Shouninjutsu

Vilfredo Pareto was a French-Italian sociologist, economist and philosopher born in 1848 in Paris. In 1906, as a lecturer in economics at the University of Lausanne in Switzerland, he first articulated what has become known as the “Pareto Principle” or the 80-20 rule when he observed that 20 percent of the population owned 80 percent of the property in Italy. It was immediately obvious that there must be some sort of underlying organic principle supporting this observation as the same 80-20 ratio seemed to apply to any number of situations.

In 1941, J.M. Juran discovered Pareto’s work and the “Pareto Chart” became part of the foundation of the quality and efficiency movements that have molded and shaped the economics and business models of post-war industrial society.

And your point is?…

9 times out of 10 (or perhaps it’s closer to 8 out of 10 to be more precise<g>), we all go through an internal Pareto Analysis for virtually every decision we make. Simply stated,

“What is the most effective thing I can do in this situation with the greatest likelihood of producing the most favorable outcome?”

But ironically, in today’s information society where data, theories and “expert opinions” seem to know no bounds, it’s harder than ever to filter the truly critical factors out from the surrounding “noise level.” You need simple, direct, factual summaries and directions you can trust so you can get on with your busy life. Thus the popularity of “Idiot’s Guide to…” books. But you’re not an idiot– you just don’t want to (or have time to) sort through all the “fat and fur” to find the “meat” you’re looking for. The fact is,

…most of what you need to know can be summarized in 3-5 (max) simple steps or bullet points that will solve the vast majority of issues you face….

Not done talking about this yet.

NEXT– The Pareto Proclamation in Practice

One thing about Ninjas— and Ninja Marketers— they don’t have time for a lot of superfluous crap.

Ask 10 people about the biggest frustrations they encounter in their working lives. 10 of them will put the “decision-making process” Go ahead. Ask.

Told you so.

Let me share a short, sweet 3-step (what would you expect from “Shuriken Kurt”?) approach to simplifying the process in almost any group decision-making environment.

It’s called RID. It’s a matrix management approach that allows multiple people to serve multiple functions on multiple “task forces.” And it’s an attempt to clarify the exact role each individual plays on those task forces. Used with a little bit of discipline, it can help avoid the “mob mentality” of trying to do everything by committee.

R (Responsible)- Only ONE person can be Responsible for a task. That person defines it, plans it and fulfills its requirements. He/she can draw on additional resources, but ultimately, he/she does it and defines how it is done.

I (Impacted)- Any number of people can be “impacted” parties. They may have information and perspective to contribute. They may have a vested interest— relative to THEIR primary responsibilities— in the results. “I” acknowledges that are “Impacted” and need to be “Informed” about the task and it’s progression, but they are not active participants.

D (Decisionmaker)- This is the single entity tasked with making the final decision regarding the task. Evaluating the quality of it’s completion or making decisions based on the conclusion of the task. 9 out of 10 times there should only be ONE PERSON with a “D,” though there may be some (though fewer than you’d expect) cases where a small group makes the final decision.

———————————

As an example of how this system would work:

TASK: Establish budgets for various departments in an organization.

R- CFO/Controller. Clearly, the head finance person needs to be allowed to take lead on this sort of project. He/she should have the right to draw on all dept. heads for input, but it’s his/her baby.)

I- Department Heads. VPs, and department heads will need to provide input. They also need to know and understand the outcome in order to fulfill their obligations

D- CEO/President. Ultimately, the top dog needs to have the final say. The Buck stops SOMEWHERE.

Another example:

TASK: Solidify a pricing model

R- Sales VP. Sales has to “sell it,” and are probably in the best position to define what the market demands in order to be competitive. NOTE: Illustrates that there is more than one way to approach the “RID GRID.” Another company may decide to make someone if finance or marketing have the “R” on this sort of task.

I- CFO, VPs of Operations, Marketing. All groups that need to contribute to the discussion and whose function will be affected by the outcome.

D- CEO/President. Again, a “biggie” like this needs sign-off at the highest level.

But the “D” doesn’t always have to be the President. Let the office manager have the “D” on office supplies. A regional salesperson can “D” their own sales call scheduling.

——————————–

This paradigm clarifies that “I”s are not responsible, nor are “R”s and “I”s ultimate going to make the decisions. Nor does an “R” get to assume that just because they are responsible, they have final say.

It also creates a common vocabulary that is useful in avoiding miscommunication, duplication of effort, “dropped balls,” and a lot of frustration.

• Who has the “R” on that task?
• If I’m an “I,” what do you need from me?
• I don’t need to be the “R” on this, but I still want to be the “D”…
• etc.

And sometimes you need to use a RID-X system, where the “X” means “you specifically DON’T need to be involved! Stop hanging around the water cooler and get back to work!”<g>