{"id":1005,"date":"2019-12-12T20:21:36","date_gmt":"2019-12-12T20:21:36","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/?p=1005"},"modified":"2019-12-12T20:21:47","modified_gmt":"2019-12-12T20:21:47","slug":"more-process-doesnt-help","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/2019\/12\/12\/more-process-doesnt-help\/","title":{"rendered":"More process doesn\u2019t help"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"
Image by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Over the last weeks, I\u2019ve been to three different conferences where I heard presentations that were variations on a common theme: if we would just add more structure and more process to the topic at hand, if we would only introduce more steps, more checkpoints, involve more people, and so on, then all the problems we\u2019re experiencing with this product road-mapping, these innovation initiatives, these business development activities, would magically disappear.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although most would agree that this is obviously wrong, the fact is \nthat in many companies, universities and government institutions, this \nis exactly what happens. The organization experiences some kind of \nproblem, perhaps even one that may be exposed in the media and makes \nmanagement look bad, resulting in a top-down order to \u201cfix it\u201d. The \nsubsequent process is obvious for those that have been part of it. \nFirst, there\u2019s an activity to describe the process that led up to the \nissue surfacing. This is followed by a review of all the actions and \nother factors, with the intent of identifying what went wrong. Finally, a\n new process is introduced or an existing process is updated to address \nthe perceived limitations, holes or weaknesses in the current way of \nworking.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Once introduced, the next step is to ensure enforcement of the new \nway of working. Obviously, the new or updated process adds overhead and \nmakes it more difficult to perform the tasks efficiently. So, before you\n jump the gun and start to work on further complicating the existing \nprocesses in the organization, there are five factors I\u2019d like you to \nconsider.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

First, one of the concerns that many ignore, but that\u2019s obvious when \nyou think about it, is that the future is fundamentally unknowable. \nLooking back, we have full knowledge of what has happened. Consequently,\n it\u2019s obvious what the optimal way to address an issue would have been. \nHowever, when standing at the point when a decision needs to be taken, \nwe\u2019re doing so with significant uncertainty about the implications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Second, depending on the organizational culture, it may be very \ndifficult to point out that individuals have acted out of a fundamental \nlack of competence. It\u2019s important to realize that incompetence cannot \nbe cured by more process. Incompetence requires educating people or, if \nthat proves unfeasible, replacing individuals with new people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Third, the more process is introduced and the more enforcement of \nprocess takes place, the more people focus their attention on correctly \nfollowing the process, rather than focusing on accomplishing the desired\n outcome. This leads to a fundamental lack of accountability in the \norganization, with everyone hiding behind having followed the process \nand failing to take responsibility for the desired results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Fourth, too much process can cause more problems than it solves. As \nprocesses are created to be repeatable and to apply to a large variety \nof different situations, an overly detailed process definition is, by \ndefinition, ineffective in the majority of situations. Especially in \norganizations that place high value on following due process, the \ninefficiencies and harm done by blindly following process can become \nstaggering, potentially even to the point of companies being disrupted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Finally, in most organizations that I work with, processes and \nmethods are developed by people that are outside the arena, meaning that\n they won\u2019t be affected by the implications of the process and method \ndefinitions. Although not actually performing the job, there\u2019s a strong \ntendency to act as \u201cMonday morning quarterbacks\u201d, a reference to the \nMonday watercooler meetings in especially US companies where the flaws \nof a team\u2019s quarterback are discussed. The interesting thing is that the\n criticism tends to come from people that would never ever qualify as \nquarterbacks themselves.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Concluding, before you fall into the \u2018more process\u2019 trap, please ask yourself whether it would help to predict the future better, whether your people perhaps lack competence, whether you promote accountability, whether the root cause is perhaps too much process and whether you\u2019re listening to so-called experts that don\u2019t actually have a sufficient understanding of the situation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To get more insights earlier, sign up for my newsletter at <\/em>jan@janbosch.com<\/em><\/a> or follow me on<\/em> janbosch.com\/blog<\/em><\/a>, LinkedIn (<\/em>linkedin.com\/in\/janbosch<\/em><\/a>) or Twitter (<\/em>@JanBosch<\/em><\/a>).<\/em> <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Over the last weeks, I\u2019ve been to three different conferences where I heard presentations that were variations on a common theme: if we would just add more structure and more process to the topic at hand, if we would only introduce more steps, more checkpoints, involve more people, and so on, then all the problems … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"generate_page_header":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[8,10],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1005"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1005"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1005\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1007,"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1005\/revisions\/1007"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1005"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1005"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/janbosch.com\/blog\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1005"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}