Success isn’t permanent, and failure
isn’t fatal. – Mike Ditka
General
Dwight David Eisenhower got it right back in 1946, when discussing civilian
scientists’ efforts: they “are more likely to make new and unsuspected
contributions to the development of the army if detailed directions are kept to
a minimum.”
When managers try to tightly define
what the problems are and micro-manage the actions of people who must solve
them, they risk sacrificing the fundamental breakthroughs that come from
“outside the box” thinking. They short
circuit the generative effects of “blue sky,” “wool-gathering,” free
thinking that can be pursued by people who are closest both to the problems and
to the likely underlying causes – because they live with them daily.
People at the top can’t see everything,
everywhere, particularly in the little nooks and crevices of today’s large
organisations with the continuous changes they undergo. Nor can they know everything about
everything, particularly in technological environments where change is the only
constant.
Perhaps a short anecdote will suffice
to show why leaving the details to the people at the lowest level is both the
most expeditious route to innovation and likely the most economically sound
approach also.
While serving in the US Army Medical Service and
assigned to a hospital in Würzburg Germany, the author encountered a situation of
having two children under the age of two who needed fresh milk etc, but wound
up living in quarters with no refrigerator... refrigerators being heavy and
costly to ship overseas, all officers were “guaranteed” a refrigerator would be
made available from the housing support folks in the Engineer Corps.....
right! So, when none was forthcoming,
the hospital commander was asked to allow the good Captain to borrow a minimally
used refrigerator on a hand receipt from the hospital.... such a refrigerator
was located, a redundant refrigerator in an outpatient clinic designated for
storage of vaccines, but actually used to keep soft drinks for the staff. When asked to sign for this Sears Coldspot
refrigerator, the good Captain balked at becoming responsible for a
refrigerator alleged to be worth over $18,400.00.... how could that be
possible? How could a Sears Refrigerator
that could be purchased by anyone out of the catalogue for $295.95 become so
valued? Curiosity provided the
answer. It seems that when the
refrigerator was procured , the Specification on the contract for purchase
cited the use as a biologicals storage unit that must maintain temperatures
between 36 degrees and 58 degrees Fahrenheit.... well, to make the refrigerator
do that, it was necessary to re-engineer the whole thing at great expense to
change its regular temperature range of 32
- 70 degrees to the more narrow but included range..... in other words,
micro-management of this decision resulted in wasting $18,104.05 to make an
item less versatile and useful than it might have been otherwise.... a mere
cost ineffectiveness of over 6,000%, and a delay in availability for two
years. Nevertheless, the Captain signed
and needless to say, the kiddies milk was immaculately cooled.
The point of this anecdote is that had
the clinic staff been allowed to deal with the “problem” on their own, they
would have purchased a small, counter top refrigerator on the local economy at
a cost of less than even the original Sears Coldspot – and they would have had it when they needed it, not
two years later (time for specifications to be drawn up and approved, bids for
contracts to be let and considered, procurement time, delay due to modification
funds coming from Engineer Corps budget and not budgeted for so it had to wait
until next budget cycle, etc). During
the delay, they not only had to inconvenience patients by sending them to
another clinic for immunizations, but also,
by the time they received it, the hospital had reconfigured and it was
no longer needed... hence a $18,000.00 employee soft drink cooler.
Decisions at the top often define
problems inadequately due to incomplete second-hand knowledge of the situation,
and tend to be formulistic based on out-of-date SOPs. The end result is too often ineffective, very
costly non-solutions.
Edward De Bono,
world renown expert on creative thinking puts it very well when he talks about
the fact that one cannot see in a new direction by looking harder in the old
one. And, as Margaret J.Wheatley puts it
in discussing creativity and change: “...cherished interpretations must
dissolve to make way for the new.”
Before you leap in and make decisions, cool
it! Maybe the folks who are closest
to the problem have better, cheaper, more innovative solutions.