7 Steps to Workflow Nirvana

Octane works with businesses to improve their workflows, moving them from analogue (paper) to digital (bits), helping to reduce data loss, error, and duplication.

Over the next few paragraphs I’ll provide some ideas to help you tame the worst business processes.

But I’m getting ahead of myself…

While at an event in Sheffield, I introduced myself to a fellow attendee, and after explaining a bit about what I do she began to regale me with the tale of a fascinating and somewhat alarming problem she once had while working for a major high street retail chain.

Understanding the process

As I understood things, during the summer months, certain parts of the store had a strict dress code, and signage was required to make a polite request (no vests or shorts).

However, before anything could be printed, a couple of bureaucratic stages had to be navigated:

  1. there was a minimum budget requirement of £8;
  2. 5 signatures were required (signature 1 was needed before signature 2, and so on and so forth).

As you might imagine, this process of gathering signatures was glacial, somewhat difficult to orchestrate, and — as the woman explained — prone to failure as the paperwork, because of the flimsiness of the stock, often got blown from a desk by the merest breeze.

So that would be the loss part of what Octane works to reduce, along with duplication and error, a point I made to the woman, which earned a sardonic chuckle.

I’m guessing the minimum spend was intended to reduce costs and avoid needless activities, but after a quick calculation, things didn’t quite add up.

So imagine a scenario where this 5-level sign-off process is performed 5 times a week per store for various activities across 100 stores. Each time the process is performed, there’s an average loss of 48-72 hours (a figure gleaned from the discussion with the woman).
rusted-pipes

Defining the ideal business process

Now, let’s imagine a simple secure piece of software with a sign-in for the stakeholders: managerial signatories; and floor managers. After an initial investment of 5-8 hours of basic training it’s up and running.

A sequence of ‘signatures’ is required, and after the stakeholder signs into the application, he or she does nothing more than read the request before clicking either an “Approve” or “Reject” button:

  • If approved, an automated request is sent to the next person in the chain.
  • If rejected, the person who sent the request could then ask for further clarification, a process captured by a messaging component within the application.

Running the numbers

Let’s assume our ideal business process shaves a modest 12 hours from a number of workflows bound by the same rules. So that’s 12 hours, multiplied by 5 times each week, multiplied by 100 stores.

Our little application would have saved them 6,000 hours.

Imagine what would happen if we applied the same streamlining to mission-critical processes that are vital to operations?

I know, it’s that commingling of terrifying and amazing!

pipe-ends

Optimising a workflow

So now you understand how structured processes might lose time, let’s explore some ideas on how we might fix that.

  1. Reduce the number of stages. If you have 7-10 stages, that’s at least 7 different places for something to go wrong, and then you or someone else has to figure out where and then how to fix it. So examine the workflow with a mindset of simplification, liaise with the stakeholders, be on the look out for loss, duplication, and error and bring them down (elimination is the goal, but not often feasible — we are human).
  2. Keep the processes small and manageable. If your workflow must consist of 7 stages, keep them compact and understandable. Some other idiot (you, I’m guessing) has to read over the documentation in 6 months’ time and make sense of it.
  3. Document everything. Use something like Google Docs and share the documentation amongst the team. Use the ‘Track Changes’ feature, to follow who wrote what, why, and when.
  4. Automation. If feasible, automate your workflow. Don’t be afraid of a hybrid analogue-digital series of processes (paper and bytes), so long as you’ve documented everything and each analogue stage has a person responsible for it. Whatever shape the workflow takes, make sure the data it creates is in digital and not analogue format (at some point, you might need to analyse the data).
  5. Limit the number of people involved. I often have to explain to clients that design is not a democratic process. So unless you’re a multinational corporation, you won’t need to vote each time someone proposes a change. An ambassadorial approach is often required to deal with those protecting the borders to their fiefdoms, and then there’s the oft cited refrain: “But, we’ve always done it like this!” In each case, take the big-picture approach and be brave!
  6. Restrict the number of signatories. The fewer the number of chiefs, the more time the indians have to — you know — do the hard work. However, build in an audit trail (via the documentation in point 3), so the decision-makers know what happened and when.
  7. For goodness sake, communicate! If you suspect there’s a flaw in the process, speak up. If someone has a suggestion, listen. Neither of these two things should be a major problem (or another time vampire) if you’ve followed point 5. While this might sound obvious, engage with the people executing the processes because they’re the ones doing the hard work, so they know better than anyone.

Perhaps now you understand why I’m passionate about ideas because it’s often those in the smallest packages that are the greatest of gifts.

First published on LinkedIn.


If work ethic had a colour, what would it be?

I suppose the good news is, if someone like Trump could be President, there’s hope for everyone.

As a kid, I was a paperboy, working for Dali, the Asian owner of the corner shop — I know, a cliché, but it’s true.

So the first “job” I had came to me from someone of foreign extraction.

Since then — swatting aside accusations of being an entrepreneur with Trump-esque glee and defiance — I’ve been working on a not-so-secret project:

Under Cloud is the place to store, share, and link excellent ideas.

Capture ideas. Create knowledge.

I mention this because in 2014 I realised that I had taken the Under Cloud as far as I could alone. So I took a leap and … (cut to the end) … as of October 2014 I had not one but two employees.

But I’m getting ahead of myself…

I had placed a recruitment advert with the University of Sheffield and received 3 applications from: an Italian; an Iranian; and a Nigerian.

Not a White Caucasian in sight, or a female, either — but that’s another subject for another time, perhaps.

Now, this isn’t a left-leaning plea for us to embrace each other while a young church volunteer strums along to a cheerful rendition of kumbaya.

Bad people come in all colours — some orange, for example. So I suppose the point is, I am here as a businessman on LinkedIn because of a multicultural Britain, not in spite of it.

First published on LinkedIn.


How to respond to failure. Or, after the problem came the procedure.

Encountering problems and making mistakes is a consequence of life, business, and everything else — and unavoidable. But the value is in how you respond to them.

As I said on Twitter this past week:

I’ve found that the best lessons in life — by far — are those where you learn how NOT to do something.

But still, as good as vicarious experiences are, they only get you so far.

In the beginning, there was the mistake…

By gum, was it a doozy! I’ll spare you the gory details (because they are — for the most part — irrelevant) but it was less a bug and more an infestation in the code. In the grand scheme of things, it has caused problems for our schedule, but the Under Cloud remains on course.

Stripping the whole problem down and tracing it to its source, it was — as these things often are — a failure to communicate, which resulted in team members and myself labouring under the assumption that something was when it wasn’t.

And then came the procedure…

So how did I respond?

We’re using a number of things to manage what we do. As a team of 3, we don’t need a lot, but we find that Slack and Trello are enough to keep things together, although we often find things said and done become lost inside the whirring cogs of the communication machine!

I created a list in Trello and added a card entitled: “Deprecated”, within which I wrote the following description:

“Here are all of the parts, components, and libraries of the application that have been deprecated, and what they’ve been superseded with.

Please update this card as and when required, but also refer to it, too!”

Some might argue it’s just a patching of holes, while some might claim it’s only of any use if people follow the procedure, but I would counter by saying that’s life, business, and everything else…


On being bold, and risking everything on an idea

I have an idea. I believe it’s an excellent idea. But belief doesn’t write code. People do.

I’m 4 years into a project — Under Cloud — which is a web application focused on the creation, curation, and management of research. It’s about capturing that moment of serendipity; when you realise you have something that fits with something else you did, or read, or wrote, and then linking them together with similar items, to create a narrative, and a stream of thought.

At present, the project is at an usable stage of development — I’m using it on a regular basis to manage my own personal and professional needs. However, much remains to be done. So, I had another idea.

The power of 3

By the end of the week, Octane will have gone from 1 employee (me), to 3. In the end, I had no choice, because to move the gain line forward, I needed to do something so different that it would mean transforming Octane and risking just about everything on a belief in an idea. I’d be running the risk of losing control, and — once more — staring into that darkness, not knowing where things were going.

Yes, I have a plan. Of course I do. But I’m charting a different course, and heading for unknown waters. It’s amazing.

I was asked: “Why not do [x] yourself?” which was an option, but it would have meant missing the chance to recruit two people who — if their delivery is commensurate with their obvious talents — could propel the Under Cloud forward at a pace and in a direction I couldn’t hope to do alone. Or worse, I do the work myself, and then 6 weeks later those same two people are no longer available to take things further.

I’m not just spending £x per hour on two people, I’m investing in a possible future for 3 people.

I could go on, but you get the idea.

So this is it, the biggest and most expensive gamble I’ve ever undertaken.


Be bold, hire “A” list people

Guy Kawasaki — ex-evangalist for Apple Inc. — once said that when you’re in the market for hiring people, hire people smarter than yourself, and don’t hire people like yourself.

It’s a bold move, and not without its dangers, but it’s something I’m having to contemplate in an attempt to move Under Cloud forward to the next phase.

The fact is — and it’s simple when you think about it — if you want to move the gain line forward, you don’t just need a different perspective, but also an alternate mental attitude, and a different set of strengths which compliment your own weaknesses and deficiencies. I know what my weaknesses and deficiencies, and that pre-qualifies the kind of person I’m looking for.