|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Consequence Vs Situation |
|
| (by Harris Kern And Ken Moskowitz - September 5, 2003) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the META Group research shows that 70% of IT organizations are still perceived as cost centers by their business counterparts, rather than as value centers. We've devised the forward movement thinking conveniently named 'consequence-based thinking.' This is a new way of looking at situations that lead to a decision whereas the business and the IT organization can change the perception to that of an asset rather than a liability. This is key to an enterprise's success.
When areas within the organization recognize IT's ability to understand and connect its endeavors to the true enterprise, the more likely other areas within the organization will be compelled to view IT as a business partner and trusted advisor rather than a service organization their department has as a resource.
The technology organization needs to understand the desired consequence, "la raison d'etre" of the enterprise and where it requires them to be as an organization. Each technologist must understand where he is in the enterprise, and how he and his workgroup serve the enterprise.
This is why our definition of the ideal IT environment is one that is designed to exceed the enterprise's strategic goals while nurturing the individual to achieve exceptional productivity and job satisfaction. The more meaningful an enterprise becomes to the individuals, the more effort people exert to bring about success. This is very different than a mission or vision statement that is "owned" by the organization and not the individuals. Owned by the organization, you get brick layers earning wages. Owned by the individuals, Cathedrals are built.
Seeing the big picture is fundamental to becoming consequence minded. The greater the opportunity to see the big picture the more likely people will be able to step into consequence mindedness. Everyone needs to see the big picture.
CONSEQUENCE BASED THINKING
Consequence Based Thinking essentially means making decisions that are influenced and driven by the desired consequences rather than by the limited situations faced.
Typically the decisions people make and actions they take are driven by a response to a situation. The situation defines and limits their view of the possibilities and they end up doing "what's possible" based on the situation.
Consequence based thinking, however, insists that the desired consequences be the main driver of the decisions or actions independent of the current situation. Decisions or actions are sought that will produce the desired outcome as opposed to decisions that are justified by and viewed as "making the best of a situation". As a result, consequence based thinking creates solutions that are not limited by the situation. Creativity becomes necessary (and often apparent), resulting in the transformation of a situation into something completely new and different.
Consequence based thinking comes from our Situation, Decision, and Consequence model, pictured below:
Essentially we propose that when people are faced with a Situation they make Decisions. Those Decisions have Consequences. The Consequences then become the new Situation.
For example: Imagine a situation where your partner phones and asks you to pick up some milk on your way home from an evening out. It's late. You feel tired. Your fatigue allows you to justify the decision not to stop to pick up milk. The next morning you awake for your morning ritual of a big bowl of MegaPuff cereal only to find yourself in a new situation of having no milk for your breakfast feast. Your decision not to stop for milk had consequences. Those consequences became your new situation.
People in any situation typically base their decisions on one of two things, the situation they face or the consequences they desire.
Most people make the vast majority of their decisions based on the Situation they face at any given moment. It is far less often that human beings choose to make decisions aligned with creating the consequences they desire. We believe those who are more consistently able to make decisions based on 'desired consequences' get more of what they want out of life and work.
We call the ability to make decisions based on the desired consequences, 'consequence based thinking' (or if you look at the model illustrated above, "below the line thinking.")
We call making decisions based on the situation, 'situation based thinking' (or if you look at the model illustration, "above the line thinking").
Sometimes we will refer to people and their decisions as being 'consequence minded' or 'situation minded,' depending on where, in our model, their focus is when they make decisions.
How can one tell decisions are driven by the Situation?
Conversely, when you are making decisions from a consequence based mindset ("thinking below the line") you tend to feel no need to defend your decisions because you recognize they are moving you toward the desired consequences.
Below, we discuss the benefits to consequence based thinking:
- People no longer fear sharing ideas because they aren't worried that they will be scrutinized as individuals based on how right or wrong their ideas are. They operate with the security that others will recognize that every idea put forward increases the odds of achieving the desired consequence and is therefore valued.
- People become very focused on the desired consequence. The energy in the organization becomes channeled to that end.
- People begin to value the power of questions instead of believing that all the power resides in the right answer. More great questions get asked and ultimately lead to better processes and efficiencies that serve the enterprise.
- Ideas are generated as the catalyst for subsequent ideas and the pressure of finding absolute solutions or final answers dissipates, enabling more and often better thoughts to flow with ease.
- The hero mentality goes away. It is replaced by a sense that all play a role in contributing to an outcome rather than one person. Great outcomes feel like shared victories.
- People don't feel the pressure to individually go for the 100% solutions. They can work toward the beginning of a solution, confident that the team will help hone the process to create the desired solutions.
- The culture becomes one of accepting mistakes with the recognition it is necessary to make mistakes in order to achieve success. There is much more "grace" and "dignity" available for human beings in such an environment. (Edison did not see failures but rather recognized he was getting closer to his desired end, a working light bulb.)
- When people become consequence minded they become open to new processes to get to the desired consequence versus becoming attached to the existing situation or current ways of doings things. It's "how do we create this result" Vs. "what's the best we can do given the situation we face." The more frequently they conform to 'out of the box thinking' the sooner solutions begin to become the norm.
Making decisions that are influenced and driven by desired consequences rather than limited by the situations faced.
Conclusion, applying this model to groups of people who work together leads to less concern about who has the right answers or who made the right decisions if the focus becomes decisions that bring us closer to the desired consequences. Work groups who become consequence minded don't care or focus on whose decisions are right and whose are wrong because they recognize that sometimes the next idea or decision is necessary to reach the desired consequences. Each idea is not measured by whether it is right or wrong. Fundamentally, each idea is used as a catalyst or springboard to the next idea, hence, the desired consequence is achieved. |
|
|
|
| Other articles under Executive IT Management: |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Printer Friendly Version
Post Comment