Disqus - Latest Comments for David Maister

Re: Fatigue

David Maister — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 09:48:01 -0000

If you're even tempted to do it, I'd say go for it, Dennis. Taking some time off doesn't have to be a "drama" - it's just good mental health. We'll all be waiting for you when you return.

Re: Making strategy work for you

David Maister — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:40:34 -0000

Thanks for building on my thoughts, Dennis. You're always worth listening to and bouncing ideas off. David

Re: I wonder…

David Maister — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 11:55:09 -0000

It's a gas, gas,gas!

Re: When worlds collide

David Maister — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 08:04:41 -0000

I don't mean to push myself forward on this, but i did co-author a how-to-do-it book on precisely this topic: The Trusted Advisor (Free Press, 2000.) It's available from Amazon and, as they say, fine bookstores everywhere.

Re: Be open about salaries – I dare you

David Maister — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 23:22:20 -0000

As always, we agree more than we disagree, dennis. But I think we would also agree that the "open salary" strategy ONLY works if there's a lot of other pieces in place, so that it's part of a unified philosophy.

That's why the SEMCO story is worth thinking about. Personally, I like the first book ("Maverick") best. It contains the best all-round view of the (amazing) company approach.

Re: Be open about salaries – I dare you

David Maister — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 22:48:48 -0000

I agree Alexander's post is really worthwhile reading, and there are a number of books now written by Semco's CEO.

However, net, net, net i come out on the side of NOT disclosing for the following reason. IF, as waa true in your case, Dennis, everyone could assess (or knew about) everyone else's performance and contribution, then disclosing rewards makes sense.

But what if you're a sizable business and there's no way people can know WHY someone got a smaller bonus? You can disclose all the salaries, but you can't (and probably shouldn't) disclose -prcatically speaking - all the personal details about why someone was a bit off their game this year, why someone was "dinged" for lack of collaboration, etc.

And if everyone knows the salaries but not the peformance details, don't you jkjust set yourslef up for idle speculation and gossip?

Wadja think?

Re: EXCLUSIVE: Applix lets ‘nonsense’ UK government statement out

David Maister — Tue, 01 Aug 2006 14:39:57 -0000

I'm with you in amazement, Dennis, not at the morality of people (that's between them and their god) but at what you point out is the sheer stupidity of thinking you can tell bareface lies and get away with it. I'm going to have to start a nlog discussion on this on my blog sometime, but I hope others join in here. This is truly amazing.

Re: Crunch time for best practice

David Maister — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 08:16:38 -0000

I'm not sure that you can teach integrity, in spite of some of the eminent business schools trying.

But you can screen for it. here's how I would do it. Design a course or program that had lots of ethical temptations in it (leaking of exam papers, for example,or opportunities to keep or fail to keep your word to your colleagues. )

Then, boot out anyone who succumbed!

Re: Crunch time for best practice

David Maister — Sun, 30 Jul 2006 12:44:46 -0000

A lot of different strands in this thread, Dennis, but let me jump on board a couple.

First the challenge for you and I (the blunt, provocative "tell it like it is" types) is that we have to be sure we're truly doing it our way to HELP people (shaking up their perspective) and not just doing it for the fun of being outrageous. And we have to make sure that other people perceive that, or they'll reject us as annoyances and move on.

Second, I think the challenge is much broader than consultants. It's ALL of us in advisory roles. For example, how many college professors take the time to question whether they are actually helping anyone through either their research or teaching? It's all too easy to lapse into "I'm getting paid for it, let me not ask too many questions."

Finally, Ron Brown contrasts anecdote with the scientific method - which stripped to its basics, is nothing more than is there any systematic evidence for this? Ron is right that in business generally (and business schools) we rarely ask for the evidence. In the words of Jeff Pfefefer's latest book, we (the clients, the consuming public) like what's NEW, not necessarily what's TRUE. That's why all these providers get away with "charlatenism" (spelling?)

And it may also be true of Wladasky-Berger and the work he cites - 30 years ago people like Earl Sasser, Jim Heskett at HBS and Richard Chase at USC were talking about the special needs of "front room", inherently unprdicatble and emergent services. Yet we all treat it as new.

Re: Theory matters

David Maister — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 23:23:26 -0000

You're right, Dennis, about the lack of originality. Are all your readers familiar with the book by Pfeffer and sutton "Hard Facts, Dangerousd Half-truths and Dangerous Nonsense."? Pfeffer has a great line - we should focus on what is TRUE, not what is NEW.

Re: The lessons of Enron – an ex-Andersen perspective

David Maister — Thu, 01 Jun 2006 20:55:15 -0000

Bravo, Brian. I'm not an insider, but everything you say echoes what others insiders told me. It's a simple lesson: when you switch from "let's make money by adhering to high standards" to "let's make money any way we can" decay and rot has set in. It might not show up immediately but (to change the metaphor) the fatal poison has been taken. You don't explain Enron (or Andersen's) demise by what happened at the end, but, as Brian has brilliantly laid out, by trying to understand the path they had been on for awhile, and what led them to take that path.

Re: I’ll be Gunning-Fogged

David Maister — Fri, 26 May 2006 18:50:46 -0000

Head boy? me? I barely made prefect!

Re: 5 deadly mistakes when starting a business

David Maister — Sun, 14 May 2006 18:08:11 -0000

The trouble with these lists, Accman, is that there are a thousand ways to fail. Avoiding nine hundred of them doesn't guarantee success. It's much more helpful to have a list of things that predict success. I suspect that if you can pass a few key success tests, then you'll be forgiven a lot of mistakes - even so-called deadly ones.

My nominations for the success tests are the familiar ones (which I think you pass in flying colo(u)rs):

a)Doing something you are passionate about
b)Being clear about who you ant to serve and what they need
c)Having something to offer them

Keep swinging!

Re: Measurement or judgment

David Maister — Wed, 26 Apr 2006 18:15:08 -0000

In the pursuit of better judgments that don't "diminish' the power of measurements, it occurs to me that good judgements frequently come from having available a variety of measures, each offering a slightly different perspective. Perhaps it is our pursuit of "THE" measure for each topic that causes the problems. If we could put in place reporting systems that offerred multiple perspectives on an issue, we'd be able to manage much better, even if any one of the measures was flawed.

Re: Measurement or judgment

David Maister — Tue, 25 Apr 2006 23:25:41 -0000

Dennis, let's keep this discussion going, because it's a very important one. You make the point that Wall Street, the LSE or DAX will not be impressed by imprecise or absent measures. Fair enough.

But I believe that an important distinction must be made between the relative importance of measures v. judgments if you are an outsider (ie an investor) or an insider (manager.) A numbers approach to investing may make more sense than a numbers approach to managing.

This doesn't mean the corporation doesn't worry about ultimate financial results. It means that the key to the best returns is to focus on managing the things (client loyalty, innovations, employee engagement)that can be shown to improve returns. And managing these things means learning to judge, not just measure.

Yes, the financial markets want performance, but the question still being debated is what's the best way to produce that performance? I don't think that, relatively speaking, it's our lack of skill in measuring that's holding us back. It's our lack of skill in using measurements as 'signals to be investigated' rather than as 'objective facts.'

Re: Google and the Me2 revolution

David Maister — Tue, 31 Jan 2006 09:18:23 -0000

If we as consumers can instantly check

Re: Holiday Buying Guide

David Maister — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:32:16 -0000

Like Glenda, I'm honored and gratified by your recommendation. It's really appreciated. david

Re: My PR guy

David Maister — Tue, 13 Jun 2006 10:58:44 -0000

Congratulations - it's going to be fascinating to see you do for (to?) podcasting what you did for blogs. This is going to be fun!

(I'll drop you an email anout the intersection of podcasting / PR and blogging.)

Re: Ajit says “show me the Web 2.0 money”

David Maister — Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:20:39 -0000

"We don't care - we just want a buyer."

Now there's the central tragedy - and problem - of all people who are trying to sell something, whether it's Mr. & Mrs. Scoble or MEGACORP. Everybody's w-a-y to impatient, and wants to get to instant gratification too fast.

I've always believed that the key to understanding selling is to understand buying, and I'm pretty sure that's as true in WEB2.0land as it is in the rest of the universe.

And what we know about how you and I buy is that, unless it costs 99 cents, we shop around and go through a buying process, using ever finer filters. In the case of buying a service, it's something like:

a) Who's out there that can help?
b) Who's qualified for our situation?
c) Who's got references?
d) Who's earned enough of our trust to be chosen?

WEB2.0 businesses can add value any any stage of this process, but I suspect too few have thought about it as a series of stages, each requiring it's own approach. Helping sellers create awareness is a very different process than helping them provide refernces (the community) versus helping them convey and earn trust.

New-world marketers need to remember old-world buying!

Re: Strategy and the Fat Smoker

David Maister — Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:42:45 -0000

Thanks for the recommendation, Eric. It's appreciated