Monthly Archives: March 2013

#89 When internal interfaces fail

Send to Kindle

In an earlier post, we looked at internal interfaces. Let’s say you have established the following:

  • A clear definition of inputs and outputs.
  • Who will do what and when.
  • Roles and responsibilities.
  • Service level agreements.

Then something goes wrong… Really, really wrong. Deadlines are not met, quality is poor, communication gaps are sprouting all over the place. With a positive frame of mind, you give your co-workers the benefit of the doubt. You get pressure from your boss and your stakeholder, making the “positive” part more challenging and your resolve to do something before you lose your equanimity.

You are determined not to get distracted by the symptoms: stonewalling, passive aggressiveness, and making but not keeping promises.

When you dig deeper, you find the astounding truth: your internal partner did not have the capabilities to deliver on the promises. You did not dig into and verify capabilities to execute to avoid conflict, now you realize you have merely postponed the conflict.

If the capabilities to execute are strategic, take the conversation to a higher level. If the capabilities are the competence of the individual, leave that to the direct manager of the individual. Continue to apply pressure on business goals and deliverables needed to deliver customer satisfaction.

External interfaces with customers, vendors, partners, and governments follow the same principles, but they are a little more complex, because… well, let me think about that and write it in a future post.

Share

#88 Checks and balances

Send to Kindle

Mistakes happen. They happen more often than we would like. The faster the pace in the work environment, the higher the urgency, the more the likelihood of mistakes.

Checks and balances are a way to catch mistakes before they happen, and if they do happen, find and fix them before they make things worse. Before you implement a process or system for checks and balances, know that the cost must justify the benefit. On the one extreme, we have the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, it provides military grade checks and balances. On the other extreme you have a quick informal review to check and double check progress and status.

A system of checks and balances will work when the culture encourages openness about feedback and the need for rapid course correction. Defensiveness will stall feedback, delay course correction, and create performance problems.

When protection of egos becomes more important than customer satisfaction, the organization is heading for trouble. You could go to the other extreme as well, give the customer so much importance that employees become a means to an end. This is bound to lower morale and lower employee engagement.

Share