"Letting Go of the Patient"

“I’d prefer a smaller font on that page,” the CEO said to the director. “And a different color—this black is just too black,” he continued. “By the way, has the communications team looked at this yet? And Simon?” The director looks bewildered—surely this isn’t that important? And certainly not the font size. Next thing you know, the CEO himself will be meddling with the page layout. And at that very moment, the CEO says, “Put that image on the left instead of the right.”

This presentation was far from finished. Even the COO, a few days later, still had plenty to say about it. With so many people involved, putting this presentation together turned into a huge accumulation of hassle and nonsense—a process full of compromises involving pet projects, self-interest, and uncertainties. And there was a great deal of confusion between what was important, what was secondary, and what was irrelevant.

This process is typical of many execution issues. The result could have been achieved with just a tenth of the time and cost. No wonder large projects take exponentially longer and cost more. As long as we don’t do a better job of separating the main issues from the secondary and trivial ones—and everyone is allowed to keep doing their own thing—everything will take as long as there is time for it (*1)

Of course, support is essential for implementation. In fact, ideas improve through collaboration. Still, we can’t do everything with everyone. And that’s not necessary, either. Let’s take a look at three types of processes.

On the one hand, there are processes with a higher purpose. That purpose is uplifting, so that all petty self-interests and uncertainties disappear. Very efficient. On the other hand, there are urgent processes. Under pressure, conflicting interests become fluid, and we compromise some of our own interests. Crisis acts as a lubricant. In both cases, the overall result is more important than the interests of any single part.

Between these two extremes lie sluggish processes. There’s no shortage of good ideas, but delays are built into the system. Because “everyone” has to be involved, the process quickly becomes endless. Of course, we need to draw on expertise, harness creative talent, and foster Ownership—buuuuut that doesn’t always have to involve everyone!

The solution for this third category is to agree on the process together in advance. It’s better to consciously focus on who, what, and when we need to achieve the goal—whether it’s a decision, an opinion, a choice, or something else. And flip the perspective. Don’t look at everything we have, but at what we can do without. A sort of “MVP” (minimal viable process).

Ask in advance how important it is. When it comes to a major issue, everyone participates; those who lead and those who follow work together. For a minor issue, the leader determines the outcome, and we evaluate what can be improved next time. After all, we can trust the leader. When it comes to a trivial matter, we don’t discuss it—ever.

Hard? Not at all. Just whenever you come across something unimportant, like the font size in this example, look at each other and shout, “Big deal!”

(*1) Parkinson’s Law: “A job takes as long as the time available”