Author: RRI

Millennials Take On Our Increasingly Complex World

Originally published in 2013.

On January 1^st at 0348 hours a young engineer employed by a service company is trying to address a problem she has encountered with a compressor on a drilling rig in the Deepwater Gulf of Mexico. She graduated from college three years ago and went to work for a large energy services company. However, several months ago she changed jobs and is now on her first offshore hitch as team leader with her new company, a similar size global energy services company.

She is a competent engineer but is uncertain what the company policy is regarding a piece of rotating equipment that while seemingly malfunctioning does not appear to jeopardize safety, the environment or production at the present time. But she worries that the situation could get worse.

A quick call to the “graveyard” shift at the company onshore Operations Center is not reassuring. Staffed by those who are too junior to be on vacation during the holiday season, the engineer she talked with had only been with company three years and actually had less field experience than she did. His supervisor was not encouraging either. Should he call and wake experts at this early hour?

Adding to the problem, the compressor’s data plate was mostly unreadable. And of course, a famous Texas blue northern was blowing through. High winds, rain and cold temperatures further impaired proper equipment identification, much less working conditions.

Both the field engineer and the operations engineer are aware that their company signed a Bridging Document with their customer as part of the new Safety and Environmental Management System (SEMS) regulatory requirements and both had attended the appropriate training for this project. Both are knowledgeable that the Stop Work Authority (SWA) gives them the right and even the obligation to dramatically intervene with operations if they feel it necessary.

As a new mom, the field engineer is concerned that she might develop a reputation in the company as a “flaky” female if her next decision turned out to be a mistake. The engineer at the operations center was receiving real time data feeds from the rotating equipment but he could not “feel” the vibrations like the on-site individual could and the equipment was still within tolerances.

Horns of a Dilemma

The engineers in our story are competent, qualified individuals doing a great job. Early in their careers, they are the vanguard of field operations. Millennials by label, they are technologically savvy and among the best and the brightest in their fields.

Things never go “bump in the night” during daylight hours in perfect weather, hence the colloquial term. Moreover, the personal stress of a new mother concerned about her reputation and opportunities for promotion resulting from just another day at the “office” should not be underestimated by those desk bound or later and more secure in their careers.

The real world of field operations can be very unforgiving even when the results turn out OK. All of the individuals in our story have significant “skin in this game.”

It is fine to “empower” people in the team building sessions. It is an entirely different story in the middle of the proverbial stormy night when one’s career and reputation are on the line. Field personnel must believe they company will stand behind their decisions, right or maybe less so.

Enablement

These best and brightest can only be as good as their supporting infrastructure. These individuals not only face engineering issues, any actions they take must be in accordance with company policy, the Bridging Document and various regulatory compliance requirements as well. This is a lot to put on the plate of an engineering team.

However, since their childhood these individuals have been online. Our field engineer mother looks in on her infant son at day care from her smart phone from a hundred miles offshore. The operations center engineer routinely Skype’s with his girlfriend, a physician, who is in east Africa serving with Doctors Without Borders.

These individuals are at the top of their technological game. However, they lack the field engineering experience of their more seasoned colleagues. This represents a demographic challenge for organizations in the middle of the Big Crew Change. How do these young people come up to speed—quickly?

Organizations not only depend on the individuals depicted in our story for their bottom line, shareholder value is at risk if they cannot prevent the next major mega-disaster. And what if they can prevent a minor incident?

Loss time, loss production, loss anything has economic consequences. Most organizations run on margins that are thinner than they would like. Oil companies are included in this group. More importantly, energy service provider margins can be even lower. This business model pushes our engineers to lower costs, reduce downtime and in some cases push the envelope.

Millennial Transformation

Out engineers appear to have the deck stacked against them. Normal Accident Theory (NAT) with its roots in the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant incident suggests that tightly coupled technologies with invariant sequences and limited slack such as Deepwater drilling operations will have accidents in the normal course of events. In other words there is a certain inevitability of a major incident on their watch. Maybe not during this rotation but a certain possibility during their careers.

However, these Millennials have a safety arsenal their parents did not—a new business model that capitalizes on their technology prowess. The emerging field of High Reliability Theory (HRT) “emphasizes are a strategic prioritization of safety, careful attention to design and procedures, a limited degree of trial-and-error learning, redundancy, decentralized decision-making, continuous training often through simulation, and strong cultures that create a broad vigilance for and responsiveness to potential accidents.”

Arm field engineers and graveyard operations watch colleagues with HRT driven policy and associated tools and then get out of their way. A strategic or systemic safety model with a holistic perspective of the life cycle the process coupled with truly empowered key personnel trained with the latest learning tools in a strong Culture of Safety offer a new perspective for a new workforce.

Aircraft pilots routinely retain and upgrade their skills in sophisticated flight simulators. “What If” scenarios, whereby the team can learn by trial and error environment where the worst result is a computer animated “do-over.” Other industry sectors train using this well documented successful approach.

In a true Culture of Safety a mom would not worry about her job or career if she erred on the side of safe operations. She would not be labeled nor would her co-worker in the Operations Center hesitate to wake up the experts New Year’s Eve.

Finally, if the maintenance history and all updated equipment manuals were available on a Smart Tablet with training videos and animation support, trepidation by those new to the company/process would lessen. Organizational policy, its Operations Management System and bridging documentation built into the workflow will enable better decision making in the High Reliability Organization of the near future.

A decade ago the digital oilfield was labeled the Digital Oilfield of the Future. Integrated Operations is a common model today. The Millennial’s World-of-the-Future will mirror the concepts of an HRO.

Will she be working for you or your competitor?

End Notes

http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/

Weick, Karl E., Sutcliffe, Kathleen M. and Obstfeld, David. (2008). Organizing for High Reliability: Processes of Collective Mindfulness. In Arjen Boin (Ed.), Crisis Management Volume III. (pp. 31-66). Los Angeles: Sage.

Ibid.

October 31, 2018
Command and Control: Is this the Way to Run the modern Railroad?
The managerial model, Command and Control (C&C) dates back to the dawn of humanity when tribal chieftains dictated the behavior of the group. It survives to this day in many forms. Typically, one thinks of military operations as the current manifestation of C&C in the western world.

According to Wikipedia, by one definition found in The US Department of Defense (DOD) Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, “command and control functions are performed through an arrangement of personnel, equipment, communications, facilities, and procedures employed by a commander in planning, directing, coordinating, and controlling forces and operations in the accomplishment of the mission.” This definition has evolved from a more simplistic version found in the Cambridge Dictionary, ”situation in which managers tell employees everything that they should do, rather than allowing them to decide some things for themselves.”

One suspects that most laypeople believe the latter definition to be to be the typical approach to C&C in their organizations. In today’s complex (often global) organizational ecosystem, that version is outdated.

The International Command and Control Institute, publication (circa 2005) , Understanding Command and Control develops this management construct in great detail. As the following figure suggests, even a simple C&C structure such as a heating/AC system is driven by a set of KPIs.

This is indicative of the digitalization of the system versus the analog controls many of us can recall from our youth. Adding another layer, today’s ‘Smart’ thermostat operates within a well-defined governance schema such as the Internet of Things.

Strong Bond Governance

We first made the case for “Strong Bond Governance” in our September 17, 2013 Governing Energy blog, Strong vs. Weak? In Critical Infrastructure sectors such as energy, medicine, etc. as defined by the US Department of Homeland Security we make the case for the construct of High Reliability Management (HRM).

The Strong Bond Governance (SBG) paradigm enables HRM. SBG demands Board of Directors and C Suite engagement in operations.

Not directly but by putting in place a governance structure. This has not always been the case with a number of catastrophic man-made disasters as the result.

In some ways, C&C mimics HRM. However, there are some significant differences. HRM sets in place a structure designed to meet the test of adversities.
- Preoccupation with Failure—a recognition that ‘failure is an option’ and the organization must respond quickly and effectively to mitigate exposure and recover. C&C does not directly address is concern.
- Reluctance to Simplify—today’s organizational ecosystems are complex. Reducing operational decisions to the so-called Power Point three bullets, High, Likely, Low is completely unsatisfactory and potentially exposes the firm to business or technical process catastrophe. Likewise, C&C models do not directly address this approach.
- Operational Sensitivity—the field is where organizational action is, and senior management must have a focus on this critical component of the business. C&C also has a focus on operations, especially in the military sector.
- Resiliency—things will go ‘bump in the night.’ Organizations must but in place the processes and expertise to rapidly respond to goblins that will be encountered. C&C does not address this process.
- Deference to Expertise—engage those who have the ‘know how’ to solve problems and that is mostly likely not the management team. This is substantially difference than the C&C model
HRM allows management to look at computer dashboard and get a snapshot of most if not all aspects of the organization. However, this does not mean that these individuals can manage from afar. Those closed to and more knowledge about this issue must take the lead.

Concluding Thoughts

Watching the news, History Channel and/or various movies, one can see that even the military no longer uses simplistic C&C. Small semi-autonomous teams take on the bad guys. To be sure there is a Mission, Rules of Engagement and other governance controls in place.

This provides local commanders the latitude needed to accomplish the mission at a minimum of human (good guy/non-combatants) and other collateral damages. Additionally, military aircraft employ ‘High Reliability Management’ techniques where the expertise of the entire crew is used rather than the Captain dictating operational performance.

Asiana Flight 214 crashed attempting a landing at San Francisco in July 2013. One causal component was deemed to be the C&C culture of the Korean pilots. Cockpit Management might have saved this aircraft and the lives lost.

Likewise, those organizations and their ecosystems in critical infrastructure sectors that use HRM enjoy safer and more productive track records than those that do not—better bottom line. The October 2014 Ebola scare is an example where the public health sector employed HRM and limited the impact of a highly contagious deathly pathogen.

There is a tendency when the stakes are high for management to take the ‘reigns.’ In other words, engage in micromanagement. The usual results are often sub-optimal. The ‘gut instinct’ towards simplistic C&C is a strong urge and this addiction must be put into remission.

A well-established Strong Bond Governance, High Reliability Organization can weather any storm the markets or nature can throw at it. However, this organization transformation must precede the advent of major challenges!

Traditional C&C is not an OE Imperative
October 29, 2018
Selling Your Economic Value Proposition to the C Suite: Translating Technology to the Language of Business

The challenge of building a Business Case for CAPEX investments with high intangible content, i.e., IoT, professional services and operational excellence, remains difficult. Many also argue that disruptive new business models are making the old ways irrelevant.

Hence, we simply must make the investment to remain competitive. After all, everyone is doing it. A matter of faith! The returns are huge (just look at this white paper).

To some extent technological based business model disruption has always been true, certainly throughout the industrial and cyber revolutions of the last 200 years or so. However, one of the major issues with technological change is the nature of the cultural differences between the technologists and those who write the checks.

We have previously described organizational culture as partly a function of an Interdisciplinary Common Vocabulary (ICV). One can look at the gap between advocates of new technologies and/or business models and the “C” suite as the lack of shared ICV. This gap may become egregious during economic downturns when financial concerns overtake strategy.

Making Your Case

As a junior sales representative and later ‘pitching’ CAPEX projects to management, I often presented the ‘Feature—Benefit’ of my suite of products and services. My success rate was on par with my peers, but the case could be made that I was no better than average. We all had weak value propositions.

While I did not know it at the time, my sales ‘ah ha’ moment happened when the department of head for an Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPIC) firm with a refinery rebuild project asked me if he would get promoted if he bought from me. Dah, what did that have to do with anything I wondered. I have great features and benefits.

At least as good as my multiple competitors. Moreover, I could lower my price and give him great value.

Once we understood his CSFs, we won a multimillion dollar (high margin) deal. His problem was not the technology. All competitive specs and price points were tightly grouped. Almost any reputable vendor would do.

His key problem were project milestones! He did not want a pile of products to be assembled. He need solutions to meet deadlines and we could deliver against that critical path. That was the value proposition he needed. By the way, he got promoted!

I have seen this phenomenon often, including earlier this month. Sales people and internal proponents of new ideas often focus on the new hot stuff, for which many competitors vie. The current crazes include IoT, Blockchain, Operational Excellence to name a few.

How many suppliers of these technologies and methods are there and how are they differentiated? Lots and poorly would be my bet and experience.

C Suite Value

The stereotypical ‘hard nose’ businessman or businesswoman is alive and well. He and she live in the C suite and boardroom. Preaching features and benefits, PPT bullet points of value or use case with glossary, poorly articulated and often unbelievable claims will make for a short meeting.

Proponents of big, disruptive or simply expensive ideas can have their ‘ah ha’ moment too. Who is the audience and what are their drivers that can you facilitate? In a previous blog this author took umbrage with sales cold calls who wanted to meet, waste my time and “learn about my company.”

In other words what I hear is, I don’t have time to do my homework before I meet the economic buyer. Another deal closing strategy! Not.

In an invited Guest Editorial for the Professional Petroleum Data Management Association (PPDM) online magazine, Foundations we had the privilege to post a short article. In How to Make The Case To the C-Suite: Selling Large Scale Data Management Project to the C Suite, we present a short overview of this process. The magazine (Vol 5, Issue 2) is free; all one has to do is sign up as a Guest.

The article tells the story of a hypothetical Chief Data Scientist as she prepares for a presentation to the Chief Financial Officer. Readers will see that for some concerns management has, she has a lot of homework and preparation to do. One would expect that much of this work is outside her comfort zone, but necessary.

Driving Success

In our hypothetical case, she has the prep work in addition to her so-called ‘day job,’ a problem most have. Additionally, she must align with their ICV and move away from ‘data speak.’

Since 2004, we have used our Economic Value Proposition Matrix ® (EVPM) to help guide this process for a wide range of large projects (including security). A free version is available. Your invited to check it out and contact us if you have any questions.

When the economic cycle is at a low point, it is hard to sell new projects. When the cycle is active, there are competing projects. Throwing money at technology has failed time and time again and ruined many careers (the antithetical of ‘getting promoted’). Building a solid business case in the ICV of senior executives is a step towards accelerating one’s career, closing a deal or enjoying a project rather than fighting every step.

One final point, when one reads statements such as, “Our software will save you 50%” they are not true on their face and management never believes them. So never make those claims no matter the authority of their source. Sometimes the value can be greater. To find out the secret look at our webpage for the answer.

Good Selling to the Top Dogs!

Further Reading

The author and others have published extensively on this subject. The list of appropriate articles and papers is too extensive to list here. However, readers are invited to peruse Dr. Shemwell’s extensive list of blogs and publications.

October 18, 2018
Are You In Distress?

During a recent offshore sail from Florida to Texas the weather significantly deteriorated on this blogger and his boat mates. Our 45-foot ocean going sailboat was one in which (mostly) the same crew that has significant sea time together.

That said, there were two days of very uncomfortable passage making. At one-point a nearby ship hailed us on the radio and inquired, “Are you in distress?” We responded, “no we were not” and thanked them for their concern. Both vessels continued their separate courses.

At that moment, our vessel was undergoing a pounding by large waves and from the bridge of the ship, it probably did appear that our yacht was in distress and in possible need of assistance. However, our vessel was simply handling tough sea conditions.

Experienced sailors know that anything is possible while at sea. Therefore, careful preparation is critical prior to any voyage. Simply put, the vessel must be sound, (able) seamen competent, and equipped as appropriate.

The US Navy has identified six principles for shipboard operations, “formality, procedural compliance, level of knowledge, questioning attitude, forceful backup and integrity, focus on human performance and create the foundation for highly effective commands where errors that could lead to minor or catastrophic events are identified and stopped early. Used together, these six principles form the bedrock on which the Surface Force implements the three operating processes: operational risk management; plan, brief, execute, and debrief; and hazard reporting.”

One could make the case that a pleasure vessel need not adhere to these six principles; however, this long time offshore sailor argues that they should as well. For example, there is always only on Master (Captain) of a vessel regardless of long time friendships. Appropriate expertise or Knowledge, Skills and Abilities (KSA) for all crew members is essential as well.

Some may notice that the six principles and three operating processes are akin to those found in High Reliability Organizations (HROs). In other words, this short story holds lessons for all as well.

Our vessel was engaged in a mission—transit from Florida to Texas. This mission was supported by a number of processes and associated tools, technologies and human capital to accomplish the overall goal.

When adversity struck, the crew (organization) responded to events on the ground (water) to address the new situation in the spirit of prudent mariners. Is this not allegorical to business?

How Can You Assure Your Organization Will Not Be in Distress When Adversity Strikes?

July 13, 2018

Love to Have the Opportunity to Learn About Your Company: I Know I Can Help

It seems that the preferred CRM Cold Call script goes something like this, ”I’d love to jump on a call with you and learn more about your company. I am sure we can help.” Really?

The roots of this approach may be from the “Sell me this pen” sales model whereby the sales representative queries the prospect seeking to find a need that can then be filled. Understanding your customer and her business needs are a critical selling skill.

However, a cold call (using this sales model) from someone the prospect does not know and may even be unclear about the product/service being offered is usually a non-starter. Yet, increasingly this is the opening gambit in many digital marketing campaigns materials.

What is missing from all of this is the construct of homework. The race car driver, Bobby Unser is credited with saying, “Success is where preparation and opportunity meet.”

Somehow, I don’t think he jumped in the car ‘cold’ the day of the race. Long hours of preparation preceded race day.

B2B selling is all about solving a specific issue or challenge the buyer is facing. Whether the potential customer knows about the issue or is unaware (for example, the first-generation smart phone), he or she must perceive value from the selling firm.

While it is usually impossible to know the details of an issue, the rep must have a starting point. Rather than, “let’s jump on a call” articulate that the rep has some actual knowledge about the prospect.

Value Proposition

If the purchasing authority works on average ten hours a day (plus or including commuting time) a 30-min meeting is 5% of his or her day. Is talking to this sales rep the best use of that time?

Frankly, teaching an uninformed individual about the company and fielding a battery of probing questions probably is not worth it to most of us. A more valuable approach would be to develop a ‘strawman’ value proposition.

The usual benchmark of value is financial. An increase in the top/bottom lines, stock price or more recently reputation (great place to work, etc.) drive operational excellence initiatives. Whether tangible or intangible organizations seek value from business cases put forth by suppliers.

Unfortunately, value often remains loosely defined; as shown in the text box. Moreover, it is often difficult and time consuming to develop a viable and valid value proposition. No matter, this homework must be done!

At a recent conference about the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT), two panels extoled the (technology) virtue available to heavy industry. An inquiry from the audience regarding the project risk of implementing enterprise level IIoT was not impressively answered. Likewise, when questioned about the value proposition one panelist timidly answered that IIoT was simply necessary to remain competitive.

Trust me, it’s going to be good! Not the most compelling use case.

Early in my sales career, this rep often put forth value propositions along the line of the IIoT example. Often, the company provided me with presentation materials to that end.

My sales life forever changed at a Mexican restaurant one lunch when I was going through the usual pitch and was interrupted by the prospect. His question to me paraphrased, “If I buy from you will I be promoted?”

I thought I knew this individual reasonably well and was speechless at the question. Later I realized that instead of a laundry list of products, spares and other materials, he was looking for a solution.

His problem would have been apparent if I had done my homework. He was charged with installing all the instrumentation in a $ 1 billion refinery retrofit. When successful, he believed his career would advance

Grilling him about his business would have made me persona non-grata as he did not have time for that. Once I proactively engaged his organization it quickly became clear how to win the deal. Three million dollars later our manufacturing facility was in over drive. And he did get promoted!

Finally, there is a level of impersonality from this selling model. This includes the much ‘loved’ follow up email driven by CRM, “I haven’t heard from you so I thought I would resend my email.”

Certainly, persistence is required to close deals; however, pestering will drive prospects away as fast as they can run. Professional behavior coupled with persistence are two sales KPIs.

You want me to give you some of my valuable time? Then do your homework and show me why I should

Are Organizational Governance Models Broken: Why Can’t Management Get a Handle on Things?
Over 15 years ago, organizations such as Enron, Worldcom, Tysons, and others failed after massive managerial maleficence and even criminality. Enron’s auditor, Arthur Andersen folded as well.

The result of this carnage was the imprisonment of many, the death (apparent heart attack) of the disgraced former CEO of Enron, suicides, massive shareholder value destruction and the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002. SOX, as the act was commonly called was supposed to fix fractures in organizational transparency!

Later, Bernie Madoff, Robert Allen Sanford and others (Ponzi schemes) stole billions from trusting clients. Where was the oversight for crimes of these magnitudes?

Almost a decade ago, three major disasters causes incalculable death and destruction:
- BP Deepwater Horizon aka Macondo—commencing April 20, 2010
- San Bruno Pipeline Explosion—commencing September 9, 2010
- Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Incident—commencing March 11, 2011
According to one 2018 report, “Close to half (46%) of senior oil and gas professionals believe that there has been under investment in inspection and maintenance of infrastructure and equipment in recent years.” Has anything been learned about the risks posed by Critical Infrastructure to the Bottom Line and societal reputations? What about continued loss of human life?

Finally, our US political class tells us they cannot ‘securely’ run an election and that outside interference somehow tainted or even changed the 2016 national election. Five plus months before the next national election, what has changed?

Nuisance to Menacing

Now a series of high profile Cyberbreaches (seemingly exponentially) continue as do management’s apparent attempts to hide the damage from affected customers and shareholders. Is this lack of transparency a SOX violation?

More regulations are not the answer. Criminals and others with malice don’t pay much attention to laws. They never have, whether mugging you in the park or stealing your identity online.

Purportedly, the first ‘hack’ took place in 1903 when a demonstration of the Morse Code was disrupted and insulting messages were sent through the theater projector. Perhaps a mere nuisance then, today cyber malcontents desire vast fortunes, political intrigue and even social instability.

In our November/December, 2017 Petroleum Africa article, A Governance Model for the Era of Digitalization: Achieving Operational Excellence Using Disruptive Data Management Techniques, we mentioned that at a conference in late 2017, an investment banker when responding to a discussion about the use of IoT as part of the digital oilfield (now how we run the business) “suggested words to the effect that if the enterprise is driven by these technologies then it is now an agenda item for the Board of Directors.” This is consistent with this author’s previous statements to this effect.

What’s Going On?

In his 1984 book, Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies, Charles Perrow put forth the theorem that in our complex world, “It takes just the right combination of circumstances to produce a catastrophe, just as it takes the right combination of inevitable errors to produce an accident.”

We have written extensively about Governance and Operational Excellence, including methodologies for developing and sustaining both. In 2014, we put forth the construct of Strong Bond Governance as well as ways Critical Infrastructure sectors can become High Reliability Organizations.

Finally, we have developed and implemented a Best Practices Model for Operational Excellence that incorporates modern governance that address issues discussed herein.

Normal Incident Theory indicates, that in any complex system accidents will happen. This theory has been debunked just like Keynesian Economics. Yet practitioners of both continue unswayed by empirical data.

It appears that corporate governance models have fallen into the same trap, making assumptions that business and technology models are limited and reactive. This appears to be a short-sighted approach with ample empirical evidence that these models are no longer relevant.

Threats to shareholder value and even the safety and economic security of entire populations that depend on Critical Infrastructures are increasing for a variety of reasons. Organizational Governance models must keep pace. Clearly, this is now part of the fiduciary responsibility of Board members as well as the entire “C” suite of executives.

Further Reading

The author and others have published extensively on this subject. The list of appropriate articles and papers is too extensive to list here. However, readers are invited to peruse Dr. Shemwell’s extensive list of blogs and publications. For more information on this and other subjects, please contact us.
May 27, 2018
Is Your Digitalized Organization Cybersecure?

Here is How to Find Out!

It seems that everyday a new major cyber breach is announced. The Rapid Response Institute and its Principals have addressed this issue many times through a variety of venues and publications.

We recently conducted a workshop, “Implementing Digitalization: A Game Changing Transformation of the E&P Sector.” The Cybersecurity of this sector transformation is critical to its success.

Moreover, since “this is the way we run our business,” Cybersecurity is now a Board of Directors issue and an integral part of its fiduciary responsibility.

As part of our continuing effort to add value to Operational Excellence and Risk Mitigation processes, it our pleasure to feature this recent Public Television interview.

We encourage you to watch this 30 minutes discussion with one of the world’s leading Thought Leaders in the Management of Cybersecurity for Critical Infrastructure Sectors such as oil & gas, electric power generation & distribution, medicine and others as identified by the United States Department of Homeland Security.

Patriot Act of 2001 defined critical infrastructure as those “systems and assets, whether physical or virtual, so vital to the United States that the incapacity or destruction of such systems and assets would have a debilitating impact on security, national economic security, national public health or safety, or any combination of those matters.”

We believe you and your organization will find watching this video time well spent. Also, should you wish to talk further with her please contact us and we will arrange this.

Stay Cyber Safe!

April 15, 2018
Organizational Predators: Jackals, Hyenas, and Wolves in Managerial Clothing

Prologue

In the author’s August 2004 edition of the then, Executive Briefing Newsletter (early online delivery) we addressed the impact on the firm of managerial misbehavior. This article was one of a list of challenges put forth to that generation of management.

Sadly, recent events have compelled us all to revisit this issue, although for some it is the first time. Upon re-reading the document, we felt that it might add value to current management and those that work for them to release it again in the blog format.

The text presented is original and only minor typographical changes have been made. We firmly believe that historical documents need to be held to their original meaning and we invite the reader to decide its value in today’s context.

One note, readers may feel passion seeping through. As this author recalls, at the time one of the jackals had harassed someone close to me.

Point of the piece, this behavior was inappropriate then and it remain inappropriate today for this kind of nonsense to exist in the workplace. Shareholder value is destroyed by this stupid behavior.

One would guess that over the next months and years shareholder value will be destroyed in court settlements because of the recent behaviors of Organizational Predators: Jackals, Hyenas, and Wolves in Managerial Clothing. Won’t put the names here—Google it!

The original text is available in Essays on Business and Information II: Maximizing Organizational Performance, pp. 85-87 of the printed edition. Readers will find it in the Ethics Section.

Reprint

Originally published in August 2004

“I think I did something for the worst possible reason—just because I could. I think that’s the most, just about the most morally indefensible reason that anybody could have for doing anything.”

– Bill Clinton

Thank you, Mister President. You have empowered another generation of Omega males in managerial positions who denigrate women “just because they could.” In Bill’s case, Hillary emasculated him and moved on to become a U.S. Senator. This option is not always available to others.

Organizational leaders are role models for guidance in how managers relate to our female subordinates. Dominant men (and sometimes women) are well positioned to do things just because they could. If the organizational culture condones the just because they could model, in reality this conduct is what management offers shareholders. As an investor, I am ready to sign up for that business model. Yah, Right—Perhaps NOT!

Over the past three years, this newsletter has sought to put forth important and indeed even critical issues to the forefront of discussions. I will tell readers up front, that this edition of the newsletter is different. It is personal, and it comes about as the result of this author’s direct knowledge about how women in his professional and personal life are being treated.

Therefore, I do not claim objectivity but seek to raise the thinking of those in similar situations as well and even the culprits themselves (and their spouses, usually wives). In this writer’s humble opinion, this issue is not transit, but endemic. In the list of those things that will not go away, this one is high.

Corporate boards and CEOs should take note, as not only are there EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) issues at stake (usually addressed by Human Resources and attorneys as background noise) but also Sarbanes Oxley exposure. Sarbanes Oxley is usually couched along the lines of information flow to the CEO and Board, however, there is another dimension.

The quality of management and their readiness to “hear” and incorporate the thinking of the best of the best, regardless of sex. Just think if the CEO of Enron had actually listened to Ms. Sharon Watkins when she raised concerns instead of just blowing her off—he might still be enjoying his Aspen resort.

You can outsource non-core activities, but you cannot outsource the corporate identity. How firm’s truly value every employee is who they are. United States criminal law has a long history of prosecuting wife and child beating felons. The principle is well established.

Oh, the Humanity

Men, more often than women, abuse the other sex and their offspring. Predators prey upon the weak and the young, usually males dominating or destroying females and their young. We see this in the wild animal kingdom and we see these predators on the Internet.

We also find them inside corporate walls. Boards and C levels often hide their heads in the sand and take a “don’t ask don’t tell” approach. Guess what guys (and it usually is the ole boys club); the train has left the station without you.

Fact is this train left a millennium or more ago. Mothers are revered as the fount of life. Regardless of ethnicity or religion, Mothers are central.

That is until we get to corporate America or any other nation for that matter. Once a woman choses or is forced to work, Mother’s Day goes out the window.

Now Alpha (and those who think we are but have not yet been culled) males think we own these feminine prizes. Guess what, you out of shape, overweight pathetic excuses for males, you do not.

Do these women report to you and are their bonuses, promotions etc. depend on your stated and written opinion? The answer is NO!

Take that and shove it up your behind you legacies of the20th century. There is a cataclysmic shift underway and while you may enjoy the short-term high of intimidating and even firing these women, Darwin rules.

You are dead meat my friend, and probably at an age when you will least be able to afford it. Mom is never irrelevant!

Throughout the western United States, one can often see the skins of coyotes hanging on barbwire fences. The clear message to other predators is this could be your fate as well.

Similar symbolic gestures are necessary in publicly traded corporations. Who gives some mid-level manager the right to denigrate hard working employees just as they put themselves out as bastions of righteousness?

If these people were so smart, they would be top executives, and if they were the real comers, they think they are (with top level sponsors) petty crap would not be their forte. Unless the organizational culture rewards the humiliation of women as part of the reward system.

Truth is, most will never amount to anything. While they have some short-term power, the organization does not really care about their efforts. Fundamentally, they know this and this fact eats at them.

Their anger is projected on their direct reports, and often the females in their organization. This is a safe bet for an abuser!

Who would challenge him? Senior management demand results that he delivers for a while and his female direct reports are put through the grinder. Pretty good gig if you can get one, especially if you are a predator by nature.

Final Thoughts

It is far past the time for a superior to have the audacity to state that I took advantage because I could. This is not just a civil liberty, human rights, woman’s right, or Constitutional Amendment right.

Organizations depend on the synergy of their organizational knowledge. Not necessarily without friction, a necessary catalectic creative agent, but beyond retribution, physical and mental intimidation, fear of job loss or demotion, as well as physical threat posited by someone often 100 pounds or larger than his target.

Sarbanes Oxley, global stock exchanges as well as common decency demand that our mothers, wives, sisters, nieces, and girlfriends be heard. The rallying of the “ole boy” network does not have a place in the 21st century organization.

Firms that overlook or down play these issues expose themselves to major lawsuits and the possibility that shareholder value may be decreased by BILLIONS. There is no credible support for predator losers.

The usual predator is an overweight male between 30-50 who attained his position through vigorous internal politicking or as the result of a merger where this individual had a title and thus perceived expertise. Often, these individual distains women all the while being a pornographic connoisseur.

This manager is impaired when dealing with women. When a strong, woman subordinate questions his decision, this personality often retreats to his dominate position over this person and seeks to dictate. This type of manager may have unresolved issues with his mother.

I do not know about you, but I will not invest my hard-earned money in firms that condone, and even promote jackals. In earlier times, these individuals would rape and pillage women unless/until challenged by a true Alpha male. Today, as then these cowards retreat rapidly, only to reappear when they think the coast is clear—always hiding in the organizational shadows.

When Boards and top management condone this behavior, they denigrate investor confidence. Billion-dollar class action lawsuits are not the fantasies of writers, they routinely occur. Why should an investor support the pathetic disgusting behavior of reprehensible psychotics who usually make less than $250K? Is this the risk-reward trade off expected?

Throw the bums out of the executive suite, but perhaps more importantly throw these true Nazis out of middle management. Sarbanes Oxley demands nothing less.

Proposition: All men and women are created equal. No pathogen has the right to spend my money furthering his limitations. A real man would just resign.

But then again, these individuals are not men. They are Jackals, Hyenas, and Wolves in Managerial Clothing. They may even be thieves as they destroy shareholder value.

What a return on $250,000! CEOs, beware, SOX looms large over organizational incompetence.

Finally, as true indictment of this testosterone starved wimps they take one of two paths in their personal life. They either physically and emotionally beat the women (and children) in their lives (wives, daughters, nieces, step-daughters, aunts, mothers, et al) sometimes resulting in the death of these females or they kowtow to these same people and take their frustrations out on organizational female underlings.

Regardless, these people are cowards and bullies. There is no place for them in publicly traded corporations and I for one do not care to fund their criminal activities.

The first CEO that tolerates or accommodates this behavior is yet to be sent to jail. No doubt, we will soon read about such an individual.

Earth to Wall Street. Enough is enough. This piece is not the rambling of a female in an activist organization. It comes from the pen of a white male born in 1948. Demographically not high on the feminist hit parade.

That is the point. This is not just a social issue it is an economic one.

The psychological rape of our wives, sisters, and daughters by low life managerial predators can no longer be tolerated. Fire these losers and put mothers in charge.

The power of motherhood is not overrated. We all have a mother and celebrate her wisdom every May. Capitalize on this hidden downtrodden resource, and remove the cowardly scum whose manly prowess is limited, except perhaps in their own twisted ego.

I for one do not care to fund such dysfunctional behavior. I for one do not care to put my capital at risk at the hands of wife beaters and other predators.

Set the traps, eliminate these vermin, and hang their skins on the corporate barbwire fence. Corporate returns will surely be better without their “help.”

Let the mothers, sisters, nieces and wives loose and let’s see if greater returns do not soon appear. I am betting my money on Oprah and Carly and not Ken, Jeff and the others heading to jail who condoned managerial malfeasance.

Further Reading

Most of the issues discussed in this newsletter are part of a larger dialogue. Readers are invited to explore additional thinking. There are many books about abuse that you may wish to investigate.

January 25, 2018
A New Relationship

This time of year, many make the so-called New Year’s Resolutions and make a personal if not short-term commitment to modify behaviors deemed as needing change. Typical personal commitments include, losing weight, getting more exercise, becoming a better spouse/partner, etc.

Unfortunately, most of these behavioral changes go by the wayside in short order. Many reasons and excuses are offered and then the cycle starts all over again on January 1^st of the next year.

For example, weight loss vendors are heavily advertising at this time of year. Most of the ads look fairly similar to the those from last year and even the year before. Our ability to fail at resolutions seems endemic.

The Relationships, Behaviors and Conditions (RBC) framework discussed herein and in other publications by the author is the proverbial three-legged stool. In this model behaviors in a set of conditions determine the relationships among parties.

When our focus on a New Year’s Resolution is only behavioral change, failure is likely. In the example of weight loss, conditions may not change, i.e., we eat out for lunch at work every day. A new relationship with food may not emerge in such an environment.

Likewise, as part of our diet plan our doctor tells us to exercise but we still hate it, failure is likely. So, what is the point? Most resolutions are doomed!

Not so fast. Achieving new behavioral critical mass will sustain our resolutions and lead to sustained change. A new relationship with the ole bogyman will cast this issue into the pit of the past.

By definition, new behavioral critical mass is self-sustaining. Hating the diet plan and associated exercise does not meet that criterion.

In other words, a set of behaviors must be changed. For example, “all things in moderation” as our mothers taught us coupled with social engagement with like minded individuals (social media and in person as well) may achieve the critical mass for sustained change.

Note that implicit in the last statement is a change in the conditions one is surrounded by. This does not mean that one must quit his/her job because everyone goes to lunch together every day. However, bringing one’s lunch several days a week does change the lunch time conditions.

None of the transformational process described herein are easy and two steps forward and one step back is often the norm. The key incentive is the new relationship one seeks.

Once that “stake” is set, appropriate new behaviors coupled with changes in existing conditions can ensure. Personal transformation is difficult; however, the RBC model offers new insight into how all of us can move forward.

There is evidence that diets do not work. Once the target weight is reached, the old behaviors often emerge.

In this case, the new relationship may better be defined as Better Health which may be a better incentive to change than simply dieting. Those who make the sustained, permanent transformation may not realize they are implementing a personal RBC but in fact they are.

Happy New Year and best of luck to all of us with our resolutions!

January 10, 2018
Excellent Behaviors: Assessing Relationships in the Operational Excellence Ecosystem

One of the hot business buzzwords of 2017 is “Operational Excellence.” It has been the subject for many pundits, including this one.
In October and November we published a two part series, Assuring Operational Excellence from Contractors and Their Subcontractors through BTOES Insights. Each part included a link to additional information.

The October edition featured an excerpt of our Implementing a Culture of Safety book. In the November edition we released our new best practice solution, Attaining & Sustaining Operational Excellence: A Best Practice Implementation Model. We are proud to make it available herein and in general.

One of the basic tenets of the RBC Framework is the general construct that Relationships cannot be determined a priori. The well-used example is a man and a woman sitting on a bench at a bus stop. Are they married, siblings, coworkers, friends or simply two people waiting to catch the same/different bus?

Their relationship cannot be known directly. However, their Behaviors will provide insight into how they relate to each other. Romantic behavior may indicate marriage, dating, an affair etc. They may still be coworkers but most likely are not strangers.

The third dimension, Conditions (environment) can be considered the stage upon which behaviors play. So, what does this have to do with Operational Excellence?

Another component of our digital environment is Human Systems Integration (HSI). In our forthcoming book, we have defined HSI as, “Human Systems Integration (HSI) considers the following seven domains: Manpower, Personnel, Training, Human Factors Engineering, Personnel Survivability, Habitability, and Environment, Safety and Occupational Health (ESOH). In simple terms, HSI focuses on human beings and their interaction with hardware, software, and the environment.”

This suggest that our ecosystem is getting more complex and not less. While not usually thought of in these terms, machines have a behavior as well. IBM’s chess playing Watson is a simple example of this phenomena.

With all of these behavioral dynamics, how can an organization attain and sustain Operational Excellence? If one takes the position that with complex highly interconnected systems things will fail (Perrow’s Normal Accident Theory) then OE is a mythical destination.

However, with a High Reliability Management (HRM) business model OE cannot only be attained, there is no reason why it cannot be sustained indefinitely. As the name indicates, HRM has a strong focus on reliability or that ability to recover quickly when an event occurs.

One example is the 2015 Ebola virus incident in Dallas, Texas. One may recall that the virus was brought to the US by a traveler from Africa. Concerns quickly mounted that an epidemic might quickly ensue.

While a few health care workers were infected, the public health care systems, medical community and others rapidly responded and contained the problem. The system was resilient! Were there problems and lessons learned, absolutely but the system worked. For most of us, life soon returned to normal.

Conditions may change, but behaviors need to continue to rise to levels of excellence. This is the key to developing strong relationships throughout the ecosystem.

December 22, 2017
Precedent Matters: Physical and Cyber Security Materiality

Cyber-attacks continue, seemingly unabated. Major industrial incidents seem to remain regardless of efforts to curtail them as well.

In many cases significant shareholder value is destroyed and perhaps never to be regained. Lives are lost and business models compromised.

In isolated incidents, senior executives “retire.” Usually, it is business as usual until the next time with the promise not to do it again. However, there is precedent for punishing organizational maleficence.

Regarding cyber security, the digitalization process underway places the process of managing information technologies into the arena of “core competency.” There are several definitions of the term. Digitalization is the process of using digital technologies as a way of doing everyday business. In other words, this process is material to the well being of the firm.

While not an attorney nor offering advice, one can observe that in the late 1990s another software issue was so concerning that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission issued guidance for public companies and others regarding the risk and materiality of exposure to the so-called Y2K date rollover. Most affected firms had significant efforts underway to assure business was not disrupted and/or risk mitigation strategies were put in place.

Shortly thereafter, the activities of Enron, MCI and others resulted in the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002. Section 404 of that act requires firms put in place “management systems” to assure adequate and effective internal controls and transparency regarding financial reporting.

According to one source approximately $2.5 trillion in value can be unlocked by digitalization for the oil industry ecosystem. However, if cyber security is weak and SCADA and process controls systems are exposed lives may be lost and facilities may be irreparably damaged.

One view is that today’s Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) organization has greater exposure than any Year 2000 problem may have caused. Shouldn’t society and investors have protections in place equal to Y2K and SOX?

There is precedent for holding organizational leadership accountable. Digitalization is a Board of Directors agenda item!

November 28, 2017