Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
An Insight Series E-BookVolume 3 | November 2016
How to TransitionBusiness ProcessesfromCounterproductiveto CoefficientAn Operations Tool for Credentialing, Certifying, and Licensing Bodies and Organizations
“If you don’t have timeto do it right,
when will you have time to do it over?”
Contents Executive Summary 4
Introduction 5
Homegrown Systems & Rube Goldberg Machines 6
The Origins of Complexity & Counterproductivity 6
Three Familiar Scenarios 7
Scenario 1: Overcorrecting Exceptions with Policies 7
Scenario 2: Communicating with Counterproductive Processes 9
Scenario 3: Task-Switching, Downloading and Uploading Between Disparate Databases or Management Systems
9
An All-Too-Familiar Workflow 10
The Challenge in Addressing a Single Issue 12
The Most Important Thing: Your Core Competency 13
Your Core Competency Will Drive Your Continuous Process Improvement
15
Four Steps Toward CPI for the Credentialing Organization 15
1. DIAGRAM Your Credentialing Process & Workflow 16
● How to Diagram Your Workflow 17
2. STANDARDIZE Your Workflow, Processes & Tasks 18
● How to Standardize Your Processes 20
3. OPTIMIZE Your Credentialing Workflow & Processes 21
● How to Optimize Your Systems, Processes & Workflow 22
4. OUTSOURCE Processes Where Possible 27
● How to Approach Outsourcing 27
● When to Outsource Your Business Processes 28
Building vs. Buying a Custom Solution 30
Before & After the Clarus Solution 30
What’s Your Next Step? 31
Executive Summary
Transitioning from homegrown manual processes to automation requires strategic planning to confront significant challenges. There are generally three observable stages in the overall process.
● Discerning when your organization may be outgrowing homegrown solutions is very challenging at times.
● Determining when to transition can be as difficult.
● Deciding to build or buy a credential management solution as part of the transition may rival in difficulty.
Our interactions with credentialing organizations reveal six typical challenges. While each one overlaps with others, all of them uncovered significant opportunities for stabilization and growth.
Each challenge and opportunity deserves its own analysis and discussion with key players and decision makers in the organization, and is thus presented in its own e-book in this series.
Solving one challenge and taking advantage of one opportunity leads to the next, as confidence deepens and the fruit of complex labors ripens, smoothing the transition path a bit more.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 4
1. Employee Engagement: From Stagnation to Innovation
2. Candidate Turnaround: From Handicapped to Healthy
3. Business Processes: From Counterproductive to Coefficient
4. Cultural Ethos: From Entrenchment to Enrichment
5. Candidate Perception: From Negative to Positive
6. Technology Mindset: From Myopic to Modern
In this BrightLInk Insight Series
Introduction
Most organizations are aware of the ultimate need to transition from manual to automation. The challenge is always one of funding and timing. The biggest challenge is confronting the temptation to improve existing manual processes. Another iteration of improvement may be less challenging, but it always proves more costly, perhaps even as much as the decision to build a custom solution.
When presented with these options, the logical solution would be to build a custom solution. Why not build a system that can…
● integrate seamlessly with your organization’s existing website?
● meet the needs of your current workflow and processes?
● handle your exclusive needs? ● be implemented in stages?
Why not try to hire a vendor who can pull this off? Or why not try to do it yourself in house? These are great questions.. Our clients thought so as well.
Questions like these are a part of a necessary journey in discovering a transition pathway to a more efficient credentialing workflow..
Our clients found that while their organization’s workflow and processes were unique in some respects, one common denominator remained apparent: they were each credentialing, certification or licensing organizations with an industry-typical workflow. As such,
our clients discovered there were industry standards and best practices that had already been developed across multiple vertical markets.
Often unaware of these existing best practices, many organizations launched numerous previous attempts at revising existing process for greater efficiency. Unfortunately, many of these efforts resulted in unintended counterproductivity.
How should a credentialing organization approach counterproductivity? What practical steps are there to analyze and resolve operational challenges with standardization and optimization? What does it look like to outgrow current candidate management workflow, systems, and processes? When should an organization consider outsourcing?
These are a few of the questions this volume seeks to answer.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 5
Homegrown Systems & Rube Goldberg Machines
Have you ever seen a Rube Goldberg machine or cartoon depicting one? Perhaps you played the game Mouse Trap as a kid or with your own children. If so, then you’re familiar with the creative and humorous goal: turn a simple task into something as complex as possible.
Coupling his engineering skill with satire and social commentary, Goldberg spent more than thirty hours on each machine design, paying close attention to the complexity of each one. Goldberg was fascinated with the tempting promises emerging technology provided, and described his machines as “a symbol of man’s capacity for exerting maximum effort to achieve minimal results.”
Each image of a device depicted a simple and obvious goal. Goldberg humorously included lettered parentheses of detailed steps, which intentionally added unnecessary complication. His mixture of complexities in each cartoon was then ironically entitled with the word “simple”.
The Origins of Complexity and Counterproductivity
Goldberg’s machines are intentionally designed as complex in order to impart humor. But this level of complexity within an organization is the opposite of fun. How does this complexity happen? Despite our best intentions, hard work, and desire for added value, complexity seems to evolve undetected in parallel to the growth of the credentialing organization itself. New growth often requires adding new processes and removing existing ones. New processes eventually become incumbent and difficult to unseat or replace. However, slowly but surely, a reality emerges that can be very challenging to confront: organizations will eventually outgrow the homegrown systems and processes that have propelled them this far.
Credential managementsystems & processes
should NOT exertmaximum effortin achievingminimal results.
Never settle forfeeling stuck in counterproductiveprocesses.
Source
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 6
Outgrowing anything is a part of life, especially for organizations. Wise leaders carefully navigate through change, and lead their team in prudently handling systems and processes that have evolved to the point of counterproductivity to their primary mission. Overlooking this reality enables non-value added elements to thrive, which we discovered in Volume 2 are considered waste.
The thesis of this e-book is that ideas originally intended to fill certain gaps and fix problems in order to increase operational quality will unwittingly create new and different problems that only compound the challenge.
The amalgamation of these challengesis often one of the biggest signs that
an organization has either outgrown or is outgrowing their current homegrown systems.
Toward an examination and correction of counterproductivity in the credentialing organization, we begin with three present-day, real-life scenarios, which will build the framework for the type of challenges many credentialing organizations face in managing candidates and credential holders.
Scenario 1: Overcorrecting Exceptions with Policies
One common scenario occurs when exceptions arise from set policies. Some exceptions are natural - but too many create unintended complexity and work against the organization. Exceptions often reveal a breakdown in communication with a candidate; depending on the method of communication, the problem may affect a handful of candidates, or a much larger group. Examples of this challenge might include a candidate missing an application window or exam registration deadline, or missing an exam altogether.
The cost for such mishaps can be high. As a result, it is a knee-jerk reaction to create stopgaps and safeguards to prevent further problems. Despite best intentions, the consequence is increased administrative overhead. Creating a new policy in light of an exception is like inserting another gear into a clock: it has to go somewhere, and every other gear will be affected.
When homegrown systems are involved, revising a policy to become more complex generally means more paperwork. In organizations where multiple policies have been affected, the paperwork multiplies. Staff subsequently feel as if the workflow and customer experience is dying a slow death by a thousand cuts. The accumulation and aggregation of multiple policy changes creates operational counterproductivity.
Process challenges can be imperceptible.
While we focus onfixing the problem with
better processes,we are often clueless
that we’re adding complexity by creating new
or different problems.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 7
Here’s a better way: adapt the 5W2H method of investigating the problem.
1. What happened initially to prompt this discussion? What is the proposed new policy is supposed accomplish? What exceptions currently exist or might occur down the road to this new policy?
2. Why did this occurrence happen? Why do we think a new proposed policy will fix it?
3. Where is this problem happening in our workflow?
4. When does the proposed new policy touch other parts of the process or workflow?
5. Who is this happening to? Which candidates and which staff members are affected? Who will have to be trained regarding the changes? Who will be responsible for implementation?
6. How often is this problem happening? How often will we need to invoke the new proposed policy
7. How will we benefit by not adding this policy”
POLICYBest Practices
1. Make your default, standard policy as simple as possible.
2. Allow for broad, best judgement policy exceptions.
3. Empower your staff; don't confine them with complex rulesets.
4. Evaluate your policies (and corresponding exceptions) for empirically validated coverage. E.g. Discover how many candidates per year a new policy change could impact? If the answer is less than a dozen, consider not creating the policy as it will incur staff overhead when managing the remaining candidates.
5. Remove your own tendencies from the candidate management process, and place them in the hands of a partner freeing you to focus on your core competencies.
STU LESTERClarus Product Line Manager
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 8
Scenario 2: Communicating with Counterproductive Processes
Consider another example: despite their best efforts, staff members are fallible. They may overlook information they need to tell a candidate, or forget what they said to a candidate. Likewise, a candidate may forget what they were told or ask the right questions. During the documentation process, some candidates will document their email address incorrectly, and staff may take incorrect action (or no action at all) to fix it. This undoubtedly sparks other examples as well.
To remedy these gaps, leadership may implement a revised standard operating procedure (SOP) to include manual steps for quality checks. Some examples include:
● An updated email form which staff use to better communicate to the candidate the need for the right information.
● Requiring a staff member to enter their initials, date, and time in a spreadsheet in order to keep track of this communication.
● An updated document is used to obtain the necessary information from the candidate.
● Ensure the new form replaces all versions of the old forms.
● Require staff to document that the new form was sent, and if/when it was received.
Scenario 3: Task-Switching, Downloading and Uploading Between Disparate Databases or Management Systems
Many organizations that have outgrown their homegrown systems feel the effects in the manual downloading-uploading tasks required to keep information synchronized among their various systems. These are organizations that have some combination of the following pieces:
● Association Management System (AMS)
● Homegrown candidate portal or paper-based/spreadsheet system
● Third-party testing vendor system/site
● Third-party verification system/site
● Invoicing system
Following is an example of an actual workflow with which many may be all too familiar.
PETER DRUCKERON EFFICIENCY
& MANAGEMENT
“There is nothing quite so useless as doing with great efficiency something that should not be done at all.”
“So much of what we call management consists of making it difficult for people to work.”
“Effectiveness is the foundation of success; efficiency is a minimum condition for survival after success has been achieved.
“Efficiency is concerned with doing things right. Effectiveness is doing the right things. . . .
Efficiency concerns itself with the input of effort into all areas of activity.
Effectiveness, however, starts out with the realization that in business, as in any other social organism, 10 or 15 percent of the phenomena– such as products, orders, customers, markets, or people–produce 80 to 90 percent of the results.
The other 85 to 90 percent of the phenomena, no matter how efficiently taken care of, produce nothing but costs (which are always proportionate to transactions, that is, to busy-ness).”
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 9
1. Candidate has access to the organization’s online portal. But they decide to phone in their question.
2. Staff receives the call and may read from a script, explaining the required documentation, and answering any follow up questions.
3. Staff member hangs up and follows up with an email to the candidate by copying email reply text from a desktop computer notepad application, pasting into the body of the email in their email program.
4. Staff pulls up the database system, logging the call and commenting in the candidate’s profile.
5. Candidate decides to fax documentation, rather than scan and email via the portal.
6. Staff receives fax, reviews, responds via email if the documentation is unreadable, using another prepared copy/paste reply in the notepad application.
7. When the documentation is finally acceptable, staff downloads and renames the file.
8. Staff accesses the candidate’s record in the database, navigates to the documentation section, fills out appropriate information manually, then locates and uploads the renamed file faxed from the candidate.
9. Staff logs comments about the previous action in the system.
10. Staff notices that the candidate requires additional third-party verification on their current credential, opens the browser tab for the third party system, logs in again, navigates to the correct place, and obtains the information.
11. Staff pulls up the other browser tab with the database and checks the box verifying the credential.
12. Staff opens an Excel spreadsheet to log the candidate’s name, ID# and third-party verification for required reference by another department in the organization.
13. Other department verifies their review of the third-party credential verification on the same spreadsheet, leaves a date/time stamp with any comments, and the candidate is now ready to receive their credential.
14. Staff prints out the credential, folds and puts it in the envelope, and files it with the existing batch to be mailed.
15. Staff takes batches to the post office for mailing.
Does this workflow sound familiar?If
takes
then processing
equals
14Manual Steps
6Minutes of
Labor
60Candidates
Daily
6Hours of
Daily Labor!
What would you do with the extra time if this same work could be completed in less
than thirty minutes per day?
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 10
The above process is real. It is happening today, and completion of the first fourteen steps takes somewhere between 2.5 - 6 minutes per candidate. Approximately 35-60 candidates require this attention daily due to a policy and process exception that was created just for them. However, there is a bigger problem than just the need for automation, integration, and fewer exceptions.
When dealing with disparate information systems, the question is:
which system truly has the mostaccurate and the most up-to-date
copy of our database?
One common approach to ensuring that all systems have the same information is to set recurring tasks which involve manually copying files from one system to another. The accuracy of the data at any given point in this method rests wholly on the successful manual efforts of staff members or volunteers. However, the glitch in the process is glaring. If and when someone forgets or misses a step in this process, there is only one question to be asked, and only a moderate degree of confidence in answering:
Which system is the most correct at this time?
Now, imagine if this misstep happens for several days and that one or more candidates, whose information is not in the most up-to-date database, call for support. The attending staff member may not know that the information they’re looking at is inaccurate and may give the candidate wrong information.
As a result, the candidate will take action based on that wrong information, creating a ripple effect of additional customer service calls to resolve. Staff may continue to be confused, having only enough time to attend to the resolution and unable to resolve the core of the problem.
There’s also the database overwrite problem. Missing a step in the manual synchronization routine, or failure to complete it altogether, may result in uploading an out-of-date database from one system into another, potentially overwriting an up-to-date version. When more than one system is out-of-date,confusion arises as to which system is actually the single-source-of-truth (SSOT). Where this question occurs frequently, data governance is probably the bigger challenge with SSOT being the more urgent portion of that challenge.
Disparate sources of information are not necessarily bad practice, since there is hardly ever one application or software product that can do everything an organization needs. But when varying systems do not have robust, automated communication mechanisms with other systems, a manual process is often the only solution.
Data GovernanceOr
Master Data Management (MDM)
Includes all of the following components:
MDM best practices include:
1. Defining and aligning your organization’s strategic objectives;
2. Establishing and documenting policies for managing your information;
3. Supporting everything with a well-defined charter, clear roles & responsibilities, and proven tools.
DataManagement
Business Rules & Policies
Data Availability & Delivery
Compliance & Adherence
Data Vendor Management
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 11
The Challenge in Addressing a Single Issue
The three scenarios described previously are not at all unusual. We do the best we can with the knowledge, resources and relationships we have at the time. Outgrowing the homegrown systems that perpetuate these errors and challenges is inevitable.
For the credentialing organization which has outgrown homegrown systems, resolving exception policies, communication problems, and synchronizing varying databases usually happens through the introduction of new policies and manual steps. Because this happens incrementally, each decision is likely the best one at that time. However, when reviewed in aggregate, these small changes result in an unmanageable, unhealthy, inefficient operations within an organization.
Ironically, these results create more occasion for error by presenting new variables and predicaments into the workflow, exacerbating the original challenge. The more this happens, the more confusion develops with unfortunate relational and organizational effects.
● New problems mean more resolution is required.
● Those attempts might turn personal.
● Internal conflict can ensue.
● Relationships may deteriorate.
● The quality of communication between employees and candidates will suffer.
● Candidates lose confidence. Some go to a competitor, if available. Others pursue legal action.
● The organization's reputation denigrates.
● Root cause analysis is conducted, and yet more new policies are introduced.
These experiences drive us to look for improvements in order to maintain a quality of credential offerings, an adherence to organizational standards, and a reasonable satisfaction rate among candidates and credential holders.
In some cases, a series of these experiencesmay culminate into an evolving, pivotal conclusion:
maybe the organization is outgrowing the homegrown systems that once seemed
to work fairly well.
Entertaining this possibility is crucial. Here’s why.
Tool of the Trade:Change Impact Analysis
Identifying changes that should be made is often the easiest part of change management. The most difficult parts are:
1. Identifying the ripple effect of that change on other parts of the organization, and;
2. Managing the social, functional, and tactical layers of the organization to see the change implemented in an effective way.
A helpful tool in initiating both challenges is the Change Management Institute’s Change Impact Assessment Template and Guidelines. A self-explanatory, self-guided, spreadsheet-based approach to this effort can be accessed at the link below.
Change Impact Analysis Template & Guidelines
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 12
The Most Important Thing: Your Core Competency
Choosing to ignore this possibility will more than likely lead to repeating the previous experiences. Our experience has shown that such recurring experiences depletes staff morale and innovation, as well as candidate trust.
Choosing to explore the possibility that your organization may be outgrowing its homegrown systems will uncover exciting opportunity. We believe this path will lead staff and board members to a place where they can discover the answers to three of the most important questions it can ask. According to Jim Collins, author of Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap and Others Don't, these three questions form what Collins defines as “The Hedgehog Concept”
1. What can your organization be the best in the world at? What are you not the best in the world at?
2. What is it that drives or fuels your organization’s economic engine?
3. What is the deep passion within your organization?
Essentially, Collins’ questions seek to identify the fundamental question for every organization: what is your core competency? Answering these by “confronting the brutal facts” will lead to breakthrough “aha moments,” taking the organization to the next level of growth. Organization leaders are encouraged to carefully consider the questions as well as to read the book and practice its transformative principles.
What is your core competency?
Answering with “the brutal facts” will naturally lead to “aha moments,” taking the organization to the next level of growth. Organization leaders are strongly encouraged to carefully consider the questions as well as to read the book and practice its transformative principles.
“A great social sector organization must have the discipline to say, ‘No Thank You” to resources that drive it away from the middle of its three circles. Those who have the discipline to attract and channel resources directed solely at its Hedgehog Concept, and to reject resources that drive them away from the center of their three circles, will be of greater service to the world” (p. 23)
Read the first chapter here.
Click any of the images below to access more information
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 13
“Every company would like to be the best at something,
but few actually understand - with piercing insight and egoless clarity - what they actually have the
potential to be the best at and, just as important, what they cannot be the
best at" (p. 98).
"If you could pick one and only one ratio - in the social
sector, cash flow per x - to systematically increase
over time, what x would have the greatest and most sustainable impact on your economic engine?" (p. 104).
"You can't manufacture passion or 'motivate' people to feel passionate. You can only discover what ignites your passion and the passions of those around you...on what the company stands for" (p. 109, 110).
What is itthat drives or fuelsyour organization’seconomic engine?
What is thedeep passionwithin yourorganization?
What CAN your organization be the best in the world at?
What are you NOT the best in the world at?
1
23
The Hedgehog Concept
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 14
Diagram
Your Core Competency Will DriveContinuous Process Improvement
The transition from counterproductivity to efficiency will flow out of the answers to these three questions. In fact, workflows and systems are driven by those answers. Regular attention to both the questions and answers can be compared to the regular maintenance of a vehicle. Following the maintenance schedule ensures longevity and maximum performance; failure to heed leads to a cycle of breakdown, resulting in financial and organizational instability.
Throughout the last century, tools and training have been developed to help organizations implement a culture of Continuous Process Improvement (CPI). CPI is the ongoing discipline of improving products, services, or processes either incrementally over time, or in a breakthrough fashion all at once. These methods were discovered and initially designed for manufacturing in the early 20th century.
In the last century, a handful of CPI methods have been developed to address industry-specific needs, furthering the value and benefit of the concept. Credentialing organizations may obtain many advantages from CPI concepts, especially because they are exposed to different risks than for-profit organizations. In order to get more done with fewer resources, CPI is required to increase revenue, stabilize the organization, and extend the reach into the candidate pool.
Adapting Collins’s statement regarding non-profits and their resources (on page 6): Those who have the discipline to implement processes directed solely at its Hedgehog Concept, and to reject those that drive them away from the center of their three circles, will be of greater service to the world.
4 Steps Toward CPI for the Credentialing Organization
There are four steps to continuous improvement of the credential workflow: (1) diagramming the the workflow, (2) standardizing processes and tasks, (3) optimizing out non-value add work, and (3) outsourcing what is not part of the core competency. This four-step method enables staff and board members to discover components of the workflow that are counterproductive to the whole. This method also empowers teams to rethink, redesign, or revise more coefficient systems and processes that are consistent with the three questions raised earlier.
1. Diagram2. Standardize3. Optimize4. Outsource
Standardize
Optimize
Outsource
1. See the following resources for additional study. The Role of Process Improvement in the Non-Profit Organization by Vikki C. Lassiter (2007). Adapting Lean Six Sigma for a Non-Profit Organization by Jocelyn De Leon (2016).
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 15
1. DIAGRAM Your Credentialing Workflow & Process
Start by mapping workflow stages and the business processes associated with each stage. Diagramming visually displays and documents what happens in a given process, and can be helpful when identifying the parts that are creating complexity and counterproductivity.
Why You Should Diagram Your Workflow
1. Informs staff and customers what is expected of them and what they should expect from each other.
2. Equips staff to visualize and identify operational errors, challenges, blocks, bottlenecks, and “black holes” (delays) that could be optimized, eliminated, and/or standardized, thereby reducing costs for the organization.
In chapter 9 of Exceptional Certification, Roger Brauer outlines the necessity of the credentialing organization having “a complete record of its certification process, [which] begins by charting the process; [i.e.,]writing down all rules and procedures.” He contends that many organizations “do not take the time to diagram and describe how their processes actually work,” and that “a well documented...process will reduce errors.”
Bauer refers to this problem as “task-knowledge-decay,” wherein people tend to forget steps in a process. This is because the memory capacity of a person performing a specific task erodes over time. As a result, the memory of that task is not as readily available when recalled later. This is a normal the human condition; however, counteracting it is necessary for the survival and growth of the organization.
Diagramming the workflow leads to standardization and optimization of the tasks and processes themselves. Each piece of information learned should result in either a human-fix (manually) or an automated-fix (software platform). The convergence of a technology platform and business processes will maximize these efforts by:
1. removing non-value-add process steps (waste - See Vol. 2 for details); 2. ensuring all value-add steps are never missed; and3. ensuring that changing staff will not result in a change in process.
According to Bauer, diagramming the process “also provides a basis for analyzing administrative costs. By studying processes, an organization can identify possible bottlenecks and opportunities for improvements and efficiencies.”
Continue to the next page to see an infographic explanation of diagramming.
Diagram
2 Exceptional Certification (2011), p. 83.3 Ibid4 Ibid
During the diagramming phase, discoveries are
made that create opportunities for
convergence.
This will allow you to produce processes that
clearly differentiate between
waste
or unnecessary human activity that could be done with greater efficiency by
an automated system,
and value-add
which is required activity that only a human can
and should perform.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 16
Label each step with the person
or persons names who are responsible for
the action in that step
ONESelect a Diagramor Chart Method
Action:Create an easy-to-read chart with interpretive schema that clearly communicates a bird’s eye view of the workflow and its main phases or stages, as well as an appropriate level of detail regarding the steps in each phase.
Help:Select a diagram or chart that most people in your organization can read. Do not choose methods or templates that require special training or advanced knowledge to interpret.
TWO:Diagram Each Major
Phase in the Workflow
Action:Write out each major phase; write the primary goal or objective in one sentence above each phase; and assign an intuitive graphic or symbol for referencing later.
Help:Ensure that employees actually understand the real value added in each phase by asking them to write it in their own words and read it back aloud to each other. This will bring a unifying clarity to the entire organization.
THREE:Diagram Each Step
in Each Phase
Actions:
1. Create a sequence of each step in each phase.
2. Use a schema that highlights the what, who, how, when, and where components of each step.
3. Label each step with a simple title or phrase.
4. Assign each step a symbol or graphic element for referencing later.
5. Execute the sequence of steps in the phase to test, and revise as necessary.
FIVE:Label the WHO
Write a brief description of
the objective of each step.
FOUR:Label the WHAT
Write a detailed description of
the actions involved with each step, in order as they
occur.
SIX:Label the HOW
Label each step with the time and date in
which it should be completed.
SEVEN:Label the WHEN
Label where in the business the
actions in this step occur
(department, building, etc.)
EIGHT::Label the WHERE
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 17
2. STANDARDIZE Your Workflow, Processes, & Tasks
When the diagramming is complete, the team is ready to standardize all the elements within it. But where to begin? Answering the “why” first will help maintain a sharp focus when executing the “how”.
Why You Should Standardize Your Processes
Consider the evolution of your credentialing organization in terms of an organism. The operational components probably grew from simple to complex. This is a normal trend for any growing organization, which is part organic and part organized. On the one hand, both parts can and should be healthy. On the other hand, either part can also mutate so that the complexity becomes parasitic. Consider the following:
● When we say that organizations are organic, we refer to the fact that they take on a life of their own and grow naturally.
● By organized, we refer to our application of structure and processes which define an organization’s shape through mission statements, processes, standard operating procedures, etc.
● And when we say mutated and parasitic, we refer to those processes that either unnecessarily or unreasonably tap the resources of other processes, thereby depleting the health of those processes and the organization as a whole.
When Growth Occurs Faster Than Processes Can Support
The goal in standardization is to ensure that the organic growth and organized structure do not outpace each other in a way that fosters mutation. Companies that organically grow faster than their structure and processes can support will experience a great deal of operational pain. The number one symptom is that staff innately sense that things are disorderly and structurally messy.
Phrases like, “tyranny of the urgent,” “hair on fire,” “too many irons in the fire,” or “running around like a headless chicken,” are frequently-used metaphors within this environment. Staff become so busy putting out “fires” that they are unable to focus on prevention. This gives rise to complexity that mutates into parasitic processes, as some actors in the organization require the time and attention of other actors in an unnecessary or unreasonable manner. Examples include:
● Cross team resource usage (one team/department constantly requesting the capacity of others);
● Cross role resource usage (one individual constantly requesting the authority of others);
● Staffing needs do not parallel revenue growth● Workflow processes do not align with the value delivered
Recommended Reading
Lean Six Sigma for Service by Michael L. George (2003, pp. 156 ff.)
Standardize
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 18
When Organized Processes are Built FasterThan Revenue Growth
On the other hand, when an organization is too focused on being organized, the normal evolution of organic growth is stunted and leaves the organization malnourished. When an organization has all its systems and processes in place, but not enough revenue required to stay in business, it is starved. In such a state, the focus on being organized is a non-value add. Organizations with an excessive focus on systems unwittingly construct Rube Goldberg versions of a workflow. The flow charts and visuals are elaborate, yet do not produce enough results to validate the efforts. Examples include:
● Operations budgets with consistently high labor costs which exceed program revenue.
● Operating at a candidate, revenue, or staff plateau for a half decade or more.
● Working harder with less results in certain areas of your workflow.
● Inability to hire more staff or give standard of living raises over several years.
Achieving and Maintaining a Balance
The balance between the organized and organic - between the simple and the complex - is a symbiotic one that occurs through standardization. The evolution of the organization will require change in processes, yet those processes should never result in something that is counterproductive to other processes, or to the organization as a whole. This challenge occurs in parallel to managing the existing disorderliness, and is all about wise transition choices in terms of time, energy and money. Part of that wisdom is a common sense approach.
While having an organized approach to
managing organic growth is key,
it cannot require a complete redesign
of services or offerings atevery stage of growth.
Therefore, the
standardization ofcurrent processesis the best starting
point.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 19
How to Standardize Your Processes
Standardization is the process of making similar as many parts of a process as possible. Its goal is to standardize the tasks which are used to deliver the process. In order to do so:
1. Identify all tasks that have non-value-added complexity (i.e. waste) in a service line;
2. Condense as many tasks as possible into a single delivery platform that can accomplish the same amount of work with less effort; and
3. Minimize the setup time between remaining tasks so that gaps are eliminated.
Service lines are considered the series of activities or tasks that are required to be completed in order to finish a process. A delivery platform is a product or service utilized to deliver the service lines. The platform usually consisting of several different resources, which require tasks or subprocesses to use. Examples include shared web pages, training materials, databases, spreadsheets, software applications, email sources, internet links, SOP notebooks, online portals, etc..
Standardization focuses on identifyingthe tasks that access and use these resources
to produce an outcome,and then merges as many tasks as possible
into a unifying system (platform),resulting in less tasks and less effort required
to complete the process.
In many cases, the total number of tasks involved in a process can be drastically reduced, sometimes even to one task alone. The reduction in administrative overhead is often drastic as well, and may lead to major reduction and reassignment of an entire staff department.
When the three steps above are followed with discipline, value-added work increases exponentially, the organization grows in an organic/organized balance, and the candidate pool is more deeply reached by marketing efforts. In this way, standardization results in breakthrough labor and cost reductions without eliminating any customer-facing offerings or services. The goal then is to see more services and products offered at a low cost, thereby attracting more candidates and renewals.
Focus on merging as many tasks as possible
into a unifying system or platform so that it takes less time and effort to complete a process.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 20
3. OPTIMIZE Your Credentialing Workflow & Process
When tasks and resources are standardized into a single delivery platform, the stage is set for optimization of the workflow.
Why You Should Optimize Your Processes, Systems and Workflow
Optimization represents the natural maturity of standardization. It is the process of looking at what has been standardized and eliminating any parts that are still creating non-value-add for the entire workflow. It also includes the elimination of anything that introduces negative economic drivers into the organization. The goal is the reduction of the total number required, internal tasks in the workflow to as few steps as possible. Examples include:
● Enabling staff to respond to all the candidates and credential holders in a given stage with a single communication action
● Using a system that binds all details of a candidate’s file into one digital folder with an intuitive flow of action for efficient handling
● Grouping all candidates requiring document review, application approval/denial, or results release into respective lists for ease of access
Regardless of the example, the goal is to remove any and all obstacles to the fast and accurate processing of candidate information.
Optimizing processes like these is especially important when a credentialing organization is strategically disadvantaged or in a highly competitive or declining market. Service lines or tasks that allow absorption of overhead quietly destroy the value in the organization by permitting labor cost and corresponding revenue to fall out of balance. At some point, a company’s strategy may require the optimization (removal) of certain services/products. When that time comes, the opportunity to focus intently on standardization and process improvement arises.
In some cases, processes or service lines should be removed or re-priced in order to restore balance. Many companies resist this approach due to the resulting short-term loss of program revenue. However, it is ultimately very effective in lowering costs and providing customers with a higher value product or service.
Staff and board members can alleviate the natural tension that arises from this situation by being transparent with candidates. Considerate and transparent communication with candidates prior to cutting things from the process is a courteous gesture, and customers typically appreciate work that ultimately makes things more efficient for them.
Optimize
THE GOALS:
THE STEPS:
1Establish a Work-In-Progress (WIP) Mechanism
2Focus attention on low-productivity tasks.
Remove any and all obstacles to the fast and accurate processing of candidate information.
1
2
Reduce the total number of required, internal tasks to as few steps as possible.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 21
Organizations that are not ready for this action can defer to consultation with credentialing industry experts. Credential industry consults can be crucial to ensuring that staff and board members fully understand what candidates and credential holders find desirable and undesirable, which is important to consider when navigating optimization efforts. Consults also prevent organizations from missing optimization opportunities, thereby diverting customer relationship threats, company strategy failures, internal process weakness, and an overhead-revenue imbalance.
How to Optimize Your Processes, Systems and Workflow
Engaging staff in the optimization phase of the workflow is critical. They are truly the filter through which every service line and process should be carefully examined for the cost of complexity. The rationale here is simple: every action has a cost. There are no exceptions to this rule.
The optimization phase should foster honest discussions with all team members about the business value that a particular task, activity, or process brings to the workflow. Any action that can produce the simplest outcome with the most accurate results, fastest turnaround and least cost is the obvious choice. There are two major drivers that assist in measuring the cost of complexity in your workflow.
1. Establish a Work in Progress (WIP) Mechanism
Work-in-Progress is a phrase that comes from manufacturing processes. It refers to “the amount of work that has started on an asset or item, but has not been delivered to a customer or received payment for the item.” In a credentialing organization setting, candidates who have started the application process but have not yet been certified or licensed are considered WIP. No matter what stage of the workflow they fall under, they are in progress until they are definitively credentialed or recertified. Consider the following delineation.
● A credentialing organization functions from a workflow, which is essential to ensuring that candidates have a clear line of sight from applicant to certificant.
● Every workflow has stages or phases. ● Every stage or phase has processes. ● Every process has tasks. ● Every task should be associated with a candidate.
Associate every candidate in your workflow with a
task.This creates a
definable amount of time to process
a group of candidates in each phase of your workflow.
5 http://leansixsigmadefinition.com/glossary/wip/6 Refer again to chapter 9 of Dr. Brauer’s book, Exceptional Certification.7 Reference Diagramming infographic (p. 15) again for an overview.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 22
Every candidate requires some type of action, which should have a definable amount of time in which it takes to complete the action. If you were to group together all candidates who require that same action, you could define the total amount of time it would take to complete that action on those candidates.
Zooming out, that action is a part of a series of actions within a process. Performing the same math, you could easily:
1. Group candidates by a task or action.
2. Multiply the number of candidates by the time to complete that task.
3. Then add all of those times together.
The sum would represent the amount of time it would take to complete the process which contains all of those actions. The trajectory becomes easy to chart as the total times for processes are added to equal the sum of time for each stage or phase in the workflow. A helpful breakdown might look like the following, here ATC stands for the Average Time to Complete a task.
● Process 1 = 2 Tasks○ Task 1 = 2 Mins ATC○ Task 2 = 3 Mins ATC
● Process 2 = 4 Tasks○ Task 1 = 3 Mins ATC○ Task 2 = 1 Min ATC○ Task 3 = 4 Mins ATC○ Task 4 = 5 Mins ATC
● Process 3 = 5 Tasks○ Task 1 = 2 Mins○ Task 2 = 2 Mins○ Task 3 = 3 Mins○ Task 4 = 4 Mins○ Task 5 = 5 Mins
● Process 4 = 2 Tasks○ Task 1 = 1 Min○ Task 2 = 3 Mins
Transferring this breakdown into a table might look like what we see on the following page.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 23
Group Candidates by Workflow Phase
Determine the Average Time to Complete Each Process in a Workflow
Phase
Multiply the number of Candidates in a
Workflow Phase by the Average Time to
Complete that Phase
Your answer will tell you approximately how long
it takes to process candidates in that particular phase.
Repeat the process for the other phases in your
workflow.
All all the phases / times together to get
the total required time to move all your
candidates through the workflow.
How to Get Started
Stage 1 Process 1 Process 2 Process 3 Process 4
Task 1 ATC 2 Mins 3 Mins 2 Mins 1 Min
Task 2 ATC 3 Mins 1 Min 2 Mins 3 Mins
Task 3 ATC 4 Mins 3 Mins
Task 4 ATC 5 Mins 4 Mins
Task 5 ATC 5 Mins
Totals 5 Mins 13 Mins 16 Mins 4 Mins
Current Cands. 125 100 150 500
Total ATC to Process Current
Cands.
625 Mins10.42 Hrs
1300 Mins21.67 Hrs
2400 Mins40 Hrs
2000 Mins33.33 Hrs
Total ATC to Move Current Candidates to Stage 2 105.42 Hrs
Total Days Required toComplete Stage 1
Calculated at 35 Hr Avg. Work Week
1 Employee 2 Employees 3 Employees
3.01 Days 1.51 Days 1 Day
WIP BOARD EXAMPLE: STAGE 1
Duplicating this effort for multiple stages should be easy once standardization of each stage has been completed. Adding all stages together yields the ATC for the workflow. Dividing the total ATC for the workflow by an average 35 hour work week yields the number of employee work days required to complete the entire workflow.
It is here that two realizations begin to occur for many organizational leaders. First, the actual turnaround time becomes definitive. This produces a comparison to the organization’s mission and/or policy, which often leads to an apparent need to lower the turnaround time, as well as the second realization: some tasks and/or complete processes can be optimized through elimination or outsourcing.
There is no right or wrong number on the ATC for the WIP. The only issue is whether or not your ATC is longer than the candidate and board are satisfied with. Where they are dissatisfied, the ATC has created non-value add, since customer service is injured in the process - meaning the customer is no longer willing to pay for the service, or that the board is no longer willing to support it.
Optimization is focused on
identifying and removing
non-value add work
so that the task associated with the candidate
may be
completed faster,
thereby increasing
customer & board satisfaction.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 24
Setup Time: A Forgotten WIP Component
One missing but important figure in the example above is set up time. Each task requires time to prepare for the completion of the task itself, such as logging into a software application, or accessing a system to download a report that will be used for a task. Identifying and calculating setup times invites scrutiny: the longer the setup time for a task, the more probable non-value add work there is. This in turn adds non-value add time to the ATC-WIP.
A fundamental Lean principle is that “long setup time creates large amounts of work- or things- in process (WIP), and that large WIP creates non-value-add cost activities such as rework, lost customers, expediting, etc.” In the formula above, 3.01 days for one employee to complete Stage 1 WIP becomes unhealthy when candidates withdraw from the process and decide go elsewhere, are non-responsive, or complain about service. In short:
non-value add work in the workflowcan often be the unseen reason why
candidates choose a competitor.
When any of these symptoms are present, leadership should take two actions.
1. Focus attention on the longest stages, processes, and tasks as the primary target(s) for optimization, assuming that a stage is mapped and standardized.
2. Inspect the stage, process, or task for complexity, which will almost always be present in homegrown systems.
8 Lean Six Sigma for Service, p. 166.
Tool of the TradePareto Analysis
The Pareto Principle states that 20% of the activities in a given process will cause 80% of the delays, called time traps. Discerning where the time traps exist and how to prioritize them for resolution are the two biggest challenges optimizing these delays out of the workflow.
A Pareto Analysis is a technique used for which components of a process should be prioritized for improvement or optimization
For example, you may want to analyze the number of times an observed process fails, or discover the costs that contribute most significantly to those failures.
Toward this end, a Pareto Analysis helps determine whether a failure frequency rate, its associated costs, and/or its ripple effects on downstream processes is a priority to address for improvement or optimization..
● If we want to know which failures in a process occur most frequently over a defined period of time, we simply count them as they occur.
● If we want to know which failures cause the greatest cost to the process, we simply multiply the results of the frequency occurrence with the known cost of each failure.
Some failures are very costly even if they occur infrequently. Therefore, the analysis must be conducted objectively, dispassionately and exactingly. In so doing you will prevent yourself from attacking a problem whose cost of correction is extreme compared to the savings realized.
For More Informationon the web
Download a Pareto Analysis
Template
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 25
2. Focus on Low Productivity
Low productivity and high costs often go together because low productivity is associated with complex tasks. Complex tasks take longer to complete, therefore accruing more labor cost. If they occur frequently in a workflow, real value-add work happens less frequently. Consider the following example.
● If there are five staff members working forty hours per week, the organization has two hundred hours of labor with which to get work done.
● If the majority of those hours are being used for non-value add work, then the remaining hours are being used for value-add work, thus producing a zero-sum game.
● Example: if 160 hours out of the 200 hours are being used to accomplish work that does not increase candidate turnaround, 80% of the labor cost is being ineffectively used, and the 20% value-add work is not happening enough.
This can be seen most clearly in support requests, which perpetuate non-value add work. Organizations refer to this practice as “putting out fires.” Transitioning from firefighting to fire prevention is the ultimate goal, which is attained through correcting low productivity.
Infrequent tasks in a workflow are a non-value add primarily because the axiom of task-knowledge decay is at work. The problem is that it costs an organization more overhead to complete complex tasks that don’t actually add value to the mission.
Process complexity always increases WIP.
Focus on reducing the complexity which usually
reduces the overall workload.
The optimization phasefocuses on this reduction
so that it takes less staff to
accomplish the real value-added work.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 26
4. OUTSOURCE Processes Where Possible
Diagramming, standardizing, and optimizing workflow processes sets the stage for developing new or revised systems.
Why You Should Consider Outsourcing
Thankfully, there is a light at the end of this transition tunnel.While the roots of process problems may be imperceptible, diligence in discovering them pays off via “a hidden profit pool that provides an important new avenue for value creation.” Identifying, standardizing, and optimizing processes in your workflow may uncover ideas for exponential streamlining, or reclaimed resources or revenue. These can happen quickly with the right outsourcing decisions.
However, if attempts to reduce complexity and standardize tasks are not successful, those tasks and/or service lines should be optimized out of the process completely or outsourced. Otherwise, revenue may plateau or decline, resulting in further difficult decisions.
How to Approach Outsourcing
Wherever the organization has completed the work of diagramming, standardizing, and optimizing, they should begin asking four questions with the following indicators:
Outsource
1. Which processes can and should we perform internally? RETAIN
2. Which processes exist that we can but should not perform internally? OUTSOURCE
3 Which processes exist that we cannot but should perform internally? LEARN
4. Which processes exist that we cannot and should not perform internally? OUTSOURCE
Those processes an organization can perform but should not, ought to be outsourced. Likewise, processes that it cannot and should not perform should also be outsourced. This action ensures that the organization is not burdened with non-value add tasks, resulting in greater value-add to customers, candidates, and credential holders. The chart on the following page may be helpful in assisting organizations working through the basic questions and concepts involved with outsourcing.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 27
When to Outsource Your Business Processes
Internal External
9 Key Questions
1. What tasks are associated with each certification phase?
2. Which tasks can be done in house?
3. Which tasks should be done in house?
4. On which parts of the business systems are we experts?
5. On which part of the business systems are we amateurs?
6. How directly are each of these connected with our customers?
7. If we outsource, how much control will we lose? How much are we comfortable with losing?
8. What impact will our decision to outsource have on our relationships with our customers?
9. How much of our decision to not outsource is about ego?
Tasks that are NOT a part of your organization’s core
competency
Tasks that AREa part of your partnering
vendor’s core competency
2 Key Considerations
1. Create more application and renewal revenue, producing more returns to reinvest in the organization.
2. Separate yourself from your competitors by becoming a vendor partner, offering you regular input into product evolution and development.
Drives efficiencies& improves
customer relationships
Grows the organizationand increases customer relevance
This model was adapted from Jim Blasingame’s work, The Age of the Customer (2015, pp. 180-181).
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 28
Building a Custom Solution
Some organizations may come to the conclusion that building their own custom solution is the best approach to handling the workflow. This may be a brilliant move if the organization has the budget to build the solution internally, but they must carefully answer the previous questions with a focus on the verb should. Just because an internal IT department can build it does not necessarily mean it should.
Otherwise, the decision to outsource a custom-built solution may be the better alternative. However, many vendors are experts in software technology, but do not understand the interrelationships of a credentialing organization’s workflow processes. The result is often a fixation on one or two areas of the build out, particularly in areas specific to the vendor. In this scenario, the resulting solution only replaces one set of counterproductive processes with another.
Buying an Existing Solution
When an organization has decided to outsource, but does not desire to build it themselves or manage a vendor’s efforts, buying an existing solution may be the best option. A partnership with a software company that is intimately familiar with the credentialing industry should be a necessary inclusion. Their solution should reflect a discovery, definition, and development process of industry standards and best practices, along with features and functionality that are “baked into” the software solution so that the organization itself is also matured. As part of the due diligence process for such a vendor/partner, investigate their ideas and beliefs around the philosophy of convergence described in this e-book.
Start with Process Consultation
BrightLink believes that the right approach to an organization’s counterproductivity challenges starts with the right questions, and not the assumption that something new should be built. Consultation is the best starting point. The Clarus Navigator solution offers the credentialing industry the consultation services with which BrightLink was founded and on which the Clarus candidate management system was built. Clarus Navigator offers consultation around existing processes and systems, industry standards and best practices without any obligation to purchase Clarus.
Choose a solutionwhich takes into
account the interoperability of ALL your workflow phases, processes, and players.
Build?Or Buy?
With Clarus
Credential management is
baked-in,and not
bolted on.
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 29
The Clarus Solution: Before & After
Prior to using Clarus, some clients utilized a hybrid invoicing solution, mixing semi-automated actions with multiple manual tasks. While viable as a temporary option, it became the incumbent practice, counterproductively creating occasion for constant data entry error, and subsequent discovery, recovery, and cleanup.
After these clients adopted Clarus consultation recommendations or made the decision to implement Clarus within their organization, crucial results were celebrated. Within weeks of deployment, the WIP on invoicing time drastically reduced, thereby reducing overhead costs and increasing candidate turnaround as well as customer experience numbers.
In one case, the standardization and optimization produced a 60% reduction in the invoicing department, triggering a reorganization of those staff to other departments and affect change there as well. In another case, an organization decided to optimize the invoicing process out of their workflow altogether and outsource it to Clarus with its built-in payment processing, reporting, and analytics. As a result, those employees were reassigned to focus on the customer service experience.
“My wife is part of a credentialing organization in her industry, so I investigated their credential management platform. While it is different from Clarus, I see areas where they also do things in the ways you've been recommending to us from the start.
I wish now that we had used your industry standard practices from the beginning.
In the future, if I come to you with non-standard requests, please set me straight!”
CEO, Current Clarus Client
BrightLink Insights | Volume 3 | November 2016 thebrightlink.com | Page 30
● Cloud-based: accessible by permissioned users from any location with an internet connection.
● Secure Scalability: securely growing with you as your organization grows.
● Industry Exclusive: developed and maintained by a company exclusively devoted to the credentialing industry.
● Baked-In Experience: built from the ground up with industry best practices across a variety of credentialing markets, including healthcare, financial, construction, utilities, safety and more.
● Integrated Systems: unifying the workflow from profile to application, eligibility verification to approval/denial, exam registration to payment, exam scheduling to exam results, recertification to renewal and termination.
● Pinpoint Accessibility: locating and accessing any candidate information at any point in the lifecycle, at the click of a mouse in seconds.
● Customized Reporting: using innovative business intelligence “Perspectives” to manage any candidates in any workflow phase.
● Third-Party Accessible: offering secure access to third-parties for credential original source verification.
● Accelerated Consolidation: defragmenting disparate sources of candidate information into rapidly, flexibly and securely updated information.
ClarusA CredentialManagement
Solution
BrightLink502 Bombay LaneRoswell, GA 30076thebrightlink.com
Phone:678.392.3317
Email:[email protected]
Web:getclarus.com
If you believe you may be outgrowing your homegrown systems, partner with Clarus to help your organization answer confront the challenges and identify the opportunities associated with the the “build or buy” question. The Clarus solution is...
BrightLink’s Clarus services and solutions help transition your homegrown-but-outgrown credential, candidate and certification
lifecycle management information systems to an autopilot experience.
What’s your next step?
As a starting point, consider Clarus Navigator, a technology-neutral consultative service with the Clarus team, designed to discover where you are, where you want to be and how to safely navigate the path there.
31
