A company I know recently replaced its time clocks with an "automated" timekeeping solution. The goal was to streamline payroll processing by eliminating some manual procedures. Employees now log in and out at a computer and the information is electronically fed directly to the payroll system. There are no timecards for managers to tally or reports to complete; everything is automatic.

Except, of course, that it isn't.

Sometimes the computer is down and employees can't log in. Or they forget to log out prior to going home. Or they log out seven minutes later than their scheduled quitting time, pushing them into overtime. Or…well, you get the point.

Organizational development experts call these issues second-order consequences. When attempting to solve one problem, companies often create indirect or deferred glitches along the way.

And second-order consequences can cause more trouble than the original problem. While the new timekeeping system has saved time for the company's payroll department, it has placed a new burden on its unit managers. All those exceptions must be tracked and entered into the system. So, to address these unforeseen consequences, the company has implemented another change. Now, when employees neglect to log in or out, for example, they simply fill out a form detailing the exceptions. Their managers must then manually make the adjustments on the automated system.

One manager, who has dozens of employees, comes in on weekends just to sort through the stack of exception forms and update the system. She would do it on work time, but she can't fit the extra four hours into her schedule. In this case, the solution to the second-order consequences has created third-order consequences.

At the pace with which change happens in the workplace today, second-order consequences are inevitable. Leaders can try to predict all the possible ramifications of change, but every new initiative carries the risk of unanticipated side effects. The way in which leaders adjust to those consequences -- and keep them from spiraling out of control -- defines how well they manage change.

Labels: business, employees, leadership, management

Boxing champion Daniel Mendoza could really throw a punch. Despite his relatively small size for a heavyweight -- barely five feet seven and 160 pounds -- he dominated the British prize-fighting scene in the late 1700s. But it wasn't simply the power behind Mendoza's slugging that allowed him to dispatch his larger opponents. In fact, the timing of his punches gave him a unique advantage.

As a pioneer of the scientific approach to boxing, Mendoza figured out a seemingly obvious way to defeat his challengers: throwing the first punch. While his bigger and stronger competitors expected the diminutive fighter to play defense, Mendoza caught them off guard with his audacity to land the first blow. Mendoza's hit-first technique is credited as the inspiration for the idiom, beating them to the punch.

As it turns out, Mendoza's boxing strategy can help you win the verbal skirmishes waged against your creativity on a daily basis.

Perhaps you've noticed when offering a suggestion that someone is always eager to shoot down your idea. A well-meaning boss, for example, might dismiss your recommendation with the helpful recollection, "We tried that once, and it didn't work." Or a coworker might admonish, "Management will never go along with that idea." If you're like most people, you get weary of the constant jabs at your innovation and stop making suggestions.

Why not employ Mendoza"s fighting style when selling your ideas? The champ knew his opponents were going to punch him, so he punched them first. No, I'm not saying you should physically hit people who assail your ideas. But if you expect their arguments, you can beat them to the persuasive punch.

Here's an example: In his speech to the 1948 Democratic National Convention, Hubert Humphrey called for civil rights reform. The way it would normally work is that Humphrey would make his remarks and, the following day, the opposing opinions of his political rivals would appear in the media. Humphrey would have to answer his opponents the next day, but by then his argument would have lost steam.

But rather than waiting for the other side to voice its contrary view, Humphrey stated it for them, and in the same sentence he provided his follow-up response. "To those who say that we are rushing this issue of civil rights, I say to them we are 172 years late." In other words, Humphrey anticipated his opponents' attack, and he beat them to the punch.

Know that there will always be people with good reasons why your ideas are bad ones. When preparing your case, stop and consider their most likely arguments. Then, like Humphrey, build your counterattack into your sales pitch. "To those who say we've tried this before without success, I say our previous experience has shown us the obstacles we can overcome."

When demonstrating your creativity, never go down without a fight.

Labels: communication, leadership, management, vision