In my last column, Working Wisely, I spoke about the need to adopt the gold standard of process - and the benefits that it delivers. Deciding that one`s organisation is going to adopt a process framework like CMMI is the first step; but how one does it is also vital. Some guidelines might prove helpful.
The first point to make is that using the process must add value - and must be seen to do so by those who must use it. Very often, good processes are not followed because people don`t know why they are doing them. The same thing is true of brushing one`s teeth - would you brush yours if you weren`t convinced of the value you obtained from doing it? One does not want to police a process, and the only way to ensure that staff follow it is to communicate effectively not only what the process is, but what its benefits are. For example, I don`t enjoy capturing daily timesheets, but I understand that this means that customers get billed appropriately, the organisation makes money and I get paid - therefore I do it.
A second point to make is that one needs to provide adequate resources to enable staff to follow a given process. Using the map book analogy I used in my previous column, it`s no good setting out on a journey without a map book. Processes should be documented, communicated and readily available in a centralised repository. Process deployment should be backed up with adequate training and support.
Leadership support is crucial in the successful deployment of process. Leaders have to be able to communicate the benefits of a process and also - here`s the rub - follow the process themselves.
It`s important to be pragmatic about process, otherwise it will become a prison rather than a guide. Let`s return to the map book analogy, where we are in the parking lot of a shopping centre and need to get to a friend`s house for lunch in 30 minutes. In the previous article we established that `investing` five minutes in the map book when we didn`t know the route was `best practice` and results in a predictable journey with minimal risk of arriving late.
Our `map book reading` policy should read something like: "Always use the map book tool if you are unsure of the best route to get from your current location to your intended destination. If you get lost on the way to your intended destination refer to map book to re-determine route."
Process is far more valuable in times of trouble than when everything is running smoothly.
Stuart Mann, performance and productivity improvement leader, EDS
Sounds simple enough...
Assuming the travel time for the optimal route from the parking lot to lunch is 15 minutes the following scenarios could apply:
* I know the route so I can start driving immediately without using the map book to plot a route and arrive with 15 minutes to spare.
* I don`t know the route so I plot a route and follow it without getting lost and arrive with 10 minutes to spare.
* I don`t know the route so I plot a route but still get lost on the way; I refer back to the map book, plot a new route and (assuming I realised my mistake early enough) make it just on time.
However, too often our policies read something like: "Always use the map book tool to get from your current location to your intended destination. Refer to map every five minutes to check you are still on the correct route."
The first policy gave us a waiver if we knew the best route but this policy expects us to use the map book even when we know the best route. It also expects us to stop every five minutes and check the map book regardless of whether we are lost or not. Although this policy works (we will still get to lunch on time and are never likely to get lost) it is not pragmatic and ignores the existing skills, knowledge and intelligence of the driver. As a result it is just plain irritating.
In other words, avoid process for process` sake at all costs. Here the principle underlying the process is not at fault (referring to the map book when necessary is valuable) but how the process is applied is impractical. When this occurs, an organisation typically blames the process in its entirety, and abandons or subverts it.
Process should be applied in proportion to project size, complexity and risk. The bigger the monster the more process you want to throw at it to minimise the risk and increase the predictability:
For example:
* Size: A long journey requires better and more rigorous planning than a 15-minute drive.
* Complexity: A short journey with a myriad of twists, turns and fenced-off suburbs needs more preparation that a longer journey on the highway.
* Risk: Preparations for getting to an important business meeting will be more thorough than for a social visit.
Common sense again.
Control the damage
Another home truth about process is that it is far more valuable in times of trouble than when everything is running smoothly. Unfortunately, this is usually when process flies out of the window: scheduled meetings are cancelled, documentation is not updated, proper testing and quality assurance are not done. This scenario is familiar to all developers, but mature organisations realise that this is exactly when process proves its value.
We`re back in the shopping centre parking lot (this is the last time I promise!), not knowing the route to our friend`s house. The duration of the optimal route is 15 minutes. However, this time we have spent too long in the shops and now have exactly 15 minutes until lunch starts.
We have the same two options:
* Take five minutes to determine the best route using our map book, make the 15 minute journey and arrive five minutes late.
* Drive blindly but fast, trusting in Lady Luck and make lunch on time - or get lost and arrive late (probably by more than five minutes).
With our predicable first option we always arrive five minutes late and we can never make it on time. With our second option we have a chance (albeit a small one) of making our commitment on time.
A process-immature organisation will choose option two and arrive late on its deliverables - usually far later than they would if they fell back on their process. There is also an increased risk that the increased urgency develops into a panic that increases the chances of having an "accident" - and not making it to lunch at all. Process helps to control the damage. When you realise that you cannot meet a commitment, it is always best to use your processes to minimise the negative impact that they will have on your project. The devil you know is always better than the devil you don`t. Process helps you manage the issues, challenges and variables that crop up on projects. Murphy hates process - but your clients will love it.
Share