Want to Engage Gen-Y? Stop Planning and Start Doing

As Guy Kawasaki says, innovate and then churn, baby churn!

Brandon H
http://newlycorporate.com

A big Gen-Y Amen to that!

Seth Godin calls this idea layering.

It's about executing on an idea and not waiting till the idea is taken already.

Ryan – I couldn't agree with you more. My company has not acknowledged the "just try it and get it done" philosophy yet. Most of the time I am waiting around to hear if the such-and-such idea was approved and then to go forward with it, which could take days/weeks. Very frustrating, but you are right…I have been pursuing other side projects. The side projects are great, but also make me question leaving the corporate world, like if my side project takes off – peace out! I can understand and sympathize with companies wanting to meet and approval – they feel like they are saving money by working out all the kinks beforehand. But, isn't it funny that after all that meeting and discussing the simplest (or even the first) idea wins and you think "well, geez if we would have just went with that in the first place and not wasted all this time." Thanks for the post!

God…. I HATE the "just try it and get it done" philosphy. I see this ALL the time in my I.T. department. We are so overworked that there never enough planning done, so we often fall into the "just make it work" mode

Oh sure, it seems to work great for a while. Stuff gets accomplished. All the managers just see the results and say "it works!". Then there are congratulations all around, and they move on to the next project.

But behind the scenes, it's a mess! People are working overtime patching stuff left and right to keep it working. Errors start creeping in. People start losing confidence in the product. Eventually, something big enough blows up to really capture management's attention.

Meetings are called. Heads roll. Eventually we go back and do the planning we SHOULD have done in the first place. Things get fixed, but it never works as good as it should, because you're building upon a bad foundation.

I suppose the advantage to working this way is that you got it working really fast, and it was 'good enough'. But geez, the stress caused by this method is nuts!

There is such a thing as too much planning. Just make sure you don't go to far the other way!

I think the problem with this post, and indeed this theory, is that there isn't any digression used. I've heard Colin Powell talk about leadership, and one strong point I heard from him was: "It is better to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission." I'm sure others have said the same thing, but it rings true nonetheless. And to that point, I agree, sometimes "just get it done" is the appropriate mentality, but in my daily business, I have to suffer because people (mostly gen y in my role) just run around and never take a step back to address the big picture.

As a project manager, the amount of extra time because someone didn't understand a situation, and instead just ran with it, is astounding. Don't get me wrong, I don't want perfection on a first run through…but there is a threshold that you need to not cross. Sometimes taking a minute to gather information and ensure you understand at least the big picture will go a long way. I'm more than willing to run with whatever project assignments I get, but if the big picture was painted completely wrong because the first person just wanted to "get it done" and takes the "we'll fix it if it's not right" approach, then it really just wastes countless hours of my day. Understanding the big picture is really something we all need to hold ourselves accountable to when we take the "just run with it" approach.

Thanks for the comments. There are definitely arguments to be made for just doing something and there are arguments to be made for planning things out. In either case, you do need to step back and take a look at the big picture. But looking at the big picture does not need to take months or years in most cases.

Planning needs to consist of taking initial action, rather than simply talking or creating elaborate written plans. We took initial action on a few ideas and realized that some of them wouldn't work for a variety of reasons. If we had just planned to do these things we still would have discovered they wouldn't work, and we would have wasted time doing nothing.

Also, this is about a lot more than just getting something done for the sake of getting it done. This is about getting something done to gauge a reaction and adjust accordingly, especially when you're talking about a new product or a new website.

I definitely recommend checking out the link that Rebecca sent over about "Layering." It's really interesting.

-Ryan

I think we should focus on finding a happy medium. I don't think Ryan is suggesting (and correct me if I'm wrong) that we shouldn't plan at all. Planning is obviously an important part of an successful business venture. It seems to me that the excessive conferencing, pre-meeting meetings, and endless bureaucracy are unnecessary in most situations.

In my opinion, if the decision has been made that there should be a change or a new venture, there should be a time limit set for the planning period. Maybe a day or two for smaller issues, and a week, or at most two weeks for more cumbersome or life-changing events. It seems to me that these stalling tactics are ways to put off making a decision out of fear of failure. So spend time on better research – not more time going over the same reserach over and over again. If you play your cards right, you may end up saving money just going for it, even if you make a mistake, than if you spend time and resources spinning your wheels.

The "just run with it" approach does not work well it corporations not because it is a bad approach but because for the most part there are no communities built around corporations and their products (at least not in the way we know communities today on the internet).

Websites and communities can release early and iterate because they will get real feedback and be able to accurately judge the tide of their community's opinion.

Large consumer facing companies don't have this ability because the only feedback they really get are through focus groups and whether or not the product sells. The other disadvantage is that they have such huge public exposure that if a product fails its really tough to reinvent it in the publics minds.

If EmployeeEvolution were to launch BrazenCareerist and have it be a flop two things would happen, one, the community would let them know what was wrong instantly through the feedback loop (comments emails etc) and two, the failure's exposure would not be so large that it would be tough to recover from.

If Coke launches a product and it fails (ie. coffee coke or whatever) they have two options scrap it or wait until the storm blows over and a new generation comes along whereas brazen careerist could iterate on the fly without much trouble.

Its the same reason almost no internet company ends with exactly the same business model it started with. On the web the community is your focus group and your planning meetings.

This is not true in corporate america and it can't be even as hard as they try to make it so.

It is a mater of initial scale.

Ryan,

I read through your article and have some comments:

"We're ready to act, we get frustrated when we can't. We're ready to get so much done and be so productive that we move up the ladder faster than anyone in the history of the organization".

Wow, that is a pretty strong statement. Can you back up that comment with facts? As most of the readers suggest, you can't just shoot from the hip without having some planning invloved. Not that you have to think and talk your plan to death, but there is a middleground that most common sense business minds understand before you act on an idea, product or project.

"Established companies seem pretty content to waste time arguing pros and cons in meetings, passing ideas up the chain of command, creating strategic plans, and perfecting their big picture vision. It's one thing to realize you're moving too slow and learn from your mistakes, but to keep running in circles is just counterproductive".

It seems that the bigger the organization, the more time is spent (the term "wasted" is a bit harsh)on getting agreement and putting ideas into action. Smaller companies can act more quickly, usually because you only have to get approval from a few rather than from many. That is why a lot of people start their own companies. In doing so, you can reduce the amount of time talking about things and can act on it more quickly. But in doing so, you take on more risk. And if you suceed in a smaller environment, you are usually bought out by bigger companies.

"No wonder we're changing jobs every 18 months, starting side projects, or ditching the corporate world all together. It's just our way of saying, "I'm not waiting around anymore. I'm going to do something."

My feeling is that young people change jobs every 18 months because they are impatient. One of the common themes I see in the Millenial blogs is that they want everything right now and they can't comprehend the concept of putting time into anything as well as an entitlement personality. What you are saying here makes all of us who have worked hard for success, a good reputation and an attempt to make this world a better place for all a meaningless journey. Further, you act as if your generation has stumbled across some enlightenment that makes you worth so much more than any who have come before you. Why is that?

"When companies finally get with the times, stop all the planning, decentralize, and actually change rather than talk about change, maybe they will begin to keep their employees around for a few years. But if I were you, I wouldn't hold my breath."

It would be very interesting to see any one generation make such an impact on the world of business. It is true that our current business model will go through a transformation of change, but it will do so gradually and will be done through many different generations, not just from one group who have such strong views about our current business culture.

These are only my opinions and I only have 21 years of corporate and small business experience to back up my views. I would welcome your views as well as those from others who agree or disagree with my opinions.

I'm going through this full circle of idea process right now. It seems like most of the time we come back to the original idea after days of trials and deliberation. The problems is I'm the one (the Gen Y'er) who has to pay for the deliberation time working the weekend to make it up. Corporate bullshit (only they don't think they're corporate). I can't defend myself or I'll be reinforcing the negative Gen Y perception they have of me already.

I think the problem is that there is a honeymoon period in the business and those of us who have been in the corporate world for 2+ years are realizing through experience all the intricacies of corporate bureaucracy. We are ready and willing to change and make changes, but the "seasoned" professionals want to waste time to plan and approve and so on and so on.

There needs to be a balance between getting 100% consensus and over-planning, and trusting ourselves to try something new and go with it. I think it's better and faster to plan for a little and go with a little over and over, than to make something into a big deal and take way too long planning and not implementing!

Jacqui and Melanie are both right that there is a happy-medium. The happy medium is somewhere between a start up launching a website and getting feedback like Brad eluded to, and the large companies wasting time passing decisions up the chain of command. Not planning anything is obviously a bad move, but over-planning can be just as bad.

Aaron makes a great point that because we're doing the grunt work, Gen-Y's are the ones who feel the effects of time wasted deliberating and strategizing. This can mean working late or working the weekend, because we were waiting around all day twittling our thumbs waiting for the higher-ups to deliberate.

Alan, it's true that bigger organization the more time is spent getting approval etc. But just because this is how it is now, does not mean thats how it has to be. Companies can decentralize and not require smaller decisions to go to the top of the ladder. Also, Gen-Y is impatient. That is why we change jobs every 18 months, and that's the point of the post. We're impatient because we know there is a better, faster, more efficient way to do things. In fact, this impatience may just be our biggest asset. That being said, you're right that the current business model will slowly change, nothing will happen over night. But, if we push hard enough while were at the bottom of the food chain, maybe we'll be in the position to make that big shift when we get to the top.

-Ryan

Ryan
One potential side effect of this "just do it" mentality is that the quality of the work can suffer. However, too much thought can lead to a lesser quality outcome, as well (i.e. overthinking).
So it's important to set goals and acheive them systematically, being able to mark them off as you go along. If it's been months, and you've got nothing checked off your list, then you ought to rethink your strategy. The happy medium theory returns!
That said, I ultimately agree with, and appreciate the post, as it sends a message out to those of us who look forward to a successful career: "Stop looking forward, and start looking here." The sooner you start, the further ahead of the curve you'll end up. That goes for your own curve, as well as the public one.
Sometimes, just doing something, can have explosive results, even if it's rushed. If you force yourself to get something done, you're more likely to get more done. So the happy medium is only right for those of us who actually have happy mediums. Some of us just need to find the medium that is going to get SOMETHING done!

-Todd

I certainly agree with Ryan's basic premise that larger companies, with their layers of management and bureaucracy, often spend too much time planning and don't know when to move forward. Regardless of generation, I can't imagine anyone who has spent any time working in a large company would disagree.

But I'm reticent to take that philosophy too far. If the example of what's going on with Brazen Careerist is supposed to support an argument that "the first idea is always best; just run with it," then I'd call that philosophy short-sighted, untested, and unwise. Coming back to a first idea is common, but it's the in-depth planning and analysis that allow you to iron out any wrinkles and to allow the entire project team to move forward confidently.

Or, you can just do it and see what happens. … These days, the people who act and then react are the ones who get ahead.

Yes and no. The ones who act/react and succeed–through skill, luck, charisma, or all three–are the ones who get ahead. They're also the ones you hear about. They took a chance, assumed the risk, and did well. But for every one of them, there are hundreds and hundreds of "not them" who failed and lost their jobs and credibility or are stuck in the reactionary mire that Scott M describes. For many of us–perhaps most of us who are no longer in our 20s–that risk is too great.

And come on; let's not imply that the people who thoroughly think things through and execute a plan stratigically are not "the ones who get ahead". The implication in this article is that the entire paradigm has shifted, which is untrue and ridiculous. There's room for both paradigms, and either one can be taken to an unhealthy extreme. As my ol' man used to say, "If it's worth doing, it's worth doing properly."

[...] why Ryan Healy spent months going over idea after idea for his new company, only to return to his original [...]

[...] down" by corporate bureaucracy. All we want is an organization that is willing to change quickly with us and what we perceive to be happening in the business environment outside of our companies. [...]