Control vs. Collaboration – Siren Song of the Old School
August 21, 2009
Don’t be tempted to revert to what worked a generation ago. The past is full of lessons, but reviving old models to address new problems isn’t one of them.
The Economist ran an article earlier this year to the effect that companies may be considering a return to a Vertical Integration model to insure that supply chains remain steady. With many suppliers in danger of, or actually going out of business, companies are jumping in to buy up sources of parts and raw materials.
Bad idea. Take your eye off the ball of your core business, and you risk losing ground to competitors who remain fully focused on the marketplace you’re competing for.
We live in a networked world. Just because your supplier is shaky doesn’t mean the whole network is going down. Maybe there are other suppliers. Maybe you don’t have to throw the baby out with the bath water and assume their role.
According to The Economist, companies are fearful of losing control over their supply chains. This is typical reactive behavior: the tendency to pull back to what used to work in the face of change. And it is bad tactics.
Control is the key word here. Control is illusory. Go ahead: reach into the jar and try to grab all the marbles and pull them out in one handful. You can’t do it.
Companies need to surrender control as they promote collaboration. The article goes on to discuss Toyota’s strategic approach to supply chain management. They invest in working with their suppliers to insure that they are stable over the long term, developing working relationships that do not include ownership or control, but promote efficiency and mutual win-win results.
This is having your cake and eating it to.
STEM -> STEAM!
August 13, 2009
I’m heading to Columbus,OH to consult with the Chair and Faculty of the Media Studies Division at Columbus College of Art & Design. Like many art schools, CCAD is energized and inspired by how Digital has opened up opportunities both creatively and professionally, and is very smartly devoting time and attention to staying at the leading edge of this wave.
CCAD’s president, Denny Griffith, recently offered a commentary in the Columbus Post Dispatch that summarizes perfectly the dilemma that many academic leaders understand perfectly well, but that State, Federal and Industry officials understand poorly, if at all.
This is the STEM question. STEM stands for Science, Technology, Engineering and Math. It’s an acronym that is supposed to prioritize the U.S. education system towards making us more competitive in the global marketplace. Unfortunately, STEM ignores what is very arguably the single strongest component in maintaining the U.S.’ competitiveness, and that is the “A” for Arts. Two years ago, the Conference Board published a study called Ready To Innovate, which demonstrated that more and more companies are looking for skill sets in their new employees that are much more Arts/Creativity-related than Science/Math-related. Companies want workers who can brainstorm, problem-solve, collaborate creatively, and contribute/communicate new ideas. And, interestingly, the study shows that there is a dearth of well-prepared creative workers.
“STEM” should be amended to “STEAM,” an idea that has been kicking around with many people for a few years now (including Griffith), and became a key discussion point of the Americans for the Arts 2007 National Policy Roundtable that I attended at Sundance. (Read the summary report from that conference here).
The bottom line here is that we must integrate the Arts into everything we do, from education to commerce. Ideas and solutions pop into the spaces created in our consciousness by the alert relaxation that happens when we create and make stuff (dare I say “make art”…). In the fitness program metaphor for good Business Development, think of the Arts as the Yoga component.
Remember those silly IBM commercials with people lying on the floor in dark conference rooms “ideating?” They were made to seem so stupid and ridiculous. But men in short sleeved white shirts with pocket protectors aren’t making it happen, either! Remember IBM founder Tom Watson’s famous admonition? “Think!” Well, OK. I’m thinking. Now what? How about “Create!”
The Alma Mater as Social Network
August 5, 2009
It makes a lot of sense that colleges and universities are stepping up to help alumni during this downturn. See the NYTimes article on this subject in the recent SundayStyles section.
Sure, times are tough, but this practice highlights another way in which the digital revolution has fundamentally changed the way we think about roles and identity in our society.
Gone are the days where the college graduate is viewed as the end product, the final iteration of a functioning, self-sufficient adult. That viewpoint is archaic and needlessly restrictive, today. We are now a culture that has begun to genuinely embrace the concept of life-long learning.
So it makes perfect (community) sense that life-long learners would continue to be a part of the institutions that spawned them, and that these institutions would continue to welcome and support these alumni.
But this also makes good (business) sense. In the networked world, we have to do everything we can to build and maintain our networks. Keeping alumni close at hand, and beholden to their alma mater once the economy turns around (and they’re again able to contribute to the alumni fund) is smart business.
The programs highlighted in this article go a long way towards branding their institutions in a positive light. No longer will they be perceived as detached ivory towers, inwardly focused on academics alone. These programs establish them as caring communities that do far more than educate – they are committed to their students for life.
Businesses could learn a thing or two from this approach.