It happens time and time again. It is the evolution we all see, but rarely acknowledge.
A person, or a group of people work hard and fail. They don’t stop, but rather they try something new and they iterate. They take what worked and capitalize on it and drop that which didn’t work. And in time they are able to make some progress. There are struggles which they plow through until one day they have created something new – a company, a concept, a persona, or an organization. They are crowned as the “Next Big Thing” (which, just by the very nature of the phrase, foreshadows their eventual mediocrity by assuming that they will be replaced by a subsequent “Next Big Thing”). They build themselves up and become a light which many others emulate.
But too often that is where they stop. Take a company for example. They build up a cutting edge workplace, create an incredible suite of products and services driven by revolutionary thinking, techniques and processes. They are the envy of everyone. But what they have built is to sustain what they have. Sure, their plans are to grow, and often they do, but their organization starts to take a life of it’s own. Rather than sustaining the cause for which it was built, the sustaining efforts slowly drift toward the organization itself – to keep it alive. As this happens, new processes, policies and management focus less and less on what made them successful in the first place, and more and more on what will keep the status quo. In essence, that which has made them who they are – their ability to take risks and to trust others – diminishes. A moment in time is attempted to be captured and sustained and guards are created to keep the organization alive. By doing this, they deplete their main life blood and slowly – ever so slowly and imperceptibly – they start to shrivel. Until, at some point, they are now the organization that is getting in the way of innovation and the one which others are jumping over as a “has been.”
Andrew McAfee wrote a post on why the Millenials won’t change the workforce. Luis Suarez wrote a rebuttal saying why they will. These are two of my favorite people to read and listen to. Most of the time they agree – yet when they disagree, it is time to take a hard look as to why.
My examination of the situation leans me toward Andy’s explanation. It was spawned by my own experience and study of the situation. About 10 years ago I worked for a company that was up and coming. Yet in a particular part of this company an organization was, in my estimation, mediocre at best. In fact, at some times they were down right destructive. In talking with another person in the company, we came up with the slogan, “This is MY company and I’m not going to let you mess it up!” We wanted to show others that this is their company – they need to take responsibility and not just be an employee – and that if it was going to change, it was up to them. So we typed up a few of these sayings and posted them in strategic places.
The signs went viral. Others did the same and it was spread to other parts of the company in other geographic locations. Did it help? No. But it sure made us feel better for a time. Why didn’t it help? Because the culture was already established. A few people rarely can have a profound impact on established cultures. There are definitely exceptions, but they are few and far between.
At that point, what are the choices? A) Borg with them or B) try something new in a new direction.
And that happens all the time. And this is why Millenials won’t have as much of an impact on established organizations as we would expect. It is because the cultures, policies and processes which they join are so well established and many of the employees have willingly assimilated to them that it is almost impossible to break.
So, what do they do? They build their own empire. And THAT, my friends, is the gateway to change. Instead of joining currently established cultures, they create their own and do things (sometimes) radically different. Soon, established organizations take note of their fringe behavior and dismiss it as a fad. Then, noticing the popularity they are interested. Then they study it out. Then they try to integrate it into their cultures, but they often fail because their cultures are not flexible enough. If the attempt does fail, they dismiss it again and again proclaim it as a fad. If it works (or if they fail but give it a try again) they try to duplicate it – but usually only with moderate success. Few companies are flexible enough to effectively embrace anything not already rooted or aligned with their current cultures – even if it would be a benefit.
Now, back to those new empires. What are they built on? Think of a graph where an established business keeps, for the most part, a status quo – a straight horizontal line. Customer (and employee) needs change and is another line below it, but constantly fluctuating. If this established company cannot match the needs, a delta is created. These new empires are the ones taking advantage of these deltas.
Wait! Why didn’t those established companies with the resources and means match customer and employee needs? It is because they have become so inflexible, rigid and they fear failure so much that is renders their organization incapable of being agile enough. For all intents and purposes, THEY are the ones who are in the best position to take advantages of innovation. Yet they have crippled themselves and left themselves wide open to powerful competition which marginalizes their effectiveness.
Blockbuster was in the wrong business. They were in the business of renting videos when they should have been in the business of delivering entertainment to homes. Because of this gap, Netflix and Redbox continues to bury them.
Do you want to start a new business or idea? Find who is incapable of moving – regardless of their resources – and move where they cannot. Who has focused so much on sustaining themselves that they have lost the vision of sustaining their intended mission?
