I come across this term when I read the book – The Halo Effect written by Phil Rosenzweig. This concept is originated from Richard Feynman. I have detailed it in my previous posting, titled “How little we know, how much to learn….”
The story tells that earnest efforts to follow the formula of success do not guarantee the landing of planes if we just do the cult.
In my seminar of budgeting in Oct 2009, some participants reflect that their companies are doing something like it, by filling the figure in the budget template, their managers hope that better financial performance would happen; otherwise, it is not, they thought there must be something wrong with the process; that is why they came to the avenue. Nevertheless, most of the participants are accountants which are out of my expectation. My target audiences are decision makers and accountants. Anyway, I am happy to have intriguing exchange of idea with the participants. I would say the steps of budgeting are i) fill in the figure, ii) quest for the stories, iii) ask for the why (5-why and 5-how), iv) develop strategy, v) create a sense of urgency, vi) set the focus (10 focus means no focus), vii) allocate enough resources, viii) check and act.
I come across the following situation now:
Engineering is blamed for not reacting promptly for keen competition by re-design. But they are only responsible for design and quality, never request to look at cost in the past. Only a trip to the customer and got to know the trend is not sufficient to drive a change. We need sense of urgency, attention from senior management, support and resource allocation. I would consider his manager only acted as the emirate and tell the follower to do the cargo cult!