I have been experimenting with delivering a version of the business architecture course at a distance. The issue has always been that when individuals want to enrol there are never enough at the same time to make a course economic for delgates and the trainer alike.
So by offering a version of 121 seminars and material on an learning management system it means the problem can be solved.
I have mentored one client recently and it seems to be well received. Skype as a delivery method is a bit flaky though with screen control freezing to much but as a first try all is going well. The delegate is based over 250 miles away and that fact alone proves the concept.
Tuesday, 26 October 2010
Wednesday, 6 October 2010
Process Gets the Blame
I am working with an organisation that has very little process, well fragments - dotted around here and there. They think they have process but they don't really. Some low level physical work flows too wordy too granular and certainly no big picture. Well meaning people changing stuff with unintentional knock on elsewhere in the organisation organic growth not change by design.
When things go wrong and you say its "because of lack of process" the reply is we have to much process that is the problem!
The issue is that what they blame as process is bad design and poor old process as a discipline gets the blame - it is difficult when people just don't know what looks good or for that matter what looks bad!
Are pockets of bad process worse than no process at all?
When things go wrong and you say its "because of lack of process" the reply is we have to much process that is the problem!
The issue is that what they blame as process is bad design and poor old process as a discipline gets the blame - it is difficult when people just don't know what looks good or for that matter what looks bad!
Are pockets of bad process worse than no process at all?
Networking Cynicism
As the downturn continues I am not surprised when as network colleagues get redundant they suddenly get in contact; this is happening about once a week at the moment.
Often you don't hear from people for years and then guess what their on the phone. The best ones are senior perm's that never returned your calls while trying to get business when they were in a position of power and now of course they want your help. How the mighty do fall!
I must admit is takes restraint not to tell them a few facts however in the preservation of the network- you never know when it works the other way- one has to hold ones tongue!
If people want the benefits of networking you think they would see the benefit of keeping in touch when times are good as it does look so cynical otherwise!
Often you don't hear from people for years and then guess what their on the phone. The best ones are senior perm's that never returned your calls while trying to get business when they were in a position of power and now of course they want your help. How the mighty do fall!
I must admit is takes restraint not to tell them a few facts however in the preservation of the network- you never know when it works the other way- one has to hold ones tongue!
If people want the benefits of networking you think they would see the benefit of keeping in touch when times are good as it does look so cynical otherwise!
Thursday, 12 August 2010
Process Technology and People have to be in balance
A recent reply to a comment on a forum that presense of business processes were negative in a business promoted this response.
Process technology and people have to be in balance.
However processes are vital, without them you have high variability non managed customer experiences and high costs. Processes are as much important assets as people.
What we see so often is badly designed standardisation resulting in some of the appaling customer experiences that we have to deal with today as customers. So just because process design is done badly is no reason to deny the value of process management.
Any business above a certain size can't function professionally without some process framework a SME can, to some degree, and that is why small compapies often do so well in a competative environment based on service; however get beyond a certain size and the cottage industry approach tends to fall apart, unfortunately.
The people issue is interesting. I have worked in failing organisations with no process or very little and they always promote "our people" as assets the result is people running around in mad chaos making things happen due to lack of process and creating a culture of indispensible people - prima donnas and heroes. In these companies costs are out of control and the inefficiencies errors and customer service are highly varied. They rush from one crisis to the next. In a market where day rates and salaries have plunged and supply of people is high people, subject to training of course, are a fairly easily replaced.
Businesses say people are their main asset and perhaps they are but most fail to treat their employees and engage them correctly. Corporate mantra of HR is that people are our assets but the reality of this doesn't often manefest in how folks are treated.
HR often believe what they wnat to believe in a group think manner - is "our assets are our our people" a corporate buzz-phrase?
Process technology and people have to be in balance.
However processes are vital, without them you have high variability non managed customer experiences and high costs. Processes are as much important assets as people.
What we see so often is badly designed standardisation resulting in some of the appaling customer experiences that we have to deal with today as customers. So just because process design is done badly is no reason to deny the value of process management.
Any business above a certain size can't function professionally without some process framework a SME can, to some degree, and that is why small compapies often do so well in a competative environment based on service; however get beyond a certain size and the cottage industry approach tends to fall apart, unfortunately.
The people issue is interesting. I have worked in failing organisations with no process or very little and they always promote "our people" as assets the result is people running around in mad chaos making things happen due to lack of process and creating a culture of indispensible people - prima donnas and heroes. In these companies costs are out of control and the inefficiencies errors and customer service are highly varied. They rush from one crisis to the next. In a market where day rates and salaries have plunged and supply of people is high people, subject to training of course, are a fairly easily replaced.
Businesses say people are their main asset and perhaps they are but most fail to treat their employees and engage them correctly. Corporate mantra of HR is that people are our assets but the reality of this doesn't often manefest in how folks are treated.
HR often believe what they wnat to believe in a group think manner - is "our assets are our our people" a corporate buzz-phrase?
Wednesday, 11 August 2010
Extreme Contrast
I was fortunate to have a day on the Ffestiniog Narrow Guage railway recently. One of the thoughts I had was how different this railway was to mainline companies; and one in particular I used daily whilst on a contract.
In accepting the vast differences in scale the overriding difference was cultural.
The daily commuting line I used seemed to treat its customers as the enemy with revenue inspectors, penalty fares, process driven ticket staff who had no empathy or concern for anyone other than their rules and inflexible procedures. Many posters of corporate mantra of customer focus but the reality is that its staff ,who are effectively inenabled due to the corporatised nature of the organisation, have a culture of resignation and "whats the point" - this is how things are done around here.
To be fair the trains run on time, well mostly, but the experience of this large company imposes on its monopolistic customer base is quite unpleasant.
The mountain railway was the complete inverse and it was all about engagement of its staff; they loved what they did, many being volunteers, smiles and fun were the theme throughout. It is so interesting to see how culture and coporatisation of a culture can create such variance. I know this is an extreme experience comparison but the well known commuter line could learn a lot from this bunch of committed amateurs in North Wales.
My observation here is about how coporate cuture can destroy the essense of customer service and how employee engagement is so key.
In accepting the vast differences in scale the overriding difference was cultural.
The daily commuting line I used seemed to treat its customers as the enemy with revenue inspectors, penalty fares, process driven ticket staff who had no empathy or concern for anyone other than their rules and inflexible procedures. Many posters of corporate mantra of customer focus but the reality is that its staff ,who are effectively inenabled due to the corporatised nature of the organisation, have a culture of resignation and "whats the point" - this is how things are done around here.
To be fair the trains run on time, well mostly, but the experience of this large company imposes on its monopolistic customer base is quite unpleasant.
The mountain railway was the complete inverse and it was all about engagement of its staff; they loved what they did, many being volunteers, smiles and fun were the theme throughout. It is so interesting to see how culture and coporatisation of a culture can create such variance. I know this is an extreme experience comparison but the well known commuter line could learn a lot from this bunch of committed amateurs in North Wales.
My observation here is about how coporate cuture can destroy the essense of customer service and how employee engagement is so key.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)