Friday, January 19, 2007

Results defined

How do you spell "results?"

As this dashboard chart from SugarCRM shows, there are a variety of components to track in order to prepare for, and eventually achieve results. Are "results" the sum of the parts? A portion of the whole?

Can the term "results" be properly defined?

I vote, "Yes." In fact, it should be possible to write for days without end on the concept of producing results. Of course, as I have other more pressing requirements, this will be an abridged version.

In chapter 17 of Purple Curve Effect, I wrote about visualizing the end result. Until all parties agree on what the final product or solution looks like, how can they be expected to agree on the results? Or even the steps required to get there? They cannot.

I claim to be a guru in the arena of creating results. I prefer to define it as "throughput," which I often label for my clients (and prospects) as "more money in your pocket." Which opens up the whole systems approach to attacking challenges. Which then brings us to John Boyd and his OODA Loop:

"The observation step is a process of gathering information, from both within and without. This information can come from a variety of sources: the media, research, direct observation, experimentation, or clandestine intelligence activity, to name just a few."

The first "O" of OODA is Observe.

My reading of late keeps circling back to a concept (perhaps even a law) that one cannot process negative commandments. For example, consider man's best friend. There you stand, ready to kick the dog. If I said, "Kick the dog," your mind will race to an image of you kicking the dog. Okay, for those unable to kick a dog, even after it destroyed the Sunday newspaper, lets change the example.

Consider petting the dog. See the scenario in your mind? Great.

Now, what do you see when I say, "See yourself not petting the dog."

It is impossible. You can see yourself standing beside the dog. But there is no such thing as "not petting." I am still working on getting my mind to grasp this concept, but so far, it makes a lot of sense. Similarly, I have heard Mike Murdock say that one cannot think "away from a thought." You are not able to think about, "not thinking about" something.

In chapter 17, I use golfing legend Jack Nicklaus to make the point. For those hackers among us (golf, not computer), consider his ability to see the result of his shot before he even addressed the ball! What do us "weekend warriors" do? We tell one another, "Stay away from the lake."

Not possible. Your mind only hears (and therefore focuses on) the lake. Want to increase your results? Focus on the end product. Hitting the center of the green. Or nailing that challenging new product introduction. Then, work backwards.

Develop the habit. I always lock my car door. Always. It is a habit. I never have the thought half way through a meeting, "Did I lock my car door?"

Producing a result is simply a habit. I cannot, not, produce results. There is only inaction. Or inappropriate actions. Tell me the challenge, and I will show you results. How can I be so sure? Because if I am personally unable to solve the problem, I know how to find someone that can. Or someone that will show me how to solve the challenge.

As Dan Aykroyd said in The Great Outdoors, "That's what I do!"

Jeff 'SKI' Kinsey, Jonah

P.S. Need help? Write me.


blog comments powered by Disqus