With the plethora of changes in the US
system (Affordable Care, Blizzard of regulatory changes) it is
becoming increasingly difficult for organizations to navigate their
way through the myriad of changes. If the pressure for compliance is
not enough, the economic pressures of competitors and the demands of
stakeholders have pushed many organizations beyond the boiling point.
Regardless of the industry, organizations currently face
increasingly strict operating environments.
It was the November 2013 article by
Josh Hyatt Raising the Standard of Compliance that afforded me
the glimpse of what large multi-national public companies are facing.
Up to this point, I felt the rain of compliance requirements in
medium sized single industry organizations. Trying to get my head
around the, what appears to be, the dichotomy between business
success and compliance. My initial perspective, like that of others
was, ‘another thing that must be done’.
The Hyatt article reviewed data of 150
senior executives of organizations whose revenue was at least $100
million per year. The data revealed that 81% of respondents that the
task of monitoring tax and employment related changes had become much
more time consuming. Supported by deductive reasoning, 92% of these
executives indicated that their budgetary cost of compliance will
increase over the coming year.
For many, personally and corporately,
the response to the compliance demands of external agencies are met
with ‘we will simply pay the penalty’. Hovering under the guise
of ‘wait and see’, for many is par for the course. However,
when it rains it pours! The wait and see model may work for a time,
but when the agency percolates to the top of some list for
investigation, and the investigation yields fruit – it become a
call to the wild for a feeding frenzy!
The roulette wheel of ‘wait and see’
is not a long term strategy for any organization. In the same vein,
organizations are being pulled by many fires and the compliance fire
may only be smoke at the current moment. Juggling one more external
demand causes executives to ponder ‘ doing things right vs. doing
the right thing’. Through the ebbs and flows of current economics
has brought me to the very question many times.
Doing things right vs. doing the right
thing may, be to the literary aficionado the power of the placement
of an adjective; in business circles has led to tremendous debate.
There appears to be no end to the commentary on this powerful phrase
when an internet search returns an immediate 431,000 hits in little
over 2 seconds. At the highest level, Peter Drucker says “Management
is doing things right; leadership is doing the right things.”
Unpacking the statement, I guess,
suggests that ‘the right things’ are tied to those things that
bring ‘good’- however we choose to define good. While ‘thing
right’ relates more to the how individual steps are made toward the
fulfillment of the ‘right thing’. This notion is supported by
John Tabita in Doing Things Right vs. Doing the Right Things,
where he contends that this phrase is the difference between
leadership and management.
Tabit builds on the notion that ‘doing
the right thing’ relies on strategic thinking that is meant to
build vision. While ‘doing things right’ is more of a tactical
pursuit. Although Tabit continues the strategic vs tactical debate he
never clearly makes the point that strategy and tactical response
must be tightly coupled.
Probably the best article on addressing
‘doing the right thing vs doing things right’ was by David
Anderson, Why “doing things right” should lead “doing the
right thing”. Anderson begins with the neuro-psychological
basis of ‘trust’. Trust in predictability and quality are the
keys to enabling deferred commitment. When there is no trust and no
underlying capability to make real options valuable, there is a
tendency to compensate with early commitment and over-burdening of a
system. When users cannot expect a consistent or quality
deliverable, they question on the validity of the output to meet
their needs. Regulatory systems provide the mechanism to instantiate
‘trust’ in the deliverable.
Although many organizations see
regulatory issues as the ‘ball and chains’ they do create trust
with the end user which will create the end result of user
commitment. This is the first step in building a solid
organization. Management must use the ‘doing the right thing’ to
make the organization successful – Drucker and leadership.
"Doing
things right" must lead "doing the right thing" to
enable a virtuous cycle of continuous improvement. Management must
stop trying to solve one challenge at a time but rather take a more
holistic view toward achieving the best achievable cost advantage.
No comments:
Post a Comment