Tags |
|
|
Links |
|
|
Will You Add? - Process Review: Making a New Methodology Permanent
The U.S. market has seen an upsurge in the demand for imported vehicles in recent years. The main consumer of imported vehicles is the average American working class. Many people find that certain car models combine space, power and safety. Figures from the automobile market provide ample evidence of increased usage of imported vehicles. The registration of imported vehicles has shown an increase of nearly 57%, whereas that of domestic vehicles shows a growth of only about 9%. The growing trend can also be seen in the sales figures of different domestic cars in comparison with their imported equivalents. Toyota, Hyundai, Mercedes-Benz and Volvo have sold more cars than Ford, Buick, Cadillac and Lincoln respectively.Besides passenger cars, i
Have you ever heard the term INTRA-preneur?It's a play on the word entrepreneur that basically means "being an entrepreneur inside a big company". In other words, it's someone with a regular job who has a boss just like everyone else - except they have the MINDSET of an entrepreneur.But what does that mean exactly?An intra-preneur could be someone who leads a new project within the company, like the launch of a new product. This would have similarities to a launching a new company based around a single product because they'd still have to manage a team, look at a new market, and generally wear may hats.An intra-preneur could also mean an engineer who thinks about the business in a broader sense. Most eng
1. Select a core framework for the methodology. That is, a set of best practices is chosen as the guiding example for operational success.
2. Modify the framework to fit the specifics of the organization, and devise a concrete implementation.
3. Train the organization to perform using the methodology.
4. Establish a process to review and improve the methodology. The fourth step is process review - a set of activities aimed at implementing a continuous improvement mechanism within an organization with the purpose of maintaining and improving a methodology.
Why Do We Need Process Review?
Throughout the process of implementing the new methodology, the desired outcome is to draw users of the methodology together by standardizing their approaches and techniques. This is normally done by creating a common master process and toolset that are delivered to the target community. Common principles and practices are instituted to ensure adherence to the methodology.
Change and variances from the methodology are inevitable, however. People will experiment with alternatives and deviations, for better or worse. In addition, over time organizations assimilate new people whose training will vary.
Variances will begin to chip away at the uniformity imposed by the common procedures.
“Some of the variances which emerge may improve the methodology if widely adopted. Improvement is always possible and should be encouraged.”
Innovations over time should not be eliminated by a slavish adherence to established procedures. More importantly, people need to feel they are owners of the process, with a personal stake in the methodology.
Some of the variances may wreck the methodology if widely adopted. Not all innovations and variations followed by methodology practitioners are good and beneficial. It is important that such destructive variances not only be contained, but avoided entirely.
Uniformity of practice is the critical characteristic of a methodology. Whether potentially beneficial or potentially harmful, in both cases the common methodology is compromised when the variances are not followed by all. Of course harmful variances must not be allowed to propagate throughout the organization. But variances that have the potential to improve the methodology but are not incorporated into it will ultimately render the methodology obsolete.
Variances compromise the uniformity of the approach and undermine the investment in a common methodology. Process review is needed to take the variances and adjudicate them for their merit, either rejecting them as pernicious threats or incorporating them into an improved methodology.
What Are the Outcomes of Process Review?
When a methodology is implemented, common practices and procedures are established to which members of the organization are expected to adhere. That is, rules are imposed which define the methodology. But as we have already noted, the common tendency of organization members is to innovate and deviate from the methodology, slowly breaking it down over time. The rules thereby define the boundaries of acceptable variances. As organization members tend towards greater variance, challenging the boundaries, the rules serve as an opposing force to maintain the integrity of the methodology. This set of balancing forces preserves the rough outlines of the methodology, but it has some destructive side effects. First, it preserves the status quo. Although in some respects this is exactly the desired effect, it does not account for changes outside of the system and does not permit adaptation to those changes. And there will be changes. Second, it positions the methodology and the organization members as adversaries. Rather than drawing people i
The History of Hand Held Terminals in RestaurantsThe desire for restaurant hand held terminals and wireless restaurant software has been around since the invention of the electronic cash registers in the 1980's. When restaurateurs saw the power of the electronic cash register how it stored and recalled orders, how it dispersed orders to various kitchen and preparation printers and how it helped control the flow of the restaurant the desire to have this power in the palm of your hand has been there. It is only recently that technology caught up to the demand.In the 1990's a couple of companies introduced hand held terminals to restaurants with limited success. Displays were small and therefore limited menu items. Batte
Throughout the process of implementing the new methodology, the desired outcome is to draw users of the methodology together by standardizing their approaches and techniques. This is normally done by creating a common master process and toolset that are delivered to the target community. Common principles and practices are instituted to ensure adherence to the methodology.
Change and variances from the methodology are inevitable, however. People will experiment with alternatives and deviations, for better or worse. In addition, over time organizations assimilate new people whose training will vary.
Variances will begin to chip away at the uniformity imposed by the common procedures.
“Some of the variances which emerge may improve the methodology if widely adopted. Improvement is always possible and should be encouraged.”
Innovations over time should not be eliminated by a slavish adherence to established procedures. More importantly, people need to feel they are owners of the process, with a personal stake in the methodology.
Some of the variances may wreck the methodology if widely adopted. Not all innovations and variations followed by methodology practitioners are good and beneficial. It is important that such destructive variances not only be contained, but avoided entirely.
Uniformity of practice is the critical characteristic of a methodology. Whether potentially beneficial or potentially harmful, in both cases the common methodology is compromised when the variances are not followed by all. Of course harmful variances must not be allowed to propagate throughout the organization. But variances that have the potential to improve the methodology but are not incorporated into it will ultimately render the methodology obsolete.
Variances compromise the uniformity of the approach and undermine the investment in a common methodology. Process review is needed to take the variances and adjudicate them for their merit, either rejecting them as pernicious threats or incorporating them into an improved methodology.
What Are the Outcomes of Process Review?
When a methodology is implemented, common practices and procedures are established to which members of the organization are expected to adhere. That is, rules are imposed which define the methodology. But as we have already noted, the common tendency of organization members is to innovate and deviate from the methodology, slowly breaking it down over time. The rules thereby define the boundaries of acceptable variances. As organization members tend towards greater variance, challenging the boundaries, the rules serve as an opposing force to maintain the integrity of the methodology. This set of balancing forces preserves the rough outlines of the methodology, but it has some destructive side effects. First, it preserves the status quo. Although in some respects this is exactly the desired effect, it does not account for changes outside of the system and does not permit adaptation to those changes. And there will be changes. Second, it positions the methodology and the organization members as adversaries. Rather than drawing people
There are many aspects to our careers and it is having the whole package that leads to satisfaction. We will experience fulfillment and success to the extent that our needs in the 4 key areas are met.Step 6 – At this point you must work to identify all of the benefits you would like to receive from your job financially, emotionally, intellectually, and spiritually.In step 5 you evaluated the payoff you are getting from your work. Now, it is time to identify the payoffs you want to get from your work.I often talk to people who stumble when given this question. They know something is not quite right and they feel it in a myriad of ways but specifically identifying how they would like it to be gets a bit more challenging.idely adopted. Improvement is always possible and should be encouraged.”
Innovations over time should not be eliminated by a slavish adherence to established procedures. More importantly, people need to feel they are owners of the process, with a personal stake in the methodology.
Some of the variances may wreck the methodology if widely adopted. Not all innovations and variations followed by methodology practitioners are good and beneficial. It is important that such destructive variances not only be contained, but avoided entirely.
Uniformity of practice is the critical characteristic of a methodology. Whether potentially beneficial or potentially harmful, in both cases the common methodology is compromised when the variances are not followed by all. Of course harmful variances must not be allowed to propagate throughout the organization. But variances that have the potential to improve the methodology but are not incorporated into it will ultimately render the methodology obsolete.
Variances compromise the uniformity of the approach and undermine the investment in a common methodology. Process review is needed to take the variances and adjudicate them for their merit, either rejecting them as pernicious threats or incorporating them into an improved methodology.
What Are the Outcomes of Process Review?
When a methodology is implemented, common practices and procedures are established to which members of the organization are expected to adhere. That is, rules are imposed which define the methodology. But as we have already noted, the common tendency of organization members is to innovate and deviate from the methodology, slowly breaking it down over time. The rules thereby define the boundaries of acceptable variances. As organization members tend towards greater variance, challenging the boundaries, the rules serve as an opposing force to maintain the integrity of the methodology. This set of balancing forces preserves the rough outlines of the methodology, but it has some destructive side effects. First, it preserves the status quo. Although in some respects this is exactly the desired effect, it does not account for changes outside of the system and does not permit adaptation to those changes. And there will be changes. Second, it positions the methodology and the organization members as adversaries. Rather than drawing people
In Singapore, some business people could be heard saying at the coffee shops: “Blame your parents when you have no food and blame the government when your business is bad.” Such wrong attitude provides a bad start to solving your problems. Shame and blame are not justifiable. Take responsibility.Much of the world’s trouble arose as people blame others for their misfortunes. When criminals are jailed for murder, they blame it on their childhood abuses that have caused them to be angry against society. Teenagers got addicted to drugs and they blame it on their divorced parents that caused them to be delinquent. People get obese and sue the McDonalds for serving fat-laden hamburgers. No wonder, we are increasingly becoming such
Variances compromise the uniformity of the approach and undermine the investment in a common methodology. Process review is needed to take the variances and adjudicate them for their merit, either rejecting them as pernicious threats or incorporating them into an improved methodology.
What Are the Outcomes of Process Review?
When a methodology is implemented, common practices and procedures are established to which members of the organization are expected to adhere. That is, rules are imposed which define the methodology. But as we have already noted, the common tendency of organization members is to innovate and deviate from the methodology, slowly breaking it down over time. The rules thereby define the boundaries of acceptable variances. As organization members tend towards greater variance, challenging the boundaries, the rules serve as an opposing force to maintain the integrity of the methodology. This set of balancing forces preserves the rough outlines of the methodology, but it has some destructive side effects. First, it preserves the status quo. Although in some respects this is exactly the desired effect, it does not account for changes outside of the system and does not permit adaptation to those changes. And there will be changes. Second, it positions the methodology and the organization members as adversaries. Rather than drawing people
Interviewing with confidence is a bit like parachuting. Granted, not just like parachuting, but they are similar in the fact that both require confidence, practice and perfect timing or you could fall on your face. For those keen on giving a spectacular interview, here are a few helpful hints to tip the scales in your favor and see that you land safely in the seat of the job you want.When you prepare for an interview, don't just assume that picking out a power suit and sticking your CV in your bag is all there is to it. Those are two very important things to begin, but a few added efforts and doing some homework before hand can help more than you may have realized."Hello - worthy job applicant speaking." When an employer rings an
As a result of process review, the methodology becomes evergreen as innovations are introduced over time. Change is managed through a rational process, incorporating beneficial change while ferreting out harmful variances. And even more importantly, incremental improvements are recognized and encouraged, thereby transforming organization members into stakeholders in the methodology. When members are encouraged and rewarded for their efforts at incremental improvement, they begin to take ownership of the system and to develop a level of commitment. The principles and practices of the methodology are no longer placing pressures against the tendencies of the organizations members to challenge them. Rather, both are working towards a common goal.
Consider the case of an academic discipline. Scholars gather around a particular field, committing their lives to making incremental advances in the field. In the same way, the outcome of process review should be the creation of a discipline in which organization members feel a sense of commitment to advancing and improving the methodology.
Where Do We Begin?
Process review begins by forming a representative body of organization members who use the methodology. Membership in the body should be revolving to maximize participation, and some basic rules and procedures for reviewing the methodology and for adjudicating proposals for change should be established. The focus of the body should be not simply to protect the integrity of the methodology, but to nurture a community motivated and even dedicated to improving the efficacy of the methodology. Only through the fostering of an ongoing process of incremental improvements and advancement will a truly collegial atmosphere of collaboration be formed. And only through an atmosphere of collaboration will the methodology survive.
HTTP = HTML link (for blogs, profiles,phorums):
<a href="http://www.atriclecheck.com/article/17527/atriclecheck-Process-Review-Making-a-New-Methodology-Permanent.html">Process Review: Making a New Methodology Permanent</a>
BB link (for phorums):
[url=http://www.atriclecheck.com/article/17527/atriclecheck-Process-Review-Making-a-New-Methodology-Permanent.html]Process Review: Making a New Methodology Permanent[/url]
Related Articles:
Five Tips for Successful Online Job Hunting
The Do's and Don'ts of Starting a Business
Bookmark it:
|