Decision Point: Wrong or Right
- 3 days ago
- 8 min read
Article no. 1: “For 364 days out of the year most of the world lives and works in monarchies not democracies, because we don’t know the difference.”
Monarchy Thinking – Choosing one person to make the final decisions.
Democracy Thinking – A group of people collaborating to solve the problems that affect them.
The first three Decision Points of democracy or monarchy:
If you did choose Democracy Thinking at decision points #1 or #2, decision point #3 is where you unlock 4x performance and lay the groundwork for 8x performance. If you skipped decision points #1 and #2, however, getting to 4x productivity will be a lot harder, but you can still 2x your productivity if you choose Democracy Thinking here at decision point #3.
After this point, it is going to be really hard to switch paths, but don’t give up hope. If you miss decision point #3 now, decision points #4 and #5 will have minimal benefit, but they do still have value. I use them all the time to convince leaders to reconsider their choices at decision points #1, #2, and #3, so stay tuned. If you can get leaders to change course, you can get back on the road to 4x, or maybe even 8x better outcomes.
Problem Metrics Over Solution Metrics
“Wrong or Right” is decision point #3 because in order to have 8x improvement, we must learn how to design good metrics. We should also define our metrics AFTER we have prioritized our problems but BEFORE we’ve designed our solutions. Creating metrics before we know how to solve the problem helps create a metric that is independent of the solution. If you can swap out multiple solutions and the way of measuring doesn’t change, it’s likely a problem metric.
Problem metrics allow us to see if and when our problems go away, but they are “lagging metrics”. They tell us when we have reached our goal, but we can’t use them until after the work is already done. Until then we can only track “leading metrics”. Leading metrics are based on our solution hypothesis: “If we change these measurable things now, then later the problem metrics will change.”
There are way more solution metrics than problem metrics, and we track them more frequently: monthly, weekly, or daily. So they quickly start to feel very important. “Look at all these improvements! We must be doing something right!” But that logic is reversed. Solution metrics measure effort. They only tell us whether or not the teams are following the solution plan. The true value of a solution is whether or not the problem goes away, the “lagging metric”.
And here is where the critical flaw of Monarchy Thinking appears: Since the value of a monarchy is tied to its solutions, if they cannot move the problem metrics, then out of an instinct for self-preservation Monarchy Thinking redirects attention to the metrics that they can move, their solution metrics.
If they cannot move the problem metrics, then out of an instinct for self-preservation Monarchy Thinking redirects attention to the metrics that they can move.
Democracy Thinking, in contrast, defines problem metrics at the beginning, tracks them separately from the solution, and then evaluates all solutions against the original problem metrics.
Right, Wrong, or Irrelevant
When you put solution and problem metrics together we have four possible outcomes:
If no, we did not meet the solution metrics, and no, the problem metrics did not improve, then we “Failed”. The solution may work but we failed to implement it.
If yes, we met the solution metrics, but no, the problem metrics did not improve, then we were “Wrong”. The solution does not solve the problem.
If no, we did not meet the solution metrics, but yes, the problem metrics improved, then we are “Irrelevant”. The problem got better because of something unrelated to our plan.
If yes, we met the solution metrics, and yes, the problem metrics improved, then we are either “Right” or “Irrelevant”. If we can repeat our success, then we can claim we’re right. If we cannot repeat our success, then our work was either irrelevant or conditional, only right in certain circumstances.
To say that another way: If we only track solution metrics, we can only see two things – whether we were “Right” or we “Failed” to implement the plan. If we track both solution and problem metrics, we learn about two more possibilities, that we could be “Wrong” or “Irrelevant”. This is why looking for being “Wrong” or “Irrelevant” unlocks 4x and 8x performance. If you don’t use problem metrics, you can only see half of the truth. Monarchy thinking only focuses on if we are “right.” Democracy thinking also focuses on if we are “wrong.”
Monarchy thinking only focuses on if we are “right.” Democracy thinking also focuses on if we are “wrong.”
What If We Are Wrong?
The dangerous difference between monarchy and democracy thinking is how each thinks about being wrong. Upon discovering that they are wrong, Monarchy Thinking tries to convince people to use their solution anyway, and tries to redirect attention away from the original problem because they are unable to solve it. Democracy thinking acknowledges that the problem still exists, supports other solutions to the problem, and looks for ways to pivot and solve new problems, even if they can only solve less important problems in the prioritized list.
Discovering we’re wrong (or irrelevant) is the foundation of what Eric Ries called the “pivot” in his “Lean Startup” book. If we did not move our problem metric, but we can move other problem metrics, it is totally cool to change our goal. The danger is only when we campaign to change the problem metric, after the fact, because we can’t solve it. This is why Democracy thinking tracks problem metrics independent of all solutions.
Changing Paths With Democracy 3.0
The image above represents the decision points shared so far. The signs show opportunities to change direction. If no action is taken, most organizations will by habit follow the path on the right. (Note: Direction does not imply any political party affiliation. I put monarchy on the right because it focuses on being “right”.)
The easiest action which is available to us at decision point #3 is collecting metrics in the first place. This is represented in the image with the sign asking, “Am I right?” I have witnessed too many projects where the only metric was how long the project had been running, and even that was contested because nobody really knew when the project was first conceived. Almost any organization will allow (and praise you) for collecting leading metrics about the solution, so I encourage you to do so. These are metrics like velocity, predictability, size, dates, counts, etc.
It is a worthy habit just to get people talking about data and metrics. It distracts them from solely following orders. For example, if a Monarchy Thinking leader changes the scope, we can point to a metric and say, “We’re happy to do this, but it will increase the amount of work, extend the date, and lower our predictability. Do you still want us to do it? Or would you like us to take something else out so that we can bring the date back in?”
When dealing with a monarchy thinker, it’s best to avoid disagreeing with an order. Instead we give Monarchy Thinkers choices and let them decide what to do, because within Monarchy Thinking that is their job. If we think they are making the “wrong” decision, our best position is to simply make a data prediction, follow orders, track the data, and compare the data a few weeks later. Then let them decide again.
If we want to succeed, we both cannot decide for them nor hide the data. If we hide the data, they will continue living in a biased bubble believing they are right. If we take the decisions away from them, they will blame us for not following orders and never learn how to be wrong. Also, we might be wrong, and this is great practice for gathering data about “right”, “wrong”, and “irrelevant”.
The Road to Democracy
The second best action that we can take to change direction is to decide with our leaders what problems the project should solve. If we can figure that out, then we can design problem metrics. This is represented in the image with the sign saying, “Am I wrong?” Being “lagging metrics” we can only update problem metrics after each new build or release, but if the solution turns out to be the “right” solution, then we will be seen as heroes when we can show that with each new build or release, the problem is getting better.
The third best action that we can take is if we notice that our problem metric never moves, or moves in the wrong direction. This means the solution is either “wrong” or “irrelevant”. When this data is available to report, it gets harder and harder to ignore. Eventually a “decider” will make the decision to change the solution. Without this data, Monarchy Thinking can only measure success by the solution metrics. Our job in a Monarchy Thinking world is to make the problem data visible.
What Does Democracy 3.0 Look Like?
We will know that we have started on the path to Democracy Thinking when we experience two changes. Work stops being about following orders or implementing “the plan”, and leaders shift from being the deciders and problem solvers to being coaches. When everyone learns that being able to identify “right”, “wrong”, and “irrelevant” is more important than being “right”, leaders begin to allow teams to generate their own solutions to problems.
There is a movie from Pixar that sums up this philosophy quite well. It appears at the end of the movie “Ratatouille”. The character of the food critic named Ego gives a speech wherein he shares a realization. He has finally understood the philosophy of the famous chef whose motto was, “Anyone can cook.” He reveals that, “Not everyone can be a great artist, but a great artist can come from anywhere.” The same is true in any workplace, “Not every idea can be a great idea, but a great idea can come from anywhere.”
“Not every idea can be a great idea, but a great idea can come from anywhere.” – Ratatouille Principle
Finding the great ideas, no matter where they come from, and allowing them to grow comes directly from understanding the difference between “right”, “wrong”, and “irrelevant”, and this knowledge itself is not possible without understanding how to design both solution metrics and problem metrics.
What’s Next
The next decision point I plan to share will be “Multiple or Single”.
Think any of these Democracy 3.0 techniques like Problem Metrics would be helpful in your organization or community? Book a Call.
If you like where this is going or you're also fascinated with how to build better lives, subscribe. I would enjoy discussing how to build a future where we all want to live. Please share this with others who you think should join the discussion.
Comments