Holland & Davis Business IT Alignment

Business IT Alignment

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:00:00 GMT

I am hearing a lot about Business IT Alignment. What is it and how do I get it from my company?

Answer: Business and IT can be said to be aligned if two conditions are regularly met:

1. IT can consistently be employed to strengthen or raise the performance of the business…and

2. IT systems can be put to work in the business without employee “angst.”

Making money for the business without employees having to work and fret for 80 hours a week should be the primary driver behind IT assets.

For many companies to be better aligned, however, aggressive actions will need to be taken to (1) ensure the IT function is structurally aligned with the business, (2) ensure that the company as a whole is supportive in investments in IT assets, and (3) develop and implement methods and tools that allow systems implementations to be both technical and business successes.

1-Feb-08 0:00 AM

The Need for Executive Leadership in Big System Implementation

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:00:00 GMT

Nowhere is Business IT alignment more critical than in the implementation of an Enterprise IT system. Nowhere is senior leadership more critical for good BITA. Failure to get the senior executives into the game almost dooms the implementation from the beginning. System advocates who really believe the system will help the business do better business have the responsibility of getting senior execs on board and playing useful roles.

Implementation of an enterprise system is a top-down management exercise that follows from a decision that is made at the top. Firms that spend $15 million to $250 million on software alone - in addition to system integration, documentation, training and change management - will want the organization to use that system to make money for the company. In company environments that are accustomed to “taking or leaving”a new computer application, depending on the preferences of the user, introduction of an enterprise system is a shocking change. Only the most senior executives on both the line and staff sides of the organization have the authority and power to make the enterprise system decision and then enforce it. While many CEOs have tried to duck responsibility during system implementation, organizations with successful systems have stand-up CEOs who actively led the implementation.

Contrary to popular belief, the second most important executive to the implementation is the COO who represents the user community who will work with the implemented system to make money for the company. The COO is directly responsible for the users who must be fully prepared to use the new enterprise system once implemented. Full preparation includes a lot more than training on the new bells and whistles of the technology. Preparation includes the alteration of all work processes that touch the enterprise system to ensure alignment and the alteration of the performance systems of roles and responsibilities of workers who will use the new system. In those cases where only selected modules of an enterprise system are implemented, like financial or human resources modules, the top organizational executive responsible for the target functional area (i.e., the CFO or the CHRO) most take on those duties just discussed for the COO.

The third key executive role is played by the CIO, the usual owner of the information technology resource for the firm, who must ensure a successful technical implementation of the enterprise system. The CIO is many times called on to be the day-to-day leader of the executive team during the implementation. The savvy CIO leads by pointing out the time and place the CEO needs to throw her support for the system and working with the COO to ensure that user preparation is proceeding as needed to be ready for the technical “go live.”.
Every top executive in the organization that is implementing an enterprise system will have a Red Zone role. That is, they should each have an important and visible piece of the Red Zone action in addition to their day job, their usual duties in the day-to-day running of the company.

Senior execs not on board? Consider delaying the IT implementation until you get them on board … or pay the piper down the road.

1-Feb-08 0:00 AM

Two by Two: The Secret to Technology Insertion

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 06:00:00 GMT

They went into the ark two by two. The go down the isle in a wedding two by two. We buy … two gloves, and two shoes. Some things “just come in pairs.” Not identical pairs, but in many cases functional pairs … like in the ark. Functional pairs, a left glove and a right glove, to give protections to both hands … same function by mirror images of each other … fitting together, matching and complementing each other. Mis-matches don’t work: two left gloves … or a well-sewn right glove and a “barely stitched” left glove.

Believe it or not, the top paragraph can be made relevant to the subject of technology insertion. What is a technology insertion? What about … introducing microwave cooking to a restaurant chain to speed up cooking and service time? … introducing a new type of airliner (the 787) to an airline to get better fuel economy and less cost per seat per mile. … introducing a new computerized trading software system into an energy company. You get the picture.

The bottom line near the top is simple: technology insertions require two (count them) projects that are complementary but very different … like a husband and a wife. Complete only one of the two projects in a technology insertion … and you don’t get successful technology insertion … and therefore, you don’t get the value that was supposed to come with the technology.

Let me explain. Suppose the navy decides to order a new airplane for fleet service … the current planes are just not fast enough anymore. After an extensive procurement process, Boeing is hired to build the new airplane … and build it they do using a project approach and a “systems development methodology.” Their job is to start from a clean sheet of paper to design and build the new warplane … and since it will be a very difficult and complex job, they must use a proven development process.

Meanwhile, the carrier force is still steaming the oceans launching and recovering current warplane … and, hopefully, preparing for the arrival of the new birds. However, the captains in charge of the carrier and the air wing are not using a “systems development process” because they are not creating something new (hanger space, appropriate catapult gear, trained pilots and maintenance personnel, etc.). They in fact will be executing a very difficult and complex task with their existing ships and personnel … using a project approach and a proven “organizational change methodology.”

The project to get the airplanes ready and the project to get the ships/crew ready are complementary but different, both in what the projects get done and how they get them done. Certainly, both projects must be thoroughly worked and completed on time. Imaging the airplane build project completed on time but the carriers and crews not ready. “Holly Cow,” yelled the leader of the flight deck crew, “What was that thing that just landed? Look, there are a bunch more coming!” (That is when the captain of the ship appears in an ad for Southwest Airlines: Want to get out of town?)

Two by two projects must go forward for successful insertion of Information Technology as well. The two complementary but very different projects:

Preparation of the information technology software/system for use in a business organization
Preparation of the organization/business for use of the IT software/system to do business better and more profitably

The two projects are complementary and of equal importance. Neither project can be subordinated to the other; and both projects cannot be managed by one side or the other … the two projects are just too different in work breakdown structure as well as for mindsets and techniques.

Therefore Program Management, better reporting to the business than IT, serves the leadership, coordination, and collaboration functions, ensure that the organization is ready to use the technology as soon as it has been proven ready for use.

1-Feb-08 0:00 AM

What Is Business IT Alignment?

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 20:00:00 GMT

Question: I am hearing a lot about Business IT Alignment. What is it and how do I get it from my company?

Answer: Business and IT can be said to be aligned if two conditions are regularly met:

IT can consistently be employed to strengthen or raise the performance of the business…and
IT systems can be put to work in the business without employee “angst.”

Making money for the business without employees having to work and fret for 80 hours a week should be the primary driver behind IT assets.

1-Dec-07 2:00 PM

Making Systems Change Visible

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Sat, 01 Dec 2007 15:00:00 GMT

When a chemical company makes a change to its physical plant, it is usually pretty obvious. There is likely to be construction work clearly visible to managers and employees alike for weeks, if not months. When construction and testing are complete, it is rare for anyone to be surprised that the new facility is expected to be utilized.

Watching construction progress is a favorite pastime of many employees on the job. But beyond providing entertainment, watching construction progress helps employees mentally prepare for their part in any new operation. In fact, if employees see construction that is nearing completion, and they have not been trained on the new equipment, their anxiety goes up as “go-live” approaches without adequate preparation for utilization.

All of this sounds logical and simple. But things don’t’ often progress this way for an IT system implementation. In fact, the opposite is likely to be the case. For many employees, the frantic work that may be going on to prepare/construct the IT system may be invisible. And to re-coin a phrase, “out of sight, out of mind.”

Lack of visibility of progress toward system “go-live” prevents mental preparation and contributes to a low sense of urgency. Project managers who are responsible for a system startup, and business managers who are accountable for making money with the new system, don’t have to wait in the shade, however. They can take concrete actions to make progress visible.

Signage – simple signage (like the thermometer we frequently see for a United Way campaign) can show a moving percentage completed
Business Project Website – creating and maintaining a unique website just for the business project enabled by the IT system can be used to show news about progress
System Demonstrations - show and tell demonstrations can make the coming system real and more tangible
User Acceptance Testing – In this most important step, employees get to “see and feel” the system that is on the way. At this point, employees begin to believe there really is a new system on the way.
Work Process Training – Employees should have the advantage of two (count them), two different kinds of training: system training (system operational instructions) and work process training (using the system as part of the employee’s job.)

In summary, selling progress is an important part of the mental preparation employees must do to be thoroughly prepared “to go to work at go-live.”

1-Dec-07 9:00 AM

What Makes Change So Difficult?

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 05:00:00 GMT

What makes change so difficult for some employees?

Answer:
Many changes in business are not difficult … as a radio personality often says, "I can do it with half my brain tied behind my back." Some changes are difficult, no doubt about it.

One concern is that we are making change more difficult by giving it a reputation of difficulty. For example, see the quote below about change coaching (us):

Essentially, Rock said, “The goal of coaching is to change the brain. You’re facilitating self-directed neuroplasticity,” or helping people change their brains.

Recent discoveries in how the brain functions offer new insights into why change is so difficult for individuals, according to Rock, a faculty member of CIMBA, an international business school in Europe, and author of Quiet Leadership: Six Steps to Transforming Performance at Work (HarperCollins, 2006).

I think a part of our job as change consultants is to say that a change at work is not about changing an employee’s life (or brain). A change at work is about changing a worker’s part in a business play. Nothing more, nothing less.

The last thing we need is to have one of our clients say, “Aha … I know what you guys are doing! You are trying to facilitate self-directed neuroplasticity on me! And I just know the manipulative CEO is behind it!!”

Instead, we are ready for the curtain to rise on the set of the new business play. Places everyone ... It's Showtime!

1-Oct-07 0:00 AM

Buying Time

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Mon, 01 Oct 2007 05:00:00 GMT

Begging for Time

“I don’t have time to do my job today, much less have the time to [learn a new computer system, serve on another change task force, be interviewed by 26 kid consultants, attend a company forum to listen to our CEO answer stupid questions about why we have to change in order to meet a competitor’s price]. I am not against changing the way we do business … I get it … to stay competitive we all have to make changes. The plain truth is that I just don’t have the time … and I can’t bear the thought of telling my family once again, that I’m going to be coming home late … for maybe the next six weeks or so.”

Are we really listening to the fundamental message (plea!) in the above quote? Are we only hearing the message we want to hear? Can we hear him saying that he doesn’t need more explanation of the change, he doesn’t need to better understand the case for change, he doesn’t need to stand up and ask management to ‘justify’ the change … he just needs the time to make the change!

Buying Time

If we want to help organizations make changes happen on target, on time, and on budget, so that they can do business better … we must bring “time relief” to employees involved in business changes. And if we are managers who need to make our business run differently and better, we must “buy time” as well as new facilities, new software, new processes. Yes, making change happen does require “buying” new stuff … like the software mentioned above. Most companies “get it” and put in the bucks to buy the hard assets (you know, the high priority stuff). And if there is any loose money lying around, some of it might even by dedicated (temporarily at least) to fund an out-of-the-can training course that might be relevant to some way to the desired change.

The real focus for spending dollars on change should be on buying time for employees. The dollars should be spent to buy help, encouragement, tools, hands-on assistance, and even “do-it-for-them” services. Let’s try an example.

What Buying Time Looks Like

One of our clients has been a pioneer in “rolling up” hospital pharmacies into a large pharmacy company. A hospital might sell their pharmacy operation to our client (for all sorts of reasons). Our client company then has to transition the pharmacy to the “company way of doing business.” In comes the company transition team … five folks come in to transition a five person pharmacy. Yep, one on one … each transition team member is trained to make the changes, explain and then clarify them, hand hold, demonstrate a “can do” attitude and show genuine appreciation for those five who have just joined the company. The lead pharmacist on the transition team pitches in to help fill prescriptions so that there will be time to “brief and explain” before the end of the shift. In one week’s time, the transition team saves the new employees from a lot of frustration, feelings of insecurity and, very importantly, overtime.

“They say that time changes things, but you actually have to change them yourself.”
-Andy Warhol

That’s right, each employee will inevitably have to make change happen … but having dedicated, talented people helping with each step absolutely will save time. So when do we start buying time? There is no time like the present.

1-Oct-07 0:00 AM

Implementing a Change

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 05:00:00 GMT

We are currently implementing a change in our production scheduling. We just got started and, already, we feel lost in the details. What do you suggest?

Answer: There are a lot of details in the implementation of any major change. You must keep track of those details, organize them, and turn each detail into a scheduled action item.

Three indispensable tools include (1) a template that can help identify and organize the details and (2) a critical path project scheduling system (like MS Project), and (3) personnel who are concrete thinkers and detail-oriented. Our firm makes its living with our implementation templates on MS Project managed by change engineers. You really have only three options: slog your way through, learn how then do it, or hire professionals who have done it successfully many times before. Good luck!

1-Aug-07 0:00 AM

Changing "Change" for a Change

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 05:00:00 GMT

No word has been used more often in the last decade. No word is more accurate in describing what is (and has been) happening in the world of business. I wish I could say that no word excites and motivates more people in business…but such is not the case.

“Change” is a word that many hear with fear and dread. To many, change means frustration, discomfort, exhaustion, and even failure. There are few people who have not had a bad experience with change in their place of business. If one announces “We are going to change the way we do business” they will often watch people duck or shudder…not applaud.

The important message for those of us in the change business is that we must be extremely cautious in how we use the word in a business initiative, lest we unwittingly create negative conditions and/or discouragement from the start.

We need to change the way we use “change” in a change initiative. In fact, we should consider different words… such as:

Improve	Enhance	Strengthen	Enable	Enrich
Alter	Replace	Replenish	Re-supply	Modify
Intensify	Heighten	Deepen	Better	Amend
Tone up	Fortify	Beef up	Tune up	Energize
Stimulate	Perk up	Excite	Accelerate	Quicken
Raise	Fire up	Evoke	Charge up	Benefit
Step up	Brace	Kindle

Most of these synonyms are common vocabulary, and very few if any carry the negative valence of “change.” So you might give some of them a try. Who knows? It might be a positive change!

1-Aug-07 0:00 AM

Organization Chart

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 05:00:00 GMT

Why are Holland & Davis consultants always bringing up “the organization chart?” What does our company’s organization chart have to do with the process changes we are trying to make?

Answer: The organization chart is the business-standard representing the pattern of official positions, relationships and responsibilities. With an organization chart, one can find his own reporting relationships, as well as see the officers who are directly responsible to the owners of the company.

With regard to process changes while we frequently start with a team of “internal process experts” regardless of where they are on the organization chart, when its time to implement those process changes, the organization chart is indispensable. Only the “bosses” on the organization chart have the legal authority to formally change process steps and/or jobs.

1-Jun-07 0:00 AM

Engineering Organizational Change

noemail@bita.hdinc.com — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 05:00:00 GMT

The discipline of Change Management can be viewed from two perspectives:

from the change manager’s point of view and
from the point of view of the workers who are undergoing organizational change.

Both perspectives are important and demand active attention if an organization and its workers are to experience successful organizational change.

Change Manager’s Perspective

For the change manager who is responsible for executing an organizational change, the purpose of the discipline of Change Management is to ensure that organizational change occurs on target, on time, and on budget

Change Management provides the change manager with actions and approaches that will allow him/her to successfully guide organizational change.

Key issues addressed by this perspective of Change Management include clarifying the directions and reasons for change. Change Management includes actions that might be taken:

to develop the vision of the future organization,
to develop the rationale or case for change, and
to plan the alterations in processes, plant/equipment/rewards that will need to be made in the organization in order for the future vision to be realized.

Worker’s Perspective

For the workers experiencing an organizational change, the purpose of the discipline of Change Management is to ensure that workers complete the change process

Prepared
Motivated, and
Competent

… to work in the changed organization. In short this second side of Change Management ensures that workers are Ready, Willing and Able to operate the changed organization.

Key issues addressed by this second perspective of Change Management include “healthy” and “unhealthy” responses to change. On the healthy side, Change Management includes actions that might be taken

to explain the reasons for organizational change,
to involve workers in planning and accommodating the change, and
to train and assist workers in acquiring needed skills, knowledge, and attitudes for transition to the new (changed) organization.

For unhealthy responses to change, Change Management includes actions that might be taken to assist workers who have severe and negative reactions to changes in the workplace.

The Integrated Perspective: “Engineering Organizational Change

With these two different perspectives in mind, we included the critical actions that need to be performed from both perspectives into our integrated approach to Change Management – Engineering Organizational Change (EOC). We know that using the EOC sequence will ensure that

the actions taken to cause the organization to change (on target, on time and on budget) and
the actions needed so that workers will have healthy response to change (prepared, motivated and competent) …

will be taken. EOC is truly an approach that will lead to “killing two birds with one stone.”

1-Jun-07 0:00 AM