When things get stressful, we often throw out phrases automatically to try and get beyond the issues for the moment without really doing what is right. But often these phrases don’t do much to help in the moment and don’t’ solve the true issues either. There are a few sayings that we hear in business all of the time that are about as ineffective as parents yelling at their children, “do it because I said so.” Even worse, these sayings in business cause people to make poor decisions and undermine their own leadership potential by repeating these phrases without really thinking about what they mean.
One of the most popular and most damaging of these sayings is demanding that people need to do “more with less.” This one is being used a lot these days because of the tough economic cycle. The most common use is to try to motivate employees to stretch further when budget and headcount cuts have reduced resource levels. The problem this causes is that people won’t have an ability to get it all done. But without a focus on priorities, each person may select different priorities across different parts of the organization. People are spread too thin and can’t finish any single project or task with quality and diligence. The result is what we refer to as corporate A.D.D. and it is a root cause of poor execution.
In our book, BIG Ideas to BIG Results, we suggest a replacement to this old and favored saying of doing “more with less.” We suggest that when budget or headcount reductions are necessary to first say, “we need to do more ON less,” meaning more resources, more staffing, and more focus on fewer initiatives. The result of this approach is a prioritization of the most important and high impact initiatives and getting the new levels of resources focused for delivering results on those top priorities.
Mark Hurd at HP is currently showing how this is done. A recently announced adjustment to their R&D programs is going to reduce a portfolio of 150 projects down to some “big bets” that number just 20-30 at the most. Their goal is to continue at similar resource levels but reduce the number and scope of the projects to for greater market impact. Rather than spreading resources thin, the idea is to concentrate resources on selective projects. In our book we outline another example of an entire company that was struggling to grow after reaching a few hundred million in sales through three business units. After reducing to just one business unit and delivering more depth of solutions to customers in just that one market segment, they were able to grow to multiple billions in revenues.
There also some very informative and clever blog posts to help you think through setting priorities and keeping focused. This will save you from having to search on your own.
Slacker Managerhttp://www.slackermanager.com/2007/10/7-habits-of-highly-ineffective-managers.html: Seven Habits of Highly Ineffective Managers
Management Crafthttp://managementcraft.typepad.com/management_craft/2008/01/take-time-out-o.html: A guest blog with Susan Reid - great tactical tips for setting priorities every day
How to Change the Worldhttp://blog.guykawasaki.com/2007/07/how-to-write-a-.html: Guy Kawasaki interviews Tim Berry on Buisness Plans (see question #2)
Tim Berryhttp://blog.timberry.com/2008/03/are-you-just-pu.html: Are You Just Putting Out Fires?
Seth Godinhttp://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2008/03/managing-urgenc.html: Managing Urgencies
Next time you are on the spot and are asked to reduce staffing and budget levels, don’t fall into the automatic excuse and mentality of simply demanding “more with less” from your team. Or perhaps you simply want to take a team that isn't executing well and improve results, take a new angle. Take the responsibility to step up as a leader, determine the top priorities, and realign resources at the right levels that will ensure success and the ability to get from Big Ideas to Big Results and let's get rid of an outdated and ineffective business phrase for good.
