Catherine,
Excellent points...do you have an example of a process where you saw those type of questions posed?
Dr. Eric Goodman
Factors that should be considered when determining whether or not a business process needs to be redesigned or improved are customer satisfaction, cost benefit which is a process by which you weigh expected costs against expected benefits to determine the best (or most profitable) course of action.
I think that there are two drivers in that aspect. I think that customer satisfaction and regulatory changes are typical catalysts for change.
As an education director, the first factor to consider in our overall business process is always the successful completion of the program by a student. Were they engaged enough by the instructors and curriculum to attend all the classes? Did the student achieve the learning objectives we set? Did they achieve a passing score on the quizzes? Did their hands-on skills meet our expectations? Did they pass the final exam? Are graduates obtaining jobs in this or a related field within 15 months of program completion? Are they telling others about the great education they received at our school? And finally: are we filling our classes with engaged students with a high probability of success? If so, then the product, "a quality education that prepares graduates for successful employment in a hands-on healthcare field" is authentic and validated. If not, then any weakness will point to a business process that needs to be redesigned or improved.
Recently, low enrollment is an issue. So the second factor for us is financially related. We need a certain amount of students to fund a budget that guarantees all the quality outcomes we desire (as above). So a business process that may need improvement for us is how we market, who we market to, what needs to shift so that more prospective students learn about our school, and basically what can we do in a business process redesign that would help reach new markets and increase our enrollment. Right? Have I grasped what this course intended?
Dar,
Excellent response and I appreciate your holistic thought process. I'd say yes, you are grasping what the course intended. I'd also invite you to think about how you would prioritize the numerous things you mention related to "successful completion"? I'm wondering if some of the things are really subsets of higher level outcomes? For example, what is the most important overarching question? If your product is "a quality education that prepares graduates for successful employment in a hands-on healthcare field". What are the most important measures? Would it suffice to focus on the student achieving the learning objectives and being employed? Keep in mind that assumes that you have the right objectives defined that are valued by employers, etc.
Also, in terms of the second factor you mention related to marketing it certainly would help to reach new markets and have more prospective students aware of the school. Having said that there may be sufficient reach know but just not the right student conversion so there may be processes there to improve, etc. Also, perhaps there are processes that are inefficient that contribute to your funding a budget that could be streamlined, etc.
Keep asking the questions and taking a holistic view in terms of the processes!
Best,
Eric
Dr. Eric Goodman
I tend to collect the qualitative feedback—complaints, approvals, comments, suggestions, and even the gripes. Then I try to match them (or at least compare them) with some kind of performance measure such as grades relative to the class, overall class performance, or other relevant measure. If I see something is wrong—such as poor performance across the board and corresponding comments, then I know something is wrong with the underlying systems and flow of the class. If I see problems appearing as isolated cases, I try my best to figure out the problem and troubleshoot on a case-by-case basis.
Often, I have stumbled into the realization that the processes and its assumptions lead to the observed problems. Thus, when I see a blending of group underperformance and hear voices (don’t worry, not in my head) telling me something is wrong, then I know the scaffolding and its processes contains a problem.
At that point, it’s the hard work of tearing it apart to see what’s going wrong. That’s the tough part…
Steven,
It is great to learn that the voices aren't in your head! It appears that you take a comprehensive approach and there is certainly a richness related to qualitative feedback. I'm wondering if you ever start with the performance measures and then based on those gather qualitative feedback?
Dr. Eric Goodman
Ah! Yes... it must sound a little backward. I use this direction while my boss uses the direction you mentioned. This way we cover the same areas, but in different ways. The plus is we gain a variety of insights due to the willingness to explore forward and backward (relative to the usual direction of inquiry).
Sometimes the backward method (the one I mentioned) can get the nitty-gritty from the field as to generate leads into better ways of doing things. Sometimes there's no substitute for wandering about the context and working backward.
Once both directions are covered, then I know enough as to do a little QUANT as to try to gain traction with the problem. (And that's the hard part.)
Steve
Steven,
Fantastic to learn that you balance the approach with the method your boss uses. It sounds like a great synergy and I can imagine the positive outcomes that result from this approach. So, if you were in another organization do you think you'd translate what you've learned and cover both directions if your boss didn't?
Dr. Eric Goodman
Oh yeah... actually I'd like to make a formal strategy out of it and form it into an article. It really does work although its a bit zany at times. Also, it's tough to use because both people don't quite align on the "goal" of analysis. Sometimes both end up in different places--spawning two sets of problems to solve.
But, with the right people, it can work. The only question is where both end up at the end of the process...
As for where it came from - it just happened because admins and professors live in different contexts. One sees it as a top-down analysis of processes, the other, grounded research into a context. The differing perspectives drive the two different paths of approach. One can hope both end up roughly at the same endpoint.
Steven,
Thanks for the insights and an article would be a great way to capture this strategy! Excellent point about the different context/perspectives based on individuals roles. Keep up the great work.
Dr. Eric Goodman
The factors I effectively look at are:
How difficult is the task? Are we making it unnecessarily difficult?
Does this task require evaluation by an accrediting body, or is this a local document to make our job easier?
Would re-evaluating this process save money?
As an administrative professional in higher education, those are my main worries when it comes to proper documentation across campus.
"Do employees avoid doing certain tasks involved in the current process because they are difficult or inconvenient?"
This is exactly correct. I've experienced this on too many occasions. When it comes to a task like development forms, everyone is quick to forget they exist. Then, when its time to evaluate them, they are out-of-date. Not just one-- but all of them are out of date. This is the major process I'm focusing on.
Genevieve,
These are wonderful questions to help you and others better understand where there are underlying issues in the process and then to identify how best to proceed. Keep up the great approach!
Dr. Eric Goodman
