This is the inherent difficulty when attempting to resolve a
problem in an existing process: is it necessary to completely replace an
existing solution with something new, or merely to make a few minor adjustments
to an otherwise perfect existing solution?
The way to settle the dispute between innovators and optimizers exists,
though it is very much neglected: as-is analysis.
The as-is analysis considers the present solution,
acknowledging that it was put in place to solve a problem, and conceding that
the present system was designed by people who were intelligent and insightful –
but that even the most intelligent and insightful people make mistakes that
lead to failure or partial success and it is possible for the people presently
involved, equally intelligent and insightful, to find a way to improve. Said another way, as-is analyst answers
some basic questions:
- What was the existing solution instituted to accomplish?
- Are those goals (still) valid and worthwhile?
- Is the existing solution being implemented as designed?
- Is the existing solution effective in accomplishing its goal?
- Is the existing solution efficient in accomplishing its goal?
The answers to these questions help define the scope of the
present effort: to reinforce existing solutions, optimize them, replace them
with something innovative, or leave it alone?
It’s an important decision to make to put sufficient but not superfluous
effort into the effort.
If the goals are no longer valid or worthwhile, then the
solution should be to desist and destroy the processes – they are merely
rituals that likely render no benefit and entail expense or inefficiency.
If the existing solution is not being implemented as
designed, then reinforcement is necessary, as the evidence does not warrant
changing or replacing it. If it can be
done properly, it may work.
If the existing solution is not effective in accomplishing its
goal, the innovation is needed to replace it with an entirely new solution that
will be more effective.
And if the existing solution is effective but inefficient,
optimization is necessary because the solution is valid, but adjustments are
necessary to improve upon it (get greater results with less effort/expense).
My sense is that a though as-is analysis is seldom done,
particularly when there is a proposed replacement for an existing solution that
has generated great enthusiasm, or a significant amount of resentment or
dislike for the existing solution.
These are more psychological or political factors that have nothing to
do with functional improvements.
No comments:
Post a Comment