A good Process can be followed anywhere

Instructions by tobideisaso-fangirl on deviantart.com

Yesterday, Mark Graban stopped by with some comments on a recent post: “Results Only” means “Value Only”. Mark noted:

My concern with “Results Only…” is that we have to be concerned about both Results and Process. If we get the right results (in the short term) through a questionable process, are we really serving everybody’s needs properly? Lean teaches us that the right process will get the right results. We need to focus on more than just results, I think.

A good point, and one that highlights some areas where Lean thinking and ROWE-thinking need to be reconciled.

First off, ROWE could benefit by making use of how standardization leads to better, more consistent results. ROWE’s highly individual focus can be misunderstood as an idiosyncratic free-for-all, as long as the desired end result is produced. I think it’s well understood, however, that a lack of standard processes leads to variation and, ultimately, inconsistent results. A lot of what I’ve seen so far on ROWE gives the impression of an inherent danger: focusing so hard on the outputs that the upstream processes which determine the quality of the outputs are ignored.

This isn’t to say that ROWE is completely tossed out the window when Lean is introduced. Rather, I think it requires a deepening of ROWE as a concept. Results only should, in no way, prevent Lean. In fact, I think establishing a ROWE only sets the table for Lean to be adopted. Put it this way – if a process is not standardized, deviations occur, and quality suffers – then there’s a poor Result. If people believe in Results-Only…..always…..then the next logical step is to look for optimization.

Once an optimal process is identified, however, my thought is that it really only takes hold when people believe executing that process is better for both the company, and themselves, than any other method of accomplishing the task. Therefore, if a process is well thought out, it is adhered to out of a sense of inherent rightness and should be executable from anywhere – home, work, hotel or whatnot. True, in many professions the equipment necessary to perform the task only resides in one place. Nonetheless, when the tools necessary to perform a task are available….anywhere…..the processes to perform that task ought to be well designed enough that they can be performed anywhere. For most white collar work, the technology has eveolved to the point where this should be the norm and not the exception.

How many times have people changed departments or divisions within a single company, only to find that the means and methods they used at the last position are completely different from what is done in the new position? Now, there’s time spent learning and un-learning multiple processes, when a single standard would suffice if it was used across the organization.

As I continue to contemplate just what ROWE is, how it can be implemented, and what this means for our entire conception of what work is, I can’t help but think that there’s a lot of ways Lean thinking aligns with ROWE. Both schools of thought seem to have some powerful, reinforcing bonds. A focus on Results Only is an absolute – it’s not something you can half-ass and get the same results as mastering not just the techniques – but to mastering the concepts.

The implications are far-reaching. Whether people are in a profession where they are required to be on-site or not, shouldn’t process standards be invoked to create consistent, recognizable, satisfactory Results to a certain specification – all the time?

About the author David M. Kasprzak

I am a seasoned project and management analyst with over 14 years of experience as a trusted advisor to all levels on planning, measuring and analyzing activities. From small-scale internal projects to multi-year development efforts supporting enterprise-wide initiatives at the C-level, I “get geeky” seeing great management practices yield great outcomes. I am a fierce & vocal advocate for learning, collaborative approaches to work and pursuing Operational Excellence through challenging the status quo and fostering management innovation

Andy Wagner

Historically, the process has always been to sit at your desk 8 hours per day, regardless of whether or not value was added.
ROWE and Lean are consistent in suggesting that we focus on the value adding processes, and not time served or other metrics falsely correlated with value.

http://myflexiblepencil.com/about_davidk/ David M. Kasprzak

Thanks, Andy.

I find the difference between both approaches to be fairly small. Lean, however, tends to be more about the toolset and the hope that a greater focus on the people will come about as efficiency is realized. ROWE, on the other hand, begins with the people in a culture transformation and, once that has occurred, looks to processes in order to find greater efficiency.

In either case, it’s pretty clear that the mindset of time served = value is based on false assumption.