Often it is the desire to move away from daily operations (the front of the battle) that encourages owners to implement management tools. However, one needs to realize that simply adding an organizing board and other tools will not facilitate the switch on their own; they will only create the necessary foundation. After you implement the management tools, you need to cultivate competent executives, and only then can you delegate the management of operations. If you go about this with an intelligent plan, you could implement management tools in a small business in six months to a year, and cultivate your executives within a year. This is a big job. You will have to invest as much time and effort as you would in establishing your technological processes. But the game is worth your while – the company will not only become well-managed, it will also gain a significant advantage over its competition.

The Valuable Final Product (abbreviated to VFP) is one of the key management concepts defined by L. Ron Hubbard in his articles. You see this all the time – your employees perform lots of actions, but not all of them are actually directed towards results. Or you see how someone is always preparing to do a job: he arranges his papers, organizes the computer files, he invents clever ways to organize his desk tools, etc. Another employee is running around crazed and completing one thing after the other. He may look busy, but he’s still not producing the results you expected. Why is this happening? Why do we have those who produce results and those who are busy with "doingness"?

In the dictionary, we can find the following definition for product, "an artifact that has been created by someone or some process" where artifact is “a man-made object taken as a whole”. An accountant prepares a report and sends it to the IRS, that is definitely a product. When a barista puts the final touches on a cup of coffee and hands it to the customer – that is also a product. When the owner of a company develops a strategy, by spending his time and energy on it, and describes it in a document that can then be studied by his executives – the strategy here is a product.

Note that the word object means “a tangible and visible entity”, where tangible means that it can be perceived by the senses as something that exists. Therefore, somebody’s brilliant plan that is not shared with anyone is not a product because other people cannot perceive it, unless they are able to read the person’s mind. For that plan to become a product, it has to be at least shared with someone, and then it will become a product. The product is always tangible, even when it comes to such "intangible" things as designs, plans, and ideas. They need to be described on paper or introduced during presentations – otherwise they are not products. A motivational meeting that inspires employees to succeed is a great product for an executive, as the change in employee attitude is quite tangible – you can see and feel it. But the product that is not noticeable to others, by definition, cannot be a product. If the, "I was trying”, “I attempted to”, “I was getting ready to”, etc don’t result into something that can be perceived by the senses, it’s not a product.

Everybody has many products in their various areas of their life. Even an employee who sharpened their pencil would have a product, as you can definitely perceive it with the senses and it is a result of work.

Work, by definition, is a conscious activity with a certain purpose. For example, a sales manager wanted to close his client on a deal for equipment supply, but instead spent his time educating the client in some technical issues. If his goal was to sell, then he was directing his efforts towards one result, but achieved a different one. Therefore, educating the customer was not a product, unless, of course, he had planned to engage in such educational activities.

If an executive created a pay system designed to improve productivity, but resulted in employee dissatisfaction and loss of personnel, then this system is not a product as it doesn’t align with the set goals. The HR manager hires an employee who stays in the company for a week and then runs away – this new employee is not a product as it deviated from the goal of hiring a new person. On the other hand, hiring an employee that improves the company's production, would be a product.

Any product must be completed to be considered a product. A salesman, whose goal is to close the deal, attracts a customer who demands discounts and special treatment, so that the executive winds up personally closing the sale, didn’t get a product. If the company’s goal setter conceives a brilliant plan, but does not describe it in sufficient enough detail so that it can be given to his executives to work on – this is not a final product. If the person assigned to the product doesn’t complete it in such a way that it can be used, someone will have to “finalize” it, which creates additional work for others.

Usually, having to “finalize” a product results in a lot of unnecessary and additional actions, and devours the production time of employees. If you examine some employee’s actions, you will see that most of their time is spent either completing other people's products or correcting the consequences of such incompleteness. For example, you ask an employee to pay a contractor for his work. Your Accounting Department starts working on it, but a week later the contractor is calling you, upset by the fact that he did not get paid. Now, you’re taking the time to handle the contractor, re-issuing the order, and convincing the contractor to continue doing business with you despite the agreement violation. The contractor may cease doing business with your company, and you’ll have to find a new one. All the while, spend time restoring your reputation in the community. You’ve wasted a lot of production time because of one very simple, but incomplete product of the Accounting Department. Why did the Account Department slack in this task? The accountant simply does not understand what his "final product" is.

I don’t know if you are aware of the scope of this issue, but it is huge. In an article on management [3] , I came across the idea that a person who doesn’t understand his product, would not be able to produce it. As a practical man, I decided to check how well my executives understand their final products. I simply asked each of them, "What do you think is the primary result or product of your position?" The answers I got from interviewing a dozen of my executives were rather shocking. They were naming lots of things as their product, but not at all the product that I expected from them. When one of the executives told me, "My product is to have my manager help me,” I quit surveying. After that I made a decision – I am not going to ask any more questions, instead I will name the exact product for each of my subordinates and make sure that they fully understand it. And don’t get the idea, by the way, that I got that answer from a totally useless executive or that the company was no good. The company was an industry leader and that executive was quite a good worker. The answer was so absurd, that it wouldn’t have even occurred to me! If you have a strong stomach, try surveying your employees or co-workers. This will be an adventure! Ask them what they consider their main product to be and you will start understanding them better.