One's Origins

In early November I placed an order for a sports related article of clothing from a retailer based in the San Francisco area.  The item was $99 and shipping was $6 for a total of $105.  I had a $75 gift certificate which would bring my total to $30.
I received the item along with the invoice indicating $105 paid with no mention of the gift certificate being applied. I called to confirm that it was applied.  The person I spoke with could not confirm one way or the other if it had been applied and agreed with me that it might not have been so he credited my charge card $75.
Last week I received the credit card bill and realized that they had indeed only charged me $30 initially than also issued the $75 credit based on the conversation to which I just referred.   (I am not sure why I did not just check the credit card activity on-line when all this was going on.)
Today, I called them to reconcile and return the $75 back that is due them.  Once I explained everything that happened, the response I received was (after a brief pause), “Well, I guess Merry Christmas!”. Apparently, I am the beneficiary of goodwill as it might have been more trouble than it was worth to try to figure out how to show the returned $75 in their systems.
Whether or not they accepted the $75 back does not change my view that this was the right thing to do.  And, I still can’t help but wonder if I should have just written this in a note and mailed them a check.  I will sleep well knowing I made the attempt to do the right thing nonetheless.  The high road paid off – it always does.
Thanks for reading. Have a great day!
Matt G.

For some time, there has been the notion that a more effective way to achieve buy-in from those impacted by an initiative is to allow them to participate in the development of the initiative.  Mounting research continues to give evidence to this idea.  Moreover, the findings also show that the degree to which the constituents’ ideas are ultimately incorporated into the final solution – in whole or in part – has much less impact on acceptance than merely allowing for the opportunity for those impacted by the outcome to voice their concerns and share their ideas.  Interestingly, every example I have been exposed to, there has never been one instance where at least some of the ideas or thoughts of the constituent body did not wind up in the end solution in some way.  (The short lesson here is valuable contributions come from all corners.  The art is to create the space to allow for these ideas to be forthcoming.)
In what I describe above is primarily thought of in the context of process formulation occurring from above and the underlings, in a corporate environment for example, being expected to fall in line/agreement/compliance, etc.
What I am witnessing in my current assignment – and I have witnessed in the past but was less aware of it – is that the impact of acceptance and buy-in works in the other direction as well.  I am presently involved in working with a non-US based pharmaceutical company in developing analytical decision-making methodologies on which they can rely to determine how to best allocate resources in keeping in line with corporate objectives.
I digress in sharing that as a career consultant, I am all too familiar with the adages around  the money spent on consultants to produce a report that no one ever uses and many might even object to – even those that hired the consultants.   The metaphorical 300 page doorstop comes to mind.
However, what I am witnessing is a greater degree of acceptance from those in higher ranks when two things are in place. First, they have to recognize the value in the effort. Second, and no less important, is that they too must be drawn into the development process.  To better describe what I am pointing to, I recently heard comments about a report produced by a consultancy that was perceived by the client as extremely underwhelming.  In this case, the consultants came in, interviewed some key people, left to put together their findings and suggestions then submitted their work product (along with the invoice of course).  While this is certainly a simplified version of the process, it underscores the lack of on ongoing engagement between client and consultant.
My more recent experiences demonstrated to me the power of upward involvement in solution acceptance.  The small consultancy with which I am contracted has, in my opinion, put this very idea into practice.  True story, we were in an information gathering session with the CEO and a few of his direct reports with a slide on the screen that was nothing more than boxes with terms and phrases that they provided.  There was nothing fancy or even symmetrical about it whatsoever.  At one point, the CEO with one arm across his chest and the other in support of his chin as if in deep thought says, “I like this slide – it’s a working slide”.  It is this kind of upward inclusion that I truly feel provides much greater chance for acceptance and implementation of the the final work product.  It is certain to be more valuable than a doorstop. And I am also certain that we will come in far under 300 pages. (Who actually reads those huge reports anyway?)
In closing, I wish to clarify that I assume no credit in the creation or appearance of such a success.  I am only grateful to have the remarkable opportunity to be a part of this process and share with you the lesson I learned from it.
Thanks for reading and have a great day!
Matt G.

There are countless articles and videos posted describing the overt differences between AT&T’s and Verizon’s approach to offering 3G access on the iPad when away from a WiFi hotspot.  This blog post focuses on the difference from the perspective of the customer experience.  The price plans for data, which while not identical, are comparable in my opinion and not a big differentiator. Also, the price points for each of the 16, 32, and 64 GB models are the same.
First, AT&T’s 3G capabilities are built into the unit and the payment model is prepaid.  That means you only pay for the months that you want to access their 3G network.  In months that you do not want 3G access, you pay nothing. There are no consequences for not using it for consecutive months nor are there fees associated with turning it back on after months of non-use.
Next, we have Verizon.  They offer iPad internet access through their network via a separate MiFi device (included in the bundled package) which is essentially a mobile hotspot.  This separate unit is about half the size of a deck of cards and receives data from Verizon’s network and provides access for up to five computers (one of them is ostensibly your iPad, but it doesn’t have to be).  This is a plus for the Verizon approach since AT&T’s 3G access is available only to the iPad with which it is integrated.
The “rub”, as I see it, is that while not bound by a contract with Verizon, you do sign up for a month to month arrangement similar to when your phone comes off contract after the obligatory one or two years.  You still pay your bill monthly for the number/service remaining active and in use (even if you don’t use it).  You can stop the MiFi sevice whenever you want. But, you will either be charged a suspension fee (barely less than the fee you pay to be active) or if you opt to not pay at all because you anticipate not using the service for a couple months you will incur a reactivation charge when you want to begin the service again.  In short, think of it as a no-contract month-to-month phone.
Additionally,  with the AT&T model, turning the service on for the months you want it is all controlled by the user right on the iPad.  If you do opt to stop Verizon’s service for months of anticipated non-need, and then start it up again, you have to call them on the phone.  It basically becomes less hassle to just pay Verizon every month even if you don’t use it.  This might come as a surprise to some people contemplating the two options as it did for me.
This is the biggest difference I see between the two approaches. AT&T’s 3G model is a pure pre-pay.  Pay for the months you plan to use their network , don’t pay when you don’t. Verizon’s model puts you on a plan that requires you to pay every month whether you use it or not, though you are not locked into a one or two year contract.  The up side is that you can use Verizon’s MiFi unit for up to five computers. (Oh, and Verizon’s network does not work in Europe.)
I hope this is helpful for some people in providing a better picture of the “customer experience” between the two options.  None of this was found in anything I read in trying to educate myself on the differences before deciding on a purchase.  I learned this after actually making purchases of both. (Thank goodness for return policies that aren’t too punishing.)
That all said, this experience has led me to proclaim myself a poster child for Barry Schwartz’s research behind his book The Paradox of Choice. Dr.  Schwartz’s thesis argues that too much choice is near toxic for consumers’ psyche and mental health.  This topic alone warrants a discussion all its own.  If so inclined, CLICK HERE to view Dr. Schwartz’s presentation on TED.
In closing, this entire dilemma completely goes away if you opt for WiFi only model and thus eliminating the need to make a decision on 3G platform.  If you’re wondering, I still haven’t decided on which is more appealing to me.  But wait, the next generation iPad will yet again have new bells and whistles. Oh, the agony of choice….
Thanks for reading.  Have a great day!
Matt

Since its debut in 2007, 22 million iPhones on the AT&T network have been sold. If the anticipated release of the iPhone from Verizon comes to fruition in early 2011 as most expect, between 8 and 9 million units are expected to be sold according to Fortune Magazine.
The reason this is being hailed as the Second Coming is mostly due to the pounding AT&T took when their network was brought to  its knees when the iPhone was first launched.  Ironically, those that complained the most (the heaviest iPhone users) were part of the problem. Before you shout at me, I realize AT&T could have been better prepared.  Nonetheless, I believe it’s naive to think that Verizon’s network won’t experience strain when the iPhone becomes available through them based on the expect volume.  Verizon networks already support the Droid and according to Fortune Magazine, the average Droid user consumes more data than the average iPhone user. (There are, however, vastly fewer Droid users than iPhone users according to Fortune.)
My point is that I don’t believe that Verizon iPhone users are going to be absolutely void of similar network issues in the beginning.  I might be wrong, but if the betting tables were open, I’d sit this one out.  Once we get some equilibrium, I expect coverage and network issues will evolve into a non-differentiator between the two carriers.
CLICK HERE for the Fortune Magazine article to learn more on the evolution of the relationship between Apple and Verizon
Thanks for reading. Have a great day!
Matt
(Disclosure: Author has iPhone 4 on AT&T network and has been an AT&T customer for over ten years.)

This may be bit of a profound if not an outrageous suggestion in the title in this blog post.  The notion is the phenomena known as servant leadership.  I first heard of this several years ago at a previous employer.  Part of the review process for mangers was the idea of “leaders who serve”.  While I certainly agreed with the concept, I did not fully appreciate how much ahead-of-the-times this thinking was.  Nowadays, servant leadership is becoming used more and more.  In short, it espouses the necessity for leaders and others in a position over groups or organizations have an obligation to support those that report to them.  Without this support, the team or organization will in most cases not realize long term sustainable success.  This post presents two very real examples from my experiences of how it works.
I completed the Executive MBA program at Villanova University from August 2005 through May 2007.  Of the many things I learned (and I learned a lot!) much of it was not listed anywhere in the program literature or curriculum. Nor would it be found in any of the syllabi.  This blog post focuses on one particular phenomenon that I plan to put into practice as often as possible.  As a backdrop, I will highlight that this program provided much opportunity for team based assignments. To support this, each class is grouped into ‘learning cells’ of between four and seven students.  I digress in saying that I believe this team structure is in line with our social make-up as gregarious creatures.  I also feel it better represents real life experiences both in and outside the business environment.
During our first module (otherwise thought of as a semester) we had an Economics course. The final assignment was not a pencil and paper exam (thank goodness). Rather, each group was tasked with presenting the class and professor a demonstration supporting what had been learned during the module.  Our learning cell decided to do a skit based on the hit TV show, American Idol.  I won’t go into great detail other than we basically had two people volunteer to lend their vocal talent (I use the word ‘talent’ quite loosely here) and the other three in our group served as the panel complete with our own Simon Cowell, Paula Abdul, and Ryan Seacrest.  Incidentally, if you’re wondering I was one of the performers and I’ll stop there…
The outcome of this presentation was a spectacular success by two notable measures. First, we were one of the few – and perhaps the first group – to receive a standing ovation (for creativity and guts rather than for the singing I am certain).  Second, the professor said he would email each group’s grades to each respective group member along with his thoughts and/or a brief explanation.  The members of our learning cell received the following in a short email, “Grade A – No explanation necessary”.
During our fifth and last module (the composition of the learning cells were shuffled a bit) we were assigned a similar team task for a Business Ethics course.  We were to provide a presentation demonstrating our learning from the course.  Our learning cell chose to perform a skit modeled after the dramatic courtroom scene in the movie A Few Good Men with Tom Cruise, Demi Moore and Jack Nicholson.  Again, we had another resounding success with high accolades from all three professors who sat in observation of the presentations.
I, along with all the learning cells with which I participated (and I highly suspect about everyone else in the class) had many other success experiences in the program.  For me, the two I described above were among the most notable. The shared attribute of both of them was that there was never any one single person in charge as we might commonly think of what it means to be “in charge”.  We had of course, as with all team assignments, elected one person to be the “in charge” person of record.  The distinction here is that this role was merely a formality.  We all approached the tasks as equals and the so-called “in charge” person was just as much a servant to the benefit of the group as were all other team members.  If anyone outside the group were to observe us in action as we prepared for the delivery of these presentations, they would likely have had no idea who was “in-charge”.
It is so meaningful for me to share these experiential observations with you as I deeply believe that maintaining perspective is so important when each of us is given the role of being “in charge”.  The importance of the “in charge” person to the success of the team is no more or less than that of the other team members.  “In Charge” should more aptly be thought of as “In Service”.
Thanks for reading. Have a great day!
Matt

According to popular dictionary entries, erudition can be characterized as “having or showing great knowledge or learning”. I am much more fond of the characterization of an erudite provided by Nassim Taleb in The Black Swan (Random House, Copyright 2007, 2010 Nassim Nicholas Taleb).  Mr. Taleb describes an erudite as”…signaling genuine intellectual curiosity. It accompanies an open mind and the desire to probe the ides of others.  Above all, an erudite can be dissatisfied with his own knowledge, and such dissatisfaction is a wonderful shield against Platonicity*, the simplifications of the five minute manger, or the philistinism, overspecialized scholar.”  By this description of erudition, I assert myself as an erudite.  Mr. Taleb also adds, “Indeed, scholarship without erudition can lead to disaster.”
After nearly 15 years as a consultant of one form or another, I still find myself longing for newness in just about every aspect of my life.  I am rich with analytical ability and yet I thoroughly enjoy helping others reach whatever it is that inspires and fulfills them.  I find myself more and more relishing in the softer side of leadership.
Over the past few months, I began to explore the possibility that a Ph.D. be my path to deeper self fulfillment.  I marvel at all I read about the behaviors and conditions behind why we make the decisions in life that we do.  Many researchers and authors have already given us much fodder to stimulate thinking.  I was beginning to wonder if my contributions existed in background unearthing new knowledge as well.
I have had some amazing conversations with many academics, professors and other Ph.Ds. Their collective insight has been amazing!  My key take-aways are that as a Ph.D. candidate you learn to amuse yourself.  What is meant by this is that your inquisitive nature drives you to explore new things. A plus for me here as I have oft enjoyed amusing myself.  I also learned that along the continuum of knowledge, where at one end it is created and at the other, it is common among the masses.  A lot happens to transfer knowledge from non-existing to commonly known.  The Ph.D. mindset more often than not (like everything else, there are exceptions) spends nearly all its time at the beginning of the continuum.  Just to the right of that there is compilation of the new knowledge. Next we have dissemination and application and finally common acceptance.
After much thought, I believe that compliation and dissemination are where my aspirations lie.  Though I do find myself perpetually questioning all that is around me including my own knowledge.  Who knows, I might pursue the Ph.D. after all.  I can’t wait to learn how all this unfolds.
(*Platonicity: a philosophical term usually used to refer to the idea of realism regarding the existence of universals after the Greek philosopher Plato.)

We are half way finished our tour (thankfully over the half of the elevation gain is behind us). As a team, so far, we have raised just short of $150,000. About 3/4 of goal! This is amazing and we are very excited. Many of my friends and family have been very supportive and for that I am grateful beyond words. If you have not yet had the opportunity to do so, please check out my pledge page at http://bit.ly/dAqDg0. Also. Updates are available on our blog at http://bit.ly/cGN1vH. Thanks again all. Be well.

I can’t help but to often reflect on this Shakespearean quote. “Man, proud man, drest in a little brief authority, most ignorant of what he’s most assur d, glassy essence, like an angry ape, plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven, as make the angels weep.”
I am in the middle of two books on the topic of human motivation. One was written in 1993 titled “Punished by Rewards” authored by Alfie Kohn.  It was a landmark publication at the time if its release and today it is just as appropriate for evoking  thought on how the use of rewards to manipulate desired behavior often backfire – so to does the threat of punishment to discourage unwanted behavior.  This applies to children and adults alike.  Indeed the likely reason it applies to adults is because rewards and punishment were so pervasive in our childhood.
The second book is “Drive” by Daniel Pink. Mr. Pink points to several other research studies beyond the work of Mr Kohn that show we in fact are supplying employees with misguided motivational gimmicks that simply do not provide the deeper inner-drive to excel and as a result do not deliver the real long-term results we seek.
I have also recently read Samuel Culbert’s “Get Rid of the Performance Review”  While Mr. Culbert only touches on the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivators, he does offer very practical suggestions to strengthening the bond between supervisor and subordinate.
Returning to the quote by Shakespeare with which I began this post, in short I offer as a challenge to all professionals who operate in the capacity of managing others that you view your relationship more as a partnership.  This opens the door to a greater level of trust between the two of you.  I also will postulate that if you hire someone whom you feel requires micro-management, are you not from the onset questioning your own hiring capabilities?  The much more nefarious scenario would be that the hiring person seeks someone to control.

I believe we broaden our view of the world by educating ourselves and keeping an ever open mind to the notion that what we believe to be true is only true for us and only in that moment. Education for me (and I certainly do not mean the system known as education but rather the activity known as learning) is analogous to the improvements in technology in digital cameras. We go from telephoto to wide angle to take in more of the landscape of life, and we also increase our resolution or pixel count so we have much greater clarity. Now, to return to the lexicon of pre-digital photography, our pictures our developed by the crucial art of putting language around the we we see the world so that we may effectively communicate with other people.
To return to my opening sentence, no two photographs, even taken with the same camera, are ever completely identical.