Wednesday, April 13, 2011

A dollar here and there


Sometimes a cup of coffee is just a cup of coffee. But when ordering it requires using words like "double tall" and paying more than $4, a cup of coffee can become a point of marital inflection.

Last week, we went to Los Angeles to visit my sister and her family. I flew in with our two little kids on Thursday, and my husband met us there a few days later. When he climbed into our rental car, Joe gave me a quick kiss and began surveying the mess (amazing what two kids can do to a backseat of a car in a mere 36 hours): "I see evidence of four cappuccinos, totaling probably $20," he said.

A few out-of-budget small purchases aren't going to break us. And they might actually benefit us.

When we first met, I thought it was cute how he could tally up the cost of things so quickly. That was a long time ago.

* * *

I love cappuccino. I particularly like Starbucks cappuccino, but I'm happy with any overpriced coffee shop that sells a little frothy decadence in a sturdy paper cup.

The problem, though, is that cappuccino is not a line item in our family budget. We don't make room for such things when deciding how to spread our dollars. Last year, Joe asked me if I wanted to add it, cautioning me that I'd need to cut out another cost.

"If you worked 50 weeks a year," he explained, "and got a $4 coffee every workday, you'd need to subtract at least $1,000 from other discretionary spending on things like exercise or manicures."

So I cut out the cappuccinos. For a couple of months, anyway. And then I began to indulge again.

The truth is: When it comes to small indulgences -- fancy espresso drinks, tubes of drugstore lipstick -- I see the budget as an aspiration. Like a diet, it's something to respect and work toward. When we first met, Joe thought my flighty, creative, nonlinear approach to finances was cute. That was a long time ago.

I am not a big shopper. I don't splurge on clothes or unnecessary frivolities. I am crafty and resourceful. When my nightstands started showing their age, I ripped pages out of an old atlas and refaced the drawers with maps. I frame the covers of my kids' favorite books and hang them on their bedroom walls.

When I see a vintage vase I covet or consider signing the kids up for a music class, I first check with my husband. I understand that a dollar can't be spent twice, and also that I am part of a team that functions best when its members make decisions together. But because I adhere to the major constraints imposed by our family budget, I suppose I feel I should be rewarded with small splurges made without discussion.

I also rationalize my indulgence when I consider my daily commute to and from work. After a mad dash to get the kids off to school and myself out the door, I cram myself onto overcrowded modes of public transport and pass through what generously can be described as a very unpleasant bus terminal. Somehow, a daily $4 beverage helps wash away all that grit and incivility.

Last year for Hanukah, Joe bought me a fancy coffee maker. It was, perhaps, the most practical, thoughtful gift I've ever received. I use it all weekend. And I love that when we have friends over for dinner, I can offer them an after-dessert espresso.

Yet, I don't want to make myself a cappuccino at home in the morning, pour it into a thermos and drink it cold and frothless when I arrive at my office some two hours later. A thought-through cappuccino is no fun! I like the spontaneity of a stop at Starbucks. Its impracticality is its value. Its decadence is its appeal.

This is what I explained to Joe after he had looked through credit-card statements. (A future column: I hate having a joint account.) He wasn't buying it. "First of all, it's not spontaneous if you do it every day," he said. "Second, even if I were a billionaire, I would consider it criminal to spend four bucks on branded coffee and milk. It's profligate."

Of course, I know he makes sense. But by definition, an indulgence is supposed to be nonsensical. I don't ask Joe questions when he lights a cigar as we sit on our porch on a summer night (though I do tell him to get the disgusting smoke out of my face). Joe works very hard, and if he wants a cigar, he should have a cigar.

To my mind, a few out-of-budget small purchases aren't going to break us. And they might actually benefit us, giving that little lift that can come from a quiet moment of self-appreciation. That's when a cup of coffee is so much more than a cup of coffee.

* * *

On a street near my sister's house in California, Joe and I strolled one sunny afternoon with the kids in tow. We ambled into an old-fashioned millinery store with hats that come in actual hatboxes: fedoras, Havanas and bowlers. For fun, I tried on a cloche with black wool sides that dip low in a style reminiscent of the 1920s. As I looked in the mirror, Joe came up behind me and said, simply, "You have to have it."

The hat cost $100, a sum equal to more than 20 cafe-bought cappuccinos. It will keep me feeling warm and looking stylish as I wait for the bus each morning next winter en route to work. Nothing beats being splurged upon by your guy because he sees you in a hat and thinks you look swell.

As for the coffee, well, Joe has offered a compromise: He's going to create budget space for me to get a cappuccino two or three times a week. We'll see if budget-sanctioned indulgences taste as sweet.

Source: Wall street journal

Sunday, April 10, 2011

The Secret to Ensuring Follow-Through


"Listen, I would love the reorg to work. But I just can't trust them."

I had called Mary* as part of my preparation for an offsite with the leaders of a fast-growing financial services firm. Mary was talking about the newly reorganized HR department.

Before, when she could trust them, Mary had a dedicated HR person — Lucinda — to address her needs. But now? Now she had to call a shared services group who were, collectively, responsible for following through on her requests.

"Why can't you trust them?" I asked.

Mary had a hard time answering. It wasn't that they had failed to deliver — but she was pretty sure they would. With so many different people involved, how could thingsnot fall through the cracks?

"The more people juggling," Mary told me, "the higher the risk of someone, somewhere, dropping a ball."

True. But there's another, more positive, side to group juggling: the more people juggling, the more likely someone, somewhere will be able to catch a ball that an otherwise busy, overwhelmed individual would have dropped.

"How do we keep them accountable?" Mary asked, still uncomfortable. "At least with Lucinda, responsibility was clear."

Mary had a point. Which got me thinking: when does a ball usually get dropped? I thought of all the mishaps, mishandles, and mistakes I had witnessed in the past month and realized they could all be traced to a single point in time: the handoff.

For the most part, problems didn't arise because of incompetence, laziness, or disinterest. They arose because of poor communication. At the moment two people were discussing what needed to get done, something, somehow, went awry.

The solution can't be as simple as one point of contact because, in a large, complex, global organization, one point of contact is never simple. The solution has to be even simpler than that. It has to work with one point of contact or many. It has to work across the hierarchy, across departments, and across all silos.

As I finished my pre-offsite interviews, I made a single request of each leader: read The Checklist Manifesto by Atul Gawande.

A physician and writer, Gawande describes doctors who resist the checklist — it's too simple, insulting even — and then shows us how hospital staff who follow a checklist save more lives than most medical "miracle drugs" or procedures.

Gawande makes a strong case for why experts need checklists, especially for the most mundane of tasks. The more expert we are in something, the more we take things for granted, and, as a result, miss the obvious.

Most of us think we communicate well. Which, ironically, is why we often leave out important information (we believe others already know it). Or fail to be specific about something (we think others already understand it). Or resist clarifying (we don't want to insult other people).

Thankfully, there's a simple solution: create a checklist and use it during every handoff.

During the offsite, the leadership team looked at where problems happened in the past and where they were likely to happen in the future. Almost all were during handoffs.

So we developed the following mandatory "handoff checklist" — questions that the person handing off work must ask the person taking accountability for delivery:

Handoff Checklist
  • What do you understand the priorities to be?
  • What concerns or ideas do you have that have not already been mentioned?
  • What are your key next steps, and by when do you plan to accomplish them?
  • What do you need from me in order to be successful?
  • Are there any key contingencies we should plan for now?
  • When will we next check-in on progress/issues?
  • Who else needs to know our plans, and how will we communicate them?

Time it takes to go through the checklist? One to five minutes. Time (and trust) saved by going through the checklist? Immeasurable.

We came up with this checklist because it addressed the most common reasons for dropping balls in this particular organization. Your handoff checklist may be different.

Here's what's compelling about an established checklist: it not only reduces mistakes, it reduces the need for courage.

Why would we need courage? Imagine you just finished explaining the priorities of a project to someone. Wouldn't it seem a little patronizing, a little insulting to their intelligence, to ask them to tell you what they understood the priorities to be?

With an established checklist, it's no longer offensive; it's standard. And when they answer, often with a slight misunderstanding of the priorities, you can correct them on the spot, saving them two weeks of misguided work and the loss of trust that goes along with it. That's the power of the checklist.

A few months after the offsite, I called Mary to ask her how it was working. Was the new HR Shared Services organization delivering? Did she miss Lucinda?

"Sure I miss Lucinda," she told me, "but I don't need her."

Then she pulled out her checklist to make sure we were both on the same page for our work going forward.

*Names and some details changed

Source: HBR