When I wrote about smart and stupid innovation, I cited the 2006 Ig Nobel award for the Mosquito that “emits a high frequency siren-like noise that is painful to the ears of teens and those in their early 20s, but inaudible to adults.” It was commercialized for sale as a “teen repellant” by Compound Security Systems, successful in the UK and was starting to ship to the US.

Then I read how kids had co-opted it to make a ringtone that adults don’t hear, so they could leave their cell phones on during school.

Now, a step further, instead of a teen repellent, it’s being used as a teen attractor, as described in a tiny blurb in BW’s UpFront, quoted here in it’s entirety.

“Yum! Brands’ KFC will use high-frequency sound—not to repel the much publicized rodents that recently plagued one of its New York outlets, but to appeal to young people. The company is deploying the Mosquito Ringtone popular with teen mobile users to sell its boneless chicken bucket. (The tone can’t be heard by most over-30s.) The TV ads will emit the noise, with KFC giving free chicken buckets to the first 1,000 viewers who go online and say just when in the ad the tone played.”

Revolution—evolution. Now one can only wonder if its original function still works.

My post yesterday brought an interesting question from Dan L. in Boston. He said, “Why in the world would any manager do anything that would reduce the options available to identify a solution needed in his/her group, especially a CEO?”

So, I paraphrased five reasons that I’ve actually heard, in one form or another, from top managers who talked about being out of the box, but really wanted to stay in it.

• Think outside—as long as it doesn’t make me uncomfortable.
• Don’t challenge the status quo in a manner that scares me.
• Be creative within parameters I can understand.
• If you want to breach the box, do it my way.
• We’ve never done it that way.

At first, Dan was incredulous, then he really thought about what’s behind each of the five reasons, and he understood what anybody who really listens to the thoughts behind people’s words comes to know.

Out of the box is about change, and change is scary—for everybody.

But it’s not about being scared, it’s about how you choose to handle it.

That’s right, choose.

Your responses, your choice.

Think about it this weekend.

Then, when you get to the office Monday and one of your people has a great idea that scares the dickens out of you, consciously choose how you respond—knowing that no matter how you choose the ripples of that choice will spread and impact not only your future, but also the future of your people and your company.

The following was sent to me by a colleague, Olessya Borneman, Marketing Manager at Russian outsourcer NTR Lab. Although she’s in Tomsk (Siberia) and I’m in Washington State (near Portland, OR) we’ve been working together and chatting for a couple of years.

We’ve unusual solutions for a number of our projects, and had some great discussions on what “out of the box” really means philosophically, as well as practically.

“Miki, This logic problem is a moral/ethical dilemma that was actually used as part of a job application by a company here.

Situation:
You are driving down the road in your car on a wild, stormy night, when you pass by a bus stop and you see three people waiting for the bus: An old lady who looks as if she is about to die. An old friend who once saved your life. The perfect partner you’ve been dreaming of.

Which one would you choose to offer a ride to, knowing that there could only be one passenger in your car?

Dilemma:

You could pick up the old lady, because she is going to die, and thus you should save her first. Or you could take the old friend because he once saved your life, and this would be the perfect chance to pay him back. However, you may never be able to find your perfect mate again.

What creative solutions can you think of? Take a moment to think before continuing.

The candidate who was hired (out of 200 applicants) gave this answer. “I would give the car keys to my old friend and let him take the lady to the hospital. I would stay behind and wait for the bus with the partner of my dreams.”

Olessya ended with this comment, “Sometimes, we gain more if we are able to give up our stubborn thought limitations. Never forget to Think Outside of the Box.”

So true. I wrote my view of boxes last fall, it’s a good post, but the comments are even better!

From first call through close, personality and MAP are major components of sales, but people change and customer contacts move on, often leaving a dormant account. Should you shift an account with potential, especially one that has bought before, to another salesperson?

I don’t believe any company can afford to lose business because of personality differences. So, when it’s the company’s financial health at stake, I really don’t think you have a choice.

Actually, how you do it is of far greater import than whether you do it. You want it to be a winning situation for everybody, not a censure of the “guilty party.”

The first action is to make it company policy that once an account has been dormant for X time it goes into a pool from which other salespeople can take it. The policy needs to apply equally to everybody—exceptions can only lead to bad feelings within your sales team. (If your true goal is to “encourage” someone to resign, there are better approaches that can minimize the detrimental side effects of turnover.)

The best way to make this work is to change the mindset of losing to one of winning, but, above all, the process must be fair, not just in perception, but, in fact.

Start by discussing it with your entire sales team, and use their input to determine metrics for what constitutes “dormant.” These metrics should be universal and apply to both the current account holder and for the new holder. For example, depending on how you define your pipeline, one approach would be to say that if it’s out of the pipeline for X months it’s dormant.

It also pays to incentivize the sales people to let go sooner and in a positive way. Positive, because even if the account isn’t actively producing revenue that salesperson is likely to have valuable intelligence on the three Ps—players, policies and politics—of the account that would benefit the new holder.

By far, the best way to achieve a truly positive handoff is through vested self-interest. Create a viable financial incentive, based on the first sale, to encourage the handoff. Strengthen their interest by adding a small accelerator if the account yields a sale in X time.

Be sure not to take that incentive money out of the usual sales commission. If you do, it will act as a disincentive to the new rep and slow down, or even defeat, your main purpose—to generate revenue from dormant (dead) accounts.

For those of you who don’t know, I earn my keep coaching CEOs and senior execs in MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™). Coaching covers a multitude of actions and interplay depending on the parameters set at the start. I do my best to stay flexible to my clients’ needs, which are a microclimate of changing topics, and I really do enjoy the subject diversity, challenges, interactions—even the occasional rant. Rants are OK, because senior people, especially CEOs, don’t have many places to dump constructively.

As you might guess, it happened today.

Said client called ranting about how everything was piling up, that he was exhausted trying to juggle it all, didn’t think he could stand much more, etc.

Some background. When I first started working with him he was underwater, both at work and at home. It didn’t take long to figure out that most of those problems could be alleviated by using my “say no” technique, which he did with great success (he’d never before found one that worked for him). We went on to work on really interesting stuff and build a productive relationship. Every now and then he slips back into the bad old habits—as we all slip—but we’d catch it and he’d get back on track.

This time was different, I knew something new had been added to the equation, but was surprised when he finally opened up.

Seems that he’d read a number of articles on the addictive behavior exhibited by people who were involved in virtual reality worlds, such as Second Life, and decided to check it out for himself, because he was curious. He found it hard to believe that it really happened, decided to check it out for himself, and now it was wreaking havoc in his life.

I was as surprised as he was. We’d worked together for over six months and he didn’t seem the type, but one of his comments was very revealing. He said that he felt like he was being pulled down by quicksand, but it was so much fun he almost didn’t mind—it was the “almost” that saved him.

Higher profits are driven by better productivity. Better productivity stems from excellent managers who know that it’s critical to value and motivate all their people (not just executives and “stars”). Excellent management is a function of MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy) which is worth more than money in the high stakes employee motivation game.

MAP is everywhere and affects everything, so it’s to your advantage to understand your colleagues’ MAP, no matter your position or theirs. Managers and candidates should evaluate each other’s MAP to be sure, at the least, they’re synergistic; salespeople familiar with their customers’ MAP will sell more; and great managers not only know their people’s MAP, but also their own.

Since MAP is learned, not innate, it changes, either passively, through the influence of those around you, or actively, in ways that you consciously choose.

I believe that good MAP is (in no particular order) positive, open, flexible, honest, secure, interested, enthusiastic, patient, sincere, encouraging, caring and loves creativity (its own or others).

Remember, every solution starts with, and is grounded in, your MAP.

We’ve all heard this one, or variations thereof, a million times,

What goes around comes around.

and we all occasionally stop believing it, mostly, I think, because we forget an important caveat

It doesn’t always come in a straight line.

Have a wonderful Spring Break weekend.

I saw some interesting statistics from Liberum Research and thought I’d share

• More than 28,000 top executives (CXO and VP) lost, left or changed jobs in 2006, 68% higher than 2005.
• 2007 isn’t slowing down—in February alone, there were 2,224 changes.

And one other from The Association of Executive Search Consultants

• More than 50% of top managers will leave during the next five years.

Although Liberum tracks the effects of management change on companies’ financial performance, what isn’t directly tracked (that I know of) is the effect of the churn on culture and employees.

Even allowing for internal moves, you still have 28,000 cultural changes ranging from minor to massive.

When the change is massive, the effect on culture is obvious (think HP), but the great majority of those 28,000 changes are much more subtle.

Companies desiring to strengthen their retention need to pay greated attention to the subtle changes. How? Any time there’s a management change, no matter the cause, watch productivity and turnover. Not just by division or department, that can hide the problems, but also by group and team.

Cultural change has the potential to be very positive—or a positive disaster.

Managers constantly look for things they can incorporate in their group’s MAP that will raise productivity and increase employee commitment.

Two such items are basic business knowledge and a large dose of pragmatism.

Business 101

Naivete regarding business frequently leads to non-reality based ideas and attitudes. If people have a fuzzy or rose-colored view of what has to happen for the company to be successful, there’s no way they can contribute effectively. Worse, this lack of knowledge can make them resistant to the procedural changes necessary to the company’s successful evolution as it grows, shrinks, or changes.

It’s not necessary, or even possible, to provide the in-depth business knowledge that comes from an MBA or 30 years as a successful CEO, but wise managers can provide basic understanding of the actual forces at work within the company. You want your people to understand

• the Business Mission Statement;
• recognize customer desire as the driving force behind product development (why build it if they won’t buy it?);
• financial controls, what they are and why you need them;
• why/how to avoid blue sky approaches and impossible wish lists;
• the reasons for requiring excellent documentation;
• the importance of quality and manufacturbility; and
• other business-specific subjects.

Teaching these needs to be active, not passive, posting the information on your intranet won’t get it done. Use brown bag lunches or company-wide webinars, followed by local discussions, to create a positive learning process.

Finally, be sure you encourage people to use what they’ve learned.

Pragmatism

Pragmatism should permeate both your MAP and culture. It should be like stain as opposed to paint—not just covering the surface, but also sinking in.

By practicing as well as preaching it, you encourage a reality-based culture where

• setbacks are easier to deal with because they are recognized and acted on quickly;
• employees speak up because they are assured that the messenger will not be shot;
• rose-colored glasses are obvious;
• growth and change of the culture without corrupting it is encouraged; and
• “not-invented-here” syndrome is veer batten.

Pragmatism works best as a part of MAP that everybody is encouraged to embrace. It helps to create a company in which not only can everybody see what the Emperor is wearing, but also have no compunction about discussing it.

Everybody’s talking about The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn’t (me, too), but many top people don’t believe that it’s really possible to jerk-proof a company, saying that they’ve tried it and it doesn’t work.

If you believe that, you’re wrong. More likely, it didn’t work for one, or a combination, of the following:

• The program didn’t start with the CEO; the CEO wasn’t really committed to it; or the CEO was the root of the problem.
• The program wasn’t comprehensive enough.
• When efforts to help the jerk change failed and termination was required, management wimped out, rolled over, and did nothing.
• Management allowed the messenger to be killed, i.e., the jerk prospered and the whistleblower paid the price.
• The commitment wasn’t deep enough to sustain it for the long haul.

The McKinsey Quarterly published an excerpt (requires free registration) that should convince anyone who isn’t a jerk him/herself. Here are a few points that should get your attention.

“Nasty interactions have a far bigger impact on the mood of people who experience them than positive interactions do… The researchers found that negative interactions affected the moods of these employees five times more strongly than positive ones.”

Not surprising, it’s the same mindset that makes us want to return our new outfit when five people compliment us and one says it’s terrible.

“…when CEOs come across as bullies, they can scare their investors as well as their underlings.”

Think Robert L. Nardelli and Home Depot.

“At the workplaces that enforce the no-jerks rule most vehemently and effectively, an employee’s performance and treatment of others aren’t seen as separate things. Phrases like “talented jerk,” “brilliant bastard,” or “a bully and a superstar” are oxymorons. Jerks are dealt with immediately: they quickly realize (or are told) that they have blown it, apologize, reflect on their nastiness, ask for forgiveness, and work to change their ways. Repeat offenders aren’t ignored or forgiven again and again—they change or depart.”

“Talking about the rules is just the first step; the real test happens when someone acts like a jerk. If people don’t feel comfortable blowing the whistle on the offender, your company will both be seen as hypocritical and fill up with jerks, so don’t adopt the rule unless you mean it.”

Make no mistake, this isn’t some feel-good concept dreamed up by your HR or PR department.

From start to forever, a no-jerk company is created and sustained by the CEO.