Executive Blind Spots

Executive Blind Spots

By Kevin Kieller January 5, 2015 5 Comments
Kevin Kieller PNG
Executive Blind Spots by Kevin Kieller

On many unified communications projects there is a gap in understanding between the senior leaders and the IT staff who are making technical decisions. This can result in a large “blind spot” that dooms projects to fail or deliver underwhelming benefits.

blind spot
noun
2 :  an area in which one fails to exercise judgment or discrimination

Unified Communications (UC) was always supposed to be about combining disparate communication systems in order to improve business efficiency. It was never about “mashing up” everything just because we could. The industry started using “UC&C,” referring to unified communications and collaboration, the “collaboration” tacked on at the end perhaps to remind us that we expected some level of business process improvement from UC. And then Microsoft last year decided to rebrand “UC” as universal communications. Now into 2015 it seems like “persistent conversations” may be the buzzword du jour, being led by the Cisco Project Squared and Unify Circuit products.

Whatever we choose to call our improved technology solution, blind spots develop because executives believe that the people they have entrusted to decide on and implement these solutions have a clear understanding of the key business objectives for the project and this is often not the case.

Many IT professionals get trapped debating technical nuances, counting and comparing features, upgrading versions “just because” or implementing redundant redundancy. They do this not because they lack skill or dedication but rather because clear measurable business objectives have not been defined.

Executives spend most of their days focused on and being accountable for managing business outcomes (sales, revenue, gross profit, cost of goods sold, etc.) and expect that this knowledge and focus will “trickle down” and become instilled in the technical staff. Most executives share business objectives in quarterly or more frequent “town halls” or other update sessions. Despite all of the good intentions, most technical projects operate “in the trenches” without clear, documented measurable business objectives. The executives assume the technical staff are making decisions in order to maximize business results; the technical staff are often not clear on what is expected.

Eliminating the Blind Spots

I once did work for a brewery and they had an annoying but useful habit of asking “how will this help us sell more beer?” The IT manager asked this with respect to unified communications. How will UC help us sell more beer? It is a good question and one that can take a fair amount of work to answer properly. This is exactly the type of question that needs to be asked about each technical solution choice: how will a particular technical solution improve our business?

The best way I have found to develop consensus around the measurable objectives for a project is to hold a “vision session” at the start of any major initiative.

The structure and name of the session can vary; however, a number of attributes for the session are important:

  1. You need to involve both business leaders and technical team members in a room at the same time. Allow at least half a day; for larger projects you may need to allocate a full day.

  2. You need someone to facilitate the meeting. The facilitator needs to be able to impart structure on the session, solicit ideas from everyone, move things along if the discussion gets bogged down, and most importantly encourage, cajole and/or force the group to document key project elements.

  3. During the session you need to develop a documented consensus related to:

a. What are you trying to achieve?

b. What business problem are you trying to solve?

c. How will you know if you have been successful?

The facilitator needs to keep the team focused on the “what” (the desired outcomes) and not the “how” (the technical solution). Because technology people like to solution, this can take some skill. Technical jargon should be completely absent from a successful vision session.

Generating documented, measurable and agreed upon success criteria is the single most important outcome from the session. This information can then be used to evaluate different technical options and to make appropriate technical decisions during the course of the project. Having everyone on the team understand how success will be measured can eliminate most blind spots. Allowing the executives to directly discuss, prioritize and document the desired project outcomes greatly increases the chance that the technical team will deliver a worthwhile result.

As we rush into 2015, raise a glass and toast the New Year and then ask yourself, “How will UC help me sell more beer?”

 

5 Responses to "Executive Blind Spots" - Add Yours

Gravatar
Art Rosenberg 1/6/2015 12:07:51 AM

Good advice, Kevin!

It's not just "selling" the beer, but also making the beer, delivering it, etc., that can impact the selling process and business outcomes. But, it is the business process "use case" performance that depends on communication operational flexibility and cost efficiency that UC and "persistent conversations" are designed to improve.

So, your "vision session" has to include identifying business process problems (time delays, errors, inaccessible or misdirected contacts, etc.) that are communication dependent, aside from other types of problems. This will also bring more focus on the "who" and the "why" of specific business process "use cases."
Gravatar
Kevin Kieller 1/6/2015 5:32:57 AM

Thanks for the comment Art. However, in some ways you are over complicating things.

My main point was to know the specific success criteria for your project. In my example, they were clear that it was driving sales of beer. They were not being asked to look at other business process problems such as time delays, errors, etc.

Use cases are one mechanism that you can employ to help determine a path to the desired outcome but first and most important you must have clear, measurable, prioritized and documented objectives. Starting with use cases is a way to waste time, even though it looks as though you are creating output.

I argue that knowing how you will be measured and making technology trade-off decisions based on this is the primary path to project success.

Trying to improve all the metrics or investing dollars to improve metrics no one is measuring (even if they should be!) or looking for inefficiencies in every process flow is how technology teams get distracted and either fail or deliver dismal results.

Kevin
Gravatar
Art Rosenberg 1/6/2015 8:41:42 AM

Don't disagree at all, Kevin!

Clearly it will always be high-priority "use cases" that must be considered, not every single "use case" that exists. So, as you point out, the beer sales "use case" was the most important one your client wanted to improve. Other "verticals" will have different priority "use cases," that won't be so sales-oriented, e.g., health care, financial services, education, government, etc.
Gravatar
Rob Popovic 1/12/2015 7:21:01 AM

Good article. While a brewery is a good example, the larger and more complex an organization is will alter the approach customer and technology provider/consultant take. You actually need to identify the corporate initiative you believe you can support, first. Then you can define business problem you're going to solve. That means you start at the CEO level. For example. if the CEO's three key initiatives are; 1) make money 2) save money 3) stay out of jail, you need to hone in on which initiative you can realistically support based on customers in the same industry or of similar size and scope. Once you do that, then you can engage the lines of business and key stakeholders for a "vision session". Otherwise, your throwing darts hoping they stick.

Good high level representation of the approach needed to tie UC solutions to business outcomes.
Gravatar
Kevin Kieller 1/12/2015 8:35:07 AM

Rob,

Thank you for your feedback. I don't disagree with any of your comments and the brewery example was just that, one example.

The key point is that you need to hold a "vision" session in order to document and prioritize desired business outcomes, whether they be to stay of jail or sell more beer.

Kevin

Kevin

To Leave a Comment, Please Login or Register

UC Alerts
UC Blogs
UC ROI Tool RSS Feeds

Related UC Vendors

See all UC Vendors»