Assigning a VP of Bull. (Small Foundry Management).

I have strongly believed that every organization should have a Vice President in Charge of Saying Bull ever since I heard of the position. I initially thought that I had read about it in Robert Townsend's Up the Organization but when I went back to that and its sequel Further Up the Organization, I couldn't find it. So, I'm not sure where the idea was generated. Who knows, I may have even come up with it while reading Townsend's books.

So, what is a Vice President in Charge of Saying Bull (VP of Bull)? It is a person, who is held in respect by the person or people in charge, that will challenge the decisions and assumptions being made by those same people.

We've all been part of decisions that haven't worked. The boss formulates a plan to improve things, and we say to ourselves, "That'll make things worse." Sure enough, after time has passed, we are proven right (at least in our minds). In a situation like that, it is apparent that someone needed to tell the boss it wouldn't work.

Even worse, we've all made a decision that haven't worked the way we planned. (At least I hope we all have; I'd hate to think I'm the only one.) We made our decision based on some assumption that, in retrospect, was wrong. We needed someone to challenge those assumptions. That someone is the VP of Bull.

Most firms do have this position, but with a different title. Instead, we usually just call it "boss." Having assumptions and ideas challenged by the boss is not unusual, but the higher up the food chain you go, the more difficult it becomes. Once you get to the top of the chain, whether the title is President, Board of Directors or owner, there's no boss left. At this point, the VP of Bull enters.

It is a difficult position to fill. The VP of Bull will probably be labeled as being negative. Nobody likes negative people, and nobody likes being considered a negative person. I once had a boss that took every question about any of his ideas as being negative thinking. He made it clear that the organization didn't need negative thinkers. Needless to say, few questions about any of his ideas were generated. Judging from the results of many of his ideas, we certainly needed the VP of Bull.

We all need to learn the difference between negative thinking and pragmatic thinking. Just because we question another's ideas doesn't mean we're just being practical. On the other hand, every question of our ideas does not come from a negative person. If no one brings up possible problems with an idea, the problems can't be addressed.

Most bosses will say that their staffs always review their ideas, and they don't need the VP of Bull. That's possible, but if the bosses act like my boss, I'm sure the reviews of the bosses' ideas are tempered by the desire for job security. To any boss who feels their staff is serving the function of VP of Bull, I encourage them to look at their last idea that didn't work out as planned. Did anyone sound a warning? If not, how well is the staff really serving the function? What about the boss who's never had an idea that didn't turn out as well as expected? Either he's not trying anything, or he's not evaluating the results of what's being tried.

The VP of Bull does need to be quite a diplomat. Telling the boss time and time again that his ideas aren't good doesn't usually lead to developing a good working relationship. The VP better learn how to tell the boss nicely that his idea lacks something, or our VP better keep his resume updated.

The biggest hurdle is that the VP of Bull must be respected enough so that the decision makers will really consider his challenges. Many of us have tried questioning a decision and received a look from the boss that indicated our thoughts were about as respected as those from an amoeba. If the VP's questions receive the same consideration, they are of no value.

On the other hand, the VP of Bull will need to know when to back off. Faulty assumptions and/or logic are a matter of perspective. Just because the VP sees it one way doesn't mean it really is that way. Hopefully, we've all had that wonderful experience of having an idea work when we've been told it wouldn't. The VP needs to make his input and then let the boss be the boss.

Now, for all of you who don't consider yourself a boss and who have been nodding your head while reading this, I have a question. About that last decision of yours that didn't turn Out, where was your Vice President in Charge of Saying Bull?