Archive for the ‘Leadership’ Category

By Mike Byrne

The first, and most obvious, leadership challenge has been what high school English teachers would categorize as man-versus-himself.  I suspect that this is no revelation to those who I have worked with before.  I enjoy being a workhorse and have often led groups by defining the objective, distributing the tasks, and motivating the group members to execute.  Sure, there are times when emotional bonding and group reflection are necessary, but by-and-large the leadership has been objective oriented; when execution has lacked, I have simply picked up the slack and given everyone credit.  But frankly, this isn’t really leadership.  At best it’s leadership in name but not in substance.  True leadership requires defining an objective, communicating it effectively, and then creating an environment in which the team as a whole is able to reach its maximum potential.  Of course there are times when the leader must dig down to move the entire group forward, but this is the exception, not the rule.

In the case of the Rwanda TEM lab team, I have been fortunate enough to have a team composed of 3 very capable, skilled, and hard-working members.  None of them need me to carry their load, yet all of them define themselves in some sense through the intensity and quality of the work they do, something I too have often done in the past.  In fact, there are times when I look at the team and see 3 Mike-like workhorses staring right back at me.  “What a dream!” some would say, but for a person who enjoys the heavy lifting it’s not as straightforward as it may seem.  How will I balance their needs versus mine?  At what point do I sacrifice my desire for tangible work for the betterment of the team?  When do I claim a task for myself to foment my own internal drive?

In order to initially satisfy their voracious appetites, I have left myself with little of the traditional heavy lifting opting for the often invisible work of leadership instead.  In some ways I am learning a lesson in patience.  Leadership doesn’t necessarily produce immediate results that are easily quantifiable: pages written, calculations completed, or hours in the can.  Instead, its immediate product is an ephemeral sense that things are going in the right direction and that the group is achieving at its optimal level.  There is no question that I am doing energy-draining work on a daily basis, evidenced by the fact that I fall hard asleep every night, but it’s not the concrete and tactile product by which I am used to gauging myself.

Further complicating the situation is leading in an ambiguous environment, one in which not only do I have incomplete information, but in which my ability to assess the risks of one strategy versus another is aided only through past experiences of tangential importance.  If I were in Jordan, Brazil, or Spain, places where I have some past work experience, I would be better able to assess the plausibility of my decisions and access much better information.  In Rwanda, however, I am relying on a sixth sense that is largely based on past experiences in high context tribal societies, which may or may not be applicable to Rwanda.  Sure, these past experience are valuable, but I am keenly aware that their application has its limits.  And all the while my team looks to me for direction through this foreign landscape, while, warranted or not, I feel the burden of their and the project’s relatively fast-paced Western temporal expectations ticking in the back of my head.

Lastly, there is the challenge of leading an American team through consensus and empowerment while maintaining my legitimacy in the eyes of a culture that expects leadership through strong hierarchical decision making.  In the case of the team, I trust completely in the abilities of the group and believe that we will reach our full potential by leading through consensus and limited hierarchy.  As a group, each individual member needs to be invested in the project and feel that they have created value.  In order to attain this, I have purposely tried to create a constant dialogue among the group members and reach out for their input on most decisions.  Sure, we could end up getting lost in the process, but so far this has not been a problem.  Instead, we have been able to take advantage of the skills of each group member, maintain emotional cohesion, and solicit thoughts that have helped us avoid hasty decisions.

Yet, despite the apparent success of this strategy with the group, I sometimes wonder whether this approach delegitimizes my leadership in the eyes of the client. Rwandan leadership consists of a healthy dose of top down management.  Our client, Jules, is a prime example.  In his home, company, and church community, he is someone who demands respect from others and generally has a vision and pulls the others along with him.  In other words, Jules leads as a general and is respected for it.

However, in stark contrast to Jules’ leadership expectations he often sees me leading through consensus and team-building – a style which he may be not accustomed to and I suspect he may regard as lacking leadership.  The easy answer would be to lead as a general in his presence and lead through consensus behind closed doors, but this is highly unlikely considering the proximity of our living and working quarters to the client.  As you may have noticed from the other blogs, we live, eat, work, and sleep in the same general vicinity as the client.  In fact, this past weekend I was once again reminded of Jules’ perspective as he coached me on how to choose a table at a restaurant.  After talking to a waitress about where to sit, he quickly interjected and explained to me that there was no need to ask for permission to sit down.  Instead, I need to go where I please and only move if the restaurant staff insists.

If it gets to a point that I feel I need to breach the subject, I will more than likely ask Jules about how he manages and motivates his employees in Rwandan.  This would not only give me insight into his personal thoughts on leadership but also a Rwandan cultural perspective.  I might even steer that conversation towards a discussion of his impressions of the group, but at the current moment I think that this conversation is a little premature.

By Mike Byrne

The last two weeks of the project, split between Kigali and Glendale, AZ, were perhaps the most intense despite having the between them weekend off.  While there was no doubt that our work and deliverables were valuable, we were compelled to endlessly check our calculations for accuracy and concerned with assuring that none of our findings would be lost in their transfer to the client.

As we transitioned from Rwanda back to the States, we were challenged by jet lag, project burnout, and self-imposed expectations of turning the on campus project presentation into the defining moment of our Thunderbird carriers.  Although I expected week 6’s preparation for the final presentation to be more relaxed than previous weeks’, it was not.  Naturally, it was a different kind of work: formatting slides, editing multimedia, and practicing presentation routines, but it was draining all the same.  Yet, in the end it was worth all the effort.  The final presentation took place late Friday morning of week 6.  It was attended by some 50 students, staff members, and faculty, and generated the most enthusiastic reception and feedback that any of the team had received since beginning their MBA’s.  It was the crowning moment that we had shed so much blood, sweat, and tears to achieve.

Week 5: Wrapping Up the Loose Ends

The line between week 5 and week 4 was blurry at best.  Over the weekend, the team finalized, reviewed and polished its spreadsheets for both accuracy and aesthetics.  During the course of this process, numerous errors were found.  In some cases, the errors had little effect on the results of the project and the recommendations; however, in two particular cases the recommendation was directly affected by the mistakes.  In a matter of two days, the team went from considering Mombasa as the future scenario recommendation to Dar es Salaam and then finally back to Mombasa.  Although all the errors were inadvertent and understandable considering the size and interconnectedness of the data and their analysis, the unexpected changes did wreak havoc on the group’s nerves and patience.

The final recommendations to the clients were determined to be: RD Tech Abridged Executive Summary

With the final recommendations in hand, the group turned its attention to drafting the final report and presenting these results to the client.  Caroline led the assembly and editing effort as the whole team divided the various sections of the report and began composition.  With the report due on Thursday afternoon, the group decided to create a Wednesday noon deadline for all drafts.  Ninety percent of the drafts were in by the deadline, and the entire report had been composed and reviewed by two group members by Wednesday night.

Thursday morning was used as buffer time to finish polishing the deliverables.  During this time the slide deck was revised, the report cover was edited, and the report was reviewed multiple times.  In addition, the actionable implementation steps for the client were completed and added to the report.  With 30 minutes left until the presentation, all activity was stopped and the presentation was sent to the clients in the US for the 2PM conference call.

For the final conference call, the team assembled around the client’s dining room table with the client present and phoned the two primary American investors in RD Tech on a conference call.  While the line was clear and everyone was viewing the same slide deck, the environment did not lend itself to conversation.  Although the final recommendation meeting had been billed as a discussion, the result was more of a presentation with some intermittent questions and light conversation.  However, this was not due to lack of trying.  The call lasted all of one hour and the key recommendations and findings were clearly understood by both the clients in Rwanda and the US.  The call ended with expressed gratitude, congratulations, and the team’s verbal commitment to clarify any aspect of the report for the client in the future.

The remainder of Thursday was used to decompress and the team took Friday and the weekend off to enjoy themselves and head back to the US to begin preparation for the final on campus presentation.

By Mike Byrne

Gorilla Hangover

Coming off the excitement of the gorillas and beginning our fourth week, I was concerned that the euphoric aura leftover from the trip would bleed into the first day of our last full week on the project.  The gorilla trekking was a unique emotional experience, but the team could not afford to loose a half-day reminiscing.  To people who have never been to visit the gorillas I realize this may sound strange, but fresh memories of communing with quasi-human beings provide you with a fresh hit of adrenaline each time you remember the experience.  By no means did I want to destroy this pleasure, but we did need to control it.  The answer to this dilemma was simple, I would stick to the originally decided upon rules and exemplify the behavior I wanted from the group.

On Monday morning, I woke up early and was the first to the breakfast table, at around 7:15PM.  No question, I was still enjoying the gorilla high and moving as if I was on vacation, but I made sure to be the first one there and, later, the first one ready to go.  By the time 8AM rolled around, the entire team had gotten the drift and was in the car ready to head to work.  Some team members were a little frazzled after having rushed to their car seats, cutting their breakfasts short.  But when asked why we were leaving on time, I simply stated that we had all previous agreed to leave at 8AM and going into our last full week it was important that we stick to our guns.  To my teammates’ credit, my logic was received with action on their part.  As we reached the RD Tech driveway, the hatchback door of the RAV4 flung open, the team grabbed their computers, and we marched into the office ready to work.

Tying Loose Ends

The week began with some leftover pricing from the prior week.  During the Monday morning hours, we began tying off those loose ends.  Chadd and Rob were missing real estate pricing for land rental and leasing in Mombasa, and I was still trying to cajole the good folks at Maersk, UPS, and Africa Worldwide to provide freight prices for 20ft containers.  Caroline had scored big the preceding Friday with her work on e-waste disposal and began the week fresh by outlining our final report format and organizing all our research into folders for the client.  After a quick lunch, the group held a snap meeting to call out its remaining unknown prices.  I, in turn, created a “wanted” list on a flipchart that was hung on the wall.  “These are our targets.  Let’s try not to leave today without having found all of them.”  By COB, 90% of our missing prices had been crossed off the list and the other 10% were sure enough bets that I could turn off the office lights in good conscience.

The Home Stretch: Analysis Begins

On Tuesday, I was relieved to know that we could finally use the rest of the week for data crunching and analysis.  After more than a week and a half of pricing and other research, we were mentally drained.  We needed good intellectual fodder to re-energize the group and it came at the perfect moment.  Looking back, I would say that Tuesday morning was the point that the group turned the final corner and began the exciting, but arduous, work of heading down the home stretch.

The first critical point of the analysis was to remind ourselves of the specific outcomes we needed from the data.  While you might expect this to have been a straightforward conversation based on the clearly outlined project deliverables, it wasn’t.  In fact, what was interesting was seeing how animated people became when trying to convince others of their preferred unit of comparison.   My goal was to keep the discussion on point and intense without leaving the team divided.  With the fervor of an energizing political discussion, we debated the value of comparing operating costs to COGS per computer to breakeven analyses.

Consequently, these conversations spawned recognition of the different, yet complementary, interests of our clients.  When considering the needs of RD Tech’s US investors, who could potentially front the capital for internally integrating refurbishment in East Africa, the team tended to lean towards measuring operating costs and years-to-breakeven.  However, the team favored a comparison of COGS per computer when viewing the project from the perspective of Jules, the founder and principle manager of RD Tech.  Makes sense; the investors would want to know when they can expect a return and the manager wants to calculate profit margins.

As the team brought the various pieces of our research together, we were presented with another critical, yet potentially arbitrary, decision – if we assume that RD Tech internally integrates refurbishment, how do we weight the following five metrics to determine the optimal location for the refurbishment center?

• Business climate analysis of potential refurbishment locations, including: ease of starting a business, construction permit accessibility, employment & labor regulations, property registration procedures, credit accessibility, investor protections, taxes and operating licenses, legal environment, and ease of business closure

• Country risk analysis for each of three potential refurbishment locations

• Freight routing and pricing for all inland freight shipments from the three potential refurbishment sites to the five most attractive markets as determined by a market demand forecast

• Operational costs of running the refurbishment facility in each location

• Total estimated tax rate including all income tax, labor contributions, property taxes, etc.

For example, while Tanzania is considered a much less attractive choice for operating a business than Rwanda, it’s a more economical location from which to export freight throughout East Africa.  If we apply heavier weighting to shipping costs, Tanzania wins.  If we apply a heavier weight to the business climate, Rwanda wins.  But instead of two countries and two variables, we had four possible refurbishment scenarios (rent, purchase, etc), three countries, and five variables that required different weighting.  After coming to a general team consensus, we also engaged the client on the decision and came to a joint client-team agreement.  The weighted order would be as follows.

1a)  Operating Costs

1b)  Freight routing & pricing

1c)  Taxation

2)   Business climate

3)   Country risk

The team then determined the relative distance between the weighted variables based on an average of each team member’s ranking from 1 to 100.

Reflection and Redirection

Lastly, on Friday, as we calculated our initial results, we took out some time for reflection placing ourselves into the client’s shoes.

Despite all our hard work, if I were the client, would this current result answer my most basic question – Is it a financially savvy decision to internally integrate refurbishment in East Africa?

The answer was a hesitant “yes.”  Unfortunately, we couldn’t defend a hesitant “yes.”  We needed complete confidence in our answer and, therefore, were determined to identify and remedy those areas that weren’t bulletproof.

Late into Friday night and throughout Saturday morning, the team went through various cycles of group meetings and individual analysis in order to identify and suggest methods for reinforcing our findings.  The result came in the decision to recalculate about 50% of the entire analysis and to reengage the client on specific values from the company’s past financials that lacked coherence.

At its core, the fundamental flaw in our analysis was the assumption that we would calculate our results based on 36 containers of computers a year for 3 years.  This assumption had been agreed on with the client’s input, but we couldn’t shy away from the fact that in RD Tech’s current state of operations this was an unrealistic and potentially irresponsible assumption.  Today, RD Tech sells some 2,500 computers a year, only 15% of the amount upon which we were basing our calculations.

Hence, we decided to turn it up a notch.  We would not make one recommendation, but two – (1) a current scenario recommendation and (2) a future scenario recommendation.  The first recommendation would be a simple differential cost comparison of the status quo versus integrating refurbishment based on current retail outlet distribution and sales levels.  The second would be a recommendation comparing the purchase of refurbished computers from the US versus internalized refurbishment in East Africa assuming a future expansion scenario with five new retail outlets in East Africa and sales of 36 containers a year for three years.       

The results of these analyses will be revealed to our client this coming Thursday afternoon.  In order to meet the basic project requirements, we need to complete the following before the meeting:

o Finalize the analysis of both our recommendations

o Draft and edit the written results report

o Organize our research onto one DVD for the client

o Develop a short slide deck to guide our final conversation between our clients in the US and Rwanda

o Create a list of actionable steps that the client can use to implement either of our recommendations immediately

Having completed this list, I hope that we’ll still have enough fuel left in our tanks to go above and beyond and create some additional unexpected value.

By Mike Byrne

This past Wednesday our team hit the mid-point of the project. The following is an update of where we have been and a quick glimpse of where we are headed.

As a reminder, RD Tech (the client) has contracted us to:

1. Research and cost alternative supply chain operations, focusing on shifting the refurbishment of RD Tech’s imports from an external supplier in the US to a vertically-integrated model with refurbishment performed by the client in one of three East African locations: Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania; Kigali, Rwanda; Mombasa, Kenya. This strategy should include post-user product disposal.
2. Conduct a cost-benefit analysis of our recommended best alternative strategy, including actionable recommendations for implementation.

Week 1
The first week was spent primarily adapting to our environment, defining the scope of the project with collaboration from the client, strategizing how to break the project into manageable pieces, and assigning roles within the team. This included meeting with the client and its US investors, tours of the client’s facilities and warehouses, and individual meetings with the client to gather information on its current logistics and supply chain. In addition, the team spent considerable time dissecting the project. Coming out of week 1, the team identified the following targets to inform the final recommendation:

• Business climate analysis of potential refurbishment locations, including: ease of starting a business, construction permit accessibility, employment & labor regulations, property registration procedures, credit accessibility, investor protections, taxes and operating licenses, legal environment, and ease of business closure
• Country risk analysis for each of 3 potential refurbishment locations
• Market demand forecasting for 11 countries in east and central Africa to determine the most attractive markets for current and future used computer distribution
• Freight routing and pricing for all inland freight shipments from the 3 potential refurbishment sites to the 5 most attractive markets as determined by the market demand forecast
• New refurbishment center costing for all three potential refurbishment locations. Costing will include pricing: construction/leasing, PPE, labor cost, utility costs, taxation and licensing, inland freight, duties & applicable taxes, among others
• Export Processing Zone (EPZ) research and determination of eligibility, benefits, and feasibility
• E-waste disposal plan and financial analysis

Week 2
As the team moved into week 2, it focused on breaking down RD Tech’s current supply chain, forecasting used computer market demand, and completing the country risk analysis. The strategy was to gain an understanding of the current market and business environments before pricing the costs associated with vertically integrating refurbishment in East Africa.

While the week was research intensive, much of the information was found in deep dive database searches. Nearing the end of the week, it became clear that the team would need the price of a used computer in each of the 11 potential markets in order to have a unified variable for projecting the future market demand in each country. This required the team to begin primary research and gave a glimpse into the complexities of pricing that would come to dominate the project throughout week 3 and into week 4. What initially began as simply identifying used computer retailers throughout East Africa on the internet and contacting them for pricing, became a nearly impossible task that required attention from the entire time and a Tanzanian research assistant in the US. Unfortunately, the team was unable to obtain pricing for each targeted market and, thus, comparable data was eventually substituted. Both the current supply chain and the country risk analysis were completed successfully.

Week 3
Having completed the market study in week 2 and identified the three potential locations for a refurbishment facility, the team began the week with a strong push to price the costs of building and operating the refurbishment centers and supplying retail stores. This included the following primary and secondary research:

• Collaborate with client to determine estimated volume, enabling completion of three possible refurbishment facility layout diagrams
• Determine necessary dimensions, staffing, and equipment for each layout
• Continue research and data collection for taxes, utilities, spare parts, and wages
• Contact numerous real estate and bonded warehouse sources to determine rental and purchase prices for land and warehouses
• Investigate eligibility rules and benefits of operating in Export Processing Zones (tax free zones)
• Contact ministries and investment boards regarding business operating laws and procedures (specifically labor, repatriation of profits, and trade laws)
• Meet with four logistics companies to price inland and ocean freight routes to market and determine applicable port fees, duties, and other expenses

Pricing and researching the aforementioned is extremely complicated and often bewildering in East Africa. In addition to struggling with poor infrastructure and cultural considerations, information and pricing were often difficult to find. Assuming information could be obtained from a reliable source, it would often be contradicted at a later point in time and have to be reconfirmed through additional time-consuming research. Furthermore, the team struggled with differentiating between official rules and legalities and the realities on the ground. Often rules and laws are not enforced and/or regularly broken, thereby creating a challenge in determining what exactly is applicable to the project and should be priced.

Week 4 and beyond
As the project heads into its final two weeks in-country, the team has three stages left to complete. First, the team will conclude the pricing phase of the project. Tuesday, Feb. 23, has been set as the final day for all pricing data. From Wednesday through Friday of the same week, the team plans on delving into the second stage – analysis. The team will analyze the numerous variables, including pricing, to determine which of the three potential refurbishment facility locations is best suited for RD Tech’s future growth. Preparing for the client recommendation and composing the accompanying report will comprise the third and final step in completing the in-country portion of the project. Despite efforts to prevent missteps, the team is anticipating gaps in its research during the analysis phase and has, therefore, built in substantial buffer time to account for any additional research. This additional time includes both Saturday and Sunday of this coming weekend.

The final conversation with the client to present the team’s recommendations is scheduled for Thursday, March 4th.

By Mike Byrne

There is no telling when the debate of nurture versus nature began, but it’s incessant resonance continues to dog the way we try to delineate, categorize, and interpret the world. Is homosexuality a gene or a result of life circumstances? Were the Columbine boys victims of a Godless American society awash in fear and violence or were they innately evil? Or, to echo Malcolm Gladwell, what is the source of success?

The management sections of America’s largest bookstores deliver a decidedly lopsided verdict. “It can be learned!” their titles protest. But does it make any sense to derive our answer from self-anointed prophets of business acumen whose profit-driven agenda is enhanced by perpetuating this myth? Likewise, many religious dogmas rely on pure evil as a key ingredient in the more coercive interpretations of their theology. Is this any better of a guide? Perhaps what boggles me the most is the extent to which we will go to prove one side right and the other wrong. Why can’t we simply admit that it is some mix of nature and nurture, allowing ourselves the luxury to dig deeper into the more nuanced aspects of each individual phenomenon?

Despite my efforts to quell this debate in my own mind, the pendulum of nature versus nurture once again swung back to life this past week as I began to address one of the most lucrative practical applications of this debate – management leadership. Although I started leading our Rwanda team in early December of 2009, it has only been over the past week that I began leading on a daily basis from a shared location, Kigali. (Before hand, we were primarily in communication via email and over an occasional conference call.) The intensity of the project and the intimate living and working conditions with the team and our client have created numerous challenges and caused me to think once again about leadership and the sources that I pull on to overcome these issues. Do I listen to my gut, a phrase that causes me to shudder considering its most famous and recent orator, or do I rely on my experiences and training to lead the way forward? Perhaps I should remind myself that it is a delicate mix of the two.

Over the coming weeks, I plan to write a series of blog posts that will reflect on my leadership during the Rwanda project. They will be written in an attempt to provide you, the reader, an intimate look at my thought processes, decisions, results, and eventual evolution as a leader through the project. I do not expect to determine where nature stops and nurture begins, but instead will attempt to flush out how I use the two in coming to decisions. In doing so, I hope to not only give you a window of insight into the Rwandan project, but to allow you to reflect on your own experiences as well.