The Process Ninja

Processes, Procedures, Work Instructions - what's the difference anyway?

It’s often all too easy to bundle “processes and procedures” into one statement as if they are a single entity. Of course, they aren’t, but ask a dozen people what the difference is and you are likely to get a dozen different answers. Throw in the oft misunderstood “work instructions” and chaos can ensue!

When working to improve business processes and procedures it’s critically important to define what each is prior to embarking on the improvement initiative. This sets a clear understanding for the business in terms of what work will be performed.

The easiest way to think about processes and procedures is in the level of detail of the information. Processes can be described as being at a “high level” and operate across the organization’s varying functions, whereas procedures sit at a “low level” i.e. they contain detailed information. Both are, of course, intrinsically linked. The procedural level can be thought of as a detailed breakdown of a step in the process.

Processes vs Procedures

…and Work Instructions

So what are the key difference between processes, procedures and work instructions?

Processes are cross-functional and define what is done and by whom. They are often depicted in diagrammatical form such as a decision tree or flowchart where the work performed is split into logical interrelated steps or “activities”. Processes should always have a “trigger” or start event and a “terminator” or end event that achieves a specific result. All processes should seek to fulfill a successful customer outcome.

Procedures define how the work is performed. They are typically documented in a step by step order with detailed descriptions of how the work is to be performed and who is responsible for performing the work.

Work instructions add a level of confusion to the puzzle, but are generally recognized as a sub set of procedures. The way they differ is that the work instruction is typically written to describe how to do something specifically for a single role, rather than procedures that may contain instructions for several different roles within an organization.

How to Use

The next question then relates to how each of these should be used.

The answer is simple: together.

Processes are an excellent means of quickly displaying the entire process in an easy to understand format, but on they are too high level for staff to use to perform their day-to-day work. This is where procedural detail is required.

The solution to this problem is to always pair process diagrams and procedural detail together, clearly showing the step (or steps) in the process that the procedure refers to.

This way staff can see the greater context and implications of the cross functional process whilst having the level of detail required to be able to successfully complete their own tasks. Work instructions can also be used in this manner but caution should be exercised as single role based work instructions can lead an insular view of the work being performed. Well-written procedural detail can often eliminate the need for documenting work instructions.

Processes, procedures and work instructions are all part of the business eco-system, and just like life on earth, they work best when we work to manage all of them together in perfect harmony.

Cheers,

TPN

Rumours of My Demise are...

Those of you with sharp eyes will have recently noticed from my Linkedin page that I am now operating as a partner in a business improvement consultancy.

Does this mean that The Process Ninja is Dead? Of course not! The good news is that I have made the switch to this new business as it will now provide me with greater flexibility to do consulting and speaking engagements - which have always been my passion.

In the past I have typically worked in long-term contracts which have not given me the flexibility to spend time on my other activities, such as building my consulting businesses (The Process Ninja, The Cafe Ninja), writing these blogs, running my beach house holiday rental business and writing more books (like my recently published "The Complete Guide to Buying a Cafe"). I also intend to do more speaking engagements and provide training in the CEM Method.

The good news for Process Ninja readers is that I now have the flexibility to help you with your process projects - whether it is a day, a week or an ongoing engagement. 

If you'd like to find out more about working with me, please contact me for an obligation free discussion or call me on +61 (0400731029).

Cheers,

TPN

A Brief History Of Process – From the Industrial Revolution To Today

When we sit in our offices and perform our day-to-day tasks, we don’t often think about how our jobs came to exist or the way in which work is structured in our organizations.  But the fact is that the way we work today is a legacy of hundreds of years of thinking about the way work is best performed. In particular the legacy of the industrial revolution looms large.

Hundreds of years ago work was the domain of each individual. From a process perspective they completed all parts of the end-to-end process. They researched, created, sold and distributed their products – much like a small business today. Fast forward to 1776 and Adam Smith introduced the world to the Industrial Revolution via his iconic book “The Wealth of Nations”.

Smith talked about what he defined as the "Division of Labor" - what we call functions today - and he used the example of the making of metal pins to demonstrate the benefits of the division of labor:

"Each person, therefore, making a tenth part of forty-eight thousand pins, might be considered as making four thousand eight hundred pins in a day. But if they had all wrought separately and independently, and without any of them having been educated to this peculiar business, they certainly could not each of them have made twenty, perhaps not one pin in a day"

Adam Smith was right and it became the basis of how we do work today - functions designed to complete specific tasks. But as companies, products and marketplaces became more complex and segmented, so became the need to have more complex and specialized functions within organizations.  We are now all acutely aware of the challenges that this brings for organizations to manage the flow of work across these functional specialties.

With a way of working comes ways to improve that work and improve the quality of the work that is performed. Frederick Winslow Taylor was one of the key figures in improving industrial engineering processes in the 19^th Century. Taylor’s focus was on scientific study of work, standardization of process, systematic training and sound structure of employees and management.

In contrast to Taylor, Peter Drucker (1909-2005) took a more sympathetic approach to employees, coining the term “knowledge workers” in contrast to Taylor’s structured and sometimes inflammatory treatment of workers. Drucker’s focus on simplification and decentralization effectively created what we understand as outsourcing today.  Another of Drucker’s key points was his continual focus on serving the customer.

Whilst many others contributed to new trends and new terminologies Smith, Taylor and Drucker stand out as the “poster boys” of process from the industrial revolution until the early 1990’s.

In the mid 1980’s Motorola introduced the Six Sigma methodology that focused on the improvement of quality. Six Sigma was based strongly on other quality approaches such as Total Quality Management. In the early 1990’s Lean (based on the Toyota Production System) became a popular means of eliminating “waste” from organizational processes.

The mid 1990’s saw a frenzy of interest in what came to be called “process re-engineering”. Unfortunately rather than being seen as a means of improving organizational effectiveness and productivity it became synonymous with corporate downsizing – a PR disaster for the process movement that lasted many years. Nothing typified this period more than Michael Hammer’s eponymous quote that when implementing process change organisations should “carry the wounded, but shoot the stragglers!”.

So where are we today? Methodologies such as Lean and Six Sigma (or a combination of both) are still used extensively in organizations, but both have their share of critics who cite the lack of practicality when rigidly implementing the methods. Many process experts also argue that techniques historically developed to suit manufacturing industries are not well suited to service industries and “knowledge work”, which exhibit less linear processes. New methods such as the CEM Method are proving popular due to their practical implementation methods but their viability is yet to be proven over the long term.

Technology solutions have also exploded in the last 20 years – we now have systems for process mapping, process modeling, data modeling, workflow and process management to name but a few. Indeed we are now seeing a convergence of all of these technologies into integrated business process suites. 

The arguments over methodologies and systems will always be with us, but as long as we are continuing to look at new ways of adding value to organizations the future of process thinking will continue to be bright for many years to come.

Cheers,

TPN

Blogging for Other Websites

I'm ocassionally asked if I'm happy to blog for other websites - the answer is yes, but I do charge for writing blog posts.

I'm also ocassionally asked if my blog content can be used on other blogs - the answer is also yes as long as there is a clear link to my website, it is clearly shown that I am the author and that the article is not edited in any way or has text added to it. Of course, you'll have to ask me for permission for each post you'd like to use.

So don't be shy - ask and ye shall receive.

Cheers,

TPN

The Importance of Process in Everything Businesses Do (Video)

This video on the PEX Network is the best video I've ever seen that encapsulates the importance of process.

It's a must watch.

Tell your friends, tell the world, the process revolution is here...

- TPN

Putting the Super in Supermarket Processes

I was fortunate to be asked to contribute to an article in the Herald Sun late last year entitled "Express too slow? Try the slow queue to speed things up"

I enjoy looking at retail processes but still surprised that Australia lags so far behind the rest of the world.

Cheers,

TPN

Absence Makes the Process Grow Fonder?

I'm sorry!

I'm really sorry! I've dropped the ball...

I know that I've been off the radar for some time and this is a short post to let you know what's happening. In the last 6 months I've been working on a large business transformation project which really has sucked me dry both physically and mentally.

Overall it has been a great experience but it hasn't been without its ups and downs (like most projects). I've had the joy of playing a major part in getting the project funding approved, gone through the pain of running process re-design workshops 4 days a week for a month and the joys of modelling swimlane EPC's in ARIS amongst a thousand other things. Unfortunately this, aligned with having our 4th child back in March and publishing my cafe ninja book meant that something had to give - and this blog was it.

But the good news is that I'm back. I may be a broken down, overweight wreck with a torn shoulder blade muscle (thanks workshops) but I'm the only process ninja you've got. The good news is that I have some big plans for 2012.

Firstly I have launched a Sydney based recruitment agency specialising in the supply of process staff. Secondly I have started on my first process book, provisionally entitled "The Process Revolution". It's going to be the type of book that the grey bearded process academics will despise. I love that.

But most importantly the experiences I've gained on my recent transformation project have given me a huge amount of material that I will be telling you about over the next few months. In keeping with my new manifesto, this blog will seek to teach rather than preach.

The Ninja is back...

- TPN

Process, Learning & The Division of Labour

With every piece of new work or indeed any new experience we undertake in our lives we go through a process of learning. We may watch the task, repeat the task, read about the task - there are many different ways of learning how to do something and a thousand scholarly scientific textbooks that will tell you all about it.

But why is this relevant to process? The answer is simple - the benefits of process are fundamentally based on the way humans learn.

In a former life I was a commis chef. One day I was given a task to make the tomato concasse for one of the dishes. The chef showed me how to do it and I repeated it after him. "Good" said the Head Chef, and proceeded to give me a bucket of tomatoes to turn into concasse.  So I started to make the concasse - I took the first tomato, chopped it in two, scooped out the seeds, pressed it flat, chopped the middle out and pressed it flat then diced the tomato. Half an hour later I felt the burning eye of the chef looking at my paltry pile of tomato concasse. "NO, NO, NO!" he said and proceeded to show me the error of my ways. "First chop all the tomatoes, then scoop out all the seeds, then press them all flat, then dice them ALL!"

I didn't realise it at the time but this was my first real-life lesson in the benefits of process. As I did each step in turn I found myself speeding up dramatically. The first few I did were slow as I got my technique right, but after that I was flying, and in no time I was finished my bucket of tomatoes and was feeling very pleased with myself (until I was given a bucket of potatoes!)

What I had replicated was the concept of functional design - the same concept that was the basis of the industrial revolution. If I had, for example, a tomato concasse factory I would probably have a team that would put the tomatoes into buckets, another team to chop the tomatoes, another team to flatten the tomatoes, etc. When we split tasks into functions we break them down into simpler more easily understood parts. As they are simpler to understand the learning curve is shorter; workers can learn to do each task quickly and become very fast at doing the tasks whilst maintaining quality. Conversely if we have multiple tasks performed by one person the complexity of learning becomes greater and it is slower to complete the overall process - we introduce multiple learning curves within the process. I would also argue that when each learning curve is repeated simultaneously there is greater memory retention than when multiple learning curves exist.

Back in 1776 a very canny Scotsman, Adam Smith talked about this exact phenomenon in his famous book, "The Wealth of Nations". He talked about what he defined as the "Division of Labour" - what we call functions today - and he used the example of the making of metal pins to demonstrate the benefits of the division of labour:

"Each person, therefore, making a tenth part of forty-eight thousand pins, might be considered as making four thousand eight hundred pins in a day. But if they had all wrought separately and independently, and without any of them having been educated to this peculiar business, they certainly could not each of them have made twenty, perhaps not one pin in a day"

Adam Smith was right and it became the basis of how we do work today - functions designed to complete specific tasks. But as companies, products and marketplaces became more complex and segmented, so became the need to have more complex and specialised functions within organisations.  As process people we are now all acutely aware of the challenges that this brings for organisations to manage the flow of work across these functional specialities.

The division of labour and the specialisation of work functions provided a totally new way of working and had a major role in the industrial revolution - but it has now become both a blessing and a curse for organisations. Now and into the future the ability to manage processes across increasingly complex organisations will become imperative.

Cheers,

TPN

The Process Ninja Blog Manifesto

Recently I've been reading a lot of blogs of all different types.  Sometimes I love a blog one week and hate it the next - why? Inconsistency. 

You may not realise it but when I write this blog I'm very careful to stick to a number of my own personal rules so I've decided to share those with you today. Think of it as a policy or a process that my blog follows:

1. Only I ever write articles for this blog. Never, ever will I let anyone else write an article for it. When you read this blog you'll always be reading my words. If you want someone else to write articles on your blog you may as well not have started one in the first place.
2. I'll never put advertising on this blog (except my own!)
3. This blog remians 100% impartial. If I say I like something it's because I like it, not because someone has bought me lunch or given me a big cheque.
4. This blog is not my creative outlet. You won't find me writing articles in novelty styles because I want to display how clever I am.
5. This blog is about process - it's a niche blog. It will always be a process blog. I stick closely to those boundaries.
6. I freely admit that this blog's purpose is not only to explain process concepts, but it is a form of marketing my services (to build trust with potential clients). 
7. This blog is methodology and technology agnostic. Whilst I might rave about new software and new methods from time to time, I am 100% open to new things - all styles served here.

Cheers,

TPN

Why I'm Bored of Theory and What the Future Holds for this Blog

I'm so bored of theory I can't even begin to explain. After yet another dull, lifeless BP Trends snoozefest newsletter this month I decided it's time for action.

I read a lot of BPM blogs, and more often than not I'm reading about what we should be doing and what BPM can achieve. It's starting to get tedious reading the same old stuff about how we're a misunderstood, under-achieving discipline that can solve all of the business problems of the world. There are enough blogs out there wallowing in theory without this blog adding to it.

In short I've decided to change the focus of this blog. I'll be leaving the theory up to others from now on. What this blog will now focus on are pratical tips and tools to perform process improvement. Real-life applications of techniques to actually do work, not just talk about it.

My intention over the next 12 months or so is to blog regularly on this topic, thereby creating enough content to be able to put it all together into a book. I would love to hear from others out there regarding their own tips and experiences. If I like your tip it will likely also end up in the book (with your consent, of course).

I'm also planning on doing more tutorial style videos as well as some podcast interviews with process people who are able to pass on some tips.

So expect some pratical advice coming your way soon, but in the meantime get your practical hats on and share your tips!

Cheers,

TPN