ITIL & DevOps – Compete or Complement?

Availability of frameworks and best practices are here to help businesses and not confuse them over what to choose. Some of the common myths include “ITIL is too much of processes”, “DevOps is a separate team in the company”. But the reality is that we get overwhelmed with these methodologies and start implementing without getting the basics right. Let us sit back and understand their roles in order to choose the right framework for the right problem.

ITIL – A framework with a set of best practices to provide IT Service Management, ITSM efficiently.

◈ ITIL emphasizes on service quality and consistency
◈ Aims for higher customer satisfaction
◈ It consists of 26 processes that are part service lifecycle
◈ Drives digital transformation

DevOps – An integral philosophy to software development & delivery that aims at unifying development and operations.

◈ DevOps integrates software testing, QA with development to achieve better communication and collaboration among product management, software development and deployment teams
◈ Focuses on Continuous Integration (CI) and Continuous Delivery (CD)
◈ Aligns with lean principles such as managing Work In Progress (WIP), work in batches and being agile to have quicker turnaround time
◈ Brings in cultural transformation

Many companies spend a lot of time in choosing either ITIL or DevOps but rather they should adopt the best practices from both as they complement each other well. It is wiser to identify what to implement when rather than debating either ITIL or DevOps. Let us now discuss the common myths surrounding these two practices.

5 myths about ITIL & DevOps

There are a lot of general myths around ITIL and DevOps. Companies often fail in project execution, blindly believing in these myths. It is significant to understand what these myths are and why they prove to be wrong.

ITIL & DevOps are mutually exclusive

ITIL and DevOps are usually considered as alternatives to each other which is a myth. But in reality, they get along well with each other as their objectives are totally different. Companies would be doing service management in some way and ITIL helps in streamlining such processes whereas DevOps leverages service delivery by bringing relevant teams together and automating routine tasks to be agile.

DevOps is all about software deployment

We often hear, “DevOps is about deployment and delivery”. DevOps is much more than this and it covers aspects of collaboration, breaking down silos and transparency. Software deployment is just one aspect of DevOps and it follows a holistic IT approach. It strives for cross-disciplinary training so that everyone has a basic understanding of every task.

ITIL is suitable only for enterprise companies

It is a general myth that ITIL is complex and costly for smaller businesses to afford. Companies can implement ITIL irrespective of the size of business. ITIL is flexible in terms of adopting only specific suitable processes. Therefore, start small and implement only necessary processes. Small and medium businesses can also adopt ITIL in an incremental fashion.  

DevOps is an automation tool

DevOps is neither a tool nor an automation engine. It is a philosophy that drives automation by identifying gaps and promoting collaboration across functions. But, it is not just automating tasks rather solving IT problems holistically. DevOps bridges the issues related to people and solves operational inconsistencies.

ITIL & DevOps implementation is a lot of investment

Adoption of frameworks such as ITIL and DevOps methodology result in resource and cost optimization. When the right tool is implemented that is relevant for the business, realization of outcome is faster. Further, ITIL and DevOps implementation do not incur much cost when the objectives are understood clearly. Management buy-in is important here to get the IT budget allocation.

Use cases

ITIL & DevOps – Complement & NOT compete 

It is very clear that the fundamentals of ITIL and DevOps are not very different and they have similar roots aiming for better collaboration and improved efficiency. DevOps aims for faster turnaround and agility through automation and ITIL also stresses on automation to improve service efficiency. The secret to success lies in understanding the purpose of each of these clearly and implementing the right methodology for the right problem. ITIL and DevOps can be very good friends provided businesses understand their dynamics. 

Continue reading

PRINCE2, ITIL or PMP: Which Certification is Right for You?

What do the qualifications stand for?

PRINCE2® stands for PRojects IN Controlled Environments. ITIL® stands for Information Technology Infrastructure Library®. PMP® is the acronym for Project Management Professional.

Who owns PRINCE2, ITIL and PMP?

AXELOS now owns the intellectual property of the whole Best Management Practice portfolio including PRINCE2 and ITIL. PMP is owned by the Project Management Institute (PMI)®.

How do you get PRINCE2, PMP and ITIL?

All three have certification programmes that you can work towards. PRINCE2 has Foundation, Practitioner and Professional levels. ITIL has several levels of certification: Foundation, Intermediate, Managing Across The Lifecycle (MALC), Expert and Master. While the Project Management Institute also offers several certifications – the most commonly sought after being the PMP – they do not, however, split them into expertise levels.

How do individuals and organisations use them?

PRINCE2 and PMP are two of the most respected project management approaches in the world today, and are designed to manage projects and improve project performance. If you are completely new to project management, a project is a unique, temporary event with a defined start and finish. Almost anything can be a project. It could be something domestic, like creating a garden; something physical, like building a school; or something more abstract like organising and running a conference.

ITIL is the most recognised framework for IT service management in the world. It is essentially a cohesive set of best practices, providing guidance for developing, delivering and managing IT services for an organisation.

How do the three qualifications differ in their approach?

PRINCE2 is a practical, process-based methodology which provides detailed, step-by-step guidance on delivering a successful project with clear processes, steps and templates.

PMP is based on the Project Management Institute’s A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, (PMBOK® Guide). The PMBOK® Guide provides you with the tools and techniques of project management.

ITIL comes from the same stable as PRINCE2 so, unsurprisingly, is also process-based. It aims to give you the ability to improve how IT is delivered and managed within an organisation. Using ITIL you can continually improve efficiency, effectiveness, quality and cost management. ITIL has traditionally been used for IT but increasingly organisations are finding it can be used in a variety of settings for a variety of purposes. CERN – the location of the Large Hadron Collider – is using ITIL for non-IT situations as reported by Computer Weekly.

What is the market for each of the qualifications?

As part of a suite of best practice products originally developed by the Office of Government Commerce in the UK, PRINCE2 has become the de facto standard there but is recognised and valued worldwide because of its practicality and scalability – in particular enjoying a strong presence in Europe, Australia and other countries outside North America.

PMI qualifications have their origins in the USA and as such PMP is the predominant certification in the US, though it is still valued throughout the world for the comprehensive content of the PMBOK® Guide.

ITIL is accepted globally as an effective and efficient way to identify, plan, deliver and support IT services in the business.

In fact, the demand for all these certifications is growing all the time; for instance, more than 1 million PRINCE2 examinations have been taken around the world and the qualification’s popularity continues to grow.

Which certifications should I do first and which are welcomed by which industries or employers?

When considering which certifications to take, you will no doubt be concerned with how each will enhance your employment prospects.

You’ll find that different industries often favour one accreditation over another. So to better target the industry area and employer type you are interested in, ensure that you do your research! You could look at their job adverts and on their websites for information on what abilities, skills and knowledge they favour. Once you have your initial qualification, you can look at the others as career aspirations, as time and budget dictate.

Is it worth doing more than one?

Indeed it is, on several fronts:

PRINCE2 is concerned with the framework in which to manage projects, whereas the PMP focuses on the skills and knowledge required by the Project Manager to manage the project through the lifecycle. You would therefore actually benefit from having knowledge of both, providing a more rounded approach to project management.

Also the adoption of the PMBOK to a PRINCE2-based organisation will help to identify the additional areas which need to be addressed in order to give projects the best chance of success, such as the soft skills needed – the PMBOK identifies needs to be covered in human resource management. In another example, PRINCE2 offers a complete change control approach, whereas PMBOK just talks of the need for it.

So where does ITIL come in? Our recent blog, PRINCE2: still got the “IT” factor for ITSM, examines one area. If, for instance, you implement ITIL within an organisation, then you are effectively undertaking a project. As such, it would make sense to use project management.

Ideally, you would use the theory and competencies you had gained from PMP and the methodology learnt from PRINCE2 to ensure the project is successful. Since not one of these certifications does everything, it makes sense, in the long run, to get all three to make you an all-round professional. It can also pay: PRINCE2 commands healthy salaries as PayScale.com shows and both PMP and ITIL are amongst the certifications that are expected to pass the test of time according to IT Business Edge.

Continue reading

The Six Sigma Renaissance? What the Future Holds for Six Sigma in Financial Services

Process standardization and quality improvement had been neglected in the financial service industry for decades. When the manufacturing industry needed to become more efficient and reduce waste, the financial service industry was flourishing and therefore, found itself not in need for major improvement initiatives. When this situation changed, everyone suddenly started to look for a quick fix and Six Sigma, which had already been so successful in the manufacturing industry a method of Quality control, was seen by many as the golden path.

Countless financial services companies have followed this path and have implemented Six Sigma in the last decade. Some have been very successful and happily announce their multi-million dollar savings. However, many others keep very quiet about their returns or have stopped their engagement in Six Sigma all together because they didn’t attain the expected return on their investment. This is reflected in the coverage of Six Sigma in the financial service sector – there is only a handful of books available on the topic, while there are hundreds on the use of Six Sigma in manufacturing.

Why Six Sigma has been so successful in the manufacturing industry, but only worked for a small group of FS firms? More importantly, how can the financial service sector make better use of Six Sigma?

Strengths and Weaknesses of Six Sigma in Financial Services

Without question, Six Sigma is a well accepted quality enhancement method which has been applied with great success in the manufacturing industry for decades. However, Six Sigma methods cannot just be transferred from the manufacturing industry to the financial service industry without any changes. Let us review the main strengths and pitfalls of Six Sigma, when transferring it to the financial service industry.

Strengths:

1. Unique customer focus

Focus on the customer is one of the main strengths of Six Sigma. By linking quality improvement initiatives to customer needs, Six Sigma teams ensure that the improvement has a positive impact on the customer. Particularly in the financial service industry, where the interaction with the customer takes place on a daily basis, customer focus is of utmost importance. When implementing Six Sigma in finance processes, customer needs have to be given highest priority. Short-sighted focus on cost or headcount reduction will not bring the long term benefits Six Sigma promises.

Only a close cooperation with customers and a clear focus on customer needs can lead Six Sigma to success in a financial service environment.

2. Six Sigma framework and tool kit

Many financial service organizations have not engaged in structured process improvement until recently. Therefore, they often lack standardized processes, organized quality and engineering departments and a general understanding of what quality improvement means to them. Six Sigma provides, with the DMAIC cycle, a structured framework to guide users throughout the improvement efforts and ensures that the project develops in the desired direction. Additionally, Six Sigma comes with a whole tool kit of brainstorming, analysis and prioritization tools that help to unfold its power. This structured approach, combined with the Six Sigma tools are particularly valuable for teams with a financial service background.

3. Data-driven and statistical methodology

Some may argue that financial service process improvement greatly benefits from its data richness. However, in my experience exactly this data overflow is one of the main problems for successful project selection and completion in this industry. Too many improvement efforts are based on ill selected data and the general assumption that the problem root cause is already known before the project even starts. This causes projects to fail and the improvement efforts to loose their reputation. Six Sigma offers a more statistical approach to measuring and analyzing data, thereby minimizing the risk of quick assumptions and allowing projects to be wisely selected and executed.

Weaknesses:

1. Resistance from people

I experienced that resistance towards change is even greater in the service industry, than in manufacturing. The average white-collar worker seems to be extremely unaware of the waste in his daily work and is, to my surprise, very resistant towards others outlining this waste to him. Now this most likely originates from the fact that processes in the service industry are invisible, following an unwritten process through electronic data exchange and peoples’ heads. Seeing and accepting waste in such a virtual environment is more difficult than in a factory, where bottlenecks and process defaults are physically existing. This resistance leads to many project failures and makes it very difficult to implement Six Sigma.

2. High initial investment and slow return on investment

The financial service industry is famous for its fast-paced culture, striving from one budget to another. However, for anyone looking for short term return on investment, Six Sigma is not the right cure. Six Sigma requires a high level of initial investment for implementation and the first years of Six Sigma introduction into an organization are particularly costly. During this period Six Sigma experts and employees have to be trained or recruited and senior management focus on Six Sigma implementation is required. Additionally, return on investment is often not realised in the short term.

From an organization-wide perspective, achieving a break-even from implementing Six Sigma takes a considerable amount of time as initial investment is high and results from improvements might only become apparent after several months.

Recommendations and Outlook for Six Sigma in Financial Services

Six Sigma is more a culture than it is a methodology. In order to make it work, you have to prepare your whole organization to embrace the values and ideas behind the concept. If you are looking for a quick fix to make the next budget, then Six Sigma is definitely not the right thing for you. The same holds for organizations that have not yet had any or only limited engagement with quality and process improvement. If you still have a lot of low hanging fruits out there, then go for Lean and 5S first.

However, if you are willing to take your organization through a true transformation, to standardize and re-engineer processes and to make a long-term commitment to Six Sigma, then go for it. Success cases from the financial service industry and many years of successful implementation in the manufacturing industry prove that Six Sigma is indeed a very effective method to bring your organization to the next level.

Both of the weaknesses outlined in this article can, with the right commitment, be reduced to a minimal. Once you have made the initial investment of time, effort and money, Six Sigma will reward you with a very worthy return on your investment.

In my opinion, particularly the ever increasing importance of outsourced finance services brings a never before seen centralization and standardization to financial organizations. This allows for large scale projects and makes the return on investment more favorable, than implementing Six Sigma in small decentralized offices. The most recent developments in the financial industry and the harsh competition following the financial crisis have further strengthened the need for more cost efficient solutions and better quality. At the same time, many players in the financial service industry have already hit their climax in getting process improvement from Lean. That's why I predict that Six Sigma will see a renaissance – this time not in manufacturing, but in financial services.

Continue reading

Designing Financial Services with DMEDI

As banking operations and check processing enters the 21st Century, so too the ways financial institutions design processes enters a new age. Long gone are the days of trial-and-error in bringing new products, services or technologies to market. Companies need to be able to implement solutions effectively – the first time – to provide superior customer service, while decreasing cost and boosting shareholder value.

In recent years, many financial organizations have turned to some form of Six Sigma or Lean Six Sigma in their search for tools to help them decrease defects and rework while increasing process velocity. But the basic toolkit associated with these methodologies does not incorporate the type of rigor needed when you want to invent a new service, product, or process (or overhaul something that is already in place). One methodology is powerful enough to handle the task. It is Design for Lean Six Sigma (DFLSS).

Design for Lean Six Sigma (DFLSS) is a complement to Lean Six Sigma’s DMAIC methodology. The basic difference between DFLSS and DMAIC is DMAIC focuses on bettering existing processes while DFLSS focuses on new processes or complete overhauls of existing processes. DFLSS concentrates a great deal of effort on designing a process to reach Six Sigma levels before it’s implemented, creating a completely new, Six Sigma-capable process from the start.

The key issue when you design a new service or process is that there are a lot more unknowns than when you tweak what you already have. You don’t really know what customers want. You don’t really know which models or approaches are workable. You may not have existing capabilities to provide the needed functionalities.

The preferred improvement model used for these situations goes by a number of names: some organizations call it DMEDI (for Define-Measure-Explore-Develop-Implement), some call it DMADV (for Define-Measure-Analyze-Design-Verify), and some just use the more general terms of Design for Six Sigma or Design for Lean Six Sigma (DFLSS). Though the labels differ, all are strategies for executing projects that require a significant amount of new design.

Define: The project team comes together with its sponsor to develop a well-defined charter that has clear ties to the business strategy and line-of-sight linkage to significant financial benefits

Measure: The team focuses on understanding the Voice of the Customer, information that will be used to design best-in-class products and services

Explore: The team innovates to develop multiple solution alternatives and selects the most promising concept, as well as confirms a high-level design

Develop: The team uses Lean and Six Sigma tools and simulation to create a robust design

Implement: The design is piloted, a control plan is developed, and the new product or service is launched

Define

The objective of the Define phase is to develop a well-defined charter for the project team that includes: a product/service description, business case, project goals, project scope, a high-level project plan, and team members. The charter should be sufficiently detailed so that the business objectives and the scope are clear to both the team and the management.

In addition, there are two major elements of risk to be considered in a DFLSS project. First, the risk that the project will not meet its objectives, which would primarily be a risk to the schedule and to benefits (technical, cost, schedule, and market risk). Second, there are the risks that the project poses to other elements of the business.

Measure

The purpose of Measure is to understand the Voice of the Customer (VOC), and to translate customer feedback into measurable design requirements.

The first step in capturing the Voice of the Customer is determining the appropriate customer segment. While in theory anyone in the world could buy your services, there is a particular subgroup, or segment, that is most likely to buy. If you’re interested in achieving maximum performance, you want to focus your products and services on the customer group where it is most likely to resonate in the marketplace.

Focus on the customer segment(s) that align with the company’s business strategy, are attractive from a size and profitability standpoint, and align with the business’s capability to satisfy them.

Start the VOC process by taking advantage of existing and available information within the business. Every company has customer contact sources that can provide a baseline for service/product design. Some sources to look at are complaints, compliments, returns or credits, contract cancellations, market share changes, customer referrals, closure rates of sales calls, market research reports, completed customer evaluations, industry reports, available literature, competitor assessments, web page hits, or technical support calls.

Once you understand the gap between the customer information you already have and what you need, use proactive methods to gather additional information. The most common techniques are interviews, focus groups and surveys.

Translating needs into requirements — If you survey customers and ask which features they would like to see in your services, they will undoubtedly say, “All of them!” However, customers don’t value all features equally. That’s why the DMEDI process exploits a tool known as Quality Function Deployment (QFD) that helps you understand customer priorities. The secret to QFD’s success is that it establishes design requirements that are:

◈ Measurable (quantifiable) so you can tell whether or not you’ve met them.
◈ Solution-independent, meaning the requirements aren’t linked to predefined solutions that the design team might have in mind (allowing for much greater creativity).
◈ Directly correlated to customer needs, so you know that you’re addressing issues that are important to customers.
◈ Easy to understand.

To achieve these goals, QFD walks through a series of steps:

1. Identifying customer needs from the VOC data you gathered
2. Prioritizing those needs
3. Establishing design requirements that address all customer needs
4. Prioritizing those design requirements (to help focus the design effort)
5. Establishing performance targets

These steps are linked together deliberately, so that at the end you can trace a path directly from customer needs to specific elements of the design.

The team also will assess the impact of failing to meet the targets and specifications, including an assessment of different risks (to the customer, to the business) and whether the organization’s current competencies are well matched to meet the performance targets.

Because there is such a learning curve in the Measure phase of a project, teams often discover quick wins: changes that look to be a sure thing, are easily reversible, and require little or no investment. The team should take advantage of quick wins as soon as possible, and begin accruing financial benefits.

Explore

After defining requirements, the team needs to answer the question: What is the best way to meet our customer needs at a conceptual design level?

This is where innovation occurs. Usually, teams will discover that there are conflicts between customer needs and the company’s ability to meet those needs, conflicts between different design parameters, or conflicts between cost and performance. Often, trade-offs or compromises are made — though finding solutions to resolve these conflicts rather than compromise leads to more innovative products and services.

The tool used here is a component of QFD called “functional analysis.” Every service or product has certain things that it must do in order to perform acceptably from a customer’s viewpoint. Functional analysis breaks the service down into its key tasks. For example, rather than brainstorm concepts for an imaging service at a system level, the team would identify the functions (prioritize paper items, scan paper to create images, validate scans, forward images) and then brainstorm solutions for each of the functions (e.g., prioritize paper images — on-us listing, transit listing, equipment, software).

The goal is to prioritize the functions that have the strongest link to the Voice of the Customer, because those will be the foundation of any new design. You also can use the House of Quality to flow down the high-level design targets into smaller design elements.

After generating many interesting concepts, the team will need to narrow the field to the one or two most promising alternatives. (Notice the key assumption that the team has multiple concepts to consider!) You want to be sure that all feasible alternatives have been explored before deciding on a single concept. World-class innovations don’t come from a one-horse race. If the investigation of concept ideas only brought about one or two options, it is strongly recommended you develop a plan to create additional options before moving forward.

Develop

The Develop phase is where the detailed design occurs. In addition to designing the core service, attention should be paid to developing information technology elements of the project, establishing a plan for human resources, developing sites/facilities, and purchasing materials that will be required for implementation.

As the solution is developed, the team should take advantage of lean tools to maximize speed and minimize waste in the new process. In particular, Value-Added Analysis is beneficial to many projects. The process map of the to-be service is reviewed and each step analyzed and assigned to one of three categories:

◈ Customer Value Add — Tasks that the customer would be willing to pay for (i.e., adds value to the service, provides competitive advantage).
◈ Business Non-Value Add — Tasks required by business necessity (i.e., financial reporting) but that do not provide value to customers.
◈ Non-Value Add — All other tasks (i.e., approvals, all rework loops, waiting).

Implement

The objective of the Implement phase is to successfully conduct a pilot, transfer ownership of the project to the new process owner, and implement the new service. One of the key benefits of the Six Sigma methodology is the rigor around implementation and process control. Everyone has worked on a project that started off well only to watch it fall apart when the solution was implemented. With solid up-front work in the Implement phase, these issues can be avoided.

Continue reading

Types Of Project Management Methodologies

Standardization of a project is not possible as the different project has different requirements and processes. However, the process of project management can be standardized by using some of the pre-defined project methodologies.

There are several project management methodology that are prevalent for managing projects like

◉ Waterfall Model:

Waterfall model is based on the incremental model. In this method, the project is planned from top to bottom at once. The whole project will be divided into seven consecutive phases. In this method, all the features are delivered at once at the end of the cycle

◉ Agile:

In this method the process design is broken into individual models. The development process is iterative, and the end of each iteration, shippable features of the product are delivered to the customer.

◉ PRINCE 2:

It is a general project management methodology and can be used for a project of any scale. It is a process-oriented approach with each process having inputs and outputs, tasks and activities to complete

◉ RAD:

Rapid application development is a project management methodology used for software development, where the main purpose of developing application faster with high quality. The whole development process is defined into four phase

◉ Kanban:

In Kanban methods, a board is used on which sticky notes are placed in the column as per the status of the task. The common status used for project task include "in queue", "in progress" and "recently completed."

◉ Six Sigma:

The six sigma are preferred for a project that needs precise measure. It uses the statistics to improve processes and minimize defects in a product or service. It uses two different sets of methodologies DMAIC and DMADV

◉ SDLC:

SDLC (System Development Life Cycle) is a generic approach to project management which cover basic project management concepts like needs analysis, design, training, delivery, and support

◉ Extreme Programming (XP):

XP is frequently used for IT project management. Like scrum, XP also works in iteration but their iteration duration is usually short. The scope within each iteration is flexible as long as the work is not started

◉ Crystal Methodology:

This method is quite supportive for fixed price contracts. Iterations in crystal method are released regularly. This method can detect any flaws in the early stage of the project, and errors are less likely to occur.

◉ CCPM (Critical Chain Project Management):

This method reduce activity duration time by 50% hence project can be finished early. It uses buffer management to control the plan and ensures minimum error.

Continue reading

Project Risk Analysis & Management

Proper risk management is control of possible future events that may have a negative effect on the overall project. It is more of pro-active then reactive process.

What is Risk Analysis in Project Management?

Risk Analysis is the sequence of processes of risk management planning, analysis of risks, identification and controlling risk on a project.

Risk Management Process primarily involves following activities

1. Plan risk management

It is the procedure of defining how to perform risk management activities for a project.

2. Identify risk

It is the procedure of determining which risk may affect the project most. This process involves documentation of existing risks.

The input for identifying risk will be

◈ Risk management plan
◈ Project scope statement
◈ Cost management plan
◈ Schedule management plan
◈ Human resource management plan
◈ Scope baseline
◈ Activity cost estimates
◈ Activity duration estimates
◈ Stakeholder register
◈ Project documents
◈ Procurement documents
◈ Communication management plan
◈ Enterprise environmental factor
◈ Organizational process assets
◈ Perform qualitative risk analysis
◈ Perform quantitative risk analysis
◈ Plan risk responses
◈ Monitor and control risks

The output of the process will be a

◈ Risk register

3. Perform qualitative risk analysis

It is the process of prioritizing risks for further analysis or action by combining and assessing their probability of occurrence and impact. It helps managers to lessen the uncertainty level and concentrate on high priority risks.



Plan risk management should take place early in the project, it can impact on various aspects like cost, time, scope, quality and procurement.

The inputs for qualitative risk analysis includes

◈ Risk management plan
◈ Scope baseline
◈ Risk register
◈ Enterprise environmental factors
◈ Organizational process assets

The output of this stage would be

◈ Project documents updates

4. Quantitative risk analysis

It is the procedure of numerically analyzing the effect of identified risks on overall project objectives. In order to minimize the project uncertainty, this kind of analysis are quite helpful for decision making.

The input of this stage is

◈ Risk management plan
◈ Cost management plan
◈ Schedule management plan
◈ Risk register
◈ Enterprise environmental factors
◈ Organizational process assets

While the output will be

◈ Project documents updates

5. Plan risk responses

To enhance opportunities and to minimize threats to project objectives plan risk response is helpful. It addresses the risks by their priority, activities into the budget, schedule, and project management plan.

The inputs for plan risk responses are

◈ Risk management plan
◈ Risk register

While the output are

◈ Project management plan updates
◈ Project documents updates

6. Control Risks

Control risk is the procedure of tracking identified risks, identifying new risks, monitoring residual risks and evaluating risk.

The inputs for this stage includes

◈ Project management plan
◈ Risk register
◈ Work performance data
◈ Work performance reports

The output of this stage would be

◈ Work performance information
◈ Change requests
◈ Project management plan updates
◈ Project documents updates
◈ Organizational process assets updates

Project Procurement Management

Project Procurement Management includes the processes of purchasing or acquiring products needed to run a business. The organization can be a seller, buyer or service provider.

Project Procurement Management also includes controlling any contract issued by an outside organization and get work done outside the project team.

Plan Procurement Management includes four stages like

◈ Plan Procurement Management
◈ Conduct Procurements
◈ Control Procurements
◈ Close Procurements

The input in the plan procurement management are

◈ Requirements documentation
◈ Teaming agreements
◈ Risk register
◈ Scope baseline
◈ Project schedule
◈ Activity cost estimates
◈ Cost performance baseline
◈ Risk related contract decisions
◈ Enterprise environmental factors
◈ Organizational process assets

Conduct Procurement process

Conduct Procurement process involves activities like

◈ Selecting a seller
◈ Receiving seller responses
◈ Awarding a contract

The benefit of conducting procurement process is that it provides alignment of external and internal stakeholder expectations through established agreements.

The input of the conduct procurement process includes

◈ Project management plan
◈ Documents for procurement
◈ Source selection criteria
◈ Qualified seller list
◈ Seller proposals
◈ Project documents
◈ Make or buy decisions
◈ Teaming agreements
◈ Organizational process assets

Control Procurements

It is the process of monitoring contract performance and correction to the contract as per the guidelines. It will ensure that buyers and sellers both meet the procurement requirement according to the terms of the legal agreement.

The input of the Control Procurements include

◈ Project management plan
◈ Procurement documents
◈ Agreements
◈ Approved change requests
◈ Work performance reports
◈ Work performance data

The output includes

◈ Work performance information
◈ Change requests
◈ Project management plan updates
◈ Project documents updates
◈ Organizational process assets updates

Close procurements

This step involves documenting agreements and other documents for future reference.

The input of this tool includes

◈ Project management plan
◈ Procurement documents

The output of this tool includes

◈ Closed procurements
◈ Organizational process assets updates

Manage Stakeholder Engagement

A stakeholder is an integral part of any project; their decision can leave a deep impact on project deliverables. In this process, the first part is to identify people, groups or organizations that could impact on the project while the second part is to analyze stakeholder expectations.

It also focusses on continuous communication with stakeholders to understand their needs and expectations.

Identifying Stakeholders

It is the process of identifying the groups, people or organization that can influence project outcomes. It allows the project manager to identify appropriate stakeholders.

Plan Stakeholder Management

It is the process of preparing a strategy to involve stakeholders throughout the project life cycle. It defines clear, actionable plan to interact with project Stakeholders.

The input for Plan Stakeholder Management includes

◈ Project management plan
◈ Stakeholder register
◈ Enterprise environmental factors
◈ Organizational process assets

The output of this

◈ Stakeholder management plan
◈ Project documents updates

Manage Stakeholder Engagement

In this stage, stakeholder are communicated to understand their expectations, address issues and foster appropriate stakeholder engagement in project activities. It allows the project manager to achieve project success without conflicting with stakeholder's decision.

The input of this stage is

◈ Stakeholder management plan
◈ Communication management plan
◈ Change log
◈ Organization process assets

While the output of this stage is

◈ Issue log
◈ Change request
◈ Project management plan updates
◈ Project documents updates
◈ Organizational process assets updates

Control Stakeholder Engagement

It is the process of monitoring stakeholder engagement in the project and adjusting strategies as per requirements. It will increase the stakeholder engagement activities as the project evolves and progresses.

The input for this stage include

◈ Project management plan
◈ Issue log
◈ Work performance data
◈ Project documents

The output of this stage include

◈ Work performance information
◈ Change requests
◈ Project management plan updates
◈ Project documents updates
◈ Organizational process assets updates

Continue reading

DFSS Study: Develop Software to Track Drug Side Effects

Integrating Design for Six Sigma (DFSS), IDOV (identify, design, optimize, validate) roadmap and selected DFSS tools in the information technology (IT) system development methodology can strengthen the business focus of IT system delivery. Adding additional steps at the beginning and end of the traditional system development cycle for DFSS can support the better understanding of the business process and the customer requirements involved, and allow the organization to realize proven business results as well as continuously monitor process metrics.

A pharmaceutical company, Medistar, applied DFSS tools to develop a new pharmacovigilance system (captures and analyzes observed drug side effects) in association with the launch of a new drug. Such a system is necessary since after its market launch a drug is exposed to a much larger population than in the clinical studies conducted during the drug development. This can lead to a change in the known safety profile of a drug. Medistar recognized the need for an updated system using newer technology. Under the old system a physician manually completed a registration form and mailed it to the respective field service agent who then transferred the information manually into yet another system. The information regarding the adverse effect was then forwarded to the pharmacovigilance team. This process was slow, cumbersome and could take several days – too long given the potential consequences of an unidentified risk.

With the launch of the new drug Medistar wanted to play it safe – every side effect should be immediately identified and addressed. From capturing all relevant patient data to the medical director making a decision, all major process steps and influence factors were in the process-scope of the project.

The Identify Phase

At the beginning of the identify phase the project sponsor, the medical director of Medistar and the project manager agreed on a team with representatives from the IT department and pharmacovigilance organization. One of the team’s first tasks was to identify the system needs and what business processes it needed to address. The goal was to understand the process, its internal and external customers and their requirements before developing the system. Therefore, the team developed a high-level process map using SIPOC (suppliers, inputs, process, output, customers). The developers of the SIPOC map recognized that not every adverse event would necessarily entail a counter measure.

Figure 1:SIPOC

The next step was comprehensive voice of the customer (VOC) data collection. The team interviewed representatives from the pharmacovigilance teams, the medical director and the chief executive officer of the company. Most of the customers immediately referred to IT software requirements instead of expressing their needs and expectations with regards to the business processes lying behind the system. Only by repeatedly challenging the answers were the customers’ true process related needs identified. The team translated those requirements into measurable CTQs (critical to quality), which served as the basis for defining key performance indicators (KPIs) for the new pharmacovigilance process.

The translation of customer needs into CTQs and their prioritization was done using quality function deployment (QFD). Accordingly, the two main CTQs of the “should-be” process were the time between a side effect (or event) reported to Medistar and notification of the medical director, and the frequency with which the medical director could make a decision based on this information.

Figure 2: QFD 1

All CTQs were summarized with target values and tolerances in a design scorecard. This was used throughout the project to measure and document the system performance. Since the company already had a pharmacovigilance system in place (with reduced functionality), as-is performance data for the first four CTQs were collected and included in the scorecard.

Figure 3: Design Scorecard

The Design Phase

At the beginning of the design phase, the team created a detailed process of the should-be process. This showed detailed process steps and responsibilities as well as first requirements with regards to the new pharmacovigilance system.

Figure 4: Should-be Process Map

Using this map the team started defining the user requirement specifications (URS) for the system. In a workshop with previously interviewed customers URS were identified and – in order to ensure that all previously identified CTQs were considered – a QFD 2 matrix was used to map and prioritize the URS against the CTQs. The main priorities from a user perspective were a user-friendly input mask and the ability to automatically create summaries and detailed reports.

Figure 5: QFD 2 CTQs and User Requirements

In addition to the above requirements other technical, system and data requirements were defined. For example, the system should include a security system with user access, including permanent access to all information for the health authorities and other specific standards imposed by the company.

On the basis of this information an initial conceptual design of the new pharmacovigilance system was developed, and it was revealed that an off-the-shelf solution was not available. An existing software system, however, could be customized to meet the needs.

Another important step in the design phase was the development of functional specifications in accordance to the previously described system requirements. The team opted for the application of QFD 3, as this could guarantee traceability of the requirements. The team began to define service level requirements for the future maintenance and support organization of the pharmacovigilance system.

The Optimize Phase

The optimize phase was typical for a software development project. It included a detailed adaptation of the software according to the customer needs and the establishment of necessary testing and validation procedures. For the description of test cases the previously created QFD 3 was helpful and provided an overview of system requirements and functional specifications.

The Verify Phase

The added value of DFSS tools in the last phase of software development was to ensure the effective handover of the IT system to the process owner – the head of the pharmacovigilance team.

In coordination with the team leader, the project team developed a dashboard to monitor the process performance. Based on previously defined CTQs key performance indicators (KPIs) were defined – how often they had to be calculated, by whom, and to whom they had to be reported.

Graphic 6 provides an overview of the different aspects of the dashboards.

Figure 6: Dashboard Definition

During the verify phase the users were trained on the new system and the old pharmacovigilance system was shutdown. The transition from the old system to the new went well and was in place prior to Medistar launching the new drug.

Continue reading

PRINCE2 Project Methodology

Introduction

Effective project management is essential in absolutely any organization, regardless of the nature of the business and the scale of the organization.

From choosing a project to right through to the end, it is important that the project is carefully and closely managed. This is essentially the role of the project manager and his/her team of employees.

Managing and tracking the progress of a project is no easy task. Every project manager must know (and communicate to his/her team) all the project goals, specifications and deadlines that need to be met in order to be cost-effective, save time, and also to ensure that quality is maintained so that the customer is completely satisfied.

The project plan and other documents are therefore very important right through out the project. Effective project management, however, cannot simply be achieved without employing certain techniques and methods. One such method is the PRINCE2.

PRINCE2 . What is it?

PRINCE stands for Projects in Controlled Environments. Dealing with a bit of history, this method was first established by the Central Computer and Telecommunications Agency (It is now referred to as the Office of Government Commerce).

It has since become a very commonly used project management method in all parts of the world and has therefore proven to be highly effective in various respects.

The method also helps you to identify and thereafter assign roles to the different members of the team based on expertise. Over the years, there have been a number of positive case studies of projects that have used PRINCE2 project management methodology.

This method deals with the various aspects that need to be managed in any given project.

The diagram below illustrates the idea.

In the above diagram:

◈ The seven principles shown in the above diagram must be applied if the project is to be called a PRINCE2 project. These principles will show you whether and how well the project is being carried out using this particular project management method.

◈ Similarly, the themes of PRINCE2 refer to the seven principles that need to be referred to at all times during the project, if the project is to indeed be effective. If adherence to these principles is not carefully tracked from the inception of the project through to the end, there is a high chance that the project will fail entirely.

◈ The processes refer to the steps that need to be followed. This is why this method is known as a 'process-based' method.

◈ Finally, with regard to the project environment, it's important to know that this project management method is not rigid. Changes can be made based on how big the project is, and the requirements and objectives of each organization. PRINCE2 offer this flexibility for the project and this is one of the reasons why PRINCE2 is quite popular among the project managers.

The Pros and Cons of the Methodology

One benefit of using this method over others could be said to be the fact that it is product-based and it also divides the project into different stages making it easy to manage. This is sure to help the project team to remain focused and deliver a quality outcome at the end of the day.

The most important of all benefits is that it improves communication between all members of the team and also between the team and other external stakeholders, thereby giving the team more control of the project.

It also gives the stakeholder a chance to have a say when it comes to decision making as they are always kept informed by the issuance of reports at regular intervals.

PRINCE2 also ensures that improvements can be made in the organization. This is because you would be able to identify any flaws that you make in projects and correct, which of course would help you to a great extent in the long run.

The flexibility of PRINCE2 allows these changes to be made run-time. Although there can be some implications and issues to the project schedule when certain changes are done run-time, PRINCE2 offers some of the best practices to minimize the impact.

Your team will also learn to save a lot of time and be more economical when it comes to the use of assets and various other resources, thereby ensuring that you are also able to cut down on costs a great deal.

When it comes to disadvantages, PRNCE2 does not offer the level of flexibility offered by some of the modern project management methodologies. Since project management, especially in software industry, has grown to a different level, PRINCE2 may find difficulties in catering some of the modern project management needs.

Continue reading

Promises of Brand Strategy and Design for Six Sigma

“99.44 percent pure”
“It takes a licking and keeps on ticking”
“When it absolutely, positively has to be there overnight”
“The ultimate driving machine”
“We bring good things to life”

For recent generations of Americans, the slogans above have become synonymous with the high-profile brands they represent. But these words are not simply clever taglines. They are in fact shorthand descriptions of each company’s competitive strategy. These words describe what the companies are pledging to deliver as well as what is special about their products and services. In the cases of Federal Express, BMW and General Electric, consumers and stockholders would agree that the success of these brands is a function of both the relevance of their promises and how effectively and consistently the companies are able to keep them.

But what does making good on a brand promise get a company? First of all, it means the company is able to consistently deliver the products, services and experiences it promises to deliver. When this happens – and customers know about it – the customers benefit from easier shopping, reduced risk, greater perceived value and increased satisfaction. Resulting business benefits include lower marketing costs, greater pricing independence and higher net income.

Brand Promises Are Not Just Talk

Coca Cola, for example, can today sell a six-pack of its Coca Cola Classic for $2.50. Down the grocery aisle, a store brand virtually identical in its ingredients fetches a mere $1 for a six-pack. Coca Cola’s “brand tax” –which most consumers do not object to paying – has vaulted “the real thing” to No. 1 in Interbrand’s annual brand rankings, with its brand valued at more than $67 billion, according to BusinessWeek. Now that’s a powerful – and valuable – brand promise.

The top organizations in Interbrand’s 2005 rankings include not only Coca-Cola, Microsoft ($60 billion), and GE ($47 billion), but also Disney ($26 billion), McDonald’s ($26 billion) and Ford ($13 billion), companies currently struggling but continuing to be competitive in large part due to their powerful brands. Data from Interbrand and BusinessWeek illustrate the increased financial value of a powerful brand(Figure 1). As the experiences of these companies demonstrate, success is clearly related to keeping promises made to consumers, because an unkept brand promise means a failure to deliver the product, quality, service, experience or pricing customers expect. Consider “Born to perform,” “The document company” and “Reach out and touch someone.” The fact is that Jaguar’s U.S. sales in 2002 were 61,204 units and 45,875 units in 2004. Xerox was ranked 26th among the Fortune 500 in 1994 and 130th in 2004. And AT&T’s revenue/income in 2000 was $46.8 billion/$12.8 billion and $30.5 billion/-$10 billion in 2004. These companies’ sales and financial results tell the story.

Figure 1: Growth in Investment Value of Top Brands Versus S&P 500 (1990-2002)

Source: Stephen Root in “Branding for Banks,” UBS News for Banks, Vol. 4 (2003)

The reality is that building a strong brand means delivering maximum value to customers as consistently as possible. And that means every employee delivering on the brand promise, in every action affecting suppliers, coworkers and customers, every time. While most brand strategists might not immediately consider it, putting Six Sigma to work is one way to achieve this level of adherence to a brand promise.

Strategy, Marketing Communication and Operations

An effective brand promise rests on three legs – business strategy, communication of the promise and implementation (Figure 2). It is the third area – implementation – where plans often go astray. It is no coincidence that in organizations building vibrant, high-value brands, the constituencies responsible for the three legs – executive, marketing and operations teams – work in lockstep. The puzzle, for some, is how to get there.

Figure 2: Key Elements of Brand Promise Delivery

Six Sigma – too often viewed as being only about wringing variation and cost from business processes – is, in fact, a versatile, effective framework for connecting executive goals (business strategy), marketing communication (brand promise) and management (operational activities).

Consider the case of the business bank that wanted to increase its share in a regional market. The bank used the DMADV roadmap of Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) and adapted it for brand strategy (Table 1). By applying DMADV, the organization realized that to advance from the business strategy to marketplace results, it was necessary to first understand the brand, define the brand promise and identify specific actions required to deliver on it (Define, Measure, Analyze). Finally, the organization needed to make sure that the defined brand promise actually was fulfilled (Design, Verify).

Table 1: Adapting Design for Six Sigma’s DMADV for Brand Strategy
Design for Six Sigma	Brand Six Sigma
Define the project goals and customer (internal and external) deliverables.	Ensure that operational activity is delivering on the competitive advantage and customer expectations created by the brand promise.
Measure and determine customer needs and specifications.	Determine the measurable extent and scope of competitive advantage and customer expectations created by the brand promise.
Analyze the process options to meet the customer needs.	Work back from the brand promise through brand associations and tangible brand attributes/CTQs to ensure that operational building blocks – business goals, organization, processes, administration and metrics – are producing the competitive advantage and delivering on customer expectations generated by the brand promise.
Design detailed processes to meet customer needs.	Design and implement the operational building blocks.
Verify the design performance and ability to meet customer needs.	Use measurement to verify that the operational building blocks are producing the tangible brand attributes/CTQs contributing to the brand associations and brand promise.

The bank’s marketing team identified customer segments and their respective product and service needs, preferences and priorities; researched competitive threats and opportunities; and gathered complete information about the business itself – its economic model, strengths, weaknesses and internal capabilities. On the basis of that work, the organization was ready to commit to a clear brand promise: “The bank that helps small businesses succeed” (Figure 3).

Figure 3: Creating the Brand Promise

This is the point at which the brand and business strategies of many organizations’ falter. The advertising and point-of-purchase campaigns take wing, but nothing else changes. Customer expectations are raised and then dashed, with predictable results. To avoid this outcome, the business bank employed DFSS techniques to transform the brand promise into “brand associations,” “tangible brand attributes” and “operational building blocks,” ultimately defining very specifically how the organization was to deliver on the promise. And because executive, marketing and operations stakeholders participated together in the process, strategic goals, expectations and planning were understood and aligned effectively throughout the organization.

A Real-World Promise and Its Parts

As this bank example illustrates, defining the brand promise in operational terms involves three critical steps (Figure 4):

1. Translating the brand promise into specific brand associations or CTQs: Here, marketers, operations management and Six Sigma practitioners study the brand promise to identify the characteristics that typical customers will associate with it. These hypotheses are then tested in customer research. For the bank, the list of brand associations included:

◈ Professional, knowledgeable banking staff

◈ A bank that knows its clients as individuals

◈ Rapid loan processing

◈ The customer’s ability to make more money as a result of the banking relationship

◈ And others…

Figure 4: Defining a Promise in Operational Terms: Focus on 'Rapid Loan Processing'

2. Converting each of these brand associations into tangible brand attributes: For this bank, it was decided that “rapid loan processing” would require:

◈ Easy-to-understand paperwork

◈ Online application capability

◈ Online tracking of application progress

◈ Easy access to a banker who knows the client and the loan application

◈ Rapid loan approval

◈ Rapid provision of loan funds

3. Defining how each tangible brand attribute will be delivered operationally: Implementation of the attributes depends on some combination of human resources, processes and technology. For example, for just one attribute of rapid loan processing – easy access to a banker who knows the client and the loan application – there were implications for:

◈ Job specifications, hiring and staffing

◈ Training

◈ Loan evaluation and internal communication and reporting procedures

◈ Electronic case files

◈ Hours of operation

◈ Availability of banker email and cell phones

A Cautionary Tale

When laid out in the example of this regional business bank, the connections between strategy and operational building blocks seem almost too obvious. But history offers many examples of organizations that somehow lost the connection between their brand promises and the brand associations, attributes and building blocks needed to deliver them.

Here is just one: Between 1974 and 1986, Schlitz (“The beer that made Milwaukee famous”) lost 93 percent of its brand equity chiefly because of its decision to lower production costs. A premium brand – in fact, the No. 2 brand in its category at the time – Schlitz cut its costs in 1974 by changing ingredients and by reducing fermentation time from 12 days to four. While the cost reduction enabled Schlitz to build sales with aggressive discounts and promotions (precisely what Ford and GM are doing today), consumers noticed a difference in flavor that, coupled with the word-of-mouth story that the company was making “green beer” (improperly aged), motivated them to switch to other premium brands.

As a result, Schlitz went from selling 17.8 million barrels of beer to selling less than 1 million barrels per year. The problem, of course, was that Schlitz failed to maintain key brand associations – including taste and a reputation for quality brewing – critical to drinkers of Schlitz beer.

Continue reading

Mobilizing a Business for Turning Strategy into Action

Developing a strategy is critical for any organization, and equally important is having a mechanism to translate that strategy into action. However, given the complexities of the European market, there is a special need for a business implementing its strategy to allow its local business unit leaders to adjust the tactics to local needs and requirements. This needs to be done while at the same time providing for feedback on local opportunities that could impact the company’s overall direction.

In short, the challenge is to find a mechanism that engages and commits to action while allowing flexibility for local differences when justified.

Developing a business strategy is the act of aligning operations and improvements with business goals and objectives. Research and experience has illuminated three primary considerations that must be taken into account when determining how to mobilize a business for implementing its strategy.

Processes

Processes are the primary vehicles for propelling strategy into action. Though most businesses organize themselves around functions and departments (R&D, operations, finance, sales and marketing), the products and services their customers receive are produced by processes that require coordination between these functional lines. These are often called value delivery or core business processes. Like “new product development” and “order generation,” for example, these core processes strongly impact a customer’s perceptions of the business.

Businesses in the same industry tend to have basically the same core processes. But how a business performs these processes often determines its competitive advantage, or disadvantage, in the marketplace and ultimately determines its prosperity or failure.

No matter what strategies a business decides to pursue, achieving many of them requires making targeted improvements in those processes that are inherently linked to strategic goals. For every business, some aspects of its operation will be more critical to a particular strategy than another. Identifying where the process-to-strategy relationships are strongest – and what needs to be done differently within those processes – helps a business to prioritize its improvement efforts, focus on those that will have the greatest strategic impact, and translate the strategy into operational terms that everyone can understand and act upon.

Once these improvement opportunities are identified, the leaders of the business can then create detailed action plans and equip high-powered teams to recommend and implement changes in strategically critical areas. In many cases, these changes will require that new capabilities be developed (or existing ones improved) in core business processes. But they also may involve changes in non-core, or what are sometimes called “enabling” processes (such as “information management” and “talent acquisition”). These processes often provide vital services internally and support core processes in delivering value to customers.

Defining and visualizing processes is the critical first step to translating strategy into action. But it is through effective analysis and intelligent, data-based decisions that a business can understand the role which various processes play in achieving strategic goals. This then leads to an understanding of which process capabilities are necessary, where improvement and development resources can best be directed, and the appropriate tools and technologies to be applied.

Measurements

Visibility and improvement of business performance requires the development of the measurement systems and data which illustrate the linkage between process behavior and the business and customer objectives for the business. Every strategic goal should be accompanied by the quantification of that goal, and no goal should be established without its associated measures. This includes outcome measures to see how well a business is performing against its strategic goals, and also the internal process measures that provide visibility to the causal factors that either enable or disable the business from achieving its goals. When these measures are lacking, it is impossible for a business to understand the cause-and-effect relationship between the actions it takes and the goals it hopes to achieve.

Reliable data is needed to align improvements with strategy and to understand precisely the processes which the business needs to develop. This involves collecting information on how processes are currently performing and then identifying the most significant gaps between “baseline” and “targeted” performance levels. To establish these targets – and determine what levels of performance the strategy calls for – requires a comprehensive measurement system which not only takes time and effort to validate and build, but needs to be frequently updated to reflect customer, market and technological changes.

Once a business has determined the appropriate performance levels for the process areas considered key to the strategy, it is then prepared to focus on developing the process capabilities that are critical to meeting the new targets. A process capability is any performance characteristic or attribute of a process which is required if the process goal is to be consistently achieved. Identifying, evaluating and collecting data on these “required process capabilities” help a business to concentrate on making changes that will have real strategic impact and to make smart investments of its limited improvement resources.

A number of tracking tools (such as process management charts and dashboards) can be used to monitor process capabilities and measure their impact on performance over time. These measures serve as “leading” indicators or predictors of process, and hence business, performance. They enable the business to make decisions and adjustments on a much shorter horizon, assess whether and how well process performance targets will be met, and determine the extent of the gains made as a result of improvement investments.

Accountability

Agreeing on what the strategy of a business should be is the responsibility of senior management. But implementing the strategy requires a business to identify and engage the right people to make accountable for process performance and to equip them with the appropriate reporting tools and disciplines to responsibly evaluate and track the performance of processes.

To achieve its strategy, a business must create an organizational culture which fosters alignment between the strategy itself and the work performed within each department and function. This cannot be accomplished simply by communicating the strategy – no matter how well-chosen the words. A business must translate the strategy into process terms and into specific process goals and outcomes. This makes the strategic plan relevant to everyone in the business and gives each one a clear “line of sight” to the strategy. And it promotes ownership of new business goals by helping everyone understand how their work contributes to the overall objectives, and what skills, knowledge and abilities they must bring to bear to make the strategy succeed.

The three primary ways a business can promote feelings of accountability during strategy implementation are through:

1. The action of its leaders. Leaders serve as valuable role models when they make decisions based on data and processes (rather than gut feelings) and when they continually reinforce the strategic importance of process improvement.

2. Participation in developing the measures and reporting mechanisms that are needed to monitor critical process capabilities. When process owners and those who support them are required to measure, improve and monitor process outcomes on a regular basis, they tend to develop stronger feelings of accountability, as well as a greater commitment to continuous improvement. Of course, this only takes place when those with accountability for process performance are given both the skills and the authority to influence and manage those same processes.

3. Performance management. This is the most effective way to drive accountability. Individuals at all levels of the business should be evaluated based on how well they meet process performance goals. Recognition and rewards, both financial and non-financial, should be based on who contributes the most to making the strategy succeed. Generally, European businesses are organized in such a way that each business unit operating in a different country has is own P&L. This can facilitate the downward assignment of accountability for business performance. A challenge, however, is balancing the efforts to create common, global and best practice standards and disciplines for processes while still allowing country and regional versions to reflect local customer, channel and regulatory requirements.

Together with processes and measurements, accountability plays a key role in implementing business strategy. By linking individual performance to process improvements and outcomes, and by rigorously measuring outcomes against established targets, businesses will have a much higher likelihood of successfully translating strategy into action.

Continue reading