If I Only Had A .....

The news last week that the US lost only 540,000 jobs in April was disturbing for a couple reasons. You had to read closely (and you had to read) to learn that the number was actually skewed lower by the creation of temporary jobs for census-taking -- excluding those jobs brings the total to the frightening levels above 600,000 in prior months. More obviously, the positive spin and market response indicated a deepening sense of desperation in the country. Is it really a good sign that almost 9% of our workforce is actively seeking employment because they have none? What of the news that including the under-employed and those who have given up their job search increases this percentage to 16%? And viewing the impact by race is simply horrifying - the unemployment rate for African Americans was 15%. Yet the media's spin that the economy seems to be failing at a slower rate was widely embraced.

OK - so people are looking for some reason to feel better, if they can't feel good. What's wrong with that? Unfortunately, saving the economy is not served by feeling good. That impulse leads to talk of recovery (getting back what you had) rather than renewal (making something new). As I read about business globally, the most radical and sustainable growth initiatives seem to be coming from developing economies, where recovery is not a consideration. Ethan Zuckerman's post on innovation earlier this year summarized rules for innovation in developing markets that would be well heeded in over-developed economies that are in desperate need of renewal. One of these is 'What you have matters more than what you lack.' As we see big business stretch out its hand to the American people relentlessly (and this week's news that the medical-industrial complex is signaling it's gearing up to do the same), I wish the market leaders in this country would internalize the fundamental intelligence in 'what you have matters more than what you lack.'

Trying to replace what was lost (what you lack) is self-defeating. If we learned nothing else, the country should have learned that the practices leading to the collapse were unsustainable. Trying to get back to those practices is more than harmful -- it is deadly. Yet, the impulse is profoundly human. I'm reminded of Jared Diamond's brilliant book Collapse: we are living out the same impulses that failed civilizations acted on to bring about their self-destruction.

Taking to heart Zuckerman's rules on innovation would renew any enterprise, and it is of a piece with the Ben Zander dictum to choose to live in a world of abundance rather than one of scarcity. It only takes a change in perspective: rather than think "All I have is a bicycle" think "I have a bicycle!" -- because that sets up the next crucial thought stream: "What can I do with that?" instead of "I need a truck and can't afford one." Thinking optimistic, happy thoughts is not the point ("whew - only 540,000 jobs lost!"); it's where you go with your thoughts. Do you open up possibility for renewal, or do you double down on moribund practices?

Recently, I stood on the dock of a distribution center, where the manager was leading a group discussion on increasing capacity 25% for planned growth. Construction and racking consultants had provided estimates for expansion within the same warehouse footprint. But, the group pointed out, we're still stuck with the same number of dock doors. This led to their thinking being stuck, because they couldn't get beyond what they lacked. "If only we had more bays ....." That discussion was taking us nowhere. So, we started talking about why that's a problem, and questioning the processes and schedules that made this a problem. In the end, embracing the number of dock doors in the facility enabled us to come up with a radically different process that would also increase productivity and throughput for all of its operations -- not just the new work resulting from growth. Persisting in getting what they lacked would have increased storage capacity, but would also have increased resource requirements -- which would be unsustainable. Getting what they lacked would doom their operation.

For most of us, our impact is admittedly small. But in the aggregate, the impact would be tremendous if we used this perspective daily in our businesses. And for the so-called titans of industry (or, masters of the universe -- pick your favorite hyperbolic euphemism), thinking small would be huge.