To misquote Helmuth von Moltke the Elder:
No project survives contact with the customer
To misquote Helmuth von Moltke the Elder:
No project survives contact with the customer
The terms innovation and invention are thrown around with abandon. This is rife in the startup domain where the innovation is often relating to a business model and in ageing corporations where innovation is being used to revitalise the organisation. But when is it innovation? Or could we actually be thinking of invention, improvement or creation instead? Continue reading “When is it Innovation?”
I remember one of my clients being confused when I mentioned the carrot and stick as we discussed motivation for change. Since then I’ve found it an interesting test to see how people think motivation works in their immediate team.
There are two versions of the carrot and stick story. Both versions include a donkey. The first version is that the carrot is attached to string at the end of the stick. With the donkey-rider holding the carrot in front of the donkey. The carrot is the motivation but can never be reached. The donkey never wakes up to the fact that it can’t get the reward. The second version is that the carrot is offered as motivation to the donkey for moving forwards. The stick is used to tap (or beat) the donkey for not moving forwards. In this story, the donkey obtains the reward but also suffers punishment for not progressing. So when you think of carrot and stick in your organisation. Which version is it? Or is it a third one, where the donkey can move forwards and can get the carrot without risk of being beaten? #business #motivation
A few thoughts from me on quick wins and why we go for the wrong type.
Hands up if you’ve ever had a project sponsor say they needed quick wins? Usually, it’s about showing that you’re doing something to the company board so your project isn’t cancelled or it’s about showing you can make savings. Both of those indicate an immature organisation that’s ready to cancel change activities before they’re due to return results. Some changes take time, some can be done more quickly. The same change activity isn’t necessarily the right type of activity to achieve short and long-term changes. So if you’re on a long-term change project and you’re asked for quick wins, start to head off the question with looking at the original plan for when you’re due to complete your first phase. A better idea is to use quick wins to generate motivation within the users. They didn’t agree to the change plan, instead their managers signed-up to it. They have some inkling of what’s going to change, or in the case of many organisations, they’ve seen many change activities come and go with little result for them. So you’re on the back foot already. Quick wins should be about the users, such as front-line teams or field workers. Listen to their needs, hear their pain, uncover the activities giving them the most problem. And only after you’ve listened, start to generate a few quick solutions to their problems. These solutions are not intended to be long-term fixes. Instead, the quick wins are simple changes that can alleviate their pain. That’s how you get people to believe in you. At the same time, you can be addressing the longer-term fixes. The best thing is that quick wins, when approached from this perspective are usually easy, sometimes just a case of asking another team to respond differently or moving some office furniture around so people can work with less stress. Remember it’s not about achieving savings but making the working lives easier. What’s your experience and how do you approach quick wins? #changemanagement #motivation
I’ve always liked the concept about innovation being the introduction of something that’s already done in one industry sector into another sector where it’s not (yet) done.
Unfortunately, it doesn’t stand-up as a complete definition of innovation. For instance, it falls short by not recognising innovation from within. By that, I’m not referring to new types of products (e.g. the internal combustion engine) since those would be better classed as inventions. Many new products are existing concepts with new features, so would be better described as improvements. But taking a product and using it for a different purpose, e.g. using an internal combustion engine to power a unicycle could be an innovation.
What I like about the simple concept is that it immediately makes people think about what they Continue reading “Rodents Don’t Scuba Dive – Innovation In The Real World”
You have many opportunities in life and business to change your mind. Each of us has many opportunities, but we don’t always take those opportunities. We may be conforming to social constraints and expectations or don’t want to risk appearing inconsistent by changing too often. Let’s look at a non-serious example and extract nuggets we can apply in a business context.
I’m in a situation right now where I’m having to re-evaluate my aims. Fortunately it’s not a serious situation and there are a few parallels to my professional life. I play guitar and I own a few guitar amplifiers. Each guitar and amp has its own tonal identity and quirks. I pick the right tools for the job; playing in a 60s Motown/soul band requires different guitars and amplifiers than playing in an 80s hair metal cover band.
At a gig at the beginning of Summer this year, I played using a very nice amplifier and it sounded awesome with the band. I really enjoyed how it sounded and I probably played better because I was comfortable that it did the right job.
I thought that I could use the same amplifier with a few changes in my set-up (i.e. a different effects pedal or two) and I would again have an awesome sounding rig, but this one would be suited to the 80s hair metal cover band I’m currently playing in.
Two things to learn from this: Continue reading “When is the Right Time to Change Your Mind?”
After a year or so working with a large, complex client and some time before that working on a startup, I’m back to writing the book I started a couple of years ago.
Three good things have come from this break:
I expect to be publishing in 2016.
Yesterday, I presented at #Leanconf 2013 in Manchester. It was the first Lean Conference covering Lean Startup in Europe. There was a great energy to the 2-day event with a variety of planned and unplanned talks plus lots of opportunity to network without the usual tradeshow conference feeling of being stalked by sales managers.
I don’t think I’ve seen a community spirit like that in a long time; every attendees helped someone else no matter how far along their own ideas were.
In the spirit of the energy that I encountered at the conference, I’ve placed the slides on slideshare. If you download the presentation, you can read the notes which will help you make more sense of the slides. Hopefully the video will be online as well soon. When it is available, I’ll update and post a link to it. The slides are at bottom of this article.
The programme I discussed in the presentation was a 2+year programme with a large city council in England. The programme was internal to the portfolio that handled Adult Social Care. It had a £1m+ budget with a team ranging from programme manager, business analysts, data analysts and communications officer, plus a governance structure and other associated stakeholders.
The aim was to make Adult Social Care more efficient, by removing waste, focussing on flow and reorganising around the value to the customer. All typical lean concepts. We did this with a mixed method that I’d developed specifically for this client. The method merged elements of Lean with Lean Startup with DSDM and Theory of Constraints, all under a typical local authority governance framework using Prince 2.
The scale of change was to alter the way of working of 200-300 social workers/care managers, their team managers, their business support plus associated teams. Most were involved in the change and took the opportunity to steer the change in ways that would benefit their service users. Additionally partner teams (e.g. those responsible for 1000+ support workers within the council, NHS staff, payments and contact centre staff) were brought into the process and contributed to the changes where possible.
Due to the time available for the talk, I didn’t discuss Customer Development. I’d like to address that here. Firstly, my customers and those of the programme, were the workers on the frontline of social care. However, we also had a duty to their customers, i.e. the service users of the city and, wider still, the overall population of the city.
We used common Lean and Six Sigma techniques (e.g. Kaizenblitz, Voice of the Customer, Gemba plus interviews, workshops, etc) for understanding the wishes and activities of the frontline workers. The default position was always to go and visit the workers where they worked including a visit out to service users where possible and where permitted. There was no “ivory tower” mentality and as little desk-based research as possible.
I did want to get to the wishes of the end user, i.e. getting the answers to what mattered to the service users. We were able to do this through a service user forum and similar activities. Just to clarify, the forum is actually a real meeting, not an online forum. However the typical customer-development approach of “get out of the building” isn’t necessarily a good idea in this case. The reason is that any change has to be ethically sound; it can’t introduce discrimination nor can experiments (or MVPs from Lean Startup) that make the situation worse for those on that trial path.
The ethical dilemma is exacerbated further when you consider the concept of equitability in that any change has to be able to be applied to the entire population of service users if appropriate to them. So if you make a change to services in October, you’d better think about how you’re retrospectively going to apply those changes to service users referred back in April onwards. That could be as simple as a rule stating that they’d change at the next review point or it could be a specific project to apply it now.
A good example of the fundamental ethical issue can be found in the simple concept of asking customers “what can we do to improve?”
I love that question; it encapsulates the whole point of speaking to customers about what they want without biasing them towards a particular solution. It usually turns any negatives about current experiences into positive actions for change.
However, frontline staff wouldn’t want to ask that question of their service users in all circumstances, e.g. those with a current likelihood of being violent, those recently bereaved or in any situation where the service user or social worker is likely to come to harm. That means that the results from a survey of such a basic question would already be biased.
Similar nuances were found in almost every typical method for achieving customer development, whether phone surveys, online questionnaires, paper-questionnaires, focus-groups, questions tagged onto the end of a visit, etc.
Now, as mentioned in the slides, greenfield opportunities such as those found in newly-commissioned projects whether within local authorities or within NHS CCGs (Client Commissioning Groups) are ripe for Lean Startup and may benefit from a more thorough application of Customer Development.
I’d like to hear your comments, so leave a comment below or contact me
Some of you may already know, I’m in the process of writing a book on improving your own service.
I’m aiming the book at the people who work the process themselves, e.g.:
As you can see, it’s not restricted to any industry, but will be most relevant to those working in service industries (whether from private, public and 3rd sector), so that should include:
More accurately, the information in the book could be useful for any industry, however there already exist books for improving manufacturing production processes, so I have not covered them.
The focus is on improving a service without recourse to large consultancy fees and should work well on small changes locally within a team and managed changes with partner teams and organisations (e.g. suppliers and B2B clients). It’s heavily based on Lean concepts, using simple tools, but also includes a framework in which to manage the changes. I’ve borrowed from a number of methodologies and concepts to meld together a method that is suitable for the average worker and implementable in any service team.
While I’m happy to write this book alone and for everyone to read, I really like the idea of the readers contributing their thoughts as I write it. This fits nicely with the Lean Startup model, so to accomplish this, I’ve listed the current table of contents below. Please have a read through the table of contents and let me know what you think. If you’re interested in this book, let me know what you want to learn from it.
Section I: Beginning
3 Where to Start?
Section II: Redesign
4 How to Redesign the Service
5 Detailed steps for How to Redesign a Service
Section III: Other Paths
6 Refocus service on customer
7 Only have today to make changes
8 Bottleneck Resolution
9 Reduce errors and improve service
10 Create a new service
11 Improve office layout
Section IV: Case Studies
12 A Real World Example: Capacity and Value Stream Owner
13 A Real World Example: Duty Role in Social Care
14 A Real World Example: Urgent Cases in Social Care
Section V: Extensions
15 Other sorting methods
16 Making it Happen
17 Managing the Change
Section VI: Continuing
18 Sustaining Change
Section VII: Reflections
19 Important Perspectives
20 Other Frameworks
21 A final piece of advice
Section VIII: Appendices
22 Appendix A: The Rules
23 Appendix B – Pocket Guide for Service Redesign
24 Appendix C – Indicators of Blocked Flow and Waste
25 Appendix D: Tools
26 Appendix E: References
I’ve previously discussed the inclusion of a dormant state and a return loop when reflecting on the fact that the Customer Journey Never Ends.
You can include a further extension of the customer journey maps by showing proximity or emotional state.
Typical customer journey maps (or diagrams) depict activities and results, maybe important events as well. These commonly use the terminology of the organisation rather the customer. By shifting that focus onto how engaged the customer feels at each stage, we see the journey from a different perspective; that of the customer.
Companies often use a sales funnel to monitor their sales process. Analysing the performance against the states in the sales funnels allows a company to redesign its sales process or to develop additional collateral. Some of the funnels focus on emotional state mixed with likelihood of buying. The customer journey map that displays emotional states can fit very well with the states defined in sales funnels. For example, the tables at the end of the superb Lean Entrepreneur book take the reader through the different levels of engagement that a customer experiences as they progress through the sales funnel:
These funnel states would need to be extended to include less positive states commonly found as customers move away from your organisation, e.g.:
There may be more states, but that will depend on your customers and what you understand about them.
My preference would be to start afresh as thinking based on the emotional state is likely to produce a different picture of the journey than the model based on activities and results.
You may have noticed that I didn’t include asking the customer for their emotional state. I nearly always advocate gaining input from customers in the most appropriate manner. I only omitted it above for the fact that it’s often a step too far for a lot of organisations. However, if your organisation has the means to engage with customers at the right level, then collate the emotional content from your customers and use that to build your customer journey map.