Can You Be The Biggest AND The Best?

I had just sent my Toyota in for its scheduled service at a local Toyota service centre; which I am told is the biggest in South East Asia. The people of Toyota have always been professional when dealing with me. So far, I have no complaints with the service I have received or with my car. In appreciation, I have taken the time to complete the relatively extensive customer service surveys that they have sent out. I have responded to two surveys so far. And, for each survey I am given an e-voucher valued at RM20.00, redeemable at the next service. In both occasions, I had also written some suggestions for service improvements.

As I was waiting for my service technician to take over my car for the next 1 hour or so....it felt like letting go off my baby. But, I digress.

As I looked around the service centre, I could not help but wonder what is going through the hearts and minds of these excellent employees of Toyota. With all the bad publicity surrounding Toyota these days, it must be difficult for those on the ground who have been thought and imbued with the DNA of Toyota : Quality.

The crisis of confidence engulfing Toyota stemming from a steady stream of vehicle recall must be heart-wrenching for this proud and storied Japanese giant and its well trained and loyal employees. My colleague in Japan wrote to me to say that it is suffering from a crisis of confidence even in Japan. Can’t be a nice feeling when your own homeland doubts your quality. I also read that Japanese newspapers, both from the left and right, are united in raising concerns that the Toyota debacle will seriously undermine Japan’s painstakingly built status as a high technology, high quality country. I suppose, if you can’t trust Toyota, you can’t trust much of Japan! And, you definitely can't trust Japanese made airline seats!

Now, let’s attempt to answer the question. I think the answer is NO.
Being the biggest car maker requires a set of behavior which may not necessarily prepare an automotive company to also be the best. You don't necessarily use the same mind-set that made you the biggest to become the best too. It seems that many in Toyota had already been voicing their concerns since the 1990s as Toyota set its eyes on loftier goals. In fact there is a conspiracy theory swirling around that, this is an engineered crisis by Toyota to NOT be labeled as the No. 1 car maker. According to this theory, Toyota executives have realized that being number one in this industry is not a joyful experience. Hence, an engineered crisis to knock it self off from the perch.

Conspiracy theories aside, there are many lessons to be learned from the Toyota Experience….there you go…the title of the next hit book to replace the Toyota Way. Once again, you read it here first though I am sure somebody else will write it!

Toyota is a company that relies on quality improvements. To be precise, incremental quality improvements. Toyota, for many years behaved like a gifted child embarrassed by her own abilities. She progressed by leaps and bounds but always incrementally; a slow and steady evolution if you like. Or at least that's what they believed they were doing. But somewhere along this incremental improvement approach they managed to introduce the Prius to the world which today commands a premium for its category.Then, its Lexus was spoken in the same breath as BMW and Merc. Then, it became the biggest car company in the world. Wait a minute! You did all that by being 'incremental'?

I don't think so. Something had to give. In this case it was the inability to manage the quality of its vendors and parts makers. So far, this is where I will put my money on if you ask me where exactly Toyota had messed up.

While we wait for more details to distill our learning, I hope our very own Proton and Perodua and to a certain extent Naza will take notice of this. You can screw up in the domestic market and somehow get back to your feet. After all we Malaysians have a short memory. But if you mess up in the international market; you have very little chance for a come back. And PLEASE don't ever think that since even Toyota can make such mistakes, it is therefore forgivable for you to do so!

On the sidelines, I am also wondering how the problems facing Toyota and lately Honda too will benefit the Tata's and Hyundai's of the world.

Wishing all of you a Happy Chinese New Year. Remember : We have only one natural resource and that is Unity. Spread the cheer of unity in this festive period. Be careful of what you say about others in front of the young ones.

Investor-Employees

Your employees are your investors. I am not referring to those who have share options and other type of ‘ownership’ of the company. Even if your employees are like my self – those who work for a salary and has no real ownership of the company they are still your investors. You will be in trouble if they realize that and behave as such while you go about treating them like...well...workers.

I am an investor in my company and I behave like one. So, I bet the serious ‘investors’ among your employees will do the same and expect the same.

How do your employees qualify to be called your investors. Well, its pretty obvious isn’t it? While your share holders pay money to own a piece of your company, your employees pay with their Time, Energy (physical, mental and emotional) and their Knowledge (which includes such payments like creativity, innovation and loyalty). In return they expect hefty profits in the form of equitable salary, increments, bonuses, and other benefits. Their investment is usually with the intention of long term staying aspiration unlike your other type of investors.

An investor-employees in this context, they will exhibit the characteristics of your typical share-holding investors. They watch your stock price, they keep a look out for good news and bad news especially if you are a global company, they keep pushing to get that one bit of extra value more before they finally give up, throw in and sell out. They are also increasingly concerned whether you are doing your business ethically and possess genuine awareness of your social and environmental responsibilities. In fact, you may hoodwink your share-owning investors with glib PR driven ‘social campaigns’ but not your investor-employees who knows exactly who you are. Are you green enough? Are you promoting equal opportunity? Are you diversity friendly?

Now, I suppose not many organizations would really want their employees to be walking around like investors. Smug with their knowledge of power and authority. That would not be very palatable for many CEOs I guess. But, imagine for a second that your employees do indeed behave like investors. Let me share an example here. A hilarious one, at least to me, but one that should get the point across. Many years ago, I was a consultant for a 3- man boutique consulting company. I worked for this company as a consultant and got paid handsomely with car and housing allowances thrown in as the business grew and in between many other benefits and support. Years later, when I called my clients and friends to tell them that I will be leaving this company but that I will still be doing work for it on an independent basis, on more than one occasion during this calls; I was asked how much I was making by cashing out. It was only after the first two explanations, did it dawn on me that these people actually thought that I did in fact own part of the company. Now, how did they get that impression? Simple – from the way I behaved when I was representing it to them. Yes. I must have walked and talked as if I owned it. I must have done work for them as if it was my business. In fact, I did. And that was entirely because, my employer knew the power of ‘ownership’. How much return did I get from that company for my investment; which was substantial in terms of my output, I must say that it was very good. How much value did that company derive from me? I must say that it was many fold as I left behind quite a huge amount of intellectual property.

I am now with another company and one, through enlightened leadership, allows me the space to strut my ownership stuff. My breakfast shop guy asked me today why is that I am always doing work during my breakfast ( I am usually drafting important emails or proposals while I am having my First Coffee!)? I wanted to tell him – Why not? After all, I just opened for business. Although the official opening time for my company is 9 am, I am more than happy to get going an hour or more earlier. But I just smiled to him and said – banyak kerja lah! Well, I have invested in my company and I want to make sure every minute of the market opening hours count. As all investors, I want a guaranteed return for this month and for many more months. And some more.

Sounds too idealistic to strive for in your 30-employee or 3000 or 30,0000 employee company? It may be.

But imagine all these investors waiting to invest in you more?
What have you done today to attract their investing sentiments as they clocked in today?

The weekend is here and I will be working through it for my business as I need to get a proposal out by Monday. You want your employees to do the same? Make them your investors.

Fears and Aspirations

It never fails to amaze me to hear how even the most seemingly beneficial and well intended plans in an organisation can be read with mistrust, trepidations and even anger. Take for example, Coaching.

We, in the world of talent development will swear by how impactful a well designed and thought-out organisation-wide coaching initiative can be. We know that it is a win-win proposition for managers, their team members and ultimately the organisation. But hey, wait a minute! Not everyone may see it that way. Rightly or wrongly, some may actually feel that "...this new thing called coaching in my organisation is nothing but a new way to make me work more for less pay"! They may sit around over cups of coffee and justify their 'argument'. In the end, the well intentioned OD team or the HR team will be flabbergasted and just scrap the whole idea in disgust.

Sounds familiar? I bet it does. But, here is the thing : It doesn't have to be that way.

A colleague of mine told me recently that when someone resists change, you can take it that this resistance is not merely in some nebulous mental capacity or at some subjective attitudinal level. Such resistance may actually be physical in the sense that there are physical parts of their brain that just cant assimilate this new information. It is almost like there is a physical clash of some parts of the brain which refuses to work or think in new, un-familiar ways.

So, don't take things for granted. Accept the fact that good intentions are not self explanatory. They still need to be :

A. Communicated,
B. Debated,
C. Deliberated, before being
D. Executed.

The time taken to transit from one stage to the next as I had proposed above, will be determined by how important the new initiative is and how much 'the way we do things here' need to change. The more change is needed, the longer the first 3 stages will take before you can finally execute your plans. Similarly, the more importance is given to the plan by the stake-holders, the longer it will take.

In this respect, it is absolutely exciting days for me now because a distinguished client organisation is taking a very deliberately planned approach to begin stage one of my 4-stage process above. I have faith that with this approach, the plans in place will be well received by all the stake holders.