Category Archives: Timespan

Cognitive Power

“Here’s a question for you,” Sam smiled. “We talk about potential, that is something we want in every candidate. You have also asked me to be specific in my language. You chided me about using analogies like – potential for growth, higher level thinking, more bandwidth, mental horsepower. Just exactly what are we talking about? And, why is this so important?”

My turn to smile. “Let me introduce a term – cognitive power. Cognitive power relates to the maximum number of variables a person can simultaneously deal with, in a given period of time. A manual task generally has a limited number of variables. Moving a pallet of ceramic tile in a warehouse requires a forklift, knowing which pallet, where is it located, where does it go, what’s in the way? There are a limited number of variables. And, those variables are physical and fixed.”

Sam nodded, so I continued. “Constructing a building is more complex. There are site considerations, zoning, platting, ingress, physical constraints, functional use, building codes, material availability, coordination of trades, availability of labor, influence of unions, finance logistics, even the weather. And some of the complexity arrives, not from the variables we know about, but, based on the timespan of the project (objective, goal), there will be variables we do not know about. The longer the project, the more uncertain the variables. Yet, to be effective, all the variables must be accounted for, including the ones we do not know about.”

“And so, a more complicated project will require more cognitive power,” Sam chimed in.

“We might try to count the number of variables to understand the complexity in a project, but the longer the project, the more some of those variable are unknowable. A better metric of complexity is to simply calculate the timespan of the project. We have to account for that uncertainty, ambiguity, in the decisions we have to make today.”

Context of Decision Making

Leave a reply

“What is the difference between you and your team members, related to the role you play as their manager?” I asked.

“Well, I’m their boss. I provide direction, guidance, coaching. I delegate task activities,” Joan replied.

“Why you? Why doesn’t the team provide its own direction?”

“Well, they weren’t invited to the monthly meeting where the company sets that direction,” Joan smartly observed.

“But, this is the age of Zoom, why weren’t they invited to attend that meeting?” I pressed.

“But, it’s a highly interactive meeting. We can’t have ten more people asking questions. We would never get anything done in the meeting. Believe me, I know my team.”

“And, doesn’t the content of the meeting concern them? Are decisions made that will impact what they do day to day?”

“Yes, it impacts what they do, day to day, but in that company meeting we make adjustments to the overall goals and objectives for the year. It’s important to be flexible, agile. My team may have specific ideas (and questions) about technical issues day to day, but in that meeting, it’s not about technical issues, it’s about a new competitor that’s eating our market share, a new office across the state we are thinking about, a new product that our customers have been asking about.”

“So, the context discussion in that meeting is different than the context your team works in?”

“Yes, that’s it,” Joan agreed.

“So the difference between you and your team members, related to the role you play as their manager, is the context in which you work, meaning the context in which you make decisions and solve problems?” I prodded. “Your decisions impact their decisions, but the difference is the timespan of your decisions vs the timespan of their decisions.”

Joan continued to nod her head. “And, the difference between me and my manager is the same,” she replied. “My manager makes decisions that impact me, but the timespan of my manager’s context is even further in the future than mine.”

“And, so, we begin to see the structure of layers in an organization,” I said, “based on distinct levels of decision making, measured in timespan.”

How Many Organizational Layers?

Leave a reply

From the Ask Tom mailbag –

Question:
When you talk about context, organizational context, I assume you mean organizational structure. We have team members and supervisors, managers and executive managers. How many layers should we have? Is it best to have fewer layers, a flat organization or more layers?

Response:
As any good consultant knows, it depends. First, an organization should have no more organizational layers than is necessary, so, it depends on what is necessary. And what is necessary depends on the complexity of the problems to be solved and the decisions to be made to effectively deliver the product or service to the customer.

I watch organizations blow up into morbid obesity because they have no framework on which to base that decision – how many layers? And, who should be who’s manager? How many team members can a manager manage? What do we expect from this manager vs that manager?

Timespan.
What is the timespan of the decisions to be made and the problems to be solved? Think about this pattern –

1 day to 3 months – Level I
3 months to 12 months – Level II
12 months to 24 months – Level III
2 years to 5 years – Level IV
5 years to 10 years – Level V

That’s how many layers you need, and only as many as you need. But, now you have a framework in which to make that decision.

Most entrepreneurs stay within the first two levels, with goals and objectives that rarely extend beyond 12 months. Those with aspirations for larger organizations, with higher revenues, more market clout, have to consider the impact of decisions and problems that extend two years and beyond.

There is a subtle seduction that occurs, however. Any entrepreneur with the intent to take their company to the next level, must first achieve mastery at their current level while sowing the seeds of problems for the next level.

A Goal Sits Inside

1 Reply

We think success is in reaching our goals, that our goals will change us and the world around us. Deconstructing the every-year process of setting goals, we may find something more important.

What is the context in which your goals reside?

It’s not the goal that changes you, it’s the context. Context is the crucible which holds the shape of you and your success. A crucible with a defect may lead your goal astray, or allow you to accept a goal that will lead you astray. Think long about the context in which you live. Change the context, behavior follows.

For an individual, context is mindset. For an organization, context is culture.

Timespan of Intention

Leave a reply

It’s January, with resolutions, goal setting, annual planning.

Most of our intentions are short-sighted. We focus on the what, not the by-when. Perhaps this year we examine the timespan of our intention as closely as the intention itself?

Instead of how many pounds can I lost by the end of Feb (when most resolutions are abandoned), we might ask what lifestyle changes we can make to add ten years to our life. What is the timespan of your intention?

Sometimes, the most important impact is not a major initiative. Sometimes, the major impact is shifting a small habit that is insidiously killing you. Or a small habit shift that will pay off in spades five years from now.

Think about your habits that support your success, habits that detract. What is the timespan of your intention?

And To All

Leave a reply

Originally published Dec 2005.

As Matthew looked across the manufacturing floor, the machines stood silent, the shipping dock was clear. Outside, the service vans were neatly parked in a row. Though he was the solitary figure, Matthew shouted across the empty space.

“Merry Christmas to all, and to all, a good night.”

He reached for the switch and the lights went dark. He slid out the door and locked it behind.
—
We hope you all have a wonderful holiday. Management Blog will return on January 3, 2022.

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. -Tom Foster

Almost Time

Leave a reply

At some point during the next few days, life will turn from frenetic holiday chaos to moments of family, friends and reflection.

Take a deep breath and exhale completely. The stress will melt away.

It is almost time to rest and renew.

Gather those around you and wish them well. Smile at yourself for you have accomplished much this year.

It’s the Hug

3 Replies

It’s not the thought that counts. It’s the hug, the squeezed hand, the warm smile, sharing a cup of coffee, dropping by, saying hello, listening.

It’s the card from a friend with a special note, calling to talk about things more important than the weather.

It’s sitting with a family member through a tough time, standing up for someone in their proudest moment.

Sometimes it’s just showing up and being fully present.

Midst of Created Chaos

Leave a reply

“How do you involve Edmund in the decision making about solving the problem?” I asked.

“As soon as we have the project specs,” Ruben explained, “when we know the outputs and the deadlines, we call a meeting. Edmund is the supervisor, so once we get into production, he is the one to call the shots. So, he is there, at the meeting. He sees all the elements we see, he just cannot connect them together.”

“And?”

“We have developed a very thorough system that identifies the constraints and keeps them productive. The metrics are easy to follow and the system makes our throughput very predictable. But Edmund fights the system, ignores the system and almost weekly causes a production snafu that could have been prevented.”

“How does he explain the snafu?”

“Usually he manages to jump in and pull the project out of the fire, but not without some overtime and not without putting the project in jeopardy. It’s almost like he is proud of the chaos and being the hero.”

Constructed, Tested, Adopted

Leave a reply

“Easy to answer the negative, more difficult to answer the positive,” I repeated. “In what way can we create the conditions where creative ideas can be constructed, tested and adopted?”

“I remember reading something from a long time ago, about a company that had something called skunkworks,” Susan was thinking. “It was still inside the company, not really a secret, but hidden away somewhere.”

“Lockheed Martin, America’s first jet fighter,” I explained. “Why do you think it was hidden away, not a secret, but out of sight?”

“They were probably experimenting with things where they did not know the outcome and the probability of failure was high. My guess is that, when there were failures, no one knew about it, so nobody got fired.”

“Exactly, the probability of failure was high, so the skunkworks were separated from operations, there was no real impact, no downside consequences. So, if the probability of failure was high, why did the company tolerate it?”

Now, Susan smiled. “Because the possibility of upside was substantial. And, they had to work all the kinks out of the ideas. There were likely failures along the way, but the company minimized the risk while they were making headway.”

I repeated my question, “In what way can we create the conditions where creative ideas can be constructed, tested and adopted?”