Two years away (from being two years away)

At the National Basketball Association player draft in 2014, former college basketball coach and now broadcaster and analyst Fran Fraschilla offered this classic observation of then 18 year-old Brazilian prospect Bruno Caboclo and his potential to become a successful NBA player:

"He's two years away from being two years away, (from being ready to play in the NBA), and then we'll see."

I thought about this gem of a line from Fraschilla in a recent conversation I was having with a friend about potential career choices. Why did the '2 years away' line come up?

Because I think that 2 years may be the new 5 years, in terms of the old classic interview "Where do you see yourself in 5 years?" question. Take your pick from fast-changing technology, new business models, disruption coming from all sides, and toss in a side dish of the gig economy and I think most people would have a really hard time seeing out five years into the future and be able to offer up a credible or coherent idea of what they think they will be doing then. Two years seems at least more tangible. The future can't move that fast, right? Don't answer that.

The really important point isn't just that 2 years might be the new 5 years, but that just like our pal Bruno Caboclo, what you don't want is to find yourself two years from now STILL being two years away from whatever goal/plan you had set out to reach.

It may be more realistic and reachable to set out career plans and goals in 2 year increments as opposed to 5, (or whatever your dopey interviewer says), but the downside is that 2 years passes really, really fast.

Just ask Bruno, who in 2 1/2 full seasons in the NBA has played in a grand total of 22 games and scored a whopping 16 total points. 

The upside? Bruno is still only 21 and has time to get to where he wants to be. 'Losing' two years might not hurt him that much. 

But I am pretty sure that most of the rest of us don't have that kind of luxury. Or an NBA contract.

Have a great day!

Learn a new word: The Grey Swan Event

For some fun for a snowy Friday, (at least in my part of the world), let's have another installment of the often imitated but never duplicated 'Learn a new word' series, wherein I share the definition and give a couple of examples of a word, phrase, or concept I never knew before recently.

You likely have heard of the term 'Black Swan', an event or occurrence, (sometimes even a person of rare talent), that is unpredictable, (really NOT predictable), is incredibly unique, happens infrequently, and often has significant consequences. Some examples of 'Black Swans' could be a disruptive new invention, like the internet, a global conflict like World War I, or a business or economic event that could not be predicted like the financial crisis of 2007 and 2008. 

Black Swans are so rare, so unpredictable, and so unique that generally speaking it is a waste of time, energy, and resources to try and predict them or forecast or plan for them.

But not all unusual or unanticipated events are true Black Swans. Some of these, at least in theory, could be foreseen or at least imagined. These kinds of events are today's Learn a new word', these are the 'Grey Swans'. The Grey Swan is an unlikely, but impactful event that generally lies outside the base case for business planning but can, if you have just a little bit of ability to think laterally, be envisaged.

The chart on the right created by Nomura Securities shows a few of these Grey Swan possibilities from the world of global economics and finance. Some seem kind of crazy, and some, maybe not so much out ot the realm of potential economic events.

When Nomura put together these possible Grey Swan events, they were purposefully seeking to identify, and more importantly try and plan for, events that are not being generally discussed, remain under the radar, but if they did occur would have significant, and potentially negative consequences for the bank's business.

The lesson for the rest of us as we wind down 2016 and think about our plans for next year?

Maybe build in a few Grey Swans of your own into your scenario planning for 2017. Maybe the CEO AND the COO might both resign in the first quarter. Maybe the new administration will dramatically reduce the availability of foreign worker visas, or maybe Amazon will decide to get into your business, and disrupt the heck out of everything you do.

Who knows? That's why these kinds of events are called Grey Swans.

Sure, they probably won't happen. But if one does, it sure will be good to be the guy or gal who saw it coming.

Have a great weekend!

It's probably too late to panic

Do you follow the financial markets at all? If you do, then you would know that at least in the USA the first week of 2016 set the mark for the worst first week of a New Year for market performance, with most major indices down anywhere from 5 - 10% from the 2015 year-end closing. The Dow Jones, NASDAQ, the S&P 500 - pretty much all showing steep drops in the frst week of the New Year - driven lower by some combination of declining economic conditions in China, a lower and lower crude oil price, and various and sundry manifestations of 'uncertainty', which no one can define exactly, but generally spooks folks who control lots of money.

But as we all know financial markets rise and they fall - and they rise and fall again, forever and ever as they always have. The reason why I wanted to write about this today was an almost offhand comment I heard from one of the financial commentators on CNBC i think, (I can't remember the specific person, I was in a bit of a Nyquil haze this morning), who said this when asked by the show's host about whether or not investors should 'panic' due to these highly volatile market conditions. His reply:

"It's probably too late to panic."

And then he went on to talk about various scenarios and strategies that he felt like would be the most successful given the current conditions. The specifics of his financial/investing advice don't really matter, the key to why what this one gentlemen said and why it stuck out to me through the Nyquil hangover was just how much sense it made in its simplicity, and how applicable it is to just about every 'crisis' at work.

Almost always when you have enough information in order to make the conscious decision to 'panic', it is probably too late for that 'panic' to do you or anyone else any good. It's kind of like throwing gasoline on the already burning fire, and doesn't help you even start to get to solutions or at least stabilization of the situation. The right time for 'panic' is probably just before things really spiral out of control, not after. Or as is the case of financial markets, perhaps the right time to get really worried and to take defensive actions is after a 5% drop, not after a 15% drop.

Whether it is investing, dealing with a difficult colleague, or trying to rescue a deteriorating customer (or even personal) relationship, 'panic' is probably almost never a great idea simply because most of us are not at all good at reading the signals well enough to accurately time our panic. Better of taking a few deep breaths, think about what signs we missed on the way, and then set to being as calm and rational as possible to make things better.

Does panicking sometimes feel good? Feel like the right and only thing to do? Sure.

Does it ever really help? 

Probably not. 

Unless you win the $1.5B Powerball this week, then it is perfectly fine, acceptable, and expected to panic.

Have a great week!

The problem with deadlines

Is that, all too often, they are completely one-sided.

When I need something done, answered, actioned, or otherwise handled is almost certainly not perfectly aligned with how you would like to accommodate my request, (or to spend the time to take a decision to actively not accommodate the request).

My, 'I need it by the end of next week' has to be translated into the language of your workflow, capability, availability, and most importantly, that mental list of the things that are ranked in order to their importance to you, (and that I almost definitely am not aware of).

I can ask you if it is reasonable if I can have that thing by 'End of next week', and you will likely tell me 'Sure, not a problem' because when looked at on a Monday or a Tuesday 'The end of next week' seems like forever away from now and the commitment to deliver seems so far afield from the promise that I would think you kind of incompetent if you simply said 'No'.

I think a better question than 'Can I have this by the end of next week?' or its close equivalent, 'About how long will it take before you can turn this around?' would be, "Where is this item on your priority list?' or 'Assuming you had everything you needed to work on this, when would you actually, you know, start working on it?'

I think it is much more important for the requestor to know how the person being asked to do something actually has the item prioritized and importance-ranked in their own mind than the often irrelevant 'How long will it take to complete?' angle.

It almost never matters how long something will take to complete.

What matters is how motivated you are to start.

Have a great week everyone!

Precaution and Preparedness

While reading some of the coverage and reports of the recent and massive Typhoon Haiyan I came across a really interesting piece on the Lean Crew site titled Wind Engineering. In the piece, the author breaks down some of the science behind wind speeds and wind pressure experienced in hurricanes, tropical storms, and tornados.Ellsworth Kelly - Colors for a Large Wall, 1951

It is a fascinating look at the topic, and kind of shocking too in a way, to think about the tremendous fury these kinds of natural disasters unleash, and their impact to life and property. In the piece, though, there was one really intriguing observation about preparedness and the precautions that can (or really can't) be taken by people and property owners in advance of these kinds of storms. Have a look and I will have a quick comment or two after the excerpt:

If you don’t live in the middle of the country, you may think of tornados as those storms that destroy trailer parks, but that isn’t giving them their proper respect. The winds in a tornado are typically much higher than those in a hurricane. Residential building codes are written to protect against most hurricanes; they don’t even try to handle tornados. A house’s primary protection against tornado damage is the extremely small probability that a tornado will hit it.

I don't live in tornado country, so I don't personally know if that last point is 100% correct, (but it seems pretty plausible, I mean, is it even possible to build normal, residential housing units that could conceivably withstand 200+ MPH winds?), but let's assume for now that it is in fact accurate.

What it reminds us, all too well, is that we simply can't (and probably shouldn't) attempt to prepare for every possible adverse event that potentially may impact ourselves or our businesses. Some risks, like a tornado, are simply too devastating for us to even have an effective plan for handling. 

But, as in the case of the storm actually making a direct hit on one individual structure, the odds are low enough that it makes the risk acceptable to the thousands if not millions of folks who live in tornado country.

Sometimes, I suppose, the best preparedness is just an honest assessment of the likelihood of impact.

Note: I know you know this but donations can be made for Typhoon Haiyan relief efforts via the Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, and probably lots of other relief agencies as well.