Marrying Amazon way v/s Toyota way?
Recently, I’ve been attending weekday family functions which are usually filled with very enthusiastic retired folk who almost always have a son/ niece/ neighbour/ walking friend’s kid to be married off. Attending these parties has meant that I’ve unintentionally started building a fabulous feet on street sales team.
I tell you…
aunties are the bomb.
After having spoken to a wide variety of aunties and uncles about their children in the market, I have realised that decisions in the arranged marriage market are taken in one of two ways - the “Amazon Way” or the “Toyota Way”.
Two companies where I’ve spent a majority of my corporate career are Amazon and Toyota. Both these companies pride themselves of strong business “principles” which guide decision making or way of doing business.
There is a lot of public literature on these two companies, but I’ll try and oversimplify for those of you who aren’t familiar already, based on my experience (yes, only mine).
In both companies, for every decision taken, there is always only one decision maker (a person or a team) and plenty of stakeholders involved. But the difference is in the process of arriving at the decision.
Toyota
Inputs are taken from all stakeholders, and then one person (or a team) develops a plan that takes into account the best interest of all teams, to the extent possible. This is then reviewed with all stakeholders multiple times to ensure that the necessary edits are within reason for all stakeholders. This is then presented to senior management in the company who will approve the plan with confidence that all stakeholders are happy.
Amazon
The decision maker presents a well-researched written plan to relevant stakeholders in a meeting. There is no mandate around building consensus with stakeholders pre-meeting, but it is considered good practice. This is read and debated within the meeting. The decision maker is free to take inputs from stakeholders, or not, if he/she/they can fight it with good reason, as long as the customer’s best interests are upheld by the decision maker.
Those of you who are in the marriage market, or have been at some point realise the subtle difference between the two and how they mirror decision making in the arranged marriage market.
Marriage isn’t just about two individuals, it is the union of two families.
Ever heard that?
Actually, I was of the impression, that this statement is starting to fade just a little bit from our society today, but having spoken to a few parents recently, I am not so sure anymore.
I think if a couple stays with the family post wedding, the families become a pretty significant part of the marriage, whether you like it or not. Naturally, this is factored into the selection process as well.
There are individuals who choose their partners, and are open to debating the choice with their families (the Amazon way) and there are also individuals who choose based on inputs from every single family member (the Toyota Way).
Call me cynical, but I’ll go ahead and tell you my problem with each of the two decision making processes, especially in the case of arranged marriages.
Choose first, debate next (Amazon Way)
If you’ve nurtured the ability ability to make independent choices, kudos to you. You may have to temporarily endure your parents putting senti, but I am guessing if you’re already used to it, it’s a non-issue.
However, I must warn you that this is much worse than any other decision you’ve ever made because you have to face the consequences of your decision everyday, for the rest of your life, and your parents might always have a thing or two to say about it for the rest of their lives.
I’ve a friend who chose a partner, and decided to live with his parents after the wedding. Unfortunately, the wife didn’t get along with the in-laws, and the boy ended up losing the debate, so the poor couple ended up getting divorced.
Of course, I am oversimplifying the situation, but the point being sometimes, choosing first and debating later without knowing if you can fully defend your choices can have undesirable consequences.
We may not marry, but at least we collaborated (Toyota Way)
With just about anything in life, being selfish is far easier than being altruistic. When you try to please everybody, you usually end up pleasing nobody, not even yourself.
So, when you receive an expression of interest and you ask your grandmother, father, mother, brother, sister, neighbour, etc. for approval, chances are at least one of them will moot the candidate out of the process even before you’ve had a chance.
Team work is great, yes, but the outcome is usually about consensus and not about the optimal result for any one individual, including yourself. Also, it takes an incredibly long time to make decisions in a group. People aren’t going to wait around infinitely, you aren’t getting younger, so you are better off choosing first, and debating next.
No one way is better than the other - to each their own. Anyway, team work or not, at least the individual driving the decision in both cases is the one who’s in the market.
Oh no wait, there are kids who let their parents do it for them. Well, that’s how we raise kids in our society though, no? Parents always know what’s best for their children. Given a choice, we prefer to do most things for our children, help them do it or at least offer our kindest advice so they never have to make a mistake or learn.
But something to think about - this person you find is looking to marry your son/ daughter and not you. So, finding your kid a partner who may make for a better partner to you than them is dangerous. Just saying.