IBM rolls back remote working – does this mean collaboration solutions don’t work

Back in May it was reported how IBM chose to implement moving workers back to offices. Media reports had it due to IBM executives struggling to be agile and thus stay competitive. AWS is kicking their ass in the cloud.

IBM’s thinking that physical proximity will improve agility through collaboration.  Media pointed to the fact this did not work for Yahoo.

Hmph.

Collaboration is critical to agility, but collaboration was ‘improved’ by all the tools, many sold by IBM, right? 

For me collaboration tools requires 3 things.

  1. Combination of meeting, voice, visual, calendar, task and document sharing for scheduled activities
  2. Combination of voice, chat and presence capability for unscheduled activities
  3. Collaborative search – not just for the two combinations above, but all data sources

Clearly all of the above is readily available.    

So, IBM and pretty much everyone else has all the tools to have FANTASTIC collaboration regardless of whether you are in the next cube or country.

 

 

Like those not so good Fantastic 4 movies (don’t get me started) –

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

something is missing.   

Is it this ‘NEW’ work type that IBM states requires a higher degree of collaboration and thus “forcing” them to require workers back to offices so these teams would be more effective?   

Or is it that the tools DO NOT WORK.?  The tools are fine.  Though the missing component is how to lead and manage using the tools.  I see that as a failure of IBM and Yahoo amongst others versus any NEW type of work.

Challenging your workers to both reach and exceed their potential.  Manage the coordinated efforts of teams dealing with emotional ups and downs, unseen obstacles that come with working on tasks/projects over time.  These are fully possible with remote teams.

When a team is physically together the manager can observe body language, overhear conversations (tone, content and frequency of interaction) and get the ‘feel’ of how the team is performing.  A good manager knows when to push, pull or just let things be by seeing, hearing and feeling all of the team interaction.  

This is what IBM wants back.  I won’t go into whether they have ‘good’ managers.  IBM and other companies not effectively using collaboration tools are like pilots who can only fly during day light and in good weather.

Nothing wrong with that – I don’t like flying in storms.  But, REALLY good pilots can fly by instruments and today’s instruments are very good.      

 

Collaboration tools are just as good as a plane’s instruments.  They can easily show the content and frequency of interaction to give part of the feel needed.  Newer tools provide deeper analytics on tone, measure task effective/efficiency against collaboration metrics.  Is it the same as being physically all together, no.  Not better or worse, just not the same.

As a leader you need to adapt your management style and fully enable the power of the tools to maximize remote teams.  Blaming remote working for your failure is weak.

How to REALLY optimize business processes

outcomes

For anyone who has worked with Six Sigma or Lean to drive waste out of business processes, that first year or two of full commitment is exciting and often results in large type savings.

 

 

 

 

mindset

Following that it takes a different mindset.  Kate Tayler captures that well with her article about Panera Bread.

 

 

The simple line that ‘what they found was that there wasn’t one thing that needed to change, but instead “hundreds of little things” to adjust.’ tells it short and sweet.  changes

Continuous improvement will occur not with big changes, but many many little ones.  Be prepared to experiment, fail and experiment some more.  That failing more too.fail

These Six Sigma experiments are greatly improved with current and emerging analytics, AI, IoT and the speed to market of cloud services.

A lot of fun too.

 

 

 

Cannot find or afford a data scientist – yes you can.

Mr. Vashishta’s is perfectly correct in his article for Fast Company “What If The Data Science “Skills Gap” Is Just A Hiring Hot Mess?”.

Specifically his formula, Platforms + Business Problems = Required Skills could unlock a pool of candidates.puzzle key

Hire that graduate out of university with mad math skills mad mathand they will crunch and crunch, build data sets, dashboards and what insights will be drawn.  Not much.

But like Vin states find a candidate solved the business problem on the same or a similar platform before?  You likely have a person like that if not in IT, then see who is solving business problems with data in accounting or marketing.  Customer Service is another hot area for those data technology savvy folks.

Ask those candidates whether internal who know your business and processes best or outside candidates from similar industries and ask them as Mr. Vashishta would to tell you the problems, their platforms, and their data.

dataoceanYour need deeper analytics to stay competitive to find new markets, strengthen customer retention and identify new opportunities. The heavy math you can rent, but the experience and knowledge of what questions to ask and provide the measure of confidence in the accuracy/quality of existing data.

You have to look past the hyped job description of the role you need and what candidates current titles are now to what their skills fully are capable of doing to uncover the talents that are already there or nearby.hidden talents.jpg