The Sacred Cows of Roles, Process and Metrics

A View on Sacred Cows

There has long been some academic argument, theoretical disconnect and the occasional raised tension between the dedicated followers of business intelligence /performance management (BI) and those that stand behind business process management (BPM).

KPI and data evangelists sometimes view process advocates as bureaucrats no longer tuned to the dynamics of changing businesses, and are now more interested in outcomes than processes.

Meanwhile, the process faithful have worked incrementally and under a long-held premise that 'where business/technology initiatives fail, there’s normally a clumsy process to blame'.

Inside Process Initiatives
By their very nature, inside process initiatives draw little attention, being as they are usually secretive. The greater effect of business process outsourcing (BPO) has already shifted workforces for scale.

What started with call centre outsourcing, sooner or later touched internal departments for travel, payroll, time and expense, software development/maintenance and even CRM or other customer-facing applications.

Process and Data Converge

In the last few years we’ve seen the process and data worlds merge to the point where process conference speakers actually discuss business intelligence and vice versa. It’s that tentative connection of processes and KPIs (or service levels for BPO providers) that has led to some recent rationalising thoughts on soft skills and the beginning of what might someday become a wider and mor comprehensive use of on-demand employment.

Executive Ambitions and Goals

We have been learning about executive ambitions and goals inside global corporations. These normally culminate in the establishment of internal priorities for employees and the outsourcing of everything else. We have to be more thoughtful now and need to consider that data centre managed service offerings are replacing not only IT infrastructure, but also their discrete IT functions.

Where is this leading?
Well, as service based infrastructure and process providers move deeper up and into the enterprise, old roles are slowly moving towards silo containment and tiers of competence. This leads more and more towards the virtual external providers whose value has becomes more nad more commoditised over time.

Driving or Steering SMEs
This use of comoditised outsourced suppliers is what is driving or steering small and mid-sized organisations and feed the continuous discussions to appraise and determine if even key undertakings like business intelligence are effectively outsourced to service providers.

Corporations' Citadel Approach

The larger corporations are not going to be outsourcing business intelligence or even key data functions anytime soon. Having said this, the previous years of rapid organic growth has created a jumble of capital assets, business architecture and roles in enterprises, which are becoming less controllable and therefore less defensible to maintain in-house.

Proven Competency
If you accept that BPO vendors have demonstrated and proven their competency, it may be more likely that core competencies will be begrudgingly and tentatively handed over to process owners inside the organisation, to manage internal and external resources.

Controlled Handover
This handover is already happening in a controlled way at companies like HP, Ford and Cisco. We already have people managing this transition, in the form of project and program managers, whose roles are enjoying elevated backing and status.

The Future

There is still some work to be done but there is good reason to believe that, improved operational metrics, performance management and business intelligence, will bring with it the mover and shakers of the process and on-demand movements. We just have to keep to the path, fight the fight and hold the faith.

Why Projects are Failing

Warning!
Projects can go up as well as done, especially in the current economic storm.
Project management has been a big part of my business management career for the last 35 years. I attended my first course in project management in the early ‘70s. Since then I have accrued a large collection of practical theories that I would like to share, starting here with the bogey man of project management, Project Failure, how to avoid it.

GOAL!
Like all good team managers or players; Start by considering the goals!
Projects have 3 basic criteria by which they are measured. They are deemed to have failed if they do not meet the following simple success criteria:
• Deliver project within planned timelines – TIME
• Deliver project as per forecast budget – MONEY
• Delivering planned results – BUSINESS BENEFITS

Only around 30% of projects achieve all three facets of the Golden Triangle, especially the last one; Business Benefits, the project ROI, the business case justification, call it what you will.

Projects Delivered or abandoned?
Partly successful projects are deemed to be ‘delivered’, even if they fail on one or more of these criteria. According to Gartner this can account for 30% of projects. They also believe that 15% are wisely cancelled before the end, having failed outright to meet their original criteria. I can only surmise that this last group did not seek expert PM rescue advice to determine if they could pull it back from the brink or limit the damage. Instead, we will assume that these projects had a high certainty or potential for failure.

Thus, it raises the questions;

• Were they doomed from the start
• Did they lose direction or support on the way
• Were they really viable and therefore saveable
• Others. Discuss!
  

Very few projects that are struggling have the reporting visibility that allows executive management the knowledge and insight to determine their real status. There is a conspiracy of silence and misinformation that prevails, along with the belief that all is well, right up until they crash into the buffers. So, for the 15% of projects that fail, let us speculate that it should have been clear for some time that they were struggling and needed to be euthanised, if only we had known earlier. Discuss!

Mid Zone muddle
With around 30% of projects succeeding and 15% failing, we need to consider the 55% remaining projects in the mid zone, struggling for a foothold in the ‘shallows’ and ‘shifting sands’ between success and failure. Do these projects ‘partly succeed’ or ‘partly fail’? Are they caught up in some ‘timeless whirlpool’ that cycles them, infinitely? Clearly, not. They would run out of money, time or support for never to be achieved benefits. If we want to draw sensible conclusions from statistics, we need more accurate reporting methods, with more precise detail and granularity. Build in tighter controls. Build a better dashboard. Lead this ship of lost souls out of the doldrums.

Choose Success or Failure?
Moving on, let’s get back to the big fight; Success v Failure. The first question to be considered is; Should we be,

1. Considering the key factors leading to success or the risk of success or;
   
2. Examining the sources of and risk of failure?
   

They are linked, of course but one is intrinsically passive and reactive, whereas the other is more proactive. In Project Management and in business today, we need strong proactive project management resources that encourage, understand and support, the risk of success and can quickly recognise the need to mitigate away from failure.

In the latter stages of a project, this turnaround from imminent failure to possible success, can be achieved by bringing in an experienced rescue PM. They will quickly assess the damage, examine the mitigation potential and plot a course out of the swamp.

How? Simply through the disciplined use of proactive PM methodology and tools, plus the implementation and positive use of strong Risk management approaches. Oh Yes! and the benefit of decades of PM experience. Call me sooner than later.

Remember: Charismatic figureheads need to be ahead of the crowd! AND the crowd need to be behind them, all the way! (not as easy as it sounds)