Why? The business owner saw a small problem and wanted a small solution. What he got was a complex "solution", one that involved changing his business. Most software products used by business have been developed with all of the checks and balances that are needed to make sure that the business functions as it should. This is good if the business is actually doing this. However, most are not. So the problem is that a proposal to totally restructure the way the business operates is met with resistance. The business owner sees a small benefit, while the "solution" provider wants to make sure his software is used properly.
Added to this problem is that the business owner can't articulate his problem, nor communicate what he wants to the software supplier or consultant. The software supplier sees only the software and how it "should" be used.
Most software is flexible enough to be used without all the bells and whistles. There are limitations to the benefits when this happens, and potential problems down the road. But when the owner doesn't see the problems or benefits, he/she is often unwilling to commit to the major effort to achieve it. Software suppliers often ignore all of this in their efforts to sell the software. They quote the benefits without showing the impact that it will have, nor the prerequisites to getting all of the benefits.
I have written many times about the need to understand the business process improvements expected when you install new software. While that is valid, there is a need for the business to evolve and learn what the benefits can be and identify new problems that can be solved. If the owner cannot see these problems, then there is no benefit of attempting to solve it.
I prefer and incremental or iterative approach.
- Identify the problem as the owner sees it.
- Outline a solution with minimal effort to solve that problem, without putting them in a box.
- Once that is solved, look at the new data provided and how that expands the possibilities that may be available to the business.
- Identify the new problem as the owner now sees it. More information will help to describe the past problems in new ways, requiring new solutions.
- As the business learns, the solutions will get bigger, and the prerequisite activity will get larger. However, the business will see that incremental effort yields new benefits and be more willing to support it.
Most small businesses don't have the resources to take on a large job. They may be willing to invest in the software, but not be prepared for a major investment in staff resources and time to do what's needed for a complete makeover.
Most businesses never use all of the functionality provided by the software products that they buy. When the big bang approach is used, they will be scared off until they need major enhancements again. They will put off the pain of the big bang for a long time, maybe until it's too late.
The incremental approach makes progress regularly, gets benefits in small chunks regularly and makes it more acceptable for small business.
Posts
1 comment:
Hi Marc,
I really liked this article ... it is dead on! There is the owner with their view, the sales person with their view and the implementation folks who have theirs. To that I would add that too often the implementation folks do not have metrics to measure success that were built from a consensus process.
I'm wondering if you use such a process to build metrics. Even if you do not at this point in time have an approach to doing this in a group setting or 1on1 interviews, I know from talking to several times that you would be the right person to talk about how the best way to do this might be. I like the idea of a group approach, but too often it is difficult to get owner involvement in a group exercise and it ends up with a 1on1. I think it is difficult also to get time at executive meetings and even at governance meetings when project metrics should normally be discussed.
Post a Comment