You're Going to Make Mistakes

You're going to make mistakes, and that's okay. But what's not okay is failing to set up systems to tell you when you've made a mistake.

How Starbucks Should Have Introduced Instant Coffee

It wasn't a mistake for Starbucks to introduce instant coffee. They introduced it in a way that weakens their brand and contradicts the story they've been telling for years. They are saying that the instant coffee tastes just as good as their brewed coffee and challenging customers to a taste test.

You should never put your customers in a position where they could lose, so the taste test is a bad idea. Starbucks should offer customers the opportunity to compare the different coffees, but the containers should be labeled so that the customers know which coffee is instant and which is brewed.

The instant coffee should clearly be marketed as "almost as good" as the brewed coffee or "the next best thing" to the brewed coffee. It should be positioned as a drink for when you can't get the original Starbucks experience. Commercials could show people enjoying the instant coffee at the in-laws' house or the South Pole. It is a way to treat yourself when the original experience is not an option.

This would expand the brand, rather than undermine it, which is what the current approach is doing.

Luxury Lite: Starbucks Goes Instant

The Wall Street Journal has an article today on Starbucks' instant coffee. I recommend reading the article for the discussion of the whole experience of using a product, for example uncorking a bottle of wine. I think instant coffee from Starbucks is a terrible idea because it destroys the notion of the ritual of making coffee. I also recommend reading Seth Godin's book "All Marketers Are Liars", which explains the importance of having a story to tell about your product. Starbucks built a brand with one story, and now they are saying that story was wrong.

Like the weather, people are subject to the whims of butterflies

The butterfly effect, popularized by Edward Lorenz, says that something as small as the flapping of a butterly's wings can affect something as large as the weather. This is because the weather is a chaotic system; it is complex, non-linear, and highly sensitive to initial conditions.

The behavior of people is also chaotic, even though each individual thinks they are consistent and rational. The discrepancy arises from a lack of knowledge of all of the internal rules and conditions that make perfect sense to the individual, but are unknowable to others.

On the way to work this morning, I was stuck behind someone on a two lane road with almost no passing zones. This person drove exactly the speed limit, although most locals will exceed the speed limit by at least 10 mph in this area. If this person wants to adopt a "law and order" posture, that's fine with me. However, in a different section of the road, this person started going 20 mph over the speed limit in order to get around a large truck.

To me, I thought this was inconsistent behavior. When I was in a hurry, this person wanted to follow the law. When they thought they would be delayed, then the law goes out the window. Internally, I'm sure the person's behavior was thoroughly consistent with his internal rules.

This is what makes management and other interactions with people so difficult. You can think you are interacting with the person the same way on two different occasions and get completely different outcomes, because you didn't understand all of the details from their perspective.

Is sales more difficult than managing?

I used to think that managing was the most difficult task in the world because it dealt with people--the most complex thing in the world. Managers are trying to get people to do something, but they typically have some leverage with those people (salary increases, job security, etc.). People in sales are also trying to get others to do something, but often have no leverage at all.

Different mindsets of managers and non-managers

I am transitioning to a non-management role for the first time in over a decade and I am surprised by how different the necessary mindset is. As a manager I was primarily concerned about others and tracked many different issues. As an individual contributor, I am rediscovering the required focus on a single task. I had forgotten what a stark contrast there is between the two roles. It deepens my conviction that the biggest step in a manager's development is the first step from non-manager to manager.

For more on this topic, I recommend the book "The Leadership Pipeline" by Ram Charan.

Management is the nervous system for the corporation

In a corporation, management serves the function of the nervous system in the human body--sensing what is going on and relaying information to the necessary parts. When a company skimps on management, you see pathologies that are analogous to nervous system disorders in humans.

It is easy to dismiss management as unnecessary overhead and therefore strive for a "flat" organization. But that makes as much sense as arguing that the nervous system is unnecessary overhead. Unlike muscle, it can't lift anything. It doesn't provide structural support like the skeleton or transport vital nutrients like the circulatory system. But when it is diminished, many challenging symptoms develop.

Talent should be measured in dB

Talent varies so much from person to person that it ought to be measured on a logarithmic scale. However, you can often hire the best for only a 30% premium. Is there any reason to not hire the best?

Cleaning Out Cubes

You learn a lot about a person when you have to clean out their cubicle. Some people hoard things, which either deprives others of their use or causes the company to spend more money to compensate. Some people leave things trashed, perhaps thinking they're "sticking it to the man" when in fact they are sticking it to their former co-workers--some of whose opinions might be important for a future job search. Some people spend a little effort tidying up and even leave behind something helpful (e.g., location of useful files) or humorous. In any event, the way you leave your workspace is part of the impression you leave behind and worth a little effort to make sure it sends the message you want to send.

Hiring People Who Are Smarter Than You

Many people claim to hire people who are smarter than themselves; but what is the consequence of doing so? It is that they will be right more often than you are. So if you find yourself shooting down their ideas or correcting them,

1. You didn't give them the information they needed
2. This is one of the rare cases where you are right and they are wrong
3. You are wrong and don't realize it, because they are smarter