|
Common Characteristics
Organizations that revolve around this perspective often lurch from
bad decision to bad decision. They have little understanding of how
to defi ne, manage, or even use information effectively. Because
of this, decisions are made not on weight of evidence but on force of
personality. Sometimes, through sheer serendipity, they get it right.
Unfortunately, that single success usually justifi es years of subsequent
failures.
Culture doesn ’t magically appear. At some point, it was created
because of its environment. Because of this, it ’s hard to fault their reli-
ance on experience over evidence. More often than not, their data is
usually fragmented, of highly variable quality, and generally not trust-
worthy. Usually, their culture was created by this very lack of informa-
tion. However, this doesn ’t forgive perpetuating a dysfunctional culture.
As this culture becomes the dominant one, they progressively ignore
the root cause of their bad data: their own behaviors.
Analytics is seen as either being “too hard” or outright untrust-
worthy. If the data contradicts popular opinion, the default position is
that the data is incorrect. Results are cherry-picked to support particu-
lar positions. In any given meeting, a substantial proportion of time is
usually spent arguing what the right numbers are.
The almost total absence of data-driven decision making creates
a vicious cycle. Decisions are made in the absence of data. When the
organization acts on these decisions, this same lack of data makes it
impossible to measure the effectiveness of those decisions. Because
there ’s no traceability, everyone claims credit for successes and dis-
owns failures. The successes people are happy to acknowledge justify
the power of pure experience-based decision making. Because failures
are ignored or outright covered up, this biased view ends up reinforc-
ing the dominant culture.
52
▸
B I G D A T A , B I G I N N O V A T I O N
Ironically, everyone normally agrees that things should be better.
Sadly, the dominant culture prevents anyone from actually doing any-
thing differently. And so, while things are obviously not as effective as
they could be, the status quo remains.
Being comfortable with this perspective does have advantages:
◼
Egalitarianism. Success and internal experience is valued
above all. Whether it ’s through experience or intuition, those
who succeed are frequently promoted to positions of power and
infl uence.
◼
Clarity of ownership. Sources of power are centralized and
either explicitly or tacitly understood. Decisions rarely rely on
consensus—specifi c individuals often have sole decision- making
capability due to their experience. While they may or may not
consult, they will eventually rely on their intuition taking into
account the information presented to them.
◼
Trust. Those with the authority to make decisions are conferred
a high degree of trust by the leadership team of the organization.
This often encourages self-determination, personal responsibil-
ity, and the ability for individual units within the organization
to operate semi-autonomously.
However, it does come with disadvantages. Some indicators of an
organization excessively grounded in this perspective are:
◼
HiPPO leadership. The data people need to make their deci-
sions either doesn ’t exist or isn ’t trusted. Analytics is rarely
(if ever) applied. Subjectivity and gut-feel is the standard
operating model, usually dictated by the highest-paid person ’s
opinion .
◼
Unconsidered reaction. Firefi ghting is common and decisions
are made without any clarity on how their effectiveness will
be measured. Knee-jerk reactions are common and while plans
may be made, they ’re rarely held to.
◼
Fragmented inconsistency. Decisions are made without
consideration of their broader impacts. Outcomes are rarely
(if ever) measured, making it impossible to understand what ’s
working and what isn ’t. Fiefdoms abound and decisions are
T H E C U L T U R A L I M P E R A T I V E
◂
53
made on self-interest rather than based on organizational
objectives.
◼
Self-delusion and outright denial. Successes are claimed by
all. Failures, however, are ignored or outright covered up, pre-
venting valuable learning.
◼
Survival. The most common measure of success is treading
water and simply maintaining the status quo. Achieving this is
“good enough.” Change is often seen as an active threat.
◼
Aimless direction. Key performance indicators are undefi ned
and tenure is determined by politics rather than merit. Success
is a subjective measure doled out by management based on
unclear criteria.
◼
Frantic desperation. People constantly reinvent their job
every time they face a challenge. Inputs and outputs are unde-
fi ned and when employee turnover happens, business processes
are reinvented from scratch.
◼
Person-centricity. Competencies are not recognized, acknowl-
edged, or even understood. Making something happen inevi-
tably involves contacting a specifi c individual, without which
everything becomes impossible.
◼
Incapacitated and paralyzed. Good ideas are ignored because
of fundamental gaps in capability. Rather than being seen as an
opportunity to improve, these gaps are used as a crutch to jus-
tify stagnation and the rejection of change.
◼
Problem-based debate. Cross-functional and internal dis-
agreements are totally subjective in nature and focus on the
root cause of current issues. Different parties will attribute cur-
rent challenges to different sources, and rather than look for
solutions, they ’ll argue about causes with no clear path to reso-
lution. Usually ending at loggerheads, the different groups will
take independent (and sometimes confl icting) actions to solve
what they feel is “the real issue.”
◼
Feudal artisans. Skills are hoarded by manual craftspeople
who have developed their experience through years of practical
application. The political enterprise guards their skills through
54
▸
B I G D A T A , B I G I N N O V A T I O N
the creation of fi efdoms and leverages their unique capabilities
for internal political gain.
◼
Technology is “nice to have.” Despite missing fundamen-
tal capabilities, technology is seen as a “nice-to-have” and is
heavily neglected in favor of hiring and developing artisans.
Spreadsheets multiply and information is a closely guarded
power base for those who have accumulated it.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
