Gap-filling
Arms, or legs?
In January this year, my son Jasper and I went to see the Australian Open tennis live here in Melbourne and we loved it.
It inspired us both to learn to play, which we did, and after three months and about 30 lessons, we can both hit the ball over the net a lot of the time. Our coach, also called Andrew, showed me something last class that has relevance to most areas of life, not just tennis.
He asked me, as I was hitting what I thought were pretty good shots, “How much energy are you using?”
My answer was, “Lots!”
And, it was true. I was breathing hard and, after each lesson, my upper forearms would ache for a day.
Andrew showed me that rotating my trunk well before the ball arrived, and then using that core rotational strength, dramatically reduced the arm effort needed. And, then, he showed me something even better: how propelling my body weight up from my feet and legs, as well as using my core, used less again.
Now, of course, I went home with sore legs, not sore arms, but the lesson was learned. My backhand is 1000% better, with much more control over where the ball lands, and much more reliably.
And it then dawned on me that this phenomenon is, in fact, what I do with most of my clients. They are putting way too much effort into their ‘arms’, whereas through our strategy work, I help them identify the ‘trunk’ and ‘legs’ where a modicum of effort should be going for a much greater result.
Case 1: A large agency that works with behaviorally challenged young people has a huge problem keeping staff (over 100% turnover a year). They are putting huge effort into retention (their ‘arms’). Where they should be looking is in their onboarding (‘trunk’) and even their attraction and hiring practices (‘legs’).
Case 2: A public health service was struggling with margins in its allied health services. They were paid per patient, per session, and throughput was lacklustre. They had tried the effortful labour of cost-cutting (‘arms’) before our strategic conversations led to them reducing the administrative burden on therapists (‘trunk’) — so therapists themselves were motivated to find ways they could each see 1 - 3 more patients each day (‘legs’).
The metaphorical take-away here: let the legs do the work, so the trunk can stabilise, and the arms then work freely with moderate effort only.
Question: In what areas are you putting in too much ‘arm’ effort, that should be coming from your ‘legs’?
Latitude
One of my clients said this to me this week, “Strategy is about creating an authorising environment for a CEO”.
After a quick moment to reflect on the truth of this, I agreed. It’s a sentiment very close to something I’ve said for years, since the time a CEO asked me, after a strategy workshop, how I thought it had gone. My response to her was, “I’d give it 11 out of 10”.
She appeared surprised by that over-the-top rating, so I went on, “Think about how much latitude they’re giving you, to enact the growth path that you have had in mind for some time. Outside of some very logical and predictable conditions, they’re giving you and your team full rein”.
Question: How well does your organisation’s strategy allow you freedom of movement, within well understood parameters?
The missing middle
In mental health services, there’s a well-known phenomenon referred to as ‘the missing middle’. It means that there are places to go if you’ve got a severe mental illness (psychiatrists available to treat severe depression, or bipolar disorder); there are also plenty of counsellors and therapists available for those psychological concerns that are relatively rapidly treatable (minor anxieties, issues related to life events like divorce or grief).
But what if a person isn’t lying in bed all day with a major depressive condition, or in the midst of florid delusions — but nor do they need just 4 - 6 sessions of cognitive behavioural therapy or a bit of life coaching. That’s the missing middle. There are fewer interventions for people with persistent, deep-seated and limiting (sometimes destructive) mindsets and mental habits, which some argue is the largest need category.
I observe a similar phenomenon with organisational strategy.
We are very good at the highest level. I see a lot of strategy that expresses ‘direction’ and ‘intent’ and ‘themes’, sometimes compellingly. I also see a lot of program and business unit level planning, some of which is very good. But, I see a ‘missing middle’: an inability to link activity to strategic value, a difficulty in creating a straight line from tangible outputs to higher-order outcomes.
The solution?
Here are two, amongst several that I use:
Ask, “What really matters?” and create measures of success for these. If this is done at a high level, then these should cascade down; done at a low level, they should aggregate up.
Put your organisational strategy on the table at every meeting, and link resolutions and proposals to strategic aims. If this feels artificial, then your strategy isn’t right.
Question: Does your strategy have a ‘missing middle’, between intent and implementation?
It’s always nice to know that 5MSM doesn’t just go out into a vacuum, and I know it doesn't when you click the heart, or drop me a line, so please consider doing that. I appreciate it very much.
Until next Friday, enjoy finding the gaps that you can fill.
Andrew