This video on the PEX Network is the best video I've ever seen that encapsulates the importance of process.
It's a must watch.
Tell your friends, tell the world, the process revolution is here...
- TPN
"Go out to the business and gather their requirements!"
How many times do we hear this said?
When I hear this being it immediately fills me with dread; images of men in suits wandering through dark forests without maps, looking for mushrooms...needles in haystacks and the like (you get the idea...)
What generally happens in these situations is that business analysts go away and do just that - gather requirements - what the business thinks they want. Typically what this results in is a giant rambling document written in a pseudo business / IT speak that the business say they can't read and the IT guys say isn't detailed enough for them to build from. So the BA goes away and creates a functional spec which the IT guys love, but by this point in time it has morphed so far from what the business want, they have a heart attack when they see the final product!
"That's not what we wanted!" they say!
"But that's what you told us!" say the BA's and IT guys!
It doesn't have to be this hard. Here's how you do it:
1. Define the successful customer outcome(s)
What is it that the customer really needs? What does the business need to do to meet those needs?
2. Define the process scope
Establish what the process actually is from the customer's perspective - current state (if a current state exists!). Don't take the business's word for it - their interpretation of what a process is may be radically different to yours. Document the process at a high level (e.g. SIPOC) - confirm with the business. Tick in box from business?
3. Define the current process
Proceed to document the process at a task level. Don't waste too much time on the as-is if you are going to change the process! Photos of sticky notes on a wall is sufficient. Tick in box from business?
4. Improve the process / define new process
List all the tasks in the current process and eliminate or improve tasks focussing on the outcomes required. If a new process, sticky note the tasks required to achieve the outcomes required with the minimal amount of activities. Don't just consider "sunny day processes" where everything goes right - consider everything that can go wrong! Look at the paths from every business rule in your process! Consider all process permutations!
5. Link Process Tasks to Procedural Steps
For each task, create procedural steps - how and why each process step is done rather than what is done. This can be done very simply in a spreadsheet ( For example my Process Ninja Workbook that utilises the CEM Method). What's more, you can then spit it into a procedural document for your staff to use for training and day-to-day operational procedures.
6. Link Procedural Detail to Business Requirements
The procedural detail helps to create a granular level of detail that greatly benefits the creation of specific requirements. It forces the analyst to think of all possible permutations and options - it forces them to think in the context of the real world, not a gobbledegook business requirements document.
7. Link Business requirements to test scenarios
Use procedural detail and business requirements together to develop test scenarios and use cases - IT can then use these for their unit testing then they can be re-used for user testing. Easy.
8. Build it. Iteratively.
Presuming that there is actually an IT solution involved (and let's face it, there usually is), it's best to adopt an iterative (agile) approach where there are short development cycles with high business involvement. I have seen too many waterfall development disasters in my time.
So in eight steps a Business or Process Analyst can create complete traceability from the customer outcomes to the delivery.
It's not really that hard, but isn't it amazing that so many people can make it seem that way?
Cheers,
TPN
My buddy David Mottershead aka The Customer Experience Coach has written a short whitepaper entitled "Customer Experience Management & Continuous Improvement Program"
For those of you looking for some further clarification on Customer Experience Management and the CEM Method, it's well worth a read.
Cheers,
TPN
I was recently asked to put together a 1 page document to provide a brief explanation of the CEM Method (Customer Experience Management Method).
This is my attempt at it - I hope it provides a handly intro for those of us out there trying to provide some clarity on what the CEM Method does and why it's different.
Cheers,
TPN
When I was a student one of my favourite pastimes was browsing through CD shops. I would spend many a spare hour doing so. Fast forward 15 years and CD shops are now almost complete a relic of a former age. But despite the fact that they're gone I don't miss them at all.
I now buy all my music via itunes and I can sit in the comfort of my own home, browsing my ipad, listening to samples of the music then purchasing and downloading the music instantly. The outcome of the process essentially remains the same over 15 years - buy music. But the process itself has become simpler, faster and more enjoyable. Technology has acted as an enabler, but this also required some customer centric thinking to get the mix right.
Soon we'll see the demise of bookshops (iPads and kindles will take care of that), Retail & Rental DVD shops (itunes and netflix will cream that) as well as post offices (dwindling postage numbers & prepaid options will kill them). And I won't miss those either. Sure we might all end up couch potatoes that don't have any need to move, but it will also free up all that wasted time traveling to retail stores so that we can do some exercise!
So what are the lessons from a process point of view?
The outcome may remain the same, but if we focus on the customer experience of the process, the customer gets what they really need, not what we think they want - or as Henry Ford once put it...
"If I'd asked people what they wanted they'd have said a faster horse".
Cheers,
TPN
In the Harvard Business Review this week Brad Power wrote a very poignant article entitled "Uniting the Religions of Process Improvement" (the title speaks for itself).
As many of you will know I am a big fan of the CEM Method - a structured methodology used to take an outside-in (customer centric) approach to process improvement. It's not the only methodology that I use, however; I use parts of Lean and Six Sigma where I feel they are appropriate and practical. In short I am passionate about CEM Method, but I'm not locked in to it as a method.
Over the past year I have witnessed horrendous, childish bunfights between the CEM Method brigade and the BP Trends contributors - this discussion is a classic example. Yes, I started the fight, I will take credit (or debit) for that, but my point of the discussion was to understand why BP Trends had a closed door policy on outside-in thinking and methods. The door is still closed it appears, and after the review of Harvard Professor Ranjay Gulati's book on Outside-in that door doesn't look like being opened any time soon. I find it ironic that as catalysts for change, some process people find it so difficult to adapt to new ways of thinking and of new methods.
But there IS a problem with outside-in and the CEM Method. It's a closed shop. Rather, it's a shop you can come into, but you'll have to pay. You will find no textbooks explaining the CEM Method. You will find plenty of books talking about outside-in and customer centricity - but as for the method, sorry you can enter the club sir, but you must be a member.
Therein lies the problem. Whilst the BP Group appear to be growing in numbers at a large rate, and consequently the number of "Certified Process Professionals" is also increasing, CEM Method remains a largely unknown commodity. In short, its credibility as a tool in the marketplace is lacking - not because of a lack of results, but simply because it is not well known. As a result of this closed shop there is also a lack of credible analysis of achievements (here I am talking Gartner or Forrester).
So where does this leave the "Certified Process Professionals" and "Certified Process Masters?" In short, frustrated. Frustrated that when we speak to clients they have never heard of the terms or the methods. Frustrated that they can't pick up a book and learn about it. Frustrated that there is no alternative to learning it other than paying thousands of dollars for a course.
Now is the time for the CEM Method to become truely outside-in - and become an open method, available to all.
Cheers,
TPN
I recently had a run of bad luck. Not only did I lose my iPod, I dropped my digital camera and broke the lense. Luckily I'm with AAMI Insurance, and luckily I chose to take out their personal valuables cover. This allowed me to claim both items on my insurance.
What followed is a tale of process that will astound you!
I checked online to see if I could lodge an online claim - no such luck. Although AAMI has an online policy manager, there is no portal to submit an online claim. So I call AAMI and I am promptly put through to the claims section. The friendly lady takes the details of my claims. Note the plural - claims. She then advises me that my two claims will be handled by two separate case managers and provides me with their contact details.
Wait a minute - two claims managers - why?
The friendly lady explains that as one is a loss and the other is a damage claim they are under two different policies and this must be handled by two different departments and hence two different claims managers. I bite my tongue. She then asks me to forward proof of purchase for the ipod to one claim manager (via email) and to obtain a quote for repair for the camera claim and send this quote (via e-mail) to the other claim manager. I informed them that it may be a few weeks until I was able to obtain the quote for repair.
A couple of days later I e-mailed the purchase receipt for the ipod to the e-mail address provided and put the camera into the repair shop to obtain a quote for repair. Unfortunately they advised that this would take around 3 weeks.
On the 2nd of August I e-mailed the proof of purchase of my ipod to AAMI for processing of my claim.
About two weeks later I received 2 voicemails on my mobile asking me to call AAMI, then a couple of days later two letters through the post. Strange given that I had sent the details via e-mail and also had advised of the delay in receiving the quote for repair.
On the 3rd of September I received the quote for repair and e-mailed it through to the other claims manager. I heard nothing so on the 16th of September (6 weeks after my initial contact) I called AAMI to ask what was going on.
"We're waiting on your information Mr Reid" said the confused lady.
"But I sent it several weeks ago to the e-mail you provided" I said
"Oh because we are a phone based business we rely on you to call us up to tell us that you've sent the e-mail so we can check for it" said the lady, matter-of-factly.
At this point my head was filled with images of the 1950's - the last time any business on this planet was "phone based". At this point I also went on an irate diatribe about the benefits of process and basic workflow systems to which she replied impotently
"I'm very sorry Mr Reid but I can see your e-mail now, I'll just process that repair and we will send you the money".
"Can't you just refund it to the credit card you have on file for me or just process it as a credit on my account?" I said.
"No sorry Mr Reid we have to refund it as cash - can I have your bank details and that will be processed in 5-7 working days..."
So I did, but what about my other claim?
"Oh I'll just transfer you to the other account manager Mr Reid..." said she.
"But can't you just refund that along with the transaction you are about to process?" I said in amazement.
"No Mr Reid, I'm sorry but that's a different type of claim handled by a different area - I have to transfer you to your claim manager". And so she did.
"Hello this is AAMI, how can I help you?"
Cue repeat of previous long winded story. Needless to say she also was a convert to the new revolution in phone based businesses and had also chosen to ignore my e-mail until I called in an irate condition.
"I will process that for you now Mr Reid and someone from the store you bought it from will be contacting you within 5-7 working days" she said.
"What? Can't I just have a cash refund like the other claim I just made?" I spluttered.
"No I'm sorry Mr Reid, this is a different type of claim and we aren't allowed to provide you with cash - it has to be in the form of a voucher for the store you bought it from".
Eventually I was called by the store, was posted a voucher and the rest is history, but think of the pain involved for both sides:
Take the time and cost of two almost identical processes and the manual effort required and multiply this by the thousands of claims processed in a year and you quickly see millions of dollars going down the drain.
But here's how to fix it:
It's really not that hard or that complicated, but some people really have a talent for making it seem that way.
Cheers,
TPN
P.S. This is my last post until early 2011 - thanks for listening to me in 2010 and I wish you and your families a fat and happy Christmas and new year (I know mine will be)!!!
Fellow BPM blogger Adam Deane has just posted two articles on his blog discussing outside-in. Whilst I appreciate Adam's attempts to share new knowledge and keep an open mind to new ideas (something that the BP Trends process academic brigade could learn from him) there are some fallacies in his post that need some serious debunking.
Whilst I agree that outside-in is a philosophy, it is more than that and I understand Adam's frustration in not being able to get a hold of "a methodology". The simple fact of the matter is that there are methodologies to outside-in approaches. Most notably the CEM Method. However the CEM method is not entirely open - you have to attend a course to learn it rather than pick up a book and teach yourself - however I believe that this will change over time.
The other myth that needs to be debunked is that outside-in is about improving customer service. Whilst I'm not saying that in certain situations it can't improve customer service, the focus is on successful customer outcomes - delivering what customers really need.
The example that keeps being discussed is that of outside-in organisation Ryanair. Ryanair are regularly pounded in the UK media for their approach to customer service e.g. For recently attempting to charge customers to use toilets. Saying that, Ryanair remain remarkably successful - why is that? Ryanair look at the customer experience and they understand what their customer really needs - and very importantly, what type of customer they actually want flying in their planes - working class man with two kids who likes to drink and gamble. As such Ryanair makes a substantial amount of their revenue by selling booze and by supplying gambling facilities on planes. These revenue streams offset the price of airfares to give others a cheap means of flying. Did you ever imagine that you would receive a flight for free? Well that may happen if airlines such as Ryanair can make enough revenue from other parts of the customer experience.
Adam goes on to say:
"Not all of the organisation’s business processes are customer related. Some are internal processes, some are required by law, and some are interactions with internal systems".
I found this statement to be astonishing. So if an organisation lost all it's customers would those purely internal or "system" processes continue to function? - of course not! A classic example is the employee payroll process. Does it touch the customer? If you think inside-out you'd say no. But the fact of the matter is that the reason that the payroll process is in place is so employees get paid - if they don't get paid they won't work as they'll leave to go elsewhere, and without employees their roles can't be performed and the company cannot function, and if the company cannot function, it cannot serve it's customers with products or services.
If you want to destroy any credibility that you have as a process professional, just keep saying that there are processes that exist in organisations that are not customer related - because it's complete and utter nonsense. I do have to agree, though with Adam's comment regarding regulatory processes - to an extent. Sometimes organizations have to meet regulatory requirements, but I'd also add that these regulatory requirements are often in place to protect customers. With greater customer centricity organizations would be better placed to "do the right thing" and avoid the regulatory overlords - but I do admit that it is something where outside-in is somewhat restricted.
If you are ever in doubt as to why a particular process exists in your organization I'd recommend that you listen to the wise words of Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi who once said:
"A customer is the most important visitor on our premises. he is not dependent on us. We are dependent on him. He is not an interruption in our work. He is the purpose of it. He is not an outsider in our business. He is part of it. We are not doing him a favor by serving him. He is doing us a favor by giving us an opportunity to do so."
I rest my case.
Cheers, TPN
Written by the BP Group's Charles Bennett, this is a nice little introduction into outside-in process design and the CEM Method.
My presentation from the BP Group Sydney Sundowner a couple of weeks ago. Here I discuss some of my recent experiences with using outside-in process design at two very different clients.
- TPN
Craig Reid is known throughout the business world as "The Process Ninja". He is a passionate advocate of business process management.
