"The phrase 'time is money' is an insult to time." - Unknown Citibank Advertising Agency

This is interesting, its proactive and fundamental! I bet the individual who coined the phrase "Time is money" was either an investor, accountant, a strategist? I can't blame the originator only because the only method we ever learn when comparing multiple things together is to assign monetary value to the comparative elements.

Talent Management is a Competitive Advantage

I am a strong believe in a robust talent management process. I will lay my hands on any article/s or books that discuss cases and strategies on the subject. I have liked several of them over the years and have applied and prospered from their knowledge in many of my endeavors. Recently I I came across one such article on FastCompany - Retaining Younger Workers in the Workplace.

The article provided a perspective on myths most organizations harbor about younger employees. Not too long ago there was a book in the same subject area by the name Generations at Work by Ron Zemke.

Over the years I realized there was something common and distinctly missing from most literature on the subject. They all talk about some of the same challenges, the same set of solutions, they all have frameworks and models, that are presented as a company wide program.

My take is we need a Meta Framework not a framework itself! A second order solution, one that fits above an existing model (clearly some of the models are good, but not executed aptly in my view):

1. One size does not fit all!
2. Constant evolution
3. Feedback & Feedforward.
   

Talent Management programs need to be unique - One size does not fit all!
In addition to the generational differences we have significant regional and cultural differences. Just within the US, people in the North East are significantly different in thought and philosophies about work, life than the Mid Westerners and the West Coasters. The values placed in organization, rewards, speed of action and culture are eons apart even between these large unstructured segments. Yet companies take the principles from a HBS program or a McKinsey Quarterly article or a think tank or a best seller book and apply in broad brush strokes independent of the company, its location, its peoples background and history. We need to invest and INVEST HEAVILY to understand the culture first!

Talent Management programs are slow to adapt - Accelerate evolution
In the internet and mobile age, information spreads at a staggering pace. That applies to Talent management models that work and ones that fail. The unfortunate part is we don't experiment enough both in quality and quantity by reinvesting in the feedback we receive. Archaic models stick around for long periods in time because people don't measure the results of the stimulus or have deliberately chosen to ignore the signals. In addition organizational alignment, structures, processes and rewards are usually among the last areas for market research and testing.

Talent Management programs are not collaborative - They are all prescriptive
The most critical flaw I have noticed the cases, perspectives and implementation of research is still the nature and intent of program execution. Most programs tend to be prescriptive, requiring the talent pool to be boxed in one reward and recognition system or the other. None are setup for a active feedback and feedforward processes. This is not a direct evolution argument as much as it is knowing what matters to the talented individual who is being incented into delivering consistent top performance while contributing to the companies strategic long term objectives and goals.

Capabilities

Yesterday I came across a interesting article in the Science Journal Section of WSJ - Scientists Using Maps Of Genes for Therapies Are Wary of Profiling. James Watson the Nobel Laureate for his work with Francis Crick on the Double Helix was deprecated for his position on eugenics. There have been a lot of new discoveries and updates in gene mapping that are raising eyebrows. The article blatantly acknowledged the lack of maturity of our species in expressing ourselves in words.

I started writing this essay because the WSJ reminded me of a recent experience. I had embarked on a knowledge management effort... I did the classic - talked about the opportunity to the stakeholders, the intangible side of KM, the process and the rewards. At the end of it I initiated a number of tasks to capture the tacit knowledge and codify it into documents, images, sounds but I quickly realized I could never capture the mind of the individual. There is clearly a LOT MORE to the human mind than just the data and information store. It is the process of transforming that information into knowledge, the multiple dimensions across which the mind is capable of thinking, the associations the mind makes, evaluates and processes the associations into thoughts, ideas until it delivers it into words. Not to get into the neurology of data and knowledge transformation but I was convinced that 'capabilities building' is a motivation more than the physical act of capturing and systematizing it.

I guess capturing knowledge is a cultural process. One that includes the steps in understanding how everyone else may be thinking and then knowing what they know and how they use it. The last step is the system!

“Damn Right” this is Serious!

Talk about REAL, BOLD and somewhat BRAZEN but truly AUTHENTIC. This morning in the MediaPost was an article on Canadian Club Whisky’s new Campaign – Damn Right!

"Damn Right Your Dad Drank It."
"Your Mom Wasn't Your Dad's First,"
"Your Dad Was Not a Metrosexual"
"Your Dad Never Got a Pedicure."

Provocative and pugnacious! Cheers to Jim Beam and BBDO.

Martin Lindstrom I disagree!

Ad Age - The Curious Misnomer of 'Global' Brands - Yesterday I came across an article in MediaPost that linked to a post by Martin Lindstrom of AdAge. The article was an absolute antithesis to the concept of a BRAND. It gave me another reason to question the "PROMISE" of Publications like AdAge?

The basis of Mr. Lindstrom's article was localization of brands and the absence of a true global brands, given their adaptation to local cultures. I wish to ask Mr. Lindstrom what he considers a "BRAND"?

To me and in my understanding most marketers believe a the simplest level a "BRAND" is not much more than a "TRUST (brand promise)" and a "VISUAL (Logo)". As long as the local execution of a brand preserves the promise and the logo it is in keeping with the equity the brand represents! So who cares if Coca Cola has more than 30 different regional flavors for coke? Who cares if Mamma Mia has unique regional gestures as part of their performance & ensemble varies? They still stand for the same exact thing, their promise! Airlines are a fabulous example of global brands they go to the extent of preserving even the cabin aroma independent of the origin and destination of the flight (Mr. Lindstrom's article on Singapore arilines).

May be Ad Age needs to get back to basics to reevaluate what they mean by a brand and more so what they promise?

Does 'Social Bookmarks' have anything to do with trust?

Not to philosophize or anything but I was wondering what is trust? I was on a website that had the classic social bookmarking links the usual suspects - MSN, Yahoo, Digg, Technorati, Del.icio.us, etc. as I scanned through the images my mind wandered to the idea of why should anyone want to check the links I have bookmarked? Other than myself or the government as part of some unknown NSA tracking scheme? The simplest answer I could come up with was "Birds of a feather, flock together". Someone who enjoys reading my essays may share the same passion and fascination for information and as such my bookmarks could offer him or her that elusive link to a site that will open a treasure of knowledge?

It took me 125 words, 575 characters to describe a simple concept in "trust" or structure in chaos. What is the market for this trust, especially since most social bookmarking is not monetized? How does one assess convergence in trust? Shouldn't trust take investment to build? Who is measuring and tracking this investment? Is this what the community refers to as "Engagement"?

I guess I am in doubt? So is social bookmarking?

Creativity & Change Management

For many years as I trudged through my corporate career I thought what differentiated me was my creativity. My ability to think different in working around the issues that lead to the doors of corporate glory. I equated my creativity to my entrepreneurship, my ability to make things work for me but often ended up taking a few steps ahead and multiple steps behind. My solutions were often too complicated for my managers, colleagues and my reports to understand, not to toot my own horn but I thought of it as my genius that left most people baffled (not scared, just baffled).

After many rounds of trying, learning and trying again I realized a very fundamental precept (Many thanks to my mentors for accelerating this learning); In a corporate role it is ones ability to make change, manage change, communicate change, enroll sponsors, engage managers and deploy change that is measured and rewarded. On the other end as the system recognizes your ability to align and drive the change it is creativity that starts to take center stage. Leading right back into making the new and different entrepreneurial solution to be accepted, adopted and deployed.

It is interesting to hear the same stories from my protege. He thinks he is creative and notices obvious opportunities that others miss and yet his suggestions are bounced off deaf ears. Are organizations just not smart enough or are they lacking leaders that have the heart to drive change?

Adtunes.com

Adtunes.com - I came across the site through a post on ANA - Mestros. I remember those days when our consumer affairs department received calls to help identify the consumer the music in one of the copy streams?

The site is amazing and so was the post. I wonder if there is a way to measure ROI off the queries on the site and also an association with share of mind and recall/decay of the creative?

Surreal or Serious?

I had a great day at the museum the other day, saw artwork by my favorite artist Salvador Dali. That evening when I retired to my study to ruminate over the day I had a strange thought, like always Dali had left me thinking about the artwork and what may have been running through his mind when he painted his masterpieces. The idea of penetrating into his mind was both trying and puzzling, some of his early surrealistic work is somewhat scary.

I can't believe how many times I felt like that when I see products on shelves across the country and around the world. We create products and then find a market for them. Somewhat like the patrons experience standing in front of a surreal artwork in the museum. It is one thing to be the first to market, communicate a value proposition and initiate a dialog BUT it is a whole different thing to have target consumer segment, identify her needs and develops products and solutions she will embrace. Fortunately there is more science than art to modern marketing. It is a repeatable process unlike art where each piece of art is a new start.

Interestingly a scientific process has posterity to it where as art could be a serious gamble. One could end up at the Museum or on the aisle to be painted over?