You are here: Home / Blog

Leading in the Economic Recovery

by

An ongoing study of leadership roles, practices, and behaviors explores distinctions between individuals who disclose that they personally or their companies were financially harmed in the recent economic downturn and those who indicate that they or their companies experienced no financial harm. The responses vary by country.

Economic harm seems more likely among residents of Europe and North America than in Africa, Asia, Australia, or South America. Respondents from North America to date see 70% of 280 reporting financial harm while residents of Europe to date see 58% of 36 reporting a negative financial impact from the economic downturn. Africa, Asia, Australia, and South America reported 43%, 47%, 42%, and 71% respectively. If leading during economic recovery is different from leading at other times, and residents of Europe and the Americas are more likely to have experienced economic trauma than residents in the rest of the world, then we might expect leadership in Europe and the Americas to look differently than leadership elsewhere as the economic recovery proceeds.

Two somewhat universal themes emerge from research and experience. The first theme is that leaders rise to the surface. People display leadership that is disconnected to the position that they hold. When looking for leaders in organizations, we should not limit our search to people in somewhat traditional positions of leadership. It may be that future holders of positions of leadership come out of the ranks of leaders whose leadership is unrelated to their position. At the moment, these leaders have followers and these followers, rather than organizations or communities, give them power or authority based on the value that they bring.

The second theme is related to this added value. One value that leaders consistently add is a vision for the future that followers find compelling, attractive, and attainable at some level. As much as so many people promote the idea that people are afraid of change, the reality may be that the fear is of specific changes and that certain change is not only tolerable but desired at a visceral level. Leaders communicate a vision for a changed workplace or community or world that a critical mass of followers crave, or at least find positively exciting.

To find the leaders, look for the followers. To understand why they are leaders rather than somebody else, look for the vision.

Goal Translation, Barrier Removal, and Performance Improvement

by

Goals and Barriers – An Overview
Business GoalsA critical first step in achievement of superior organizational and individual performance is the determination of short-term organization-wide goals. This is a matter of defining the macro level expectations of the organization. Once the necessary direction for the organization has been determined, that direction can be translated down through the organization so that all departments and individuals are committed to working toward achievement of the overall goals. In order to do this, each department must have its own set of goals that support the goals of each piece of the company above it in the organizational structure.

In the process of “translating” organization-wide goals to departments and individuals, barriers will surface. These barriers become not an excuse but a roadmap by which the organization can achieve its goals.

The key to using identified barriers to reach organizational goals is to create prioritized action plans for the removal of those barriers. This avoids the phenomenon of employees feeling that they are removing barriers for the sake of removing barriers. The motivation is clear when there is a logical connection established between the barrier and an acknowledged organization-wide goal.

Organizational Alignment
eProcesses begins to understand the level of organizational alignment with respect to a set of goals during the Initial Evaluation stage. During this stage, eProcesses starts with identification of the organization-wide set of goals. Our efforts toward improved alignment continue throughout the relationship between client and consultant.

As the engagement with eProcesses unfolds, our Consultants will work to clarify and articulate an initial set of organization-wide goals. This is not necessarily the same set of goals that we identified during the Initial Evaluation stage. The clarity of the goals is crucial to the effectiveness of the goal translation. It may seem obvious, but achieving organizational alignment around a set of goals is unlikely when the goals lack clarity and specificity.

Stretch
Effective goals force the organization to stretch. There must be sufficient challenge associated with the goals to motivate an attempt to reach the goals, without having so much stretch employees and managers simply shake their heads incredulously. A general expectation for appropriate stretch will depend on your specific organization, but eProcesses finds that a 20-25% improvement in organizational performance is reachable in most client organizations.
Goal Categories

There are a number of ways to categorize or classify goals. There should generally be at least one goal associated with each of the following areas: Quality, Service level, Cost, Customer Satisfaction, and Revenue.
Barriers

As goals are translated from “Corporate” to “Department” to “Individual” levels in the organization, barriers will often be raised. eProcesses will document these barriers and, with the management team, prioritize them. Priorities should be based both on perceived impact and on perceived level of effort required for resolution. It is through the resolution of these barriers that most clients will find achievement of their goals.

Barrier Removal
A systematic effort to not only identify, but remove, barriers should become part of the organizational culture. In this way, an organizational expectation of continuous improvement is established. Simultaneous with the establishment of the continuous improvement expectation, the organization must assure that the tools required to remove the barriers and a system to reward the efforts to remove the barriers are in place. The culture will gradually reflect an atmosphere where everyone is working consciously to continuously improvement organizational performance.

Performance Improvement
In order for goals and barrier removal and continuous improvement to appear intentionally linked within the culture, metrics must be established to track performance against key organizational goals and to identify performance within the various organizational improvement initiatives. In some circles, this is known as a System for Managing. It should provide each manager at each level with a scorecard on a daily, or at least weekly, basis so that each manager can answer the question “How did we do?”

Tracking relevant performance metrics across a relevant interval of time and reporting it within a System for Managing will allow managers and supervisors to see progress. This is not enough. Where significant change is under way, it is important also to attempt to provide each individual employee with some visual reminder of the progress being made and their part in it. Success breeds success and visible improvement breeds more visible improvement. A highly visible graph or chart in addition to a well-placed table showing individual performance will enhance the organization’s long-term ability to achieve and sustain performance improvement.

Summary
In an environment that is placing constant demands on organizations to improve, senior management must assure that goals are translated and aligned so that everyone is working toward the same objectives and moving in the same direction. Any goals worth attempting to reach are not going to be easy. Challenging goals, by their nature, will imply individual or organizational barriers. In order to achieve the communicated goals, then, barriers must be identified and removed. And the efforts and results must be broadly communicated so that the improvement is sustained rather than short-lived.

TPP Integration – Technology, Processes, and People

by

Companies give a wide range of reasons for investing in technology: improve quality, reduce costs, shorten lead times, improve consistency, and improve communication are a few common ones.

Each of these reasons, and most of the other reasons that could be offered, have an explicit or implicit basis for the technology purchase decision. And, behind each of these decisions, is explicit and implicit integration of the new technology with the company’s people and processes.

This integration does not happen spontaneously. Quite to the contrary, effective integration of technology, processes, and people requires implementation experience, focus, and support at the highest levels of the company. High level support is required because the introduction of new technology changes processes and behaviors. Behavioral change does not come easily. It often meets with significant resistance. The nature of many organizations is such that resistance to change often receives high-level support itself. Without top-level support for the change initiative, the required behavioral change may not happen.

The most frequent process-related challenge is the failure to consider the impact of the new technology on specific processes. Sometimes this failure occurs because some processes are overlooked in the implementation planning process. The more common scenario, however, is that companies, even successful ones, don’t take the time to understand their processes.

Our Approach
At eProcesses, we begin with a thorough understanding of the organization’s goals and objectives, its expectations. We find it useful to start with the broad corporate expectations. The focus moves from the broad view to a departmental view to an understanding of the expectations for the new technology or other change initiative.

From an understanding of the expectations, it is then important to move to an understanding of the organization’s processes. Ideally, a company will always have current, detailed documentation on each of their processes so that whenever a company seeks to improve its processes, whether through technology or otherwise, the impact can be quickly determined. Most companies have inadequate documentation of their processes and, as a result, a poor understanding of how the work actually gets done. In the interest of time it is often best to focus only on those processes likely to be impacted by the potential changes.

Documentation of the processes must be followed by identification of where technology affects the process and where people, preferably by position, are engaged in the process. This information is needed so that the documentation can be used to determine the impact of technology on the process and the impact of process changes on the behavior and job descriptions of people.

Finally, with a knowledge of the technology objectives and the processes, it is time to understand current behaviors and behaviors to be changed, and then how to change those behaviors.

The processes and job descriptions are a starting point for understanding what people do and what they are told they are expected to do. Often there is a discrepancy. To understand what people are likely to do, the next step is to review current reward and recognition programs. If people are not doing what is encouraged by the “r&r” there is a strong likelihood that the “r&r” is not providing people with the necessary incentives.

In order for behaviors to be changed long term, people must recognize a valid reason or incentive for changing their behavior. It is rarely enough to make the change in behavior a condition of employment. In some cases, incentive programs need to be developed to encourage the desired new behaviors. In some cases, contests are appropriate. In most cases, managerial behavioral and technique changes are needed.

Change management coupled with the introduction of new technology should not be, but can easily be, underestimated. While most companies recognize the need for systems integration and, to a lesser degree process definition and integration, the behavioral element is frequently overlooked. What is often recognized too late is the fact that the benefits of technological and process changes will never be realized without successful behavioral change.

Achieving Your Investment in Technology

by

ROI, Not a Model, a Process
At eProcesses we see most Cost Justifications and or Return on Investment documents for technology investments following the normal Rate of Return, Payback Period, Net Present Value, etc. model. Though sound from a financial point of view, there are underlying elements that are overlooked when it comes to new technology.

ROIThe chart represents a process where Corporate Strategies/Goals are the starting point for financial analysis. The process then moves to the departments/business units that are going to be involved in the new technology. The departments define their ‘Functional Objectives’ with the new technology and, therefore, capture the motivation for the investment and the business objectives that are to be achieved. These objectives and motives have value and provide direction for the ensuing project. It is up to the project team to quantify the value and include it in the ROI calculation. All of this is then moved to initial starting point of the technology project.

Integration of Business Processes and Human Behaviors with Technology
To truly achieve the full benefit of your technology investment, eProcesses suggests there is another element to consider. eProcesses observes that companies usually invest in technology to achieve greater value from their Human Resources. But we rarely encounter companies who make the other investment that is required to realize the benefits, the real integration of the new technology into the processes and behaviors of the organization. The ROI that convinced you to invest in hardware or software throughout the company had an underlying assumption that you would change the way you do business. At eProcesses we help you change the way you do business. We help you realize the ROI you initially expected when you invested in the technology.

Industry Unique eProcesses Systematic Project Methodology
The eProcesses methodology works because we separate ourselves from the normal 5 to 6 step project approach with our unique 10 Phase project methodology. We incorporate strategic and human factors into our analysis that is normally left out in the typical study. We look for the barriers that can cause failures; we then work with you to eliminate those barriers so you can achieve the expected results in your technology projects. If you have already implemented a project and are not happy with the results, we can help you understand why and assist you in obtaining the desired results.
eprocesses project methodology

More Than Technical Integration

by

Technical vs. Process vs. People Integration
Integration is a term that is commonly used, frequently without agreement as to definition. A dictionary definition of “integration” would say “the act of forming, coordinating, or blending into a functioning or unified whole.” It is commonly used, especially in association with technology, purely from the perspective of systems integration. In practice, however, even systems integration involves much more than integrating systems.

At eProcesses, when we speak of integration we speak of technical or systems integration but extend systems to include not only technology but business processes and people and their behavior. We believe that a company cannot realize the full value of its investment in technology, in business processes, or in people unless all three are integrated into a effective, efficient, well-tuned whole.

Technical Integration and ECR
New technology is a common path that companies take to improve organizational performance. Rarely will a company make an investment in technology without the expectation of an appropriate return on investment. Companies understand that new tools or technologies may be required to improve the capabilities of their workforces and to improve the capacity of the organization. Technology is seen as a way to improve the efficiency of the workforce or the throughput of a plant or the service level that can be provided.

But, technology by itself cannot yield the desired result. For technology to have the desired impact, the technology must change the way work gets done. The way work gets done does not change unless there is also a change in organizational behavior. When eProcesses looks at organizational behavior, it looks at Expectations, Capabilities, and Rewards (ECR).

At the macro level, ECR addresses the Expectations, Capabilities, and Rewards of the whole organization. What is expected of us and how do we know? What tools do we have at our disposal to fulfill the expectations and are they appropriate? What is in it for me if I do what is expected (WIIFM)?

ECR clearly has application at a micro level also. As applied to the introduction of new technology, the primary focus is on modifying one or more processes, Capabilities in the macro sense, in order to improve organizational performance. At the micro level of ECR, the Capabilities are the tools and information and other resources that are made available to the organization.

With respect to Expectations, everyone must have the expectation that the new technology will be used. This setting of expectations starts with executive and senior management and continues to supervision and all who are associated with the new technology. Even peers must have a sense of responsibility for driving acceptance and use of the new technology. On the opposite end of the Expectations spectrum, all steps must be taken to eliminate any sense that it is organizationally acceptable to not use the new technology.

With respect to Rewards, some element of Reward and Recognition must be introduced to reinforce the use of the new technology. This R&R can be written or oral accolades or admonition. The R&R can be monetary. The identity of the R&R appropriate to a specific technology introduction will depend on the specific organization.

Technical Integration and Process Integration
The primary reason that companies purchase new technology is to change the way work is done. Processes, or the results of those processes, may be seen as either ineffective or inefficient. In either case, change is warranted. Companies that adopt new technology without understanding their processes and the weaknesses of those processes are destined to pursue suboptimal, or simply unsuccessful, technology implementations. The high percentage of implementations judged less than fully successful within the popular press would lead one to believe that too few companies pay attention to this step.

There is a large volume of literature detailing the techniques for process documentation and process reengineering. Lack of educational materials is clearly not a problem. However, there appears to be a lack of understanding of the importance of this step. Sometimes it might be a budget consideration, but it is more likely a lack of awareness that is the issue.

But, it is one thing to change the design of processes and another thing to get people to actually do the processes differently.

Technical and Behavioral Integration
The key to changing organizational results is, ultimately, changed organizational behavior. A company can acquire new technology, but, by itself, that will not alter organizational results. A company can redesign organizational processes but, unless people actually do their work and manage their work differently, even process change and processes integrated with the new technology, there will not be performance improvement.

At the risk of simplicity, the key to performance improvement is getting people to perform differently.

To get people to perform differently, a company must understand why the changes are needed, how technology can improve performance, what performance improvement is possible without technology, and they must understand the management implications of these changes. And, they must understand what is expected of them, especially during a time of change.

Managing Expectations
Managing expectations means that people understand what is expected of them, and why. These expectations are communicated through the behavior of management. These expectations are communicated by what behaviors and results are rewarded, and how. These expectations are communicated through the way people are trained, and managed, and reviewed. People at all levels need to have a clear understanding of what is expected of them, of what the new processes will look like, of how they will be managed, of the criteria that will be used to assess their performance, of how they are progressing, and of how they will be rewarded for improved performance. They need to know how they will be integrated into the whole of the organization.

The Result: Total Integration Management
Effective change that involves technology requires total integration management. Technology must be integrated with business processes and with the behavior of people. Expectations must be aligned with capabilities and rewards.

To integrate technology with processes and people, you must first understand the current processes and behaviors. Then, you must understand how the technology will alter those processes and behaviors. Then, you must change the design of the processes and behaviors. Finally, you must implement the new designs and manage to those new designs.
Technology cannot be implemented in a vacuum. Processes cannot be altered without consideration for the technology and the behavior of people. Behavior cannot be changed without consideration of the goals and objectives of the organization, the technology of the organization, the processes of the organization, and the culture of the organization.
Total Integration Management suggests a consideration of all aspects of the organization when seeking to implement change. Such a thorough consideration of the breadth of organization will, ultimately, help to assure the realization of the return on investment that is proposed by the technology or process change initiative.