The iMentor 80/20% rule
You may have heard of a few different 80/20% rules before, such as:
The Pareto Principle, which is the principle that 80% of outputs result from 20% of all inputs for any given event. Therefore for any given goal, its a reasonable and even sensible approach to identify the inputs that have the potential to produce the highest possible results or returns, and make them the priority in achieving your goal. (Investopedia).
I’ve heard Steven Bartlett (Diary of a CEO) refer to an 80/20% rule of having to piss off 80% of people to get to the 20%, but the 20% is your target market.
Motivational speaker Jim Rohn developed a 70/30% rule which is a means of proportioning your after tax income. 70% for necessities and luxuries, 10% for charity, 10% for wealth-creation and 10% for savings.
I hope you see where this is going, friends… you’ve guessed it, I’m going to be so bold as to propose an iMentor 80/20% rule!
This rule works on the hypothesis that in a professional setting, when questions are directed to you to answer and account for, and its reasonable and fair that you SHOULD be the one to answer i.e. its related to your actual job or area of expertise, not that you’re covering for someone else who SHOULD be answering (we’ve all been there). This rule proposes:
80% of the time, tactful, measured and balanced answers concluding with a “get out of jail free” card are the best way to go.
Only 20% of the time should you go all in, cards on the table, with a direct and unequivocal answer.
What I mean by a “get out of jail is free” card is the piece of information that leaves the person receiving the answer with the understanding of “this is the best answer I can give you right now, based on the information I have available to me, but I don’t know what I don’t yet know.”
"How do you know when to do one or the other?” (asked nobody, but I’m going to pretend you asked anyway). Well, firstly, if you find yourself questioning which way to answer - the very fact that you are questioning it means you are falling in to 80% territory.
Here are 3 reasons where we think the 80% route is the way to go, and why we think its the way to go the majority of the time:
Diplomacy. I am of the firm opinion that diplomacy is not only essential to getting things done, but getting things done right.
“The truth hurts.” Theres a reason this saying exists, because it does. When it is not a critical situation, I find that people rarely want the unbridled truth, you’ve got to spin it up a bit. There is a clear distinction to make here. Never lie and never bullshit. You will be caught out and your credibility will suffer. However, a bit of “sugar coating” or “putting a hairband on it” usually never hurt anybody.
Things change. How many times have you been full sure something was on track on a Friday, only to find it completely derailed by the end of the following Monday. It could be for a number of reasons, the technical solution is actually a lot more complex then estimated, theres an unforeseen cost and your budget is tracking way off, a regulatory change comes out of nowhere and all your resources get redeployed to that. You should always, expect the unexpected.
Here are 3 reasons where we think the 20% route is the way to go, and why we think its the way to go the minority of the time:
The data doesn’t lie (and hips don’t lie either but thats another article for another time). More on this in a roleplay example to come!
If someone is ethically or legally out of line. There is no scope for beating around the bush here. You can be as diplomatic as you need to be but if someone is operating in a way that puts someone or something in harms way - call it out there and then. Same in business as it is in life.
Power plays. Stand your ground when someone is trying to undermine you on a call or in a meeting. We’ve all been there. Sometimes it’s blatant, sometimes its subtle. Don’t let it go unchecked. Once, I had a colleague senior in age and experience to me but in no way my superior or my direct line of management tell me to stop having pre-wiring conversations with people before a steering meeting because its a waste of time. I thanked him for his suggestion but confirmed that I have my own approach to doing things, so not only have I already gone ahead and had those pre-wiring conversations for this steering, but that I will continue to do so.
Lets role play a fake scenario to see when and where to use the iMentor 80/20% rule:
Theres a steering meeting for a project that is tracking 12% over budget. Your budget is 3million so it’s enough of a derailing to warrant a serious justification and resolution plan. You think you’ve pinpointed the general problem down to Tim and his team not doing what they needed to do by a deadline you very clearly set them. Your Director wants answers at this steering as to what the problem is and how it’s going to get back on track.
Role play 1 - the 20%
You call out on the steering call that Tim and his team did not do what they need to do by the deadline you clearly set and thats the reason why this project/meeting/situation is tracking 12% over budget, valuable time and cost was wasted with no output.
Role play 2 - the 80%
Pull Tim for a pre-wiring (call, coffee or side chat) BEFORE the steering, saying something like “Tim, you might help me out here, I needed Bob (on Tims team) to do x/y/z because we’re now tracking 12% over budget due to this missed deadline and time waste and it's going to get worse if we can’t pull it back quickly”
Theres a huge likelihood that you will learn of a very valid reason why the work wasn’t done:
Both Bill and Tim had unexpected personal disasters and this fell through the cracks.
Tims team is under massive pressure and haven't even had the chance to consider completing your request because theres 5 other higher priority items (agreed by leadership) before yours!
Tim’s Director told him not to do it and focus on something else.
If you go all in, cards on the table, and follow through on the role play 1 you risk multiple things, mainly amongst them ruining any future chance of working effectively with Tim AND looking foolish in front of your Director and others for not trying to resolve this amongst yourselves before steering.
When given the opportunity, most reasonable people will work to fix things before they become a disaster. It’s up to you to give them the opportunity. It’s essential to not railroad or blindside people and in so far as possible get on the same page with your peer before you both speak to your Director.
Let’s say you’re with me so far, and agree that 80% answer style is the way to go. Next, is what I would describe as the “sugar coating” / “putting a hairband on it” AND utilizing that all important get out of jail free card.
“Director, we are tracking over budget at 12% with 6 months to go, but I have spoken with Tim and Tim’s team have confirmed 80% of the future development work on component X is already done before we hit this snag on component Y, so we envisage being able to ramp down time and resource quicker in that area in 3 months time and even out the spend of the problem we have with component Y. We need to track it carefully though and can’t afford any future surprises, so we’ll put a follow up meeting in for 4 weeks time to check in on progress.”
Remember, we at worst never and at best rarely, know it all or have the full picture of any given professional situation. Doing the pre-wiring before big check in sessions and hedging your answers when reporting to management is the large majority of what management want and need to hear. For all we know, this is a minor project and a blip on the priorities for Tim and his team and Tims director is far more concerned with 5 other higher profile projects. Never assume that what you have identified as an issue is the full story.
In the rarer, 20% of the time, when the side chats have been had, and the pre wiring is done and you’ve tried to get the situation back on track with demonstrable effort - and its still not working and you’re tracking over budget with no resolution in sight its time to give it straight, and be direct.
When you’re doing this try to have a majority consensus behind you. In the example above when Tim tells you it cant be done because he doesn’t have the resources. Explain to Tim that you’re going to have to escalate at the steering and this is what you’ll be saying. Talk to others within the network of your project, and verify do they also see what you see as the issue and the reason its tracking over budget. If you have a quorum that views the situation the same way you do and agree it needs to be called out - thats your approach. Unfiltered, evidence backed, data driven and direct (the data doesn’t lie). Chances are even Tim will agree with your approach as he is only following orders from his Director.
We hope his has helped, or will help some time in the future, friends.