Why matters January 15, 2008
Posted by Esa Tihilä in : eBusiness , trackback
Why some businesses or projects deliver better results than other ones even if there is an equal number and quality of resources, talent and customer potential available? Here are some of my thoughts.
I have been running and taken part in many business process engineering and business re-structuring cases during my career. For example, there are cases where the business model has been changed, where we have been against the wall and in a difficult position without instant change or renewal of operations, where growth or demand for services has exceeded all expectations and where new opportunities or operational models have been required.
Some of these cases have gone extremely well and some haven’t. And even if the cases mentioned above were ran by good, competent people based on known decisions and with a clear agenda, still some of them delivered better results than others – and not only 15% better but up to 200% or even better.
Why?
Simply put, it was a question of the team, its agility and cooperation skills – in other words, team work.
People involved with the case not only knew what they were doing but also where they stood compared to the target and where they needed to go and the means to get there. When comparing best cases with good cases there is one key difference in ways of working. In the best cases, people approach things with an open mind and are constantly asking things like: why we do this like this and what if we do it in a different way? And if we do it as proposed does it provide any difference or better results than doing it according to plan?
When analyzing best cases afterwards, we have sat down and discussed our business cases – not only reviewed them but also explored if we could do something differently with fewer resources but with more results. Sometimes we have listened completely different industries and businesses, trying to open our minds and look for best practices.
Some may say it is a risky or a theoretical approach (= Not invented here) to review and take ideas from other businesses. But it is worthwhile when you are stuck and there has been no development for some time. This happened a few weeks ago for me and my team: We were in the middle of a delivery of the solution and in trouble – there was still a lot of work to be done but only few days left to execute. People were naturally getting nervous on both sides of the table.
We analyzed the case through once again and someone had the idea of changing the roles of the key people. Quite a risky approach some might say but it gave us a fresh new pair of eyes to analyze the issues and several questions like “why do you have to do it like this…” A new, fresh approach did open the eyes of the whole team and suddenly we were back in business. The new guy was able to find essential new information from the database and he was able to feed the others with relevant information to correct the problem. Suddenly we were able execute a several days’ job within one hour and suddenly all the parties did see the chance to meet deadlines with good quality.
What can we learn from this case?
People are used to working in a certain way, without any need or interest to change. Or a man can dream only what a man can implement.
Too often only a crisis situation forces businesses to change.
Changing roles and responsibilities may allow you to shift up a gear. This is also very true in team sports like ice hockey or football. A team that lost today may win tomorrow and play a very dominant game by making some changes in their playing squad or by taking the opponent into account.
What does this have to do with Enterprise Purchase to Pay solutions you might ask?
A corporation saves money and gains better control of their financial processes by implementing enterprise purchase to pay solutions. But is it good enough? I say: “NO IT IS NOT”. If people do not see “what’s in it for me”, “how could I contribute to this?” they execute the case as requested but are they continuously giving their best? If that’s the case then we are in situation of good vs. excellent case at minimum.
I mean real involvement of people and putting them in charge of their case. By opening the doors for ideas a case may become even more attractive to all stakeholders. By opening the case I mean opening discussions within a team, with suppliers, other organizations or consultants. The Idea is to ask “how would you execute this case better? And why?”
The power of “why” is strong even during the implementation and production as well – it is a healthy question to ask every now and then.