- C. Tedeton

Mar 19, 2010

C. Tedeton

Jan, 21, 2010

“I wouldn’t just hire you due to your technical knowledge, but because you ask questions and don’t just accept what you are given.”

Thanks for the vote of confidence TL.

-C. Tedeton

Jul 10, 2009

• Progressive….Always pushing for future solutions to today’s business drivers.

• Engaged….Never forget that “The Business” drives IT

• Competent….Be a SME on how your IT systems function in support of the goals of the firm

-C. Tedeton
Apr 21, 2009

-C. Tedeton

Craig Tedeton

Craig Tedeton

There are organizationally designated leaders in many American companies that would prefer to get along, go along and not rock the boat when it comes to fundamental and potentially devastating circumstances. I say, not only rock that boat but sink the damn dingy you have been bailing water from and emerge from the murky depths with a speed boat instead.

I cannot possibly remember how many times I have heard statements like “that’s just the way it is, learn to deal with it”, “what can we do about it”, “that’s what they told us to do (with a shoulder shrug)”. These attitudes, dispositions, and general willingness to deflect, avoid, and ignore potential problems within an organization have greatly contributed to the condition in which many companies find themselves. Some say that they are just complaints and do not help the situation. I do agree there are many that only point out problems to hear themselves talk or to attempt to cause dissension in the ranks, by which fragmenting a group in order to appear elevated within the organization. These are not the comments I’m writing about or the people I aim to address.

I’m speaking to those that have a sense of evaluation and progress, the ones actually looking for that speed boat or are truly tired of bailing water from the dingy. As true leaders, one should see the act of internal evaluation as a personality driven compulsion that leads to actual innovation, greater levels of efficiency and an overall enhancement of the firm’s competitive advantage. If leaders only see a complaint when problems or errors are brought to the forefront, then that leader should reevaluate their role in the planned success of the organization. This self-imposed evaluation should ultimately drive the leader to a higher level of self-awareness and objectivity that will bring into specific focus the true responsibilities of their position.

Some organizational management too often prefers harmony over discourse and tranquility over effectiveness. I have found, that having a quiet shop usually indicates a dying shop. While managers look to keep the peace a large piece of their firm could be sinking below the surface. I have always been in favor of greater levels of activity over increasing levels of affect. With a well selected staff and an informed company, a leader can spend a greater portion of their efforts on enhancing the organization for future growth rather than only plugging the holes or looking for a bigger bucket to bail with.

Now that we have described this increasing problem, how do we address it without sinking the boat? How does one fix this overarching predicament and get the firm on a better track? How do we allow the organized and effective addressing of problems and not have the leaders shun or discourage the practice? There are several practical and efficient ways to allow for the presentation of problems and not have this exercise turn into the typical ‘gripe session’, or worse.

First, during regularly schedule meetings, add a few minutes to that agenda for participants to addressed observed problems or suggest potential situations that may need to be addressed in a more formal manner. This will not significantly lengthen meeting times, but will give members of the group or department an opportunity for their words and ideas to be heard. Also, this allows the leader to openly evaluate the information and solicit cordial and constructive remarks before deeper consideration is given.

Secondly, open this idea up to the entire organization. The tried and true method of the company suggestion box still works. There are many that believe this old method of gaining information is not at all effective. It is usually the ones that have to remove the chewed bubblegum pieces and the handfuls of candy wrappers from the box that believe this way. But, if all parties involved have the organizations best interests in the forefront then the old suggestion box will yield some noteworthy ideas, minus the sticky mess.

Lastly and perhaps the most difficult method of soliciting information about and acting on these problems is the creation and maintenance of an environment conducive to open, unidirectional and effective communications. Some companies have what many term as a ‘closed’ management organization. This is denoted by the lack of horizontal communication between departments and upstream communications with management. If one is to create and maintain an open environment, then the lines of communications should almost resemble a cobweb. A network of interconnected and interdependent relationships within your organization that has no easily discernable hierarchy or any resemblance to a pyramid can help foster an atmosphere of cooperation and effectiveness.

By no means am I suggesting that true leadership take a back seat and let chaos rein. Building and controlling a fully integrated and communicative environment takes an even greater level of effective leadership than sitting atop a company that is sinking. When you solicit and encourage open communication it is almost the old saying ‘careful what you wish for’. Weak and ineffective leaders need not apply. This method of operation can try the nerves of even the best of us. But, if a leader is willing to take the challenge, the rewards will be an endlessly loyal staff and a powerful organization. It will be time to retire your bucket and stop the bailing….you have emerged with your speed boat.

Now step on it!

Craig A. Tedeton

Feb 2, 2009

The process of discovery can take on many forms, with the primary determination attributed to the experience and knowledge of the consultant. This can also be the genesis for the formation of predetermined pitches or biased attitudes toward the addressing of the customer’s central objectives. In an open and focused mindset, I have found that beginning the discovery process with the tried and true methods of business evaluation; one can thwart the personal tendencies of bias and curtail the human drive to have a predetermined approach.

The fundamental business evaluation tools have long been practiced in Business Schools at many colleges and universities however; these methods seem to fall by the wayside while in the throws of actual business operations.  This is the place in which the Business Strategist can bring the discovery process back to the fundamentals, help the customer look at the foundation of their business and pull the focus from what they see as the “problem” and also help the strategist maintain the required level of objectivity and concerned detachment.

These traditional tools are not overly complicated and there in no ‘trick’ to properly executing them. It just requires the effort and detachment that should always be present when one evaluates any situation or condition, the ability to let the results speak for the situation and leave the expected results at the door.  One of these methods of discovery is the SWOT analysis.

SWOT is and acronym for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. This tool is design to help a strategist or business owner objectively evaluate their company and their competition, by organizing and arranging a finite list of business aspects in a logical and easily understandable structure. If done with complete honesty and forthrightness, this is an invaluable tool in the effective planning and execution of a sound business strategy. It can bring into specific focus problems or opportunities in the areas of operations, training, human resources, and marketing.

The next effective tool is the 9-Cell Matrix. This may be somewhat less familiar to many as it can be utilized to measure a number of intersections of business topics or principles. In a recent 9-Cell analysis, I compared industry attractiveness and competitive strength/market position of the three major players in the game console business. After creating a listing of specific topics within each category, I was able to build a graphical representation of each company’s position which was helpful in crunching the numbers into an easily digestible form. Although, numbers are the foundation of all good analysis, the graphics help quickly convey your work to almost all viewers.

The next tool of analysis is only applicable to competitive industries, so if you have your monopoly or oligopoly you need not refer to this tool. The Five Forces analysis is intended to detail several areas of a competitive market; threats of entry and substitutes, bargaining power of buyers and suppliers, and the degree of rivalry above existing competitors. This tool is valuable in that is a great method of looking at inputs and outputs on a macro scale, but also gives one the framework to drill down to specific players in the market. This is a time consuming analysis, but well worth the effort if you plan to effectively compete in any market in any region.

There are many other methods and tools that can help a business strategist or owner/operator carefully and completely analyze almost any situation. The tools detailed above are a great start to moving a business toward a complete picture of the market and help one make logical and informed decisions regarding the future of the firm.

In many instances, organizations have completely gutted their IT departments in order to impact fixed costs and show a rapid impact to the income statement. This however is one of the principle reasons proper and thoughtful diligence is rarely given to selections of technologies and sets the business leader up to handle areas that they are not willing to or not trained to accommodate.

Another reason for difficulty in making good technology selections is the business leader’s unwillingness to acknowledge their shortcomings when dealing with technology. As is often brought to ones attention, using technology is the primary source of knowledge when attempting to determine the level of usability to an organization. This is another place proper IT leadership is crucial.

Craig Tedeton

C. Tedeton