A friend at KnowTheNetwork, wrote a rather interesting opinion regarding liberty and freedom. Tsudonimh wrote:

Liberty - 1: the quality or state of being free: a: the power to do as one pleases (Merriam-Webster)

What does it mean to be a free society? Or for a citizen to possess freedom?

Liberty allows you the free will of action and speech up to the point that you infringe upon another’s liberty. The ideal of liberty is uncomfortable and uncompromising and belief in such an ideal makes me a radical in most every circle.

My response is as follows:

Tsu, I would agree with the very principal of your belief. I have become a little more jaded in the simple fact that people have forgotten a very primary component of Liberty - the responsibility and accountability that accompanies such a power as being free.

Freedom, in my humble opinion, is much like love. I can be selfish and call it love - but true love is a relationship where both partners are committed to the other selflessly. This creates restraint and borders where both parties can feel completely protected. Why? Because each party has the other’s best interest at heart.

Extend my argument to liberty: You are correct in that your freedom ends where it will infringe upon another’s liberty - but who is to decide this? The problem here is liberty works only in a society where its members are focused upon an attitude of service and selflessness - protection for each other.

Every argument in a marriage - every argument - comes from one party doing, saying, or acting in a selfish manner. As such, every conflict in history stems from another’s belief in something that is opposite from another and an unwillingness for compromise.

One thing that people have forgotten is that government is supposed to be the people. We in point of fact, live in a more socialistic culture where we have traded our rights of freedom for creature comforts - traded our liberty as currency to pay for the outsourcing of our hassles and worries.

Some efforts by our “government” have been good, but most have been stretched and twisted - resembling something wholly different than the original spirit of law intended.

Keep in mind, legalizing everything is not the answer, excusing irresponsible behavior is never the solution. Successful societies hold to the covenant of some standards - and agree to live by this social contract. Why? To preserve the greater good, to perpetuate humanity itself.

I admire your idealism, and I once to held to a standard that everyone could self moderate, but what I have been sadly made aware of through experience is that so many people do not - or worse - will not self-moderate their behavior.

What is truly sad to me is that these same abusive and selfish individuals claim it is their “right” to act in such a way as not acting in this fashion would impose upon their freedom. If you need any grander social experiment as proof, I would encourage you review a little thing called Woodstock 1967… Great ideals, but a miserable failure exemplifying self-indulgence and excess which resulted in soulless physical exchanges, malnutrition and disease.

No my friend, we are not mature enough to handle a “no holds barred” society.

Ken Stewart’s blog, ChangeForge.com, focuses on the collision between the constantly changing worlds of business and technology. Ken is also the Director of Technology at Kearns Business Solutions.

Corey Smith got me thinking about process and procedure. I thought about this a while and this is what I came up with in summary. Short, sweet, and to the point.

I suppose procedure was intended to franchise process, but as we all know franchises have never been credited with creativity - just pure productivity.

So which do you prefer, procedure or process? Creativity or productivity?

I ran across a great story in a book I’m currently reading, A Gentle Thunder by Max Lucado (for those interested, I post my current reading list in my blogroll in the sidebar). This parable offers meaning on so many levels, I really could not pass on posting it.

The faces of the three men were solemn as the mayor informed them of the catastrophe. “The rains have washed away the bridge. During the night many cars drove over the edge and into the river.”

“What can we do?” ask one.

“You must stand on the side of the road and warn the drivers not to make the left turn. Tell them to take the one-lane road that follows the side of the river.”

“But they drive so fast! How can we warn them?”

“By wearing these sandwich signs,” the mayor explained, producing three wooden double-signs, hinged together to hang from one’s shoulders. “Stand at the crossroads so drivers can see these signs until I can get someone out there to fix the bridge.”

And so the men hurried out to the dangerous curve and put the signs over their shoulders.

“The drivers should see me first,” spoke one. The others agreed. His sign warned, “Bridge Out!” He walked several hundred yards before the turn and took his post.

“Perhaps I should be second, so the drivers will slow down,” spoke the one whose sign declared, “Reduced Speed.”

“Good idea,” agreed the third. “I’ll Stand here at the curve so people will get off the wide raod and onto the narrow.” His sign read simply “Right Road Only” and had a finger pointing toward the safe route.

And so the three men stood with their three signs ready to warn the travelers of the washed-out bridge. As the cars approached, the first man would stand up straight so the drivers could read, “Bridge Out.”

The the next would gesture to his sign, telling the cards to “Reduce Speed.”

And as the motorists complied, they would then see the third sign, “Right Road Only.” And though the road was narrow, the cars complied and were safe. Hundreds of lives were saved by the three sign holders. Because they did their job, many people were kept from peril.

But after a few hours they grew lax in their task.

The first man got sleepy: “I’ll sit where people can read my sign as I sleep,” he decided. So he took his sign off his shoulders and propped it up against a boulder. he leaned against it and fell asleep. As he slept his arm slid over the sign, blocking one of the two words. So rather than read “Bridge Out,” his sign simply stated “Bridge.”

The second didn’t grow tired, but he did grow conceited. The longer he stood warning the peple the more imprtant he felt. A few even pulled off to the side of the road to thank him for the job well done.

“We might have died had you not told us to slow down,” they applauded.

“You’re so right,” he thought to himself. “How many people would be lost were it not for me?”

Presently he came to think that he was just as important as his sign. So he took it off, set it up on the ground, and stood beside it. As he did, he was unaware that he, too, was blocking one word of his warning. he was standing in front of the word “Speed.” All the drivers could read was the word “Reduce.” Most thought he was advertising a diet plan.

The third man was not tired like the first, nor self-consumed like the second. But he was concerned about the message of his sign. “Right Road Only,” it read.

It troubled him that his message was so narrow, so dogmatic. “People should be given a choice in the matter. Who am I to tell them which is the right road and which is the wrong road?”

So he decided to alter the wording of the sign. He marked out the word “Only” and changed it to “Preferred.”

“Hmm,” he thought, “that’s still too strident. One is best not to moralize.” So he marked out the word “Preferred” and wrote “Suggested.”

That still didn’t seem right, “Might offend people if they think I’m suggesting I know something the don’t.”

So he thought and thought and finally marked through the word “Suggested” and replaced it with a more neutral phrase.

“Ahh, just right,” he said to himself as he backed off and read the words:

“Right Road - One of Two Equally Valid Alternatives.”

And so as the first man slept, and the second stood and the third altered the message, on car after another plunged into the river. 

Another guest post by a good friend and author, Corey Smith, mastermind behind the business and technology blog, masterthebusiness.com. In his spare time, Corey has also founded several companies to include Resumango and TributeMedia as well as being the Chief Web Architect for Dealer Marketing Systems and Editor-in-Chief at Office Product News. I do hope you enjoy reading this post as much as I did.

Change is not easy to implement in an organization. People are resistant to change. The fact is, much of what we try improve with change fails. Not because that the change is bad, but because we don’t make sure the change itself succeeds.

If you are the lone wolf crying in the office, then don’t expect any of the change you want to implement to happen. The only way for change to work is if it starts from the top down. If the boss doesn’t care about what you are trying to accomplish, it simply won’t happen.

I find it interesting when IT departments implement some new technology and then wonder why it doesn’t work. More often than not, the business leaders in the organization don’t want to make any change, so the new technology simply falls on deaf ears.

If you are going to push for any change in your organization, make sure the boss is on board or be prepared to fail.

 Corey Smith’s business and technology blog provides a common sense approach to running your business. He also maintains a news feed service for the copier, printer and document management industries.

When you think of IT, MIS, or any other acronymn used to describe the technology department of a company, what is the image that comes to mind? Does it resemble a Saturday Night Live skit Nick Burns, Your Company’s Computer Guy?

Many IT-types have bemoaned the fact that technologists have gotten a bad wrap. I wonder why that is?

Simply put, the stereotypical computer tech was always long on computer wisdom but terribly short on the softer skills in life, such as tact and social grace. I am not totally sure whether most computer guys had watched too much Gordon Gekko and fancied themselves all powerful, or if they just didn’t notice they were alienating their customers. Either way, the end result was the creation of our famous stereotype, Nick Burns…

As a manager, culture is one of the most delicate things to balance. Do you choose the talented player that can put points on the board and overlook some ‘minor’ team-fit issues? Do you sacrifice and choose a mediocre player that can get along with everyone and take direction?

That’s a trick question, to a certain extent. You choose neither. It is possible to choose talented players, but you can’t forsake the overall team concept. Combined, individuals can accomplish wonderful and extraordinary things. So don’t sell yourself short and let your ‘IT rooster” rule the roost. It won’t be as easy as pounding your fist, and you have to decide for yourself if your IT guy is your go-to-guy.

If you are an IT guy or gal, make sure you put yourself in a position to be the go-to-guy (or gal). By keeping customer service in the forefront of your mind and engaging in your culture you may not win employee of the year, but you could get a reputation for solving problems rather than being one.

Today we discuss the blurring of technology lines. In a recent article in ImageSource titled Top 10 Industry Trends, authored by John Mancini, the President of AIIM, outlines what he believes to be the top 10 drivers within the DMS space… Let’s continue our discussion with the number 8 influencer in the DMS space this year:

8. The blurring of technology lines.  What does your business need? Copiers? Scanners? Records management? Content management?  Document management? Business process management?  E-mail management?  Most likely, all of the above in some configuration. And the solution providers who can help end users figure out the appropriate configuration – they won’t all be the same – will find end users racing to their door.

John strikes a cord with this article. It resonates a simple truth, “Add value to your customers’ business and make them clients for life.” More than ever, companies are looking for answers. They hire analysts and accounts to give them a clue about what’s going on in this rat race. They hire consultants to spin a web and show them a future where they are rich and wise. They hire marketing and public relations firms to package all of this up and put a nice bow on top…

What happened to common sense?

To some extent, people are a little scared about all of this technology being thrown at them. In reality, it’s a lot of F.U.D. Combine this with the intent of some opportunistic individuals who are looking to capitalize on a little ‘man behind the curtain’ (so to speak). So what’s this common sense nonsense all about, anyway?

 For those of you who haven’t read Jim Collins’ Good to Great, get it, read it, and sleep with it! I can’t tell you one book that a business should live by… It’s not a bible by any means, but it has some good ole fashion common sense advise. Collins goes on to say that you have to have the right people in the right seats on the bus and get the wrong people off.

With all of this waving of fists and frothing of mouths going on about the ‘document industry’ people keep missing the one truth that a business is not four walls and a roof, it is a group of like minded and passionate individuals working as a team. File that!

I have been in the technology industry for around 11 years now, beginning in the United States Marine Corps. This was one of the most trying times of my young life, both personally, with a newly wed wife living 3000 miles away from home for the first time, and professionally - and a challenge was what I signed up for. One of the sayings of the Corps was, “Shared adversity builds team.” Boy, did the Marine Corps take advantage of this, and I will tell you that I worked with some of the best and brightest people I have ever had the privilege to serve with.

One of my regrets is that I was not mature enough at the time to appreciate what the value of a team offered as opposed to standing on your own against the odds. Sure, I got the idea of a fire team or squad, but I never truly understood what the Staff Non-Commissioned Officers (NCO’s) would always say, “The Marine Corps doesn’t take care of Marines, Marines take care of other Marines.” It is something that I am only starting to truly understand how profound a statement that was. I truly worked with one of the best teams known on this planet.

To say that, is to say that when I joined my current company almost 5 years ago, I have come to understand there are so many layers to building a true team. Through finishing a degree and attending various management seminars to building my own team, perhaps the most fundamental thing I have come to know is that people help other people; it takes the right people supporting each other in pursuit of a common vision that truly takes a team from good into the realm of greatness.

I am a big fan of Jim Collins book Good to Great. One of my favor parts is where he talks about getting the right people on the bus, in the right seats on the bus, and getting the wrong people off. We started along a path of building a great company many years ago, and it started with the founder, lived on with the new owners, and has not only been seeded in each of us at this company but has really taken root. It is not a fanciful wish or a begging question, but a resolute and humble knowledge that the passion of doing the very best job for those individuals that stand beside you makes you great!

While this post may sound a little cultish, almost as if I had ‘drank the Kool-Aid’, the team that I have had the privilege of working with and even building has turned out to be a greater honor than accolade. I have been humbled by the many trials I have been through and think of this current position as infinitely more complex and challenging than ever was the Marine Corps, but exceedingly more rewarding. It is the people that I hold up that in turn support me so that we may work towards a shared vision… and I have learned a valuable lesson that we stand stronger together than alone - a lesson both business and society-at-large can learn from.

Regards,
Ken

I just recently had the pleasure of meeting a new friend, Corey Smith, at ITEX, who runs the Master the Business blog, through a colleague of mine, Darrel Amy, who owns Dealer Marketing Systems. He wrote a rather interesting article on his blog that I was thumbing through called ‘Does change always equal ROI?’

I responded back with some thoughts of my own:

I firmly believe change is hard, and people generally only want change because they are unsatisfied with the current situation, but is the grass really greener on the other side?

Of course, this is a rhetorical question in the grander sense of this reply, but a question that should, nonetheless, be asked by those change agents within a business and really examined. It is my humble opinion that only two things should dictate change: 1) an internal desire to positively impact the business and 2) an external market pressure or development that dictates change to survive.

People by their very nature are experiential. This is to say that they must generally experience a great deal of pain or pleasure to enable the catalysts for change to take root. It is my submission that change only occurs in any form of permanence with the former as it takes an increasing amount of pleasure to perpetuate lasting change (see economics 101: the law of diminishing returns).

So in a nutshell, change for its own sake never succeeds, and you are dead-on in stating change can indeed be painful. However, it is that very vision of change from the leader given to the troops, and reinforced by line managers that keeps change on track - along with a good business plan of course!

What I would submit to you is change management can be positive, much quicker to realize ROI, and much less painful, even to the point of being positive, if you have spent the time building a culture that is high capacity and dedicated to the grander vision of a leader…

You must consistently remind people why we are changing, but most importantly, as a technologist and business process improvement advocate, I have found that gaining not only C-level buy-in but grass roots buy-in to be the real key. This is why my number 1 metric is always long-term cultural adoption.

Communistic you say? Not in the least. I have found that your associates can often tell you what is screwed up most in the business. Why is this? Because they are often closest to your customer… This is of course to say you have built a high-capacity team and that you have the right people on the bus — and in the right seats on the bus (to use a line from Jim Collins).

Culture is king and how change can be accomplished in both good and bad situations.

Regards,
Ken