Best Practices Q & A - Part 15

Question: "We have been told by several people that we do not need a dedicated Conference Room Pilot facility, that it can all be done from our regular workstations via Internet meeting technology and conference calls. Why are you so insistent on having a physical place, a meeting room for the team? Isn’t this a bit "old school?"

Answer: "Good question; goes to the heart of how we do, or don’t work together. We are great fans of Internet meetings and conference calls, and have done significant portions of projects using these tools. However, there ARE limitations. As a guideline, the more closely a team needs to work together, to trust each other and communicate not only hard data information, but to perceive more subtle forms of communication, the more physical presence will prove valuable and, in the end, will save major amounts of time.

The lack of trust is the greatest cause of additional work on team-based projects, because it leads to CYA work, which does not add value to the actual project itself. When people are physically in the same room, learning, growing, arguing, debating, collaborating, disagreeing and resolving issues, there is an opportunity for trust to really grow and strengthen. If you label in-person communication as "100% of the information" that passes between people, as you move further away from this, major portions of this "100%" are lost. Video conferencing would be the closest, followed by Internet meetings, with phone conference calls in last place. Each increment allows the participant to pay less and less attention to what is going on. Everyone is under intense time pressure, it seems, to "multi-task" which is techno-speak for "I’m not really paying attention to you."

Advanced web meeting technology allows the presentation organizer to discern who is really paying attention to the presentation, as the viewer client software can detect and communicate real-time to the organizer who has moved the window into the background, to work on their email or something else. This doesn’t happen when you are in the same room together. Your CRP is way too important to allow it to be "moved into the background."
-

Implementation: Conference Room Pilot Preparations

Article Summary: In previous newsletter articles, we focused on the “front-end” of an implementation project, including setting up clear top management support, involvement and communication, and selecting a Best Practice implementation project team. When these are accomplished with Best Practice methods and principles, the team is, at this point, operating in a low-risk field – so far, so good.

In this article, we discuss preparation for a Best Practice Conference Room Pilot. This includes making sure the team itself is sufficiently educated and trained, and that the CRP itself is sufficiently organized. In our next issue, we will discuss the detailed implementation preparation activities, the “dress rehearsal” aspect of the CRP – where the rubber hits the road before the rubber really hits the road – and the Go-Live preparations critical to success.

Topics include:

• Education and Training for a CRP
• CRP – the Dress Rehearsal
• CRP facility – organizing for success

Education and Training for a CRP

The first step in this area is to clearly separate education from training. Briefly, in the context of implementation, the purpose of education includes:

• New concepts – these are underlying thought processes, and assumed understanding that is embedded in the Best Practices integral to the new software. The implementation team must clearly understand these if it is to be effective in the CRP process and implementation preparation that is at the core of the CRP. Often these are different ways of looking at things, different perceptions. If one doesn’t understand these, there can be a real crippling effect, as people (unintentionally) try and force-fit the new software to work the “old” way.

• Example – many problems associated with implementations of material planning (MRP) functions stem from the fact that those using it have not been adequately educated in MRP concepts. Effectively using software delivering MRP capabilities has a poor chance of succeeding if the users are blindly clicking on buttons and following rote procedures. A person who truly understands the concepts involved with a particular software function can almost figure out how the software works on their own.

• Precedes and informs detailed planning – if those who are planning the project truly understand the concepts behind the business processes, and the revised, more effective work flows that will come with the software, the steps from “here” to “there” will be considerably shorter and more direct.

• Speeds up detailed, hands-on training – As was just mentioned, the actual amount of detailed, hands-on training needed to become proficient with the software is a small fraction of that required to “teach” rote-style, how a person is to do their job with the new system. We have observed people like this taking notes that say “hit the down arrow 3 times, then press Enter…” and the like. Frightening, from a management point of view! As MRP legend, George Plossl said many years ago “If you think education is expensive, try ignorance!”

Ideally, education of the core project team precedes the business process analysis and software selection process discussed in the preceding chapters. If it has, so much the better. If not, start now. In any case, though, the education process should be expanded to include others in the company who will be using or otherwise involved in the system. The implementation planning process that is the core of the CRP includes a detailed education and training plan for all who will be using the new system’s functions.

For the complete article, please visit the PROACTION website "Conference Room Pilot Preparations".

-

Best Practices Q & A - Part 14

Question: “Several of the people that appear to be the best choices for our implementation project have worked at this company their whole career. How do we bridge the gap for these otherwise good folks between the ‘way we’ve always done things’ and the new Best Practices that we hope to bring into operation with the new system?”

Answer: “While the first impulse answer is ‘education,’ in reality it is ‘support.’ These folks must feel secure in their place in the company, in their jobs and roles, to be able to embrace changing how they look at things, how the work is done. No amount of education, to an unwilling, threatened or frightened person will stick. The more it is pushed on them, the more they will tend to fight back, to resist, defending the status quo. Naturally, this is the opposite of what you want to accomplish. If your leadership pays quality attention to these seemingly non-business, yet essential needs, these people may become the champions you need to lead the change because they are often very loyal to the company and really want to see it succeed now and in the future.”