The 3 Relevances.
The Future Does Not Fit in the Containers of the Past. Edition 192.
Change sucks.
But irrelevance is even worse.
Today most firms, institutions and individuals are grappling with 3 levels of relevance.
Does my firm have a relevant business model for the future?
Does my company have the relevant organizational structure, talent mix and suppliers/partners to succeed tomorrow?
Do we as leaders and practitioners have relevant skills and expertise to navigate the transformed world ?
Relevant business models.
A case can be made that every company needs to interrogate its business model given the changes in technology, demographics and mindsets.
When a company finds itself in trouble it tends to be for two reasons:
Culture: A cultural breakdown due to some combination of a toxic environment, outmoded incentive models or inappropriate leadership. ( Boeing today, Wells-Fargo some time ago).
Competition: An existential crisis driven by a new different economic or distribution model that usually emerges from outside its category definition or usual competitors. ( Tesla and Uber challenges to established auto-makers, linear networks challenged by streaming.)
This culture and competitive soup is now being stirred robustly by AI, Block-chain and XR.
Today AI is driving the cost of knowledge to zero and changing the economics of everything from protein folding to content creation. It is also enabling individuals and small companies to gain scale and capabilities for a few hundred dollars a month that match those of many large companies in an increasing number of areas.
At the same time Blockchain is both creating new ledgers of trust but also allowing creators to own and watermark their work in a world where large tech companies have taken most of the profits and modern AI models are training on their IP.
Upcoming breakthroughs in XR ( Augmented Reality, Virtual Reality, and Spatial Computing) will change communication, creativity and collaboration dramatically within the next three years or less. ( Apple Vision Pro is a threat to any TV manufacturer once its price declines in a few years.)
Smart companies and leaders are re-thinking their business model in various ways including:
a) Blank Sheet Approaches: Working with their internal teams and partners and consultants to re-imagine their business if they were starting today. If they were to begin our company today to satisfy the needs of their customers how would they do it?
b) Attack Mode: If they were to bring their company to its knees as a next age competitor with no legacy constraints but just legal and scientific constraints what would they do?
World class talent and companies never get defeated. They defeat themselves by placing constraints that only exist in their mind or culture or current business models.
Relevant structures and systems.
The future does not fit in the containers of the past.
Most incentive plans are often optimized to deliver today rather than ensure tomorrow.
In a high velocity and fluid world, partnering and openness rather than control and closed systems are likely to thrive.
Three approaches are often used to re-think structures and systems:
a) Multiple Models: World class companies and leaders run schizophrenic models that have teams focussed on today as well as having teams focussed on tomorrow. These teams often with completely different structures, incentive plans and timelines. While major talent is focussed on today, quite a few world class players in the company are allocated to tomorrow and incentivized to deliver tomorrow’s vs legacy metrics.
b) New Incentive Systems: Firms that have incentives, talent and power structures focused primarily on current delivery while claiming to be future forward should not be taken seriously. Incentive plans, talent allocation and organizational structure drive tomorrow and not strategy decks, flurries of press releases or the announcement of future 20xx task forces.
c) Wider Eco-systems: The best leaders have also begun to re-design the eco-system and architectures of their companies. Many have started to partner aggressively to quickly scale talent while ensuring flexibility looking across wider horizons to ensure both relevance and access to technology. (Microsoft has embraced Linux, partnered with Open AI and long ago dropped the Windows operating division.)
Are we still relevant?
Companies do not transform people do.
A company remains relevant if its people and leaders remain relevant.
Today anyone who began work more than five years ago needs to find a way to both learn new capabilities but also unlearn some old habits.
This is particularly true for senior leaders with many decades of experience.
The way it was is not the way it is and definitely not the way it will be.
Change is coming much faster than we can hope to retire.
These changes are not just technological, but need to incorporate new mindsets of talent, different economic models and an expectation for leaders and companies to deal with political and social agendas whether they wish to or not.
The key to remaining relevant in the future is to upgrading our mental operating systems.
Leaders everywhere are embracing the new way through a combination of experimenting and using modern technology, hiring coaches, being reverse mentored, partnering with academia and schools and connecting with other leaders to share best practices on learning.
The best companies are also re-allocating dollars to training and learning and mandating up-skilling.
Twisting ourselves into new shapes takes time and practice and can hurt.
It is like going to the gym. Initially difficult and painful.
Some keys to remaining relevant followed by world class talent and leaders.
a) Learning: Leaders today allocate 5 to 10 hours a week to learn and they allocate at least a fifth of their time to think about and re-imagine their firms for tomorrow. If leaders only spend their time on today they realize that their company will not be taken to tomorrow. It is no longer enough to be up to date. One must ensure our teams and skills are up to tomorrow.
b) Monitoring:Leaders watch where top talent from schools are going or where VC and PE money is being driven.
c) Stepping out of comfort zones and category definitions: Tomorrow has already happened elsewhere.
“The future is already here- its just not very evenly distributed” William Gibson
Too many people go to the same industry conferences which are often nothing but incestious gatherings that generate still-born ideas. Best to leave the rote and familiar that feels like Ground Hog day and go to conferences or events of other industries or in other countries.
Regardless of what each of us do we need to address the 3 relevances regarding the future since our firms, our teams, and ourselves are going to spend the rest of our lives.
Rishad Tobaccowala helps leaders and companies see, think and feel differently about how they grow themselves, their teams and businesses.
I don't know how you can be so prolific and maintain such a high standard of content but, good on you and thank you. Your final point about industry conferences got my attention. After decades of media, advertising, marketing, and digital advertising conferences where I attended as few as possible but that was still too many - after the experiences you just described perfectly, I became an independent brand consultant. I started going to procurement conferences instead of marketing conferences and that made all the difference for my little business.
I totally respect the relevance thesis. I find being a polymath is good for business these days because the learnings are transferable across industries and categories. Being hyper specialized may be a near term win, but not good for long game myopia.