As I visited Viet Nam from the top to the bottom last month, I began to realize there are a great many parallels between the conflict in Viet Nam and Afghanistan. I hope our young and inexperienced President is taking his time understanding these parallels, their implications, and learns from them.

Here’s what I noticed:

1. We installed a US favorable puppet government in both cases, both corrupt to the highest levels and without local popular support. One failed, the other will!

2. Drug money fueled a lot of our covert effort from the Golden triangle composed of the intersection of Cambodia, Laos and Viet Nam, and now it’s the poppy fields of Afghanistan. We can’t/won’t stop it because we need a lot of the dollars it generates to advance our agenda. Shame on us!

3. The local indigenous population sees us as “occupiers” not as “liberators.”

4. The enemy is virtually unrecognizable, citizens by day, warriors by night. And they live in the local villages so “innocents” are always killed as we advance, playing directly into their PR hands as well as our press who is anything but an impartial reporter.

5. The domino theory is alive and well. We were afraid if we didn’t win in Viet Nam we’d lose all of Southeast Asia, and now we’re afraid that if we don’t stop Al-Qaida and the Taliban we’ll lose the region. Turns out it wasn’t true then, and it isn’t now. These indigenous people are country loyal, they are distrustful of those around them and for good reason and they won’t easily be dominated by a neighbor. Never have, never will!

6. Viet Nam was and Afghanistan is a political war. Lyndon Johnson ran it from the White House just as Barrack Obama is attempting to. Here’s the problem, we don’t totally trust the Generals because we know victory thru overwhelming force is their goal, as it should be! Johnson’s response was to reluctantly agree to force increases, many of these increases were hidden from us, and now Obama is doing the same thing – sending in “support” troops and not telling the US citizens, and then sending in another 34,000 (as we’re told he’s about to do) when he was asked for 40,000, and the incremental creep begins!

7. Johnson couldn’t tell us what a “win” looked like, and now Obama doesn’t even want to use the word “win” - but we all know what a loss looks like, especially the loss of fine young men and women.

8. Is the Karzai government really any better than the Taliban? Take a look at a few of the laws they’ve passed recently – women have gone backward, hard to imagine, but true! And if the population wants, even embraces and protects the Taliban, and they do, why is it our problem to fix?

9. If the end is the same as well, we’ll declare victory, while effectively surrendering and leave at some point in the future – shouldn’t we do it now? Read The Lone Survivor, a terrific true story – it gives a great sense of what it’s like there day in and day out.

It’s foreign, way over there, and not a part of our consciousness very often, se we just it continue on hoping for the victory miracle that just doesn’t happen-let’s not let it happen all over again—let’s call it a day and come home now!

Thoughts on Accelerating Revenue in a Down Economy: Part 3
There are a host of pains organizations inflict on themselves that present clear and present dangers to their very viability. Among those we often see are:
Goals and objectives that are out of sync with job descriptions and employee expectations
Compensation plans that don’t reflect the will of the organizations executive leadership
Management who believes it is their prerogative to manipulate sales compensation plans, changing quotas, territories and commission schedules mid-stream
Sales automation/CRM systems that are installed to provide management reporting with sales productivity as a by product
Few understand the complicated nature of channels, how to avoid conflict, and how to motivate organizations they don’t own, yet many businesses just can’t grow organically fast enough. Effective committed channels are a necessity.So what can companies do?
They must learn to hire for a season. Recognize that a significant percentage of employees will move on within a few years. Call it out confront it and embrace by designing the job description accordingly, and eliminate confusion and contention. Hire the very best for the tasks at hand. It’ll require a bit more thought and planning, but it’ll be worth it.
Delicate themselves to serving their employees and to making them successful; not managing them for compliance, rather leading them for significance; leading them rather than directing them
Embrace technology. Many managers are digital immigrants leading digital natives. They resist it and demean it with comments like “I’ll never text.”. We must immerse ourselves in it, admit our fears and frustrations, and join the ranks of the next generation who takes all this technology as a matter of fact and can’t understand why their management doesn’t.
When we employee systems we must think first of the impact on the employee. Implement a CRM to make the sales people more productive, and have management reports as a byproduct. It’s the only way they will embrace it and the data will be accurate and timely.
Hire scientifically. Success at a previous company is no guarantee of success with the next.. It can no longer be acceptable to give an employee 9 months or longer to see if they will succeed. Thai’s as much as 1/3 of their tenure. They must be positioned to contribute much quicker.
Build support tools like the company web site that personalize the web experience, allowing the inquirer to truly understand how your products and services can met his unique needs, and build it a way that leaves a thumb print behind so more and more can be turned into customers. It’s not the number of web hits that counts, it’s the number of customers that are generated.
Have a mission statement that is meaningful, measure ideas against it, reward innovation, and create the opportunities that demand transformation versus incremental improvement.A soft economy can be the best time to gain market share. It’ll take a non-traditional approach, but embracing a win/win mentality, a servants heart for employees success, an acceptance that each employee really wants to make the best decisions possible, combined with an ability to accept effort and failure will help turn a business, even where the economy is having a negative impact, into a consistent winner.
at 3:30 PM 0 Comments-Leave Your Own!
Monday, November 17, 2008

Wyoming Wisdom
A few months ago I shared some of my grandfathers “Wyoming” wisdom. Over the last few days I’ve had a few events that reminded me of a few more of his down home philosophies. I thought I’d share them with you:
“If you get to thinkin’ you’re a person of some influence, try orderin’ somebody else’s dog around”“Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment”“Remember even a kick in the caboose is a step forward”Hope you enjoy them
at 3:29 PM 1 Comments-Leave Your Own!
Saturday, September 6, 2008

Thoughts on Accelerating Revenue in a Down Economy
Part 1
As an interim executive specializing in helping my clients drive revenue, I am often asked how we can expect to help increase revenue when the economy is weak. Reflecting on numerous engagements I’ve had in a variety of industries, I find myself reminded of Pogo’s famous dictum: “We have met the enemy and he is us!”
Many of the hurdles that slow growth, and arguably most business failures, can be traced to decisions made by the organization, a result of a company’s own actions. Which is why the barriers to meeting revenue objectives can be found and eliminated, replaced by processes and disciplines that leave a company able to meet their objectives predictably and consistently now and well into the future.There are some major themes we see often. Among the most common is presuming that constant improvement will suffice when transformation is required. The failure to anticipate and transform is a critical failure that stunts growth. An example many of us have heard is that if Henry Ford had desired to incrementally improve the transportation system of the day, and if he had simply listened to what his customers asked for, he would’ve bred a faster horse. He didn’t, and the innovation he brought forth transformed transportation as we knew it forever.A more current example might be Hewlett-Packard. It was studying how children responded to the web that caused them to re-think their digital and printing businesses. The kids seemed to take “ownership” of a page of data only after they printed it. As long as it was on the web, it was just available data, but not “theirs.” It was this realization that allowed them to connect the dots and the digital camera was invented. Not as result of photographers asking for a new way to take, store, and transfer photographs. The market didn’t know what it didn’t know, and therefore couldn’t ask for it. But some innovative minds under the direction of leadership willing to transform the company saw an opportunity that could be exploited. Who would have dared to bet on an idea that would take on a company that had been dominate for 100 years—Kodak? But they did, and now a vast percentage of all photographs taken are taken digitally with a cell phone! They transformed the very way we take, store and transfer photos, creating a whole new market that has relegated earlier technology largely to obsolescence. And in the process changed the very way we think about taking photographs.These examples are indicators of not only the vision it took to recognize and create the product, with little help from customers or other sources of traditional input, but more importantly, they are examples of transformation. In neither case did management believe they could succeed by making incremental improvements, they needed radical transformation, and they had the courage to attempt it. Many don’t!A hurdle we also often see that impedes growth is the insistence on maintaining a traditional hierarchical management structure. Copied from the great Roman and Prussian armies, they served us well when we needed structure to facilitate communication and control quality. The ability to successfully replicate processes while driving out cost and scaling the business was a natural for this proven approach. But technology has rendered the discipline and oversight an immediate manager brings largely unnecessary. Peers will recognize and correct deficiencies long before a remote manger sees it, and long before the rules personnel has imposed on us can be successfully implemented. Organizations that recognize that the systems and technology we now have available allows them to monitor, train, and lead with a much flatter organization structure, will find themselves more responsive, adaptable and successful. The removal of layers of management also serves to reduce cost, and facilitates broader decision making and innovation.

When Constant Improvement Isn’t Enough
Many, if not most organizations have processes and mission commitments around routine improvement. Often they are formalized, and labeled with titles like Continuous Improvement Program, Total Quality Improvement (TQM), Zero Defects, Business Process Re-Engineering (BPR) or perhaps variation of Kaizen, the Japanese philosophy espoused by Dr. W. Edwards Deming, under General MacArthur’s program to re-build Japan after World War ll. Kiazen, (改善) means "improvement". Kaizen strategy calls for never-ending improvement involving everyone in the organization – managers and workers alike. While making small but continuous improvement is surely a laudable goal, much like always increasing revenue while reducing expenses is a philosophy that should be embraced universally, there is another profound aspect to thriving as a business.Successful leadership will additionally focus on transformation/innovation. If Henry Ford had been merely trying to achieve incremental improvement, he would have tried to breed a faster horse.I’m reminded of a breakfast meeting I attended recently with Carly Fiorona, former CEO of Hewlett-Packard. While she took pride in being a good listener with all stakeholders, she knew her leadership group must be transformational in their thinking and lead the commitment to innovation. H-P has often commented publicly that a significant percentage of their revenue comes from products that simply didn’t exist 18 months earlier. A bit of Moore’s Law in practice!She told a fascinating story of the development of the digital camera. It wasn’t demand from customers, who all seemed satisfied with the 100 year domination of the market by Kodak; and it wasn’t exotic research in some secret lab. It was transformational thinking that led to innovation at its best. In an H-P center scientists watched eight year olds learn to surf and master the web. Occasionally they would print a page. Each time they were asked why they printed a particular page they responded in way that made it quite clear the print function was a way of claiming ownership. Until they printed it, it was just information on the web, but once they printed it, it became theirs..Next came brilliant leadership, fostering innovation and potential transformation. They needed to determine what the connection was between the web and the print function that H-P could leverage, creating a new product or service. They felt H-P possessed a clear advantage in digitizing data, and they were the leader in print technology. The concept of having images digitized, and then being able to deliver them anywhere on earth immediately after they were created, allowing the recipient to print, and thereby “own” them was the epiphany that conceptualized digital photography. Within just a few years, H-P had toppled the once mighty Kodak and was in the enviable position of being able to claim market leadership. And now, in just a few years, it is estimated that the vast majority, perhaps as many as 80% of all photos taken are taken with a cell phone, and are immediately ready to forward electronically. But it’s not enough to invent something. The mere creation of a new product doesn’t really help anybody until it’s taken successfully into the market. You must produce! You must make the product and you must move it into the market effectively and efficiently.While this may seem intuitive while thinking about products and markets, it is rarely practiced effectively when it comes to the sales arena where it is largely absent altogether. It’s a critically important part of a healthy sales process. Companies often tinker with quotas, assigned territories and commission/incentive plans, trying to make things just a bit better than they were the previous period. And yet we read in a recently published study that less than 10% of most company’s salespeople can effectively describe their core business. The ability to turn average sale people into a high performance team often requires transformation. It’s executive leadership that must recognize when small improvements are not the answer; rather the solution may very well be in recognizing when to pull the trigger on a transformation of the sale force. This is not to suggest a whole new staff. On the contrary, while occasionally some do need to replaced, the ability to think creatively and create a productive environment is what is called for in this case. I once thought of it as much like playing golf. If we ask a golfer who normally shoots in the nineties to shoot a par 72 and offer him a million dollars to do so, he’ll fail, so it’s not about the incentive. If we tell him we’ll fire him if he doesn’t shoot par, he’ll still fail, so it’s not about the threat. If we show him exactly what to do, and then tell him to go do exactly as demonstrated in order to shoot the desired par score, once again he’ll likely fail, so it s not about instruction. So what’s the answer? How do we get a 90’s golfer to shoot a par round? In golf the answer is a scramble. In scramble, all players work together to achieve the best possible score. Each contributes his best shot toward the goal of a lower score, and to be sure, when the round is over, the player who has never scored under 90, will have posted a par or better round. It happens every time. And it does in sales too. When we come together in an environment that allows the entire team to contribute their best effort, where all have a role and contribute to the victory that which they do best, the result will always be much better than the individual is able to accomplish by himself. We will have succeeded in transforming an average salesperson into a high performance, highly productive contributor. The issue then is from whom we should expect the innovation and occasional transformation, such that we’re not relegated to the scrapheap of obsolescence. The answer is confident, skilled, visionary leadership. Employees can be empowered to recognize process deficiencies and recommend improvements; it’s a matter of the culture. But it’s the leadership that must find ways to pull themselves out of the trees and look candidly and critically at the forest, listening to all stakeholders, but relying on none exclusively. The role of transformation and the requirement for innovation are among the most important roles in managerial leadership today. Many leaders have come to rely on external interim skilled and experienced help to position them for success as these significant changes are sold to the employees, and embedded in the culture and processes. They realize that a fresh perspective based on years of experience removes the bias that often exists toward the status quo. And the ability to discern precisely when it needs to occur separates the well known successes from the mediocre. The desire and ability to predict, anticipate and foster a culture that craves innovation, and expects transformational creativity is the leadership we will be reading about in the chronicles of success.-Michael Pearce
at 2:25 PM 0 Comments-Leave Your Own!
Monday, May 12, 2008


A thought for consideration…
I’m not the man I’d hoped to beI’m not the man I thought I’d beI’m not the man I should’ve beenBut with grace and forgivenessI’m a better man than I was.
at 11:17 AM 0 Comments-Leave Your Own!
Thursday, April 10, 2008

Challenging Traditional Organizational Theory: Has “Seasonal” Replaced “Career?”
The hierarchical organizational model employed by most organizations today is based on the historical models developed for the great Roman and Prussian armies. It’s adaptation assured quality replication and reliability in the manufacturing process while the organization scaled its capacity and simultaneously increased efficiency. In today’s world where globalization, the need for nimble adaptiveness, collaboration and wealth creation by talented “associates” rules, it may actually work at cross purposes and become an impediment to potential success, especially since the ability to innovate is a significant predictor of success in today’s competitive market.This means creativity needs to be applied throughout the organization, including in our organizational structure and staffing. The challenge for all hiring executives must be how to mobilize and monetize every employee’s commitment each and every day they are engaged with the organization. If loyalty and longevity are not to be rewarded nor expected, then we must create new approaches that will keep the work place highly engaging and personally rewarding. This simply cannot be effectively done using 19th century (and earlier!) models.Contrary to some current theories, attracting talent is not the biggest challenge facing hiring mangers today. The biggest issue before most companies is how to profit from the talented people they recruit. The ability to combine talent, technology and organizational design to create much higher profit per employee is the real challenge. Highly talented people really don’t require, nor are they willing to accept overly hierarchical models. The concept that this generation of skilled, educated self-directed thinkers will require a privileged class of managers and administrators is an example of how today’s organizational structure creates barriers and impediments that can stifle the creative worker and limit the organizations success.Let’s consider a practical example, that of recruiting, hiring and integrating a VP of Sales. Research indicates that the VP of Sales role in most organizations has a life of less than two years. So, we know we are hiring for a season, but we continue to interview for a career. We talk about career progression and longevity with prior companies, and similar metrics that really have little bearing on the capacity to succeed with a new company. The idea, the elephant in the room we all see but resist coming to terms with, is that both the prospective employee and the employer are thinking of the hire from a “seasonal” perspective. The employee isn’t committing to a career, nor is the company.Those recruiting interim, or seasonal, hires at the senior level, hiring for a specific set of skills for a defined period of time, may well be the first to realize the enormous opportunity that lies within embracing a new model, that of yielding the best results from the best people for a specific task or period of time. They will likely be the leaders we study when we look to those companies who have created the most wealth, routinely turn in the highest productivity per employee, and are the most sought after companies for whom to work “for a season.”