The most dreaded words for us are "BPM requires too much overhead". Why? Because the job just got harder by having to first get through a misaligned perception.
The earmarks of BPM academia can be found in most books on the subject and, to complicate matters even further, there are a number of practitioners who believe the only way to treat each engagement are to take a formal "top down" approach. On the other side of the coin there are the software vendors that would prefer you purchase the solution on the promise that the sun will shine brighter. This "bottom up" approach is viewed as the "what BPM is" because the marketing of BPM drives the perception that BPM is only a technology. Either approach, taken to the extreme, can be dangerous.
We've previously spoken of the confusion growing in the industry around whether BPM is a methodology, a technology or a way of thinking . The problem, or salvation, is that it is all that and more. We believe that the opportunity for Process Improvement can be a hybrid of both a top-down and bottom-up approach, add into that recipe experience, practicality and a dash of "Just Do It" enthusiasm. Given this mix you're likely to find that ROI achievements are closer, and less expensive, to obtain.
The CEO, CFO and/or CIO do not want to hear that in order to achieve BPM returns they have to ship everyone off to Tibet to learn the teachings from the masters for six months. They need solutions yesterday and, with the speed of change occurring in the business world, the tomorrows are coming faster than ever. By the same token senior management does not enjoy when a multi-million dollar system investment needs to be scrapped because it didn't do what they expected, or they didn't invest in the process definition and organization changes to support a new approach.
Not in this economy! Now, more than ever, realistic and practical approaches are needed. The economy has reduced the workforce for a number of companies, which are now faced with the burden of producing the same, if not more, with fewer resources. At some point when things pick up you need to ask whether you want to hire back into the same inefficient processes you've always had, or do you want to do something about it? And if you want to do something about it, has the perception of cost or approach dissuaded you from taking that step?
One of the major disappointments in the software development arena is most approaches (waterfall, RUP, Agile, etc.) are perceived to be a total and immutable commitment to a methodology. While each is somewhat malleable within their own framework, they aren't suited for every single problem. The more successful development manager is going to view each as being a different kind of tool and they have the flexibility to choose which tool is best suited to a set of architectural changes or feature requests.
So what do you do?
The BPM space is starting to trend the same way, so here are a few pointers we practice to keep approaches realistic, manageable and efficient:
· Be Real: Change is not limited to a new technology. Often times a process and, more importantly, people need to change as well. A good look at both helps identify where roadblocks are likely to occur and a good head start on correcting those issues.
· Think Like an Artisan: Start with the realization that the technologies, methodologies and types of cultural changes necessary are the tools to get the job done. An experienced and practical facilitator will recognize that and set about picking the right approach and right technologies to address the need. This requires an agility in thinking from the target audience be it middle, senior or executive management.
· Leverage Existing Talent: Consider pairing up some of the more rigorous thinkers with the "out of the box", or more cavalier thinkers. It may take some getting used to, as both these types will need to learn and gain insight into the positive aspects of their respective approaches.
· Go Iterative: Taking small “Just Do It” steps are a good way to avoid analysis paralysis. Put realistic boundaries around scope and accept that, in post-reviews, changes may be necessary. This is a kind of mini Process Improvement opportunity that may result in a slight increase of cost, but avoids a complete restart or abandoning of the effort.
· Produce and Discuss Metrics: This must occur from various perspectives including the Customer, Finance, Process, Technology and People. Avoid glossing over indicators that may not look good, instead ask the question… “Why?” And then put in action plans to overcome the obstacles.
These are simplified descriptions but it holds true to the tenets that most things in Process Improvement and Technology changes don’t require boiling the ocean.
Until next time sports fans!
