Some improvements only ever exist in theory. For example, the moon shot IT system that can do everything but costs so much time and money that the world has moved on before it can be delivered.
Other improvements exist within a frame but don't look so good when we take a wider view. For example, more specialisation sounds great but at what point does dicing up a customer's needs or a process leave us with a shitty whole made up of world-class parts?
In the other direction, sometimes our view can go so wide that we forget how to keep it simple. For example, integration and better coordination sound like they must be good things but when are we trying to provide something so wrap around and cotton wooled for our customers that all we can do is tie ourselves (and them) in knots? And when does that single customer record that sounds so alluring overreach what I really need to know to answer a customer's query (... or overreach how much they might want me to know?).
As we embark on improvements we need to look beyond the benefits in principle to have the hard conversations with ourselves:
> What are the chances of us delivering these benefits in reality and in full?
> What might we give up along the way - not just the financial or opportunity cost of delivering the change but also the impact on added complexity, technical debt and so on.
> How enduring are these benefits likely to be or will the rate of change in the world outpace the rate at which we can deliver and crystallise the benefits?
It's simply not true that reaching for the stars gets us the moon. Just as often it leaves us grasping at thin air.
Format: Blog
Tags: Theory
Comments
No comments on this post yet.