It struck me recently that there's probably another management truism we should bring to bear. Basically it breaks down like this: the more you comfort and knowledge your team has around its tools and methods, the more general the problem to be solved can be. Conversely, the less the team knows about the methods and tools it is using to solve problems, the more specific the problem statement or opportunity statement needs to be. Let's look at this from both perspectives.
If I have a very strong lean or Six Sigma team which is steeped in the tools and processes, I can basically turn them loose on a process and ask them to find and fix any problems they uncover. The assignment can be general since they know their tools and methods and the kinds of "fixes" they can create and when a specific tool will add value. On the other hand, if I have a team that is new to a set of skills (for example, innovation) and ask them to get involved and create a new product or service, I must give them much more clearly defined scope and objectives, for two reasons. First, they don't understand the tools and methods well, so they can't determine which ones to apply. Second, without scope and objectives, they are very likely to fall back on safe assumptions rather than push an idea beyond what seems "acceptable". The more radical the thought process, the more the management team needs to provide scope and clear objectives.
Now, this last bit is completely at odds with the way things work in most organizations. Generally what happens is that we ask people to "innovate" without training or tools, as if this is an innate skill, and we don't provide measurements or objectives for fear of constraining their thinking. Well, without constraints any idea is a good idea, and a safe idea that resembles what we already do seems even better. How can we think differently when we haven't been trained to do so and when we haven't been pushed to do so based on the objectives?
I think the more well known the problem is, and the greater the comfort is with the tools and processes, the less you need to define the potential outcome. On the flip side, the less well known the problem or opportunity is, and the less comfortable the team is with the tools and processes, the more definition is necessary in order to achieve success.
Comments