The limitations of a managed team

Applying the methods, techniques and concepts of the relatively stable world of bricks and mortar to the fast changing world of e-business, can throw up many strange anomalies and unpredictable failures that are difficult to correct. Without a suitable mind set, the problems seem perplexing because the solutions require the abandonment of many fundamental principles usually associated with successful business enterprise.

In the book "The Entrepreneurial Web", there were a number of issues that caused much controversy when the relevant draft chapters were given out to the readers for their comments. The first of these was when it was proposed that the conventional practice of working with a structured and predictive business plan would be totally unrealistic given the nature of the chaotic environment of e-business.

Despite the fact that it was patently obvious that continuous technological developments and rapidly changing competitive strategies would make a mockery of any forward looking planning, many people found it almost impossible to envisage setting out on a business venture without a formulated business plan. Here was an example of an established and deeply seated dogma being retained, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to that it is a nonsense.

By examining in explicit detail, the fundamental assumptions upon which such plans are based, the majority of the readers overcame their resistance to the idea of working without a plan and managed to make the paradigm shift to be able to see how businesses could be grown rather than planned. They saw how planning could prove to be a handicap in the Information Age and the competitive advantage would go to the businesses that employed bottom up strategies, where customer feedback dictated the evolution and structure of the business models.

The second major controversy was when, by the same reasoning, it was proposed that the concept of a managed team would not be an appropriate organisational structure to use in any approach to set up an e-commerce or e-business solution. To some, this proposition was unthinkable and, despite all rational argument, they clung to the notion that nothing could ever replace the organisational construct of a managed team. They were stuck in this paradigm and no amount of persuasion could trigger a paradigm shift.

Paradoxically, many of the main supporters of a managed team approach were already working at the cutting edge of e-business projects and because they were working successfully within the environment of a managed team they assumed there was nothing wrong with it.

The reality however is that the frenzied rush of so many businesses to get a Web presence had been so great that all rational thinking had been cast aside. E-business solutions were proposed and readily accepted, based upon the business thinking prevailing in the conventional world of bricks and mortar. Projects based upon careful plans and put into operation by well managed teams was the way things had always been done. Why should it be any different for e-business?

Very few could foresee the limitations of a managed team and, like a crowd of lemmings, everyone was following the example of everyone else - the blind leading the blind - structuring their e-business solutions around the the innappropriate concept of a managed team.

It seemed to most that managed teams were highly successful in the newly emerging world of e-business. The team based organisations were in high demand and making lots of money. Investors and most core business executives, who didn't fully understand the technology, were quite happy to see their solutions being handled by what appeared to be competent teams of experts working in conventional, time honoured ways.

The reality, however, was that most of these teams were not truly focussed upon coming up with competitive e-business strategies based upon core business considerations. They were simply competing with each other , to explore different imaginative ways to use the latest technological advances.

The bottom line for these team based solution providers was not the profitability of the underlying business, but, the profit they were getting from creating Web sites and back-end solutions. They just had to build them. It was almost irrevelant as to whether or not the results of their work actually provided a competitive solution in the world of commerce. This resulted in thousands of e-businesses being painted into expensive corners, while the real game had moved goal posts and was being playing in a new field. (Note: an apt, industry expression used to describe this situation is: "The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead").

Because of this universal disregard for the real purposes of business enterprise, there was the illusion that vast numbers of businesses, based upon managed teams, were succeeding. They were all making a profit - even though it was based upon the ignorance of funding authorities and clients. In such a situation, there seemed no logic in going against the flow to try out unconventional strategies. It was only when vast sums of money had been invested in e-business ventures that showed no signs of real world success that people stopped to think about how they should really be approaching the problems.