What might be blocking the RegTech revolution?

What is RegTech?

Regulatory Technologies (RegTech) –  according to Harvard Kennedy School

“the application of new technology to regulation-related activities in order to shift them from analog-era to digital and computational models and, thereby, gain dramatic increases in effectiveness, efficiency and scalability”

It’s not surprising that amid an increasingly regulated global business landscape, many financial institutions are turning to RegTech to help them cope with greater scrutiny and the potential for hefty fines for non-compliance.

RegTech, however, is still a relatively new phenomenon but its growth has been rapid.

  • But has it been too rapid?
  • Has it left us focused on the goal while the fundamentals have been forgotten?

Whenever the term RegTech is mentioned there’s also the immediate thought of Policies and Procedures. In many organisations the proliferation of these controlling documents just means more qualified regulation officers and employees need to go on refresher courses. This is a huge cost and commonly lost in a training budget held by HR that is rarely measured as to the effectiveness of the training.

Now if it works well, your organisation would have well-trained teams and you’re making RegTech work for you – a real competitive advantage.

But the evidence suggests organisations are struggling. And they’re caught in at least one known gap called the ‘Knowing-Doing Gap’. But most likely they’re stuck in other gaps and traps that are collectively referred to as Behavioural Waste™.

‘You cannot change your future, you can change your habits. And surely your habits will change your future”  Dr. Abdul Kalam

In late 2017 Philip Creed, director and head of RegTech at fscom said “The main barrier for RegTech firms is a lack of compliance expertise on integration. Most RegTech firms are heavy in technology expertise but light on the compliance knowledge. When it comes to solving the financial institution’s actual problem, there can be a skills gap. To overcome this, RegTechs will need to bring in talent to shore up the gaps or outsource that element to experienced consultants.”

Skills gaps are interesting as it’s obvious that they need to be identified and filled by all organisations before they enter any innovation, disruption or change. But the real gap, the real elephant in the room – organisational culture – rarely gets addressed because it’s assumed it’s too difficult. Ignoring culture and the cultural change needed just adds to more Behavioural Waste™.

Philip Creed’s statement might almost come straight out of the book “How to make Lean Management Work”, which, had the book been written in the 1970s perhaps such change management programmes would have had more than a 20% success rate!


RegTech is a Change Programme

This may sound simple but RegTech is not only change, but a massive change. So why don’t we listen and learn from what the experts have researched time and time again, that demonstrate the characteristics of successful change programmes?  Once such in-depth research is the published work of Rao, H. and Sutton, R.I, “Bad to great: The Path to Scaling up Excellence”

“Before leaders attempt to adopt good practices, it is necessary to remove the bad, by identifying and reducing destructive and negative attitudes and behaviours to necessary change” in McKinsey Quarterly February 2014.

This sounds obvious too, doesn’t it? Yet, we still make assumptions that this RegTech project will alter these behaviours automatically. The facts show that it rarely if ever happens.


RegTech officers, employees and training

As Policies and Procedures grow, RegTech officers need to know a lot more which again is obvious.  That includes employees too although to a much lesser extent. The traditional route to increasing knowledge is Training. But there is a flaw in most training programmes and Rao and Sutton and others have highlighted it.

If someone hasn’t the right mindset and ready to move, then any training intervention will have much less of an effect – and “..no better than random chance” according to the CIPD.

The aim of any training programme is also to ultimately change behaviours to improve results. Initially, this change is a conscious action and when we regularly practice these behaviour changes we will convert the conscious actions to automatically happen. This is commonly known as unconscious competence and in some cases can be called common sense.

Consider the analogy of learning to drive a car. Initially, it can be clunky and quite erratic. With focused practice, in a relatively short time, we become proficient enough to pass a driving test. Then after more practice, we can experience travelling to our destination with very few conscious thoughts towards our driving. When there’s a traffic build up or incident, our awareness will then automatically engage conscious behaviours to navigate the problem. We also have an advantage in this state-of-mind and that’s having a clear purpose – safely arriving at our destination.

Isn’t that what we’re aiming at within the RegTech space?

Perhaps the issue is you don’t have a clearly defined purpose that your team are completely engaged with?

Changing organisational culture, personal attitudes and behaviours can be difficult. But if you assume they’ll change because RegTech is the saviour, then we wish you luck, because you’ll need it!

Next steps

There is a free to join global group emerging in the RegTech and FinTech arena called Disruption Disciples and our CEO is head of the London Chapter. Here are a few links to demonstrate you’re not alone YouTube LinkedIn Company  Website

If you’re in the risk business, ignoring this advice is taking a risk – can you afford to ignore it?

As ever you have a choice – what’s yours?

Mind Fit CEO interviewed by David Williams on Forbes.com


Behavioural Waste – why deal with it first?

David K. Williams, a Forbes.com writer, recently interviewed Neville Gaunt, CEO of Mind Fit about why it’s important to eliminate or significantly reduce negative behaviours before an organisation introduces any innovation or looks to change practices and grow.

David says in his article:

Nearly every behavioural or cultural issue within a company, such as conflict, avoidance, aggressive or passive aggressive behaviour, is the result of dysfunctional behaviour that can be identified and improved through attention to where people’s attitudes and thinking fall on the Mind Fit Map®.

and organisations who have introduced the Mind Fit Process internally know to be true. They also know that the process is guaranteed to be successful, giving a real ROI on the investment they make on the programme.

David also lists specific forms of Behavioural Waste™ that he sees prevalent in businesses today:

  • Ignoring and failing to address bullying behaviours
  • Allowing conflicts to grow and fester
  • Poor training that fails to produce and measure results
  • Obsolete working methods
  • Cynical attitudes or unwillingness to consider feedback
  • Overloading of capable individuals, considered easier to work with, rather than supporting or dealing with the issues lower performing individuals face


To read the full article in Forbes click on the following link or cut and paste into your browser

David Williams interview with Neville Gaunt



We’d like to thank David for his personal interest and writing such a clear and concise article for Forbes.com readers.

Special thanks are also to Cheryl Snapp Conner who introduced Neville Gaunt and David Williams in 2016.

Want your organisation to create the best platform, eliminate Behavioural Waste™ and build a culture of innovation, growth and much more?

As ever the choice is yours…. what is it?



David K. Williams

CEO of Fishbowl Inventory, in Orem, Utah. David is a serial entrepreneur, a contributor to Forbes and HBR, and the author of “The 7 Non-Negotiables of Winning,” from Wiley & Sons. Readers can follow his weekly Forbes.com columns on life, leadership and entrepreneurship via Forbes.com (https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidkwilliams/#9e802cf7bf74). They can learn more about his company, Fishbowl Inventory, by visiting www.FishbowlInventory.com.

Cheryl Snapp Conner  

CEO of SnappConner PR and Creator of Content University™

Is The Biggest, Unchecked Business Disease – Behavioural Waste™?

The biggest, unchecked Business Disease – Behavioural Waste™

Organisations believe in leadership development as there are $billions invested in leadership development every year, made on the assumption that “better leaders get better results”. Some, more focused (maybe informed) investors focus their leadership programmes on engagement, assuming better leaders create more engaged employees and teams and that then leads to higher productivity, better results.

If leadership development programmes are an investment, what’s the ROI?

Why make assumptions when the facts are there, if you care to look?

Well one thing is true and has been unequivocally proven that changing and improving attitudes and behaviours will improve performance (1). So it’s great to know that all those $billions spent on leadership are based on having the right belief. It can work! And that is also true in every part of life and can simply be seen in athletes and sports people, where focused training, changing behaviours by doing something marginally different will increase performance. You only have to look at the stories behind Olympic and Paralympic athletes, broadcast on most TV networks, to see where they started and how they progressed. The whole idea behind terms like ‘marginal gains’ is nothing new but has been exposed to a much wider audience thanks to TV, the Press and social media.

But who notices those improvements in sports people can be replicated in business, or other areas of one’s life? What if you saw the Head Coach as the COO, driving the business forward?

Interestingly, books like “Winning” by Sir Clive Woodward demonstrate the processes that Sir John Whitmore (of coaching fame) and his team were practising in businesses way back in the 1970s and 1980s.

In sport, it’s also well known that talent isn’t enough and Woodward’s TCUP (Think Correctly Under Pressure) made the difference between winning and losing. The bottom line is that attitude and behaviour makes the real “sustainable” difference to performance.

If you changed your mindset and believed everyone were talented in your organisation, how would that change your thinking?  

Now if that’s got you thinking differently, and prepared to take the first step, the burning question is…

Where do we start?  Behavioural Waste

There’s lots of great advice from evidenced and relevant research that says mostly the same as Sutton and Rao (2014) in their book “Scaling up excellence: Getting to more without settling for less”, highlighted in the Harvard Business Review in 2014. They point out the intuitive good sense that before leaders attempt to adopt good practices, it is necessary to remove the bad; and that this can be done by

“… identifying and reducing destructive and negative attitudes and behaviours that block the adoption of necessary change.”

In other words, the importance of removing embedded avoiding and blocking behaviours before introducing innovative practices. The authors’ research found that negative interactions with bosses and co-workers have five times more impact than positive ones to the extent that bad behaviours usually swamp the good, undermining the “scalability” or wider adoption of new excellent practices.  A key insight from this kind of thinking is the power of encouraging leaders and employees that they are “doing the right thing” when they start to focus not just upon their own needs and wants, but upon the people affected by their actions.

Eliminate or Reduce Behavioural Waste™ (BW) – the business disease

We could list all the negative behaviours and disruptive activities that could be in existence in your business. The 10 Fatal Leadership Flaws  –  Jack Zenger & Joseph Folkman (2009) – are all in that list.

But it’s easier to define them in what they are collectively –

Behavioural Waste TMBehavioural Waste™ – all forms of behaviour that divert energy, talent and resources away
from the personal or organisational purpose

Rao and Sutton and others have merely pointed out that (1) above also works in a business setting. Change (negative) behaviours and results improve, and you can now innovate, value-add and grow. Now the question is

“ How much Behavioural Waste™ have we and what do we do to get rid of it?”

Well the key is you don’t have to get rid of it and eliminate it. Reducing it so it doesn’t prolong and impact the business performance is good enough. Pareto’s 80-20 rule still exists here!

Organisations will have 3 forms of BW that can be quickly identified : Personal, Cultural and Systemic.

Each of these BW are business diseases and with the right diagnosis coupled with the right remedy, you can permanently get rid of them. A leader that operates their own agenda for personal gain, “do as I say not as I do”, or constantly uses management (MBA/MA) speak for effect are not the engaging, inspiring examples for your employees.

Next Steps?

Being a leader puts us all in a position of making decisions, but only those decisions that are ours to make. As you are still reading then there are now 4 choices:

  1. Free chapter of Recycling Behavioural Waste download – the business disease http://bit.ly/BusinessDisease
  2. Assess your own organisation’s BW http://bit.ly/MindFitFootprint
  3. Do something else
  4. Do nothing – keep doing what you’re doing and hope your medicine works

As ever the choice is always yours.

So what’s your choice? If you choose any of the above we’d like to have your feedback on what influenced your decision.

Where do Reality-Driven Leaders start?

Where do Reality-Driven Leaders start?

We’re often asked this question and what may be surprising is that no matter the size of the organisation the answer is the same – start with reality. Why? Because we instinctively know that’s the right place, yet we all make assumptions and hence we get it wrong, or feel lucky if we get it right. However, let’s take instinct and gut feel out of the equation and hopefully your common sense should become obvious from reading the following.

There are 5 roles that Reality-Driven Leaders perform :

  • Investigator
    • Challenges beliefs and identifies the reality
  • Innovator
    • Generates new ideas to tackle Behavioural Waste™ and identifies opportunities for Growth Behaviours
  • Navigator
    • Provides clear routes through the complexity that organisations operate in
  • Stabiliser
    • Generates robust systems and processes that remain adaptable to meet change
  • Explorer
    • Explores potential scenarios that build organisational agility to meet constant and complex change

and each of these roles are needed in any organisation so you get the best result. But problems will always arise if you make assumptions and these create or expand the perception-reality gap.


A common story – established department , new boss 

In the late 1980’s Graham Williams, architect of the Mind Fit Process® and co-author of Reality-Driven Leaders in a Complex World was put in charge of public order training in a UK police force. Never having been involved in public order, or been trained, it was completely new to him.

Most leaders on accepting a new assignment would accept the status quo, assuming everything was fixed and get on with doing the same job as the predecessor. A few might quickly assess the situation, perhaps make a few small but effective changes and then settle in with doing the job.

However, a Reality-Driven Leader would get on with doing the job so effecting a seamless transition but look at the big picture and start asking questions and then making changes that improves results.

Graham was staggered by what he found, the evidence, yet what he discovered is his new world is still relevant to how organisations attempt to meet the challenges that they face today.

This is Graham’s story…


Graham’s Journey of Discovery – the investigator

The evidence:

Police forces had been tackling various levels of public disorder for many decades across the country including the Brixton riots of 1981 and Tottenham Broadwater Farm riots in London of 1985. To provide protection to officers the police had adopted a protective shield similar to that used and designed by the military for use the narrow streets of Hong Kong. The shield measured 5ft 6inches high and was made of flexible Polycarbonate. However the wider UK streets meant the shield had to be used very differently tactically than the design required.

The new tactics required the forming of a 5 x man shield unit consisting of three holding shields that were held together and overlapped, and two officers behind holding their front three colleagues in place.

The shields and the tactics were extremely cumbersome and tiring and were not user friendly. Furthermore, they were not very easy to use in different situations despite variations of the tactics being adopted.

Reality on the ground showed that public order problems varied across the country and that the tactics developed were obviously far too rigid for that reality.

In short, it was clear that an off-the-shelf product forced behaviours that were marginally effective but far too rigid for the reality of the situations faced by front line personnel.

Blackboard square pegs in round holes

As a new manager, Graham inherited a process and it is often the case it was a result of forcing and squeezing the problem into the available solution because it’s an expedient way forward. But is that the right thing to do?

Eisntein perhaps said it well enough

Einstein 1 hour to change the world

 A new beginning

Graham realised that the police had simply started at the wrong place. They identified a solution to protect their offices – the long shield. They created tactics based on the 5 x man shield unit and then looked for the problem. This was clearly the wrong way round but, as you may also know is the all too common approach.

So, he started at a very different point and began to ask questions. Protecting officers was naturally one requirement, but that was only part of the problem and not the real problem. The real problem was managing public order – which ironically was in the title of his  department – Public Order Training.

Start with – What is the Problem?

So his start point was to explore the varied types of public disorder problems across the country. Then (as an innovator and navigator) he created flexible tactics that could be used in different scenarios. He then developed a shield which would also provide adequate protection. It was shorter than the original long one, had a gulley down each side that allowed good linking if needed, it was lighter and more robust and enabled officers to run with it for some distance.

 Police public order

The logical order to solving public disorder problems was obvious. First, identify what is the actual problem; second, what tactics are needed and finally, what protection was required.

Results measurement was also important (the stabiliser) and that fed back into the effetiveness of tactics and any fine tuning that may need to be made.

Today, some 30 years later, the smaller shield and tactics are still employed to this date, yet despite the improved results, there  are a few  police forces that use the larger shield.


The Business World

Today Graham’s journey above maybe what some organisations would  consider as a Complete Lean Solution, or a Business Process Review and of course it works. But the evidence says it has rarely be done successfully.

Research from a variety of sources says

“80% of Lean or Change programmes fail”

and as recently quoted by MicKinsey and the Harvard Business Review

“Over 70% of Leadership Development Programmes are unsuccessful”

Any good change manager or facilitator will know that the right starting place is where you’ll win, everytime.

While organisations will look at wholesale change programmes once in a generation, many will be investing in Leadership or Management Development with the expectation that such training will improve their management team and it follows that results will improve. So does this actually happen?


Where do organisations start developing people?

Providers, who are in the market offering various training interventions designed to meet organisational needs, tackle problems and improve results are still starting at the wrong place.Blackboard square pegs in round holes

In 2017 a majority of providers are still offering knowledge or systems solutions to organisations, which for example range from lean management, psychometrics, leadership training, value development and culture change, together with various tactics on how to apply them.

They then assume that the organisation will fit their (off-the-shelf) solution and tactics into the problems that the organisation faces. It is typical of trying to fit a square peg in a round hole and that means adjusting everything else to make it work.

Meaning and Evidence

To give you some meaning to what we are saying a search on the web will reveal the obvious. If you look up leadership training it quickly identifies a list of providers who offer very similar products, albeit marketed very differently. For example they may list the objectives of their training that include:

  • Understanding the difference between leadership and management
  • How to identify strengths in people
  • Communication skills
  • Interpersonal skills
  • How to motivate people
  • Making key decisions
  • How to empower people
  • Dealing with conflict


The list explored would give a range of knowledge to ‘wannabe’ leaders much of it based around theories and concepts that may be interesting but many are now outdated and may even be obsolete.

Here’s one example – a well used piece of information which has been rolled out by trainers for decades is the percentages relating to effective communication. Participants are given 55% body language, 38% tone of voice and only 7% of words to what achieves good communication. It is simply not true. Neither is the myth relating to changing a habit only taking 21 days. We suggest you check them out. Do your own reality check and google it – you’ll be surprised at what you might find as to the research done on either!

However, this approach by providers is entirely the wrong way round. Giving people knowledge or systems as a start point, some of which is or may be flawed, does not produce good or even develop good or great leaders. Organisations around the world are inundated with leaders who operate from a dictatorial platform that disempowers and disengages employees and results in poor or barely adequate performance.

Global engagement levels are stubbornly fixed at 13% despite the $billions invested in developing soft skills – regular Gallup research.

Even if on paper these are what you want, great development programmes with inspirational trainers just don’t work!

These providers, which are the majority, let the client down as their proposed solutions rarely delivers as promised. The CIPD recently said

“Success is no better than random chance…”

They are solutions from a different time and from different problems which happened to work for the provider or their organisation in the past.

“Knowledge is Power”

may have been the mantra and drive of last century, but in today’s complex world what is lacking is the right application of any knowledge gained.

If today all that was needed was “knowledge is power”, everyone that goes on an expensive sales course will therefore be great salespeople… wouldn’t they?


Providers appear to perpetuate their solutions through their professional bodies which makes them ever more enthusiastic. Clever marketing also rebadges these old and outdated approaches so what you get is the “Emporer’s new clothes”.

Check the web again, Google it for the reality. Here are some findings:

  • Lean management – 80% lean initiatives are abandoned within 3 years. Only 2% get the results they desired.
  • Leadership – 67% organisations think leadership training is a priority yet 93% of programmes fail.
  • Engagement – staff engagement is seen as essential for organisation yet for years Gallup survey has consistently reported 87% of employees as being disengaged across the world.
  • Value-based management – in the 21st century having values statement is a fact in business life. Living them is a different matter. Most fail because the culture is not addressed, the leadership is poor and people are disengaged.
  • 10 Fatal Leadership Flaws –  Jack Zenger & Joseph Folkman (2009) – and they are prevalent and stubbornly resilient even today.

The start point is not a poor quality solution that we try to make fit but identifying the problem first.


Reality-Driven Leaders

Today, we advocate the new role of Reality-Driven Leaders. These people operate from a position of their own reality from which the right solution for your organistion can be identified. This enables improved or new solutions to be found and the methods to deliver them.

Such leaders need to be pragmatic, flexible and relevant in all they do. They need to have the right attitude to challenge the status quo.

These leaders must remain flexible as the world in which organisations operate is always changing – having internal and external agility is critical to they way they work. The role must be cyclical so that it does not become bogged down in rigid systems and processes that often overcontrol but are built on changing realities.

If reality is at the core of what you do it really is simple.


Off-the-shelf solutions do not work or rarely do. Start by asking:

  1. What is the issue (reality), and
  2. What are the problems we need to solve in order to resolve it?
  3. What are our options, and which ones will work (choices)?
  4. How do we implement our choices (tactics)

Do you want Reality-Driven Leaders?

As ever you have a choice. What’s yours?



Are you trying to prove Einstein wrong?

Have you noticed how the one or two line sayings from real thought leaders are always simple and yet have far deeper meanings once you start to think about them.

So when Einstein said,

“The world as we have created it is a process of our thinking. It cannot be changed without changing our thinking.”

what are we thinking when we read it? Or do we just nod in a knowing sort of way and really don’t think at all?

Maybe we need another stimulus? Perhaps one that’s engaging our like for humour and one that engages our comical brain like this?

“Insanity : doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results.” Maybe a picture helps…Einstein definition of Madness or Insanity

Or make it even simpler… To get better results, don’t you need to change something?

To some it will sound obvious, and you might say common sense that to improve on what you’re doing you need to change something. But how often are we brave enough to really change?

The next picture seems to be one that is more likely when we look at the business world.


But it’s not really funny is it?

When Boards, Directors and Management are under pressure to perform, improve the ROI, grow the business, maintain market share or just survive the global economic mess is it any surprise change is something that is resisted?

How about asking the question…

Do you think Einstein was wrong?

Whether Einstein said the “Insanity” quote or not I’ve always smiled when I’ve quoted it because if you do the same thing in the same way all the time, then prior to the global recession you would have expect to get the same results. But what about now? That’s not the case today for so many businesses, is it?

You may ask where’s the evidence for that? Take a short look at the high street changes in the UK – Jessops, BHS. What about the Steel Industry decline? No matter where we look there’s lots of evidence and your sector has its own issues I’m sure.

So to improve you have to do something different seems obvious, doesn’t it? If you say yes…what’s next?

Enter the first hurdle that many fear – what do we change? The questions then come thick and fast. It could be worse if we change the wrong thing? What would the shareholders say if we make it worse…? And all sorts of doom and gloom questions start to unfold.

But to improve, change you must!

Where to start? That’s the $1 million question.

Why not start simply?

The first question is where are we now? What do we do that gets these results? And the simple answer to that is probably we don’t really know. But what we do know is that we do some things good and some not so good.

So it should be a simple task to find out what we’re doing well and just do more of it. Wouldn’t we be doing that already?

Undoubtedly somewhere in the discussion will be about the resources. That should quickly result in a discussion about the quality of the leadership, the employees who deliver the results. That may then lead to skills and training and that’s the time we forget about Einstein.

But if you thought Einstein was right you’d look at things differently this time – wouldn’t you? Why differently this time?

Because all the evidence says

don’t do what the vast majority of change programmes do and give leaders and employees more knowledge training. You will just create a bigger “Knowing-Doing Gap”… and fail.

Adding to the Knowing-Doing Gap will be what we call Behavioural Waste ( Behavioral Waste )

Evidence of that is where?

As recent as 2013, Pfeffer & Sutton, reiterated the known enigma and continued existence of the “Knowing-Doing training gap”.

In 2014 published results in the Harvard Business Review from Sutton, R. I., & Rao, H. (2014). “Scaling up excellence: Getting to more without settling for less.” concluded  

It is necessary to remove destructive and negative attitudes and behaviours first...”


The choice then is yours

Do this… no change








Or listen to the evidence and dare to believe there’s something better.

If you dare to believe there could be something better, then you could look at this

Recycling Behavioural Waste Cover








On the following link


As ever you have a choice. What’s yours?


What’s the cost of Behavioural Waste (or if you prefer Behavioral Waste ) ?

There’s at least 1hr per day per employee in every organisation – how much is that?

Is Behavioural Waste the missing link to Lean Programmes Succeeding?

Why do Lean Programmes fail?

Research suggests that over 70% of all lean programmes fail. If you’d like to see some research about what might be the why then this link is useful http://www.lean.org/Search/Documents/352.pdf

Yet during my years in the oil&gas, construction and retail industries I’ve implemented many successful lean programmes. Not all were perfect, but all were successful and some were done in record time. Some teams were forced together, mostly multi-disciplined by need, many given what seemed an enormous task again driven by the demanding nature of the business.

We also had no real concept of the origins of lean programmes in Toyota and our approach was focused on our business – it was simply known as a Business Process Review, BPR.

So why did we have success?

The simple answer is people made it happen. It’s all too often that Lean Programmes know that people count, but do nothing or not enough to make the people effect have the right or the best impact. The focus is all on the process and assumptions are made that people want the change, or are prepared to change but they are are assuming something that may actually not be there.

The issue as we now know is what we term Behavioural Waste™, and organisations have so much of it that before you enter a change programme, you need to change attitudes and behaviours first. If you eliminate or significantly reduce Behavioural Waste™ , any improvement is possible and innovation, creativity, engaged employees, inspired leaders become everyday norms not exceptions.



Recyling Behavioural Waste™

The great thing about our behaviours is that if we want to change them we can – we have a choice. The hardest part is to define or assess what we actually do and then simply by raising our awareness we can then decide to do something different to improve.

You can therefore recycle the bad stuff and improve. To show you what’s possible this new book is for you.

Recycling Behavioural Waste Cover

Key Messages from this book:

1. There’s no point in trying to grow your business if you are currently busy doing the wrong things. You won’t have time to adopt new approaches. Begin by reducing wasteful behaviour to create the space to grow purposeful behaviour.
2. People like doing lean, fixed systems or efficiency exercises because it focuses attention onto processes, which are seen as impersonal, and thus avoids the issue of having to change your behaviour. Behavioural Waste™ is the largest hidden cost that businesses fail to account for.
3. When people talk about culture, they don’t realise that they may have already chosen to fail because talking about the culture of an organisation doesn’t help solve the problem of what in particular, needs to change. The real cultural issue is everyone’s contribution to the accumulated Behavioural Waste™ that is collectively strangling your purpose. If you have  purpose that is meaningful, you can empower people to say “no” to futile, wasteful working,
and to innovate usefully.
4. Behavioural Waste™ is parasitic. The old Parkinson’s Law quotation that work expands to fill the time available for its completion is only partially true. In reality it is unchecked Behavioural Waste™ that expands to cripple meaningful purpose.
5. When people understand their own Behavioural Waste™, as well as the consequences of that Behavioural Waste™ on other people’s behaviour, and begin to control and reduce it then new capacity for growth begins to appear and people have time to consciously think and to innovate.

If you’d like a free digital copy then email us at growth@mindfitltd.com with your organisation’s details.

As ever you have a choice.

  • want to Recycle Behavioural Waste?

  • continue to do what you do?

  • do something else?

What’s your choice?

Is Recycling Behavioural Waste your missing link?




Is Your Health Suffering? Does your Doctor help?

Customer is always right

An article in the British Medical Journal (BMJ May 2015) urged doctors to stop over–treating patients in ways that do not help and could even harm. It suggests some patients are given pills or have tests that they do not need but doctors feel under pressure to act. As the UK has just gone through a general election for the new government and the NHS has been a hot topic throughout the build-up to the vote, you can’t help thinking that the pressure on budgets might have something to do with the timing of the BMJ article. However, that aside, isn’t what they are ‘suggesting’ not just common sense? Get to know your patient better and then deal with the whole condition? A bit of future proofing?

Shouldn’t doctors be doing that anyway and aren’t they trained that way? The simple answer is No they probably haven’t been trained that way if the BMJ are now urging them to do it, perhaps like most training it’s assumed they know it and then do it. And despite it being common sense, the evidence from the BMJ suggests it’s not common practice either!   NHS Funding

“Rather than urging and suggesting – why not tell doctors to do it – it is after all, the right thing to do?”

Some, like the doctors in my surgery thankfully buck that trend, looking my overall health and not prescribing instant solutions for the problem (the effect) I tell them about. Thankfully in the 10 minutes allocated (oh yes that’s part of the problem too!) they get to the cause, well that’s what their aim is!

Know your customer?

What happens elsewhere? Isn’t what the BMJ suggesting just what every leader or business owner knows? That if we know the customer well we can satisfy their wants and needs and have a good long term relationship of mutual benefit?

Yet are doctors really to blame at all? Are they the victims of unrealistic patient pressure?

Doctors are undoubtedly part of the problem however, years of unrealistic beliefs and expectations by patients that the solutions to their illness can be found in a pill are driving this over-prescribing.

The Evidence

Go into any chemist and the shelves are stacked with pills and potions for every imaginary ailment. Many of us routinely carry pills in our pockets or handbags. We are subjected to advertising campaigns from the suppliers of those products that all you need to do to return to good health is to shove a chemically enhanced pill or potion into your system. We’re all bombarded by adverts about instant results (shiny objects) and wonder drugs…

“the best anti-aging cream that ….” “the instant cure for those with weight problems….”

Not too different than a CEO wanting an instant result in far too many ways! We think it’s easy by popping a pill, or rubbing in creams. Very few of us take real responsibility for our own health. We eat, drink and smoke too much and as the damage to our body builds – we get the wake up call and we turn to the doctor for a cure. Not enough of us take the initiative and exercise, eat well or properly, keep our weight down, drink responsibly, and don’t smoke. We live in an unrealistic bubble that ill health happens to other people and so what, there is always a cure! It’s on a shelf in the pharmacy or can easily be prescribed. We are indestructible!!! So when we have a health problem we turn up at the doctors and expect to come away with some pills. Problem solved. If the doctor was to suggest that we need to exercise, lose weight, stop smoking, eat healthily and definitely,” don’t smoke” we already know this so what happens? We may get annoyed and become difficult. Once we have got what we want we ignore all the good advise and carry on as before.


We already know in another article in May that anti-biotics are having a reduced effect. A £2 billion fund has been suggested to be created because the main pharmaceutical companies know there is little ROI on new drugs so they are not investing. So the problem is global! Individually we know that paracetamol may not work for “that” headache and want different, more powerful ones. We may form an opinion that the doctor does not know their job that well so we pressure on him or her to give us different pills (whilst keeping taking the ones we have already got, just in case). We become needy patients and doctors are now locked in a cycle of being an outlet for the pharmaceutical companies. And all that means is more pressure on limited NHS funds – when it’s gone, it’s gone! A&E

“Is it any wonder – A&E – Accident and Emergency has become Anything and Everything ?”


So what is a better way, which could reduce the cocktail of pills we take, some of which can have side-effects that are worse than the original problem? We need to take responsibility for our own health. Unless we do we may succumb to a life of over-indulgence leading to a pill solution that ultimately can lead to a poor quality of life and a state of helplessness where we are totally dependent on pills or worse. How do you do that? Take control? Well, it’s simple. Next time you go to see you doctor, take the lead and ask a simple question

“My dear Doctor, what non-pill options are available?”

Once the doctor has recovered from you asking the question you may be surprised at the options that are available to you that can ultimately lead to a healthier and better quality of life where pills are only prescribed when there is no alternative. So the choice is yours.   Or does your unrealistic attitude make you a victim of your own inactions. 

If you want to know how you can stop being the victim then contact us to find out how Mind Fit can help.

What Stops Us Acting and Engaging with Renewable Energy?

What do we know about Renewable Energy?

Oil & Gas - nor renewable energyAsk anyone today and they will have an understanding of the impact on society and our reliance on fossil fuels for our energy needs.

We also know the carbon dioxide released from burning fossil fuels is having an effect on the climate and is leading to global warming. And we’ll know it has consequences now, and for future generations.

Or maybe you think this is hype to get everybody to buy into renewables because government with business is using big stick techniques to bully us. Why would they do that? Because that’s what they always do. And because even if they thought about it, they don’t know how to engage with their own managers, leaders or implementers.

But then the question is so what? Is it all about fossil fuels? Do we really believe what we’re told? What can Mr and Mrs Public do about it?

In reality, apart from lobbying, driving the car less and recycling or moving to ‘green ‘ energy providers we can do very little. Like all things Global, it’s down to Governments to act.

Without going into the failures of the past, the UK government now has a legally binding target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050.


Meeting the Targets – does money talk?

To meet this target it has introduced various financial incentives for homes and businesses to switch to renewable energy technologies, thereby reducing carbon emissions. These incentives take the form of the Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI) and the Feed in Tariff (FIT).

Sun power

Solar power is a clear winner in the switch to renewables because the price of installation has fallen substantially over the last decade.  More and more households in the UK are installing solar panels and enjoying the benefits of lower energy bills. In fact it is believed that 10 million homes in the UK will have solar panels by 2020.

The added financial motivator to switch is the fear generated as we’re open to the big energy companies raising prices as recent history has clearly shown.

By switching to these new energy sources, consumers are given more control over their future, less exposed to cost fluctuations and save money on today’s ‘lower’ prices. What more can you want?

Of course at the moment we’re also living in a dream world of 50% lower oil prices than a year ago and we’ve seen about a 33% reduction in petrol and diesel prices. And today that affects us immediately with more money left in our pocket. So we know the value of money. But if it were money as the only drive, wouldn’t we have all switched to renewables by now?

What’s the reality?Awareness

In the last few years £millions has been spent on an awareness campaign focused on consumer choice and the opportunity we all have to switch energy provider and reduce household energy costs.  How many households have switched to a cheaper provider? In reality very few.

What does Google Say?

Why Google? Because it’s where we seem to think the authority is on everything. It’s on a website, in print so it must be true – really? Many people ‘google it’ and find 1 article on the first page of 200 million hits and believe what we read – perhaps because we don’t have enough time to do much else – we’re all  too busy.

The two scientists responsible for Google’s failed attempt to launch a renewable energy revolution have written an article explaining what, according to them, went wrong with their project. They have come to the conclusion that fighting climate change with today’s renewable energy technologies won’t work – but they present no evidence for it, writes Energy Post editor Karel Beckman.

Critics of renewable energy are having a field day in the blogosphere. It has now been proven beyond doubt, they cry, that “renewables simply won’t work”. Why not? Well, because Google says so. Read the full article here – Why Google gave up on renewables (hint, they don’t understand energy)


Breaking the myths… reality check again!

People need to understand how renewable energy can be beneficial to their wallet, and to the environment. By teaching and sharing knowledge about the current developments on this area people will start learning the truth behind these technologies, and will stop using myths like “solar energy doesn’t work during winter” or “Wind turbines kill birds”.


Facts from the Bigger Picture – Sustainability  

In the recent Accenture and UN Global Compact survey 93% of CEOs view sustainability as important for the future success of their business.

Although many organisations have built their strategic approach to sustainability, they are struggling to achieve full management and employee engagement in the agenda. They are therefore yet to see the results – if they ever will.

Research proves that the successful organisations are those who engage the hearts and minds of their people, and who demonstrate positive beliefs, attitudes and behaviours to drive business results. These organisations are also more innovative and take advantage of opportunities – in effect they are the early adopters, winning all the way!

They also acknowledged early on, that implementing a successful sustainability strategy requires achieving a mind shift – maybe a paradigm shift – at an executive and operational level within the organisation. Developing positive leadership and ‘Can do’ attitudes helps organisations achieve outstanding results and outperform their competitors.


Engaging Hearts and Minds

There’s lots written and known about the value of an engaged workforce. But if it were common place the results would be much better – Gallup’s 2013 survey shows similar engagement levels to previous years and at 17% of the workforce it’s nothing to be proud of. Imagine what a 1% increase would mean?  That’s 1/17th increase or 6% improvement overall – is that worth looking at?

With our experience and results we’d agree with Accenture’s findings – because it’s great leaders that get great results as they find the solution to engage each individual in their team.

Great leaders have the right mindset, and as Warren Bennis said

Balance “Managers are people who do things right and leaders are people who do the right thing. Both roles are crucial, and they differ profoundly.”

But today we seem to have too many managers and too few leaders. So the balance is way out! We need both and effectively applied to every context so we get the best answer.

Who are your great leaders? History proves that developing great leaders is not easy.

But leaders aren’t just born, as many still believe, leaders are made. So how do you make them? Again all the evidence and research shows training and coaching, the traditional approaches don’t work – only 10% might be converted into workplace improvement.

What about an alternative?

The recent “Good to Great” by McKinsey report referred to case studies and rigorous academic research that shows if you want to create and spread excellence, eliminating the negative is the first order of business. How you do that? The McKinsey study leaves it to you to fathom out.

Behavioural Waste TM



At Mind Fit we identify negative activities through the term Behavioural WasteTM and the experience of being trapped or ignoring gaps between beliefs and reality generates much of that. Our process further raises your awareness and that of your business about how your attitudes and behaviours and that of your people, impact on everyone’s ability to perform to their optimum, lead and engage, work in teams, and ultimately improve performance.

We do not assume that we know your issues and thatwe have the solutions that you need before we start to work with your organization. We work in partnership with our clients’ so that the input activities that you choose to change are relevant to you and your business.

So what next?

The choices are all yours:Business Change - are you fit for the 21st Century

  • You can continue on your own path and engage in renewables
  • Use traditional training and coaching methods to improve your engagement
  • Free yourself, your people and your business from those blocking behaviours and outperform your expectations enhance and expand renewables

If you choose to reduce the negative attitudes and behaviours blocking your success, then we’d be pleased to have a discussion to see how we can help.

But whatever you do to take advantage of renewable energy, make it your conscious choice.


Mind Fit people take action, achieve higher performance, are more productive and where relevant, more profitable

Has your organisation a DRA mindset?

What is a DRA mindset?

It’s being highly aware in different and dynamic contexts; able and ready to take relevant and appropriate action to minimise risk in whatever you are doing – it’s what’s called a Dynamic Risk Assessment mindset.

A DRA mindset is nothing new. It has been common practice where potential loss of life and injuries are a constant threat as in the military or emergency services. The good news is that through focused practice, including some live situations, people can improve their DRA mindset in their context so it has real meaning.

When normally dealing with Risk Assessment through HSE, HR and the like the tendency is to run for the rulebook and find the policy. If a policy doesn’t exist or does not ‘fit’ the situation, the panic is to create it and then tell everyone it exists, ready for the next time something happens. Rulebook evolvement is driven through a series of knee jerk reactions instead of a dynamic mind using a dynamic assessment in different situations.

We all have a DRA mindset

Risk is an everyday occurrence in any business from product or service based industries whether in banking, financial services, manufacturing, construction, retail… in fact anywhere.

Going for a walk, getting on a train or driving a car are common risks that individually we take for granted and yet mostly these trips are undertaken safely. So what is it that changes when it comes to other daily issues where a DRA mindset is required?

Here’s an extract from an experienced professional in Construction Design and Management Regulations (CDM)

Working people struggle to get their heads around all the plethora of policy, procedure and protocol in their working environment; worrying about whether they have ticked some box, read some instruction, may have missed some instruction … what, in simple terms, can be regarded as a ‘procedural overload’.

The overload can actually divert and turn some away from the true focus of what they should be doing and thinking about to keep both themselves and those around them safe from harm. Over worrying of risk-averse situations, ‘real safety’ appreciation (not simply the ‘paper-chase’ of safety!) is diminished considerably.

… then let’s consider DYNAMIC RISK ASSESSMENT

In its simplest form a Dynamic Risk Assessment is done by all of us many times a day without really thinking, for example when driving the car or crossing the road. Providing staff with DRA skills allows them to make informed and practical decisions in the face of rapidly changing or uncertain environments. When applied, employees who use their ability, knowledge, training and experience to make informed risk decisions in situations where standard and often rigid protocols do not fit, then a practical culture of Dynamic Risk Assessment will evolve. This can cross-pollinate those parts of the business where process protocols exist and dominates yet may not work in changing circumstances. DRA is situationally driven rather than procedural driven and is a proven solution.

In its purest form, DRA has been used by the emergency services, such as the police, paramedics and fire and rescue, for many years with split second decisions made in high-risk situations. These are capable people able to operate in the sure and certain understanding they have all the component knowledge, skills and ability – the complete mindset – to manage their work so that their employers and colleagues can rely on their proven qualities.

Dynamic Risk Assessment is an essential component of successful safety management in:

  • Organisations for client facing staff in front-line services and enforcement officers
  • Business service organisations where staff have to visit sites with complex or unknown hazards
  • Highly hazardous workplace such as found in explosive atmospheres around the petro-chemical sector where a wrong decision can have potentially catastrophic fatal consequences.

But the techniques learned can be deployed equally well in customer service environments such as in hospitality and retail where a high level of awareness is critical to a successful and happy customer journey.

Applying a Dynamic Risk Assessment culture will make workplaces much safer.

… a business, where people understand dynamic situations and base risk control actions on information only available at the time, will lead to a culture of better safety management … of course, written policies, procedures and protocols around their working environment set out the cultural aims and objectives. However the application of the detail in those written components requires a situational DRA mindset – and empowered employees is key!

David F Jones   FCIOB   FASI   MRICS   M-CDM-C, Chartered Surveyor ~ CDM Consultant & Trainer

Creating a Dynamic Risk Assessment CultureCreating a dynamic risk assessment culture

If you want to develop a Dynamic Risk Assessment culture across your organisation the first step is to change the mindset to accept the concept of what dynamic would mean.

The next step is simple; develop ‘can do’ attitudes and ‘winning minds’.

Of course, you can always take the risk and continue to do what you’re currently doing.


The choice, as ever, is yours.

Find out more email us here

No Clear Purpose? Would you say No?

No Clear Purpose? Would you say No?


A colleague and a fellow director of Mind Fit is also a Professor of Innovation and is regularly requested to present on innovation related subjects to variety of institutes, public and private sector organisations.

One such recent request was for a programme to be delivered on Knowledge Management. You might have had similar experiences, but how many would say no?

To read Victor’s story click hereWhat would you do if theres no clear purpose – say no