Tuesday, June 05, 2007
The "right" processes are wrong
I was pondering processes while making some tea today. Most of my process pondering these days is inspired by what Sig is doing.
I think our natural tendency is to work hard toward some perfect process. We try doing something in one way, find the flaws, adjust, grow, etc. Hopefully as things progress we have developed processes that work really well for us. But that is the key right there, they work well for us. The question we need to ask is whether they work well for anyone else.
Think about an employee trying to get a job done. What usually happens is that the boss (we) try to impose our process onto their actions. It is a kind of FIFO mentality (fit in or f-off). Our process might work brilliantly for us, but horribly for them.
Compare it to making a cup of tea (or coffee, or your beverage of choice) — every person has subtleties and nuances in the way they make their favourite drink. The end result is the same, a drink which you enjoy drinking, the process is different. Typically we are happy to allow people their own coffee/tea/beverage making process, why do we expect them to design/code/file/etc. according to ours? Do we allow freedom for variation in the process if the end result is the same?
It seems like a fixed process way of working is a relic of modernism. Allowing processes to vary provides flexibility to create efficiency (each person works differently, just like we each make tea differently). Also, we get to watch the process and see the benefits (and disadvantages) of how others do things. Again, adjust, grow, etc.
On the other hand we also want to avoid the confusion of a laissez–faire environment. There must be some form of regulation. Do not police process, regulate it. Ensure outcomes, monitor efficiency. Be open to new ideas. Adjust, grow etc.
When I was preparing this post I sent it to a friend, Dave Alcock (founder of The Forum SA), who gave me some great feedback which I felt needed to be published as is:
Technorati tags : processes, business, systems
Read More
I think our natural tendency is to work hard toward some perfect process. We try doing something in one way, find the flaws, adjust, grow, etc. Hopefully as things progress we have developed processes that work really well for us. But that is the key right there, they work well for us. The question we need to ask is whether they work well for anyone else.
Think about an employee trying to get a job done. What usually happens is that the boss (we) try to impose our process onto their actions. It is a kind of FIFO mentality (fit in or f-off). Our process might work brilliantly for us, but horribly for them.
Compare it to making a cup of tea (or coffee, or your beverage of choice) — every person has subtleties and nuances in the way they make their favourite drink. The end result is the same, a drink which you enjoy drinking, the process is different. Typically we are happy to allow people their own coffee/tea/beverage making process, why do we expect them to design/code/file/etc. according to ours? Do we allow freedom for variation in the process if the end result is the same?
It seems like a fixed process way of working is a relic of modernism. Allowing processes to vary provides flexibility to create efficiency (each person works differently, just like we each make tea differently). Also, we get to watch the process and see the benefits (and disadvantages) of how others do things. Again, adjust, grow, etc.
On the other hand we also want to avoid the confusion of a laissez–faire environment. There must be some form of regulation. Do not police process, regulate it. Ensure outcomes, monitor efficiency. Be open to new ideas. Adjust, grow etc.
When I was preparing this post I sent it to a friend, Dave Alcock (founder of The Forum SA), who gave me some great feedback which I felt needed to be published as is:
"There are times when the concept needs to take a back seat. Particularly where team members interface — there need to be agreed conventions of handover and interaction at those interfaces IMHO.
"It also relies on there being adequate skill/experience/ability within the people you give this licence to. Some people simply need method otherwise there is no way they can achieve the objective.
"My personal take: Method can turn ordinary people into super-achievers and turn super-achievers into ordinary people."
Technorati tags : processes, business, systems
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)
Search This Blog
Subscribe
Tags
About this blog
I'm Duncan Drennan and this blog is about spreading ideas regarding engineering, our environment and creating a better world. You can also follow me on Google Reader.
About Engineer Simplicity
Engineer Simplicity specialises in the design and development of electronic products.
Copyright Notice
© Copyright 2006-2010, Duncan Drennan, All rights reserved
Popular Posts
-
We are in the middle of an energy crisis and each of us need to make some dramatic changes to ensure that we have electricity, and that the ...
-
The short version (my "elevator pitch"): Compact fluorescent lamps (CFLs) use about a fifth of the energy of a normal (incandescen...
-
As engineers we spend a lot of time solving problems. A customer has a problem and it needs to be fixed. The electronic boards you have just...
-
There are a lot of steps to turn an idea into a product. Each step requires care and attention to ensure that the best product is created. B...
-
So here we are, the first blog post...well, really, here I am. My name is Duncan Drennan and this is my blog on business, design, electronic...
-
This post forms a part of the SA Blook . So what is our reality? South Africa has an unemployment rate of about 23%, a skills shortage crisi...
-
eWaste is a particularly difficult issue to deal with as it contains many different materials and lots of extremely hazardous substances. I...
-
Electronic design automation tools like OrCAD , PADS and Altium Designer are part of an electronic engineer's day–to–day life. We need...
-
With 48 post over nearly three years, I am certainly not a prolific blog writer. My goal has never been to write a lot, but to rather explor...
-
I think that it is worth trying to understand some of the reasons we are heading towards a food crisis . The result of all of this deregulat...
© The Art of Engineering 2013 . Powered by Bootstrap , Blogger templates and RWD Testing Tool