jamesridgers

Meet Willow Tufano. Willow is a real estate owner, renting her property to tenants for high margins backed by low-requirement venture capital sourced locally with quick payback terms, subsidized by Willow’s other business, the procurement and selling of used household goods, such as furniture, baby items, and electronics.

When she’s not running her business, Willow is also continuing her education, using online educational options to provide flexibility in her schedule and allowing her to focus appropriate energy and attention to her various endeavors. In short, she’s doing well at balancing her project portfolio.

Oh, there’s one small detail I forgot to mention.

Willow is 14 years old.

Yes, fourteen.

Here’s her story, as told by USA Today. It’s worth a read.

Willow displays wisdom in program and portfolio management at levels that I’ve seen some MBAs fail to reach. For example, her opportunism with regards to “waste”. She takes other people’s trash and makes money from it. She times it appropriately. She knows where to look. She observes and maximizes the exploitation of that opportunity.

Her schooling is another thing I’m impressed with. Well, I should say, her vision and flexibility with her schooling. She recognizes how important it is, and has found the right solution to allow her to get a good education while still running her businesses. And she’s obviously a hard worker, putting in the effort necessary in her resale business to make the profits she’s targeting.

But I think the thing that impresses me about Willow the most, and also frustrates me about myself and other seasoned business minds around me, is that Willow is uninhibited by prior experiences and lessons, so she’s not fighting habits or having to unlearn techniques that don’t work. She’s making it up as she goes along. She’s being creative and artistic with her time and resources for the betterment of her business.

In my world, we call this “out of the box” thinking. I bet Willow calls it simply “getting things done”.

One of the most fascinating of Apollo missions is the one that history knows as “a successful failure”, Apollo 13. Forming the plot of one of my favourite movies, this famous mission saw Jim Lovell and his crew deal with the danger and adversity of serious malfunctions and precarious life support problems to return home safely. And the same man who directed the Apollo 11 moon landings also directed Apollo 13′s flight and rescue, Gene Kranz.

Kranz’s inimitable style and depth of leadership was the key factor in Apollo 13′s safe return as he led the efforts of thousands of people who were striving to bring the three stricken astronauts.

“Let’s not make things worse by guessing.”
Odyssey, the name given to Apollo 13′s command module capsule, was a complex beast of a machine. It had literally millions of systems, which meant that it had literally millions of things that could go wrong. When one of the oxygen tanks exploded, it caused problems and failures in countless other systems, and it wasn’t clear exactly what had happened or why it had happened. Nobody onboard Odyssey or at mission control in Houston had any idea of what was happening, except for one thing: The spacecraft was dying, and if they didn’t do something quickly, the astronauts would die too.

When there are millions of pieces to a jigsaw, it’s difficult to pin point causes and effects amid the chaos of strange, broken behaviour, and Kranz knew that a human tendency during times of crisis and time pressure is to fill in the gaps with educated guesses and intuition. The problem with that is that it isn’t acceptable when human lives are at stake. So, in one of the back rooms at mission control, with his very best engineers and mission controllers gathered, he gave them a wonderfully simple, yet critically important, parameter for their rescue efforts. “Let’s work the problem, people. Let’s not make things worse by guessing.”

Every problem has a solution, but reaching that solution requires a methodical, logical approach, not an emotional, worry-filled guessing game. When a problem is understood, it starts to become clear what can and can’t be done, what is within and without our control, where help is needed, and where help can be provided.

“Unfortunately, we’re not landing on the moon.”
From the moment Odyssey’s oxygen tank exploded, the astronauts and mission controllers had to improvise a new mission: Get Jim Lovell, Fred Haise, and Jack Swigert home safely. Part of that improvised mission included using the engine on Aquarius (Apollo 13′s lunar lander) in ways it hadn’t be used before; correcting trajectory, adjusting speed etc. Upon consultation with the designers of that engine, they said that it wasn’t designed for that kind of use, it was designed to land on the moon. Kranz’s response? “Unfortunately, we’re not landing on the moon. I don’t care what something was DESIGNED to do; I care about what it CAN do.” And so as the mission controllers and systems engineers got to work solving the many problems, Kranz inspired “out of the box” thinking and encouraged creativity in problem solving.

Look at our systems, processes, parts, materials, and other items on hand, and ask if they can be used to solve problems that they weren’t designed to solve. Find ways to fit square pegs in round holes. So often, there are materials and skills and ideas right in front of us that are perfect for solving the problem at hand, but we must think outside of the box to see them.

“Failure is not an option.”
This is, perhaps, Kranz’s most iconic and memorable leadership value, but it has its roots in fear of loss and failure. Amongst the thousands of people working to bring the Apollo 13 crew home, there were those with negative predictions and defeatist attitudes. Particularly after losing three astronauts in the Apollo 1 fire, some had thought it was only a matter of time until another disaster occurred that claimed human lives. Gene Kranz was having none of it. “We’ve NEVER lost an American in space, and we’re sure as hell not losing one on my watch. Failure is not an option.”

If failure is viewed as a viable, acceptable outcome, it starts to factor in to the equation. By ruling failure out, it forces tenacious, dedicated, resilient thinking and problem solving. With this mindset, if something can be accomplished, it will be accomplished. This is, in fact, the same tenacity and resilience that led to the many successful Apollo moon landings.

“Our finest hour.”
At one point during the multi-day ordeal, President Nixon called NASA leadership and asked for the odds on a successful return of the crew. Some of Kranz’s peers had outlooks that were somewhat less optimistic than Kranz himself. This was understandable; by the time Odyssey had made the long trip back to Earth’s vicinity, there were still multiple problems; a typhoon was forming in the oceanic recovery area, the heat shield may have been irreparably damaged, the parachutes used to slow the fall may be frozen solid. Clearly, there were still a lot of obstacles to overcome, and some of the pessimists voiced their opinions, believing that this could be the worst disaster NASA has ever faced. “With all due respect”, Kranz told the disbelieving, “I believe this will be our finest hour.”

Have you ever heard the saying “anyone can steer the ship when the seas are calm”? It’s entirely applicable to this very situation that Kranz faced. A good leader isn’t paid to coast; a good leader will earn his or her stripes, reputation, respect, and salary when the chips are down and the storm is in full swing. Victory is at its purest and most enjoyable in the face of adversity. Certainly, winning a soccer match 3-0 is great, but it’s even sweeter when you come back from 2-0 down to win 3-2. Kranz knew this. His resolve and steady leadership, determination and tenacity, responsiveness and empowerment all fed his team the motivation and inspiration and leadership they needed to win the game against all odds. And the victory trophy was three fellow citizens of the planet earth returned safely from the brink of death.

Kranz’s legacy to us as leaders is simple but extremely powerful and effective. Work the problem. Be creative. Expect success. Believe the best is yet to come.

Apollo 11 is best known for its remarkable achievement in fulfilling John F. Kennedy’s 1961 mandate of “landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to earth”. It was the jewel in NASA’s crown during the Apollo era, and arguably remains the most remarkable achievement not just of NASA but of mankind thus far.

But hidden behind the glory and wonder of this scientific and exploratory achievement sits tales of near-disaster, alarming close calls, almost-aborts, and tense go/no-go moments that spell out the depth and width and breadth of how dangerous and hard this was to achieve, and in those we find shining examples of brilliant, holistic leadership from which we can learn valuable lessons.

The story of Apollo 11′s leadership structure from lift-off to touchdown is one of knowing when to step back and when to step up. As flight director for the moon landing, Gene Kranz had to put absolute trust in his mission controllers, step back a little, and allow his guys in the trenches to step up. A great example of this occurred during the descent to the moon.

At around 5,000 feet from the moon’s surface, Charlie Duke (a fellow Apollo astronaut who had the job of CapCom – Capsule Communicator – for the Apollo 11 landing) radioed Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin and gave them the green light they were waiting for. “Eagle, you are ‘Go’ for landing!”

“Roger that” replied Armstrong, “Go for landing”.

And then something went wrong. The alarm light on the control panel lit up and the onboard computer (extremely primitive by today’s standards) flashed an alarm message: “1201″

“1201 alarm” Armstrong radioed back to mission control.

Here’s where Gene Kranz did two things that were key to his successful leadership of this achievement.

First, he stepped back and let procedure occur. Months before this moment, his mission controllers had simulated this landing and had procedures in place for responding to issues and problems. When the lives of two astronauts were at stake, the situation didn’t need a Flight Director butting in and relaying questions and answers between his CapCom and the various mission controllers. And so he stepped back and let the predetermined protocols play out.

Second, he trusted his men to adhere to the mantra that he had instilled in them after the Apollo 1 fire: “Tough and Competent”. He knew, without a shadow of a doubt, that his mission controllers would make the absolute best decision without endangering the mission or, more importantly, the lives of the two men in the Lunar Module.

Because of these predetermined leadership behaviors, it took the mission controller who was responsible for the guidance computer just four seconds to figure out what was happening and respond. “We’re go. Hang tight. We’re go on that alarm.”

Armstrong continued his descent towards the moon.

“1202 alarm!”

“Same type. You’re go. Same type.”

We all know the rest of the story. Neil successfully landed the Eagle in the Sea of Tranquility and made history.

Now think about this. Quite literally, there were millions of things that could have gone wrong during that landing. Even with redundant systems, any situation could have arisen that could have forced an abort, killed the mission, or killed the astronauts. Navigating those risks takes a unique composure, a special kind of trust, an inspirational example, and a surety that is unwavering. In stepping back and letting his subject matter experts step up, he made an exemplary leadership decision for the betterment and fulfillment of the mission at hand.

There are times in the execution of our business-critical functions when leaders need to step back and let the team step up. If there is trust in expertise, it doesn’t need managing. It needs empowerment, and it needs ownership. When everyone understands what the cost of failure is, like the Apollo 11 mission controllers did, empowering team members to own their expertise and execution becomes incredibly effective leadership which, in turn, reaps incredibly affected rewards.

This weekend I watched the film “For All Mankind”. Made in 1989, this documentary tells the story of mankind’s journey to the moon, the challenges, perils, tragedies, and triumphs that occurred along the way, and the legacy left by the 12 men who walked on the lunar surface.

NASA’s ‘Apollo’ program strikes me as one of the most rounded and encompassing examples of leadership that we can draw from. It has everything, from complete and total leadership failure and breakdown to magnificent, inspirational leadership that made the impossible possible.

The story of Apollo 1 is tragic. A fire on the launch pad during a routine test in January 1967 took the lives of three astronauts, and at a broad level it was a result of leadership breakdown. Nobody was to blame and everybody was to blame. North American Aviation, who held the contract to design and build the spacecraft, weren’t listening to the concerns of the astronauts. Their engineers were being held to unrealistic schedule constraints by North American’s management. North American were under immense pressure from NASA leadership to deliver, and so shortcuts were made and safety compromised. And it was all done under NASA’s supervision.

However, in the aftermath, there is a wonderful example of strong leadership. During the Senate hearings investigating the disaster, astronaut Frank Borman was asked what he thought caused the fire. “Lack of imagination”, he said, before expounding that nobody had imagined or thought of these risks. Then he implored the Senate to “end this witch hunt and let us get back to the business of landing on the moon.”

This display of resolve and belief reinvigorated the organizations involved with Apollo, with effective changes being made almost immediately. Management was restructured, communication lines were opened, schedules became secondary to safety, and, above all, belief was renewed that America could get back on track and land a man on the moon.

This is a wonderful example of refocus after a setback. In the face of disaster, we often want and even need to stop what we’re doing and post mortem the situation to understand it. The problem is that sometimes that leads to the kind of finger pointing that the Senate was doing during the Apollo 1 “witch hunt”. At some point we have to draw the line. At some point we have to assess our risks and move forward with a plan anyway. At some point we have to lead. At some point we have to get back to business. We owe that to our teams, and we owe that to our imaginations.

A mere 18 months after the Apollo 1 fire, Apollo 11′s “Eagle” spacecraft landed on the moon, and Neil Armstrong made his “one giant leap for mankind”. Over 400,000 people played a part in making that happen, but if key leaders hadn’t refocused and reimagined the Apollo program after the events of Apollo 1, it may have never happened.

One of the key leaders at that time was a man named Gene Kranz, a Flight Director in Mission Control. Three days after the accident, he called his team of Mission Controllers together and gave the following speech:

“From this day forward, Flight Control will be known by two words: Tough and Competent. ‘Tough’ means we are forever accountable for what we do or what we fail to do. We will never again compromise our responsibilities. ‘Competent’ means we will never take anything for granted. Mission Control will be perfect. When you leave this meeting today you will go to your office and the first thing you will do there is to write Tough and Competent on your blackboards. It will never be erased. Each day when you enter the room, these words will remind you of the price paid by Grissom, White, and Chaffee. These words are the price of admission to the ranks of Mission Control.”

This shining example of refocusing leadership has a lasting legacy. Kranz’s Mission Control oversaw the first lunar landing. That same team worked tirelessly and innovatively to bring home the astronauts of Apollo 13 against massive odds. They were tough and they were competent. More than 30 years later, that toughness and competence continued on; NASA administrator Sean O’Keefe quoted Kranz’s inspirational speech in the aftermath of the Space Shuttle Columbia disaster, adopting the same principles throughout his Mission Control as Gene Kranz did in 1967.

I recently finished reading Steve Jobs’ biography written by Walter Isaacson. As much as it’s about Steve Jobs, it’s also a fascinating insight in to Apple, their culture as personified and exemplified by Steve, and why they’ve been successful in redefining multiple industries and quite literally changing the world.

The thing that I love the most about Apple as an entity is the way they sell their products, and the absolute belief by everyone involved in what the company does. They’ve mastered the art of communicating the ‘why’ before the ‘what’, and staying true to that vision through a product’s entire lifecycle.

Many companies get this in reverse order, including Apple’s long-time competitor Microsoft. They communicate the ‘what’ first. “Here’s our product. Isn’t it cool? Would you like to buy one?” This is the orthodox sales technique. It’s what most traditional sales people have been doing for centuries, and is the equivalent of cold calling.

What Apple do is communicate why they’ve made their product, and invite you to be a part of their movement. “Here’s what we believe, and here’s how we think technology can improve our lives. Would you like to join us?” It’s a risk, for sure, but it’s a significantly bigger statement than just the device. For those who decide that they want to be a part of that vision, they can purchase some really cool technology – iPads, iPhones, MacBooks etc.

The fact that the first generation of iPads outsold every single competing device combined in its first year is testament to the power of vision. It’s testament to the power of belief. As Apple have managed to get millions of people to believe the same thing as them, it’s propelled their device to the top of the market by a very large margin.

This really shows the value of believing in what you’re doing and selling, even when it seems to go against the trends. Steve Jobs himself exemplified this in his closing statement at the launch of the iPad 2:

“A lot of folks in this tablet market are rushing in, looking at this as the next PC. Hardware and software are done by different companies, talking about speeds just as they would with PCs. Every bone in our body says this is not the right approach.”

Do you see that? “Every bone in our body says this is not the right approach.” It takes courage to stand up for what you feel is right, not what everyone else says is right, and in this respect the iPad was and is the embodiment of innovation according to a vision, not according to a technology. And successfully so.

Here’s what I’m getting at; stand up for what you believe is right, and sell your vision, not your product. Getting people to buy in to your belief is far more powerful than getting them to simply buy your product. A product can start a trend, but a belief can start a movement. Movements, as we’ve seen throughout the world in recent times, can lead to revolution, and revolution, as history shows us, leads to change. Steve Jobs changed the world because he had people with him who bought in to his vision. With the same ‘vision-first’ mentality, there is no reason why you and I can’t achieve the same.

I came across this video today. At first I found it to be incredibly funny…

…but then it got me thinking about the things we use to identify ourselves, and more importantly, the assumptions we make about people based on their assumed identity.

Employees at my company take pride in our products. On any given day of the week, the majority of my fellow employees wear t-shirts, hats, jackets, or pins associated with our products. At lunch time, it’s easy to spot employees of my company walking around the nearby mall. In short, it’s very easy to identify a fellow employee by what he or she is wearing.

The same merchandise, however, is available to our community of customers. People not remotely associated with my company can buy the same t-shirts, hats, jackets, pins, and a host of other merchandise to show their loyalty and love of our products. So at events such as our annual conference, where consumers and employees converge, it becomes almost impossible to tell the difference.

Deliberately wearing a Staples shirt to Staples is a little extreme, but it does highlight how quick we are at making assumptions regarding individual identity. When Jon told the lady that he didn’t work there, he was telling the truth. The lady still didn’t believe him. Why does the logo on his shirt overrule what he says? Have we, as a society, become so suspicious of each other that seeing something defeats verbal explanation?

I found this to be both funny and accurate enough to share. How often we find ourselves in a project management storm that has all the bad elements going full force yet still somehow turns out okay. Success in spite of itself? It happens.

On November 7^th, 1962, NASA awarded a contract to Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corporation to design and build the lunar landing vehicle for the Apollo missions. Over the next 7 years, Grumman’s team of talented engineers set about the mammoth task of inventing a machine that would do something that nobody had ever done before. It was true, pioneering innovation, and Grumman completed their remit to NASA, playing a major part in the extraordinary feat of landing men on the moon.

During one phase of the project, the Grumman team was testing the landing gear design on a full sized and fully weighted prototype. For several, consecutive tests, the leg was snapping at a particular hinged joint, and they couldn’t figure out why. One night, after pouring over his designs and calculations for hours, one of their best engineers discovered his error. That error, incidentally, had been made months prior, and all calculations had been based off of that erroneous data since.

He went to Grumman’s Program Manager for the Lunar Module, Tom Kelly, and confessed his mistake. Tom immediately realized the seriousness of the mistake. Fixing the mistake would put the program months behind schedule and cost millions of dollars. It would be understandable, perhaps even expected, for that engineer who made an honest mistake to be fired because of the impact to timeline and budget.

But that’s not what Tom Kelly did.

Tom Kelly sent that engineer home. He told him to take a few days off, rest and relax and spend some time with his wife and kids, then come back to work the following week and assist in fixing the mistake. It was Tom Kelly’s belief that as long as the team at Grumman were open and honest about their mistakes, and worked together to fix them if and when they happened, they had a shot at being successful in building a spaceship to land on the moon.

That belief turned out to be a good one. The first Lunar Excursion Module flew in space on January 22^nd, 1968, just 5 years and 3 months after Grumman were asked to build it. 12 more Lunar Modules flew in space, one of which famously became a life boat for the crew of the stricken Apollo 13 crew. The Lunar Module was an excellent spaceship; the result of a commitment to excellence.

The reason I tell you this story is to illustrate that a commitment to excellence and a steadfast belief that ‘good enough’ isn’t good enough doesn’t mean that there isn’t room for mistakes. The human factor tells us that mistakes can and will happen. They are inevitable. It’s not ‘if’, it’s ‘when’. A commitment to excellence doesn’t determine a ‘no mistakes’ policy, but it does determine how you react and deal with mistakes when the happen.

Had Tom Kelly fired his engineer, I don’t think anyone would have argued. Certainly, it would have been a loss of engineering talent, and a replacement would have had to be found, requiring Grumman to pour additional man hours in to bringing that replacement up to speed and integrating him in to the project. But when the initial mistake cost huge amounts of time and money, Tom would not have been chastised for that decision. People get fired for less every day.

Yet the culture of excellence that Tom had instilled and pursued in his workforce and with his workforce meant that everyone understood that it’s better to own up to the mistake rather than try and cover it up or, worse, try and shift the blame. When the tired, overworked engineer discovered his mistake, he owned up to it. Their collective commitment to excellence determined that the problem would be fixed, the lesson would be learned, and the same mistake wouldn’t be made again.

In project management, one of the most valuable processes a team can go through is the Lessons Learned cycle. This is where some introspective questions are asked and acted upon. What went well? What didn’t go well? What did we do right? What mistakes did we make? What should we keep on doing? What should we stop doing? By striving after excellence in asking these questions regularly, the leader will begin to influence a cultural shift towards excellence that doesn’t forbid mistakes, but instead determines how to deal with them and learn from them.

In Grumman’s case, the lessons they learned during the lifecycle of the Lunar Excursion Module played a massive part in them delivering on their promises to NASA. Mistakes happen. They are not forbidden. They should be expected. Mistakes are okay. Address them, fix them, and learn from them. It’s in that cycle that levels of excellence get higher and higher.

I maintain that ‘good enough’ isn’t good enough, but remember that excellence is a journey towards success. Mistakes are always an inevitability, but failure, as NASA Flight Director Gene Kranz once said, “is not an option”.

Last weekend, I ran the Santa Barbara International half marathon. It was the third half marathon that I’ve run this year, and it was the most enjoyable but also the hardest half marathon that I’ve run.

Several factors made it the most enjoyable. The location is just beautiful – dramatic mountains to the north, meandering coastline to the south. The time of year was just conducive to endurance running – it’s clear and sunny, but cool and breezy. My running partner is someone I love – this is the second half marathon that my girlfriend and I have run together.

But as enjoyable as the race was, it was also the hardest race I’ve run because of just one factor: Mile 10.

Mile 10 on this course is a steep incline. Bear in mind that the geographical topography of Santa Barbara is generally full of inclines and declines. Over the first nine miles, there had been other inclines and declines, but none that compared to that of the tenth mile.

Somewhere around mile 7 or 8, my girlfriend turned to me and said “Mile 10 is a big hill. We’d better pace ourselves now so we can make it.” This was strategically one of the best decisions we made during the entire race, because we needed every ounce of strength and determination during the “big hill”.

And it was a struggle. Within the first few hundred feet of that hill, my left leg was cramping in three places. My heart rate had increased dramatically. My breathing had gotten faster and shallower. I had to fight for every step. And fight I did, because not only did I conquer that hill without walking or resting, but the pay off was fantastic; a fast paced, downhill finish for the last few miles and a ‘photo finish’ in front of a cheering crowd at the finish line.

Over the few days since that race, I’ve been struck by the parallels between what it takes to complete a tough half marathon and what it takes to be an effective project leader. There are 3 key lessons we can learn.

1. Doing something hard requires a lot of effort. You won’t get anything hard done if you don’t put in the effort required to do it. You shouldn’t even take the first step if you’re not willing to go that extra mile, and you absolutely shouldn’t demand it of anyone else around you. We were fully aware that Mile 10 was going to be a steep incline, and we took the first steps at the start line willing to do whatever it took to conquer that challenge and finish strong.

2. You’ll hurt yourself and your team if you push too hard and too fast. Pacing ourselves in the preceding miles helped us push through the tough mile. Had we been running faster or harder, we would have been out of breath and out of strength, and that mile would have gotten the best of us. As a leader, it is important that you look at what lies ahead, and pace the rate of yourself and your team to be able to dig deep when it counts the most. You don’t want to burn out in the first few miles.

3. Change requires small steps and good timing. Before Mile 10, we adjusted our pace, took in nutrition and hydration at the right intervals, and mentally prepared ourselves for the hill. After Mile 10, we took in the surroundings, picked up our pace, and finished fast and strong. In business, important changes should be affected as deliberately timed, small but accumulative efforts. Anything that is important and worthy enough to change will take time. Give it the right amount of time, so you can be stronger at the finish than you were when you started.

There’s also a fourth, more philosophical lesson that can be learned here; that the success of those working with you is dependent on your leadership. When we started Mile 10, my girlfriend and I both said something along the lines of “We’ve got this. We can do this. Let’s go.” When we crested Mile 10, we looked at each other, threw each other a high five, and gave a well deserved “nicely done!” to each other. This inspired and encouraged for the remaining few miles. Be the inspiration to your team. Be the encouragement. Be the source of the “We’ve got this. We can do this. Let’s go.” Then when you collectively get there, be the high five and the “well done”. This will provide the inspiration to get the job done, and the encouragement to finish strong.

When we crossed the finish line, someone was there to immediately place a medal around the neck of every runner, as proud friends and families looked on. Sometimes we just need to be there at the finish line, smiling proudly as our teams get the reward they worked so hard for.

Run and run well, so you can finish and finish strong.

Following on from my post last week on “good enough” not being good enough, I’ve been thinking more about excellence; what the word really means, what the reality of the word really is, and why it’s something that I feel strongly about.

The bottom line is that there is never a legitimate reason for lack of excellence. There are only excuses. ‘Excellence’ means doing the absolute best you can do, or giving the absolute best you can give, with what you already have at your disposal, whether that be talent, material, time or other resources.

What is good is good, and what is not good is not good. The problem is that we spend a lot of time trying to explain why something that is not good is good. We make compromises and concessions. We sacrifice standards. We fall in to that ‘good enough’ cycle, and then start rationalizing the throwing of money, people, or both at the problem to make things “better”.

I go back to my earlier statement. Excellence can be achieved with what you already have. It might take longer, require greater levels of creative thinking and application, and some harsh self-critiquing, but it can be done. I’d even argue that it should be done, to learn the habit of realizing full potential before adding money or hardware or people or whatever to the problem.

Twitpic.com is an excellent example of this. One guy in his apartment with nothing but an old server, an Internet connection, and some free time created an excellent web service that today ranks 477 in the world by Alexa. Sure, today TwitPic is a legitimate business with employees and server farms in data centers to handle the load that is demanded of it, but the website itself has changed very little. The level of excellence present in TwitPic’s service was established early, by one guy with some free time in his apartment with an old server and an Internet connection.

On the other side of the excellence coin, lack of excellence is the symptom of more serious root causes; laziness, complacency, carelessness, lack of passion, lack of vision…the list could go on. If we’re serious about achieving high levels of excellence, we have to avoid those root causes. Replace lazy, complacent, careless people with hard working, passionate, detailed people. We have to demand more of ourselves, and then perform at levels that meet and exceed that demand. That can be done without extra money, extra people, or extra systems. All it takes is some determination and perseverance, and an absolute unwavering standard to except no excuses for a lack of excellence.