Business studies is full of two way grids ,matrices and canvasses of one type or another, These range from well known acronym driven tools like PESTLE SWOT to the now famous business model canvas,
As a lecturer in degree level business I see students getting the wrong end of tools; they think as long as they can talk about PESTLE or SWOT or Porter's Five forces they know Strategic management inside out.
Unfortunately the tools and acronyms give a false sense of security; many students know the tools but fail to use them well. This is not just for students business professionals also fall foul of generalist lists or a patch work quilt of "post it" notes on a flip chart. What is missing is the motivation behind a listed factor.
The classic at the moment for any PESTLE analysis or SWOT threat is BREXIT. Apart from every poorly managed and failing business blaming BREXIT rather than themselves, the threat is rarely explained.
This type of thing is especially seen in PESTLE and if you don't explain the reasoning for something on the list and its consequence clearly stated then doing the PESTLE in the first place is pointless.
Kaplan and Norton also got frustrated when the great Balanced Score Card resulted in massive lists under the headings and had to write another book to rectify the poor usage - Strategy Mapping,.
Rubbish in rubbish out - no tool or framework is going to solve that for you.
This is a blog about business architecture business design,change management and general comments/observations about management
Thursday, 4 April 2019
Tuesday, 5 February 2019
Senior Management don't get AGILE.
On a recent Twitter discussion a tweeter was complaining about senior engagement and asking where senior managers get their information and attitude about AGILE.
I wrote back and said that software developments whatever they are are so low down in the weeds that C level exec have very little knowledge and interest.
Upward selling of methodologies is always a looser's game and we focus too much of the latest fad or trend ; this is particularly a problem in the technology space. It stems from an over introspective view of what we do and an over inflated importance in terms of tactical issues in the bigger picture.
In the echo chamber where everyone is doing and saying the same then there is little perception that others outside of our world just don't see things as importantly as we do.
Focus on what methods deliver - outputs- not on selling the brand of the methodology. I have seen too much of people evangelizing about one method or another, whether it is Six Sigma , Lean or Agile, or anything else for that matter, it is just counterproductive. So many change initiatives start with selling some silver bullet approach rather than getting on with delivering quality outputs.
Forget the selling the method, the training and the overview pitches just use it to do good things - that is what earns respect; the pay rises and bonuses will follow.
I wrote back and said that software developments whatever they are are so low down in the weeds that C level exec have very little knowledge and interest.
Upward selling of methodologies is always a looser's game and we focus too much of the latest fad or trend ; this is particularly a problem in the technology space. It stems from an over introspective view of what we do and an over inflated importance in terms of tactical issues in the bigger picture.
In the echo chamber where everyone is doing and saying the same then there is little perception that others outside of our world just don't see things as importantly as we do.
Focus on what methods deliver - outputs- not on selling the brand of the methodology. I have seen too much of people evangelizing about one method or another, whether it is Six Sigma , Lean or Agile, or anything else for that matter, it is just counterproductive. So many change initiatives start with selling some silver bullet approach rather than getting on with delivering quality outputs.
Forget the selling the method, the training and the overview pitches just use it to do good things - that is what earns respect; the pay rises and bonuses will follow.
Monday, 28 January 2019
Strategy a difficult lesson.
Traditional strategy theories based on the VMOST type approach and those of Porter and Mintzberg present unconvincing output among students. Mission, goals and vision are easily stated but the problem comes when trying to teach people to convert these into meaningful actions. There seems to be a missing link ,a gulf if you like, between traditional corporate strategy statements and operating model design.
The development of the business model canvas helps here greatly but it still fails to appear in the main textbooks that stick to the older strategic planning tools and theories.
The business model and the expansion of the "how to" part of that model - the operating model is key.
What we need to do is to try to connect up the steps in "strategy to reality" or "strategy to execution" from these currently isolated separate steps into a more continuous development that logically takes us through iterative developing steps towards a sensible outcome that is meaningful in both strategic and day to day terms.
The four steps to success - strategy operating model development implementation and control need to have tools and techniques that create a much more visible end to end process rather than being stuck in their own worlds.
Strategists, architects, project managers and finally the operational managers ,who have to realise the strategy day to day, all talk different languages and use different approaches that seem to pull everyone in towards the middle of their own area of expertise.
This year we hope to expand on this thinking as we develop a strategy to execution storyboard to help people link strategy through to business as usual using a set of simple tools and approaches.
I have been trialing these ideas with our third year undergraduate students who are studying the UK's only specialist degree in insurance. The Strategic Management Module has given me a great opportunity as a lecturer to try to stitch the parts together and make some sense of the stages that traditionally are taught in a separate way.
I will keep you posted!
The development of the business model canvas helps here greatly but it still fails to appear in the main textbooks that stick to the older strategic planning tools and theories.
The business model and the expansion of the "how to" part of that model - the operating model is key.
What we need to do is to try to connect up the steps in "strategy to reality" or "strategy to execution" from these currently isolated separate steps into a more continuous development that logically takes us through iterative developing steps towards a sensible outcome that is meaningful in both strategic and day to day terms.
The four steps to success - strategy operating model development implementation and control need to have tools and techniques that create a much more visible end to end process rather than being stuck in their own worlds.
Strategists, architects, project managers and finally the operational managers ,who have to realise the strategy day to day, all talk different languages and use different approaches that seem to pull everyone in towards the middle of their own area of expertise.
This year we hope to expand on this thinking as we develop a strategy to execution storyboard to help people link strategy through to business as usual using a set of simple tools and approaches.
I have been trialing these ideas with our third year undergraduate students who are studying the UK's only specialist degree in insurance. The Strategic Management Module has given me a great opportunity as a lecturer to try to stitch the parts together and make some sense of the stages that traditionally are taught in a separate way.
I will keep you posted!
Sunday, 6 January 2019
2019 A New Year and a promise.to post more.
This blog has been running for since 2013 and I should post more, I know. It is easy to forget or focus on other things. So let me start the year with better intentions with a new brief post.
As I start 2019 I see reduction in the interest in business architecture as a term and a discipline as in recent years it seems unfortunately to have been absorbed and assimilated by the "Borg" of I.T. Self important guilds and bodies have just, to be frank, certificated it to death.
What is clear though is that the underlying techniques and tools still are in demand, but from business people in operations and from elsewhere outside of the I .T. department. In reality the term business architecture is not in their vocabulary at all but what they do is. I suppose in truth it doesn't really matter as we should not be marketing a discipline or role as such, which has been quite common over the years, but what is important is the promotion of the right type of good solid design methods.
Marketing the discipline has passed; let us now focus on the outcomes and how to achieve those outcomes instead.
As I start 2019 I see reduction in the interest in business architecture as a term and a discipline as in recent years it seems unfortunately to have been absorbed and assimilated by the "Borg" of I.T. Self important guilds and bodies have just, to be frank, certificated it to death.
What is clear though is that the underlying techniques and tools still are in demand, but from business people in operations and from elsewhere outside of the I .T. department. In reality the term business architecture is not in their vocabulary at all but what they do is. I suppose in truth it doesn't really matter as we should not be marketing a discipline or role as such, which has been quite common over the years, but what is important is the promotion of the right type of good solid design methods.
Marketing the discipline has passed; let us now focus on the outcomes and how to achieve those outcomes instead.
- What is the future operation going to look like and why?
- How do I communicate why we are moving this way?
- How do I analyse this poorly presented strategy?
- How do I avoid transformation failure and unnecessary expenditure?
- Are buzzword topics necessary or are they a distraction?
- How do I plan what to build and when?
Some key questions, a sample set among many others, that will be answered in 2019.
Happy New Year.....
Tuesday, 2 October 2018
The Cheshire Cat and Operating Models
On reviewing an article on operating model choices - I
researched a phrase which is a slight mis-quote from Lewis Carroll -
‘if you do
not know where you are going, any road will take you there’.
It describes the futility of operating model work without
strategic direction. It was used to suggest a good strategy is essential prior to design. The real passage has a similar meaning and is apt.
‘Cheshire Puss,’ she began, rather timidly, as she did not at all know
whether it would like the name: however, it only grinned a little wider.
‘Come,
it’s pleased so far,’ thought Alice, and she went on. ‘Would you tell me,
please, which way I ought to go from here?’
‘That depends a good deal on where you want to get to,’ said the Cat.
‘I don’t much care where—’ said Alice.
‘Then it doesn’t matter which way you go,’ said the Cat.
‘—so long as I get somewhere,’ Alice added as an explanation.
‘Oh, you’re sure to do that,’ said the Cat, ‘if you only walk long
enough.’
Pretty much sums up a lot of business change – enjoy!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)