Site management
Search

Powered by Squarespace
Categories
Recent blog posts
sizzle.jpgThe Sizzle is our blog - observations, thoughts and snippets related to quality, delivery and cost in enterprises; for a profile of the author go here
Tuesday
08Dec2009

grand plans vs quick wins

DateTuesday, December 8, 2009 at 02:44PM

The time-frame for projects is, of course, dependent on scope (and budget and quality) but it is not uncommon for projects to require decision trade-offs between large, long term gains and smaller faster fixes, or quick wins.  There is no magic formula on the balance to strike, and certainly there are many examples where either:

  1. grand plans suffer from changing context, flagging confidence, shifting sponsor support, or increasing project risks and fail to deliver on expectations, while immediate issues have gone unaddressed; 
  2. quick wins "do it fast but don't do it right" - applying band-aid solutions to symptomatic problems while causal factors continue and ultimately lead to strategic failures.

These extremes, however, suggest oversimplification in the way scope meets strategy - a cause of tension in development projects. 

The trick is to assess potential deliverables on a roadmap against the benefits they offer and to tailor and prioritise the work programme accordingly. In principle, even "strategic solutions" should show reviewable deliverables in 6 -12 weeks and a working iterations in 18-24 weeks. Appropriately prioritised, these small steps should have big impacts while also progressing the strategic plan.

A well thought-out plan will consider time-to benefit, front-loading, and crawl-walk-run-lead aspects but also note that, in some cases (e.g. softening markets) even a delay may be the most economic option.

Maybe its about reaching for the low-hanging fruit, while ensuring you're at the right tree.

AuthorTony | | | | CommentPost a Comment
Monday
16Nov2009

passion as channelled emotion

DateMonday, November 16, 2009 at 09:32AM

One irony in modern business theory is how we are encouraged to be purely rational operators and yet also encouraged to be passionate about our brand. Rationality makes for more collective productivity as all elements of the business machine can be better controlled and directed.  Passion is an emotional response to challenge - a way to harness and focus powerful and positive human instincts. The truth is you need both to various degrees and where you strike the balance depends on your business reality.  If your industry is mature and your model built on predictable efficiency, then you may feel less need for passion and greater need for productivity. But if your business is in a more disrupted space and you are competing for position, passion can be the X factor that sparks creative solutions and drives your team to win.

We need to acknowledge that business is made of people and, not only is it the talents of passionate individuals that fuel change, but it is emotional appeal that binds the rational elements of our brands into customer winning formulas. Sure, uncontrolled emotions can drain and misdirect a business, but emotions channelled toward business ends as passion can be the secret to success and achievement of purpose.

AuthorTony | | | | CommentPost a Comment
Tuesday
20Oct2009

how to make change happen

DateTuesday, October 20, 2009 at 10:45AM

If you are frustrated trying to make change happen in your organisation, or for that matter, your life, take a moment to think about the overall process and what it takes to start. A useful framework is the "Transtheoretical Model" for understanding and affecting behavioural change in a social marketing context. Here action is preceded by pre-contemplation (where the change is not yet considered i.e. ignorance is bliss), then contemplation (where people sit on the fence with ambivalence), then preparation (where people begin to test the waters).  

To help move their change along then, you can try validating people's lack of readiness and decision ownership and encourage re-evaluation of the status quo, its inherent risks, and the pros and cons of change. As people get their heads around it, promote the positive outcomes of the change and then break it down to small initial steps. Note also, that change requires its resistance (R) (or cost) be overcome by the degree of dissatisfaction (D) with how things are, the strength of vision (V) of what is possible and clear first steps (F).  This is Gleicher's Formula: D.V.F>R. Add pragmatism to your passion and you may just accelerate the tipping point for improvement.

AuthorTony | | | | Comments Off
Tuesday
29Sep2009

thinking backwards

DateTuesday, September 29, 2009 at 09:09AM

Many processes and activities seem to begin in a logical place: with what you have. In document automation, systems will typically pull material from data and content stores and manipulate them into a coherent flow and relevant context. This is how contract or bid building systems usually work - selecting paragraphs from libraries of copy and stringing them together for editing and combining with entered words. The issue this can create, however, is chunky or blocky content that risks losing editorial consistency at best and risks looking ugly and inaccessible at worst.  Since Stephen Covey coined the mantra "start with the end in mind", many people have emphasised the benefits of outcome or output oriented processes: such as in business planning, market research, or deployment projects. The approach applies to document automation as much as anything. Important relationship-defining documents are more than content collections - they are devices for cementing expectations as well as demonstrations of how parties will communicate in a relationship. Whether it be a sales proposal or a procurement contract, it must be fiercely reader-oriented. To do that, it's design should start with the desired reader experience and outcome before populating pages with rules-based words.

AuthorTony | | | | Comments Off
Tuesday
25Aug2009

collaboration - the hero sum game

DateTuesday, August 25, 2009 at 11:11AM

Collaboration has always been a part of business models in one form or another, but today more than ever organisations are working together to achieve a common end where they may not otherwise connect. Communications technologies have certainly helped but recent trends in social networking, portal and web-based process automation technologies have combined to define a new era for collaboration. Enterprise 2.0 is unlikely to ever resemble a ubiquitous, open Lotus Notes but there are huge opportunities for real-time efficiency gains where like-minded entities can share business requirements in collaboration platforms. Perhaps the public sector (Government 2.0) has the best opportunity to do this where agencies already share owners, compliance frameworks, and even outcomes sought. Centres of excellence can lead the way as hero agencies hardening new solutions that scale and accommodate their peers. Technology vendors need to also embrace this trend with new, even integrated, models that enable entities to share costs and risks as well as gains. This is the hero sum game.

AuthorTony | | | | Comments Off
Page 1 2 3 4 5 ... 41 Next 5 Entries ยป