That elusive Simplicity

Keeping things simple might just be the hot management topic of the last ten years or so. Complexity hamstrings almost all organisations. Yet there is precious little consensus as to how to achieve simplicity.

That complexity is a crippling problem is clear. I work part time for a company that helps companies engage with their staff. Every client interaction we have tells the same story. People are stressed, overloaded, struggling to stay above water. The more senior they are, the worse it gets. No-one likes it, everyone can see it, all can see how counter-productive it is – yet nothing changes.

Schumpeter in the Economist had another look at simplicity in his or her column last week. He quoted a few interesting practices.

First, it is suggested that complexity needs an occasional bonfire. This makes sense. It is a bit like the clutter around your house or keeping your files up to date. You can do so much each day, but it still tends to expand. So every few months you should have a sort of spring clean.

This is the same with complexity in an organisation. Every year or so we should make a project to remove the clutter. Stop some committees. Simplify some approvals. Eliminate some tasks, or even some jobs. Actively look for things to cut.

This makes sense. I witnessed the same with reorganisations. If there is not a project to cut out waste every five years then the organization gets too fat. It is a human nature thing. We are all ready to get excited about our ideas to grasp new opportunities. That adds to positions and activities. None of us is so willing to reduce our footprint. Who knows, the next step might be demotion or redundancy. So, sadly, someone has to apply the pressure for us, and the best way is for that to happen organization-wide. For a few months, there is uncertainty and some loss of focus on growth or client, but at the end of it we have a slimmed down and fitter company.

Then Schumpeter highlights some smart practices from individual companies. Most try to tackle the hidden costs of people’s time. It is very easy to arrange a meeting or to write an e-mail, so much so that it can seem cost free. But every time we communicate, we impose the cost of time on the other party or parties.

Everyone complains about receiving too many e-mails and attending too many meetings. But we could all do more to help ourselves. In e-mails, the amount received globally has to equal the amount sent, so on average we send as many as we receive. If we can get into the habit of sending fewer, we will probably receive fewer.

So I would go even further than the company quoted by Schumpeter and give people an e-mail budget. It can have its own currency, let’s call it the clog. Sending a mail costs one clog per recipient. Each attachment adds one more clog. It is simple, and the server can keep count and produce automated reports. Then each month, people can be judged against their budget. The worst performers can be publicized. People can be coached on good practices if they are persistent offenders.

It is similar with meetings and phone conferences. In general, I always found that meetings with more than six attendees achieved very little. So set a maximum, say eight. Make the default time 30 minutes instead of an hour. Start at five past and finish at five to, so no-one has an excuse to be late (that they came from their previous meeting or it overran). Then insist on promptness, pre-reading, clear purpose, minutes, and all the other well-known good practices. One company even has meetings standing up, so people don’t get too comfortable. Phone conferences have become even worse than meetings – they have the same failings but are even easier to set up.

Schumpeter has good examples, but I believe he misses the main point. So matter what you do about good practices and spring cleaning, complexity will still tend to mount. The only antidote is to actually simplify the business. If a company can reduce the activities it carries out, then the result is structural simplicity.

The role models in this are many new companies, like Google and Facebook, who start with simple missions, small staffs and few activities. It is very hard for established companies to strip things away. Outsourcing can help, but can also make things worse, if the result is managing lots of complex external relationships. I am also far from convinced by the recent strategies of Google and Facebook – they have so much cash that they are acquiring rabidly, not just overpaying but also condemning themselves to the same complexity that bedevils others.

In the corporate context, the main opportunity for many lies in going against the perceived wisdom of integrating units, especially geographically separated ones. My least productive time at Shell was spent trying to get companies around Europe to work together. I still doubt the net benefits, considering IT cost, disruption and work life sacrifice. Having smaller, autonomous units makes a lot of sense to me in many situations. Look out for a trend of companies giving power back locally, also de-mergers and de-listings.

Apart from IT, the big disaster in integration is the necessity to travel. When people start work, travel is offered as a benefit, and perhaps for a while it is. As we grow older, it becomes the opposite. Technology may help in some small ways, such as better information and IT connectivity, but it also creates new traps, such as the expectation to maintain e-mail contact 24/7 wherever you are.

I think there is a lesson here in our personal lives as well. I blogged on this before, but I don’t think I mentioned travel. I have come to believe that travelling less is one key to simplicity.

It is amazing how often you meet people who have never been to the main attractions in the cities where they live. Others seem to be collecting countries and landmarks as if it were a competition for who can visit the most.

This is all very well in your twenties, but I think it becomes counter productive later on. As with so many things, we are lured by our peers and also by marketing campaigns. Every advert for a cruise will show a relaxed atmosphere and a beautiful view. Of course it does not mention the cramped cabins, the idle hours or even the effort to get to the start and end points.

My advice with travel is to seek less and to find more. Think about cutting out a venue and spending those extra days at home, especially at the end of a holiday, when you need unwinding time before going back to work. Instead of jumping in the car again next weekend and sitting in queue after queue, instead just walk locally or visit that museum down the road you have never seen, or even just stay at home talking with your family. Notice what there is around you. You can always find something wonderful without travelling at all, if your senses are open.

Further, pace travel through your life. By all means burn the candle at both ends in your twenties. Build in more relaxation to your schedule in your thirties, especially if you have kids. Young kids like routine, not long flights and disturbed sleep patterns. By your forties, go to familiar places and for longer spells. Then, if you have a retirement bucket list, make sure you start in your fifties, with long, sweeping holidays, while you are still fit enough to travel freely, and also be ready to invest a bit more in luxury. Finally, as your body winds down, allow your schedule to wind down with it. Less is more, and less seeking will result in more finding.

Simplicity is elusive. Many trends in modern society work against it, whether the trend is corporate pressure, globalization or simply enticing travel marketing. Yet simplicity has magnificent benefits. Others will not help to make our lives simple, we need to counter some of these trends and fit our own behaviour for our own best interests.