Coming out of business school, somebody once told me, “If you design a solution correctly, everybody can be a winner.” It was up to the solution designer to capture every user’s requests, wants, and needs and to piece them together into a solution that creates high value for all of them. Soon after, I entered the real world of system implementation and I soon realized that this advice was purely, 100%, unequivocally wrong.
In the real world of solution design and implementation, executive management, middle management, and rank-and-file often have very different and competing goals. Executive managers typically value reporting and metrics. They want to capture every piece of data that might possibly be used for some type of analytical reporting at some point in the future. Executives tend to drive systems towards analytically powerful, but overly-complex systems.
On the other hand, rank-and-file employees typically value efficiency, ease of use, and collaboration. They want a tool that actually speeds up their job and helps keep them on the same page with other team members. Rank-and-file employees tend to drive towards automated, efficient systems with very little analytical power and accountability. Middle Managers are usually trapped somewhere in between, having the unenviable task of reconciling one group to the other.
So what is a QuickBase developer to do? Far be it from me to offer a solution to probably the most difficult problem in change management; however, the following observations have been helpful to me.
Step 1: Accept Reality
First, I have found that after a new system is put in place users can be grouped into one of three categories:
- Winners: Users who gain high value from a system
- Losers: Users whose jobs will temporarily be made more difficult by the new system.
- Sorta’ Winners/Sorta’ Losers: Users who will gain some value from the system, but will also have some difficulty adopting it.
It is impossible to design a system where at least one user group does not face challenges. The sooner we accept this reality, the sooner we can design strategies to manage the effects of change on this group. This is very evident in sales automation systems. Most systems on the market are geared more towards executive management and middle management. It is usually an uphill battle to explain to a sales rep, who is used to capturing their sales quickly on a paper form and letting an admin deal with organizing the data, that they gain value from now having to logon to an online system they don’t yet understand in order to enter their leads. Or even worse, now they need to fill out a paper sheet on the road and re-enter it into the fancy new sales system. But what about the value they perceive from having a place to manage their contacts and follow ups? My experience is that most sales reps already have sophisticated and effective ways for managing this for themselves.
So let’s face it, management are the winners in most sales systems, not the sales rep. If you were to build a sales system geared towards sales reps, management would most likely have to make major tradeoffs in the type of reporting they will see. Still not convinced? A major goal of sales systems is pipeline reporting. What value does a sales rep get from having to login to the system and update their “Expected Close Dates” every week? In this instance, I posit they get limited value. Let’s be honest with ourselves that each group expereinces solution changes very differently, so we can plan how to maximize overall value to the organization as a whole.
Step 2: Choose Your Winners
Your next step is choose which user group will be your winners. In some cases, this will already be chosen for you. If you are hired by executive management and they are providing your requirements, you have no choice but to gear a system towards this user group. In other cases, it will be less clear who your winners should be.
Who is the optimal user group to build a system around? I don’t think there is a single right answer to this, as this is largely determined by the organizational situation. My personal view that no matter what user group you target as the Winners, it is often optimal to convince executive management that they accept the role of Sorta’ Winners/Sorta’ Losers. This creates an environment where management is accepting trade-offs, resulting in a more balanced system.
Step 3: Maximize Value to the Sorta’ Winners/Sorta’ Losers
Next, you should try to create as much value for the Sorta’ Winners/Sorta’ Losers as possible. The goal of course is to win as many of these users over to your side as possible. It is the battle for the heart and minds of this user group where the true success of the system is decided. For QuickBase, this is easier because it was designed to be simple yet powerful for end users and it also enables them to create their own solutions.
Step 4: Plan for your Losers
Best case scenario, these users will grumble about the system, but comply. More often, they will vocally complain about the system, but comply. Worst case scenario, they will actively sabotage the implementation of the new system. The absolutely worst thing you can do with this group is ignore them or refuse to accept that they exist, though this often seems the path of least resistance. Their anger will grow and possibly spread to other user groups. I have found it helpful to listen to their issues and actively communicate the benefits of the system to the organization as a whole. Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn’t, but at least they feel listened to. I also try to make concessions when possible and keep them in the communication loop. I have had varied results with this, but it always turns out better if I acknowledge them.
What do you think? How do you handle change management, especially user groups who will lose from your system?
Also, if you are interested in this sort of stuff, you should read Our Iceberg is Melting by John Kotter, whose ideas I borrowed freely.
About James Cosman
James is a Solution Architect at MCF Technology Solutions, a leading provider of cloud computing services (most notably QuickBase). His core competency lies in translating stated business needs into tangible, value creating applications. His MCF team is based in the great city of Houston, Texas and he holds an MBA from Rice University. Go Owls!
Our conversation continues about the optimal mix of technology to support business process. In our last TechWise blog,“Living IT, QuickBase Leads The Way”, we discussed the concept of Living IT and why organizations should plan for changing and dynamic technology. To elaborate further on this topic we want to introduce some ideas around what we refer to as the the Application Ecosystem and how technologies such as PaaS and ETL fit in.
The Application Ecosystem of an organization is a broad way to refer to the various technology tools that the organization uses. This applies to government, for-profit and non-profit organizations. At the center of the Application Ecosystem is what we refer to as Core Systems. These tools are typically associated with basic organizational functions required for accounting and transactional purposes. For smaller businesses, tools like QuickBooks or PeachTree are the frequent choice while larger organizations have mostly deployed ERP systems like Oracle ERP or SAP.
While accounting and ERP systems have expanded to include broader functionality few if any organizations are able to function with a single technology to manage business processes. This is due to the fact that ERP and Accounting systems are designed fir best practices and with transaction management as the primary focus with process management flexibility given limited attention. This means that organizations are pushed to find technologies that complement and extend core systems. We refer to the multitude of applications that support defined and ad hoc organizational processes outside the core systems as the Extension Layer.
The Extension Layer
There are two basic types of applications in the Extension Layer, Point Solutions and Situational Applications. Point Solutions are specialized, typically best of breed applications that solve a specific and typically well defined need. Image management, warehouse management and CRM are areas that often are targeted for point solutions. The other type of application in the Extension Layer is often referred to as Situational Applications. These are applications that solve more unique or possibly temporary organizational needs where no viable Point Solution exists. Often these types of applications are managed ineffeciently using spreadsheets or simple databases.
The final but very important element of the Application Ecosystem is the body of interconnections between applications. These connections or integrations may be between applications in the Extension Layer or with Core Applications. In many cases organizations lack the technical capability to effectively integrate applications so information is moved between applications with human, manual processes. Only when extension applications reach a significant size and value are they integrated in an automated way with other applications.
Paas & ETL Enable Flexibility in Extension Layer Application Creation and Interconnectivty
Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) tools such as QuickBase and Wolf Frameworks provide organizations with tool sets to rapidly build and deploy Extension Layer applications that extend core accounting and ERP systems or provide effective departmental or workgroup functionality. PaaS is frequently utilized for Situational Applications but also quickly becoming a strong choice for CRM, sales force automation and other areas often relegated to Point Solutions.
One of the main benefits of PaaS as part of an organizations Extension Layer is the ability to quickly and easily interconnect data and processes between applications designed on the same PaaS technology. For example, QucikBase allows the ability to create cross application relationships between applications as a simpel and easy way to share information.
A technology that is rapidly becoming mainstream is Extract-Transform-and-Load (ETL) tools. Open Source technologies like Talend ETL are allowing rapid, low cost development of integration. This means that organizations can choose to automatically tie together applications, processes and information that previously could not have been efficiently integrated.
It seems there is a continual push and pull in the technology world between centralizing and consolidating technology vs. distributing and diversifying. We’ve asked ourselves this question often of whether our clients will be better served with a single technology to support their needs.
This line of questioning typically leads to the evaluation of the trade off between a single multi-purposed technology that solves many problems but none well as opposed to a number of “best-of-breed” solutions.
In reality organizations seem to answer this perennial question with decisions that shift the balance continually. These decisions and the resulting daily interactions with IT systems are what we refer to as “Living IT”. By acknowledging that technology within an organization is a dynamic entity allows for a whole new approach to solving business process and technology challenges. A number of important factors are defining “Living IT” and it’s place in the 21st century organization.
1. The gap between management and technology is shrinking
As the Cloud evolves and the explosion of advanced collaboration and business process tools continues, technology that previously relied on IT staff to deploy and support is becoming accessible directly to information and process managers. Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) technologies such as QuickBase are a perfect example of tools that are narrowing this gap. While QuickBase has the ability to handle advanced technological problems, the codeless development environment is used by managers with limited technical skills in tens of thousands of companies to deploy collaborative information gathering and process applications.
2. The costs and risks of change are shrinking as the benefits are growing
The 21st century company has to adapt quickly. This means adding capacity and scaling quickly but also being nimble enough to shrink and shift directions nimbly. In the “Living IT” environment companies need tools that are flexible, scalable and in many cases expendable. QuickBase is again an ideal model for supporting change at a low cost. The QuickBase subscription model is user based allowing organizations to develop as many platform applications as are needed with the scaling costs based on users only. As organizations needs change applications can be retired without concern and new ones rapidly developed and deployed.
3. Interconnectivity and security, two sides of the same coin are the main drivers of 21st century technology
Ubiquitous access to the internet has opened the doors to a new wave of collaboration between people and between technologies. This new power of communication has also brought with it very real organizational concerns about security and accessibility of information. QuickBase provides powerful tools to take advantage of collaboration but also manage the associated risks.
- Domain/application user model: QuickBase users are registered with the QuickBase domain or with a private domain for enterprise accounts. Application managers can then invite users who have registered in their domain to applications to allow access. This simple but powerful model allows for easy collaboration with users inside and outside the organization without compromising security.
- Role based security: within an application access is defined for each user by designated roles. Roles can be easily configured for simple access rules or more complex data driven models. This enables applications to effectively create different user and data experiences tailored for each application user.
- Secure and capable API: QuickBase supports communication to and from external application via an HTTP API model. The API enables interaction with all application tables for query, record add/update and import actions as well as more advanced interactivity. All API interaction required authenticated sessions and for increased security, applications can enforce API token requirements.
The most important consideration in creating a true “Living It” environment is to embrace and not fear technology change. Even very traditional technologies like accounting systems have to flex and change as the tax and other financial policies change. Process and collaboration tools need to be even more flexible to support organizational evolution. QuickBase is in ideal tool for supporting the “Living IT” environment due to it’s ability to enable development of secure, collaborative process and information management applications.