Tag Archives: john hackett

Getting To Yes – How To Win At Negotiations, By Not Trying To Win

Do you go into negotiations expecting to win? Is your main strategy to get what YOU want at the expense of the other party? Do you feel on edge during negotiations? Do you find your negotiations sometimes descend into aggression, argument and attrition?

Positional Negotiation
Positional Negotiation

Then you are not alone. It turns out that many people find negotiations stressful. Indeed, many people are frightened or apprehensive about going into a negotiation. For most of us, negotiating with another party is all about conflict – a literal fight for supremacy. Who will emerge victorious? Who will have to compromise the most? Who will be the loser this time round?

We are often told that negotiation is all about winning. We are encouraged to get as much out of the other party as possible. Knock the buggers down, take as much as possible from them.

This is approach is incredibly disabling. What makes matters worse is that negotiation is not limited to meetings with suppliers or third parties. Virtually every conversation we have in business with any party, including our colleagues, is a negotiation of some sort. So we are subconsciously fighting for supremacy in almost every business conversation we have.

Is it any wonder that our organisations are full of game-playing?

The word negotiation simply means a discussion aimed at reaching an agreement about a particular situation. If you’re fearful or apprehensive about negotiating, virtually every business conversation becomes more difficult than it should be. Equally, if you approach negotiation as a battle for supremacy, then every business conversation takes on an elevated level of drama as you subconsciously fight your way towards victory.

So often during a negotiation, differences emerge between you and the other party. Attempting to work through these differences most often results in intense emotions, disagreement and arguments until neither party involved is able to recall or focus on the original purpose of the negotiation. Most negotiations of this type never reach a satisfactory conclusion.

Negotiation is one of THE most important business behaviours and therefore our approach to it is profoundly affects the success of our organisations.

Positional Bargaining 

The cause of all the difficulties I have described lies in our approach to negotiation. The way we think and the way we behave when negotiating with others is hard wired into us. Subconsciously, we all know that something isn’t working, but it goes unquestioned. We all continue to negotiate in the same way, getting the same unsatisfactory results.

So how do we usually approach negotiations in our organisations? Let me explain.

Usually, we will establish a position – i.e what we want out of the negotiation. This position will be fixed and our aim on entering the negotiation will be to protect our position and give away as little as possible. Of course, the other party in a negotiation will be doing the exact same thing. This is a recipe for WAR. What usually ensues is a form of positional bargaining – a kind of mini-drama in which both parties haggle from their fixed positions in an attempt to reach agreement on a single, unifying position. The reality is that this positional mindset often prevents an objective and useful agreement from being reached, leading to arbitrary compromises, unsatisfactory outcomes, damaged relationships and disappointment. (By the way, if you want to see positional bargaining in action, watch BBC Parliament.)

In short, both parties are so obsessed with winning – ensuring they satisfy their positional requirements, that they are unable to focus on the purpose of the negotiation.

When we are being positional, we are also unable to relate to the other person in the negotiation. We don’t understand their values, what drives them, their emotional state. We miss body language, verbal cues and facial expression. We are blind to the person we’re working with – effectively reducing them to an adversary that must be conquered.

Not good.

The antidote to this problem is an alternative mindset. I personally describe this mindset as Objective Negotiation.

Objective Negotiation

Objective Negotiation is a fundamentally different approach that does not involve winning or losing, emotional investment, compromises or disagreement. It is based on an open understanding of the problem to be resolved and the use of objective criteria to allow both parties to work together to intelligently determine the most appropriate solution.

In an Objective Negotiation, we seek to identify the problem requiring a solution, the possible options and their implications and the most appropriate solution using objective facts. The key aspects of this approach are as follows:

1. Identify the problem requiring a solution

Separate the people and their position from the problem at hand. Instead of articulating their position, both parties should agree on the unifying problem that requires a solution. What is the purpose of the negotiation? What is the problem that needs to be solved?

2. Focus on values, not individual positions

Most traditional negotiations focus on the individual parties positions. In an Objective Negotiation, we understand that the underlying interests and motivations, the valuesthat drive both parties, are often very similar. By focussing on understanding each other’s values, the parties are able to see and understand how closely aligned they actually are, thus dissolving a common opportunity for conflict.

3. Determine objective facts about the situation

In many traditional negotiations, subjective opinions are treated as facts. In an Objective Negotiation, both parties seek to understand the objective facts of the situation – what can be verified as true in reality, so that sensible decisions as to the most appropriate solution can be made.

4. Generate different options to solve the problem

All too often, very few options are considered during a negotiation. With both parties seeking to assert their positions, there is a subconscious limitation on the number of options open to discussion. Emotional investment makes certain options unpalatable. An objective negotiator will seek to understand every possible option that may allow the problem to be resolved. These options will be analysed in light of the objective facts of the situation and the values of both parties.

5. Establish the likely implications of each option

For each option in an Objective Negotiation, both parties work together to understand the likely implications of each option over short, medium and long term time periods, in order to inform decision making.

6. Objectively select the most appropriate solution to solve the problem

The final outcome of an Objective Negotiation is a mutual agreement on the most appropriate solution to the problem at hand. This outcome will be based on objective criteria arrived at through a logical thinking process as opposed to a positional argument.

So here we have a completely different approach to negotiation that is not based on two parties asserting their positions and trying to win, but on both working together to determine the most appropriate solution to the problem at hand.

When you approach a negotiation in this way, the potential for conflict is diffused and the result is a mutually agreeable solution. You could say that this means both parties win.

Skills For Getting To “Yes”

To be successful at objective negotiation, you will need a palette of behavioural and thinking skills to work with. Some of the most important include:

1. Communication Skills

Build rapport with the other party. Recognise their verbal and non-verbal cues. Manage your own body language – what messages are you giving to the other party? Express thoughts and ideas with clarity. Be specific.

2. Creative Thinking

Think widely to determine potential solutions. Be flexible – don’t get hung up on your presuppositions. Get knowledge to allow all possible options to be identified and explored.

3. Influencing

Pace and lead the other party towards objective appraisal of the facts. Recognise and manage their emotional state. Guide them away from their fixed position towards solving the problem.

4. Chunking

Know when to be more specific or more general – if a negotiation is stuck on specifics, try being more general (chunking up). If things are excessively generalised, try steering the negotiation to specifics (chunking down).

So try approaching your next negotiation in an objective manner. Sometimes when you forget about trying to win in a negotiation, everyone wins.

As always, if you would value a conversation about how Objective Negotiation can be applied within your organisation, I am available at info@franklinhackett.co.uk

Screen Shot 2014-02-10 at 15.07.21

John Hackett

Managing Director, Franklin-Hackett Ltd.

Don’t Listen To Your Customers, Look Into Them – Predicting Customer Needs

Being something of a petrol head, I recently had the opportunity to spend some time with the latest version of the infamous MINI hatchback. I have to tell you that my wife and I are massive MINI fans. We have had three different modern MINI models in the last 10 years and we have loved every single one of them. True, they are impractical, noisy, uncomfortable and ultimately a bit conspicuous. But at the same time, they are extremely good fun to drive, infinitely customisable, well made, full of character and utterly iulovable.

So it was something of a surprise to find that I absolutely hated the new version. Being a hard-core MINI fan, you would think I would lap up BMW’s latest offering as though it were manna from heaven. I didn’t.

You see, they fundamentally changed the car. And the reason they changed the car so dramatically was that they listened to their customers.

This may sound counterintuitive, but listening to what your customers tell you is fundamentally a bad idea. Let me explain.

Asking The Customer What They Want = Trouble

When they set out to develop the latest generation of MINI, BMW conducted aggressive market research and customer clinics. They asked customers what they didn’t like about the existing MINI model. Customers came back with plenty of criticisms. The hard suspension, the levels of noise inside the car, the lack of rear space, the lack of boot space, the poor position of some of the switchgear, the centre speedo being slightly pointless, build quality criticisms. The list went on and on.

Now you may assume from this plethora of problems that customers absolutely hated the car. And yet they didn’t. They completely and utterly adored it as if it were a member of the family. The level of loyalty to the MINI brand was astounding. So why were customers reporting all of these problems? Problems that were inherent to the design of the car?

Well, they were just answering the question BMW posed! If you ask somebody what they don’t like about a particular product they will often tell you and they may even come up with a considerable list not dissimilar in length to the one these MINI customers came up with. This however, does not necessarily mean that they dislike the product on the whole.

So, with this laundry list of customer criticisms, BMW set about changing the car to ensure that all of these faults were addressed. This was about as intelligent as attempting to climb the West Pier ruins in Brighton during a force 10 gale. The end result of this obsessive tinkering was a larger car with many of the original unconventional elements that made MINI’s so distinctive taken away and replaced with conventional designs. The unique toggle switch controls on the centre stack for the windows were replaced with ordinary buttons on the doors. The retro central speedo was removed and placed above the steering wheel – a conventional position. The funky fluted leather seats were discarded in favour of larger, less quirky BMW items. The car was made several inches wider and considerably longer in an attempt to create interior space. The suspension was softened to create comfort, at the expense of driving enjoyment. The steering was made lighter, losing the go-kart feel that many owners loved about the previous models.

The new car IS more comfortable, more spacious, quieter and more refined. It has a more logical interior layout. It’s easier to use. It incorporates the latest in gimmicks, sorry, “modern technologies”. It feels and drives like a small BMW. And many of the core customer base, me included, hate the thing.

What BMW failed to understand here, as many other companies also fail to do, was the “give a shit factor”.

The “Give A Shit Factor”

The give a shit factor comes down to one thing. How much do customers really care about the things they criticise? You see, although customers in BMW’s clinics had plenty of criticisms about the MINI, their level of dissatisfaction with these things was relatively low. In short, they weren’t that bothered. In fact in many cases it could be argued that customers actually felt that these things were part of what gave the car the character they so loved. In taking them away and sanitising the product, BMW destroyed the character that made people so loyal to the brand in the first place.

Now at this point you might be thinking what’s the complaint here? BMW asked the customers what they wanted – they listened and made relevant changes. Is that not what we should be doing? Listening to the customer?

The point I want to make is that there is more to satisfying customers needs than just listening to what they say. The difference is understanding their needs. This is significantly more sophisticated.

Customers Don’t Know What They Want

The problem is the customers are rarely able to clearly articulate their needs. If you ask them specific questions, you’ll get specific answers. While this may work in some situations, it is not wholly reliable. Most of the time they tell you what they THINK they want, not what they actually need.

The reason is they don’t understand what they need. Understanding their needs and providing the product or service to meet them is your job, not theirs.

A famous example that demonstrates this is the iPad. If you had asked people in 2010 what they wanted in the device of the future, they would not have described the iPad. In fact when the iPad was launched, Apple came in for significant criticism – “a big iPod Touch”, “no USB drive”, “where’s the keyboard” etc, and yet this device completely changed the entire landscape of computing as we knew it then, leading to the proliferation of tablets and other mobile devices we see today. What made a difference with the iPad was Apple’s inherent understanding of people’s needs. They listened to what people asked for but looked into what they said rather than taking it at face value. This allowed them to anticipate features and design ideas that would give people the results they wanted.

If Apple had listened to what customers said in 2010, they’d have developed something akin to a stylus driven MacBook with the keyboard sliced off. And nobody would have bought the thing.

Looking Into Your Customers

Do you understand your customer’s needs? Can you see further than them, anticipating their requirements and providing the solutions that deliver what they need? Do you understand what they give a shit about and what is really not that relevant to them?

Understanding your customer is about much more than market research and customer clinics. It’s about what they don’t tell you. It’s about the hidden information that holds the secret to unlocking the best solution for them. You can deduce this by looking into them – thinking about what might enhance their life, make things easier, surprise and delight them. To do this you need to 1. gain understanding through insight and 2. care.

Don’t listen to your customers. Look INTO them.

Remember, your job is to anticipate the future and bring it to the customer. That’s what they’re paying you for.

Don’t ask them – they don’t know!

P.S. Don’t let me put you off the MINI – it’s still an excellent car, it’s just… different.

Screen Shot 2014-02-10 at 15.07.21

John Hackett

Managing Director, Franklin-Hackett Ltd.

Back to Work… or is it School? – The Origins Of Workplace Stress

It’s September 1st and everyone is back to work after a refreshing summer break. The business world is re-awakening from its slumber and getting ready to make the next step forward.

At the same time, children are returning to school with a collective groan. And perhaps, a good number of us are making similarly negative noises about returning to work. But why Screen Shot 2014-09-01 at 13.38.24would we do this? What is it about going back to work that makes us apprehensive and miserable?

Well, I’d like to mention one leading factor of the September Blues – office politics.

Ah yes – that pesky little phenomenon that we’re all used to, that we all tolerate on a day-to-day basis but nobody likes. The thought of returning to an environment full of poisonous political behaviour is enough to make most people wish for an epically disastrous unexpected weather event to relieve them of the need to go to work.

Office Politics

Ask most people about office politics and they are likely to tell you that they believe it is unavoidable – it’s just a natural result of putting people together in a room for sustained periods of time. And it is. But it doesn’t have to be.

For a moment, let’s take a step back. At this point I would like to ask you to think about your school days. What behaviours did you see going on at school? What kind of things did people do? What political games did people play?

Hopefully, your reflections will have reminded you that there is such a thing as school playground politics. And perhaps you might already be realising that there are striking similarities between the political behaviour you remember from your experiences of school and the dreaded phenomenon of office politics.

And the reason for this is simple. They are the same thing.

The reality is this –  most adults have not unlearned the destructive and childish behaviours and mindsets they left school with. Behaviours in the workplace such as victim mentality, blaming and persecution, consensus paralysis and past focus are all typical manifestations of these problems and are the things we experience as “office politics”.

The fact is that office politics is optional. The behaviour needed to create politics is chosen by people within the organisation. It may be a subconscious choice, but it’s a choice nonetheless and can therefore be changed. The problem is most grown adults don’t have a clue how to behave any differently. They’ve never been shown an alternative.

The unfortunate truth is most people behave like schoolchildren when you put them in an organisation. They’re going to of course, because being an employee within an organisation is really no different to being at school. You have a hierarchy, variable levels of intelligence, performance and popularity amongst the members, rules and regulations and a sense of duty – i.e. you are required to be there or else. If people haven’t learned alternative behaviours then they simply revert back to those they practiced at school, as fundamentally, the situation is the same. People revert to type under pressure.

Choosing Not To Engage

The good news is that you personally have a choice over this. Every one of us can change the way we behave as individuals. What we cannot do is change the behaviour of others – we can only influence it through our own actions. If you choose not to engage in office politics, then you create a circle of influence around you which helps to move others away from the destructive behaviour.

So what you must do is this:

1.) Read my blog article “You Are All Diseased”. This will show you the 4 main behaviours that create office politics and how to avoid them. You can find it here: https://franklinhackettltd.wordpress.com/2014/07/09/you-are-all-diseased/

2.) Check out the document “Office Politics 101”. This shows you how to recognise when political behaviours are taking place, based on the language people use. You can find it here: http://www.franklinhackett.co.uk/Resources/Office%20Politics%20101.pdf

3.) Observe your own behaviour and try to avoid falling into the negative behaviours I’ve described. Widen your antennae and become more aware of how other people are behaving. Use your alternative positive behaviours as a lever to influence their behaviour. Don’t get dragged down by the negativity – rise above it.

If you increase your awareness and become a positive role model you will make a difference – both to your personal happiness and emotional health and to the culture of your team and subsequently, the organisation itself.

Office politics is really just school playground antics souped up with shirts and ties. So bear this in mind as you return to work this week – do you want to go back to school or back to work?

I leave the choice to you.

Note: for help and advice on these issues, please feel free to contact me via email – info@franklinhackett.co.uk. 

Screen Shot 2014-02-10 at 15.07.21

John Hackett

Managing Director, Franklin-Hackett Ltd.

You Are All Diseased – Coping With Organisational Politics

We’re a sick bunch, you know.

Did you realise that every second of every day, your body’s immune system is fighting off a multitude of infections? To function properly, your immune system must detect a wide variety of agents, known as pathogens, from viruses to parasitic worms, and distinguish them from the body’s own healthy tissue. Having done so, it can fight them off and prevent the body from being overcome by disease. Kind of useful, really.

medical reportMost of the time, you are completely unaware of this process taking place. Your immune system deals with the incoming assault and you are able to function normally. But every so often, you will succumb to some malady or another. This will go on for a short period of time, during which you will be aware that you are unwell, until your immune system gets on top of the problem and fights it off. It’s really rather amazing.

What’s more interesting is that even during these periods of ill health, you are able to continue to function relatively normally, even though you have disruptive symptoms that impair your functioning to varying degrees. But when the immune system breaks down or is unable to handle a particular disease, the body begins to malfunction and ultimately, without treatment, shuts down completely.

Organisational Immune System

It’s exactly the same in organisations. Every organisation is diseased to one degree or another, with an internal immune system fighting off the disease to a sufficient extent that the organisation continues to function, despite being sick. This is why you can experience life in an organisation as being dysfunctional and unpleasant for years and years, yet the organisation continues to operate, albeit poorly. The diseases in question arise in the form of behaviours – the little things people do every day that all add up. It turns out that there are a number of particularly persistent and destructive behaviours that afflict most organisations, impairing their functioning and hindering their ability to make progress.

The Four Behavioural Diseases

What I want to show you now is the 4 main diseases that affect organisations – the 4 main behaviours that rot its culture from the inside out, so you can identify their symptoms and take action to drive them out of your organisation.

And be warned, you may well be contributing to their spread yourself.

So here we go – welcome to my organisational autopsy report…

1. Blaming and Persecution

i.) Symptoms

A person makes a mistake at work and feels emotions of guilt, fear, anxiety and self-loathing. Their self-esteem drops as they wake up to the fact that they are responsible for this almighty cock-up. They become nervous as they wait to be found out and publicly humiliated by their colleagues and managers as a result of their mistake.

ii.) Cause

In most organisations, when a mistake is perceived to have been made, the default behaviour is not to identify the cause of the mistake in order to prevent repetition, but to find and humiliate the person responsible.

Blame is the aim and persecution is the tool used to deliver the message.

This rather dramatic ritual of hunting down and publicly vilifying the appropriate individual is incredibly common. The level of drama associated with it varies according the the culture of the organisation involved and the personal style of the person delivering the persecution. But the mindset behind the behaviour is the same – mistakes are the result of people, therefore blaming and persecuting the perpetrator is the best way to deal with them.

It also works in reverse. Individuals will often use blame and persecution to deflect attention away from themselves – covering up their own mistakes by attributing blame to someone else.

This continuous cycle of blaming other individuals and then persecuting them for their perceived faults creates a culture of fear, reducing every business situation to a personal mini-drama where preservation of self-esteem is the order of the day. Hardly a recipe for making progress in the development of a business or organisation, surely?

iii.) Treatment

The antidote to this particular disease is to normalise mistakes. Accepting that mistakes are inevitable and understanding their usefulness in gaining knowledge for the future renders it OK for people to make them. We all make mistakes, we know this to be one of the qualities of being human, so why not treat them as normal?

Focus not on the person who made the mistake, but on the circumstances that led to the mistake in the first place. What can be learned from what happened? What suggestions does the person involved have about what might work better next time? How can we move forward?

The key is not to beat up the person responsible, but to understand the facts of the situation and learn. This removes the personal element from the situation and allows an objective view of the facts to be achieved, making it easier for the organisation to move forward in a better position. Mistakes can be positive – allow people to make mistakes and you get innovation. Blame and persecute people for their mistakes and you get stagnation.

2. Victim Identity

i.) Symptoms

Members of the team justify their performance at work by identifying all the external factors that they believe to be outside their control and demonstrating how they have prevented them from making progress. Phrases such as “it’s not my fault”, “I would have done it but x happened”, “this decision is so unfair!” and “why is it always people at our level that get treated badly?” are heard on a regular basis.

ii.) Cause

Welcome to the world of Victim Identity. When you’re in this world, you believe that everything in your work life is controlled by others. – you are not responsible for your own circumstances. Victim Identity is an extremely common and pervasive mindset and it infests most organisations to one degree or another. It can be seen across all areas of an internal hierarchy, from the contact centre agent through to the senior director, and it rears its ugly head continuously, infecting conversations, decisions and behaviours.

Organisations are riddled with victims. The problem is, victims don’t believe they are responsible for taking action or making a change. They constantly complain about their job, but perversely won’t look for a new one. They think their boss is a cretin, but won’t have the relevant conversations to improve the relationship. They lament the external factors that prevent them from achieving their tasks, but do nothing to address them.

It’s important to understand that one of the reasons people adopt a Victim Identity is to protect their ego. By absolving themselves of all responsibility for their actions, they are able to direct blame for their circumstances on others. For this reason, frequently, victims will turn into persecutors.

I need to make an important distinction.  Many of us experience victimisation at some point in our life but what is at issue here is the playing out of the victim role.  Everybody experiences challenges and barriers on a regular basis but it is how we choose to address those circumstances that determines what role we will play. People choose to be a victim – and an organisation full of voluntary victims is not a productive one.

iii.) Treatment

Since a Victim Identity is primarily a learned behaviour and not inborn, it is possible to change it. The key is to manage your response to the victim behaviour you are being presented with. These steps usually help in guiding a conversation with a person who has a Victim Identity:

  1. Establish clarity about the situation and show empathy for the person’s feelings. Phrases such as “I can see how you might feel that this project’s objectives make unfair demands on you, and at the same time it’s true to say that this is unlikely to change” can help to build rapport with the person while establishing that their responsibilities are their own. While you should empathise and validate their view remember not to sympathise – this just reaffirms the person’s view that they are a victim.
  2. Engage the person’s thoughts in solving the problem. Phrases such as “I’m just wondering what your thoughts are on how these objectives can be achieved in the time you have available” help to move the person towards considering their situation in a logical and rational manner, diffusing their emotional state. It’s important to be consistent in the message that the situation is not going to change – the person needs to use their mind to sort it out.
  3. Reinforce the person’s positive qualities. Reward their initiative and validate their positive behaviour.

3. Past Focus

i.) Symptoms

People make continuous references to events that occurred in the past or dispatch long tirades about the circumstances that led to the current situation. Phrases such as “Well what you have to remember is this situation came about because of x” and “We tried this 10 years ago and it didn’t work then” continually appear in meetings and conversations.

ii.) Cause

Oh, we love to bring up the past in our organisations, don’t we? Sit in any meeting in any organisation and you are sure to hear sentences similar to these pouring out like a leak from a sewage pipe. They direct thought towards what happened in the past, usually in a negative context and prevent intelligent discussion of what needs to happen for the organisation to move forward.

The reason behind this is the common mindset of Past Focus. The past focussed person brings up old issues from the past during a meeting or conversation, which diverts the discussion into old unresolved hurts and pain while avoiding the current issue. Doing this spreads the argument so thin with so many accusations and wastes so much time that the main problem does not get resolved.

Organisations have to move forward in order to survive in a changing world but Past Focus roots them to old situations that may not ever be repeated, helping to ensure that they are unable to deal with whatever the future might present.

iii.) Treatment

The obvious solution to this problem is to steer conversations to focus on the future. Usually, it’s helpful to ask the past-focussed person some intelligent questions designed to move their thinking to a future-based approach.

Questions such as “How is this relevant to the situation we’re in today?”, “What can we learn from the situation you’ve just described?”, “What do you think we should do now?”, “How will we manage this going forward?” will divert attention away from lamenting the past and towards understanding the future, while allowing room for lessons to be learned from previous experiences.

4. Consensus Paralysis

i.) Symptoms

Every decision involves continuous checking up and down the internal hierarchy. The main area of concern is ensuring that everyone is “happy” or “OK” with the decision or plan. Progress is slowed down further if any of the individuals involved express concern or dissatisfaction about the decision. The “what” of decision making is given more consideration and rated as more important than the “how”.

ii.) Cause

Organisations are obsessed with achieving consensus. Whether it’s through a fear of hurting people’s feelings, or a need to demonstrate “buy-in” to decisions, many organisations are now driven by a consensus culture. No decision can be made unless everyone agrees or has at least voiced their opinion. This leads to the insidious disease of Consensus Paralysis.

The result of this continuous checking for consensus up and down the hierarchy is a decision making process so slow that nothing really ever gets done. The obvious impact is that change and innovation within the organisation is stifled.

What’s more, Consensus Paralysis leads to apathy, cynicism and detachment within an organisation as people begin to realise that nothing ever changes.

But at least everyone is happy, right?

iii.) Treatment

Consensus Paralysis can be unlocked by realigning the focus of decision-making. The key is to move conversation away from the personal subjective into the rational objective. Often, when the facts of a situation are made clear, the logical solution is revealed. In many cases, personal preferences and emotional standpoints dissolve in the light of factual data.

This can be achieved by using a simple set of questions that focus people’s minds on the problem to be solved, as opposed to their personal position. These questions include:

    1. What are the facts of the situation?
    2. What options are open to us?
    3. What are the outcomes of these options?
    4. How will we manage the implications?
    5. What is the best option based on our understanding of the facts of the situation we face?

By focussing on what the best option is from a business perspective, based on objective facts, we can eliminate the need to achieve consensus from the individuals involved in the decision-making process. A clear business decision will automatically engender consensus.

Springer’s Hackett’s Final Thought

So I will leave you to mull over that fact that your organisation is diseased. The infection is spreading. It’s life may even be in danger. If this was a close friend or family member, would you stand back idly and watch them succumb to a treatable disease?

What are you going to do to help your organisation on the road to recovery?

It starts with you.

Screen Shot 2014-02-10 at 15.07.21

John Hackett

Managing Director, Franklin-Hackett Ltd.

Upcoming London Speaking Engagements

I have recently been invited to speak at two excellent events in London, both taking placePicture 865 within the next three weeks. They are:

  • UNICOM Agile Application Lifecycle Management – 26th June, Lancaster Hotel London
  • IIBA (International Institute of Business Analysis) Member Meeting – 3rd July, London

At both events I will be speaking about decision making and the perils of right and wrong thinking.

For more information about both organisations please visit their websites:

http://www.unicom.co.uk
http://www.iiba.org

If you would be interested in a conversation about how I might contribute to an event or function please contact me at bookings@franklinhackett.co.uk

Screen Shot 2014-02-10 at 15.07.21

 

John Hackett

Managing Director, Franklin-Hackett Ltd.