Anyone who has worked with a Failure Mode Effects Analysis knows that the more complex that a process or product is...the higher the probability that a failure can occur...
I also think that anyone with common sense could come to the same conclusion without this utterly grueling analysis...
********************************************
If one looks deeper into the prior two sentences, there is an interesting parallel to be made with 21st century process improvement methodologies...
Did you see it?
The more complex a process...the higher the risk of failure...
********************************************
I have had an interesting journey through the process improvement world...
I have been involved in my share of deployments that required extremely complex methodologies...
Other deployments were stayed focused on the basics and were very simple and straight-forward...
My "M.O." has always been to challenge the reason for every deliverable within a methodology...and the value of each towards the expected deliverable...
I focused on the goals and the expected results...rather than doing things that were inserted for the sake of someone's fragile idiosyncrasies or need for control...at the cost of the project...
*********************************************
In the perfect world of process improvement the most efficient methodology would consist of two steps...
1 - a clear problem/goal statement
2 - The solution
If a methodology could go from #1 to #2...it would be awesome...
From Problem to Solution...What more do we need?
Heck we need to do some work!
We need to show them that we are earning our keep...
We need to show them that we are technical specialists...
We need to show them that they can't do it themselves and ensure our job security...
But wait...
That's easy!
Let's add some steps (deliverables)
STOP! What did we conclude about complexity and intentionally adding it earlier?
As we add additional steps within a product, process or methodology...the higher the probability of failure!
Don't get me wrong...
I recognize the argument that each additional deliverable contributes to the process and helps ensure that the methodology is successful...
When is enough...ENOUGH?
But let's use common sense, logic...and our FMEA...
Each deliverable adds risk...that can only be averted with additional controls!
Did you notice?
Each deliverable actually does not increase complexity by a factor of 1X but by 2X!
Why?
Each deliverable requires control!
An additional step...or worse...a series of steps...A PROCESS!
*********************************************
As Process Improvement Specialists...we need to seek SIMPLICITY rather than complexity
Why?
Simplicity reduces risk and increases the probability of success...
The Cii's mission is about making meaning and significant positive differences...
Delivering results with a reduced RISK...is what we should strive for...
*********************************************
Let's take a brief editorial diversion...
Beyond responding to the paradigm that complexity is required to ensure success...or...
It creates a conundrum...a "Catch 21"
"Darned if you do and darned if you don't"
That each step is a required component in the recipe...
Why would someone build a complex methodology?
Complex methodologies are IMPRESSIVE
They inherently have marketing potential...
Complex methodologies are safe...because only a select few totally understand them...
From a practical standpoint...there is a value...
I believe that the steps are added to build "trust"
The Process Improvement methodologies add steps to ensure that the recommended solution can be trusted...
"Statistically connected or proven"
"Graphically or visually represented"
What else can you add to this list?
Did you get my point?
Many steps are there because we are not trusted!
We are required to add steps because of our own performance...or those of our predecessors...
*********************************************
Over time...I saw that "The Answers are out there..."
From this came my methodology which I called "solution-based" problem solving...
It is not unlike TRIZ...which I believe is "halfway there..."
The premise with TRIZ is that there are VERY FEW unique an innovative solutions and that most can be categorized into 30 to 40 groups...
TRIZ falls short with the need for creative application of the solution set to the specific need...
The "New Brass Ring" actually takes solution-based problem solving to the next level...
It takes the best of the methodologies of the past and combines the benefits of the 21st century...
It minimizes the tool set and provides results quickly and efficiently...
You can read more about this methodology in my book "The New Brass Ring" check it out!
It may be what you are looking for...
How Thriving Organizations are Addressing 21st Century Challenges
An interesting article, a very unique way of writing. I have always been interested in looking for ways to improve skills of process improvement with lean six sigma. your article has been a good help. I am working with a hard core process improvement tool known as ProcessModel with which I can do simulations on computer before implementing them in real life.
ReplyDeletegreat sharing..
ReplyDeletebiomassfuelsupplies.co.uk