FUNCTIONAL CONFLICT

I hate conflict.  At the core of my being, I know that harmony reigns, and yet there were whole days I dedicated to resolving a conflict.  Over time, I have learned that there is an inherent conflict in the very business functions organizations depends on to get to a healthy EBITA.  Notice the words; “business functions,” not people. Albeit certain personalities are attracted to business functions that call for certain personality strengths to support success.  Nonetheless, when I see a conflict in terms of business functions, I am less likely to personalize conflict when it appears. More importantly, I am more mindful to understand the functional conflicts and can align differences to serve the bottom-line.

Those of us who have worked in a variety of business functions, know that departments approach work differently to be effective.  Each has its optimal pace, timeframe, the focus of application and contribution to the organization. Within these four contexts, there is variation.  For example; optimal work pace may be fast, slow/deliberate or “in its time.” Sales are dominantly fast-paced, with a little “in its time” in a “get r done” expectation of outcome.  Contrast that work pace with the bookkeeping side of accounting, which dominantly has a slow or deliberate pace focused on accuracy and correctness. Within these two important business functions, a natural conflict is present. I can recall many times frustrated bookkeepers chased after sales for cost receipts near at the close of the month. The conflict is no one’s fault.

The context of time frame consists of a continuum that includes short, medium or long-range time.  Different business functions operate best along different points on the time frame continuum within the organization’s overall time frame.  Administrating human resources by developing and implementing personnel policies and procedures focuses on results needed within a short time frame, while the development of human resources takes a longer time to become sustainable and constructively impact the organization for the long run.  So, in the management of human resources, a conflict is naturally present.

Some business functions have a local impact, while other business functions focus on a greater or global impact, some both.  An organization’s operations have a local focus and impact, dominantly. Organizations seek innovative ways to improve operations locally, within its walls.  Marketing strives to make a wider, perhaps global impact in the way information about the organization is distributed through various communication venues. If you have witnessed disagreement and frustration between marketing and operations, look no further than what each department believes they need to be successful, most times those resources are not aligned.

Whether a business function impacts an organization’s development through greater effectiveness or efficiency is the last context of conflict this article addresses.  The dominant function of Research & Development is to find and develop effective products and services to bring to market. The budgeting side of a business’ accounting function focuses on contributing greater efficiency to support decision-making and providing guidance based on financial parameters.  How often do you see the organization’s heads of accounting and R&D going to lunch, casually?

The following table displays the dominant – not exclusive – focus of business functions in the contexts of pace, timeframe, application and overall contribution to the organization.   Please note that if you disagree with the dominant focus of a specific business function, it’s ok, and the disagreement contributes to conflict, another variable. BTW, acceptance is a form of resolution.

 

DEPT Pace Timeframe Local/Global Effective-Efficient
Sales Fast Short Global Effective
Marketing Fast Long Global Effective
Operations Fast Short Local Effective
R&D Fast Long Global Effective
Financial Planning Fast Long Global Effective
Accounting Slow/ Fast Short/Long Local/Global Efficient/ Effective
Bookkeeping Slow Short Local Efficient
HRD Slow Long Global Effective
HRA – Personnel Slow Short Local Efficient

 

These are just four contexts.  Additional contexts include the time reference a department works with; past, present, immediate or future.  What is the dominant thinking a department applies to be successful; concrete, pragmatic, conceptual, abstract, potentiality, possibility, probability, etc.?  What does the department juggle or coordinate; goals, people, ideas, systems, etc.? Fun, huh?

Organizations cannot escape conflict, and the different business function foci are obvious fundamental reasons for its presence in the workplace.  Healthy organizations accept, understand and leverage conflict to become better. They see conflict as a resource to align, not ignore. One way to leverage conflict is through structured debate, which sharpens and refines issues.  Another way is to consciously weave the diversity of foci and approaches into an organization’s decision-making process. A process that includes guardrails of conduct supporting the accumulation of contributions from the group responsible for the successful implementation of the decision.  

Bottom line: Don’t take conflict, personally.

W Scott Erickson, MBA, CFC is a Senior Associate at FarVision, a consulting company offering a proven decision-making method that aligns the diversity of business function approaches and resources so organizations can achieve more goals more often.   

THE IMPORTANCE of TRANSFORMATIVE TEAMS

Creating Transformative Teams that solve problems and implement mission goals play one of the most crucial roles in moving an organization from a business as usual/hierarchical, short-term, non-sustainable orientation to a transformative, organic/flat, sustainable orientation, and is a primary focus of FarVision’s work.

Recently a friend of mine, a successful business owner/ CEO, was consolidating several operational locations into a modern central headquarters. This required moving people, equipment, office supplies etc. We were on a brief holiday together when I had the opportunity to observe how decisions are made in her company. A call came from one of her managers asking what should be done with 2 desks; move them, sell them, store them?  She and the manager discussed the options and she said to just move them to the new facility and put them in the hall by her office until a final decision was made. They then chatted about how all was going and ended the call. This to me is an example of “the CEO has to sign off on the toilet paper”; too many decisions are made at the top. What a waste! How many times a day are phone calls like that made and by how many people? Multiply that over a period and the cost to the company in the wasted capital, time and human potential will be significant. There is a solution that is simple but not easy; build the organizational muscle to share authority through Transformative Teams.

Building the organization’s capacity for problem-solving through Transformative Teams takes commitment, willingness to take risks and maturity from all members. It also requires that the Ultimate Authority (owner/CEO/President) for the organization is willing to share her/his authority so that decisions are made at the right levels, by the right people and at the right time. That means that accountability, responsibility, risk-taking, and rewards are shared, WHERE the decisions are made, and their solutions are executed, instead of holding all that at the top and sending down directions.

Sharing authority, by using a sustainable process, throughout the organization achieves the following:

  • Shortened, effective decision making and solution execution
  • A proactive environment to take advantage of opportunities quickly and effectively
  • Elimination of silos
  • A strategic roadmap to focus on the Mission tasks to achieve the Vision
  • Acceptance of risk taking and making mistakes to build a mature organization
  • Collaboration for long-term prosperity, a caring environment, honest communication, commitment to wellness, and creative practices
  • Connections and creative conflict among all departments
  • Elimination of feeling stuck

FarVision has an organic process, Realizing Optimum, for problem-solving that works best with teams and with challenges that have been around for a while or have long-term implications. Because teams are time-consuming, a quick decision, like “what do we do with the desks?”, should be made by one person who has the authority. Sharing authority to flatten hierarchies begins with the Ultimate Authority (CEO/President/owner) and moves to include the Leadership Team (department leaders/key decision makers). The Ultimate Authority and the Leadership Team begin to build the organizational muscle/flatten the hierarchy, share authority by writing the Purpose, Vision, and Mission and then setting the strategic objectives guided by Purpose, aligned to the Vision and accomplished through the Mission. The Mission elements become goals that are accomplished by Transformative Teams. The teams adjust once the mission goals/tasks/problems are solved; they never become committees or permanent. The result of using this disciplined approach creates a more adaptive environment that frees up its members to sustain the business through turbulent times in the long run.  

Using teams is not a new practice. We have been successfully using teams for over 30 years in a variety of industries, sizes of businesses and locations. The one constant for success is HOW the teams are formed, WHO is on them, and HOW decisions are made, and the solutions implemented. This is very simple, not easy, to achieve when there is one replicable process that sets the guardrails as well as supports the freedom to make mistakes while maintaining accountability.

Won’t it be a great day when the phone rings and your manager says “you know those desks we bought, I got rid of them because my team just came up with a better solution for locating our business.” That will be the day when you know you are part of an organic organization that will make it in the long run. Congratulations!

SO YOUR BUSINESS IS LIKE A FAMILY?

In my role at FarVision Consulting, this is something I often hear from the small businesses we work with. We know immediately that this is code for “we really care about each other,” but being a family is not always perfect.

In many families, there is a strong level of commitment and caring for each other, but there are also complex layers of conditions, expectations, history, and competing needs. Personality often plays a role in what people say, do, and how they perceive the words and actions of others. Family and group dynamics may offer conscious and unconscious contributions to family life as well. These factors, as well as limited time and other resources, may impact what and how things get done. In some cases, not every family member has the assumed level of commitment and caring for others. Indeed my experience with family is that you take some bad with the good.

If a business truly is like a family, does it include these complicated layers?

Absolutely!

Commitment and caring are two significant values that are often part of a family, and in a business setting, can create an environment conducive to productivity. However, blindly assuming that these values are shared with every member of the team is not always helpful, and not acknowledging the other layers of “family” may even be harmful.

Example: Company X is owned by three sibling partners, John, Mary, and Sue. During childhood, Sue often felt as the youngest that she was left out of family discussions and decisions, and often blamed John and Mary for not including her. John and Mary felt that Sue was annoying and exhausting to be around. Although they thought they had grown out of these issues by adulthood and did not anticipate any problems being equal business partners, at the first sign of financial struggle for the company, old family dynamics again came to the surface. Sue immediately felt that John and Mary were purposely leaving her out of meetings where important decisions were made. John and Mary felt that it was just easier to work without Sue. At a time when all company owners should be working together, old wounds prevented the siblings from focusing on the needs of the business as each went through her or his own difficult emotions related to the past family dynamics.

Sometimes it is hard to see these layers when you are living and working within them. In families, outside counselors are often brought in to help identify and correct unhealthy patterns. Similarly, organizations may choose to bring in outside consultants to help identify and correct unhealthy dynamics. Sometimes individuals may also elect to pursue individual counseling to address these personal family dynamic issues outside the business.

Being able to help organizations quickly find and understand those unhealthy dynamics, which we might consider pain points, is essential. At FarVision, we help organizations that either is family or feel like family to identify the positive opportunities as well as challenges of working together. Through working with Purpose, Vision, and Mission, we help individuals understand if they are aligned with the company—or not. Through our work with teams, we support businesses to create roadmaps to build on the strengths of commitment and caring. We help people understand and leverage the negative “family” dynamics so that everyone, regardless of personality and role, is helping get the company to the next level.

FarVision has decades of experience helping businesses of all demographics achieve success. For more information, visit our website at www.farvisionconsulting.com.

HOW DO YOU ACT WHEN THE GOING GETS TOUGH?

Recently I was talking to a longtime friend who asked me if the work we do at FarVision Consulting can be applied outside of a business setting. I answered that it can. With tears in my eyes, I told her that my life’s work is to discover the best way to solve both the everyday mundane and once in a lifetime kind of problems, in a way that shows mutual trust and respect, is transparent, honest, fair, firm, effective, kind and provides eye-opening opportunities to improve leadership and organizational health.  Additionally, I want to disrupt bureaucracies that act to preserve their own status quo. I was really on a roll! And being the person, she is, she said: “write about that because you are speaking with deep conviction and a high level of consciousness.” She was right, this is who I am and what I stand for. We can’t live unconsciously any longer.

I believe that one way to achieve greater consciousness will be accomplished through helping business come to the forefront of creativity, prosperity and community leadership and be instrumental in removing barriers of complacency and unconscious behavior.

One example of an unconscious behavior is the recent deplorable actions of John Schnatter, founder of Papa John’s Pizza, where his words devasted his corporate image and caused a well-deserved outrage from the public, as well as his removal from leadership. This would never happen in an organization with a values-based foundation that demands accountability on all levels and from all members, regardless of position or title. In short, the leader respects the value of personal and corporate character and the organization’s culture demands it as Standard Operating Procedure. NO EXCEPTIONS. One of the reasons is, to quote Thomas Paine, “character is easier kept than recovered.” Companies must develop their character, the same as people, to be conscious.    

Why are the role of businesses and their leaders especially crucial today? They are in prominent positions to be noticed and to actively set the tone for the health and wellbeing of our society.  Examining the historic view of where women and men looked for leadership, the path has been from religion to science, to government, now to business. Like it or not, leaders in the industry had and will have a profound influence on how people behave.

There is less and less acceptance of individuals being one person from 9-5, and another person after that, in their “real” life. This disconnect from personal values and inability to connect to professional values is cause for many of the persistent challenges experienced in both business and community environments today. The authentic person, not the “act as if” person, is the real leader. The business, like the person, that can write and share its unique reason for being, sets a high bar by going deeper than a standard explanation of what it does. An expression of values (this is who we are) describes value-based guardrails so there is no last-minute decision making about “this is how people like us behave” when the going gets tough. This statement of purpose creates a cornerstone of beliefs that translates into how clients are served, people are supported, work gets done and profits made and sustained. Without this written foundation, the company members will eventually lose commitment to the original excitement for coming together to work.

One of my family’s neighbors ran a very successful manufacturing company based on an innovative type of plastic he invented in his garage. The applications seemed limitless and there were few competitors, at that time. People loved to work for him because of who he was and the innovative work environment. The business grew, adding locations and personnel. Eventually, fewer and fewer people knew the founder personally and the work environment became less dynamic. There was change due to growth, but the real culprit was the lack of connection to the founder which caused a disconnect with the purpose and vision. There was a vacuum of values and creativity. Without a connection to the purpose and vision, the corporate enthusiasm waned, and people showed up to do just do their jobs and go home. The owner eventually passed the company to his next gen, who then sold the company for a significant profit. A conscious commitment to the founder’s purpose, vision, and mission, throughout the organization, so that it outlasts the founder is the key to sustaining longevity and prosperity. It prevents premature aging and perhaps a needless sale.  

Today, more women and men need support for their personal wear with all and moral courage to create organic businesses, consciously united by the values in the Purpose, pulled forward by the Vision and achieving Mission goals with teams. We are here to help realize this goal. It is our life’s work.

BUSINESS SUCCESS THROUGH SHARING AUTHORITY

Business challenges are changing quickly with the rapid progression of technology and its influence on how we function. We need to learn new ways to meet the demands of these challenges while maintaining a clear focus on profitability, the bloodline of every organization.

We at FarVision believe the key to success in these changing times is to transform organizational management from a “hierarchal” to a “flat” form of operation. This spreads responsibilities all across a company’s most valuable assets…its people.

By subscribing to a flat management model, a company can empower their people by engaging with them at every level, through the use of teams for problem-solving. This creates a culture of personal responsibility which is acknowledged and celebrated continuously as success is realized, in the form of increased profits.

Flat organizations are based on a concept of sharing authority to reach an optimum level of success. Shared authority creates effective teams who are flexible and nimble. They can adjust to changing circumstances and the accompanying problems in a timely fashion, with high levels of success. Empowered teams with shared authority can accomplish greater things in less time than a single, individual leader.

A transition to this form of flat management requires a strong leader. Someone who understands the value of “we” versus “me” and is willing to continue supporting the organization by functioning in the role of the ultimate authority, and accepting the accompanying responsibilities, in critical areas such as financial and legal, while sacrificing some control over the management by sharing authority. Although it may seem risky to some, today’s progressive leaders have come to realize that an organization must attract and retain quality people in order to achieve sustainable growth in this very competitive business climate. Experience has shown the best way to accomplish this is to empower a company’s people by implementing a model with shared responsibilities and authority that is transparent, accountable, and predictable.

FarVision has worked with a number of companies whose leaders have recognized these facts. Many of them felt “stuck” in the company’s development, even though they have experienced strong growth and some level of success. They felt overwhelmed at times and were concerned about the future of the business under its current operational model. They knew something needed to be done to make the company better, they just didn’t know what it was.

This is where FarVision came in. By delivering our proprietary 3 stage process, we were able to assist these organizations in orchestrating a new way of thinking and collaborating. The leaders began by deciding a major shift was needed, and they were committed to a new and innovative way of managing their business.

For the process to be effective, a company’s leaders are required to fully invest in this change in a transparent way. Leaders in flat organizations must be willing to “open the books” to their associates. This permits the development of a financial plan that holds everyone in the organization accountable for their performance and allows them to experience the impact of their efforts on the bottom line. Everyone is then personally invested in the overall success of the business. In addition, it proves a leader’s commitment to transparency in all things, big and small.

Also, leaders must be willing to assign authority to individuals in the organization so that they can function, within clearly defined guidelines, at a level of responsibility that supports peak performance. As individuals become empowered in this way, they feel more appreciated and become more committed to the organization. Now you have a culture that attracts and retains quality talent by recognizing them as valuable assets through sharing authority.

Sharing authority is the ultimate signal of a healthy and holistic operating culture. It tells others that “We value our people and trust them to have an active role in building our company’s success. This company IS our people.” Very powerful words to the rest of the world.

Check out our Business Solutions page to learn about the services we can provide to help your business succeed.

MECHANISTIC VS. ORGANIC ORGANIZATIONS

How to Lead an Organic Organization

Today’s front-runner leaders know that improving their organization’s culture from reactive to proactive creates both a healthy climate and a healthy bottom line. One option to accomplish this is to change from a mechanistic, top-down culture to an organic, flat culture. This shift in decision making improves communication at all levels of the organization. Implementing this kind of change takes a true commitment from all the leaders beginning with the ultimate authority, the one leader, who is accountable for the success of the entire organization. Complete organizational success is the ultimate task.  A place to start to create an organic culture is to educate all the leaders about the difference between rigid (mechanistic) guidelines and self-renewing (organic) guidelines.

Mechanistic guidelines can impede leadership growth by replicating business as usual methods, discouraging risk taking, and limiting creativity. I recently worked with a client who wanted to shift more problem solving and creativity to her leadership team, so she could take her company to the next level of growth. She was discouraged by a lack of participation when she asked for input and ideas. By honestly looking at why this was happening we discovered that there was no support for mistakes and that expectations for success were unrealistic. Her idea of delegating did not include any support for creative conflict or permission to be approximately right. Guidelines were clear but too rigid. Shifting to flexible guardrails encouraged the team to explore options and feel confident that mistakes made within those guardrails were acceptable and necessary. The entire leadership team is now aligned on how to do problem-solving and explore new options.

Organic organizations have leaders who decide HOW things are done, before deciding what, when and by whom. This orientation better prepares an organization to successfully steer in the constantly changing waters of modern life. Focusing first on process (how) vs people (who) ensures longer term and more effective problem solving and is vital to an organic culture.

I suggest that the leadership team use the following comparison to determine which kind of guidelines exist in their organization.

MECHANISTIC GUIDELINES:

  • Set clear expectations. Everyone knows how to be successful and how they will be rewarded and held accountable
  • Have checks in place to define non-negotiable behavior. Anyone who is not willing to comply should be allowed to leave the organization.
  • Train and educate leaders for improved skills.
  • Do problem-solve in real time.
  • Make sure everyone knows the vision and how to contribute to the organizational goals.

ORGANIC GUIDELINES:

  • Develop the company Purpose, Vision, and Mission with a cross-section of organizational members so that everyone in the organization can be successful.  Working with common values (Purpose), knowing where the organization is going long-term (Vision) and its goals to get there (Mission) ensures all players will have the option to step up or step out.
  • Focus on how to get things done then prioritize what gets done.
  • Develop leaders and teams that have the right level of authority to solve challenges as they occur and where they occur in real time. This cuts back on wasting time in meetings.  
  • Encourage mistakes as part of learning to navigate with a roadmap. The right kind of accountability and rewards ensures there are guardrails.
  • Spread authority appropriately throughout the organization to avoid making decisions in silos or by the same few people, who then delegate. This encourages expanded knowledge and know how to deal with opportunities and threats where they live. This builds organizational muscle for creative risk-taking.

Business leaders who know that the company already holds the answers and will take the time to find them, instead of rushing to a short-term solution, is on the way to creating a long-lasting organic structure and a healthy bottom line.

ORGANIC vs. MECHANISTIC STRUCTURES:

 

Mechanistic Organic
Individual specialization:
Employees work separately
and specialize in one task
Joint Specialization:
Employees work together and
coordinate tasks
Simple integrating mechanisms:
Hierarchy of authority well-defined
Complex integrating mechanisms:
task forces and teams are primary
integrating mechanisms
Centralization:
Decision-making kept as high as possible.
Most communication is vertical.
Decentralization:
Authority to control tasks is delegated.
Most communication lateral
Standardization:
Extensive use made of rules & Standard
Operating Procedures
Mutual Adjustment:
Face-to-face contact for coordination.
Work process tends to be unpredictable
Much written communication Much verbal communication
Informal status in org based on the size of an empire Informal status based on perceived
brilliance
The organization is a network of positions,
corresponding to tasks. Typically, each person corresponds
to one task
The organization is a network of persons and
teams. People work in different capacities
simultaneously and over time.All work is aligned to a common Purpose, Vision, and Mission.

Source: http://www.analytictech.com/mb021/organic_vs_mechanistic_structure.htm

DIFFERENT BUT EQUAL

Mention “personality assessment” to anyone and you are likely to get a blank stare or even a disapproving groan. But you might also find that some folks proudly report their Myers-Briggs personality types as if being an INFJ is a badge of honor.

Since its release in 1943 as a standardized way to categorize Carl Jung’s 16 different personality types, over 50 million people have taken the Myers-Briggs assessment. It is commonly used in career counseling to identify types of jobs and job settings that would be best-suited for people. In the business world, it is often used to help organizations understand their strengths–and challenges.

The work of Jung and others taught us that people tend to differ in terms of personality in four ways–typically leaning more towards four of the eight personality traits: introversion and extroversion, intuitive and sensing, thinking and feeling, and judging and perceiving. The Myers-Briggs is just one structured way of assessing and giving feedback to people about their preferred traits. Used successfully, it can lead to amazing insights and strengthening any team.

Unfortunately, sometimes participants approach the assessment process in a competitive light, thinking that some personality types and traits are inherently better than others. While it is true that having a particular personality trait in certain settings is helpful (for example, having an extroverted person on a sales force might lead to higher sales), the world needs a balance of each personality trait. Carl Jung was clear that each trait has specific strengths and challenges, but none is better or worse than another, and we need them all in the world. For example, a feeler type might focus on the emotions of people affected by a decision, but without the thinker types, there could be limited focus on what is fair for everyone involved. Although a judging type likes to make decisions quickly, which often helps people to feel like “something is happening,” the perceiver type might open the path to make sure that all avenues of possibilities have been explored. In a perfect world, every organization needs the balance offered by all traits. Jung also told us that preferred traits do not prevent us from understanding or acting like the opposite; introverts may often find themselves in extroverted roles, and they can learn to do the job very well, even if it is not always intuitive or comfortable.

At FarVision, we understand this balance and cheer everyone for their strengths. But we also incorporate a bit of reality into the situation, helping organizations see natural gaps that exist. Understanding tasks at hand and personalities, we can predict fairly accurately what challenges may exist, and help people understand how to best meet them. All personality types contribute great and necessary things to every business, and to our world, and none is less important than another; however, understanding these traits may be one key to being the most effective organization possible.

Learn more about the Personality Assessment we offer that will help your team work together.

3 STEPS TO LEAD EFFECTIVELY

I must admit that I read almost anything about how to be better organized. I like to know that it is important to make your bed every day, fold socks like sushi so they are happy, make checklists for important projects and pick up items only once to organize them. I agree being organized helps us in decision making.

What I don’t like is spending time getting organized when it does not help produce a result. I believe that being effective is much more important than being efficient, yet I sense both are important. So I began my search to find out how to do both.

My first job out of graduate school was as a guidance counselor at a community college in CA. My colleagues and I examined why the same problems in our department happened repeatedly. We took courses in communication skills, scheduling, time management, conflict resolution, writing goals, strategic planning, making people happy, leadership and assertiveness training. We did better for a while and there was always some improvement but in the long run, we went back to a “business as usual” mindset. We really tried. Nothing stuck. I did learn some tips on how to be more efficient but not how to be more effective.

Finally, three jobs later, moving from the west to the east coast, having a baby and moving from CT to FL, I heard about a methodology that answered how to be both effective and efficient so that solutions stick. I attended training sessions and studied. I learned that the difference in what I tried in the past focused on people’s behavior, NOT on the structures that influence behavior. Structure influences behavior and culture. Structure makes it stick. If there is no supportive organic structure and no alignment around why you are doing what you are doing as a company, the best ideas will not produce permanent results. The improvement will be temporary. People will eventually get discouraged, stop trying and will expect the leaders to fix it. The culture will become risk averse and will stagnate.

So, what is the effective structure?

First, change the focus from people to the mechanisms for working and what is not working. How do you make decisions? Ask if you are making decisions that are short-term and/or long-term oriented. Do you only expect individuals with high levels of authority to implement solutions? Do you use teams designed for specific tasks? Do you have the right authority at the right levels? Do you have gender and ethnic balance?

Second, make sure that everyone, from custodian to CEO, knows the vision – where you are going – and knows their role in getting there. Have a healthy combination of short-term tasks AND long-term task teams to meet the Vision. Do you use Vision teams that are led by the right people regardless of their titles? Do you support teams making decisions vs recommendations? Do you reward risk taking? Do you have a good balance of women at all levels of authority?

Third, use a consistent and organic decision-making process or mechanism. Provide the right amount of time and the right tools so that solutions can be implemented. Do you look at core competency development as part of a successful conclusion? Is there a budget for new projects so that teams and individuals know their guardrails? Is everyone encouraged to talk and contribute for the good of the company? Do you strive to remove silos?

The fast pace of our times requires resiliency and wisdom that seeks effectiveness beyond the mistakes, looks at how decisions are made as well as which decisions are made and who makes them. The new normal accept that traditional business models must be improved upon for long-term success.

What I learned, once I changed my focus from people (who) to the mechanisms (how), is that how problems are solved (effective) is essential for success. The “how to” guardrails (efficient) make it timely. Paramount to producing long-lasting results depends on how problems are solved by the right people and how the implementation is supported by the right people.

The mechanism we implement at FarVision is simple to learn, produces results and can be applied in a variety of circumstances. Our mechanism is very well suited to women decision makers because the result is “problem solved” and the solution implemented for the long run and for the benefit of all.