The story in this issue traces the journey of my understanding of what is referred to as. “The relevant range” from technical specifications to seeing people as relevant/irrelevant. Spoiler: I find some of the most interesting people are at the outer fringe of “relevant.” Please let me know if there is any way I may be of service to you or your organization.
Note: These posts regularly form the basis for roundtable conversations I host. If you would like to be a part of these conversations, please let me know
In this post:
Story: The Relevant Range
My first career choice was motor racing. I started with motorcycles, and hoped to progress to auto racing, and then turn to running a motor sports team. My aspirations were fueled by trips to the Milwaukee Mile and the many places (legal and not) my friends and I found around South Milwaukee to ride our minibikes, later motorcycles.
I did all my own work on the bikes I owned. The floor of our garage regularly resembled a parts diagram from the owner’s manual for my Honda CR125M dirt bike. I learned the importance of specifications and tolerances. Technical tolerances were often specified as a range, such as plus/minus five thousandths of an inch. I quickly learned that a micrometer and a torque wrench were my friends. Things like spark plugs and piston rings had tolerances within thousands of an inch. Clutch bolts had to be tightened to specific torque levels, or the clutch could explode while the engine was running – been there, done that.
My Pa persuaded me that it would be better for me to get a college degree first and then pursue my dream of being a motor racing phenom. That turned out to be good advice.
My first job out of college was as the Materials Manager for a 350 bed nursing home. The role gave me an opportunity to learn about supply chain management. Inventory carrying costs balanced with the cost of running out of supplies. In the nursing home, too much inventory made for a crowded storage room. Running out of resident care supplies had potential for disaster. The relevant range of inventory balances could be determined through the optimal order quantity calculation. It was an easy choice to avoid running out of supplies.
As my career developed my focus moved from procurement to business systems. Much of this work involved keeping track of interactions with people as they engaged with organizations: patients with doctors, doctors with hospitals, prisoners with justice systems, employees with employers, etc. A key element of keeping track of such interactions is knowing what data to capture to support information management. It is hard to make meaning from a report that essentially says, “People did stuff” but we really don’t know who did what.
My interests followed a natural progression: parts to systems, systems to people, to how people make meaning from their relationships with parts, people and systems. Making meaning involves both objective and subjective data. Engine manufacturers provide tolerances as part of technical specifications. The optimal order quantity for nursing supplies is based on specific variables that can be easily interrogated. Subjective data is more elusive. The action taken after climbing the ladder of inference is dependent upon the observer.
Jim Collins talked about the Hedgehog Concept in his book, Good to Great. Collins uses the image of a hedgehog as a creature that does one thing well and goes on to illustrate how organizations that focus on doing one thing very well are more likely to be successful over the long run. He emphasizes focusing on the intersection of what you are deeply passionate about; what you can be the best in the world at; and what best drives your economic (or resource) engine.
Applying Collins’ Hedgehog Concept requires making decisions about the relevant range of both objective and subjective considerations. If everything is important, then nothing is important. What you are deeply passionate about; what you can be the best in the world at; and what best drives your economic (or resource) engine is both a focus exercise and an exercise in setting boundaries. The Hedgehog Concept is as much about what to ignore as it is about what to focus on. It is a reasonable expectation that a business would only serve a narrow portion of the public. Restaurants are an obvious example of a business that makes no attempt to be fully inclusive. If I’m looking for Asian street food, I go to DanDan in Milwaukee’s 3rd Ward. Club Charley’s doesn’t do Asian street food but is a great place for hanging out over a great burger. DanDan’s menu describes the relevant range of what the restaurant has to offer. It is no secret that the relevant range of DanDan’s potential customers is narrow.
The bang from the engine and the motor oil on my right foot made it obvious that my motorcycle’s clutch bolts had been tightened beyond the relevant range. An engine is a closed system with a finite set of parts and functions. People, on the other hand, interact with many systems in many ways. Sometimes by choice and sometimes by circumstances outside of their control. The Hedgehog Concept is premised on the assumption that someone else will serve the audience outside the scope of the hedgehog’s focus.
There is a not so subtle difference between a limited menu and leading a diverse group of individuals. The hedgehog concept can be instrumental in fine tuning an organization’s business model. As a macro level leadership guide, not so much. Those organizations that view qualified individuals as outside the relevant range (irrelevant) are more likely to struggle while those businesses that can be open to a wider talent pool will be more likely to succeed.
When the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) was passed in 1990 and affirmed in 2008 it included an “undue hardship” exception that allows organizations to exclude access to facilities or qualified individuals from employment. In essence, the ADA provides an opportunity for organizations to determine that some of the public falls outside of the relevant range of inclusion. Organizational infrastructure (policies, procedures, communication channels, budget authority, and decision making authority) can be an unintended barrier to inclusion. In my doctoral research and in my work with Mainstreaming on Main Street® (MoMS) I focus on environments that are supportive of persons with disabilities (PWD) in professional settings. Inclusive environments are characterized by inclusive organizational infrastructure: they have a broader sense of the relevant range.
.My work with Mainstreaming on Main Street® (MoMS) has run parallel to my work with Servant-Leaders in Southeast Wisconsin. The interface of Servant Leadership and inclusion . Leaders, who may or may not identify as Servant-Leaders, recognize the importance of the hedgehog concept in focusing their business model. They also recognize that policy that identifies people as being outside the relevant range of inclusion has negative long-term consequences: on household income, labor force participation, gross domestic product, health care costs, etc. In the language of Servant Leadership this awareness is referred to as: foresight, conceptualization, community building, and stewardship.
DanDan:
Get these posts in your inbox
You can get these posts in your inbox. Click here to join my mailing list.
Dan Lococo 
Leave a comment