April 2007 Archives

Around an year back when we were kicking off a big project in office, our unofficial motto for the project was "lets play like the Aussies". Watching Australia win the World Cup last night reminded me how appropriate that motto was.

The Australian cricket team has won 4 of the last 6 world cups. They have made it to the finals of 5 of the last 6 world cups. They haven't lost a match in the world cup since 1999. In short, they rule the game and there is not even a distant second. Their domination has lasted 20 years and there are no challengers in sight.

In a sport that is often termed as "a game of glorious uncertainties", how can one team continue to dominate so consistently? Over 20 years, dozens of players, coaches, management and selection committees must have come and gone. So it is definitely not a case of individual genius. It is also not a case of just having things fall in place (the way they did for India in 83 or for SL in 96). Australia's success is a case of having the right system in place and following processes. Whether it is selection procedures, training regimens, talent spotting or team strategy, their appears a clear method in their ways. There is no adhocism and very little dependence on individual brilliance. Contrast that with the India team. We have traditionally been people oriented. A great all arounder or a genius batsmen or a legendary leg spinner have historically given India its cricketing successes over the years. This is of course the reason why the Indian team goes through so many crests and troughs.

Australian team is a great example of how organizations should work. Dependence on individual star performers can yield results in the short term but adds little to the strength of the organization. If anything, it can leave rest of the team rallying behind a few individuals. So when those individuals stop performing or are not available, things start falling apart. In contrast, a process based approach may take time to show results. It is hard to get processes right in the first go. It is also hard to get people to change and adhere to processes. But once a good system has been put in place, its there forever. It doesn't depend on individual brilliance or sheer genius. It makes success more predictable and a good system allows identifying weaknesses early on. Sure, it might not be as sexy as a Sachin Tendulkar cover drive - but then how many World Cups has Sachin lifted so far?

There is a saying in Hindi - "laaton ke bhoot baaton se nahi maante". This roughly translates to "force is the only option to cure some". The original idiom is much more colorful but I am unable to capture it in English!

Anyway, I bring this up today because it looks like some "laaton ke bhoot" on Delhi roads have been cured almost overnight! Ever since traffic fines were increased 6-folds in the city, drivers (yours truly included) seem to have started behaving. Cops have gone in to overdrive in the last few days. You can find them on every intersection. Some even peer inside cars stopped at traffic lights to check if they can nab somebody talking on a cellphone or not wearing a seat belt. Its interesting how immediate the effect of increased traffic fines has been. Of course, it still remains to be seen how long this effect remains.

I think one of the reasons why people follow traffic rules more in the US (ok, I know they break rules too but we are talking in relative terms here) is because traffic fines are very heavy and have long term consequences. Each offence shows up on your driving record and can cause your insurance rates to go up. Moreover, 3 offenses in a year and you lose your license! And God help you if you get caught for DUI (driving under influence of alcohol). Delhi needs something similar. It is just too easy to get away committing traffic offenses here.

Traffic follows a classic "me too" pattern. You can observe this for yourself if you happen to be lucky enough (?) to be driving on Delhi roads. Approach a red light which people usually don't stop on. You can find many such intersections in Noida, for example. Now as you approach the red light, make sure to stop well before the stop line. You will notice a couple of cars zip by jumping the red light anyway. But then, almost certainly, everybody else will stop and wait for the light to turn green. This happens for me every time. I find it pretty amusing. The fact that you stopped on a red light sends out a signal to everybody else that perhaps this guy has spotted a cop somewhere around here. I doubt if it occurs to anybody that I might just be following the traffic rules!

As we have grown, and our projects have become larger and more complex, we have started realizing a need for more formalized processes. There is a clear need to standardize on many of our practices, methodologies and tools to make project delivery more homogenous and predictable. In the world of technology startups, "Process" is a four letter word. Often also termed as bureaucracy, introduction of processes is often perceived as an attempt dehumanize an organization. That to some extent is actually true because to minimize risks and scale, organizations need to get more process driven and less people driven. At the same time, Processes often impede free thinking and innovation. Too much Process can give team members  a feeling of simply being part of the system or a cog in the wheel.

For a growing organization, its a tricky balance to achieve between introducing processes and encouraging individual creativity. After all, this freedom and flexibility is what attracts most people to work in a startup as against working in a process driven larger company. It does make me wonder if becoming slow, bureaucratic and tangled in processes is the inevitable fate of all companies as they grow in size? A friend who works in Reliance laments how all decision making and thinking happens in the HQ in Mumbai while the regional offices are left to execute upon those decisions without questioning them. Big tech. companies like Infosys and Wipro also seem to straitjacket teams in to working against a very stringent process driven approach with little scope for experimentation. While I was at Microsoft, the Windows division worked on a very loose set of processes. That, in retrospect, was very commendable considering how big that team was and how much it took to keep the machinery working. However, the lack of stringent process did create problems and I think steps were taken later to address those issues.

So, my question is how does an organization become more process driven and yet continue to remain innovative and encourage original thought? Is it even possible? Are there any examples where this has worked well?