Disagreeing with a Hero
I recently read a column in Expert Voices at http://www.cioinsight.com/ called CIO as Chief Process Officer, not Strategic Leader.
It's a summary of a conversation with Dr. Michael Hammer - a hero of mine, who invented the word re-engineering and along with James Campy, wrote a terrific book called Reengineering the Corporation. I've seen Dr. Hammer on several occasions, listening to his advice on How to Succeed with SAP. Believe me, he knows what he's talking about.
The latest article is a continuation of his thinking about Process reengineering, and he espouses a new theory that CIO's should become CPOs - Chief Process Officers.
While I agree with much of what he says, I have a hard time completely swallowing the concept. Yes, CIO's are generally very familiar with company processes. Their departments support the technology that support the processes and they have an extremely good "under the hood" view of how things work together - or not. And it's for this reason, that Dr. Hammer believes they should become process champions within their organization.
Good reasons all, but it rings a little hollow with me. Here's why.
Once you anoint a Process Guru, almost instantly, you excuse others from the responsibility. "I don't have to worry about process - that's Dave's job" - is a sure path to failure. We tried the same model with the CIO role...before the advent of I.T. Steering teams. Steering teams brought in other executives into the technology decision making process.
And overall, companies use of technologies, investment, project selection/prioritization and execution benefited as a result.
Dr. Hammer points out that successful processes require strong leadership, the right metrics and commitment. But he's a little vague on how to get there.
It's a little like the old joke: "How do you make a million dollars in Real Estate?"
Answer: First, start with two million dollars.
I think that answer may lie in Process Steering Teams. Senior executives need to agree which processes need improvement, determine the success metrics, provide the necessary process training/education and dedicate the bset resources to help redesign the processes (usually achieved through value stream mapping exercises). They determine where the pilot should begin and who should be involved in the process. Compensation plans need to be aligned with process improvement goals.
To me it's exactly the same challenge as Change Management. Successful efforts are driven by all top leadership. It's a priority for the company - not just a project of the week. The ultimate goal of the Process Steering Team shouldn't be to refine derelict processes. It should be to turn mid and lower level managers (in fact, all employees) into process champions.
The ultimate goal should be to have everyone at your company focused on process inefficiencies - not just a CPO.
Toyota is generally regarded as the platinum standard for manufacturing efficiency. Their processes are no secret. The huge challenge in imitating Toyota's success is that lean processes are part of Toyota's culture - ingrained through decades of process focus. The other huge benefit that Toyota garners is standardized processes. Everyone uses the same processes. To accomplish this, everyone must understand the process, why it works and what the success metrics are.
Process innovation can't be sustained by one person.
It's everyone's job.
And until we recognize that making and executing lean processes is everyone's goal, new CPO's may suffer the same fate as many early CIOs - very short tenure.
