Author: The Information Badger

Many years ago, a business unit leader asked the Badger to review a project delivering a small but important system to a Space sector client. The unit leader was receiving frequent escalations from the client who felt the project manager (PM) was unsuitable and delivery was going to be late. From the unit leader’s perspective, the PM was doing a good job, progress was on track, and finances were healthy. The PM had previously delivered similar projects successfully. The unit leader wasn’t therefore unduly concerned but asked the Badger for an independent delivery practitioner’s opinion as a tactic to ease client concern.

The Badger called the PM to arrange the swift review. On the phone the PM was helpful, upbeat, and confident that all was well, but there was something about the call dynamics that made the Badger’s nose twitch! The review subsequently commenced with a face to face kick-off meeting at which the PM was in transmit-only mode, waxing lyrical about having exemplary processes, tools, and records that proved concerns were unfounded. The Badger’s nose twitched even more!

The review’s findings? Well, the project had an exemplary trail of documents with all the fully approved baseline, foundation and plan documents you’d expect plus full traceability to the contract. It reported comprehensively and on time internally and to the client and had a good suite of tools to track progress against plan, finances and produce forecasts. The project had everything required to comply with the contract and internal company standards. This was a model project, at least administratively!

However, what was wrong was clear from talking with team members and the client. The PM was an exceptional administrator, but a poor manager and leader. One team leader put it vitriolically as ‘He’s a process junky. He doesn’t listen to anything I tell him. He just processes the data he’s told me to provide to get the answer he wants’. The PM wasn’t listening to his team or assessing any risks and threats to progress. The team was becoming alienated, and the client was escalating because they could see the tensions.

The Badger reported this and some recommendations to the unit leader, highlighting particularly that the PM wasn’t listening to his team, that progress metrics were thus unreliable, and that delivery would be late. The unit leader seemed reluctant to accept this and did not take any action. Two months later system delivery was delayed 6 months, the project moved into loss, the project manager was replaced, and the business unit leader was moved from his role!

And the Badger’s message is? Simple. Listening is a crucial skill. Listening objectively is key to making good decisions and shaping the right outcomes. It’s an essential and vital skill for anyone in any kind of managerial or leadership position at any level – but be aware…not everyone has it!

The Badger’s never been a member of any political party and never will be! There. That’s got that important piece of context for this piece out of the way!

The Badger was trained to think independently and objectively, to analyse facts, learn from life and career experiences, and formulate personal opinions while respecting that the opinions of others might differ. Over the years the Badger’s found that rational independence, rather than allegiance to a particular ideology, has been a beneficial because no ideology has a monopoly on being right. Why is the Badger making this point? Because this week the ‘my way is right’, ‘It can’t be done’, and ‘they won’t agree’ rhetoric, gamesmanship and speculation from politicians and the media-savvy chattering class seems to have been particularly pronounced. The Badger has thus found a tinge of irritation infiltrating his thoughts, especially when what can be done with technology has featured in political debate.

The Badger, who believes firmly in democracy and healthy debate, wondered if levels of misinformation and media shrill has got out of hand. In the UK, posturing over negotiations with the European Union on Brexit has been particularly high because there’s an important meeting of the UK cabinet on Friday 6th July. Frictionless trade with the EU and the nature of the border between Northern Ireland and Eire – the UK’s only land border with the EU – have been hot topics in EU negotiations for months. On the Northern Ireland border issue, many domestic and EU politicians have lined up to rule out a solution which uses technology to keep the border as it is now. Having listened to many items on why a technology-centric solution won’t work, the Badger has concluded first that the positive case for it hasn’t been well presented by politicians or the media, and second that politicians appear to have an intractable ‘can’t be done’ mentality when that suits their individual or party-political objectives.

The Badger’s thoughts crystallised in a very simple – and some may say naïve -conclusion; namely, that technology can and must play a big part in frictionless trade and making the Northern Ireland border with Eire work with little if any change. If major cities can use automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) for congestion charging, ANPR can be used to automatically fine you for speeding or not having vehicle tax, and you can buy goods on-line track and track the location of your item in the delivery chain, then it’s not credible to assert a technology-based solution at a border is impossible. What makes it impossible is only the posturing of politicians and those who need a media story. Every time the Badger hears a politician of any persuasion or country say something can’t be done and cites technology as one of the reasons then the Badger says ‘Oh yes it can’ out loud! Career politicians might need a wake-up call. Mr Trump. Do you have any spare time?

The Badger’s thoughts turned to call-centres this week, triggered by a conversation between three pensionable ladies overheard in a local coffee shop. It seemed that one had a good experience with a call centre, one an Ok one, and the third a particularly unhelpful experience leading to a ‘never going to call again’ comment.

The Badger pondered on his own experiences, both as an end customer and from having some relevant experience as a business and IT professional. Call centres of varying types, of course, feature in our daily lives for almost everything. Whilst many interactions with banks, government departments, health services, utilities, insurance companies, retailers and so on, can be done online, there’s always a number to call and a series of buttons to press on your phone if you want to speak to a human being.

So, what emerged from the Badger’s cogitations? Simply that call centres seem to fall into one of three categories – the good, the bad or the downright ugly. The good tend to be very good with well trained, friendly, customer-centric staff supported by well-integrated IT systems that work smoothly to provide the call handler a complete picture of you as a customer. The bad tend to be disjointed and inefficient, with agents that aren’t well trained who just regurgitate their scripts and have poorly integrated IT systems providing a fractured view of their customer. ‘I’m just going to put you on hold while I check on another system’ tends to be a frequent and rather tedious refrain. And then there’s the ugly. These have annoying and unhelpful call agents who sometimes introduce themselves with implausible names, and seem hell bent on upselling other services rather than dealing with what you want done. The Badger doesn’t stay long with organisations whose call centres fall into the ugly category!

The size of an organisation doesn’t seem to be a direct indicator of which category its call centre will be in. Bigger sometimes isn’t the best, often because of the difficulties interfacing with long-standing legacy IT architectures and systems. Smaller organisations who are likely to have more limited legacy IT estate issues often seem to provide the best experience for their customers, which no doubt helps with customer retention and the important dynamics of growth through repeat business and customer recommendations. The Badger also wondered about the much-vaunted impacts of Artificial Intelligence, only to conclude that there’s still lots to do in most organisations just to unlock customer information from IT systems and make it comprehensively available to front-line staff before any AI vision is truly viable. So, let’s hope things improve on the joining up of IT systems front so that more call-centres move into the ‘good’ category before the robots even get close to taking over. There’s something humanly reassuring about the dynamics, antagonisms and nuances of interacting with another human in a good call centre, so long may it continue!

An earlier Badger musing, which you can read here, pondered on the effectiveness of TSB’s Go-live readiness assessment and leadership decision-making relating to their calamitous migration from Lloyds Bank to the systems of Banco Sabadell, their Spanish parent. Well, this week IBM’s report on TSB’s IT problems was published (see UK Select Committee: TSB-IBM report). The Badger found it an interesting, but depressing, read. In a nutshell, many of the readiness basics you’d expect for such a major, complex, and business critical migration seem to have been obviously missing. Why this wasn’t obvious to those in TSB and its parent raises all kinds of questions, but the themes from the published report clearly imply that Go-live readiness processes and evaluations were not as comprehensive, rigorous, or evidentially based from a business and an IT perspective as they should have been.

Comprehensive, probing, objective, evidential Go-Live readiness processes that encourage honesty regardless of any internal pressures for positive outcomes, are essential to making the right Go-Live decision. These should cover, as a minimum, stakeholders, business areas, media handling and public relations, customer and customer service, management of change, IT (especially functionality, data migration, defects, test, build and release, performance, resilience and capacity, infrastructure, and technical support), partners and subcontractors, and risk. A focus on each as well as the interlinked totality is essential to ensure the overall picture is joined-up, gaps are identified and mitigated, and that risk is minimised. Assessments should always validate the readiness of viable mechanisms to deal with the unexpected or problems after Go-Live. Not doing this represents misplaced optimism and significantly adds to the risk profile at the point of making a final Go-Live decision.

This all seems obvious to the Badger! So why do things like TSB still happen? Because no matter how good the processes are, people, personalities, behaviours and internal organisational culture remain key factors. Regarding the latter, the Badger has found over the years that the internal culture that organisations tell you they have doesn’t always translate to what’s truly embedded in the workforce!

The Badger ends this piece with a wry smile. An interview with the UK Secretary of State for Transport is on the radio. He’s being grilled on the disastrous impact of a new train timetable on passengers across the north of England. He says all the Go-Live readiness indicators were Green, and a review has started to understand how this could be the case given the major disruption that ensued and continues. In fact the Badger’s wry smile is morphing into a hearty chuckle because it looks like dodgy Go-live readiness evaluation will provide the media with a stick to beat politicians and large organisation leaders for a while yet!

The Badger just took a phone call from our electricity supplier pressing to fit a smart meter. It’s all part of a government programme where providers must roll out smart meters to >26 million homes across the UK by 2020. Home owners are, however, not obliged to have them. These calls happen regularly. Unsolicited cards and letters pressing for installation appointments also arrive frequently by conventional post only to find their way quickly to the recycling bin. It’s all very irritating.

The call centre staff are normally pleasant enough; they are, after all, just doing their job and following a script prepared by their company. The Badger is never belligerent with callers and always responds in the same way, namely to politely decline an installation because the Badger has the right to do so and because there’s no real benefit to the Badger’s household. The Badger has lost count of the number of times the same conversation has taken place, so following today’s call the Badger sat back with a coffee for a long objective think. Does the Badger’s standard response underpinned by a personal intransigent to change, a reluctance to embrace modern technology, or is it just driven by frustration at a company that just don’t seem to listen to what their customer says or wants? Should the Badger capitulate and just take the Smart Meter?

Well, the Badger’s thoughts were influenced by the film WALL-E (watched with children recently), and by items about which there’s been some publicity over the last week. Examples of the latter include the usage of social media which an average person consults ~150 times a day, addiction to computer games being recognized formally as a mental health issue, obesity in younger generations, and the benefits or otherwise of Artificial Intelligence. The outcome of the contemplation – perhaps predictably – is that the Badger will not be changing his stance or response regarding Smart Meter installations!

Why? Because the Badger is very technology, environment, health and budget aware and is already doing the right things to balance household, country and planet needs. The Badger’s wife put it rather neatly. She doesn’t want another app on her phone to adjust the hot water or central heating or any other device in the home. She wants to have to get up from the sofa, make needed adjustments, and exercise her limbs to avoid being a couch potato! The Badger’s sentiment is similar. The Badger senses that the ethical, human, and public policy aspects of technology adoption are lagging well behind the speed of the technological advancement itself. Which brings us to WALL-E. If you haven’t seen this film, then do so and note the depiction of humans. Are we already and accidentally on the slippery slope where the WALL-E depiction of humans becomes a reality? Hmm. Perhaps I’ll use this on my next call regarding Smart Meters.

Staff and their cost is important for any organisation. This gets lots of attention to ensure an organisation’s staff profile not only aligns with strategic ambitions and objectives, but also remains competitive, financially viable, and market-relevant. Discussions on the topic often take place under strap-lines like ‘outsourcing to drive efficiency’, ‘realigning the pyramid to support our strategy’, and ‘juniorisation to save costs and free up seniors for more valuable work’. There’s nothing wrong with having such discussions; they, and the subsequent decisions and actions, are crucial for ensuring an organisation continues to thrive. No more so is this true than in the IT services industry where ‘juniorisation’ has been an almost perpetual subject, and become a well-used word, for the last two decades.

The Badger’s first experiences with ‘juniorisation’ involved moving roles in Western geographies to India, and the replacement of experienced staff on a major contract with cheaper staff from the same territory to increase profitability. Looking back, there were many hidden challenges, things were not straightforward, and not all the intended benefits were achieved. One thing is certain, however. Staff whose roles were ‘juniorised’ – typically older, very experienced, loyal people who had worked hard for their company for a decade or more – became disgruntled, quietly disaffected, and suspicious. Loyalties to the company they’d materially helped grow successfully were shaken. Many found that promises of new roles or retraining were hollow, and some voted with their feet for pastures new. ‘Juniorisation’ – rightly or wrongly – became a euphemism for a devaluing of long tenure staff, dilution of the organisation’s overall capability, and an increased likelihood of being made redundant.

Many organisations handle those affected by ‘juniorisation’ respectfully, well, and with the utmost integrity. Sometimes, however, ‘juniorisation’ is handled deviously and disrespectfully, and can be just a smokescreen for ageism and exiting older, higher paid staff using back-door methods. Regardless of the country you work in, the Badger feels that if you’ve many years tenure and ‘juniorisation’ appears in the organisation’s rumour mill, or indeed in coffee point gossip, then you should always quietly prepare yourself appropriately! Always remain objective. But if it looks like you’ll be affected then re-read your employment contract, your organisation’s published staff policies and processes, and know your rights under local employment law. If you think age-discrimination is relevant, then formally complain using your employer’s formal processes. Hard-working, loyal staff with long tenure often place more trust in their organisation than is warranted. There is, however, only one thing to do if ‘juniorisation’ comes your way. Look after No.1. Put past loyalties and priorities aside because No.1 is not the organisation you work for, it’s you!

People’s attitudes are fundamental to an enterprise’s, or country for that matter, success. The Badger’s experience from working with very talented and diverse people during a long career is that where people have personal pride, want to do things, want to be the best they can be, and have an inner resilience, then they will solve whatever problem is put in front of them and their enterprise will benefit by thriving. That doesn’t mean everyone needs to be a demanding leader or egotistic extrovert! Far from it. These attitude attributes come from upbringing, family ethos, education and culture rather than personality, privilege or wealth.

Maybe it’s a generational thing, but the Badger has wondered lately whether attitudes experienced over many years have evaporated in the modern generation. After all, the media seems full of why things can’t be done, tales of upset and woe, political doom and gloom, and Armageddon scenarios of one sort or another. The snowflake generation also seems less resilient and more emotionally vulnerable than the Badger’s generation, so it’s easy to feel that the ‘right stuff’ in today’s youngsters is very diluted. The Badger, however, is now more optimistic and encouraged that the right attitudes are still there! Why? Because the fog of negative media content and commentary is largely just that – fog. Under the fog there’s much cause for optimism, as illustrated by two recent items that caught the Badger’s attention.

One was an interview with Creative & Media Studies students who were asked if Brexit would negatively impact their prospects. No, they all said. They all passionately said they were – an intended to remain – the best anywhere, and that they intended the UK to be a global creative powerhouse come what may. The Badger felt a surge of pride!
The second was an interview with a professor representing the Royal Academy of Engineering who articulated with passion that UK engineers were – and intended to stay – innovative world leaders in Artificial Intelligence (AI) with a clear vision, direction and understanding of the future. The professor conveyed real belief that the UK is and will remain a powerhouse of capability regardless of Brexit. Engineers were, rightly highlighted as the miracle workers who take technology and put it into real use for society, and people who are not afraid to start businesses. The UK is, and will always be, at the forefront of innovation come what may. The Badger experienced another surge of pride!

The people in both items spoke from the heart. The positive attitude that the Badger is familiar with from times past shone through. They all conveyed determination and an inherent desire to be the best they could be, regardless of any constraints or boundaries in front of them. Some of the younger generation clearly still has the right attitude! Great stuff! Because any country whose people don’t have enough of it will decline, and it feels like us Brits, no matter what others might think, haven’t quit lost it yet.

You’re a hermit if you’re unaware of the new General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) that came into effect on 25th May! GDPR is about privacy and harmonisation of regulations across Europe for the safeguarding of personal information. It impacts all organisations that process your personal data. Corporates, government departments, charities and even small businesses have spent lots of money getting ready. The Badger, like you no doubt, has experienced one manifestation of this, namely a plethora of emails from organisations asking the Badger to take one action or another, sometimes simply to confirm they can still have the Badger’s email address in a mailing list!

The Badger thinks GDPR is a good thing. Why? Well, a few years ago the Badger had some responsibility for security and data protection and, to be frank, it was an uphill struggle to get data protection high up on executive priority lists. GDPR and a number of highly public data breaches have changed this, mainly because the business, financial and reputational consequences of being found wanting are now very onerous.

GDPR, the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica affair, and Zuckerberg’s rather bland sessions with US and EU committees have brought the importance of personal information, its use by social media platforms, and the power of those that control them into rather sharp public focus. Awareness of how platforms can use what you do on a platform has risen very significantly, and the public is realising for the first time just how much these platforms know about how they go about their daily life. Millennials and children at school seem to run their lives through social media platforms, and the Badger has often wondered if they ever stop to think about the wider ramifications of their posts and the insight their posts and usage provides to organisations that do not appear in their circle of friends.

The Badger isn’t anti-social media. Far from it. The Badger uses various platforms, but always carefully and selectively. So what point is the Badger making here? It’s simple. We are the public, and – regardless of age, wealth, ethnicity, culture, or social standing – our personal information is just that, it’s ours. This means we all have some personal responsibility for who we give it to, what we post and share, and for understanding how it might ultimately be analysed and used. GDPR reinforces this point! Privacy education from an early age is crucial and will, no doubt, be boosted by the new regulations and the fact that politicians have woken up to potential manipulation of your social media data for anti-democratic purposes. So, the Badger hopes that we – the people at large – not only become more thoughtful, caring and protective of the information we share, but also use the power granted to us by the new regulations. Long live Getting the Disparate Public to take more Responsibility for its personal data and for holding organisations to account via the new regulations…

The Badger listened to a radio interview with David Coulthard this week. David is an ex Formula 1 racing driver and now a commentator for the sport. The Badger’s ears pricked up when he told the interviewer that he wished he knew what he does now when he was 20 years old. Don’t we all! David felt it was important to pass on his knowledge gleaned from experience to help his young son when he had to join the workforce in due course. David believed that younger generations were finding it more and more competitive to join the workforce in their chosen career, and that having knowledge passed on by their parents could be nothing but helpful. This resonates well with the objectives of this website, which is now 1 month old. The Badger took some comfort that the site’s objectives are not misplaced!

Immediately after the Coulthard interview there was an interview with a politician who was articulate, precise, remarkably objective and very clear about what they said. Later in the day there were snippets from this interview in the media. The Badger sighed at some of the distortions and wondered if anyone had really listened rationally and objectively to what was said!

There’s a famous saying attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Epictetus. It says we have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we can speak. Indeed, one of the Badger’s leadership colleagues often used this saying in meetings with direct reports and wider presentations to staff to remind people of the importance of listening. The Badger, however, believes in an extended version of the Epictetus saying, namely ‘we have two ears and two eyes, so we can listen and see twice as much as we speak’. The Badger’s experience is that people who listen closely, observe behaviours and read the facts, and rationalise all these inputs before they open their mouth to speak, make quality decisions, tend to succeed in their task, and build reputations for objectivity, integrity and fairness. Those that shoot from the hip often struggle to build trust and respect and ultimately fail.

Of course, business, politics and project delivery are full of situations to be handled. So, if you want to get to the bottom of, and ultimately turnaround, whatever situation you’re facing, then always devote twice as much time to listening closely, observing behaviours and assimilating the facts, before analysing the right thing to do and speaking to direct the correct action. That way you’ll do the best for your organisation, yourself, and for others. The ‘others’ bit is important – business and project delivery difficulties are, after all, rarely the fault of one person.

At some stage in our working lives we’ll all have rolled our eyes and wondered how someone in a senior or executive position reached those lofty heights! This often happens if we see or hear behaviours, judgements, and decisions from leaders that seem crass, political, self-centred, and out of alignment with realities seen by the wider workforce. Gossip becomes rife, leaders become disliked and distrusted, and coffee point conversations speculate that leaders’ motives are driven by their own personal rewards.

The Badger has certainly had these thoughts over the years! However, the Badger has learned never to jump to conclusions about a leader, their credentials for their role, or their personal motives until you’ve worked for them directly. Until then they should be given the benefit of the doubt. After all, people rise to positions of power in their organisations because they have a hunger to progress their career and do so, and the wherewithal to take the opportunity when it arises. This doesn’t mean they are the most capable people on the planet, and the best leaders know that!

The Badger vividly remembers being appointed into a senior position reporting directly to an executive leader responsible for a number of businesses. The general perception in the workforce at the time was that the executive was an oddball. They chain-smoked, always looked scruffy even when wearing a suit, and looked and spoke like one of Barry Humphries alter egos. The executive was not a good communicator either. Coffee point conversations across the workforce often gravitated to wondering how the individual ever reached the position of running a business, especially when folklore had it that the executive often had one too many drinks at social events, gravy stains down their shirt, and neck ties that appeared to come out of the side of their neck rather than from under their chin!

At first the Badger was cautious. However, it quickly became evident that behind the popular caricature was a highly educated, intelligent person with exceptional business instincts who was great fun to work with. They were dedicated, worked exceptionally hard, and had an absolute passion to do their best for the company, its staff and clients. The Badger quickly realised this was a capable and successful leader who deserved their position; they just needed some better internal marketing!

The Badger learned too that the old saying ‘Never judge a book by its cover’ applies just as much to people as it does to books! Don’t take things at face value, regardless of widely held perceptions. Form your opinions of those with power based on what you see of the real person and their motives when you engage with them personally. In most cases you’ll wonder less at how they reached such lofty heights. If, however, you see that the cover is the best thing about the book, then roll your eyes with abandon and worry…worry lots!