<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=1907245749562386&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">
Event_bg

The Leonardo Blog

All Posts

Forget the distracting buzzwords - focus on organisational improvement instead.

5-2

The development of organizational management theory should seek to make operational management simpler, not more complex. Is it possible that the primary goal of organizational performance improvement gets lost in the ever-increasing list of shiny objects such as transformation, digitalization, robotization, valuation, acceleration, innovation, automation, and disruption? Are the -ion ideas a distraction or a boon for good management?

"Perfection is achieved, not when there is nothing more to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." Antoine de Saint-Exupéry [1]

As a process practitioner, an important part of my job is to help make management simpler. Not more complex, simpler. Surely this is also true of fellow travelers in the many forms of architecture, in business rules, in business analysis, and in all the dark arts of management? Management will never be simple — any undertaking involving people is bound to get complicated — but there are ways to make it simpler to understand, design, and execute. There are also many ways to make it more complicated than it needs to be.

We need ways to get to the core of organizational management, to clear away the mists and distractions and get focused on what really matters. Creating the world's most complex PowerPoint slide, or crafting the most abstract set of words, doesn't help. Conjuring up increasingly-complicated methods is more likely to hide than reveal core truths. Our objective must be to illuminate, not to confuse.

In their opening keynote at the 2017 BPM Conference in London (produced by IRM UK), Roger Burlton and Chris Potts led a valuable discussion amongst delegates about the important conference themes: transformation, digitalization, valuation, and innovation. For completeness, we can add a few other common -ion words to this list: automation, disruption, agilization, robotization, acceleration (at least one of which I may have just made up!).

There was lots of useful discussion at the conference, as there is in many organizational settings, about the meaning of those ideas, their interrelationships, and their relative merits and importance. Which is more important and meaningful? Can they be combined?

One key theme that comes from such discussions is how to sell ideas to the C-suite, how to get executive commitment to, and funding for, another important -ion word, execution.

It often feels like the purpose of the ever-increasing list of such buzzwords — shiny objects — is to catch the attention of executives, to exercise a cargo-cult mentality where if we create a <insert shiny adjective here> program, wonderful things will happen.

Does the C-suite really need shiny objects?

Do they really depend on management-by-slogan? I hope not — they are running a world of organizations, and we are rather dependent on them. We need them to be making rational, logical choices and not be swayed by the latest word du jour.

What the words and ideas in this -ion collection have in common, and surely their shared purpose, is to improve the performance of organizations, to improve the way in which organizations execute their strategic intent. Management is about the execution of strategy and the measurable, objective, and continuous improvement of organizational performance.

We are in danger of creating a vicious cycle of increasingly-complex ideas that require additional increasingly-complex ideas to describe them; it's complex ideas all the way down!

Improvement of organizational performance may involve accelerated transformation — through innovative disruption and the use of digital, robotic, automated solutions — leading to improved valuation and more agile execution! However, the result, the ultimate goal, must be improved organizational performance. All else is a means to that end.

For those of you who have been following my writing (thank you), you know what's coming next — this is a business process performance issue. My guiding management principle, the primacy of process, says that the only way any organization can create, accumulate, and deliver value (products and services) outside the organization is via cross-functional business processes, and that those processes are, therefore, also the way that every organization executes its strategic intent.

There are many things we do to improve the performance of processes; the -ion ideas are commonly and importantly part of that set. Before we start on any of them, we must discover and document the process hierarchy, understand how the processes should perform and are performing, and create a mechanism for making cross-functional changes (since the organization chart says little about cross-functional management). This frames the elegant simplicity required for effective and sustained improvement of organizational performance.

Once we know what processes we are trying to improve, what that improvement would look like (in solid business/organizational terms), and how cross-functional change will be achieved and sustained, then we can invoke as many of the -ion ideas as we like.

What will then follow is illumination, not from shiny objects but from the removal of concealing complexity.

New Call-to-action


[1]  https://goo.gl/LDVf35 

Roger Tregear
Roger Tregear
Roger is a Consulting Director with Leonardo. He delivers consulting and education assignments around the world. This work has involved many industry sectors, diverse cultures, and organization types. Roger briefs executives, coach managers, and support project teams to develop process-based management. Several thousand people have attended Roger's training courses and seminars in many countries - and Roger frequently presents at international business conferences. Roger has been writing a column on BPTrends called Practical Process for over 10 years. This led to the 2013 book of the same name. In 2011, he co-authored Establishing the Office of Business Process Management. He contributed a chapter in The International Handbook on Business Process Management (2010, 2015). With Paul Harmon in 2016, Roger co-edited Questioning BPM?, a book discussing key BPM questions. Roger's own book, Reimagining Management, was published in 2016.

Related Posts

The Process Life — What's It All About?

What's it all about? If you google "what's it all about" you get 4.5 billion results. Seems that we are keen to answer that question. Of course, it would be much more useful if there were just one answer. I have a similar experience when I ask people what they understand by "business process management" and related phrases. [2.5 billion, in case you were wondering.] It would be of significant benefit if there were just one answer here also. Good news! There is just one answer. The bad news is we all agree with that but have a different version. The great news is that we can solve this problem — if you all repent and agree with me!

Why BPM Maturity is an Untapped Organisational Superpower

  Processes deliver Every organization makes promises to customers and other stakeholders. Such promises are its reason for existence and are shaped as value propositions in the organizational strategy. Traditional management follows the organization chart with most management activity directed up and down that chart. But how do we get work done? How do we deliver on those promises? We work in collaboration across the organization, not up and down. Is there any box on that chart that can, by itself, deliver products or services externally? No there is not, that’s not the way it works. Processes deliver on our promises.

How To Replace Random Acts of Management With a Metamodel of Improvement

The simple existence of a problem is not enough reason to invest in fixing it, perhaps not now, perhaps not ever. Organizations need a systemic approach to define what good looks like, assess current performance, and make evidence-based decisions about which performance gaps to close. The Tregear Circles replace random acts of management with a metamodel for continuous process improvement. I have recently encountered several examples of the idea that higher process performance target scores are obviously better than lower ones, just because they are … well … higher; that setting a target of, say, 95% is, without doubt, better than a target of 88%, and in striving for improvement we should go 'as high as possible'.