Calculating Meeting ROTI (Return on Time invested)

As you know from earlier posts, poorly run, time-wasting meetings peeve me.

I've read that improving the quality and productivity of meetings can improve productivity for the organization by up to 15%. When you consider that many people, especially managers, spend up to half their work week in meetings, improving meetings seems a good investment.

I posted a column on Stickyminds.com on this topic. (It's on the front page now, after the week of July 28, search on "ROTI".)

Here are the details on using ROTI.

If you want to improve meetings, gather data to focus your efforts. At the end of the meeting, ask participants to rate their Return on Time Invested (ROTI) using this five point scale:

0 = Lost Principle: No Benefit Received for Time Invested

1 = a little better than 0

2= Break-Even:Received Benefit Equal to Time Invested

3= a little less than 4

4=High Return on Investment: Received Benefit Greater than Time Invested

Benefit can come from:

Sharing information
Making decisions
Solving problems
Planning work

As each participant states his/her rating, build a histogram that shows the results. It might look like this.

Meeting ROTI

4 |

3 ||

2 ||||

1 |

0 |

I'm happy if most people feel the meeting was a break-even investment. Still, there's almost always room for improvement. Even if everyone rated the meeting at 4, it's worth doing the next step to find out why the meeting worked well so you can repeat your success.

-Ask the people who rated the meeting 2 or above what specifically they received for their time investment.

-Ask the people who rated the meeting at 0 or 1 what they wanted but didn't get.

-Then ask what specifically worked, what didn't work, and for possible changes.

Next meeting you can make adjustment based on the data you''ve gathered.

The delegation test

Awhile back, I attended a workshop where a recently promoted manager, Renee, complained about being overwhelmed by volume of work she had to accomplish. She had recently added two people to her staff, but she was still overwhelmed.

The other people in the workshops offered suggestions for managing her workload -- transferring work to her staff, deciding not to do some projects, hiring contractors to do some of the work. For every option, Renee had a reason it wouldn't work.

Finally, we tried a little experiment to see if we could figure out what would help. We made came up with a trivial task -- picking index cards up off the floor -- and "hired" two contractors to do the work.

Renee sat back to watch.

In a couple of minutes the "contractors" had picked up all the cards.

We asked: "How was that? The cards are all picked up and you didn't have to do it -- your time was freed up to do more important work. Do you think you could hire some contractors?"

Renee frowned. "No," she said. "It won't work."

"What about this experiment didn't work?" we asked.

"They didn't pick the cards up the right way," replied Renee.

Did you know there was one right way to pick up index cards of the floor?

Renee will continue to feel overwhelmed by her work, because she cannot delegate. Renee believes there is one right way to do the work, and it's her way. She's unable to allow the people doing the work to decide the "how."

Renee will have difficulty retaining staff, too. Most professionals do not tolerate the level of micromanagement Renee will impose.

When managers focus on the result and let the technical folks decide the "how," the workers are happier and the manager is freed up to attend to the big picture.

Generate additional alternatives before you settle on a watered down compromise option

Alan Francis posts this piece on compromise from Seth Godin:

The old saying is right: "A camel is a horse designed by committee." If the goal of marketing is to be extreme in some attribute, it's inevitable that compromise can only diminish your chance of success.

Compromise is about sanding down the rough edges to gain buy-in from other constituencies. Vanilla is a compromise ice-cream flavor, while habanero pecan is not. While there may be just a few people who are unwilling to eat vanilla ice cream, there are legions of people who are allergic to nuts, sensitive to spicy food, or just plain uninterested in eating a challenging scoop of ice cream. The safe compromise choice for a kid's birthday party is the vanilla. But vanilla is boring. You can't build a fast-growing company around vanilla.

In almost every market, the boring slot is filled. The product designed to appeal to the largest possible audience already exists, and displacing it is awfully difficult. Difficult because the very innocuousness of the market-leading product is its greatest asset. How can you market yourself as "more bland than the leading brand"? The real growth comes with products bthat annoy, offend, don't appeal are too expensive, too cheap, too heavy, too complicated, too simple - too something. (Of course, they're too too for some people, but just perfect for others. )

Bootstrapping entrepeneurs often upend existing industries because the dominant players in an industry are the last places you'll find empowered mavericks. The market-leading companies may owe their dominance to the Purple Cow they marketed years ago, but today, they're all about compromising themselves to continued profitability. The seeds of theior destruction lie in their dependence on being in the middle.

This piece focuses on products, but the same dilution can happen when groups compromise when choosing between several alternatives for a strategy, design, or other course of action. Too often the result is something so watered down that while everyone can live with it, no one likes it.

Alternatives become watered-down when the question is
"What is the least amount of change that will make this alternative acceptable to you?" -- and each person in the group gets to answer that question, and chip away at the alternative.

Instead:

Understand the values that underlie each alternative. Identify the most important values.

Look for a way to combine the alternatives in a way that holds those values.

Generate additional new alternatives that hold several sets of values.

Go with a watered down compromise as the last resort.

(I'm not running out to buy habanero pecan ice cream, though. I like vanilla.)

Stars and Steadies

A recent HBR article asks Are You Supporting Your B Players?

It's a good question.

Many managers focus exclusively on the low-performers, believing that their job is to bring them up to adequate performance. It's a huge investment in time and emotion (as discussed in the oft-cited Managing a Struggling Employee).

Then there are the managers who make the mistake of talking to employees when they screw up. (And then guess what happens?)

Others invest all their time in the stars, leaving the steady performers to wonder if they matter.

Organizations need stars and the steady performers. Both are valuable.

If you want to keep you stars and steadies happy, build relationships with them. Work on it every day. It's your job.

You won't find this in the book

I'm in Boston, at the galactic headquarters of Rothman Consulting Group, Inc. Johanna and I are hard at work on a book to help technical people make the transition to management.

Here's how I became a manager: Tuesday I went into work and found out my boss was being moved into an "individual contributor" role. A release he'd estimated would take 6 months was now in it's second year, and his boss was out of patience.

On Wednesday, I was the manager.

Ah, but that was many years ago, and I've learned a thing or two since then.

Many many techical people make a similar abrupt passage into management. The scary thing is, everyone seems to expect new managers to know how to manage, just because they've been told "You're the manager now!"

Anyway...

We're editing our zero drafts (the brain dump stage) to get them ready for initial review. Here's one of the gems you won't find in the book:

Assign people to the strategically important work first
Don’t assign people to the least important projects; let those projects go. If you don’t have enough people for everything, then pick and choose what you will have people do. Don’t try to use people like a thin layer of peanut butter on a piece of white bread. You can’t make the peanut butter smooth over the whole piece of bread; it clumps in places. And then the bread tears. Choose where you want your people to clump.

Clear, eh?

Here's the later version:

Assign people to the strategically important work firstDon’t assign people to the least important projects; let those projects go. If you don’t have enough people for everything, choose what you will have people do. Assigning people to several projects at the same time and expecting them to multi-task is asking for trouble. If you don’t have enough people to staff several projects at once, do the projects one after the other. Paradoxical as it seems, you will actually finish projects faster if you do them one after the other in sequence rather than trying to move several project forward at the same time with the same resources. See the chapter Assign the Work to learn more about the evils of multi-tasking.

So you can assign people strategically, or you can just clump them.

What project managers do

Brian Marick reports on his blog that he's ducking out on a trip to the water park to attend ScrumMaster training. Here's how he explains the difference between a conventional project manager and a ScrumMaster:

What's a ScrumMaster? The closest analogue in conventional projects is the manager, but the ScrumMaster has very different goals:

"Removing the barriers between development and the customer so the customer directly drives development;

"Teaching the customer how to maximize ROI and reach their objectives through Scrum;

"Improving the lives of the development team by facilitating creativity and empowerment;

"Improving the productivity of the development team in any way possible; and

"Improving the engineering practices and tools so that each increment of functionality is potentially shippable."

Actually, I think excellent project managers have always shared most if not all of the goals on this list.

BUT... I think they figured out on their own that the way to achieve results was to focus on the sort of goals Brian describes. They learned through observing other great project manager or through trial and error.

This certainly isn't the stuff they emphasize in traditional project management training.

Ken is making these goals explicit and elevating their importance. I'm all for it! (I'm planning to attend ScrumMaster training in September.)

Not all parts of management are fun

On her Hiring Technical People blog, Johanna Rothman writes about firing people who don't work.

This matches my experience. Holding on to employees who aren't pulling their weight drags down morale for the entire team.

Firing someone isn't easy, and it's certainly not fun. Sometimes it is the best thing to do for everyone concerned.

Managers, especially new managers, are hesitant to fire employees because:

1) They worry they haven't done enough to coach the employee to acceptable performance.

2) They make excuses for the behavior... as in "Oh, that's just the way Sam is. He's a good worker, but forgetful." after Sam forgets to pack the slides for an important client presentation. Or "Jennifer losing her temper because she's going through a divorce." Two years later, Jennifer still losing her temper and wreaking havoc.

3) They don't want to be "mean." I talked to a manager, Dan, who had to make a decision to retain or fire an employee at the end of his 6-month probationary period.

It was the week before Christmas. Even though the employees results were marginal and his interpersonal skills were non-existent, Dan couldn't bring himself to fire the guy right before Christmas.

Two years later, the employee is still there. Dan kicks himself for not releasing the employee at the end of his probation.

4) They don't want to "ruin someone's career/life. What if he can't find another job? What will she do if she doesn't have a pay check?" Being fired is a difficult experience. But it's not the end of the world. It's not a managers job to protect employees from the consequences of their own choices.

I absolutely don't believe in firing people cavalierly.

Making the decision to terminate employment is part of a managers job. Not a fun part, not one you'll ever enjoy (I hope) but a necessary part.

A manager's job is to field the best team he can and accomplish the organizations goals. And sometimes that means firing an employee who isn't doing the work or negatively effecting the work environment.

Get out of that rut!

I found the RENEWAL 50 on Tom Peters site (via John Porcaro)

My favorites:

1. Go to the nearest magazine shop. Now. Spend 20 minutes. Pick up 20--twenty!--magazines. None should be ones you normally read. Spend the better part of a day perusing them. Tear stuff out. Make notes. Create files. Goal: Stretch! Repeat ...monthly ...or at least bimonthly.

3. Take off this Wednesday afternoon. Wander the closest mall -- for two hours. Note the stuff you like. (And hate.) Products, merchandising, whatever. Repeat...bimonthly.

4. Buy a packet of 3x5-inch notecards. Carry them around with you. Always. Record cool stuff. Awful stuff. Daily. Review your card pack every Sunday. (Obsess on this!)

6. Project stuck in a rut? Look through your Rolodex. Who's the oddest duck in there? Call her/him. Invite her/him to lunch. Pick her/his brain for a couple of hours about your project.

7. Create a new habit: Visit your Rolodex. Once a month. Pick a name of someone interesting you've lost touch with. Take her/him to lunch ... next week.

8. New habit: You're in a meeting. Someone you don't know makes an interesting contribution. Invite him/her to lunch ... in the next two weeks.

9. You run across somebody interesting. As a matter of course, ask her (him) what.s the best thing she/he.s read in the last 90 days. Order it from Amazon.com ... this afternoon.

10. Take tomorrow afternoon off. Rain or shine. Wander a corner of the city you've never explored before.

11. Go to the local Rite Aid. Buy a $2 notebook. Title it Observations I. Start recording. Now. Anything and everything. (Now=Now)

15. Read a provocative article in a business journal. Triggers a thought? E-mail the author. So what if you never hear back? (The odds are actually pretty high that you will. Trust me.)

47. Call the Principal Client for your last project. Ask her to lunch. Within the next two weeks. Conduct a no-holds-barred debriefing on how you and your team did... and might have done.

48. Call the wisest person you know. (A fabulous professor you had 15 years ago?) Ask her/him to lunch. Ask her/him if he or she would be willing to sit with you for a couple of hours every quarter to talk about what you've done/where you are going. (Try it. It can't hurt)

Actually, alot of these work for writers, too :-)

Reframing: What to do when you lack something you need.

I often work with groups who know where they want to go, have some good ideas on how to get there, but they are blocked.

When I ask why they can't achieve the results they envision, they tell me things like:

--We lack resources.
--We lack funding.
--There's a lack of organizational support.

Listing all the "lacks" almost never helps groups move toward their goal. All you can do when you have "lack of" is "get some."

Instead of listingwhat you don't have, describe what is - the attitudes, behaviors, structures, processes, etc that exist and are blocking you from achieving what you want.

Here's a list of words I use to stimulate thinking about "what is" rather than what's missing.

Outdated
Fragmented
Overlapping
Uncoordinated
Unrealistic
Reluctant
Disjointed
Confusing
Excessive
Unbalanced
Conflicting
Unclear
Restricted
Neglected
Obsolete
Pervasive
Misused
Extensive.

"Lack of funds" might become "Unrealistic funding for the current project"

"Lack of organizational support" might become "Conflicting priorities," or "Overlapping sphere of control."

Working through unrealistic funding for the current project, conflicting priorities and overlapping spheres of control aren't a piece of cake to deal with. But it's easier than trying to get some funding or whip up some organizational support.

Writing self-help once you have something on paper.

I'm staying with the writing theme today... It's a holiday, so I'm taking a couple of days off from writing about software management to write about writing.

Assuming we don't fall into the fear trap, the quantity trap or the correctness trap, we'll have some words on paper.

Now what?

I'm a big fan of peer review for writing. I have a group of fellow-writers who provide invaluable help. We attended Jerry Weinberg's Writers Workshop together a few years ago. One the things we learned there was how to be an effective peer reviewer. Yes, there is an art to providing helpful feedback on writing. So we help each other. More on that later, perhaps.

Whether you have a group of writing peers or not, you can help yourself with these editing techniques. (I originally posted these on the AYE Conference wiki.)

I always edit on paper. I find I don't see the structure of a piece as well when I'm working on a screen. Having paper in my hands allows me to flip through pages looking at the size of sections or scanning the flow of subheads. I also find it easier to go back and re-read a section, on paper than on the screen.

Get a feel for the article
Read the entire article from start to end to get a feel for it.

Sometimes the first part of the piece will be jumbly or dull. Authors often produce clumsy beginnings in their struggle to get started, so the first paragraphs are not always a good basis on which to judge a manuscript. Many of us were taught in school to start with a long wind-up -- wind-ups work for pitchers but are deadly for writing. Bad beginning to articles are easily corrected, so if the beginning bog you down, skip down a ways and start reading there.

Are there parts where you wanted to read more? Are there parts that feel like a detour?

Understand the structure
Next, read the article paragraph by paragraph and make a note in the margin summarizing the what the paragraphs says. If you need to write two (or more) notes, it should probably be two (or more) paragraphs.

Read though the notes margin notes in order. Do the topics jump back and forth? Do they seem to progress and build on each other? This usually tells me where I need to start re-ordering to create a logical flow.

Once in a while, I come across an article (like the one I am trying to write now) that is truly jumbleacious. I get out my scissors and cut the sections and paragraphs apart. I sort the slips of paper into piles and label the piles to understand the underlying structure of the ideas. Sometimes I tape the sections back together in different order to see how it will flow. This is the physical form of cut and paste.

Look for reader interest
Is the writer saving the best for last? Is there a nugget that deserves to be more prominent or appear earlier in the piece?

Will the opening tell the reader why it is in it for her to keep reading? The author needs to capture the readers interest by the first two paragraph. The more the author can use these paragraphs to help the reader to identify with her, or with the problem he's writing about, the more likely the reader will continue reading.

Most readers (especially magazine) readers flip through looking for something that catches their interest. You have about 20 seconds. Use them well!

Advice on Writing

Ron Pihlgren passes along this advice on writing from " How to Write - Advice and Reflections" by Richard Rhodes:

He [Richard Rhodes] encourages people not to get sidetracked by fear "If you're afraid of what other people will think or your efforts, don't show them until you write way beyond your fear."), quantity ("If writing a book is impossible, write a chapter. If writing a chapter is impossible, write a page. If writing a page is impossible, write a paragraph. If writing a paragraph is impossible, write a sentence. If writing a sentence is impossible, write a word and teach yourself everything there is to know about that word and then write another, connected word and see where their connection leads."), or correctness ("Forget spelling", "Forget punctuation"). "The less baggage, the better,"

This rings true for me. I work with a lot of writers, and particularly new writers get stuck because they can't get the first sentence perfect... they edit themselves before they have anything written on the page.

Years ago, I did free writing as a writing practices. I'd open a book to a random page, pick a sentence and write on that topic for 20 minutes. No matter what, I kept the pen moving on paper for 20 minutes. No correction, no attention to spelling, grammar, coherence... just keep the pen moving. When the pen keeps moving eventually, you get beyond what ever is blocking.

I often didn't keep much of what came out of freewriting, but there were snippets that allowed me to start on something else.

Which points to another trap for writers, falling in love with certain words or phrases (sentences, paragraphs, sections...) and holding on to them when they don't fit or move the story forward.

So here are three more guidelines for writers:

1) Put something on the page before you edit. Keep your hand moving.

2) When you have fallen in love with a passage, remember the delete key. If deleting is too hard -- or the section will fit in another piece -- cut and paste it into a different file.

3) Seek feedback early. And choose some one who knows how to give help rather just criticise.

(I am Morpheus, by the way)