ANTIGENcy

Icon

Inoculating companies against inaction, irrelevance, inflexibility and instability.

New Perspectives :: A Biologists Joins ANTIGENcy Thinking

How do each of the dimensions of business fit with a biological paradigm? Jotting down some thoughts here…

1. Strategic

Organisms evolve. Organizations evolve. How can you understand your organization within the context of the business ecosystem? By understanding the competitive landscape, adaptive peaks, the role of mutability and how to exploit niches.

2. Leadership

In animal behavior, hierarchical properties within a population determine the nature of leadership. What aspects of leadership determine success or failure? The ability to work within the tribe, dominance behavior, the propensity to take risks.

3. Culture

Culture is an emergent property of complex biological processes, not restricted to humans. How is culture defined within a species or society, and what is its role and importance? Culture is comprise of information that passes on through generations. A unit of cultural inheritance is a meme (from Dawkins’ original definition). Defining and understanding memes can provide insight into prevailing cultural trends and their potential impact on an organization.

4. Extemal

Homeostasis is the physiological feedback loop that enables organisms to maintain constant internal environments despite external variations. What processes enable organisms to buffer physiological processes against external changes? Feedback loops within dynamic systems enable information to be transferred to allow adjustment of systemic processes to adapt (locally) and so return to a desired state.

Filed under: 1

Affinity

In immunology, affinity is the attraction of an antibody to an antigen. In the corporate sense, affinity is the attraction of a solution to a problem. Simple huh? Not really.

Yesterday I was “attacked” by an immunologist in the RTP who thought my metaphor was preposterous and worse, lame. He claimed that it was again, opportunistic marketing looking for a new trend. He went on to politely discard my idea as moronic and told me that I didn’t know enough about science to draw from it. Probably. But fuck him.  By that logic we all must stop saying “Rocket Science” or “Rocket Surgery.”

I heard what he was saying. I even agreed with him on a base level. Beyond that, what an idiot! He claimed that I ought to know what I was talking about before I ventured into the pristine science of immunology.

Here is what I want and what I am doing:

I believe we are all heading into an evolved state of business. A state that is now capable of moving, changing, replicating, infecting, killing other businesses. It has always happened, it is now just happening faster. And in the future it will move yet faster. We will learn to adapt to it. But how will we learn? What is the most effective way to set ourselves up to the task of seeing, accepting and adapting to business change?

I am arguing that by borrowing from biology, we can create new frameworks to see, accept/reject, create, adapt and inoculate in ways that create advantage. I want to help change perspective. To create a new environment to see things through a metaphor that extends one’s perceptions.

I am mapping out what I believe are to be generally accepted hierarchies of problems (antigens) that are or will affect a company’s well being (body). There are a lot of them.  I am creating parallels between management consulting and immunology to help me frame methods for dealing with these problems by using creative/unconventional solutions like design thinking (antibodies).

What is most interesting so far is how well the science of immunology and the art of enterprise transformation correspond to one another. It makes me wonder why I wasn’t thinking about this while working on my last big digital transformation consultation last year.

Filed under: General , , , , , , ,

Gary Hamel asks a Great Question

Gary Hamel’s terrific question: What’s the one thing your company could do to lessen the gravitational pull of the past?


Filed under: General , ,

What is my definition of “Management Consulting?”

If this Antigency concept, at its most root level, is a mash-up of management consulting and vaccine science, I want to be clear as possible and define what I think the principal elements are. I have been asked a lot about this as I had suspected would happen.

I know vaccine science to be just that. Its the science of designing, creating, testing and delivering vaccines. Let’s agree that is vaccine science or part of Epidemiology, Immunology and Biology. Am I right? I am sure there is plenty of debate…but for the sake of simplicity…

Now Management Consulting, on the other hand, is more squishy and ambiguous and has been molested by so many for so long. You can go out tomorrow and claim that you are management consultant. I certainly have. And for that, I have had my ass handed to me enough times to finally get it right and understand my place in it. So here it is; my open-sourced definition of management consulting. Management Consulting is:

  • about the application of consulting methods to address business performance issues within companies and organizations
  • it is used to help companies identify, address and improve key business performance issues across a number of industries
  • typically delivered on an issue-by-issue basis over a set amount of time using a set process
  • identifies and prioritizing issues, creates feasible interventions to address root-causes, tries to measure impact of interventions based on key performance issues
  • seeks opportunities to sell specialized services to other businesses and organizations
  • typically an analytical, left-brain exercise

So there you have it. I would love to flesh this out and gain a broader perspective in the mean time. What do you think?

Filed under: About ANTIGENcy, management consulting , , , ,

The Epidemiologic Triad

The term ‘epidemiologic triad’ is used to describe the intersection of HostAgent, and Environment in analyzing an outbreak.

Relevant to our work in that we help organizations (the host) bolster their defenses against corporate antigens (agents) within their environments.

Filed under: Properties of Antigens

An innovation formula

It occurred to me that the amount of pointless jabber is commensurate with how easy it is to be right. Or how hard it is to be wrong. Or how acceptable it is to us all to keep reading and retweeting the same crap over and over again. I am just as guilty as the next one. Just spouting.

I have been researching broad swaths of  innovation for the last two years and last night I hit a breaking point. I came across an innovation report from Accenture.  I read it twice and became angry at what turned out to be less interesting and insightful than the back of a pack of Splenda. Ironically none of us have innovated around innovation in while. Shame on Accenture for letting such a pile of crap out their door. I expect a whole lot more from them and so would their clients.

I know others in this field are equally dumbfounded or jaded by this.

I am looking for companies who are truly innovating and not just talking about it. If you know of any, please shoot me a note.

Filed under: Innovation , , ,

ANTIGEN: Broken Multichannel Touchpoint Strategy

Just read this from Forrester and it brought me to the inability to meet consumer’s multi-channel needs ANTIGEN.

Seventy percent of US online consumers research products online and purchase them offline. Based on this behavior, Forrester has identified two consumer categories: multichannel buyers and online window shoppers. Multichannel buyers use the Web for both research and purchases, while online window shoppers use the Web exclusively for researching their offline purchases. Multichannel buyers are almost six times more numerous. They are also more affluent and savvier online users than online window shoppers. The demographic and psychographic differences between these two consumer segments, and examples of how top US retailers are evolving their multichannel strategies in response, offer insights into how eBusiness professionals can enable multichannel consumer behavior.”

So, do you have what it will take to close the loop on your consumer’s online-to-offline needs?

Here is a snapshot of many different touch-point channel opportunities. You should be able to quickly determine if you have a closed-loop strategy to meet more of the complex needs of today’s consumers–or not.

In short, are you thinking about all the ways your business can and should meet the expectations of tomorrow’s customers?

  1. Social Networking
  2. Widgets/Tools
  3. Vodcasts
  4. Natural Search Engines (eg. Google)
  5. RSS Feeds
  6. Print Advertising
  7. Portal Widgets/Tools
  8. Desktop Widgets/Tools
  9. Affiliates (non-dealer)
  10. All Brand Web sites
  11. Events
  12. Broadcast
  13. Video interview (eg. YouTube)
  14. Blogs
  15. Catalog
  16. Customer Service
  17. Direct one-to-one Emails
  18. Distributor/Dealer Events
  19. Marketing emails
  20. Forums
  21. Email to a Friend
  22. Dealer Websites
  23. Dealer Stores
  24. Mobile
  25. Podcasts
  26. POP
  27. PR
  28. Product Returns
  29. Product Exchanges
  30. Product or Service Warranties
  31. Online Personal Data
  32. Payment
  33. Balance Checking
  34. Order Tracking
  35. Account Management
  36. Wishlist Management
  37. Opt-in/Opt-out Management
  38. Password Recovery
  39. Gift Card Purchase/Redemption/Balance Checking
  40. Holiday/Gifting Logistics Related Capabilities
  41. Holiday Hold
  42. Delayed Shipping
  43. Ask a Question
  44. Take Customer Satisfaction Survey
  45. General Feedback
  46. Rush Shipping
  47. Gift Services
  48. Purchase an Item
  49. Purchase Item Using Catalog Number
  50. Edit a Wishlist
  51. Create a Wish List
  52. Delete an Account
  53. Edit an Account
  54. Create an Account
  55. Order Re-tracking
  56. Delete a Wishlist
  57. Send a Wishlist
  58. Purchase an Item from a Wishlist
  59. Opt-in for Emails
  60. Recover Password Again
  61. Opt-out for Catalog
  62. Opt-in for Catalog
  63. Product Reviews
  64. Complain about Service

*attribution to Twiss Interactive for this exhaustive list of touch points.

Filed under: Brands, Consumer , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Doing things you think will be messy

Sometimes you have to kiss a monkey to see what you cannot yet imagine.

Sometimes you have to kiss a monkey to see what you cannot yet imagine.

Great email yesterday from a Spanish gentleman who was referencing my last post about inefficiency of brainstorming. He said, “to gain the outcome you want from brainstorming, you have to get messy. Do things you haven’t done before. Kill ideas and rebuild them backwards.”

Then he said, “Sometimes you have to kiss a monkey to see what you cannot yet imagine.”

Genius. I love that.

Filed under: Innovation , ,

Innovation Antigen::Brainstorming a Waste of Time

In the last month, I have been working on an innovation antigen. I am not nearly done yet but want to share some progress here and now. This is an antigen that will help surface the need for change at the leadership level. This is not new stuff. Everyone knows companies need to be innovative. And everyone knows the typical CIO-driven organization does not have the tools, propensity or courage to invite innovation in the door. That is one problem. The other more menacing problem is that many companies feel or believe they are innovating with little or no success when they aren’t being innovative at all. This sours their appetite for continued innovation. If it hasn’t worked for them in the past, regardless of how they did it, they do not want to invite it back in to ravage their modest progress along the knowable lines of average.  In other words, they have little faith innovation can be predictable, manageable and repeatable. This I learned from www.strategyn.com.

My aim is to point to the source of innovation latency and help uncover what isn’t working. Companies of all types and sizes should be able to perform their own “innovation quality checks” by evaluating prime variables affecting positive innovation. The reality is simple. It takes a lot of time, heaps of patience and a willingness to surrender control where control has lent the most comfort in the past…at the top. In my experience, innovation is far more likely to originate in a bottom-up rather than a top down fashion.  Also, in my most recent experience, innovation is deflated by a leadership that is scared and bound by need for control and lack of confidence and curiosity. Firms who’ve made modest earnings with faith in the status quo and comfort in the pragmatic are at most risk. Here are the basic dimensions that will help you determine your company’s climate for innovation.

leaders with no followers

leaders with no followers

  • Do we have a clear strategy to innovate? This is found by asking the question: “what services and products do we offer and how much are we willing to invest to make them better, more profitable or successful?”Chances are that you do not have in place, what it takes to make better situations occur from an innovation strategy. Otherwise you would not be taking the time to read this. Adopting the right innovation strategy can be simple if you are asking yourself honest questions and supplying equally honest answers.
  • Do we have the right processes in place to realize the right innovation for us? Processes are the workflows you have adopted to achieve your desired service or product outcomes. This is where I have lost all faith in brainstorming. It is most likely a waste of your time. Brainstorming is often the “re-arrangement” of all the thoughts and ideas you already have, re-purposed in safe variants too close to what you likely already have. You have to look at more stuff, think about it harder and be willing to surrender everything you have to bring something new into its place. This is critical. You have to be willing to adopt processes that allow the act of destruction in order to create new conventions. For quickest results, try a wholesale destruction of your current process. Allow yourselves to believe that breakthroughs tend to come from a perception system (or process) that is confronted with something it doesn’t know how to interpret. In other words, kill your process early and often. Re-invent processes to innovates.
  • Do we have measurable goals? No matter how much stuff you come up with, if it isn’t aligning to a goal, it’s merely cognitive masturbation. Try to bring simple goals to the table before you do anything else. If your measurement is, “come up with something the CEO likes, the president thinks is going to work or the CIO is willing to invest in, your already screwed. Those aren’t objectively measurable and in fact, invite the cancer back in. Instead, have a test group of outside potential users use them in prototype form and see how they react. Better yet, embark on a cyclical innovation process allowing your tweaks to any innovation to test with real users over and over again, allowing you to gradually perfect your new ideas with the test group. Then show how your progressive innovation process is gaining incremental successes with real users. Then show that to the C suite.
  • Do we have people who possess innovative skills or ideas? Yes you do. You have to let them do it.
  • Do we have the right leadership? –No.

Filed under: Innovation , , , ,

Design transfusion

– reposting an article i wrote earlier on a different site–

I am keen on Marty Neumier’s new book the Designful Company because it handsomely mirrors the work I have been doing lately. I felt like the book provided me with a peer sensibility. If you design transformation for a living, you may now have your very own bible. Thanks Marty. I think this book is great and by a significant margin, it is your best.

Here are a two excerpts that really made me think:

1.) “To build an innovative culture, a company must keep itself in a perpetual state of reinvention. Radical ideas must be the norm, not the exception…Companies don’t fail because they choose the wrong course–they fail because they can’t imagine a better one.”

2.) The management model that got us here is underpowered to move us forward. Are we getting better and better at a management model that is getting wronger and wronger?

For me, working in a pure knowledge services industry, things like this have me wondering, is it right to measure what we are measuring? If the industry we are in is going to steadily become saturated (and we would be smart to hedge against rise in competitive sameness) with new stronger entrants, it will be wise for comapnies to seek competitive diferentiation more aggressively. It is no longer enough to be better.

It makes me think of the Daft Punk line, “Harder, Better, Faster, Stronger.”

When the economy sucks and you’re responsible for making several ends of the company meet, you have to think differently to stay ahead or stay alive. Sometimes companies need to transfuse to transform. They need to get the old stuff, way of thinking, processes and pragmatism out and let some new in. Why? Because things are changing. The way people interact and the way your company meets the demands of its customers is undergoing transformation. It is wise to pay close attention to this. The old stuff can bog the company down.

For the last month I have been working with a North Carolina health care insurer to help them with social media focusing on how it impacts their business. Much of my involvement in their transformation has been thinking about their organization as a body undergoing a strategic transfusion. They have most everything they need and the most talented people I have met, they just needed a change or a course of fresh, objective, outside thinking to revitalize their culture, operations and team.

Marty has also widely pointed out many diagnostics why companies are feeling the abrupt need to change. I love his list.

Here is what The Designful Company claims is happening:
• Customers are controlling the company
• Jobs are becoming avenues of self-expression
• The barriers to competition are no longer controllable
• Strangers design our products and services
• Fewer features are better
• Advertising is becoming counter-effective
• Demographics are beside the point
• Whatever you sell, you take back
• Best practices are obsolete at birth
• Meaning talks
• Money walks
• Stability is fantasy
• Talent trumps obedience
• Imagination beats knowledge
• Empathy trounces logic

I know change sucks for most but when you are in the business of helping organizations make the most strategic change happen in the most economical way, this is great. I look for more writing and interaction on this topic and I applaud Marty for sticking his neck out and writing this book. I am sure there are many six sigma blackbelts and hard core pragmatists who see this great book as having little value. We’ll see.

Filed under: General , , ,