December 4, 2010 – 10:24 am
I’ve been thinking about it for some time. My conclusion is quite simple. Here’s the checklist:
- Define the go-to guy’s in the most common situations, and one to take care of everything else.
- Hire only the very, very best.
It all comes down to people, obviously. It’s with the right people that one can achieve quality. Real, subjective, unquantifiable quality.
Tradicional, process-oriented quality management is for companies to big or to inefficient to communicate well. It’s great for big corporate productivity, but demands to little from people. They develop less in the little things. That results on inneffective meetings, inneffective communication, inneffective trivial things. When every mundane task is defined, why bother to think if you are doing the most effective and right way?
However if retaining know-how is a key feature, and most of the times is, then quality management still has a key part in small companys. But should be called documentation, user or project support. A compilation of not so obvious methods or details learned the hard-way by the organization. Not defined by the management. In the process, it gives a big picture of how things work in an organization, allowing to quickly integrate new players.
That’s not rules. That’s knowledge.
It’s the same thing with different vision, diferent words. But the right word goes a long way.
And what really is the definition of quality?
November 20, 2010 – 6:25 pm
Just found this on the drafts. Still makes sense:
We all know that HR are the most valuable active of any organization. Its the raw talent in the people that make (or not) a disruptive company in this innovation-oriented world.
This requires a different kind of management. Going to the roots, I found this definition on Wikipedia:
The acts of getting people together to accomplish desired goals and objectives efficiently and effectively. Management comprises planning, organizing, staffing, leading or directing, and controlling an organization (a group of one or more people or entities) or effort for the purpose of accomplishing a goal.
However, in a talent-oriented world, were the key to sucess trough innovation is culture and people working together, the manager role must evolve dramatically.
I believe in a more coach oriented, rock-star like manager, whom the only purpose is to let the talent work, taking away the clutter. It’s all about taking care of the non-technical work and making the output of the team as raw as possible.
April 18, 2010 – 10:45 am
Este foi um fim-de-semana propositadamente parado quando comparado com o habitual. As semanas que se avizinham vão ser duras com os projectos que temos entre mãos, e há necessidade de ganhar fôlego para a corrida, mas também para pôr a leitura em dia e fazer planos para o futuro. Acabou por relembrar-me da importância enorme que tem o acto de criar e aprender na nossa agitada vida orientada à produtividade.
No dia a dia, pela pressão da obtenção de resultados ou até pelo perfeccionismo intrinseco das pessoas, tornamo-nos por vezes tão focados em fazer, despachar, responder, deliver, que não sobra tempo para aprender, criar ou planear o futuro. Contudo estes são precisamente os momentos com mais impacto na nossa vida, porque nos permite inspirar-nos, repensar o estado das coisas e inovar.
Lembrei-me também de um post que havia lido à algum tempo sobre a importância de tirar sabáticas regularmente. Vem na sequência de uma inspiradora talk de Stefan Sagmeister na TED Global de 2009, onde ele conta a sua experiência de parar um ano em cada 7, e o impacto que isso tem na sua vida enquanto designer.
Por tudo isto, começo a ganhar vontade de inovar este ano. Vou continuar a guardar o mês de férias que ainda tenho para uma mini-sabática (e não é isso que as férias deviam ser?). Espero finalmente despachar a prateleira de livros que tenho em espera para ler, bem como investigar algumas práticas de gestão em Júniores Empresas e Startups que tenho ouvido falar, sem ter tempo para explorar.