what 

happens if we type these here

Tackling Operational Deficiencies

Looking to boost the bottom line? While most technical consulting and design firm managers focus on increasing utilization, the best potential for improving performance is through greater efficiency. Let's face it; there is only so much you can do to raise utilization, and some efforts can unwittingly produce negative impacts (like fostering an environment where time charges are overstated).

By contrast, there are countless opportunities to reduce the inefficiencies in how we work. I have yet to conduct an operational assessment where this wasn't true—even for the best performing companies. Better still, correcting most of these deficiencies requires relatively simple fixes, if only you can get managers and employees to buy into the changes.

Securing buy-in is the primary reason that I endorse a participatory process in attacking operational inefficiencies. People are more inclined to "get with the program" if they helped develop it. Getting employees involved also helps you more accurately identify the root causes of the shortcomings that exist, as well as the solutions that are likely to work.

The Genesis of Change

You know in advance that some changes will be involved, and change is always difficult. So how do you get your employees to do things differently? The figure below illustrates the primary elements involved in individual change.

u Perceptions. This is how people see things. It matters little what the truth of the situation is (if that can be determined); our actions are driven by what we perceive it to be. Therefore the first step in addressing operational deficiencies is to identify employee perceptions of the issues. Then as you move to implementing solutions, you will likely have to work on changing some perceptions in your organization.

u Attitudes. This is how people feel about things. Changed attitudes are critical to changed behaviors. People act on how they feel. In every company that I work for, there are always a few "bad attitudes" that impede the desired changes. Understandably, the goal emerges to try to change those attitudes. But I doubt that we can directly change anyone's attitude. They must do that. What we can influence is how they perceive things.

u Behaviors. Ultimately, operational improvements require behavior change. Sometimes managers try to enforce such changes by making mandates and threats. This approach may work in the short term, but the results never last. Any enduring behavior changes will involve corresponding changes in perceptions and attitudes. The process described below is designed to effect change in this way: From perception to attitude to behavior.

Characterizing the Problems

I am typically hired by senior managers who will describe to me the problems as they see them. No offense to my clients, but I've found that management is usually an unreliable source in characterizing the root causes of operational deficiencies. It's not necessarily their fault. But managers are often detached from how most of their employees really see and feel about the issues.

Even if they were to ask, they may not get a completely honest answer. For one thing, management is often perceived to be a big part of the problem. The best approach is to get an objective third party to conduct the assessment and facilitate the development of improvements. Following is a basic process that I've used with success:

u Communicate the need for change. Don't make the mistake of bringing in an outside party and launching into an assessment until you've secured buy-in from your employees. They should understand the issues and the implications, and should generally agree that something needs to be done. Failing to do this beforehand means that the assessment is likely to be viewed with either apprehension or skepticism, or both. It's particularly important to gain support from any parties who will be targeted in the assessment (for example, from project managers if looking at project management issues or from the marketing department if looking at business development). For more advice on communicating change, read this article.

u Talk first to small groups of peers. This can be representative groups or literally everyone. I like to start at the "bottom" of the organization, with administrative personnel, and work my way up to senior management. The focus of these first sessions is identifying the issues. The key question: Where are our best opportunities to improve how we work? Try to keep the discussion constructive and not let it turn into a gripe session. I recommend groups of no more than 15 people, with sessions limited to one hour.

Why groups of peers? People are more likely to talk about problems if their superiors are not present. Peers are also more likely to see the issues similarly, so that consensus is easier to reach. I prefer "working up the organization" because many problems work down the organization—from management to staff. This enables me to first view the impacts of operational deficiencies from the perspective of those typically most impacted by them (or at least those who have the least control over those impacts). Then I can better frame the questions on the issues when meeting with managers later in the day.

u Look for root causes. Simply identifying the problems isn't enough. You need to understand why they exist, because this is where solutions begin to take shape. One thing I've learned in meeting with peer groups is while most everyone recognizes the same issues, people at different levels can see the causes much differently. Effective solutions must respond to these differences in perception.

u Summarize your findings. You are likely to end up with a long list of issues (remember, I said their are countless opportunities for improvement!). Before proceeding to the next step, you must narrow the field. I look for trends. What issues came up most often? Where is there more agreement? Where was there more emotion evident? These are the issues to carry forward into the solution-development phase of the process.

Identifying Solutions

The problem definition phase of this process typically takes a full day. The next day, you begin working together to determine how to tackle the issues discussed in day one:

u Meet in cross-functional groups. Having identified the issues in groups of peers, it's now time to work in mixed groups to define solutions. Plan on the same number of small groups, now reconstituted, for a second round of one-hour sessions. Start each session by reviewing the findings of the first day. Suggest a short list to work on, seeking agreement from the group. Then brainstorm strategies for addressing those prioritized issues.

To keep the sessions productive, I recommend one of two possible approaches: (1) Let each group work with a different issue or (2), if there are only one or two issues, have each subsequent group refine the strategies developed by the previous groups.

u Summarize discussions and draft preliminary action plan. Once the facilitator has met with all groups, he or she should synthesize the information into a preliminary action plan. You might want a few employees who participated in the previous sessions to help in this effort. Be sure to define specific actions, responsible individuals, and milestones. If more work is needed to craft a feasible plan, assign a committee to finish the process.

u Present the plan to staff and seek their endorsement. This is usually fairly straightforward since people were involved in developing the plan. But this is another test of commitment, as well as an opportunity to do a little more fine tuning on the plan if needed. 

Obviously, the process is more complicated than simply going through the steps described here. But this lays out a proven template for assessing your operational deficiencies and defining solutions that can be successfully implemented.

Copyright © 2004, The Business Edge, all rights reserved

Home    |    Experience    |    Articles    |    Links    |    Contact