Time for Evolution

Strategic Scientific have hit a new milestone.
 
Not a strange one, not a major event, but a little stepping stone along the way of company evolvement.
 
We have had one of our significant, early on board, associates leave.
 
People lives change, different influences pull them in different directions. The same happens to companies, and so you find at some point nothing lines up the way it did before and the bond has to be broken so all parties can best pursue their needs.
 
From the company perspective this takes some anticipation of the event - being aware of the signs that the working relationship is under strain, that it's no longer meeting the company expectations. Indicators can be a reduction in the ease or frequency of communication with particular individuals. It could be a lack of flexibility in their approach to projects or willingness to accept new processes, changes, adaptations to what is required or hoped for. The signs are there and senior management need to be constantly vigilent.
 
Trying to address these issues doesn't always reach a solution - sometimes it can be hard for an individual to articulate the reason why things don't feel right and there can be unclear messages between what is said and what is done. But once the decision that a parting of the ways needs to happen has been reached, even if it is only on the management side, then the actuality needs to be planned for.
 
Knowledge is key. What does that individual know and what skills do they bring to the organisation. What imapct  will their departure have on the day-2-day functioning of the business and also on the medium term plans.
How can you ensure that you capture all the knowledge that you need to keep the company moving forwards and who within your current team matches up on the skills side, or what skills do you need to recruit in as replacement.
 
It doesn't have to be a 1 for 1 swap. In SSC that hasn't happened. We have looked at the departing skill set and divided that up into 3 areas, one which is covered by a new recruit, one which will be brought in as an occasional resource and the final area will be covered by current team expanding their role and interests. It has taken a few months of preparation but it has gone smoothly.
 
And that preparation has made the actual departure easier for all sides.
No shock, no great upheaval, just a simple parting of the ways and best wishes for all involved for the future.
As it should be.
 

Protecting IP rights when staff leave

If your organisation employs staff, it’s a sure bet that at some point in the future they will choose to leave. When they do, how can you ensure that the company’s Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) and other sensitive information are protected?
 
As with many things in life, prevention is preferable to cure, so plan for leavers early – in fact, plan for it at the appointment stage. Broadly speaking (under UK law) where an employee creates IP in the workplace in the course of their normal employment duties, the rights automatically vest in the employer.  To maximise protection, IPR ownership should also be explicitly addressed in employment contracts, along with contractual obligations to not disclose confidential information and trade secrets both during and after employment. The employment contract can also be used to obtain the author’s waiver of any moral rights which may exist in Copyright works they create as part of their employment. Employment contracts should also include explicit requirements for employees to return and/or delete all confidential information on termination of their employment or at any time if requested by the company. This should include both the return of physical documents and anything stored electronically. 
 
During the period of employment and as a matter of good practice to ensure there is no doubt over what information is confidential or a trade secret, employers should highlight such information by labelling it clearly.
 
Many companies use a leaver “check list” – ensure this specifically addresses IP, confidential information and trade secrets, and that all information identified is catalogued, and stored in an accessible form and manner. Categories include:
  • Processes & production information, know-how & previously attempted, but flawed techniques or 'blind alleys' that did not achieve their intended results (“negative know-how”)
  • Machines & manufacturing information
  • Customer lists & confidential customer information, reports & analyses
  • Operation & design manuals
  • Designs, drawings, diagrams & artwork
  • Ideas & plans
  • Technology information
  • Formulas & calculations
  • Compounds
  • Prototypes
  • Laboratory notebooks & experiments
  • Experimental, analytical & design data
  • Vendor & supplier information
  • R&D information, reports, know-how & negative know-how
  • Cost, price, profit, loss & margins data, reports & analyses
  • Quality control information, procedures, manuals & records
  • Maintenance know-how & negative know-how
  • Sales & marketing information, reports, forecasts & plans, advertising materials
  • Financial information, documents, budgets & forecasts
  • Computer printouts, operating reports
  • Administrative & managerial information, key decision makers, internal organisation
  • Computer software & source code
  • Creative individual works & collaborative works

Decisions, Decisions

Is decision making and the process that entails a marker for success in your company? 

I've been examining the SSC process  recently as we are expanding and I'm wanting to make sure that we continue to do things in the best possible way, so for various reasons I've been comparing internal SSC ways to those of other organisations.

I'm intrigued.
The key questions appear to be :
Do all decisions need to be handled the same?
At what stage of company development should there be delegation and budget responsibility.?
How can you define a strategic decision and who should be involved in that?

All organisations need to work those answers out for themselves and keep them under review.

But what when it goes wrong? What can that tell you as a company about where you are at?
And what does it communicate, perhaps subtley to clients and the outside world?

Different topics require different levels of consideration. Sales issues require a secure, determined and speedy decision making process. Being unable to make the decision about what to do, taking weeks over a simple binary choice could indicate that you are reticent or unsure of your product and how to approach your market. Or it could tell you that your sales process isn't flexible enough and needs review.
 
Other areas, such as the decision to recruit new staff need lengthier consideration, and the decision to form a partnership to co-create a new product needs weighty and deep planning, complete with fact-finding and should not be rushed.

Decisions which require face-2-face meetings of senior staff can be useful, but in busy small companies are not always possible. Other mechanisms need to be employed - Skype, email conversations. If a decision which should be taken in a single quick conversation, especially if that decision has been promised to an external partner or potential customer, takes more than 48hours you may have a problem. If it takes multiple weeks, then you definitely do. SSC has a system where outstanding issues are flagged and raised to the top of the "to do" chart on a weekly basis. It works for us, we have 6 people across 5 locations and we regulary use skype discussions to get decisions made and action plans formed. I wonder if we had a central office would we rely more on face-2-face and would that slow us down?