Magnetic North

WIIFT

Have you considered the WIIFT mindset, because most of us are masters of WIIFM; What In It For Them (WIIFT) versus What In It For Me (WIIFM)? There is little friction to assuming a human-centered approach when we are the priority. The degree of difficulty increases as we try to empathize about the needs and priorities of other people. If we are articulating a Magnetic North (purpose, vision, mission, and values) or setting strategic priorities, the likelihood of it resonating is tied to a WIIFT framework.

Together or Separate

When we share a Magnetic North (purpose, vision, mission, and values), it is easier to decide on behalf of the group if we arrive at an intersection first. If we are unclear about our compass, we will likely wait for the group to assemble before proceeding. If we consider generative questions when our environment is stable, we get clarity on where the boundaries exist for our team. We can forerun future events if we deliberate about unique situations our peers encounter. A culture of curiosity allows us to focus on the work that matters and guides our reaction when we find ourselves lost in the wilderness.

We cannot always be together, call a meeting, or wait for an answer. Periodically, we must act for the whole. A sense of shared purpose and a calibrated compass enables us to navigate, even in unfamiliar terrain.

Best Decision?

If you are a summer camp trip leader, taking campers into the wilderness for backpack, horseback, and fishing trips has many responsibilities. One of the primary objectives for any journey is the safe return of all those who sign up for the adventure. You and the staff must make numerous decisions starting before the trip departs (food, gear, medications, briefings, etc.) and continuing until after the trip returns (debriefing, medical reports, repair/return gear, etc.).

The campers are the priority for the trip leaders. However, you make decisions throughout the trip considering more than their desires. Campers might prefer to play Capture the Flag, but it is getting close to dark. The surrounding terrain is a rocky meadow ringed by a dense forest. The group is showing signs of fatigue, and you have been briefed that a black bear was recently sighted in the valley where you are camped. You might postpone the game to another campsite and suggest an alternative activity, or you might organize a quick round.

The best decision for maximum fun is to play the game; it might be the highlight of the summer for the campers. A potentially safer decision is to play cards and not allow anyone to leave the campsite unless accompanied by a staff member. This might disappoint the campers but mitigates the risk management exposure. Our decisions are influenced by who we are serving. As the responsible party, trip leaders might consider their training, what parents want for their campers, and how the camp’s management would respond if an incident occurred. Conversely, the campers seek to maximize the camp experience; they see the joy and happiness of a quick game in a remarkable setting.

We are continuously placed in situations where we must decide between options. The stakes of the decisions vary, and the impact of the outcomes ranges wildly. For monumental decisions, we may labor over a variety of considerations. For inconsequential choices, we probably grab and go. The more clarity we have about what we believe, what values are embedded in our cause, who we serve, and what impact we seek, the less friction, and we will get to the decision point quicker for significant choices.

Direction vs Speed

In many cases, direction is more important than speed. A fire truck responding quickly to a structure fire provides little use if it is dispatched to the wrong address. An Olympic marathon runner who misses a course marker does not medal if their error takes them too far off route, despite maintaining the quickest pace per mile. The Concorde was highly dependent on speed to stay aloft and amplify its brand. Yet, covering the distance from NYC to London in record time is irrelevant if the plane lands in London, France.

Pausing to confirm alignment with magnetic north (or a critical bearing point) might make our work more constructive, even if we arrive without securing the fastest known time.

Watts for Free

In the road cycling community, innovation creates new levels of efficiency. A fundamental measurement for cyclist is the number of watts (power) it takes to reach a specific speed. The ultimate goal is to use the least amount of watts to reach the highest speed, since more power requires more energy. If a rider cycles at an average power of 200 watts over 162 kilometers (100 mile century), then any strategy to reduce their power and maintain the same speed or achieve a higher speed while maintaining the same power gets discussed. Riding in a group and benefiting from the inherent draft is a highly practiced strategy. Done correctly, one can achieve a 30% reduction in power output on the right terrain. First lesson, when the conditions are correct and we work together we are faster as a group than as an individual.

Over a decade ago, the idea of ‘marginal gains’ was added to the cycling lexicon. Teams started seeking minor changes and additions that resulted in micro impacts on an athlete’s performance. When bundled together, a measurable net positive was evident. Strategies included, taking personal mattresses to multi-week races like the Tour de France so an athlete slept on their bed each night. Mobile kitchens and chefs were hired to prepare the athlete’s breakfast and dinner, allowing for individual dietary restrictions and meals that met the extraordinary caloric needs of a tour cyclist. Food is ready when the cyclists required, not when the hotel’s restaurant has time.

Some marginal gains strategies were beyond the capabilities of citizen cyclist to put into practice but others were easier to adopt. Cycling kits went from loose fitting two piece lycra jersey and shorts to one piece tailored sprint suits that were far more aerodynamic. Cycling helmet design evolved from a priority for ventilation to speed. Socks, shoe covers, width of handle bars, and even the bearings in the rear derailleur pulleys redesigned. These equipment updates were not required but some were almost free.

The question becomes, if we know something is faster, do we adopt it into our practice? As a professional cyclist, not evolving to capture ‘free watts’ is detrimental to long-term career opportunities. For the amateur, the selection of ‘free watts’ is personal preference.

What are known practices that would make our enterprises more effective but we choose not to adopt? Are these changes aligned with our values or do we value traditions over change? Are we comfortable with our results or are we seeking greater impact? Where does our Magnetic North (purpose, vision, mission, values) point when we consider new opportunities?