A Picture is Still Worth 1000 Words

Communicating ideas using workflow modeling has always allowed people to look at what they do, promote understanding, assess value and efficiency, and study such things as through-put, hand-offs and decision points. The reason modeling and diagramming is so attractive to the analyst or the manager is its ability to communicate and convey meaning using a largely visual medium. In an era of “global everything”, inter-connectivity and information overload, that kind of visually accelerated understanding and analysis is truly an advantage to business operations that harness it. As it happens, it’s also ushering in a new ear of “Napkin Business Modeling”.

Fast Company: Next

The April ‘08 issue of Fast Company magazine has a wonderful little article by Kate Bonamici Flaim who covers the growing popularity of using white-boards (UPS), post-it notes and other doodles to render business process drawings – usually at a fairly high level. She shares how companies like Facebook, eBay, InfoSys, and Microsoft have used some simple form of visual communication to quickly and easily impart strategy, mission, goals and business models. What used to require thick binders or lengthy Powerpoint presentations can now be shared and reasonably well-understood with a single drawing.

It Works

I have long been a doodler, keeping pads handy and jumping up to the white-board to explain myself. My peers who preferred lengthy text, technical language and endless meetings would immediately cringe yet just as quickly loosen their resistance and proclaim they “get it.” This simple approach is rather Zen-like in its capacity for including and transcending complexity without caving into it and appealing to the innate wisdom of people to “see” flow in their environment and the truth of things without bogging down in and becoming attached to details. It is helpful in sales, new hire training, implementation and advertising. It works because it trusts that people are inherently intelligent and forces the communicator out of the role of educator. We have so many bad habits and chief among them is the tendency to want to prove how smart we are by piling heaps of academic and intellectual treatise atop our listener. People want to know that what you are pitching – a new process, product or solution – will work for them and the enterprise as a whole. Simply show people how it works and git into workflow.

Check out www.fastcompany.com

Workflow Simple

I recently met with a client who was very interested in mapping workflow and getting some traction on his business process re-engineering for a future state he could only imagine. His interest was the product of a two-hour meeting wherein he learned that knowing what his people do would be a prerequisite for developing a new system RFP. As it happens, this shop has been in business since 1977. Had they ever modeled workflow or attempted to look at their activities through the prism of BPM? Short answer: No. Until now, they have relied entirely on policies and procedures. Their P&P haven’t been touched in years. Essentially, this fellow–the CEO, mind you–hasn’t any idea what really takes place on the “shop floor”. Needless to say, it is a shop that is not only bleeding money, it is missing opportunities to serve its customers more effectively and it is missing opportunities to make more money.

Does Size Really Matter?

The company I am referring to is small by some standards at 350 employees. My firm belief is that size doesn’t much matter once you reach a certain point. What is that certain point? I think once you begin managing subordinates, you have reached that point. Once you have to teach someone else what it is you do, you’re there. Another point may be once you realize that no single person handles all your suppliers and customers and products from end-to-end. Once, that is, you have activities and sub-processes that require changing hands.

Small?

If your organization is too small to hire a trained workflow or business process engineer or analyst, then I suggest you buy a book or two and start training yourself. Business Process Managementby John Jeston and Johan Nelis is a great starter on BPM and Learning to See by Mike Rother and John Shook will introduce you to Lean and Value-Stream Mapping. Getting a grip on concepts and beginning to model what you do will automatically open your eyes to what is possible.

Why?

Because it matters. If you’re small, it matters. If you work in a large organization, it matters. There are many reasons to commit the time and effort. Most of all, give yourself the opportunity to eliminate waste, innovate, compete, manage your supply chain better and make more money. Any organization can buy that.

“Not an IT Project”

I think the software vendors would be smart to find new ways to introduce people to workflow and BPM. Start by emphasizing that application development and SOA are NOT the only reasons to develop expertise and improvements. Automation is one of the value propositions. Not the only one. Make systems easier to use. Really simple. Make systems cheaper for small organizations. I know there are free downloads but they’re too complicated to use. Keep it really simple. Business and trade group journals and magazines need to do more to popularize simple approaches and the ROI that can be realized when people know what they’re doing in relation to what others are doing.

Broken Record?

I know I’ve said before and I know I will say it again. I feel like am I performing an autopsy when I go into an organization and discover that they haven’t any idea what they are doing. Fragmentation and dis-organization are the rule in so many shops. I use the word “shop” colloquially. Some of these shops are $50M and $100M companies and some are very large governmental organizations. It makes me simply sad to hear that tax-payer money was used to buy technology that nobody knows how to implement, for instance. It makes me sadder still to know that a healthcare organization can’t deliver quality care because the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing. I think pride is what may be missing as a driver. If you have anything to add, feel free to comment. I’d like to know if this phenomenon stirs you the way it stirs me.

Workflow Integral: Broadening & Deepening Your Approach To The Way You Do Business

I want to share a brief quip based on a recent meeting with one of my clients. I think it may resonate with people who are charged with managing business operations, product lines, services and teams of people. Anyone, that is, who might be interested in improving their workflow IQ or that of their organization.

“2000 What?!”

My team had recently wrapped up a high-level study for a large public health system and one of our recommendations (a foregone conclusion) was that they would need to invest in a contemporary transaction system. Of course, one of the steps involved in deciding what kind of application to invest in is to define requirements. Requirements–functional and technical–are a product of mapping current workflows and then extending those into business processes that can be analyzed in terms of the rules that govern activities and decisions made in-process in order to develop future state or “desired” business processes. There’s much more to it that that but you get the idea. The next steps involve collecting or harvesting requirements for an application from the schemmatics or drawings you have rendered.

When we discussed these next steps, the CIO proudly declared: “We’ve already done that.” “Oh,” I said. “When?” He went on to share that “3 years ago,” his department and unit heads mapped out their workflow. “That would have been in 2005?” I asked. “No, 2004.” He replied. Further, rather than develop requirements based upon their own mapping exercises, they “borrowed” requirements from another coalition of similar agencies. “When were those requirements written?” I asked. “2003.” He replied.

Problems

You can guess (one guess only) how successful this approach to writing requirements will be. I suspect that’s why they’re 2 years behind in making this change. But the real problem in this illustration is in the eyes of the department and unit managers sitting around the room. One chirped, “I’m afraid the requirements won’t reflect what my people do everyday.” Good thinking. Another chimed in, “My people are clinicians and it isn’t in their nature to work in two systems and not be able to take notes when they’re with a client. This change risks not reflecting who we are.” Again, brilliant observation. These managers understood something seldom appreciated by technology people (especialy those who are under-resourced and several years behind the times) – people use these tools.

People are Complex Systems

We’re integral by nature so our tools need to accommodate the variety of factors that motivate our behaviors. This is more true now than it ever has been. That’s because we want our tools to encompass more and more of what we like or need to do. The iPhone is a great example. So is Google. They integrate otherwise disparate activities into a common application and single interface. That’s the point of Business Process Management. That’s the point of standardizing code and re-using data. That’s the point of understanding what all your customers want to experience.

What’s Integral?

I give Ken Wilber full credit for my understanding of what it means for something to be integral. I give myself full credit for all that I don’t understand.

• “Integral” takes into consideration my sense of self on an internalized, individual basis. This is really my self-sense. My sense of “I”. One finds motives, emotions, intelligence, passions, beliefs, sense of purpose and mission.
• An integral view also takes into consideration what is exterior to me in terms of discrete phenomena like all of the “it” that I am or you are. This really refers to the human body and how it is compounded from atoms and molecules all the way up to this brain sitting in this head atop this body. In work, we are surrounded by other “it”s, all external to us and all of them are organized in terms of how they are compounded or assembled. The body is what moves in relation to other bodies (and tools like desk-tops and printers and machines) to produce…a process!
• The integral view considers the internal sense “we” share. This is the collective cultural dimension of work (and life as a human being). It considers our values, our mores, the story we tell ourselves about ourselves as a “tribe” would. In this modern age, our story trends toward pluralism and appreciating others’ perspectives (sort of). This view lets me figure out where and how I fit in with others in my group and how our group relates to other groups.
• Lastly, an integral view considers the external social system or organization of people (the “its”) as seen from the outside and their environment all of which is less visible but still serves as infrastructure. This would include industry, trade groups, corporations, governance, nation-states, governments and all of the social apparatus they produce (like laws and schools). This, for example, explains why it takes weeks for a purchase to be approved “because of all of the red tape”.

Wilber goes on to explain that each of these four “quadrants” include lines of emerging intelligence and developmental stages. That is, they can be rather stunted or more evolved. The more evolved they are, the more they are said to be “trans-personal” and include but transcend their less evolved natures at lower levels of organization and development. Ok. Enough philosophy. Especially done this way. Trust me, if you wan to learn more, there’s plenty to read. Don’t take my word for it. This has been a rather brutal summary treatment of very exciting material.

The point is…

Using the example above, if you want to help a team of people through change, transformation and evolution from: less organized to more organized; from low quality to high quality; from paper to database; from less efficient to more efficient; from fragments to integral; then you are strongly encouraged to look back to those four bullets above and consider how the change will impact the individual (“I”), the group (“We”), the individual actor’s body (“It”) and the social system they belong to (“Its”). From that standpoint, you can account for an integral change and avoid barriers, resistance, and potential failure.

• Will people accept it?
• Will people feel as though they were regarded?
• Were their beliefs and sense of purpose be upheld?
• Will the social system support it (and fund it)?
• What are the rules, mandates, laws, and budgets?
• How are partners and suppliers going to react?
• How will the body move through this change?
• What will the new process exert on the body?
• What is important to these people?

And for cryin’ out loud, don’t wait 3 years to apply some other agency’s requirements to your 4 year old workflows! Ask more questions, go for more depth, more span, and act quickly before the recession gets any worse.

Workflow Low IQ/High IQ: the Good, the Bad, and the Really Ugly

Normally, I wouldn’t name companies. Today, however, is a different story. Several factors have led me want to rant & rave a bit. Firstly, this once mighty economy is in a recession. Secondly, last month, 65,000 net jobs were lost. Thirdly, American colleges are enrolling 75% fewer computer sciences students and foreign students are racing back to their home countries having received a wonderful education in engineering or some such domain because our government won’t let them stay as productive members of our workforce. Fourthly, I have had a series of experiences in the past two hours that bring to life the consequences and underpinnings of the first 3 points in this paragraph.

Low IQ – High IQ

Let me clarify: low workflow IQ means that an organization has workflow issues. They are suffering from low productivity, low efficiency, low quality, high error rates, a high rate of redundancies in work, little to no value-add in their activities, long process time, low employee and customer satisfaction, etc. A high workflow IQ essentially indicates an organization experiencing the opposite results.

The Good – Companies with Very High Workflow IQ

1. Netflicks. Totally dependable and absolutely consistent in their process. As a customer, I am thrilled. They are a marvel.
2. Jajah.This alternative to greedy phone companies is a joy. So easy to use and totally reliable. I emailed customer service a question very late at night as I was trying to reach someone in India and received a reply within seconds explaining exactly and simply the solution. I have saved hundreds of dollars using these guys.
3. Lexus. Their service center is heads and shoulders above anything in the industry. I love them. Quick, clean, professional, thorough, honest. Everything flows there.

The Really Bad & Ugly – Companies with Really Low Workflow IQ

1. Wells Fargo. One of the largest banks in the country with very sophisticated systems. Sure. In one visit to the bank, 2 tellers and a loan officer each plugged my account number in and pulled up 3 different accounts belonging to 3 different people. Human error? Whatever. One of those people had a $100,000 line of credit and the loan officer asked me how much I wanted to withdraw!
2. Petsmart. Fish food normally stocked and available on their website isn’t stocked. The “fish guy” hasn’t any idea what kind of fish I am referring to nor the brand of food. I show him the brand and he walks away to get the “guy in charge” who tells me that in the 4 months he’s been there, he’s never heard of the brand (6 other products from same brand sit squarely on shelf in front of us). I ask him if he can order it for me and he explains I will need to go home and place an order online. I will. With the distributor in Japan.
3. Time Warner. This behemoth digital media company takes the cake. My DVR machine breaks down, I take it in to a local Southern California outlet (because they won’t pick it up) where I join 18 people standing in line. One staff member walks away from his station and returns 30 minutes later to watch the TV hanging in the corner. The other, a tireless young woman, runs back and forth across the store to slow printers and the stock room deep in the back, retrieving various boxes for customers. Another fellow tries to answer the questions of a mostly Spanish-speaking customer for a full 45 minutes. How a store in this particular Southern California city with a population mix of 51% Hispanics doesn’t have a single bi-lingual staff member is appalling and beyond me. How they can send an employee running to a store room in the back to fetch boxes everybody needs is mind-numbing. How they can ask 3 staff members to share one slow printer several yards away from every workstation is mind-blowing.

Complain, complain, complain

I know it sounds like I am complaining. I am. I am not telling you this from the standpoint of a consultant or a manager. I am sharing from the perspective a customer. When businesses adapt to the business 2.0 and web 2.0 environment and adopt workflow optimization methods, their customers sing their praises and they succeed. When companies bury their heads in the sand and plead ignorance, they irritate customers and lose business.

What to do?

Wonder what it’s like to do business with you?

1. Play “undercover customer” for a day
2. Ask your customers for feedback and act on it
3. Hire competent people and train them properly
4. Examine your workflow and remove waste
5. Reduce quality concerns (at least 10 of the 18 people standing in line at Time Warner were returning a “box” of one kind or another. Issues with suppliers?)
6. Stop whining about losing business and the rise of global competitors and do something about it. Compete for customers again.

Non-Profit Organizations & Workflow: Doing More for the Cause

Anyone who has ever worked in a non-profit organization knows all too well that slim administration and operations budgets translate into hard work. I’m not talking about gleaming hospitals and health insurance companies that meet non-profit status criteria. I’m talking about the small and mid-size social services agencies, group homes, charitable missions and advocacy programs that provide invaluable services in this country and the NGOs that do similar work around the globe.

Non-profits are staffed by intelligent, educated, experienced, mission-driven and hard-working people. The salary structures and the nature of the work do not tend to attract people who are looking to make a buck, climb the corporate ladder and get out. Similarly, because the organization is not so much “selling” something, it provides services in the trenches with whatever resources happen to be at its disposal. Slim margins mean there is little investment in technology and innovation. Not because managers, leaders and the board of directors don’t want to or don’t see the value in it, they simply can’t afford radical investments in technology to automate some of the back-breaking work.

Improved Workflow Can Stand-In for Automation (for the time-being)

While a non-profit may not be able to afford new technology-enabled tools that would drastically reinvent their delivery systems, they can afford to emulate systems and work backwards. By visiting a large for-profit that provides similar services – as a soup kitchen may be to a successful restaurant chain – the non-profit manager can learn something about how automation and systems make restaurant work more efficient and satisfactory. It may be in the way that the customer is greeted and moved quickly to a table or in the way an order for food can include some customization and accommodate allergies and diet preferences. It may be in the way that money is handled on the back-end or in the way that supplies and inventory are managed.

Bringing these lessons back to the non-profit to model the current state and the future state so it looks and feels more like the automated solution is not only possible, everybody benefits and it costs little.

Analysing and Managing Workflow for Improvement Doesn’t Necessarily Involve Information Systems

In this day and age, much of what is said in the press and in workshops and books on the topic of managing business process and workflow is spoken by software developers and consultants who can improve workflow and automate processes using technology. Often, the approach leads to new, tailored systems. That is not – by definition – the only reason to engage in workflow improvements. Workflow and business process can and will improve by applying the fundamentals to a white-board and then implementing them using sound project management principles.

Change Means Disruption – Addressing the Beliefs that Maintain the Status Quo

By virtue of their budgets and scant IS/IT resources, non-profit agencies tend to resist innovation and change. It makes sense in the context of organizations that cannot afford to develop new processes in parallel and test-mode. “Too many people would suffer in the interim. Programs might grind to a halt. What if there were mistakes? The founder’s unique approach cannot be challenged. The board will never approve it. We can’t afford it!”

All of these are the beliefs that maintain the homeostasis of things – people, processes, outcomes – and, with care, they can be “entered” and challenged for the purpose of producing a better outcome. Working with a non-profit involves challenging sacred cows that are often very different from the sacred cows one encounters in a for-profit setting. Greater care has to be exercised in challenging them because drivers of behavior like beliefs, values, vision and mission are very strong and give way only when the organization can be assured that their purpose will be met. Making the case for doing more with less and producing better quality outcomes is the best bet. Secondarily, a higher-performing non-profit does, in fact, attract greater funding but that is always secondary to the mission.