I am working on harmonizing a Product Handling process for two departments that has just merged. Both depts had their own processes on Product Handling. I need input on questions and issues to bring up at the first working session.
I think it's important to get the group talking like a team first. That means they need to understand why they are there and what they need to accomplish as a newly formed group. One way to do this is to create a team charter. Once established, the focus is on what they want to do as a group, instead of who has the better processes.
Also, before you even look at the two sets of processes, you can do a working session on what the 'ideal' process would look like. Then do a gap analysis between that and the two you have. Pick the best parts of the existing processes that map to the ideal model, and then build the rest. You MUST do this as a cohesive team. Otherwise you won't have any buyin, just a lot of grief. Saving Changes...
Michael WoodProject Manager / Business Analyst / Business Process Improvement Guru| Independent ContractorGig Harbor, Wa, United States
Also consider the entire product management process - What are the orgainzation's goals and objectives related to product handling - from a manufacturing / acquistion through delivery to customers? These larger goals and objectives should drive the combined department's discussion on how the current processes can be improved to achieve those goals. It is not a question of taking the best of both departments. It is a question of designing processes that deliver value to stakeholders. This can only be done by defining, in measurable, operational terms what those needs are. Then present those needs to the new team and have them work together to develop new ways to achieve those goals. Then map those changes against the current processes to see if either of the two approaches can be re-calibrated or if a whole new process is more appropriate. You might discover that a continuous improvement approach works best or that the product handling process needs to be reengineered.
Hope this helps Saving Changes...
Stephen MayeSenior Vice PresidentVa, United States
Thanks Laura and Michael for the great thoughts!
To add one quick note to what has already been said... It is important to remember that not only do departments (made up of people, of course) have a sense of ownership and maybe even pride in the existing process(es), but they also have a unique view of the world that will likely be useful in getting the full lay of the land. Edward DeBono talks about (too many years ago, I can't remember which book) map making in the process of improvement and reinvention. His point was that rather than trying to select between available options, the objective should be to build a comprehensive map that includes all reasonably available information. Then, from the map you define a new route (as opposed to selecting from existing routes).
Each department probably has (or at least had) a good reason for doing things the way they do. If those reasons are not understood as part of the entire landscape, you could find yourself fixing problems that were solved 10 years ago.
This is starting to sound entirely too theoretical. Go with the practical advice above and check out the BRE and VSA processes under the Process heading on the toolbar to the right.
Over time I have found that there is a relatively simple way to overcome the politics and resistance to change. By starting at the end and working back through however many processes you are seeking to integrate, and asking a set regime of questions at each point in your information gathering.
If you start by defining the primary objective or output of the process(es), you can then ask the question Saving Changes...
Michael WoodProject Manager / Business Analyst / Business Process Improvement Guru| Independent ContractorGig Harbor, Wa, United States
Good approach Taz. Consider tying outcomes to how they add to stakeholder value and support quantified business objectives and you will really get their attention Saving Changes...
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not Eureka! (I found it!) but rather, 'hmm.... that's funny...'"
