Technology is great, when it works. How many times have all of us made this
statement when tech has left us hanging?
But, is it really tech that’s the problem?
One of the nice conveniences I take advantage of each year is
online or kiosk based license tab renewal.
Since I own a plethora of motorcycles it is extremely handy to go
online, enter in the license plate and last 3 of the VIN, and process my tab
renewal in minutes. However, the
Minnesota DVS website has been experiencing some problems, which lead to
finding this article:
“State won’t
say when DMV problems will be fixed. Senator suggests IT overhaul”
Reading through the article I’m reminded what a difference
mindset and thinking have to play in how well our technology supports us. The responses from the MN IT group are (unfortunately)
far too typical of traditional thinking, and clear indicators of an underlying
problem with this type of thinking.
Let’s take a look at some of the symptoms. “Redwing said the team is working on a “road
map’ for how to fix the $93 million system, known as MNLARS, and that road map
will have a timeline for fixing the problems, which have persisted since its
launch in July. ... Redwing said the “road map” would be completed at the end of
January. ”
While a roadmap is essential to a lean agile way of
thinking, it is never kept in a dark corner until ‘completed’. If we are working on a roadmap, and not
getting feedback from our stakeholders, how do we have any idea if it is in
line with what they want? How do we know
we have priorities organized for the best economic sequencing of value? Roadmaps serve one key purpose: they
elaborate in more detail how we expect to achieve our vision. They are not predictive (we humans are terrible
at predicting the future) but instead rely on “based on what we know today”
approach. As we begin to iterate towards
this vision through the roadmap we apply what we learn along the way to update
and improve the roadmap. So, in short, a
roadmap is never ‘complete’ until the vision is achieved. If this sounds undisciplined to you, then you
are missing the point. It is actually
far more disciplined than a traditional, ‘waterfall’ approach, as it requires
us to learn quickly, measure our progress honestly, and apply both learning and
metrics to iterate on the roadmap.
Senator Scott Newman is one of the vocal critics of this
approach within the Minnesota legislature.
“So far I haven’t heard much of anything of a definite answer to
anything,” he said. “So far I have heard ‘I don’t know’ and, to be candid,
evasive answers.”. What puts IT
leadership in a situation to provide these types of frustrating answers? This is (almost) always a systemic problem,
and in this case most likely goes quite deep.
If the system penalizes honesty and learning, then we will work within
the system, and these types of vague answers are the result. How do we fix this? Fix the system. This is a core responsibility of lean agile
leadership; create an environment that promotes openness, honesty, and a
culture of learning and iterating based on that learning. I completely understand this is in a government
setting, and unfortunately, we tend to expect more of this predictive
behavior. But what if the system
underlying this problem promoted and encouraged fast learning, application of
that learning, and transparency to progress and direction? You would see a very different scenario.
Seeing the full organizational process you use to deliver value as a system is critical to improving situations such as this. As Esther Derby points out, applying lean and agile thinking to improving these types of situations is only possible when approaching this as a system problem, and not a people problem.
Seeing the full organizational process you use to deliver value as a system is critical to improving situations such as this. As Esther Derby points out, applying lean and agile thinking to improving these types of situations is only possible when approaching this as a system problem, and not a people problem.
Based on my years of coaching large enterprises that find
themselves in just such a situation, I have Weighted Shortest Job First. My guess is that far too much time has been
spent on the gathering and far too little on the economic sequencing. Open the conversation with key stakeholders (state
government officials, DMV users, etc) as to the direction and purpose, deliver
incremental changes and improvements on a regular basis (no less than monthly)
and apply concepts such as Innovation
Accounting to measure the impact of the efforts. This is not an 'assessment' issue, this is a 'let's get started and learn and improve as we go' issue. I have seen this same organizational system at many fortune 100 companies, and have experienced over and over that this is a solvable problem, but not with
traditional thinking. Incorporating a
mindset, principles and practices based on Lean and Agile thinking is the only
way to solve these types of systemic problems.
some specific advice for MN IT (and echo Senator Newman's sentiments). Change the system, before it’s changed for you. This would involve quickly gathering and assessing the major problems and sequencing the resolution of these efforts for best economic outcomes using a formula such as
some specific advice for MN IT (and echo Senator Newman's sentiments). Change the system, before it’s changed for you. This would involve quickly gathering and assessing the major problems and sequencing the resolution of these efforts for best economic outcomes using a formula such as
No comments:
Post a Comment