Competitive Edge

So last night our MBA team (Team Baldwin) met on-line to make decisions regarding our mock company for the upcoming round (year) of competition. We had to make decisions on existing and new products in different (and changing) segments including Research & Development, pricing, marketing/advertising, and production as well as investments in future production, automation, employee development/training/recruiting, etc. There are a ton of different things to try out. We could have probably stopped after about an hour and would have been "fine."

I think one of the things that can make me an effective problem solver is that "fine" isn't good enough for me. I ascribe to Jim Collins believe that we don't have great businesses/schools/churches, etc, because we have good ones. It is this desire to move from good to great that drives me on. However, when applied to unnecessary situations, this can lead to the annoyance of others. Now, my team didn't seem annoyed with me, but they potentially could have been when I kept on about how I'm unhappy with our projected cash flow, then our projected ROE, then the fact we had to lay people off, then considering what the competition is doing, then tying back to our strategy. If you are reading this team, thanks for your patience.

I don't know if I learned anything about leadership here, but it did affirm that thinking to this depth is fine as long as vision is cast to show the value and potential impact of it. In the case of a simulated MBA program, the value and potential impact were limited so the rigor probably wasn't necessary.... however, if this really was a company I was running (or a church I held a leaderhip position in), this rigor (and more) would be critical - but it needs to accompany vision.