The Shift from Service Provider to Integrated Alliance Partner

As end users become more sophisticated in their operations they understand through experience the real advantages of optimizing product delivery processes.  It is natural that they should want to extend those advantages to key services, both provided and received.  Supply Chain Management (SCM) is often thought of as a manufacturing discipline, which it indeed is.  Today, however, SCM principles are being adapted to the services side of business as well, with rewards and dividends to both sides of the provider / end user relationship.

For many this is a fundamental change requiring acquisition of new skills, knowledge, and mind sets.  These folks must learn to walk first, but getting up to “business speed” cannot take too long.  Others have the requisite skills and knowledge but need to extend them to new areas of their business.  In both cases, overcoming ingrained cultures running counter to the initiative is paramount and something that should be thoughtfully done.

Across industries and market sectors companies are looking for service providers who want to partner with them at new levels.  Whether the end product is machinery, financial services, a new building, or operational in nature; optimizing the delivery process is now a holistic agenda that encompasses all required resources.

What Is Driving Business Integration?

For starters, better educated and more demanding customers.  As organizations improve internal management systems and mechanisms they develop new intelligence about themselves, their competition, customers and yes, service providers.  Business intelligence is a greater differentiator now than ever before.  Process improvement, Six Sigma, metrics programs and other initiatives of their ilk are changing the way we understand and organize our work.  As that intelligence matures it begins to ask new questions, test new ideas, and probe for new advantages.  Extending that intelligence beyond the boundaries of your own organization by challenging business partners to match it in their domains and align their processes with yours is a natural next step.

Competitive intensity has increased in recent years, partially the result of economic stress.   Focused by the need to survive some companies have pared away non-core businesses, reduced or expanded offerings, or taken advantage of opportunities to expand and grow.  Behind all of these strategies is a single imperative – succeed when others do not.  The oft-quoted exhortation to “Never let a good crisis go to waste” has been taken to heart. These activities amount to a reshaping of business, each incidence an opportunity to streamline processes.  Many companies have gone after these opportunities with zeal and more often than not they challenge their business partners to match them stride for stride.

Customers seek to minimize the number of business relationships they must manage.  Their goal is to lower the amount of management friction that is applied to the business of doing business.  As a result, strategic business alliances often form in which multiple businesses collaborate in competition against other alliances.  It’s not just your company competing for business anymore, it is your alliance competing against other alliances.  That means each alliance partner has a vested interest in each partner’s business performance; and it motivates alliance partners to plan, act, measure, and communicate in similar fashion.  You cannot do that when your processes, standards, and tools are different.

Fulfillment of customer requirements has always been the primary business purpose - it has not always been the primary business activity. Although SCM began as a manufacturing discipline, business in general is moving from a production-based model to a fulfillment-based model, improving business speed and alignment.  The foundational principle at work here is that of connectivity, creating networks of entities that share business intelligence and act together in synchronized fashion.  As this model moves further down the chain efficiencies and advantages are increased to the advantage of all in the network.  Inherent in this model is the recognition that individual firms depend upon resources controlled by others in the network.

Integration Tools

Deployment of secure and integrated information technologies across the customer – provider alliance enterprise enables process synchronization and speeds the flow of information.  In classic terms, such seamless operating protocols make pulling resources vs. pushing them possible, thereby avoiding stranded investments for inventory, space, and management systems at each level of the alliance.

Common measurements and language are critical elements.  Each partner in the alliance may elect to retain measurements they feel are uniquely important to them but which are not relevant to other partners; all partners, however, should adopt common measurements and language for tracking and reporting enterprise activity.  If, for example, the customer’s five most important Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) are expressed as cost per end unit or cost per revenue unit, then the alliance partners providing support services to the customer should provide measures of their business that feed into the customer’s metrics in similar fashion and language.

The human part of the equation requires specific attention.  The degree of transparency required can be a challenge.  Sharing business intelligence and allowing visibility and integration of key processes may be a new dynamic for some.  Employing managers who have a collaboration orientation, are comfortable working with a range of technology systems, and who understand process design should be a priority for any firm engaged in an alliance business model.  Linking compensation to alliance performance strengthens the leverage towards implementation of cross-enterprise best practices.

Information is the Currency of Integration

Integrating and managing the supply chain seeks to assure that the right part shows up at the right place, at the right time.  The goal of services integration is to speed information to the point of need exactly when needed, thereby enabling the deployment of services in the most efficient manner.  The opportunity to integrate services to the level discussed here is enabled primarily by technology and information systems.  Information becomes knowledge, and knowledge becomes wisdom.  Wisdom, when acted upon correctly and speedily, becomes advantage.

Condition-based service management systems proliferate today.  I get an email from the car dealership with an appointment date and time when it is time for an oil change in my vehicle; not based on distance driven or elapsed time but on the actual condition of the oil and operating conditions of the engine, and on the day of the week and time of day I prefer based on the history of previous visits.  Sensors communicate automatically when set parameters are reached, triggering a process that results in my pulling into a service bay.  In building management an exact parallel occurs when an outsourced HVAC maintenance provider is dispatched to service a unit by automated sensors linked to intelligent building systems.  This model can be applied at multiple levels, even to stocking paper for copiers.  The fact that cloud computing largely eliminates the cost of deploying these technologies is speeding their adoption.  Service vendors lower inventories, redeploy capacity, and reduce costs.  Customers have greater visibility, can forecast more accurately, and have more control over cash flow.

The philosophies behind service chain integration are not new: Deep integration of business processes by alliance members who are invested in each other’s success, who are intensely customer-centric, who trust each other and accept accountability, who are driven by a desire to achieve process excellence, and who share business intelligence willingly.  When merged into a cohesive operating system each becomes a force multiplier for the others, improving service quality, cost and efficiency.  

Business Agility: A Model for Improving Responsiveness – Pt. 2

This post concludes the series on business agility which I first explored in the March 25 post.

AGILITY IN PRACTICE

Rely on A Good Compass, Not Maps

Today’s business environment changes too rapidly for a detailed and rigid business construct to remain viable for very long.  No matter how detailed you try to make a business map it will eventually mislead you.  Developing a “compass,” however, allows you to navigate territory with a sense of direction, purpose, and by using currently available intelligence and resources to create a path forward. Here again, emphasis is placed on organic strategy, one that anticipates changing opportunities and risks, is purposely alert for their signals, and which allows for mid-course corrections. 

Cultivate Resilience Instead of Strength

Organizations that try to resist failure at all costs view doing so as a strength, often touting that this preserves resources and improves efficiency.  That may indeed be true, but it also limits the amount of experimentation constituents feel empowered to undertake, which in turn can limit the acquisition of knowledge and discovery of opportunities.  There is also the issue of speed.  High intolerance to risk requires than any new initiative or idea be thoroughly vetted by all levels of the organization before approval to proceed is granted, thereby delaying benefits of the initiative (assuming it does not die on the vine in the process).  Entrepreneurial organizations take a different approach entirely.  Here, “failing early and often” is viewed as a learning process that increases knowledge and contributes to future success.  While no one would suggest that all organizations should be entrepreneurial in nature, it is fair to suggest that those which are strongly oriented in the risk averse direction consider the costs of their stance.  Focusing on organizational structures and governance that improve resiliency provides the ability to accept reasonable risk with the assurance the organization can recover when needed.  This generally means a less autocratic structure with “check, plan, communicate, act” systems in place to speed response at the tactical level.

Pull Instead of Push

One common attribute of agile organizations is that they invariably share robust networks.  Social connections among participants provide access to intelligence and resources.  Affect networks are based in shared motives, expectation and business or operational norms.  Cognitive networks focus on shared understanding, common definitions of work, and supportive systems for doing the work.  These networks do not act alone.  While each has its own core there is significant overlap, allowing each type of network to influence the others.  Information, resources, strategies, and operational norms are all shared with trusted partners making resources outside the “home” organization available.  Leveraging these networks can provide opportunities for increasing flexibility and better aligning resources with the need of the hour.  For example, a company may choose not to fully staff and thereby consume labor resource funds when work is fluid and requirements shift.  In this case a company may choose instead to maintain a funding pool which allows it to procure specific skill sets and knowledge on an as-needed basis exactly when the need exists.

Business agility strives to create an environment at all three levels (strategic, operational, episodic) that promotes responsiveness to changing business conditions while avoiding the chaos and trauma that can paralyze an organization undergoing change.  Making increased sensitivity to conditions and robust responsiveness characteristic creates an environment where change is expected and less threatening.  In today’s shifting landscape those are valuable traits, especially in the FM arena.

Business Agility: A Model for Improving Responsiveness – Pt. 1

This post begins a short two part series, continuing the subject of business agility first examined in my March 25 post.  Part One of the series addresses the theory behind agility.  Next week’s Part Two will focus on the practice of agility.

AGILITY IN THEORY

Business agility has long been the hallmark of successful organizations, and its importance in contemporary business is growing.  True agility, however, often requires a mindset and operational dynamic that is counter intuitive given industry’s penchant for quick fixes and control.  Real agility requires a business culture and strategy that is sustainable over the long haul.  Typical business reactions such as reducing headcount and services, de-emphasizing customer service, or deferring projects and initiatives that create capability and capacity will work for the short term, but they are not generally sustainable.  These strategies consume or discard resources that may be better used creating and re-energizing.

Defining Agility – An Elusive Quest

One of the problems with “Agility” is defining exactly what one means when one uses the term.  It is a common term and strategy in the IT world, but focuses almost exclusively on IT systems that improve communication and data sharing to speed processes. Manufacturing types express agility in terms of customization and last responsible moment commitments.  Knowledge management professionals describe it as using knowledge management systems to provide greater or faster awareness of changes.

In their paper “Understanding Organizational Agility: A Work-Design Perspective” Holsapple and Li suggest a homogenized definition that can be applied in most cases, identifying alertness and response capability as key dimensions of agility. 

“Agility is the result of integrating alertness to changes (recognizing opportunities/challenges) – both internal and environmental – with a capability to use resources in responding (proactive/reactive) to such changes, all in a timely, flexible, affordable, relevant manner.”

Another important characteristic of agility is recognized in the statement,

“Business Agility is in the mind of the organization and comprises an absolute willingness to constantly monitor one’s position, in a timely and appropriate manner – not just to respond quickly.” 

This statement makes the explicit and often misunderstood point that agility is not just about speed.

Three Levels of Agility

Strategic, Operational, and Episodic agility comprise the agility spectrum.  Each is achieved intentionally through work design that promotes organizational and cultural drivers which are supportive of agility.

Strategic agility can be identified as maximizing organizational alertness to business changes and integrating response capability.  Its purpose is to structure and govern operational work to assure alignment with organizational mission and strategies, thereby enhancing the organization’s ability to identify and take advantage of business opportunities.

Operational agility derives from this integration of alertness and response capability, governing episodic work by allocating resources and setting schedules in the most efficient manner.

Episodic agility refers to what we may more colloquially describe as transactional or task-specific work.  This is where work processes produce tangible value.  It may be intellectual collaboration in the case of knowledge workers, or the fulfillment of specific service or production processes.  Importantly, it is at this level where alertness to task level environmental conditions may lead to process variance.  There is an interesting dichotomy here between agility, which emphasizes alertness and appropriate response to changing conditions, and process management which generally emphasizes control and stability.

The three levels have definite boundaries, support each other, and when taken as a whole permeate the entire organization. In this manner they provide the combined alertness to changes and response capacities that enable taking advantage of opportunities, or adjusting to threats in a nimble manner.

Next week we discuss three specific strategies that help improve agility.

Customer, Serve Yourself!

I recall many years ago when I was a new employee at a major financial institution and my boss and I were wrapping up an east coast trip.  More or less on the spur of the moment he decided to reroute our trip home through Chicago to check on a rumored real estate deal.  When we got there we learned much to our dismay that the deal was done.  A long term lease for the entire top floor of a new high rise in the loop area … to house a regional data center.  To say this is one of the more nonsensical decisions I’ve ever seen would be true, but it certainly isn’t the only one. 

As a result of this particular event a new corporate policy was implemented requiring that the Corporate Real Estate and Facilities group lead all real estate and development projects.  Shocking, I know.  Previously our group had been a service available to senior management in different regions.  Some used us, some did not.  After this incident choice was removed and the organization got serious about managing its real estate processes.

What is the point of this story?  It is this: Customers have a responsibility to make responsible decisions.  Consultants have a responsibility to assist them and hopefully, to help them avoid these kinds of egregious errors.  While both customer and consultant share responsibility I believe it is the customer who carries the larger burden.

Customers know more about themselves, their strengths and weaknesses than outsiders do.  Consultants can investigate, analyze and suggest cures; but it is the customer who makes the choices.  They decide which consultant to engage, how diligent to be in the process, how objective they will be, and how they will respond to advice and input.  Customers do a disservice to themselves when they shortchange any of these because they didn’t get the answer they expected or wanted, or don’t think the effort involved is worth it.  If the initiative is not worth your effort to do correctly then it certainly is not worth engaging consultants in the first place. 

Intelligent customers understand the environment they work in, what is needed, and what is not needed.  They make fact-based decisions and are candid with themselves first and foremost.  Intelligent customers buy smart, hire smart, design smart, and execute in smart fashion.  In other words, intelligent customers make better decisions and execute better because they know more, have well-honed protocols and standards, and require adherence.

While this story is about a real estate and development project it could just as well have been about deciding whether or not to build a new factory, launch a new product, or any other business decision.  Knowing your requirements, their drivers, what risks and mitigations are involved and a hundred other things are important.  As FM’s we are often in the customer seat as we acquire services to meet our organizational needs.  Are you a smart customer?  Do you know what the requirements really are?  Do you know where the levers are and under what circumstances they should be exercised?  Do you know what your internal customers are looking for, what their business plans are, what frustrates them about your operation?  Do you know the strategic direction and tactics of your enterprise and are your goals and processes aligned with them?

You are an FM.  You serve internal customers.  You are also a customer yourself and every service, product or project you acquire has a pass through effect to your internal customers.  Your smart customer behavior has a direct effect on the health of the enterprise. 

Serve yourself well so you can better serve others.  Be a smart customer.

How Can You Lead When You Don’t Agree With Your Leader?

Leading can be messy business.  It has its rewards but challenges are never in short supply it seems.  Partly I think leading is complicated because it is relationship based and relationships are always in flux. It is easy when the person you look to for leadership is aligned perfectly with you and the same is true of your relationship with those you lead.  But that doesn’t happen very often.  In a large sense, successful leadership is defined in our ability to be effective in spite of these mis-alignments.  Yes, one of a leader’s most important functions is to improve alignment, but when alignment is a goal and not the reality a leader and those he or she leads must still be effective.

Understanding the other person’s perspective is a key for me when I am in this misaligned state.  To understand I must listen, pay attention, synthesize, evaluate and reach conclusions on why the other person has the perspective they do, its validity and importantly its motivation. 

An interesting thing happens here.  I cannot understand without information.  In order to get the information I need to ask open questions and listen honestly.  I must probe to find out what the other leader believes, why he or she believes it, what experiences or data has led them in this particular direction, and I must be willing to accept that they may be correct.  I must engage our relationship in open dialogue which in turn engenders mutual respect, transparency, and trust.  In the end I may not necessarily agree with their conclusions or they with mine, but if I can understand their process and reasoning I can make an informed decision to support them anyway or continue the dialogue to press my perspective. 

It’s that relationship thing again.  By nurturing it through rough spots I help strengthen it.  By abandoning the effort I weaken it.  By leaving it I lose my voice.

This is not an unimportant point.  People sometimes flee positions because of misalignment conflict, robbing themselves of an opportunity to contribute and mature.  These are conditions that will be repeated often throughout a career.  Fleeing such a situation now does nothing to prepare you for the next.

The value of visible conflict resolution should not be underestimated in its effect on others.  When these types of leadership conflicts exist in organizations it makes people nervous.  There will probably those who are aligned with each side for a variety of reasons, but everyone will know that the leadership tension exists, and that will make people nervous.  Some may even begin postulating negative repercussions of the conflict and then begin to act on those concerns, creating another set of issues that must be overcome.  But, just as everyone will know there is a conflict among leadership they will also know how it is being processed.  They will see when you are honestly looking for ways to make it work, and that fact alone will build their trust in your leadership.  Why?  Because they will see that you take it seriously, are willing to listen and learn, and that you conduct yourself respectfully – all traits that people value in leaders.

Asking yourself what you need to learn about a particular conflict is possibly the most important step when beginning to face a conflict in leadership.  This internal question sets the tone for how you will engage the other leader.  Often you will find that the most important things you have to learn are about yourself.  What is this situation trying to teach me?  What deficiencies do I have in dealing with this situation and how can I improve them?  How can I approach the other leader in a way that encourages transparency?  What is my responsibility to those I lead and the larger organization in this circumstance?  What is really at stake here?  All of these are important questions to ask as you begin to seek information that will contribute to resolution.

Leading really is a relationship thing.  Paying attention to your relationship with other leaders should be a purposed and principled behavior.  Expecting that you will be in perfect alignment with them at all times is not reasonable.  Seeking to fairly understand, communicating and leading effectively as you work to resolve misalignment issues is absolutely expected of you – by those you lead, other leaders, and I hope by you.

Using the Balanced Scorecard to Improve Strategic Alignment

The building blocks of strategic alignment; business strategy, FM strategy, organizational infrastructure and processes and FM infrastructure and processes, combine with strategic fit and functional integration to act as the foundation upon which real alignment is built.  While understanding this conceptual base is necessary, it is only the base.  Strategic alignment is an ongoing process and can sometimes be hard to discern, given its conceptual nature.  That is where the balanced scorecard comes in, providing a way to measure FM strategies and outcomes in a way that is clear, relevant to the business, and actionable.

A balanced scorecard measures four dimensions; financial, customer, internal processes, and innovation/learning.  This broad view of the business, as opposed to a traditional financial or operational metrics only view, provides a deeper perspective of current operating performance and future performance drivers.  Because of this broad view perspective, the balanced scorecard is best viewed as a management system, not a performance indicator.

To build a successful balanced scorecard for FM organizations you must address each of the four dimensions.

• Financial Perspective:  How is FM maximizing shareholder value?
• Customer Perspective:  How is FM performing in ways that matter most to its customers?
• Internal Process Perspective:  What are the factors needed to build strategic capabilities and efficiencies?
• Innovation and Learning Perspective:  What are the knowledge, skills, and systems needed to sustain continual improvement?

You can see how these four dimensions act upon each other.  Learning, for example, supports continuous improvement of internal processes which in turn results in higher customer focus and satisfaction.  By linking the four dimensions of the FM balanced scorecard to enterprise strategy FM’s help align their unit strategy with the overall strategy of the business.

This linkage to enterprise strategy is critical.  Many FM’s have balanced scorecards that are FM centric, focused primarily on traditional FM metrics.  While this may indeed indicate how well your operation is performing in relation to broad based FM benchmarking metrics, it may do little to illustrate how your FM department is supporting or hampering the overall goals of your specific business. 

And that is the point, isn’t it?  Understanding how FM relates to your overall business, how you can provide positive support to the enterprise, how you can leverage FM to the benefit of your business are all good things to do. 

In today’s business world being able to demonstrate value and leverage are two critical elements of success.  Those who do these well are at a strategic advantage.  They can explain FM value and importance in specific business-centric terms, they demonstrate attention to improving customer outcomes, they learn and innovate to the benefit of the enterprise.  In doing all of this they act as thought leaders, anticipating and fulfilling the needs of their organizations, aligning FM with the enterprise at strategic and operational levels.

Is that you?  Does it sound like your FM group?

It should.

Relationship Management Is Key to Strategic Business Alignment

When working to strengthen FM strategic alignment with the business do not overlook the importance of a strong relationship management program.  “Program” implies that this effort is intentional, as it should be.  Too many FM’s make the mistake of concentrating solely on the immediate project or task and do not pay enough attention to purposefully managing stakeholder relationships.  Relationship management, however, is a critical element of FM success, especially at the leadership level.

• A close relationship between functional leadership and customers ranked fourth among enablers that help increase strategic alignment.  (Luftman and Brier)

• Conversely, lack of a close relationship ranked first out of fourteen identified alignment inhibitors. (Luftman and Brier)

• Business executives repeatedly downplayed the value of formal organizational structure, but frequently emphasized the critical role of relationships in achieving strategic alignment. (Chan)

The best relationship management programs are not only intentional but also multi-level.  Peer-to-peer communication occurs on a routine frequency at all levels of the organization, informing the alignment process up and down the FM chain.

While it is beneficial that these interactions occur at all levels it is most important that exchanges at the business unit and executive levels be especially well tuned.  This is where the most important information resides and where FM has an opportunity to learn the most about stakeholder issues, plans and initiatives.  With this knowledge FM leaders can be proactive with projects and services in a manner that best supports core business outcomes.  That is, after all, what alignment is about.

At the strategic level executives will want to be intentional about maintaining contacts and a pattern of communication which shares information.  These conversations take many forms, some of them of a more informal nature.

At the tactical level there are many ways to increase the alignment dialogue.  One common methodology is to designate specific Customer Relationship Managers to interact with their counterparts or senior executives in business units.  Often this takes the form of a zone management program in which building specific information and projects  are shared, but it need not be that tactical.  If it is, the strategic dialogue should be a specific touch point as well.

Alignment, however, is not a one way street.  While FM may be seeking to align its strategies and operations with core business strategies this process also informs stakeholders about FM’s capabilities, forward leaning attitude and willingness to be a true partner in the business, not just a “call me when you need me” service provider.  It is a critical difference.  The more business stakeholders accept FM as a full partner in the enterprise then the more leverage FM can apply to positive effect.

Aligning FM with Enterprise Strategy – What Works?

Aligning functional operations and strategy with enterprise strategy first requires correctly understanding what alignment is.  I think the best practical definition I’ve run across is from Y.E. Chan who says,

“Alignment is best described not as a uni-dimensional phenomenon but as a superset of multiple, simultaneous component alignments that bring together an organization’s structure, strategy, and culture at multiple levels, with all their inherent demands.”

Multi-dimensionsal, simultaneous, and I would add, ongoing alignments.  Sounds like a messy process and it sometimes can be.  But there are a number of tactics that will help to make the alignment process successful.

A top down approach with a clear focus on business strategy is essential.   The changes required during serious alignment projects often require top-down motivation to overcome inertia and turf issues.  Senior executives are closer to enterprise strategy and have the ability to exert influence across the organization, and the ability to fund technology and other initiatives. 

The alignment framework must be strategy driven.  It’s all about consistently applying the same key strategies across the organization in a manner that maximizes adoption, market reach and shareholder value.  If the framework is focused on non-strategy issues then the lack of a unifying driver can present obstacles that stymie the effort. 

Operational metrics and customer satisfaction help to drive alignment initiatives.  Metrics to the rescue, again.  It’s hard to align something that you do not clearly see or understand.  Correctly quantifying operations and customer satisfaction provides a way to measure alignment gaps and prioritize projects based on expected benefit and importance to successive alignment initiatives.

Adopt continuous improvement and six sigma as alignment tools.   Hopefully you have already been using continuous improvement and six sigma protocols to optimize your own processes.  Alignment initiatives present the opportunity to take this to the next step, expanding the boundaries around your processes to include outside functions in which there is an important relationship in either direction.

Revisit mission statements to assure relevance and alignment.  It may sound obvious (because it is) but many organizations have not aligned their mission statements to be complimentary of each other.  If these statements are indeed the pointer on your compass to success, then different parts of the organization are moving in different directions at different speeds and with different levels of concern.  Making sure that mission statements express common values and outcomes all the way down the line helps everyone keep their eyes on the same goals.

Make alignment important to everyone.  You think it is now?  Maybe.  Making alignment a reportable element that influences performance reviews and compensation will guarantee it gets the attention you want it to get.