Dispelling The Myth Of Corporate!

When I was in college studying Biomedical Sciences, I learned the importance of experimentation where accuracy in measurement and duplication of results are cornerstone to success. I worked as a research assistant conducting antiviral experiments on the eye under a grant for a now defunct pharmaceutical (Telios). It was at this time in my life that I realized that the most efficient of disciplines provides the vehicle of large revenue for big business. That research and development requires a huge investment or cash outlay that's very often a part of sunk costs. That R&D defines innovation where the return on investment in most cases is determined by how well business can make use of it! If big business is effective then huge revenue can be generated by their activity and individuals will thrive with an increase in commerce. Unfortunately, this is where the public's perception of corporate America gets distorted and how individual business success is overrated.

Numbers, numbers and numbers followed by poor analysis or lack of data treatment! Very many people view business professionals as analytical and their success is closely associated to material or monetary values. It would be nice if this were true, but it's not as many aspects of business is more about efficiency and effectiveness of business leaders and the organizations they operate. Business is more about overcoming initial obstacles to success, finding appropriate funding for operations and sustaining operations and growth over competition. Through all of this more companies than not are woefully inefficient in their operations and are able to exist short-term eaking out some profit! Surprised? You shouldn't be, as the balance between business financials allow for some to exist and profit over competition if there's inefficiency within industry. In large companies, "leaders" are often chosen by their ability to "team" and by their project successes. Now, keep in mind that "teaming" in corporate is more about likability and doesn't ensure success through diversity as true diversity is more about cultural or idealogical variance than ones phenotypic expression. Acceptance of the differences, values and processes is what help create a better team and fosters innovation.

 Today, "the proper fit" has become a "high school popularity test" where friends hire friends or people who they get along with (which doesn't resemble a diverse "think tank") for networks of professionals for hire. Now, don't get me wrong, this is fine especially given the "state of play" in the market where employers rule, wages are gun down as worker values are played against one another. However, if the fundamentals of business efficiency, the essence of innovation and vision of leadership is what we strive for then the strategy of compiling the right folks is questionable. The point is "you don't have to be a brain surgeon to be in business," but you have to assemble people who completely understand or who are skilled in business disciplines to effective and efficiently operate a mid-to large size company! Networking as the rule and not the exception, only exacerbate the problem in business if the problem can be identified. As most large companies are filled with "fluff" it is highly unlikely that there's any existing process or people in place to analyze the numbers and identify the operational errors.

"Perception Is Reality?" Bull!

During an evaluation, I had the pleasure of receiving feedback which included comment that I viewed as disconcerting and indicative of intellectual weakness. After hearing about what a great job I was doing managing the worst tour of the three shifts, he transitionEd to the individual rating suggesting preconceived impressions and obstacles to a superior rating. This along with the usual "it's very competitive" as if he matriculated through such was insulting. At this point, I began to provide some introspective about his statements by giving him a foolish look when he said "you know, perception is reality!" Oh yeah, when? And with whom? We are not in high school, instead we are running a multinational corporation,idiot!

The idea that business and leadership decisions are made based on perception and not analytics leads to many questions about efficiency and effectiveness. How are we evaluating performance? Are there enough checks and balances within large organizations? Are investors getting the best discount rate for the associated risks? If they only knew that risk assessment is absent in over 95% of decisions. That most leaders in large corporations have no concept of this valuable tool and most rely on a "hunch!" In business very many decisions are made without formal analysis where managers are empowered to use their perceptive powers. This is fine for some decisions, not for most and more appropriate for a very small business. What ever happened to deploying skill to reduce error and mitigate risk for improve efficiency in an effort to reduce cost? How much would you entrust to someone who may be unskilled in evaluating business performance? Vision beyond one functional tasks is an exceptional quality to have, a skill that is not often taught on the job!

So, when I hear folks expect or "perceive" that business is about getting the most for the investment (ROI), I laugh because most business decisions are made without any concept of ROI and proper analytical skills.