This
(http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/07/act_fast_not_first.html)
was not just another article in HBR I just read and close every day; this made
me read a biography. I thought this
would be one of the right daises to introduce to those of you who might not
have come across the name of this US Air force pilot in your common management
programs. His concepts of war proposed some decades ago not only changed the
art of war but also hold perfect lessons of management in an era of rapidly
declining time-frame for a management concept called Strategy. Before I start
off with management aspects of his theories, let me introduce him to you.
This
person could defeat any opponent in simulated air-to-air combat in less than
“forty seconds”. Some of the best pilots in the air force challenged him at
point or another, so did the best pilots in the Navy and the Marine Corps. But,
no man could be found who was better in air than him. He was never defeated. In
1959, when he was just a young captain, He became the first man to codify the
elusive and mysterious ways of air-to-air combat. He developed and wrote the
‘Aerial Attack Study’, a document that is now termed as Bible for air forces
around the world. He has put forward his Energy- Maneuverability Theory from
which the finest jets of their time the F-15’s and the F-16’s were engineered
for which he was acknowledged father of those two aircrafts.
His
work made him the most influential thinker since Sun Tzu wrote the art of war
2400 years ago. The results of his work were manifested in the Gulf war.
Everything about the startling speed and decisive victory can be attributed not
to the media heroes, not to struggling and bombastic generals, but to a lonely
old man in South Florida, who thought he had been forgotten.
Popularly
known as ‘Forty Second Boyd’ (remember the time in which he can defeat an
opponent?) and a ‘Mad Major’, here is a person who changed not just the art of
war but also that of management- John Boyd.
Now,
keeping him aside let us take a look at the present business scenario, the ever
changing business dynamics, the possible entry of disruptive technologies is
giving sleepless nights to the top managements and R&D labs world over. The
technology that you called superior one year ago is outdated now. I agree there
were times when businesses enjoyed a near monopoly and devised strategies to
consolidate their positions, not brushing aside the fact that they invested
heavily in R&D. But if I tell you investing heavily in R&D combined
with effective strategies to counter competition will not solely serve the
purpose and you need to have that ‘extra eye’ to foresee future.
What can be a better example than ‘Intel
Corporation’, the company enjoyed a near monopoly and its nearest rival AMD was
never even a concern for it. It was setting benchmarks only on its previous
products. But blows came to Intel in some other form. Intel failed to realize
the specifications that a mobile processor needs is very different from that a
PC needs, because it failed to understand that sustaining success is much
beyond benchmarking themselves. In a market space where Snapdragon and Qualcomm
processors are the norm for every smart phone out in the market, the Intel’s
‘Atom’ processor meant for smart phones was dumped by every other smart phone
manufacturer due to its power hungry nature. Intel still finds it tough to
enter this space. Similarly many examples like the collapse of Sony digital
music players with the entry of ipods, the competition Boeing is facing from
Airbus can be observed from around us.
In
other words, speed is killing our decisions. The crush of technology forces us
to react in very less time. Not many understood the challenge of time pressured
decision making like John Boyd. He developed a decision making framework which
is gaining popularity among the business leaders worldwide. It is known by the
acronym ‘OODA’(Observe, Orient, Decision, Action).
It
analyses, synthesizes and defines most important critical component of
performance- Reaction Time. ‘Observe’ the rapidly changing environment,
‘Orient’ yourself to the environment based on these observations, process the
disorder and understand when your competitor might become confused. ‘Decide’
what to do and ‘Act’ at the right moment. The ultimate goal is ‘Act Fast but
not First’.
This
necessarily conflicts with our basic management lesson taught every other day
-‘The First Mover Advantage’. Let’s see why this is obsolete at times. In the
year 1983, a well known company introduced shampoo in sachets to make it
affordable to the rural poor at cheap prices, a very good innovation
inarguably. But, it is the other companies which gained from this innovation
and The First mover actually stood at loss in terms of revenues. Apple
introduced a really cheeky OS which is arguably the best one until then, but
how much time did it take for Google to make an OS which is arguably better
than iOS?
If
only Intel would have observed what is happening around it, it would have
grabbed the emerging market of smart phones and so is with the other companies.
This
definitely raises doubts like what if the opponent also follows OODA loop?
Answer: Get into his OODA loop.
Now
don’t ask me, what if companies make OODA as a strategy since I mentioned
strategy will pale into insignificance once we start using OODA. I do not know
the answer.
And
oh yeah, did I forget to mention why I described this Genius as ‘An sung war
hero’? John Boyd was hated by every other US Air force personnel because of
this straight forward nature and inability to accept corruption in an area
where it was a norm.
Signing
Off,
Tarak
