There is a somewhat obscure but tragic story involving two extremely capable explorers and their attempt to be the first to discover the South Pole. Ronald Amundsen and Robert Falcon Scott were both very experienced in traversing hostile climates in fact, Scott had led a South Pole expedition previously in 1903 getting to 82 degrees, South. Unfortunately one of these men was to succeed spectacularly and the other one would fail miserably leading to his death and the deaths of all the members in his party. The difference between the two men really came down to specific knowledge and preparation. I first read about this historical event in Jim Collin's latest book Great by Choice. In the book which he co-wrote with Morten Hansen he uses this as an example of what he touts as the characteristics needed for success which are; fanatic discipline, productive paranoia, and empirical creativity. While one of these men did exhibit these traits he also understood how important it was to first understand his challenge and to be thoroughly prepared. His actions lead to his success and reinforce Stephen Covey's Habit #5 "Seek First to Understand And Then To Be Understood" from his book, The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. This is actually the sixth article in this series which I title The 7 Habits of Highly Effective PLM Adoption. To translate both Collins' and Covey's principles into Product Lifecycle Management terms what this means to PLM adoption is that it is important to completely understand the issues and the processes you are impacting before you can deploy effectively and this is best achieved through comprehensive discovery. This article will explore the value of this activity and the impact of leaping before you look.
I won't keep you in suspense although I suspect a decent portion of my audience already knows that Amundsen was the successful one while Scott ended up as a human Popsicle out on the tundra of Antarctica (just a few miles from a food cache by the way). The interesting thing about Amundsen was that he was obsessed with the details and went to great lengths to prepare effectively for this expedition. Some examples of his preparations include living with the Eskimos for an extended period of time to learn how they moved about in cold weather and what means of transportation they used (dog sleds). When he set up his supply drops he used 20 black pennants at specific intervals to mark the drops and stashed over 3 tons of supplies for 5 men versus the one ton Scott stashed for his 17. Amundsen brought 4 thermometers to Scott's one. This was a key measuring device for altitude. The point is Amundsen took the time to understand the environment he was going into and to take the necessary precautions for any bad luck he may have encountered. "Victory awaits him who has everything in order-luck people call it. Defeat is certain for him who has neglected to take the necessary precautions in time; this is called bad luck." Of course he is being ironic but we see similar occurrences when companies attempt to deploy PLM software. The companies that spend the time up front better understanding their environments and the opportunities they have to impact them experience much better results than those that jump into deployment without extensive discovery.
It tends to vary in regards to who is at fault for skipping over discovery in PLM deployments. Sometimes the company adopting the technology is in a rush or they don't want to spend the money or resources on what they perceive to be a non-value activity. Other times the vendors or consultants are eager to minimize cost on services to maximize software margins or they want to deploy a "one size fits all" solution that maximizes their efficiency but not the clients. Obviously companies are sensitive to cost and PLM has been perceived as a science project at times so a prolonged discovery can contribute to this impression. Most of the examples in Covey's book are more relational. He discusses the importance of empathic listening which could be very useful when determining the viability of PLM in a company environment. Discovery doesn't have to be overly involved but there are some fundamental keys that need to be established up front if you are going to be successful. One of the first questions that need to be answered is, why are you doing this? It seems obvious but you would be surprised how many companies get very far down the road with a PLM deployment without being able to answer this question. Another critical question is how are we going to measure our success? Many companies have put PLM in place with no way to quantify the impact it has on the company. This must be established up front and you need some sort of baseline to compare against. There are several other questions like these that can be addressed in discovery but the key is to establish mutually understood outcomes that will provide guidance for how the project is supposed to proceed and what consitutes successful completion.
It is tempting to jump straight to the solution without fully understanding the problem. As Covey points out in his book we all have the tendency to frame things in an autobiographical manner. We project our own perspectives and context on things we hear from others. Covey talks about the 5 levels of listening which include, ignoring, pretending to listen, selective listening, attentive listening and finally empathic listening. Most of the time people tend to fall into the first 3 categories but professionals understand the value of truly understanding a client's needs. If the company is willing to sit down and discuss their issues it is critical that consulting organizations and software vendors make sure that they "listen with intent to understand", as Covey describes. He goes on to discuss the importance of this type of listening "Empathic listening is so powerful because it gives you accurate data to work with. Instead of projecting your own autobiography and assuming thoughts, feelings, motives, and interpretation, you're dealing with the reality inside another person's head and heart." The example he gives for this type of interaction involves a small company that is negotiating with a large national banking institution. The president of the company actually told the negotiating team for the bank to write the contract in a manner that suited them to allow his company to better understand their needs and expectations. Then they would review the contract and provide feedback. This approach facilitated much better communication between the two companies and eased the tension significantly. By thoroughly understanding their perspective he had prepared them to be ready to listen to his. This allowed both companies to achieve the Win/Win scenario we discussed in my previous two articles.
Discovery can raise images of expensive lengthy consulting sessions yielding little value. It is important that when conducting discovery that it is properly executed and focused on specific outcomes. Emphatic listening is a key ingredient in this activity on both sides of the table. If this step is bypassed or improperly executed it sets the stage for effort and cost that will most likely not result in value. Hope and luck are not strategies as Scott and his men discovered. To be successful one must understand the activity and environment completely and prepare for the challenges that will inevitably present themselves. If you had to choose between the two approaches of Amundsen and Scott I am sure you can recognize that it is better to be a national hero than a frozen polar bear treat.
[Edit: Repost from 2012]
