The Process Ninja

Linking Process, Procedures & Business Requirements to Successful Customer Outcomes - a Business Analyst Guide

"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

Whitepaper: Customer Experience Management & Continuous Improvement Program

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

Process Black Holes

We've all experienced them. Customers loathe them. Companies don't realise they exist. They suck good sentiment out of your customers and suck money out of your company coffers. I call them "Process Black Holes".

Process black holes are where a process blackspot occurs where one of two things happens:

1. The process becomes like a pass the parcel game where the passing never stops. It goes round and round passing the piece of work between multiple teams utilising company time and money until the customer gives up (and takes their business elsewhere) or...
2. The process becomes like a magicians act - POOF! It's gone. Unresolved, uncontactable, unknown - except to your customers - who are building up into a frenzy of discontent. "They're USELESS!" you hear customers say - and they are right. My recent experience with AAMI is a classic example of this.

Process black holes exist because companies don't understand their processes, don't have visibility and dare I say it "management"  of their processes. They are more prevalent in organisations where there are processes that cross more functions (hence more breakpoints) - more opportunities for the process to fail.

So what can we do to rid our organisations of Process Black Holes?

1. Understand where breakpoints exist (visibility of process)
2. Eliminate or improve them (redesign functional teams, automate where possible)
3. Align processes to the customer (eliminate unnecessary activities)
4. Measure process failure - where are the pain points?
5. Continually improve - track successes, cost savings and improvement for the customer

Listen to your customers. Listen to your employees. Close those black holes.

Cheers,

TPN

CEM Method - An Introduction to Customer Centric Process Design

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

Do Your Processes Wear Brown Cardigans?

I live my life in a constant state of battle. It's a battle against blandness, it's a battle against the kind of people who Billy Connolly would describe as "the beigeists" - the brown cardigan brigade. When it comes to process we often battle against "the beigeists" who are scared of change, who say "that's the way we do it around here", who say "no, it can't be done".

It can be a tiring battle, but it's a battle, which, as process people we need to fight - it's our job. It's our job to challenge when no-one else dares. It's our job to push change when everyone else is scared. It's our job to innovate where others prefer the status quo. It's our job to take risks when others are afraid to fail.

If we choose not to do these things, we end up creating processes in brown cardigans - bland, boring, stagnant, ineffective.

I'll end this post with a comment from Theodore Roosevelt, who put it much better than I will ever be able to:

“Far better is it to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checked by failure...than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in a gray twilight that knows not victory nor defeat.”

'Till next time, keep daring to do mighty things...

- TPN

Of Garbage Trucks and Process Bubbles

This morning, as I drove into the street where I park my car, I was faced with a large garbage truck blocking the street (and of course, as bin trucks are magically immune to the rules of the road, he was driving the wrong way down a one-way street). Therefore I was forced to sit stationary with my indicator on in a very busy Sydney CBD street.

Behind me, cars slowly started to back up with their indicators on. Then cars coming round the corner who wanted to go straight on got stuck in the queue. The first car behind me could see the garbage truck blocking the street, but the other cars behind me could not. It was only a matter of time before the horns started honking (about 30 seconds to be precise since Sydney drivers are not known for their patience). Who was this idiot sitting in a busy street with his indicator on for no reason? Why was he blocking the road!!!?

Thankfully, across the road from me, a van full of electricians were watching from a distance - they could see the whole line of cars and the garbage truck blocking the road. So when the cars further down the line started honking their horns they started to shout and gesticulate towards the cars indicating that there was a blockage in the street. The horns stopped honking, the bin truck eventually emerged and everyone was happy again.

The same thing happens with process - often those performing the work are living in process bubbles - they see immediately what is in front of them, but they don't see what is happening before or after them in the process. So if something goes wrong they don't have the visibility of what has gone wrong and they have no idea how to fix it. But, like our friend the electrician who can see the whole process unfolding, if we take a holistic view of the process we can not only see where the pain points are occurring, but we can communicate our message across all workers in the process.

Standing back and looking at process in its entirety is not some self-indulgent, navel gazing exercise. By the nature of functional work, workers are primarily interested in getting their piece of work done (that's why they studied so hard at the university of blah de blah - so they could sit and do that particular work for the next 45 years!) But doing work and doing it well doesn't necessarily equate to good process - it's not about doing things right, it's about doing the right things.

This is why looking at the process in its entirety (the customer experience) is so essential and why it needs to be the focus of the C-level. Otherwise we all end up honking our horns for no good reason at all.

Cheers,

TPN

Manual Vs Automated Processes - Finding The Magic

A comment by Nimbus CEO Ian Gotts on my last blog "A Coffee Procedure" struck a chord with me:

"Great looking coffee. So you have described a process. One you want repeated accurately, one that would benefit from certain steps have photos or videos, but one you cannot automate.

That is why Nimbus Control exists. 80% of corporate processes are like this.

So to those who say BPM=automation, now I'd say its time to wake and smell the coffee"

In our rush to automate business process its sometimes easy to forget that work revolves around those funny things called "people". There seems to be a tendency to make the assumption that almost anything can be automated - but it can't. If we look at the complexity of everyday work and the decision making involved (never minding the social interaction glue that makes the business world revolve), automation is just a small part of making process work.

I believe that good process automates where possible as long as there is no negative impact to the customer experience. To me, process is the mechanism that links tasks together - it then guides the worker to complete the tasks in the best manner possible.  

Process isn't all about software, it's about putting practices in place that  enable the outcomes we want for our customers. Think about the millions of small businesses that do not have the luxury of software tools - they can still benefit from robust processes and procedures (I know because my cafe did!)

So when you become consumed by your quest to automate every process and every task you see, stop for a moment and consider:

• Do I need to automate the task, or the links between the tasks?
• Will automation negatively impact the customer outcome?
• Should I be telling or guiding the user?

There is a happy medium between manual and automated tasks in every business, and if you get that balance right that's when the magic starts to happen.

Cheers,

TPN

Self Service Portals - How to Get it Right or How to Get it Wrong

Maybe I'm just weird, or maybe it's my age, or maybe it's because I'm a man, but if there is the option of avoiding human interaction with a customer service person I will take that option every time.

It's more than likely due to my lack of patience with badly design IVR systems that send me around in loops then put me through to a queue which keeps me on hold for 20 minutes or my lack of faith in company contact forms and email addresses which disappear into black holes. But give me a self service customer portal and I'll be as happy as Larry - if it's done right.

Self service is all the rage - who would have thought 30 years ago we'd be checking into airlines ourselves? 50 years ago no-one thought we'd be pumping our own petrol! But today we are "outsourcing to the customer" whatever we can - and it makes sense:

• The company saves money by reducing reliance on staff
• The customer feels more "in control"
• The customer does not have to wait in queues

Of course the company foots the bill for the development of the customer portal, but if done right customer portals can be a huge money saver whilst simultaneously improving the customer's experience (the moment of truth). But on the flip-side, if done badly, customer portals can generate more harm than good, generating increased calls from angry customers and damaging the company's image.

Here's a couple of examples of good and bad customer portals:

The Good - Alphera

Alphera is the finance arm of BMW so you'd expect that their portal would be as good as their cars - and it is! Here's why:

Easy login with well designed screen:

Upon login there is a well designed screen with everything in one place. From here I can press on any of the large buttons to access the information I require:

 

There are also helpful links which will take me to some of the most common tasks.

What sets the Alphera website above others is the ability to update information i.e. rather than being a static portal. I can update my personal details, bank details and set up payment reminders. I have access to every piece of information I require and if my details change there is no need to contact the company by any other means. I have total control.

On the contrary, let's have a look at what I call the "lipstick on the pig portal" - the kind of half-baked portal the world can do wiothout:

The Bad - Optus

After I login I see a screen with my different services:

There is adrop-down which gives me four options:

1. Move house (how often does anyone do this?)
2. View my usage
3. Change service ownership
4. View my bills

Numbers 1&3 direct me to download a form that I need to complete and post - hardly an online portal! 

Number 2 links to another screen where I have to look at services individually (not in one). I click on my broadband service and I get a blank page with an error message. Lovely.

So what can I do? I can view my bills in PDF format and I can view usage on one of my services. View being the operative word: I can't update anything, can't change or cancel my service or buy any additional services. In short I have a limited, static service - lipstick on the pig. My only option if I want to do anything requiring some form of update is to call that hideous IVR and sit in a queue for 20 minutes (because I know Optus don't respond to emails or contact forms!) And at the end of my contract...I take my business elsewhere...

With customer portals we have a huge opportunity to improve the customer experience and to save money - they can even be revenue producing if done properly. But if you don't take the time (and let's be honest, money) required to get it right you may as well not bother.

Cheers,

TPN

The Trouble With Outside-in

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

Can Process Save the Planet?

I'm interested in sustainability, but I'm even more interested in the linkage between sustainability and process. I would imagine that sustainability is to most process people a matter of common sense, and what many of us have been practising for years. It's all about production without the pain.

So here we are in the 21st Century and Mr Gore has informed us about what we've done wrong - namely belching too much carbon into the atmosphere. So we need to change the process (rapidly) to stop the effects. To do this there are both short and long term improvements that can be made - let's look at those:

Short-term: Reduce the amount of power we use. 

Ok, so this is a simple, quick fix, right? The less power we use, the less carbon we produce. All it relies upon is to change people's habits to reduce power consumption and wastage. For example, I should now turn off all my devices that have standby modes off at the wall socket when not in use, turn my fridge up to 4c and recycle as many products as possible.

But I'm a lazy human being. I don't really want to spend 10 minutes every day going around switching sockets on and off. I like the soft drinks in my fridge to be icey cold and I question whether my recycling has any effect if I have to rinse out all the bottles and cans with hot water (which uses power). In short, habits are hard to change and people will always gravitate to what is simplest and easiest for them. But fundamentally all of these improvements are fixing the effect, not the cause.

Long-term: Fix the cause. 

If we knew that all of the power we used was clean and did not damage the planet, we wouldn't need to worry about the difficult process of changing people's behaviour - one of the hardest things to do. If we used clean sources of power such as wind and water none of this would be necessary.

The Problem

But the problem remains the upfront cost of building wind and water turbines, of giant fields of solar panels and the like.  Much like bringing BPM into an organisation, we know it's the right thing to do, but when it comes to signing the cheque the powers that be stick their heads in the sand and pretend that everything is all right. Instead they invest in piecemeal solutions that continue to provide some benefit, but which fall well short of the true gains that could be made by fixing the cause and not the effect.

Let's hope that our politicians and corporations can make the right decisions - or the price of fixing the effect and not the cause may be our children's future.