Don't send an architect to a house fire
So many of the problems I see in programs are because the actions taken don’t match the complexity of the situation.
In my last post I spoke about our fascination with ‘quick wins’ and how it can hinder our ability to deliver. This is not to say that speed should be ignored. Sometimes you need to move rapidly to build credibility.
There is no point running a 6-sigma improvement program or a 3-day offsite if the business is almost out of cash. Equally, it is a bad idea to have everyone running around with their hair on fire when the business is actually performing well. It’s exhausting and ineffective.
The level of intervention needs to match the situation.
Levels of Intervention
There are five levels where the urgency and nature of the problem drives what you focus on and how you need to operate.
1. Rescue.
You have significant operational issues, and it’s unclear which levers will provide a result. Everyone has advice on what to fix. Everyone is overwhelmed. Things need to get better now, or we won’t be around much longer.
The intent is to create movement. Use force to shift the situation, without trying to improve it. Focus on creating space to move.
Pick one metric and make it the only thing people talk about.
Try seven things rapidly, if three work, brilliant. Up the energy level and don’t worry about efficiency right now. Stand-ups and fast cycle learning loops are the way of operating.
Level 1 interventions will show you what is possible. It is powerful but not sustainable. Stay in Rescue mode too long and any performance turnaround will revert to the old ways because of false urgency and burnout.
2.Rebuild.
At this level the operation suffers from big swings in performance with some good days but really bad days as well.
The system is fragile and you don’t trust it to perform without close monitoring and rapid action by key individuals.
The focus is on stabilising the situation. Make sure the right people are in the key roles. Look for the big levers – critical coordination meetings, filling gaps in capability that will shift the underlying processes. Make performance visible to everyone and take action if metrics start to move out of range.
Don’t create a large improvement program because you are still in the world of ‘sense and respond’ – trying out changes and seeing what shifts the system. Be open to suggestions on how things could be improved, and keep running experiments to understand what works within the confines of the overall ecosystem.
3. Renovate.
The operation is running well, and you get frustrated by the occasional bad day.
Now you can start to think about shifting the underlying operating model. Focus on process design and building for longer-term performance with standardised ways of operating. Build capability in your teams and individuals, and potentially make structural changes to make accountability clearer.
You're looking for consistency and long-term performance rather than quick fixes. The timeframe of change stretches out more than the previous two levels and benefits from a more structured approach to change.
4. Refine.
Things are running well, so now the questions turn to the cost and efficiency of the operation.
This is where your Six Sigma and continuous improvement methodologies belong. Apply well-known methodologies to work through optimising the situation. Have a formal approach to make sure you are prioritising those areas with the most leverage and highest return on effort.
5. Reimagine.
When everything is operating well we end up at the final level…The world is changing. The situation might be getting away from you – normal ways of working are not as effective anymore.
This is where you step back, throw the windows open and look around. Engage with different views and explore ideas outside your usual echo chamber before deciding on a new direction. Find a way to place bets on different options or sensors that help you understand how the world is evolving.
This level needs to have a degree of discomfort because, as Charles Handy’s Sigmoid Curve points out, the need to move on this before the peak of performance and, as Clayton Christensen’s Innovator’s Dilemma highlights, this is difficult to do when things are going well.
Each of these levels of intervention requires a different cadence and governance model. The way you operate at each level is significantly different. Level 1 needs a fire fighter, and Level 5 needs an architect.
Know what you face
One size never fits all in an organisation. You might have one operation or project in Rescue and another in Refine. The friction happens when we try to manage a Rescue mission with a Refine approach – when you try to turn around failing performance with an ‘optimisation’ program.
This leads to a few simple questions:
Are you clear on the reality of your situation?
Is there agreement on that assessment?
Is your intervention level fit for the task at hand?
When everyone is on the same page and the approach fits the problem, you stop wasting energy and things become just a bit easier.
