Shortlink for Sharing:
Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookShare on Reddit

Continuous Business Process Transformations

Posted by .

Practically every company has heard of continuous improvement techniques, from Lean to Six Sigma to 5S. But a post from the Harvard Business Review reminds everyone that no improvement program prevents us from needing to think clearly.

Blogger Ron Ashkenas writes that:

…Iconic six sigma companies in the United States, such as Motorola and GE, have struggled in recent years to be innovation leaders. 3M, which invested heavily in continuous improvement, had to loosen its sigma methodology in order to increase the flow of innovation. As innovation thinker Vijay Govindarajan says, “The more you hardwire a company on total quality management, [the more] it is going to hurt breakthrough innovation. The mindset that is needed, the capabilities that are needed, the metrics that are needed, the whole culture that is needed for discontinuous innovation, are fundamentally different.”

Here at AccelaWork, we’re no stranger to the problems with productivity growth and six sigma. We’ve reviewed the issues with Lean corporate productivity management as well. That’s not to say that these approaches are entirely bad. Rather, that it is the thinking and questioning done by stakeholders which makes the different. The copyrighted process improvement technique is not what’s important. It’s the people that matter.

business improvement consultants meeting

© Flickr user Highways Agency

In fact, we covered this in a piece called about being slaves to business process methodology:

[Recall] a familiar saying: there are no silver bullets. This expression reminds us not to put too much stock in comprehensive methodologies. However, the bullets are not without value. Peter Drucker says it best: Plans are worthless, but planning is invaluable. The benefit of a methodology is not in adhering to the practice, but in being methodical.

Harvard Business Review is right: continuous improvement is important, but not because we stick to officially approved methods. Rather, we must engender a mindset of always improving, always questioning, always thinking of better ways. Only when individual stakeholders are part of the process will true continuous improvement be at the center of the organization.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookShare on Reddit
  • http://www.workwiseinc.com Jeff Fossum

    Is it the problem of how the tool is used? CIP could be used to improve the innovation process, correct?

    • http://www.accelawork.com Robby Slaughter

      Thanks for the comment, Jeff!

      The problem is the blind adherence to the tool. Any tool can be useful, but only if the practitioner knows when to apply it!

  • http://www.softwareag.com/ Nancy Beckman

    “Plans are worthless, but planning is invaluable”

    That’s a great quote and so very true. Plans are only good if you can deviate from them. Rigidity gets companies into trouble because it means they can’t adapt, or they evolve too slowly and get left behind. You need a plan, but you have to know when it give up on the plan and make a new one.

    • http://www.accelawork.com Robby Slaughter

      Nancy, you are right!

      The problem is that many companies become addicted to doing things one way, and confuse having a process for having no choice but to follow that process.

      Thanks for sharing your thoughts! Come back anytime!

Shortlink for sharing: http://acwk.us/1l2Gq2V

Book Just Released - "The New Science of Time Management"