The Curious Case of the iPhone process

In an earlier post I talked about my day in London and the process issues I had with agencies.

A little later on in the day I went to buy an iPhone at the Apple store in White City, West London. I wondered into the store. It was quite empty. I played with the iPhones for a while and then went to the counter. There was a sign saying 'Queue for your iPhones here'. I queued. I waited about 6 minutes for a free station. Then I asked for an iPhone. I was asked if I had a reservation? I said 'No'. I was told I couldn't get an iPhone without a reservation. But I was also told I could make a reservation using one of their machines. I did and was able to make a reservation for about 45 minutes time.

But it got me thinking of the process behind this.

Apple have obviously decided they want to manage the flow of iPhones.So in order to do this they have restricted sales of iPhones to people who have a reservation. Is this to manage demand? Maybe. But having made the reservation there was obviously sufficient stock to allow me to pick one up within the hour therefore it wasn't a demand issue. In fact if they had enough stock in - which they obviously did - they could allocate a proportion out to those who had reservations and still keep a 'slush' stock on hand for walk ins like me.

My thought on the whole reservation issue was this "If I'm on-line making a reservation for an iPhone, why wouldn't I just go to the on-line Apple store and order one for home delivery?".

To me the whole 'reserving an iPhone' process seems flawed. Your thoughts?

---

Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.

---

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford See related info below

Is process scaleable?

Wednesday this week was a day of process frustrations for me.

Let me explain.

I went into London with one aim: To re-register with two agencies who assist in getting acting jobs for me. (For those who don't know, I am an actor as well as a Business Process consultant). The concept is very straightforward - in each agency you fill in a form, sign a document, and have your measurements and pictures taken.

The first agency I went to was ill-prepared for the day. Even though they had booked appointments from 9am, they were not even ready to start until 9.30. Then they had people unsure about which order they had to be processed in. The process itself was unclear in terms of who did which part in which sequence. Photos were being taken randomly before people had been fully processed and it was generally a shambles. I was in there for well over 1 hour.

Contrast that with the later appointment at a different agency. On arrival a row of chairs was ready, each one equipped with a clipboard, pen and appropriate forms. Names were noted for the record and people were processed in arrival sequence. Each person was taken to a measuring station, then to a computer screen, then to a photo studio. I was in there for about 15 minutes.

Fundamentally the process each of these agencies was using was identical, but the implementation of the process was seriously flawed. Actually, on reflection I think the first agency was not using a process. They were just running things on and ad-hoc basis.

It got me thinking about scalability of processes. Agency 1 was a smaller than Agency 2 by quite a margin. The number of people they were processing was considerably less. So, in fact, their process should have been slicker and easier to manage than Agency 2's. But is this in fact the case? Could I have taken the process flow from agency 2 and dropped it into agency 1 without an issue?

Was the process scaleable?

Is process scaleable in general? Can a process which deals with 30 people/widgets/forms per hour be upscaled to deal with 3000 people/widgets/forms per hour without obvious detriment? (Obviously this assumes that it is physically possible to process the appropriate number of items in the given time).

Your thoughts?

---

Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.

---

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford
See related info below

Why Change?

I work with an organisation that - amongst other things - sells tickets to theatre shows.

The woman who runs the box office is a woman 'of a certain age' who has - over the years - developed a slick, well run method of handling ticket sales. She uses Excel to track individual seats and has a colour-coding system to identify who has ordered, who has paid and who will pick tickets up on the door.

For her it works well.

However it is inefficient, slow, complex and - with all the best will in the world - outdated.

A short while ago we attempted to automate some of the process using standard web applications. This was met with a stony wall of rejection. Her comment? "If it works why do we have to change it?"

That's a cry I hear time and time again across the process world. "If it works why do we have to change it?"

And the cry is a valid one. If a process or system has been developed over the years to be optimised for a particular method of doing things, why should a review seek to change or modify that process?

The short answer is it shouldn't. However the fact that a process is running well in a single way does not mean it is running the best way. Take, for example, the insurance company example I quoted on an earlier post. They had a superfluous step in their process which had arisen as a result of factors that had changed since the process had been developed. The same for the laundry service. If you had asked them if they were following the best process they would, undoubtedly have said yes. But they weren't.

The other factor which links into this is almost certainly an aversion to change. Studies have shown that bad change management is one of the key factors surrounding project failure. In the case of changing a 'tried and tested' process this is even more critical. Especially if the process has been customised by the people who perform it to make their life easier.

In every instance where you are reviewing the process look at it from the point of view of 'just because it is running and well integrated at the moment does not mean it is efficient and cannot be improved'

People won't like the fact that they may have to change (and they may attempt to slide back to the old way of doing things at a later date), but your process will be much improved as a result

---

Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.

---

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford  
See related info below

The $64m question about BPM.

I have a very simple thing for you to consider today. If you could reply with your thoughts in the comments (or alternatively tweet them to my Twitter account) I would appreciate it.

"What is the one thing you would do to increase BPM take-up in organisations?"

My suggestion: Take it out of IT and make it a business project.

---

Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.

---

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford
See related info below

Friday Review 17th September 2010

Here are some of the links posted over on the Process Cafe Espresso Shots this week¹

What is Ideal Customer service? - Forrester's thoughts on Customer Service

The Rise of a New Career: The BPM Professional - Some thoughts by Connie Moore from Forrester about what the new BPM professional looks like

BPM is a cultural issue, not a technical one - So BPM is a cultural issue not a technical one? I agree to a certain extent. But how does this explain a lot of the BPM implementations that have struggled with the technology?

BPMN 2010 Keynote - Keith Swenson's thoughts and comments from the BPMN 2010 keynote speech. Always worth reading





¹ The Process Cafe Espresso Shots is a place for linking to process related articles written by other people that don't merit a full post on the Process Cafe but are still worth your time reading. Sort of an espresso shot of 'The Process Cafe'-eine.

Top posts of the month for August 2010 - Process Cafe

Usually at the beginning of the month I send you through a list of the most popular posts from the blog over the last thirty days. I'm still going to do that. But what I found is that there appear to be regular posts that come up every month. I think the reason is that by highlighting what the popular posts are for a given month more people will check them out during the month and hence they will remain popular over the following 30-or-so days.

What I therefore wanted to do was to give you a list of some of the more popular posts from a response or feedback point of view. This will broaden the possibly base of information you can look at and, maybe, highlight a couple of posts you might want to read.

So here goes. The top five posts for August 2010

1. Ten BPM blogs you should be following

2. My thoughts on Gartner's BPM Magic Quadrant

3. Silo Thinking and why it is bad

4. Your Criteria for choosing a BPM tool

5. Review - Lombardi Blueprint modeling tool

It's nice to see the post 'Ten BPM blogs you should be following' coming it at the top this month. Also the perennial favourites from previous months are still hanging around.

You might also want to check out the following posts from last year:

Process inconsistencies hit the customer .. again
Why we aren't Storming The Bastille of processes
Health checks for processes: Treat them like you would your own body
It's a TRAP: Documenting processes rather than managing them


I'm also going to be tweeting some blog posts links from the last couple of years over the coming weeks. If you wish to follow me on twitter you can do so at @gaz4695

Thanks to everyone who visited the site last month. I hope you keep coming back and finding interesting articles to read and comment on.

---

Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.

---

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford  
See related info below

Bowling and BPM - All style, no skill

I went to the local bowling alley this weekend to celebrate a birthday with a couple of friends (not my birthday, don't worry you haven't missed anything). This alley is quite small (20 lanes) and only half the lanes were being used.

Those lanes that were being used were populated by a rather motley group of folks from an uncertain demographic - although our group was by far the oldest.

What I found interesting to watch was the different styles and approaches to bowling.

I think it's safe to say that most people were trying their best to throw the ball down the lane and hit the pins at the end. But within that criteria there were a number of diverse methods of doing this.

1) All style no substance.
The young guys in the lane adjacent to me were trying to impress their girlfriends. They had chosen to use a ball that was far lighter than one they should be using in order to be able to throw it a great deal faster than was necessary. However they were obviously working under the impression that throwing the ball hard and fast was enough to guarantee a strike. As it happened throwing the ball hard and fast was enough - in their case - to guarantee the ball ended up in the gutter quicker and with a loud bang. They had no talent for the game whatsoever. But their throwing action looked good to the girls.

2) Trying hard but ill equipped.
In the lane on the other side were a group of girls who were amongst the demographic which would best be described as 'overweight or obese' They were obviously out to have fun but were constricted by the fact that they were unable to move fast, nor were they able to bend down to release the ball along the lane. As a consequence they would shuffle to the foul line, swing the arm back and - as the ball reached their thigh on the follow through - release it towards the pins. It would arc through the air for a metre or two before contacting the ground with a crack. Invariably it would bounce off line and roll rather forlornly down towards the target. Occasionally this would result in two or three pins being knocked over, but generally it would fall into the gutter.

3) Just starting out. Using all the aids.
In my own group we had Doris. Doris (not her real name) is a women of a certain age who likes to attend our evenings out and remind herself what she's missing. Doris has leg and back pains and knows she can't bowl well. But she insists on stacking the cards in her favour when she plays. She always has the lane bumpers raised and she usually uses the learners frame to release the ball initially. As a result she can score quite well. She never has a gutter ball and the ball never bounces off line the way it would do if she were to drop it onto the lane like our friends in the adjacent lane.

4) Theoretically good. Needs practice.
I fall into this group. I know the theory of ten-pin bowling. I know the best angle of approach to use to get a strike. I know how to use the markings at the end of the lane to help with the aim. Indeed on several occasions I can score strikes and spares  almost with impunity. But in amongst that I know that in order to be any good at this game I need to play more often than once every eight or nine months.

5) All the gear. No idea.
In this group we have one of my co-players from last night. He has his own bowling ball - which he brings out whenever we invite him to play. He has a rehearsed routine for each throw. He can score quite well when his luck is in. But at the end of the day he has no finesse, no style and looks just plain silly when he bowls. This usually reflects in his score. For a guy with his own bowling ball he should be scoring strike after strike and leaving the rest of the amateurs behind. Unfortunately he never does.

So what has this got to do with BPM?

As I was watching the various people attempting to put up a good score with their different styles it occurred to me that there are great parallels with the folks who are attempting to implement BPM in their organisations:

1) All style no substance.
This would be the organisation who have seized upon BPM and process management as something they can do to try and impress senior management. They've obviously spoken to folks who have done this successfully and know what a good implementation looks like. Unfortunately knowing what one looks like and producing a good one themselves are two completely different things. They try different things, look professional and cool while doing it but end up throwing gutter balls all the time.

2) Trying hard but ill equipped
This group encompasses the organisations who have had BPM thrust upon them when they were not wanting it or not ready for it. They are trying hard to do things 'the old way' and cannot get their minds around the fact that things will need to change before they are able to make the most of this opportunity

3) Just starting out. Using all the aids.
Personally I like this group. They know that they don't know a lot about this. But they're willing to learn. They take advantage of any support they can get from the toolset, vendors or outside agencies. They attend the full training classes and learn whatever they can about BPM. Then they take small steps.

4) Theoretically good. Needs practice
The theoretically good group include those companies who have probably progressed from the previous level ('Just starting out. Using all the aids'), but have - for some reason - not continued on. They know that they can do this. They have the knowledge and experience to produce good quality BPM work. But they are rusty or lacking in practice.

5) All the gear. No idea
Finally we have what - to me - is the bulk of BPM customers. Usually they are large entities who have 'seen the light' and managed to wangle a significant budget from senior management to implement BPM. They've studied what needs to be studied, bought what needs to be bought, have attempted to implement the right things but are working from a position, basically, of ignorance. They don't really understand what they are doing with BPM. They don't understand why they are really doing this but they know that with the money and expertise they are throwing at it they should be able to produce something world class. Unfortunately that never seems to be the case.

Obviously some of the above statements are generalisations. But it did strike me as significant that something like ten pin bowling would have a number of parallels in the BPM world. Can any of my readers say with any authority that they don't agree with at least some of the classes I have mentioned above?

More to the point can they recognise themselves (or their clients) in any of the classes I have listed?

---

Reminder: 'The Perfect Process Project Second Edition' is now available. Don't miss the chance to get this valuable insight into how to make business processes work for you. Click this link and follow the instructions to get this book.

---

All information is Copyright (C) G Comerford  
See related info below