Sunday, 23 December 2018

Six Questions which predict Team Success and set your agenda for 2019.

I have worked with a lot of clients in 2018, which has been great. I really value the short, interesting and productive engagements as much as the longer projects that deliver outputs, outcomes and overall improvements for people and the business.

One of the shorter but interesting facilitation engagements was to ask a team the following six questions and get their ideas for how to make the answer YES for each.

  1.  I know what is expected of me at work
  2.  I have the materials and equipment I need to do my job right
  3.  I have the opportunity to do what I do best every-day
  4.  In the last 7 days I have received recognition or praise for doing good work
  5.  Someone at work encourages my development
  6.  At work, my opinions count
The key themes (in this example, which may not be representative for other organisations) included...
  • People understand the role of management in co-ordination, communication and collaboration but don't value micro-management of tasks.
  • People don't like chaos. There is a strong preference for predictable environments, managed workflow, consistent decisions and priorities and time to focus and get things right.
  • People don't mind being measured (eg timesheets, objectives, KPIs, successes) if they are clear about the objective, benefits and have the freedom to decide "how" they do their work.
  • People often know the best free tools, techniques and methods to do their job faster, cheaper and better. A lot of time, money, effort is wasted with indecision and interruption which compromise the outcomes.
  • People value being valued and that isn't always about remuneration. Sometimes it is thanks, appreciation, training, or simply being recognised as having achieved objectives, KPIs, successes etc.

What is so great is that people want the answer to be YES and given the freedom to suggest ideas will work hard to come up with solutions that make the work place a better, more fun and productive place to work.

My book for the year has been The Phoenix Project

The Phoenix Project: A Novel about IT, DevOps, and Helping Your Business Win6 Feb 2018
by Gene Kim and Kevin Behr

I loved this book because the story was so real to so many projects that I have managed. The people, problems, technologies are typical as are the outputs, outcomes and frustrations. What has been great is realising that these are real-life issues with practical real-life solutions that can be applied.

As a troubleshooter often involved in project rescue it is always great to have insights from other people's experience that you can apply to your own circumstances.

I like this book so much that I am prepared to buy a copy for anyone who works with me and whats to understand what we can achieve together.

What book would you recommend to me?

The books that might help you in 2019, and your recommendations?


At the end of 2017 I stopped competitive sport and sought a new outlet. Having pushed my body to its limits I am now stretching my mind and am very grateful to a few good people who have suggested some wonderful books.

This blog is part an acknowledgement and thank you to the people who have really made an impact on me either directly or for the recommendations they have made.

I am therefore sharing a list of what I've read and why, just in case people have similar interests and would like to read the same books. It is also a great opportunity to canvas recommendations.

It is true that my physical fitness is not what is was when I was 30 or even 40, but there is no reason that my mind shouldn't go from strength to strength and I am grateful for any ideas that may improve me or my business in 2019.


This is a small subset, I think I may have read 50 books. I have attempted to put them in the order I would recommend with the best at the top of each list. I greatly value people's recommendations in the comments.


The Phoenix Project, A Novel about IT, DevOps, and Helping Your Business Win 5th Anniversary Edition, By: Gene Kim, Kevin Behr, George Spafford

The Goal, A Process of Ongoing Improvement - 30th Anniversary Edition, By: Eliyahu M. Goldratt, Jeff Cox

Critical Chain,Project Management and the Theory of Constraints By: Eliyahu M. Goldratt

The DevOps Handbook, How to Create World-Class Agility, Reliability, and Security in Technology Organizations

The Toyota Way to Lean Leadership, Achieving and Sustaining Excellence Through Leadership Development

Thinking in Systems A Primer By: Donella H. Meadows


The Cold War, A World History, By: Odd Arne Westad

The Great Economists, How Their Ideas Can Help Us Today,By: Linda Yueh

Misbehaving, The Making of Behavioral Economics, By: Richard Thaler

Red Notice, By: Bill Browder

A History of Russia: From Peter the Great to Gorbachev, By: Mark Steinberg, The Great Courses

Willful Blindness, Why We Ignore the Obvious at Our Peril, By: Margaret Heffernan

The Secret Barrister By: The Secret Barrister

Inside Story: Politics, Intrigue and Treachery from Thatcher to Brexit


The 12 Week Year, Get More Done in 12 Weeks Than Others Do in 12 Months, By: Brian P. Moran, Michael Lennington

The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life By: Mark Manson

Key Person of Influence, The Five-Step Method to Become One of the Most Highly Valued and Highly Paid People in Your Industry

Summary of Algorithms to Live By by Brian Christian and Tom Griffiths By: Instaread


Bad Blood By: John Carreyrou

Conspiracy, Peter Thiel, Hulk Hogan, Gawker, and the Anatomy of Intrigue, By: Ryan Holiday

Hitch-22, A Memoir, By: Christopher Hitchens

Sapiens and Homo Deus: A Brief History of Humankind and A Brief History of Tomorrow by Yuval Noah Harari


I would like to thank Tom Hacquoil for a number of books: Zappos, The New New, When Breath Becomes Air, and a bundle of books on cryptocurrency

I would like to thank Jane Frankland for her book INsecurity

I am also mighty impressed by my Commonwealth Games Team Manager, Gary Jones who has published Evidence Based School Leadership and Management. Although written for schools the idea of doing anything based on data is a good idea!

I am also grateful to Gailina Lieu for the work of the Jersey Policy Forum and some great books: The Road to Somehere and Utopia for Realists. This opened a really interesting trail which included Andrew Keene's book How to Fix the Future and another breath taking look into the future with Life 3.0.

FOR 2019

I greatly value people's recommendations in the comments and am curious if there is a book club in Jersey for either Business Topics or Social Change.

Thursday, 8 November 2018

The Planning Fallacy and the Innovator’s Dilemma

Scott D. Anthony

August 01, 2012

“You have to deliver $300 million in incremental growth by 2015,” the business unit head told the leader of his innovation team. “That’s less than 5 percent of our revenues, so that should be quite doable.”

While $300 million might sound like a ridiculously large number to small business owners or entrepreneurs, leaders in many global giants consider the amount a drop in the bucket. But anyone with near-term innovation targets with nine (or six or even four) digits in them should ensure they are familiar with the concept of “planning fallacy.”

The basic concept, first presented by Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and his partner Amos Tversky in an influential 1979 paper, is that human beings are astonishingly bad at estimating how long it will take to complete tasks. As recounted in Kahneman’s recent book, Thinking, Fast and Slow, one study found that the typical homeowner expected their home improvement projects to cost about $19,000. The average actual cost? $39,000. Despite ample available information, 90 percent of high-speed railroad projects have missed budget and passenger estimates, with an average overestimation of passengers of about 100 percent and underestimation of budget of about 50 percent.

Entrepreneurs often underestimate how long it will take them to produce revenues, and wildly miss how much they will have to invest to commercialize their idea. As investor and pundit Guy Kawasaki notes, “As a rule of thumb, when I see a projection, I add one year to delivery time and multiply revenues by 0.1.”

The same challenge makes it difficult for companies to escape the innovator’s dilemma. To get through the corporate approval gauntlet you have to project big numbers. Then early results disappoint. Often projects or even divisions get shut down. And the company is staring at an even bigger growth gap. (Innosight cofounder Clayton Christensen memorably termed this the “growth-gap death spiral” in his 2003 book The Innovator’s Solution).

One way to avoid planning fallacy is to get — and use — data from comparable efforts. A simple starting point can be historical projects. Few companies look back to see how well past forecasts panned out, let alone seek to understand the markers that identify successful projects. Or consider looking at easily accessible public data. A few years ago I started a small database of disruptive companies, tracking revenue from day one. Consider the data for 10 of the fastest growing companies in recent history: Google, Netflix, eBay,, Groupon, Zynga, LinkedIn, Facebook, Baidu, and Remember, these are the best and fastest growing startups. (The number in parenthesis represents the number of companies in each year of the sample.)

How about new product introductions? There are certainly outliers. Apple’s iPad $10 billion in first-year revenue, for instance, would make it about the 250th biggest company in the United States, around the same size of Whole Foods, GameStop and Avon Products. But the basic pattern continues. Out of more than 11,000 consumer product launches in North America between 2008 and 2010, Nielsen found only 34 that were distinct, generated more than $25 million in first-year sales, maintained at least 90 percent of sales volume the next year, and had faster sales velocity than the category average. Only six of those 34 had two-year cumulative sales that exceeded $200 million. That’s only 0.055 percent of all launches.

If hitting your growth targets relies on a once in a lifetime success, it is at least worth considering the following three questions critically:

  1. Are we following best in class approaches to ensure that we identify and accelerate our best ideas?
  2. Do we need to increase the amount of resources (both human and financial) we are investing in growth?
  3. Do we need to increase focus on acquisition as a growth strategy, at least as a way to “buy time” for organic efforts to develop?

It does turn out that uninvolved outsiders often offer more realistic (if somewhat negatively biased) projections than involved experts, so consider having select outsiders help to answer these questions to help balance the unrealistic inside view.

For innovators, careful consideration early helps to avoid death spirals later.

Saturday, 3 November 2018



At the turn of the millennium I was doing my MBA (Management Consultancy) and chose Transactional vs Transformational Leadership in Change Management as my dissertation topic. I was fascinated by the what I saw as the hype of charismatic leadership versus the more operational and steady approach to process improvement. I saw it as a battle of style over substance.

I have learned a lot since then and having been part of the team leading the Incorporation of Jersey Post Office from government department into company, been Operations Change and Sales Support for RBSI and NatWest and then again having led Incorporation of government department into company: this time Ports of Jersey.

I have had the opportunity to see, use and learn from both Transactional and Transformational Leadership in Change Management.

So it is with this interest, knowledge and experience that I am very interested in the SoJ Chief Executive plans to transform Jersey’s Government.

Below is a nice summary (by someone else) of Transactional vs Transformational Leadership in Change Management. I don’t actually agree with everything in the article, but in the interests of balance it is important to acknowledge different views.

My reservations include

1. I disagree that a Transactional Leader is not concerned about the futuristic vision or strategies. The difference in my experience is that the Transformational Leader exerts change by charisma (often lasting only as long as their tenure) whereas the Transactional is more systemic (with the result that the Leadership element may be difficult to discern.)

2. I would contend that a Transactional Leader is very capable of “the key functions” list outlined below. Indeed the whole idea of having a systemic list of how to go about change is Transactional.

3. Finally I’d say the “best practices of transformational leaders in business” are actually Transactional tasks (driven by the head) rather than charismatic persuasion (engaging the heart)

What do you think?


Original Source

Leaders play a crucial role in steering organizational change and inspire or stimulate people for achieving excellence at work by realizing the pre-defined goals. Effective leadership provide a direction and vision to the people from top to bottom, develops a conducive culture, climate and values for enabling certain expected code of conduct or behaviour out of employees.

Leaders conceptualize and administer suitable strategies for driving continuous improvement in the existing processes, motivating employees for superior performance and facilitating change across various functionalities.

Leaders play both transactional as well as transformational roles depending upon the organizational context, environmental factors and the long term objectives.


Transactional Leaders work in accordance with the predefined modes of operation and are more concerned about ensuring a continuity in the day to day functioning, ensuring seamless operations by establishing systems and processes in place and focused towards achievement of set targets. Such leaders can enforce disciplinarian actions, establish a systemic framework and define a road map of action, formulate & implement policies and motivate superior performance through a systems of rewards and incentives.

A Transactional Leader is not concerned about the futuristic vision or strategies for acquiring market leadership, but is more concerned about ensuring that the tasks assigned are completed on priority by meeting the quality benchmarks.


It would be more appropriate to say that the Transformational Leaders are the real champions of change. They are the visionaries who influence or motivate teams for achieving excellence in business performance. Transformational leaders give more importance to the development of cohesive teams and facilitate an environment of collaboration for achieving the next best level of performance, instead of ensuring the completion of day to day organizational duties/tasks. The focus is more on team building, empowerment of employees, alignment of individual-organizational goals and culture building for motivating individuals to embrace the change for the better.

Given below are the key functions performed by the Transformational Leaders:

1. Creating a Vision: Transformation Leaders are responsible for envisioning and ensuring that the vision is shared and communicated across all the levels to inspire and motivate people for driving excellence at work.

2. Setting Examples or Modelling: Transformational Leaders inspire employees through Modelling or exemplification of good behaviour or a desirable code of conduct.

3. Establishing Standards: Well defined standards and norms, guide the employees in following a desirable pattern of behaviour and working towards the fulfilment of common goals through a collaborative approach.

4. Culture & Climate Building: Building a facilitating climate and a culture of mutuality, interdependence and flexibility are the major functions of Transformational Leaders. A conducive organizational culture can motivate individuals for delivering performance excellence and exceed expectations by achieving newer milestones at work.

5. External Communication and Liaising: Transformational Leaders establish a connect with the external world and are the main point of contact for communicating with the key stakeholders for the resource support, technological assistance and acquire knowledge regarding the best business practices of leading organizations. This function essentially involves strengthening relationship with the stakeholders or business partners.

6. Team Building or Synergy: This is one of the most important functions of leaders who follow transformational leadership style by building a motivational climate and creating a positivity in the work environment for completing tasks collaboratively.

7. Talent Acquisition & Development: This is the key responsibility of the transformational leaders, which involves identification of the best of the talent pool and nurturing them with adequate training & development support.



1. Transformational Leadership style encourages innovation and creativity in the workplace by creating an enthusiastic and a challenging work environment. This kind of leadership provides ample opportunities to the individuals for growth and achieving newer performance milestones.
2. New Leaders may evolve out of a several followers.

3. Transformational Leaders are visionaries and they possess an extraordinary capability of communicating the vision to the followers. Since, such leaders are more skilled in visualizing the bigger picture, they can address challenges much efficiently.

4. The team members work for the achievement of a common goal or vision by being influenced or inspired by their leaders, thus driving excellence at work.

5. Transformational leadership encourages mentor buddy relationship between the leader and the follower, thus creating a conducive environment for innovation and improves organizational preparedness for any kind of change process.

6. Transformational Leadership brings reforms in the existing processes, creates higher expectations in followers and motivates the followers to deliver beyond the pre-defined expectations or the set framework.

7. Transformational Leadership surely guarantees high performance of the teams as well as superior productivity and growth.


1. Though Transformational Leaders can see the bigger picture, but they lack detailed orientation for which they require the support from the transactional oriented people who are more organized and detailed oriented. Lack of detailed orientation may result in a major oversight, which may ultimately affect the organizational interests in the long term.

2. Transformational Leaders rely too much on inspiration, passion and emotional aspects, which may lead to a neglect of the facts or realities through research, investigation or information gathering.


Transformation in Technology: Various Technology giants like Apple, Microsoft, Intel, IBM and many others, revolutionized the computing world through technological innovation by introducing state of the art quality software applications and microprocessors. Even the world of internet has witnessed a change in the contemporary scenario with Google enjoying its leadership as the most effective search engine and Amazon & e-Bay leading the e-commerce platform.

Transformation in Financial Services Industry: Due to the internet revolution, the financial services industry is undergoing a sea change with the availability of online platforms for the investors for planning their investments independently, researching, trading stocks and investing in various financial products by being in any part of the world. Pioneers like Peter Lynch, proponent of Mutual Funds and John Bogle, proponent of Index Funds, changes the attitude and preference of the investors on various financial portfolios. Today, Mutual Funds and Index Funds have become the most preferred choices for the investors because of the low costs involved and diversified benefits.

Diversification: In the era of globalization and liberalization, the organizations follow diversification strategy for business expansion across the globe and maintaining a leadership edge in the competitive market. Leaders like Jack Welch, the CEO of General Electric during 1980s, restructured the entire organization from the traditional bureaucratic set up to a more agile and lean framework.

Other Examples include Business Process Outsourcing and Knowledge Process Outsourcing which has resulted in generation of cost advantages for the organizations and enhanced business efficiencies, increased job opportunities for millions of people across the world and revolutionized organizational functioning as a whole. Again quality tools and processes like TQM, Kaizen, Six Sigma, etc have led to continuous improvement in business operations and achievement of superior quality benchmarks in manufacturing practices.

Sunday, 28 October 2018

In a series of tasks where should the focus be?

The theory of constraints: In a series of tasks where should the focus be?

Identify the constraint.
Optimize the constraint.
Subordinate the non-constraints.
Elevate the constraint.
Return to Step 1.

Explanation here

Feedback and comments and debate always welcome

@AdaptCCompany +447797762051
Adapt Consulting help people and organisations get things done

Wednesday, 24 October 2018

Being prepared to do it, is key.

To amend a great quote from Warren Buffet

Always give advice you would be prepared to follow, because one day someone might hire you to implement the things that you suggested.

It is always easier to give advice from the
sidelines, but its value is if it is suitable,
feasible, acceptable and practical.

Being prepared to do it is key.

Feedback welcome

Tim HJ Rogers
Helping people and organisations get things done.
Consult | Co-Create | Deliver

Tuesday, 23 October 2018

Could you achieve more?

Many people act on deadlines and focus in a crisis.

What would happen if a year was 12 weeks not 12 months? What if every day mattered – and the focus was on what you will complete TODAY not the list for tomorrow? What if the end goal was that close?

Could you achieve more?
Could you do better?

Feedback welcome

Tim HJ Rogers
Helping people and organisations get things done.
Consult | Co-Create | Deliver

Saturday, 15 September 2018

ICO Receiving 500 Breach-Related Calls a Week Since GDPR Took Effect

The United Kingdom’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has been receiving 500 calls pertaining to data breaches since the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) took effect.

Speaking before hundreds of senior business leaders at the Confederation of British Industry’s (CBI’s) fourth annual Cyber Security Conference, ICO deputy commissioner James Dipple-Johnstone revealed that of the 500 breach-related calls received weekly by the Office, a third of them aren’t warranted or pertain to events that don’t qualify as data security incidents.

Hopefully we are more diligent in Jersey and more thoughtful about what we escalate

The Jersey OIC has good guidance here

Feedback and comments and debate always welcome

@AdaptCCompany +447797762051
Adapt Consulting help people and organisations get things done

UK Business Leaders Warned About Cybersecurity - Jersey needs to be prepared too

British business leaders need to extend their cyber security defenses beyond the threat posed by Russia to other states and criminal syndicates, one of the UK’s leading spymasters has warned.

In an interview with the Financial Times, Ciaran Martin, chief executive of the UK’s National Cyber Security Centre, which is part of the communications intelligence agency GCHQ, said that while Russia remained a serious threat to businesses, Iran and North Korea, as well as international cyber criminals, presented equal if not greater risks.

Adapt Consulting Company has been working with TechColab and a number of other Cyber Essentials organizations to create a CE Toolkit of tools, templates, training and scripts to apply Cyber Essentials compliance to SMEs and Charity Businesses.

With the States of Jersey now suggesting Cyber Essentials is mandatory, it's a good time to get prepared.

Feedback and comments and debate always welcome

@AdaptCCompany +447797762051
Adapt Consulting help people and organisations get things done

Friday, 27 July 2018

What can we learn from this: Lidl cancels SAP after 500M Euro and 7 years

I highly recommend the postings which caught my eye and caused me to think about lessons to learn.

What is really interesting to read is the previous positive news story (May 2015)

What changed?

My first point to check what to see if the IT person at Lidl had left. He hadn’t. But the fact that he arrived March 2015 suggests there was already a review ongoing when the positive news story (May 2015) was being planned.

So what happened?

In short I don’t know. But it is interesting to speculate not necessarily about Lidl or SAP, but about the circumstances when you should pull the plug.

1. Projects should be future focussed: All project should be forward looking to the benefits ahead rather than nostalgia or loyalty for the past.

2. Projects should align to measurable benefits: The purpose of a project should be to achieve a measurable outcome (time, cost, quality, reputation, market share etc.) If the circumstances change affecting the outcome it is simply foolish to press on regardless.

3. Projects should have key performance indicators for progress: It is important to know that projects are progressing forward and not just consuming cash and resource. I have seen too many projects where the wheels are spinning but there is little traction and less progress.

4. Projects should be small or phased: I have long argued that monolithic projects fail and the key to success is momentum. A series of smaller projects or discrete phases reward success, create confidence and capacity and provide agility.

All entrepreneurs argue that it is better to fail fast, fail early and fail forward. This means if you can see something is not going to work pivot or abandon but don’t madly plough on regardless.

I broadly accept the entrepreneurs’ argument, but I would first say that before you pivot or abandon make sure you have genuinely tried. Too many projects fail for a lack of ownership, planning, priority or resource. Maybe you project isn’t a bad one, maybe you just have not properly committed what is necessary to achieve it.

Of course internal competence or capacity may be grounds to pivot or abandon: But be clear whether the issue is that the project is ill conceived, the benefits are simply not there, or you don’t have the wherewithal to do it properly. Each provides a different lesson even if the outcome is the same.

Thursday, 5 July 2018

What project management style should I take if it is not going well?

It is a cliché to say it is not what you do, but the way that you do it. Therefore setting aside whether you adopt PRINCE2, Agile, Waterfall or any other project methodology it is important to consider your project management style.

First I think it is important to recognise the role of project management as leadership, and then to example style as a leadership style.


For a summary of project leadership over project management see my earlier blog


Goleman provides a very handy guide to leadership style and when to apply them.

Visionary — mobilize people toward a vision.
Works best when a clear direction or change is needed.

Coaching — develop people for the future.
Works best when helping people and building long-term strength.

Affiliative — create emotional bonds and harmony.
Works best to heal rifts in teams or motivate people in stressful times.

Democratic — build consensus through participation.
Works best to create consensus or get input.

Pacesetting — expect excellence and self-direction.
Works best to get quick results from a highly competent team.

Commanding — demand immediate compliance.
Works best in crisis or with problematic people.



It is commonly accepted that any projects should be on-time, on-budget, to-specification with low-risk and high-communication. These therefore present themselves as simple generic measures for good Project Governance. When dealing with any supplier make sure you are clear about

ON-TIME, knowing the timetable, delivering tasks, reporting progress and alerting issues

ON-BUDGET, knowing the budget, the spending, and issues or changes

TO-SPECIFICATION, knowing what needs to be delivered and why: this isn’t just about tasks it’s about end-results: What does success look like?

LOW-RISK, knowing the risks, issues and assumptions and agreeing the actions

HIGH-COMMUNICATION, making sure all the above is clear, documented, understood and followed

The role of a project manager includes planning of tasks and requirements; co-ordination of resources; monitoring of progress, budget, change, risks and issues and representing the project and product(s) through to delivery, hand-over and successful use.

The point about delivery, hand-over and successful use is key. Project Leadership is not only about Process but about Products it isn’t only about Outputs but about Outcome. Therefore Project Leadership needs to think broadly about “what are we trying to achieve here”.

This is a very important concept when dealing with suppliers. Do not let suppliers simply burn-up time and costs; make sure they are delivering something that is of value.


Keep a Record of Agreements
If suppliers are difficult, slippery or evasive about what was agreed or what they are doing make sure you have a regular meeting with agenda and minutes which formally agree in writing what has been decided. If necessary (because people find minute taking dull) get agreement to audio record the meetings. However make sure you have agreement before you audio record.

Keep a Record of Tasks, Progress and Issues
Make sure your suppliers provide a routine update (weekly or monthly) of tasks, progress and issues. Make sure they have end-results and they are delivering something that is of value.

Pay people for success
Make sure payment is linked to end-results and they are delivering something that is of value. Do not pay someone for hours done, pay them for agreed/approved outputs delivered. Have a check-list and tick off the items as they are done.

Trust, but verify
If a suppliers says something is done, or promises that they are ready (eg disaster recovery) put them to the test and get them to demonstrate something is done or that they are ready. If they fail, give them another chance. If they fail three times, don’t give them another chance.

Evidence hand-over and celebrate success
Have a formal ritual hand-over process done on a specific day and following completion of a tick-list that validates everything has been done as agreed. Then open the champagne and celebrate. If you supplier is never ready or always have “..just one more thing to do…” then that should be a warning.


If you have experience or suggestions applying different leadership styles or dealing with difficult project situations please comment. There is no one-truth in projects, programmes and change and I am always open and interested in different perspectives and different circumstances.


There are hundreds more blogs on projects, programmes and change here


TimHJRogers World Champs Rower, Commonwealth Games Triathlete, MBA (Management Consulting) PRINCE2 Projects & Change Practitioner, TEDx & Jersey Policy Forum

Friday, 29 June 2018

Jersey’s Digital balance between Opportunity and Trust

There are some interesting challenges when considering innovation, artificial intelligence and the use of data and the purposes it is put to.

Is the role of government to be the conscience of business, make-up the short-fall in family and community responsibility, and the prefect for innovation and wealth?

There are some very stark contrasts between Singapore (government custodian of centralised data), Estonia (people decentralised data) and China (government controlled data).

Does Jersey want to use data to drive a political agenda (in the way China ranks and scores citizens) or encourage engagement (in the way Singapore offers-up centralised data) or reassure people (in the way Estonia will report each data access directly to the citizen)

Some interesting questions as we contemplate opportunities arising from AI and the blockchain, with the former offering data and decision power and the latter audit and trust.

I look forward to hearing the views of the panel at Barclays AI Frenzy Launch Event 12 July 2018

#jersey #egov #blockchain #regulation #socialchange

How to fix the future – Andrew Keen

Feedback and comments always welcome

@TimHJRogers @AdaptCCompany +447797762051

TimHJRogers World Champs Rower, Commonwealth Games Triathlete, MBA (Management Consulting) PRINCE2 Projects & Change Practitioner, TEDx & Jersey Policy Forum

Jersey’s Digital balance between Opportunity and Trust @TimHJRogers @AdaptCCompany

Five things to make a difference to our Digital Future

In his book “How to fix the future” Andrew Keen has looked to what five factors might mean the future is to our benefit rather than Brave New World, 1984, or The Matrix.

1. Ensure AI is open and not propriety or owned. A modern day example would be the World Wide Web. The open, free and accessible by all has been the formula for success.

2. Ensure fair play allowing new entrants to the market and preventing dominant abuse by larger organisations. This is where legislation and regulation is necessary for standards and certainty which helps innovators thrive.

3. Hold social media to high standards, fact-checking and challenging fake news and being vigorous with corrections but fair to opinions. Notably in some countries it isn’t possible to post comment without using their national-ID. That may be a step too far, since the idea of accountability and responsibility has to be balanced with privacy. There is room for debate, and some easy controls in a community as small as Jersey.

4. There is a sliding scale from human to robot. With augmented processing power available from our phone, glasses, and ear piece we are already seeing technology implants to help the disabled and enhance the able. We are already seeing technology replace humans and it’s time to rethink about the role of the human and the protections for those that will not thrive in this new world.

5. There is plenty of evidence that cave people have fuller and happier lives than people today. It can be debated if the industrial and technical revolution has liberated or subjugated the majority. There is a backlash against globalisation and expert-elite but is it too late when the decisions are made by machines rather than policy makers? How are preparing for these changes in education and choice?

I look forward to hearing the views of the panel at Barclays AI Frenzy Launch Event 12 July 2018

#jersey #egov #blockchain #regulation #socialchange

How to fix the future – Andrew Keen

Feedback and comments always welcome

@TimHJRogers @AdaptCCompany +447797762051

TimHJRogers World Champs Rower, Commonwealth Games Triathlete, MBA (Management Consulting) PRINCE2 Projects & Change Practitioner, TEDx & Jersey Policy Forum

Five things to make a difference to our Digital Future

Go for Launch or Gone to Lunch?

Too many projects languish at the bottom of someone’s in-try.

My experience is people seldom like to say NO, and passive resistance to change comes from a thousand “Yes but…” excuses or pending some critical meeting, review, endorsement, memo, assurance or approval.

The problem is that too often delay or doing nothing is more expensive and risky than doing something and (if necessary) making corrective action.

The mantra is often to Do Ditch Delegate or Delay

My challenge is to help them Decide. My approach is what I call my Go for Launch meetings. I invite the stakeholders or work-stream owners to a meeting and simply ask: “Are we go for launch?”

This face-to-face approach to managing people and tasks is far better than memos and emails because people immediately have focus and ownership for the response.

The answer is either YES, or NO because…..

At least then I can hear and manage the delay which otherwise pile up as inaction rather than challenges to overcome.

Interestingly people don’t like saying NO, so very often I get YES and a firm commitment where otherwise there would be deafening silence.

Having made the firm commitment, and having done it personally (with ownership for the response) it is interesting to see how many stuck projects become personal missions and quickly become unstuck.

Feedback and comments always welcome

@TimHJRogers +447797762051

TimHJRogers World Champs Rower, Commonwealth Games Triathlete, MBA (Management Consulting) PRINCE2 Projects & Change Practitioner, TEDx & Jersey Policy Forum
#linkybrain #projects #change #leadership #performance

Too Many Projects?

I have worked with a good many clients who have too many projects and not enough resources. In many cases hiring extra resource to help the work, the co-ordination and the delivery is all that is required.

But in some cases the in-tray is simply piled high with many No1 Priority Tasks to the extent that people suffering change fatigue regard failure as business-as-usual.

The simple answer is focus, but that isn’t necessarily the right answer.

As a triathlete too much focus on swimming is always at the expense of cycling and running and the secret to success is know the perfect blend for the person, the course, the circumstance. As a former athlete and high performance coach my challenge is always to focus on the outcome and rely upon the process.

In business focus on your strengths is a regular but wrong suggestion. It is seldom your strengths that cause you problems but your weaknesses. Being brilliant at sales is of little value if you are not equally good at invoicing and receipting income.

I have worked with organisations with as many as 250 projects in a 20 year pipeline. The question is often is it better to do 100 things at 1% or 1 thing at 100%. This is a hypothetic argument since no organisation will do only one project per year – but it makes a point: If you attempt to do too many things there will be no discernible benefit and you will simply dissipate your energy.

Project success is nearly always in the planning. Good planning makes for easy communication, collaboration and execution. The same is true of business strategy. Too many objectives both exhaust the staff and confuse the customers.

Inevitably strategy is about competing interests and becomes highly political and personal. What is often missing is an agreed method of measurement or priority. It may (or may not) be return on investment, customer satisfaction, market share. What is should not be is who shouts loudest.

Perhaps the subject of your next strategy, planning or management away-day should not be which projects should we do, but by what method should we prioritise. Then, like the athletes I train focus on the outcome and rely upon the process.

The perfect solution is one which is suitable, feasible and acceptable.

Feedback and comments always welcome

@TimHJRogers +447797762051

TimHJRogers World Champs Rower, Commonwealth Games Triathlete, MBA (Management Consulting) PRINCE2 Projects & Change Practitioner, TEDx & Jersey Policy Forum
#linkybrain #projects #change #leadership #performance

Who do you work for? And how that question can determine the outcome of change.

I have been Project Manager for some large scale public sector change projects. One of the questions I ask is: Who do you work for?

They may answer as follows…

I work for the public sector
I work for government
I work for [person name]
I work at [location address]
I work for the finance team
I am an accountant

I find it interesting to see if their belonging and identification is with the organisation, the department, their profession or something else. Understanding this helps understand motives, values and loyalties.

For example loyalty to the boss, profession, department or organisation are not the same.

Too many projects start with communicating top-down and not listening bottom-up. My experience is before making pronouncements perhaps start by asking some questions. It may help to establish motives, values and loyalties.

@TimHJRogers @AdaptCCompany +447797762051

TimHJRogers World Champs Rower, Commonwealth Games Triathlete, MBA (Management Consulting) PRINCE2 Projects & Change Practitioner, TEDx & Jersey Policy Forum

It’s not what you do but the order that you do it.

I have seen a good many large-scale and small-scale change projects in my time.

The order in which you do things can have a big impact on the result, as any mathematician: 4 / 5 + 3 -1 = 2.8 but 5 + 3 -1 / 4 = 1.75.

But here is a simpler example: If you put on your underwear, trousers and shoes and shirt you look ready for a job interview. If you put on your shoes, trousers then underwear first you may struggle to get anything past those shod feet and second, you’ll look like an idiot with your underwear on the outside.

This is obvious isn’t it? Ok, try putting this in the right order…

STREAMLINE: Use new procedures and technology to streamline your products and services making them efficient and effective.

DOWNSIZE: Reduce the size of the organisation, with an impact on competence, capacity and desire.

CHANGE: Embark on a massive period of change demanding significant competence, capacity and desire.

THINK: Rethink what are your core and affordable services; what should continue, what should be streamlined and what should be outsourced or stopped.

OUTSOURCE: Outsource non-core services and non-essential people, allowing flexibility without commitment and ostensibly allowing another organisation to provide the services to other people which you don’t want to do or cannot afford.

UPSKILL: Upskill your people so that they have competence, capacity and desire, either to improve your business or somebody else's. Either way they are adding to society rather than being a drain on the public purse as someone who is unemployed or depressed.
What are the implications of this order?


Or this?


Please put your observations in the comments below.

What is the future like for Charities? And should government be helping?

What is the future like for Charities? And should government be helping?

As government will inevitably seek to outsource more and fund less, what is the future like for the 500+ organisations in Jersey’s third-sector who are increasingly bridging the gap between social need and public service?

Without doubt the new Charities Law will have an affect where smaller organisations cannot satisfy the demands of governance.

It seems predictable that, for example, with 30+ Charities all competing to serve and support those affected by Cancer we are bound to see some rationalisation and consolidation as organisations with similar objectives merge.

It seems logical that there will be an increased drive to share back-office resources like HR, Training and Technology.

This is not an issue unique to Jersey.

The UK Small Charities Coalition help small charities access the skills, tools & information they need to get going and do what they do best, but this is becoming more difficult.

GDPR and Cyber Security will demand increasing attention on policies and process. The Times wrote Smaller charities have been “left in the dark and confused” about how they can comply with strict new data laws.

In parallel with the planned government reform it seems timely to also consider a review of the relationship between the public and the third sector, perhaps with a view to leveraging the central admin functions of the public sector to support Charities.

For example, why not standardise and streamline the data-sharing agreements between government and the Charities that provide public services under a Service Level Agreement.

Why doesn’t government, perhaps, offer every Charity that operates under a Service Level Agreement free Cyber Essentials and free Secure and Encrypted email – just as it would any Public Sector Department.

If Charities are to be used either as an extension of public service, or a replacement for services that can no longer be provided by government it seems both logical and fair that government should extend its infrastructure and expertise to help them.

Thursday, 22 February 2018


We all like to understand ourselves a bit better and I was recently invited to take a psychometric test which looks at my Verbal Analysis Aptitude and Numerical Analysis Aptitude.

Both tests are 24 minutes against the clock and designed with a count-down timer to create a degree of pressure and stress to see how you respond.

Let’s examine a couple of really scenarios

Scenario 1 - There are 40 questions and Sam answers 20 of them, all correctly, in the time available. Score: Of the ones Sam answered Sam got them 100% right, but Sam only answers half the questions so Sam scores 50% Interpretation: Sam is slow, but correct.

Scenario 2- There are 40 questions and Alex answers 40 of them, getting only half of them right, in the time available. Score: Alex also scores 50%, but using a very different approach. Interpretation: Alex is fast, but not correct.

The scores are the same, but have very different interpretation which may be gathers be assessing the time spend on reading and responding to each question. Presupposing accurate timing of each was recorded.

Let’s examine different context and strategies with different implications

Strategy A – The aim is to get the most right, so if you are running out of time you are better guessing (and having a 20% chance of getting it right) rather than let the clock run-out and not score.

Strategy B – The aim is to get the least wrong, so if you are running out of time you are better spending time getting it right than being panicked or guessing wrong.

Real life implications

If you were in a business/culture/context where speed and getting most right made money or saved lives then you may consider Strategy A. Perhaps in this context Alex may be the better candidate.

If you were in a business/culture/context where accuracy getting is wrong cost lives or money then you may consider Strategy B. Perhaps in this context Sam may be the better candidate.

This was not an unusual psychometric test, but the implications of how the algorithms are interpreted and the context in which they are delivered produce very, very different outcomes.

What is interesting in this context is the GDPR Implications.

Under General Data Protection Regulation [GDPR] Sam or Alex are entitled to know how the process works. The have rights related to automated decision making including profiling. This type of test is specifically mentioned: “a recruitment aptitude test which uses pre-programmed algorithms and criteria.”


Because this type of processing is considered to be high-risk the GDPR requires you to carry out a Data Protection Impact Assessment (DPIA) to show that you have identified and assessed what those risks are and how you will address them.

GDPR also:
1.      requires you to give individuals specific information about the processing;
2.      obliges you to take steps to prevent errors, bias and discrimination; and
3.      gives individuals rights to challenge and request a review of the decision.

These provisions are designed to increase individuals’ understanding of how you might be using their personal data.

You must:
·         provide meaningful information about the logic involved in the decision-making process, as well as the significance and the envisaged consequences for the individual;
·         use appropriate mathematical or statistical procedures;
·         ensure that individuals can:
a)       obtain human intervention;
b)       express their point of view; and
c)       obtain an explanation of the decision and challenge it;
·         put appropriate technical and organisational measures in place, so that you can correct inaccuracies and minimise the risk of errors;
·         secure personal data in a way that is proportionate to the risk to the interests and rights of the individual, and that prevents discriminatory effects.

If you are an HR professional or expert in psychometric testing I would be very interested in your feedback, experience and suggestions.