Kill the company exercise

There is a very interesting tip related by Wharton professor, Adam Grant (2016), for constructing better investment pitches. Instead of doing a hard sell and focusing on the positives, we begin by explaining the negatives. Counter-intuitive? Known as an "upside-down pitch" this works as follows: 

"By acknowledging its most serious problems, [...] it [is] harder for investors to generate their own ideas about what was wrong with the [pitch]. [Potential investors find] themselves thinking hard to identify other concerns, [...] decid[ing that] problems [a]ren’t actually that severe". The creator of this pitch style, Rufus Griscom, said "When I led with the factors that could kill the company, the response from the board was the exact opposite: oh, these things aren’t so bad. Newton’s third law can be true in human dynamics as well: every action has an equal and opposite reaction" (Grant, 2016, 23%).

Taking this idea a step further, we can stand in the shoes of our competitors to determine where our own organisation is weak. To develop a more active, innovative and change-oriented approach to leadership at the drugs company Merck, the CE had the executive team spend two hours in small groups brainstorming ideas to "put Merck out of business" (Grant, 2016, 68%). The execs were: 

"pretending to be one of Merck’s top competitors. Energy soared as they developed ideas for drugs that would crush theirs and key markets they had missed. Then, their challenge was to reverse their roles and figure out how to defend against these threats. This 'kill the company' exercise is powerful because it reframes a gain-framed activity in terms of losses. When deliberating about innovation opportunities, the leaders weren’t inclined to take risks. When they considered how their competitors could put them out of business, they realized that it was a risk not to innovate" (68%)

Then Merck - or any organisation - must DO something about what they have come up with. First having a deep and honest "discussion about the most serious threats and how to convert them into opportunities to transition from defense to offense" (Grant, 2016, 72%), then assessing the level of risk; prioritising; allocating resources; planning; and implementing strategy. This is a SWOT analysis on steroids.

The 'kill the company' idea was the brainchild of Lisa Bodell, who explains that companies get - effectively - fat and complacent over time:

"Most companies, even successful ones, do not sustain a culture conducive to innovation. As they grow in size and complexity, it becomes hard for them to see what’s happening beyond their own walls. Their internal groups or divisions can become insular, resulting in creative and managerial silos that have no idea what anyone else is working on at any particular moment or what others’ strategic plan looks like. Companies often wind up using a microscope to scrutinize their isolated internal efforts rather than a telescope to keep a broad view toward the future. As the speed of change increases and demand for results continues to grow, critical thinking in all its forms—questioning, creating, inventing, exploring—too often takes a backseat to efficiency, output, and short-term ROI" (Bodell, 2012, 5%).

Doing the 'kill the company' exercise gives us licence to take a clear-eyed look at EVERYTHING. Honesty rules. This is a very clever tool: providing we enact the results.

Sam

References:

Bodell, L. (2012). Kill the Company: End the Status Quo, Start an Innovation Revolution.  Bibliomotion.

Grant, A. (2016). Originals: How Non-Conformists Move the World [ebook]. Viking Press.