How “Keep It Simple, Stupid” is Really Smart
When you are defining your business processes you should never assume that anyone knows anything. Your process documents should be written easily enough for a 5th grader to follow. If you don’t have processes that can be defined in this manner then your process is too complex.
Here’s some wisdom from Einstein:
“But my guys on the floor need to use critical thinking and be able to make choices about XYZ…” and I agree with you. I’m not saying the people are stupid, and I’m not saying that their jobs aren’t filled with complexity, but if the overarching process cannot be simply defined you have essentially clogged your business pipeline.
A little more from the Einstein..slightly different:
When you clog the pipeline several things happen. The first and foremost is that you have limited the amount of potential income. Business should be about maximizing throughput, the amount of quality work you can get through your system in one door and out the other is how your end game is defined. If you get mired in minute details and tweaking efficiencies you will lose money in the long run. By focusing on throughput you can simultaneously increase revenues while reducing costs and inventory.
This is what I mean by getting caught up in simple efficiencies rather than looking at the total throughput. Doing processes in house to save money and increase efficiencies only works if you are not making throughput suffer. The problem is that the efficiency looks good on paper and can hide the logical fallacy.
Back to the main point though; if you clog the pipeline throughput suffers. If throughput suffers you don’t make nearly as much money as you could. This happens from over-complicating your process. The other thing that happens is that you become reactive. Without a clear set of process rules you are reactive instead of proactive. You will get mired in the small details again and unable to get ahead. It’s all about getting ahead of problems. To get ahead of problems you need to be able to critically think about issues.
“But you just said the process should be simple, which is outside the critical thinking realm…” and again I agree with you. I want the process to be simple so that all your people are left with is high performance brain activity. Your people function better if you take all the unnecessary choices away and leave them with the one’s that they have to think about critically in their area. Pair down the process to a simple flow chart and let the rest takes care of itself.
Here’s some advice from Leo D (no not the movie star):
I recently read an article right here on linked in how some people have made this a way of life straight down from the top. Steve Jobs and most of the Presidents only wore 1 or 2 outfits so that right from the start of each day they could pair down unnecessary choices.
Your business processes should reflect this sort of thinking if you want to thrive. There are very few instances in business where over-engineering is a good thing. If you try to over-engineer your process, the whole thing will suffer. This usually happens over a long time and it is problematic because the proprietor of the over-engineered process will have difficulty seeing it. Usually what happens is that someone makes a mistake at some point, so a rule is put in place to mitigate that problem from ever happen again. Seems logical, but it is a slippery slope. Pretty soon more rules split of that rule to handle exceptions. Combine that with rule creation for the other 30 mistakes that have been made and pretty soon you have a naturally evolved over-engineered business process. By the time you are stuck in it, it is often too late, and once again, the authors of said mess will have incredible difficulty seeing it. After all, those rules were all made with good reason right?
Lastly, and compounding on the idea of being reactive rather than proactive your company is doing poorly via the ‘bus rule’. I have referenced this in several of my articles, but the gist is that your are doing well by the bus rule if a team in your organization can be replaced reasonably quick if they all go to lunch and get hit by a bus today. If your processes are over-engineered, then it does not matter what caliber the individual(s) sent to replace them is/are. They will not be able to make up the difference in a timely fashion.
Long story short, when it comes to your business process rules, a 5th grader should be able to read it and understand. They may not necessarily be able to do the work without the proper education or training, but the process itself should be understood crystal clear with simple paired down flow charts and step by step bullet points.
Every organization should undergo regular review and audit of all business process rules and flows. These reviews should critically look at all of these processes for flaws. I’m not saying that additional rules do not need to be implemented from time to time, but they have to be rules that do not disrupt the overarching flow.
In my opinion it is well worth an organizations time and money to bring in an outsider to also critically examine the processes. This is of course due to the aforementioned problem that the people who created the problem often can’t see it. If you believe your organization has no problems than you definitely need to bring someone else in to take a look!!! If the person is competent and despite your best efforts you cannot explain the reason for something they have uncovered than you have got something that needs simplifying. Don’t be stubborn and let them poke holes in your flow.
Here’s a little something by Mr. Branson, who I’m told knows a few things about business:
Remember, be smart and build a business that can be understood by stupid folks.
