No information is better than bad information

Have you ever asked someone for directions, only to learn after following their instructions that they were wrong? It's awful. Why didn't that person just tell you they didn't know in the first place? Or maybe they thought they knew but they were simply mistaken? Either way, you're worse off that if that person had simply said: "I don't know".

Applications, websites, reports and user interfaces are the same way, and often times exist solely so that you can more clearly present certain information to someone. If the information you're presenting is wrong though, what's the point? You've actually done more harm than good.

People working in technology sometimes forget this simple truth - that bad information is far worse than no information at all. If you're getting so caught up in the functionality of something, so eager to see it "work", that you're neglecting the actual information being presented, you're doomed to failure.

We're working on an application right now and have decided that in order for it to guarantee a positive user experience, the GPS must be turned on and a coordinate must be retrieved. Could we use cell tower triangulation? Sure, we could. But that also means that a lot of people would be given incorrect information. The application would technically work but we'd be doing our users a huge disservice. Sometimes the best answer is "Sorry, I can't help you right now"

No amount of fancy design or awesome functionality can cover up the stink of bad information.

Are you certain that what you're presenting to your users is correct? If you're not, you have problems with the very foundation of your application.

Patience is Expensive

In our personal lives, I think the old adage is true - patience really is a virtue. Having patience with your friends, spouse, and children is a way to strengthen the foundation of your most important relationships. There's not really any cost, the rewards are great, and there is very little (if any) risk.

In business though, patience can be very costly. It's not a virtue, it's an expense. This doesn't mean it's never worth the cost - but a lot of times it isn't.

If your revenues are declining, you probably need more action than patience. If a project is running off the rails, it needs a project manager that's going to fix it immediately, not someone that's going to be patient and "let the process sort things out." If someone wants to start their own business, too much patience might be what's holding them back.

The exact definition of patience is: "the capacity to accept or tolerate delay, trouble, or suffering without getting angry or upset." Of course, getting angry or upset doesn't necessarily mean showing that you are angry or upset.

My point is, if you're able to accept "delay, trouble or suffering without getting angry or upset" you are, at a minimum, paying a price for that patience.

It takes practice

What is "it"? Well....it's anything. There's simply nothing you can expect to be good at without a lot of practice. This holds true in sports, acting, music, writing, and yes - also in business. The difference is that in business we're often not given (or giving) the opportunity to "practice" - everyone is always competing.

This is a huge problem.

Practice is where you get to make mistakes. Practice is where you push yourself to limits you're not quite sure you can handle. Practice is sometimes successful only when you identify the point where you fail. I'm a huge believer in the theory that we learn more from success than we learn from failure. But I also believe that no one becomes successful without a lot of practice and that sometimes the best practice sessions are filled with mistakes. The key is to keep the mistakes small, contained and to learn from them.

I was a springboard diver from about the age of 7 and continued all the way through my senior year at the University of Iowa. The amount of practice time compared to actual competition time was astronomical. We would practice 6 days a week and 4 hours per day, but we would only have competitions once every couple weeks. When we competed though, we were ready and in top form - because we practiced so much.

In the world of business, this practice to competition ratio is completely flipped.

Rarely are developers, project managers, designers, marketers and a host of others given the opportunity to practice. People are expected to perform at "competition" levels without ever being given the opportunity to push themselves to their professional limits. The result is one of two things: When mistakes are made they're huge with tremendous impact, or talented people find themselves in positions well below their abilities and ultimately become bored from the lack of stimulation.

The other thing that's required to make practice effective though is coaching. Unfortunately, this is something that a lot of managers are either unwilling or unable to do for their people and it's a real shame. Coaching takes knowledge, skill, time, patience and effective communication. How many managers do you know that possess all of what's needed to provide proper coaching? Is it any wonder then that people aren't given the opportunity to practice?

The combination of constant competition along with a managers' inability to coach virtually guarantees most employees aren't going to get practice time. The opening here is for those of us who can coach, and are willing to let our employees push themselves to their limits. We need to recognize that if we've hired people with talent, then we owe it to them to give them practice time.

This means giving them more responsibility than others might be willing to give them. It means knowing ahead of time that some mistakes will be made and being okay with it. Most importantly though, it means being able to take the time to coach them.

How much practice time are you getting? How much coaching are you providing? The answers are more important than most people realize.

Don't define yourself by your liabilities

When I started Ideal Project Group back at the end of 2006, I received what is probably some of the best business advice I have ever received - don't define yourself by your liabilities. I had (and still have) the good fortune of knowing Stephen Neish, CFO for Voxeo Corporation and he warned me that too often businesses believe it's their liabilities that make them legitimate. He explained that he had seen countless organizations spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on everything from leather couches to flat screens to servers that could provide capacity they probably wouldn't need for years - all in an attempt to legitimize themselves.

Three years later, being more profitable than General Motors, Bank of America, Citibank and a host of other zombie corporations littering our economic landscape, I'm glad I listened to his advice and thought I should pass it along.

The reality is, profits are what make you legitimate.

If you're thinking of starting a business, or have one already, allow your profits and your assets to be your guiding light - not your liabilities. Thinking of starting a web development firm? Do you really need office space right now or can you work out of a public library with free Wi-Fi? Want to open a restaurant? Do you really need a score of $2,000 flat panels? Opening a boutique retail shop? Is it necessary to spend $20,000 or more on hardwood floors?

Now, during the course of identifying yourself by your profits and not your liabilities there will be those who attempt to diminish you and/or your company. Why? Because it's very easy for people to see your liabilities; it's not so easy for them to see your profits.

I cannot count the number of times someone has tried to belittle the company I am building. You just have to be willing to shrug it off keeping only one thing in mind - anyone that tries to diminish you or your business because you don't have more liabilities is almost certain never to have started their own company. It's also helpful to remember it's a lot easier to tell someone else how they should spend their money than it is to spend it yourself.

Don't define yourself by your liabilities. Good luck; and may your profits allow you to succeed.

Talent Problems Cannot be Solved with Process

Sometimes work doesn't get completed because it wasn't clear to the person who needed to do the work that they were responsible for the task at hand. Sometimes work is completed late because due dates were not communicated clearly. Other times, work isn't completed because something else suddenly took higher priority. In these instances, a new process may help prevent similar issues from occurring in the future. Keep in mind, a "process" in these examples may amount to nothing more than a simple list of priorities or it may be something more complex. None the less, they are issues that can be solved by providing greater clarity on priority, responsibility, and delivery dates.

Sometimes however, tasks aren't completed or priorities are mixed up because the person responsible for doing the work is simply not good at their job. No amount of process will turn a poor performer into a good performer. I could follow the same workout routine, eat the same food and wear the same shoes as Kobe Bryant. Guess what - I'm still going to be a crappy basketball player. I simply don't have the talent that he has.

To take the sports analogy a bit further, look at how often teams change their players. Even dynasties that keep the same core athletes still identify ways to make their teams stronger, and this often involves getting rid of athletes that aren't performing.

Now, I'm not suggesting that companies should be going around looking for people to fire. What I am saying though is that before implementing new processes and procedures, you should make sure that you're not trying to address a talent problem.

If you truly have issues with clarity, prioritization and ownership then a little more process may be exactly what you need - no matter how lightweight it may be. If however you're trying to correct someone's performance by adding more process, don't do it because it won't work.