil.
- Data driven decisions.
- Communicate effectively.
Hire by committee, I buy into. For years we tried to have central people do the hiring in our company, which lead to having to create a baseline of what was acceptable. What always happened is the person didn't mesh with their department. From here we did a culture study on the company to find out who we were as a company and by department so that hiring could be easier. The exercise was fantastic, it lead us to understand that hiring by committee was best because even if the committee was a cross-section of departments, all subscribed to the company culture. Members of a department on a committee that were hiring for their department would be enthusiastic about a person who fell into their department culture and would then have a passion about convincing the others to hire a certain person. Bottom line, a committee will either ferret out those who will never fit the company or ensure a fit is there, the most important aspect of hiring; besides only hiring the best. ;)
Cater to their every need, I have trouble with. Yes, human capital are the greatest assets we have. Yes, cultures like Microsoft and Google have created people in cultures that now expect gym memberships, flex hours, and comp days. Not that these are bad, they are great tools of motivation yet the culture dictates a need to have them. I don't subscribe to this thinking. Yet is my philosophy so different? Kris Philosophy: pay more than the going rate for good people, performance bonuses, health care, profit sharing, Christmas bonus, small bonuses through the year, aggressive raise structure. It is possible my thinking is a hold over from the older generation above me handing the reigns over, our company is manufacturing and the median age is somewhere in the high 40's. The idea from the post had got me thinking, this is a good thing.
Pack them in, I agree with. There is a degree of business that needs to be remote from the head office in manufacturing globally as we do. This creates a problem and communication has to be high. Generally, having everyone under the same roof and in their own offices, for the most part, expedites the process better.
Eat your own dog food, I also believe, even in the manufacturing sector. More like especially in the manufacturing sector. If the development department has to do things their way and not the customers, to get a product to work, all they are doing is seasoning the dog food. If you make it, you better be able to use it the customer's way is our mantra.
Encourage creativity, I also believe is a good rule. Yet it's hard because time and productivity get in the way. Although, allowing a certain amount of time for people to create their won ideas makes a buy-in to the company. We can't go the Google way on this but we can in our own way.
Strive to reach consensus, is one philosophy point I subscribe to as well. But is it because I'm a young executive who doesn't have the frame of reference as the next person or do I believe in the concept. Personally, it's a combination of both; I've not been good at or a fan of giving directives unless I have to. Getting the buy-in from the group will usually work the best overall. The key is to remember that executives such as myself can stop the bottlenecks by giving directives when it's needed to nudge the ship course.
Don't be evil, should go without saying but too many companies lack the ethics to guide them in not doing evil. It starts with some sort of ethical code from above that becomes the company ethics, it's a culture thing and it has to be communicated and taught daily.
Data driven decisions, I believe as well but don't bank on it. Most decisions I or my staff make has to be on as much data as possible but the rest is frame of reference in making some gut input. Actually, I would say that in my decision process, data is only a tool to show glaring success or failure, everything else is gut. A company has to keep agile, allowing managers to make guts decisions will do that.
Communicate effectively, I also buy but don't see many companies doing it well, including my own. It took years to get people to email and now there is too much. Then came the education on how to CC and forward effectively. Now my experimentation is in the area of Wiki's and corporate memory. There will be no perfection only evolution towards success on the topic of company communication.
Interesting stuff, it made me think.
Scott has written several essays and work across the Internet on Project Management, working is the software world and for large software developers. He recently published his first book on Project Management from O'Riley, I've really enjoyed the book.
Comments