The post Key to Success in Omni-Channel Migration: Part 2 – Preparing the Tactical Foundation for an Omni-Channel Migration appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>To avoid the pitfall of inadequate preparation, we strongly recommend investing the time and energy into strategic executive alignment and tactical foundational preparation. Both of these priorities need to be pursued in tandem to produce optimal results and to ensure the migration’s success.
We described the elements necessary for strategic executive alignment in our previous blog post, “Key to Success in Omni-Channel Migration: Part 1 – Driving Strategic Executive Alignment.” In addition, you will need to focus on these tactical foundational elements, as they are especially important parts of successful omni-channel implementations:
1. Data and Integrations
While omni-channel platforms consolidate previously disparate platforms, they are also still highly reliant on integrations with other systems. For instance, for single sign-on, companies will want to integrate with their HRIS system, typically via Active Directory. Companies will also want to integrate with systems of engagement or record such as CRM applications for screen pops and process efficiencies. Recent regulations require robust e911 solutions which are typically not native to omni-channel platforms. Many omni-channel platforms often don’t natively include robust Workforce Engagement Management or Natural Language Understanding and Processing solutions with best-in-class functionality, so integrations with 3rd party solutions are often necessary. And as a final example, many interaction designs will rely heavily on data from a company’s internal data infrastructure. These are a few examples of systems that need real-time integrations, and companies must ensure that all solutions in the proposed ecosystem are equipped with modern APIs.
2. Legacy System Clean Up
Foundational data integrity is a perpetual challenge, but if done reasonably well, can make omni-channel implementations infinitely easier. Some examples of data relevant to channel platforms include naming conventions, employees and organizational hierarchies and business unit structures, extension/DID assignments, organization of sites and locations, inventories of physical devices such as phones and fax machines, catalogs of voice prompts, on-hold promotional messages and music. In addition, reviewing a company’s existing journey maps/service blueprints and interaction designs by channel for optimization in advance is recommended. System clean-up and the completion of any major, planned changes in advance will allow resources to focus less on management of the legacy platform and more on the migration to the new one.
3. Technical Training
While an implementation partner certified by the omni-channel platform manufacturer is advised, companies will benefit from internal resources with a baseline understanding of the new platform. Many decisions need to be made throughout the process and having internal resources familiar with both company-specific knowledge and a foundational understanding of how the new platform operates will be a tremendous asset. Alternatively, companies will rely on the decisions made by the implementation partner who frequently lacks critical company context and may take shortcuts with platform design decisions. Some of the many design decisions that have far-reaching implications include infrastructure, environments (development, test, production), global templates, reusable objects, naming conventions, development standards, data infrastructure and peripheral systems architecture. Most platform manufacturers include training resources as part of any purchase, but the sooner internal resources can begin their education, the more valuable they will be during the implementation process on critical design decisions.
4. Capacity Management
As organizations get their arms around legacy systems clean up and begin to familiarize themselves with how the platform solutions operate, it is critical to understand business requirements and employee roles within the organization. This exercise casts valuable light on capacity needs and licensing types that can have a significant impact on the financial model. Most modern platforms have a variety of license types (based on functional capabilities) and models (e.g., perpetual, named, concurrent) that must be understood and will impact the costs of these systems. As mentioned at the top, many of these areas should be worked on in parallel, and this topic is one that ties directly back to vendor negotiations and contractual terms.
These tactical activities represent a significant amount of work, and not all of them need to be entirely completed prior to beginning an actual omni-channel migration. However, evaluating these topics in advance will position an organization to hit the ground running with an omni-channel migration. This will be a big project regardless, but it will be exponentially easier if both the tactical foundation and the strategic executive alignment elements are planned in advance.
Cimphoni consultants have extensive experience leading CX omni-channel migrations for companies in a variety of industries, including working with leaders and staff on the aspects of the tactical foundation described above. If you’re embarking on an omni-channel initiative, please call us at 888-470-0448 or send us an email at info@cimphoni.com.
Please also read our latest white paper, “Is Your Customer Experience as Healthy as You Think it is?”
The post Key to Success in Omni-Channel Migration: Part 2 – Preparing the Tactical Foundation for an Omni-Channel Migration appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The post Key to Success in Omni-Channel Migration: Part 1 – Driving Strategic Executive Alignment appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>But migration projects are no small task.
There are two early-stage priorities that require time and attention in order to ensure a successful omni-channel migration: strategic executive alignment and tactical foundational preparation. These two activities should progress in parallel to each other in advance of actual implementation efforts.
In this post, we will focus on strategic executive alignment, which is essential for any significant initiative and no different for omni-channel migrations. Here are a series of topics that should be addressed as early as possible when beginning an omni-channel implementation:
1. Strategy Definition
What is the company’s vision and mission that customer experience designs need to align with? Establishing objectives for teams to model is key. This strategic work starts with describing the interactions you want your customers to have with your organization; not just the capabilities, thoughts and emotions your customers have about these interactions, but also the roadmap for channels that you want to enable.
An essential topic for organizations to examine is the level of automation or self-service to build. Many companies still want a very high touch, human-to-human experience, while others are rapidly embracing the more modern, fully digital and automated design approaches. These discussions set the stage for critical decisions regarding how marketing campaigns and digital channels (web, mobile, social, etc.) will be integrated with the more traditional voice, chat, and email channels that these platforms natively provide. These decisions also impact how organizations will manage campaigns, customer touchpoint preferences and interaction compliance adherence.
Other strategic technical decisions that should be considered up front include companies’ preferences related to premise or cloud-based solutions, target users for the platform (e.g., customer facing and traditional corporate associates) as well and the enterprise device strategy (will the platform support legacy physical phones or is the enterprise moving to softphones, what is the preference related to the use of mobile device solutions?).
2. Operational Model / Change Management
Establishing how this strategic initiative will be managed is also a critical step to work through early. Unless an organization has a well-established, cross-functional model that ensures that these types of initiatives effectively align executive strategy, disparate business unit objectives, CX design, technical design, and vendor management, companies should establish steering committees and assign highly qualified initiative leadership resources to organize this complex transition and to successfully manage the significant change involved.
3. Journey Maps/Service Blueprints
To the CX design point mentioned above, documentation of journey maps and/or service blueprints alone can be an extremely important foundational piece of an effective implementation. Regardless of whether the migration is a “like for similar” or a transformational approach, current state maps or blueprints are critical to have in place. In the case of the former, these designs must be well documented at a detailed level to serve as requirements for the new platform. For the latter, without understanding current performance metrics and prioritized areas of opportunity, implementation efforts can result in unfulfilled expectations (e.g., poor CX designs and marginal returns on investment).
For those who are unaware, a “like for similar” approach refers to the functionality delivered. On one end of the spectrum, companies can bite off a smaller effort by simply replicating the functionality they have on their current platform with the new platform. But when going through a change like this, those functional capabilities are often perceived as significant differences by the users given the vast differences between platforms. Alternatively, companies can take a more transformational approach and tap into the vast, expanded capabilities that market leading platforms offer…but that requires a lot more effort, strategy, vision and change management.
4. Vendor Evaluation and Selection
With a solid strategic design, coupled with clear business and technical requirements, a well-structured RFP can be relatively easy to write and include a clear evaluation and scoring models. Market dynamics and vendor capabilities are evolving quickly and getting through this process efficiently yet comprehensively is a significant effort. Vendor negotiation and contractual agreements can easily become quarters-long processes that can be expedited if planned up front. This process becomes more complex when considering not only platform vendors but also implementation and ongoing support providers. All of these efforts must be done in conjunction with a strong financial model that tracks the current, disparate vendor platforms to be retired, the costs not only for the omni-channel platform but also the requisite integration solutions and the impact (benefits) to the operational model (reduced handle times, interaction automation, improved CX, etc.).
Cimphoni consultants have led numerous CX omni-channel migrations for companies in a variety of industries, including working with the executive teams on the aspects of strategic alignment described above. If you’re embarking on an omni-channel initiative, please call us at 888-470-0448 or send us an email at info@cimphoni.com.
You can learn about the tactical foundation preparation in our blog post, “Key to Success in Omni-Channel Migration: Part 2 – Preparing the Tactical Foundation for an Omni-Channel Migration.” Please also read our latest white paper, “Is Your Customer Experience as Healthy as You Think it is?” to gain a more comprehensive perspective on building a stronger omni-channel customer experience.
The post Key to Success in Omni-Channel Migration: Part 1 – Driving Strategic Executive Alignment appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The post Guide to Building a Healthy Customer Experience [Guide] appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>Instead, companies must understand that improving CX requires widespread coordination and change across many areas within their organization. And each of these areas must align with a strategic and operational emphasis on customer. Our “Guide to Building a Healthy Customer Experience,” describes three fundamentals your organization must focus on to ensure the delivery of exceptional Customer Experiences.
The post Guide to Building a Healthy Customer Experience [Guide] appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The post The Whole Picture: Functional Requirements Are Important, But Not Sufficient in Selecting Software appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>If you are an IT leader, do you find your concerns about application security, performance, compliance and a slew of other important requirements dismissed by business leaders as unnecessary roadblocks?
With business-led IT gaining traction and becoming an acceptable way of provisioning applications, the adversarial relationship reflected in the questions above will only intensify. But there is a solution.
In our most recent white paper, “Guided Autonomy Governance Model: Resolving the Tension Between Corporate IT and Business-led IT,” we described the challenge of balancing corporate IT’s need for a stable and secure suite of applications with the business’ need for speed, agility and innovation. Often these two needs are in conflict. It is not uncommon for business-led software investments to focus on the functional needs of a new software application because that is what they know. However, they often miss the important aspects of what it takes to sustain a stable and secure computing environment (see Figure 1).
Although many business leaders know there are more factors to consider beyond defining the functional requirements of the software they wish to purchase and implement, they often lack the skills, time or patience to understand the importance of non-functional requirements (NFRs) and incorporate them into the software selection process. This failure to include NFRs upfront in the software selection process can create a significant business risk later when compliance, performance or security become a problem.
So, what exactly are NFRs and why are they important?
For many technology investments, NFRs typically include enterprise architecture, interoperability, disaster recovery and availability, performance, legal and compliance and security. Each of these are explained below:
Cimphoni has developed the guided autonomy approach to manage the tension between corporate IT functions and business-led IT that optimizes the business need for speed and agility with the risks inherent in not addressing NFRs. This approach allows for deviation from standards, namely in the form of technology policies and principles. These policies and principles recognize the need to balance complexity against the business value of the application.
What does this mean? As an example, functionally robust applications, like ERP platforms, used across the enterprise with multiple integration points need to comply with IT standards (e.g., specific server operating system, database management system, application development language, etc.). Conversely, applications used at the workgroup level can get by with less restrictive policies. Policies may not stipulate an integration pattern but may suggest several patterns that would work. These policies may not require specific vendor hardware and software, but would provide a list of acceptable vendors. Principles are even broader in their application and generally used for applications used by individuals. They would suggest implementation of minimal security controls (e.g., two-factor authentication), but not provide a list of specific vendors to use.
The guided autonomy framework shown in Figure 2 describes the NFRs placed on software applications based on the four classes of applications discussed in the white paper: Corporate Managed, Collaborative, Corporate Supported and Autonomous. The governance model is designed to create agreement between corporate IT and business-led IT on the NFRs and how they can be applied to balance benefit and risk.
To learn more about Cimphoni’s Guided Autonomy Governance Model and how it can benefit your organization, download the white paper today, or contact us to discuss how we can help you improve the success of projects that balances the needs of all constituents in software selection, implementation and support.
The post The Whole Picture: Functional Requirements Are Important, But Not Sufficient in Selecting Software appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The post Holistic Approach to Enterprise CX Design [White Paper] appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The universal objective of Customer Experience (CX) design is to deliver exceptional interactions that quick-
ly transition prospects to customers; drive loyalty and customer penetration; and ideally, reduce or optimize internal costs when delivering those experiences. The means to those ends are much more complex, and identifying where to prioritize limited resources to pursue those ends is even more challenging.
There is no one right answer to how organizations should address enterprise CX design. Approaches differ based on investment capabilities, CX maturity levels, customer journey complexity, persona diversity and many other variables. Every company is unique, and different ap- proaches are appropriate for companies with differing levels of strategies, objectives, and situations.
But all organizations should ensure that their technology design approaches are not myopic and are not influenced by product capabilities of the systems that they have purchased. It is easy to get caught up in technology features and vendor roadmaps and lose touch with cus- tomers’ actual experiences. There are two approaches that help reinforce a customer centric perspective that should be in considered: Journey Mapping and Service Blueprints.
Learn more in our White Paper, “Holistic Approach to Enterprise CX Design.”
The post Holistic Approach to Enterprise CX Design [White Paper] appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The post Why Problems Persist – Key Blockers of Business Agility appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>Business leaders face many challenges today as they attempt to improve business agility in response to rapidly changing demands of the market. Technology can often be seen as a panacea, providing a shortcut to business transformation where hard choices about products, channels, business processes and structure can be avoided. In my experience, I have learned that business leaders need to make sober assessments of their competitive weaknesses. These weaknesses are usually the result of issues left unresolved that, over time, have become problems that can no longer be ignored.
These problems often become extraordinarily challenging, and solutions require ingenuity, intelligence, and creativity. An organization’s ability to bring these skills to bear when problems emerge varies from company to company and also varies over time. Additionally, there are factors outside of a company’s control that can also influence the outcome. Examples include competitors introducing new products or services, rapidly changing customer preferences, or technical solutions not delivering key functionality as advertised. These internal and external factors all contribute to variability in problem resolution timelines, but easier solutions have a higher likelihood of being resolved (and resolved more quickly) than complex problems. Organizations may see solution probability rates similar to the example below:
Solved Within: | 1 Hour | 1 Day | 1 Week |
---|---|---|---|
Low Complexity | 50% | 85% | 95% |
Medium Complexity | 35% | 50% | 80% |
High Complexity | 10% | 35% | 50% |
However, solution probability rates are also impacted by three foundational factors that are often overlooked but are essential to a positive outcome. These factors are:
On the first point, our inability to solve problems because we don’t acknowledge them is a common challenge. This happens for a variety of reasons. Sometimes, it is because we are prideful and don’t want to admit that something we are responsible for isn’t performing well. Other times, the ability to acknowledge the problem is tied to someone who isn’t directly involved and who doesn’t feel the impact. This might be due to poor communication from the people directly involved or an unwillingness to be bothered if not immediately affected. But the adage is accurate, “You can’t solve a problem if you don’t admit that there actually is a problem.”
Secondly, many problems are simply tolerated. Frequently, the people directly impacted don’t have the time, energy, influence or insight to solve the problem. Or the problems are not considered important by those with the competency or authority to resolve them. Of the three factors involved in problem solving, this one is probably the most frustrating. We’ve acknowledged that there is a problem, we just choose not to address it. We can all think of situations like this that have affected us personally. Perhaps we are in a job function that is burdened by a problem that is known, but that management chooses to live with because it is too complex or costly to address. Or we are a customer with an issue that the vendor providing the product or service we use isn’t willing to resolve.
Thirdly, if you don’t understand the problem, how can you possibly solve it? All too often, we quickly jump to conclusions about the problem itself, which leads to the implementation of ineffective solutions. This tendency is especially dangerous as those solutions typically take effort, investment, and time to understand and then to implement. Effective problem solving of complex issues requires a broad and deep understanding of the people, processes and technologies involved. Frequently, root causes of issues are two or three steps removed from where the symptoms are observed. Problem solving tools like Fishbone diagrams, control charts, cause and effect diagrams, Pareto charts, scatter diagrams, etc., can be used effectively to develop a comprehensive understanding of the problem and its various elements.
Let’s look at this empirically to illustrate how essential these factors are to problem solving. If we assume that all three factors – acknowledgement, desire and understanding – are required to solve a problem, and if we use a 0-10 scale (lowest to highest) for each of the three factors above, we can create a simple formula to determine our success rate. Let’s assume that we fully acknowledge that there is a problem, that we are fully committed to resolving it and that we take the time necessary to fully understand it. Our formula would yield a numerical result of 1,000 (10 x 10 x 10 = 1,000).
At the other end of the spectrum, if any one of these factors doesn’t exist (e.g., a rating of 0 on our 0-10 scale) our result immediately drops to 0. That is, if we don’t acknowledge an issue, or if we don’t have the desire to resolve an issue or if we don’t truly understand the issue, we have no chance of solving the problem. As a middle ground for each of these factors let’s say we somewhat acknowledge the issue, somewhat desire to resolve it and sort of understand it we end up with a numerical result of 125 (5 x 5 x 5 = 125). That is a far cry from our ideal score of 1,000 yielding a likelihood of success at only 12.5%.
Rating (0 - 10)
Acknowledgement 0 5 10
Desire 0 5 10
Understanding 0 5 10
Score 0 125 1000
Foundational Factor Rate 0% 12.5% 100%
By revisiting the Solution Probability Rate graph from above, we can select a medium complexity problem that has an 80% chance of being resolved within one week based on internal and external factors. We must now also account for the impact of these three foundational factors on our base Probability Rate. If we assume that acknowledgement, desire and understanding all rate as 10s, we still have an 80% chance of solving the problem. But, if our ratings on those three factors drop to 5s, our likelihood of finding a solution drops all the way to 10%!
Ex. Medium Complexity Solved within One Week 80% 80% 80%
Foundational Factor Rate 0% 12.5% 100%
Actual Probability of Solving a Problem 0% 10% 80%
Admittedly, addressing these three factors doesn’t guarantee success. We must still possess the aptitude and ingenuity to solve complex problems. But putting the effort into acknowledging the problem and committing the resources and developing a comprehensive understanding of the problem gives businesses a higher success rate than looking for a shortcut. Many problems are left unresolved not because their solutions are extraordinarily challenging, but rather, they remain problems because the foundations of problem solving itself are lacking.
If you are challenged with persistent problems that are standing in the way of greater business agility, perhaps it’s time to examine if these three foundational factors are holding you back. Or contact us and we’ll help get things moving with an objective external voice to help you break through.
The post Why Problems Persist – Key Blockers of Business Agility appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The post Guided Autonomy Governance Model [White Paper] appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>Cimphoni has developed the Guided Autonomy Governance Model that is built to resolve this tension between corporate IT and business-led IT, which balances the needs of the organization as a whole and respects the needs of both sides of this argument. Our white paper, “Guided Autonomy Governance Model” presents the solution for CIOs and senior leaders to bring peace to the provision of technology across the organization. It includes:
The white paper also defines four classes of applications based on a mix of corporate vs. business-led IT involvement.
If your organization needs a solution to the tension between corporate It and “shadow IT” within various departments, this white paper is for you.
The post Guided Autonomy Governance Model [White Paper] appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The post There Is Light in Shadow IT appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>Rather than viewing shadow IT as an issue, a better approach is to see it as an opportunity to collaborate more closely with business leaders. Rather than focusing on why shadow IT is a problem, jointly focus on the business challenges to be addressed. IT is evolving from a function or department to a business-enabler helping companies to compete effectively, no matter where IT is located organizationally.
Business leaders generally have a good understanding of what they need, but may lack a full understanding of all the non-functional elements necessary to deliver a robust, technology-enabled solution. Engaged CIOs will advise business leaders on IT best practices that ensure high levels of security, interoperability, compliance, performance, resilience and usability – turning this into a win-win situation. The shared goal is to quickly deliver a solution that addresses an intended business outcome.
An open and candid conversation among business and IT leaders to discover the reasons for shadow IT can go a long way in improving the relationship between these groups and deliver solutions that create new business value. To be certain, there are clearly upsides and downsides with shadow IT. Understanding and addressing both and learning from and applying the insights gained is the starting point for delivering this new business value.
The Dark Side of Shadow IT
Let’s begin with a quick review of the downsides of shadow IT since much has been written on its potential risks. Keep in mind, many of these risks result in increased complexity, cost and extended time-to-value. The downsides of shadow IT generally line up around the following risks:
As mentioned above, escalating IT costs are often an early warning sign there is a problem. The first stage to shining a light on shadow IT is to determine where it is operating and estimating how much it is costing the company.
Shining a Light on Shadow IT
Talk to people. IT professionals in the corporate IT organization often know where the pockets of shadow IT are in the business. They know because they have had to say “no” to internal customer requests for hardware, software or services due to constrained resources or time. And so, the internal customer must either wait or pursue their own solution. Unfortunately, this happens far too often.
Talk to operational and functional decision-makers. These are the internal customers who are often forced to seek out their own solutions. They tend to be eager to share how they have solved a specific need with a custom-developed application or SaaS solution – and how they are supporting their specialized application through a super-user or programmer on their team.
Talk to Finance. Finance personnel typically have access to general ledger account-level detail across the business to gain insights into shadow IT spend. In companies with a common ERP system, standard chart of accounts and fixed asset system, this is relatively straight-forward. In companies with heterogeneous financial systems and inconsistent general ledger accounts or account definitions, data cleansing will be needed to capture accurate shadow IT spend.
Excluding any allocated corporate IT expenses, shadow IT costs in non-IT functions, business units or subsidiary operations may be recorded in:
Some of these costs, such as FTE salaries and benefits, may have to be estimated. Other cost categories, such as professional services, may have to be reviewed in further detail to eliminate non-IT services.
Many CIOs are surprised at the level of expense and inefficiency generated by shadow IT – we have seen over 30% of total IT spend occurring outside the traditional IT organization.
Igniting Shadow IT
A recent client CIO commented, “Shadow IT isn’t always bad. We just need to figure out how to use it to our company’s and customers’ advantage.” This is the right attitude.
Developing relationships with non-IT decision-makers and understanding their pressing business needs is the first step to unleashing the potential of shadow IT organizations and leveraging shadow IT spend. Organizationally, using business relationship managers (BRMs), individuals that liaise between business and IT (and understand both), is one way to ensure changing business plans and actions and resulting technology implications are understood. Discussions among BRMs and their business partners will highlight business problems to be resolved with IT solutions. Decisions can be made jointly as to how best to provision these solutions – either through custom-developed software or commercially available applications. And, BRMs can educate their business partners on how to control, manage and support IT solutions in compliance with appropriate company IT standards, best practices and policies.
The second step is learning the business so IT can be proactive in identifying and delivering impactful solutions. IT can shift from saying “no, we can’t” to “yes, we can.” Becoming a trusted business advisor elevates the role of IT, enables transparency and encourages creativity.
IT’s enhanced understanding of the business will ensure proposed IT solutions are more closely aligned – whether focused on delivering a compelling customer experience, improving operational productivity or reducing the time to market for new products and services. The narrower the knowledge gap between business needs and IT capabilities the more relevant and effective IT solutions will be in meeting these needs. This will dissuade business leaders from pursuing their own solutions by seeking the advice and support from the corporate IT organization.
Step three is accepting that, in some circumstances, speed and agility of solution deployment are more important than developing or finding the “perfect” solution. Our clients tell us one of the key reasons shadow IT is created is due to IT’s inability to respond with urgency to help the business meet new and rapidly evolving customer requirements. Measured experimentation and iteration are good – as long as the business and IT are working together to deploy solutions that address the needs of the market without exposing the business to the risks mentioned previously.
Having a framework for deciding when a company-wide solution needs active IT involvement versus when a workgroup solution can be developed by a shadow IT team is critical. We recommend an approach called “guided autonomy”, which establishes guardrails around which IT projects or services require IT involvement, approval and support and which IT projects require only IT awareness. See Cimphoni’s upcoming blog post for further information on guided autonomy and how it can help your organization exploit the benefits of shadow IT while mitigating the risks.
Performing a shadow IT assessment, including the use of automated hardware and software discovery tools to estimate the total IT spend in the company is a great starting point. This assessment will provide visibility into current state of computing assets, particularly those that fall within the realm of shadow IT. This will then create the basis for a discussion between business and corporate IT to reduce total IT spend while also improving the effectiveness and value delivered by these assets.
If you are interested in identifying how to exploit the benefits of shadow IT spend while mitigating related risks to your company, Cimphoni can work with your team and walk through the necessary steps. We can start with a SnapShot Assessment across the business to discover and prioritize opportunities. Additional information can be found on our website regarding digital transformation.
The post There Is Light in Shadow IT appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The post Why Now is the Time for Business Agility appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>Relying on static business processes and the software that enables them just doesn’t work anymore. Implementing large enterprise applications that encompass all elements of the business are fraught with long delivery cycles, high costs and uncertain business value. Command and control structures that require rigid adherence to standard operating procedures have also become obsolete. These once popular approaches to managing a business have become liabilities in today’s rapidly changing business landscape.
So, now is the time to consider becoming a more agile business. To do this, a company must accept that the underlying system that enables their business to operate successfully – the proverbial “pillars” of people, processes and technologies – will need to be updated more frequently than what has been done historically. The good news is that these updates do not need to be done all at once, but can be accomplished incrementally over time. Start with the problem areas, those that affect the customer and employee experience, and work out from there.
Getting people to change what they do and how they do it on a frequent basis is probably the most challenging of the three pillars. The irony is that the people, as consumers, that are demanding innovative products and services at an increasing rate to meet their needs are the same people, as employees, that struggle with change – adapting to new roles/responsibilities, learning new skills, performing new tasks – within the companies where they work. However, tapping into what people do best – engaging and collaborating with others, creatively solving problems, dealing with business nuances – and giving them the latitude and responsibility to manage their work can “grease the skids” of change.
Too much process and an organization’s agility will be diminished by rigidity and a false sense of stability and control. Too little process and an organization can’t scale effectively, run its operations efficiently and chaos ensues. So, how does an enterprise determine what is the right amount of process definition – not too much and not too little?
One approach involves segregating processes into those that are relatively static (e.g., financial: record-to-report or HR: hire-to-retire – although my Finance and HR friends may debate me on this) from those that are driven by a dynamic marketplace (e.g., sales: prospect-to-order or product/service: concept-to-offering). Static processes, by definition, likely only need major updates every 2-3 years. These processes can be defined fairly rigorously and often require a high level of conformance for regulatory purposes. However, the closer a process is to the customer, the more frequently it will need to change, sometimes as often as every 3-6 months. Entertainment and social media companies have had to deal with this phenomenon for at least the last decade.
Finally, technology is the most straightforward of the three areas to address. The classical waterfall approach, Agile Scrum or even continuous integration/delivery are well-established practices for the gathering of requirements, design, development, testing and delivery of software solutions. Generally, technology by itself does not provide a sustainable competitive advantage. However, when combined with market-differentiated and customer-aligned business processes and an empowered, informed and skilled workforce, companies can dominate their market.
So, how does an organization adapt its business in each of these areas with the agility and responsiveness that it takes to compete effectively? Cimphoni has identified three areas of competency and some of the enabling technology platforms that address this question. These three areas are: sensing, responding and adapting.
Additional information can be found on our website regarding the role of these and other emerging technologies in optimizing business performance.
If you are interested in improving business agility and responsiveness, Cimphoni can guide your team through the necessary steps. We can start with a “SnapShot” capability assessment across the business to discover and prioritize improvement opportunities. Or, if you have a specific area of the business that needs attention, we can start there as well. In either case, we take into account the people, processes and technologies relevant to your business and industry.
The post Why Now is the Time for Business Agility appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>The post Why Now is the Time for Business Optimization appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>In the midst of the chaos that 2020 has brought, it has also allowed for moments of reflection and examination of how our businesses operate. Our recent experiences have altered our perception of a common barrier to optimization efforts: willingness to change. We now know that not only are significant changes possible, they are necessary.
So now, as we strive to stabilize and thrive in a new business environment, we must ensure that our organizational foundations are strong and efficient. We must examine our internal operations and identify how to become more effective while offering exceptional services to our customers. We must recognize that the unique challenges of this current environment make it the right time for an emphasis on Business Optimization.
So, what is Business Optimization and how should companies approach these types of initiatives? Business Optimization can be defined as activities to achieve effectiveness by improving the efficiency, productivity and performance within an organization. At Cimphoni, we focus these initiatives around what we refer to as the VCVE : I Metrics:
An unspoken but assumed requirement of each of these metrics is Quality as any of these measures would be invalid if transactions were processed incorrectly.
We then identify areas within a company’s business operations where improvements in these metrics deliver the greatest Impact, represented as the last of our five key metrics. As we examine current state process flows within these target opportunities, we forecast how various innovative technologies can transform and improve VCVE : I metrics. These transformational initiatives typically align around some of the following key business objectives: operational efficiencies, revenue growth, quality assurance, compliance adherence, customer experience and employee engagement. These objectives can be improved by leveraging a variety of technologies including:
Through effective utilization of these technologies, organizations can transform their internal operations by implementing:
There is a wide array of vendor solutions that can optimize companies’ internal and customer-facing business operations. By investing in initiatives to optimize organizational foundations, companies will have a strong, sustainable and scalable foundation in place that will then allow them to focus on other areas. And, as this core strengthens, it will deliver improved profitability and operational consistency. These initiatives will also continue to demonstrate that a culture of change and continuous improvement is not only possible, it is a requirement in today’s business climate. This foundation then allows organizations to focus on a complementary cultural attribute that is also essential: business agility. Cimphoni has the experience and expertise to help on both of these key strategic fronts.
The post Why Now is the Time for Business Optimization appeared first on Cimphoni.
]]>