The Best of Both Worlds [2008]
Let me quote myself for a moment:
"In a fluid, uncertain world of endless possibilities you have two choices:
- Go with the flow – adapt fully to the changing tides and be who they want you to be
- Be who you are – find the customers, opportunities and actions that work best for you"
It’s as relevant to individuals as to organisations. Some people – social chameleons – mould themselves to the situation they’re in; others are gloriously themselves wherever they are.
Likewise, some organisations don’t even try to reach out to customers who aren’t like them, while others are spectacularly diverse and adaptive.
Both strategies work. And both strategies don’t work. The question is: under what circumstances? And how far is too far?
The world is full of opportunity. Rising expectations, expanding horizons and the increasing complexity of life make that inevitable. There’s never any shortage of new knowledge, issues and tasks for government agencies or not for profit organisations to take up.
And there’s plenty of opportunity for companies – large or small – to enter new markets, expand niches, extend product lines or enhance their offerings.
But how do you decide what the best options are?
I would argue that in such a fluid environment you do this first and foremost by recognising what you are and what you aren’t. Not trying to be all things to all people, but specialising intelligently.
Deciding which customers or stakeholders you’re most compatible with and working out why the others don't fit so well.
Discovering which of your qualities and values fit best with the social or economic environment you find yourself in and emphasising them.
For example – take Windshift. Who knows why you read these newsletters, but the words that keep recurring in the feedback I get are “eclectic”, and “insightful”. An identity to be proud of. And since I set up the Windshift network to attract what Karen Walker calls “people like us”, it follows that you probably have some of these qualities too.
So don't expect to see Windshift doing brand monitors and CRM studies:- we do exploratory research, not business as usual. And don't expect to be interested in the Trajectories system unless you're ready for some fresh new insights into your organisation.
Actually it’s a shame these three words don’t lend themselves to some pithy acronym we could use to start a social revolution – like LOHAS or GRUPS . Eii sounds like someone just stood on your toe.
An organisation’s identity is really a bottom line issue. I’m not talking here about the cost of logos and livery, I’m referring to the value of orderly expansion, the revenue you get by extending lucrative niches or the premium of a well-managed brand.
Equally, straying too far out of your comfort zone, going after the wrong sorts of customers or failing to recognise trends that matter can really hurt profitability.
This isn’t about size.You don't have to be small to have a strong sense of identity or a clearly defined mission. Even New Zealand’s largest company Fonterra is a specialist rather than a generalist.
And the most successful large international organisations often have quite distinctive ways of doing things that just happen to work in all sorts of situations. Virgin, Microsoft, Google, GE – you know the list.
Unfortunately in the world of the public company where there’s so much short-term pressure to grow by picking winners, executives often try to back ALL the horses just to make sure they don’t miss out. Like steroid use it’s a strategy that may work in the short term, but it destroys in the long term.
People who work in such environments talk of panicked decisions and increasing distrust as leaders lurch from one possibility to another, bound by such tight time frames that they simply can’t wait until the better strategy works.
Almost inevitably, organisations that are too indiscriminate end up with no clear sense of direction or cohesion or spirit.
But organisations that stick too rigidly to what they know or how they see the world also risk destruction - through stagnation rather than exhaustion.
They may well have a brilliant specialisation, or a particular way of doing things, but if the broader environment turns against them, they’ll probably be the last to recognise it. Imagine how easy it is for these introverted organisations to be overtaken by more adventurous competitors.
Even those who set out to pick winners can be blind-sided by a challenger they didn’t see.
So what’s the answer? Simply put, it’s to aim for the best of both worlds, the point where you have a clear sense of your own identity and an equally lucid view of what the world around you is offering.
To know who you are and can be and who you aren’t and will never be. Having an enduring and resilient point of difference makes it so much easier to discriminate between the opportunities that are never going to work for you and those that will work brilliantly, now and in the future..
I am very attracted to the idea of seeking the best of both worlds and of deliberately aiming to balance opposing imperatives.
I think in many spheres, from corporate citizenship to risk management, brand development to workplace relations, pulling together the best aspects of competing value systems is a useful thing to do.
I don’t know how many times in my time as a consultant I have responded to the question: "should we have this or that?" with the words “you need both”. But it’s a lot.
Unfortunately I also say it to myself when I go shopping.
Cheers
Jill
Jill Caldwell is Director of Windshift Communications Ltd. Click Here to contact Jill directly This is a free monthly newsletter provided to direct subscribers only. No further use is made of subscriber information. [Copyright Windshift Communications Ltd 2006]
Distribute [unchanged] with impunity. Quote with attribution.
. . .aim for the best of both worlds, the point where you have a clear sense of your own identity and an equally lucid view of what the world around you is offering..
