The Big Shift
The Big Shift
Let’s get real for a moment. Why would ANYONE set about disrupting the fundamental beliefs and assumptions of their whole organisation just to make their software and product development more effective?
It’s not for the sake of increased profit – Deming’s First Theorem states:
“Nobody gives a hoot about profits”.
If we believe Russell Ackoff, executives’ motivation primarily stems from maximising their own personal well being a.k.a. their own quality of work life.
Is There a Connection?
Is there any connection between increased software and product development effectiveness, and increased quality of work life for executives? Between the needs of ALL the Folks That Matter and the smaller subset of those Folks That Matter that we label “executives”? Absent such a connection, it seems unrealistic (understatement!) to expect executives to diminish their own quality of work life for little or no gain (to them personally).
Note: Goldratt suggests that for the idea of effectiveness to gain traction, it’s necessary for the executives of an organisation to build a True Consensus – a jointly agreed and shared action plan for change (shift).
Is Disruption Avoidable?
So, the question becomes:
Can we see major improvements in the effectiveness (performance, cost, quality, predictability, etc.) of our organisation, without disrupting the fundamental beliefs and assumptions of our whole organisation?
My studies and experiences both suggest the answer is “No”. That collaborative knowledge work (as in software and product development) is sufficiently different from the forms of work for which (Analytic-minded) organisations have been built as to necessitate a fundamentally different set of beliefs and assumptions about how work must work (the Synergistic memeplex). If the work is to be effective, that is.
In support of this assertion I cite the widely reported failure rates in Agile adoptions (greater than 80%), Lean Manufacturing transformations (at least 90%) and in Digital Transformations (at least 95%).
I’d love to hear your viewpoint.
– Bob
Further Reading
Organisational Cognitive Dissonance ~ Think Different blog post
Think Different
Bob – we cant make up the measure and then say they are a failure.
“In support of this assertion I cite the widely reported failure rates in Agile adoptions (greater than 80%), Lean Manufacturing transformations (at least 90%) and in Digital Transformations (at least 95%).”
In their eyes, they consider themselves successful as the organizations rolling out these changes have only incremental innovation needs and they change a few things without changing anything major. I look at the metrics differently – they get back what they put in and the results they get it what they deserve.
We can only look at this from their lenses – otherwise we would be just judging and in opinion territory
{We can only look at this from their lenses – otherwise we would be just judging and in opinion territory} – We would still be in the opinion territory, just that of the opinion territory of the managers. So much corporate speak here, a delectable diversion is this way https://talknormal.co.uk/
Pingback: Blogs Exploring Deming’s Thoughts on Management « The W. Edwards Deming Institute Blog