Archiv der Kategorie: English

Entrepreneurship in lockstep

Are these the rules of the certifications or the artificially created Compliance, which increasingly burden entrepreneurial action nowadays? Or are these potentially the employees on all levels that prove patience, do not offend and realize slowly the Peter’s principle? Stimuli for new approaches should be delivered by science, consultants or best-practice. However, they introduce again and again the same for all. State-of-the-art software generates ever more similar cars for automakers. The same target groups are provided by a few, specialized agencies. Ready-made ERP systems lead to more and more similar procedures. Despite the continuous outcomes, certified project managers are still preferred instead of capable leader personalities. Entrepreneurs reuse the business models that are already established in the market, in order to make nothing wrong. The outsourcing caravan follows the swarm – first China, then India, now Africa. Is this not entrepreneurship in lockstep?

gleichschritt

Today, it would be difficult for Henry Ford to realize his ideas – too much national regimentation, exuberant bureaucracy, actively obstructing interest groups. The Ford Model T, that was available in any color, as long as it was black, would not receive MOT approval. Cartel authorities would nip any bundling of enterprises in the bud. Innovative ideas must be promptly published in the interest of the shareholder protection. Today’s managers are not able to act entrepreneurially, even if they wanted. After years of standardization, the responsible people know behind which arguments to hide.

  • Cobbler, stick to your trade
    An obviously pragmatic approach is the focus on the core business. The actual tasks that contribute at most to the corporate success or that the customers associate especially with the enterprise constitute the relevant business. This you can see at the production depth. While Ford reached in the beginning nearly 100% creation of value, the production depth in the automotive area sank until today on average to 20%. Thus, the cars are actually developed and manufactured by the suppliers. With this division of labor, the enterprises gave up their originally comprehensive power. Eventually this affects even the innovative ness that is handed over to the suppliers. That way the shoemaker degenerates to a 20-percent nerd, who only sews the shoes, pack them into a box and place them on the market. On a long-term basis other specialists can even do it better. With the last 20% then the enterprise will also dissolve.
  • Who does, what everybody is doing, remains everybody
    The new swarm approaches suggest that you can use the knowledge of others without expenditure. Since many enterprises have already sold their silver in the interest of the shareholder values, shifted jobs abroad by outsourcing and have reduced over the years personnel, the knowledge of the remaining employees is the last asset that can be exploited. With the strategy of swarm intelligence one or the other got the idea to open these economical resources. Customers and employees are invited to express their ideas. This is not about growing knowledge, but siphoning off the existing ideas. What is forgotten here is the fact that swarm intelligence creates highly redundant knowledge. It still must be separated entrepreneurially the useful from the noise. Goethe already wrote: “And here, poor fool, I stand once more, No wiser than I was before.” Additionally this this source of knowledge offers also the other companies similar insights. You will not be ahead of the pack, but you will fall in the same black hole of disadvantages. And what is above all difficult: The competitors remain abreast, since they foster each other.
  • He who follows in the footsteps of others, never leaves a footprint of his own
    The advocates of standard solutions expect savings by distributing the costs on multiple shoulders. At the end of the last millennium the tsunami of today’s standard software built up. In the companies a clew of self-developments had been formed over time that could be maintained only with difficulties by own means. In the meantime the clew is back again, only that it is now knotted by the software makers. And again egalitarian approaches prevent the advantage that you could obtain by your own engagement. If you look at simple applications, like HR-systems, the solutions only differ in the logo. After the initial upside of the ERP system is already past, we notice meanwhile more and more, in what expensive hole we landed. The software provider determines, when, which release to be used – with all consequences for the internal interfaces. The Gordian knot becomes even tighter. Who can now afford the development or introduction of another solution? And what is especially harmful – nobody is ready for entrepreneurial improvisations. The manager is safe, since the decision for the standard solution is the right decision, because everybody uses it.

The whole thing reminds of socialist countries with their business thinking – always the same, no risk, not being noticeable, not harming the community, sticking to the rules etc. You can see this in nowadays Compliance. You always had to adhere to the laws, but however now many practice anticipatory obedience. After all the consequences of courageous acting are no longer clear. It is the same as with the bonsai method that was published in the 90s – nip any sprouting engagement in the bud.

Bottom line: Today’s entrepreneurs resemble a company of soldiers, who drill in the yard. No one quits the generally accepted way and give something new a chance. They forget thereby that this adaptive behavior would not be possible without the spirit of innovation of the previous founding fathers and pioneers, who made the current enterprises. In the established enterprises wild ducks, who would be able to create something new, have only little elbow space in order to make an impact. For making sure that nobody recognizes it, the leaders hide behind the core business, the swarm approaches and generally accepted solutions. This is entrepreneurship in lockstep.

Batch processing – memory of the future

An important reason for the introduction of writing 6500 years ago was, besides religious and ritual reasons as well as writing chronicles, the administration of lists and tables in the context of bookkeeping. In those days there were certainly moments, in which the scriveners could not perform their tasks in a timely matter and created that way piles of unfinished tasks. In this case the employees had to invent accelerated transactions, in order to process the piles. Even if there were no electronic data processing at that time, with no doubt they already had invented the batch processing.

papierstapel

On the mainframes of today the batch processes are running over night, which transfer the accrued data of the day into the respective systems and databases. If the night is not long enough, the appropriate batch window must be expanded by additional computer capacities. The processing follows thereby different patterns.

  • First come, first serve
    In medieval times strict grinding rules were defined, in order to prevent fiddles. Until today this rule provides fair handling for requests that are submitted one after the other. The sequence results from the entry. The pile grows and the affairs are processed from bottom up.
  • Nip the things in the bud
    The advantage of preferring the last entry comes from the fact that the file already lies on the table and thus does not have to be sorted. As long as you have sufficient resources, you can avoid this way any piles. Since this leads to a waste of capacities, if there are no orders, this approach is only economical, if it saves costs of pile administration or storage space.
  • Burning issues
    Already Eisenhower was concerned with the question, what should be first dealt with. The matrix that was named after him, recommends to immediately take care of the urgent things or at least to delegate them to competent employees. The sequence depends on the expiration date of the task. For this purpose you need a good overview of the due dates in the pile.
  • The more danger, the more honor
    In this case you engage with the most extensive tasks first. They can stem from the value of the result, from the required effort for processing or the number of involved people. Naturally they take especially long. With the earliest possible beginning, the probability rises to finish timely. For this purpose the procedures must be evaluated according to their extent and then be sorted in descending order.
  • Many pennies make a dollar
    In this case you emphasize on the tasks with the fewest extent first. Also here, as within the last bullet point, the importance is derived from the value of the result, from the required effort for processing or the number of involved people. These tasks will probably need less effort. By the preferential processing of these tasks the pile quickly gets significantly smaller. The procedures are also evaluated according to their extent, but then be sorted in ascending order.

In data processing the data are not processed with one of the above procedures, but after the logical relationships of the databases and files. The goal is to have a consistent volume of data the next day. The height of the pile depends thereby on the IT for collecting the procedures. Appropriate rules bring the data already into a format that can be processed faster, when they are typed in.

In the agile projects of today you use piles, the so-called Backlogs, likewise. Here you simply collect the tasks that are not yet realized. The Product Owner, i.e. a decisive representative of the field, determines after a sprint, which tasks are developed in the next sprint. A sprint is a two to four-week work cycle, in which the developers have full control of the conversion.

Thus, the night window for the completion of batch runs corresponds to a sprint. The substantial difference is that the batch window must complete all planned procedures, since otherwise the consistency of the data is no longer secured. If a task is not finished in a sprint, you can use the subsequent sprint or put it pack into the backlog.

Bottom line: Batch processing was always needed. The difference results from processing and the sorting of the piles – FIFO, LIFO, FEFO, HIFO, and LOFO. In the context of the agile organization the Product Owner makes the decision, but they also still follow the same patterns. That makes the batch processing a memory of the future.