Dive deep into our knowledge
How being an above average driver will reduce your systems implementation risk
29 Jan, 2025
Are you an above average driver? What all of you? So, everyone reading this document is above average? Hmmmm, ok…
What about the capabilities of the employees in your company? As a manager/owner/leader, you will naturally have some bias towards your team, you will have pride in their capabilities and consequently if I asked you “How good is your team?” surely, you’d respond with “Above average”.
What about being ready for a business transformation, a new business software event, a change to business processes, a major ERP implementation?… Are your team ‘above average’ in this scenario?
To continue the analogy - there are some amazing bicycle/scooter couriers around: they could upgrade to a motorcycle relatively easily; they could probably upgrade to a transit van with training; but would they have the capability to upgrade to an HGV? This is what you’re asking your team to do with the implementation of a new system.
So how does HSO make this better? When we first engage, we’re likely responding to a competitive tender with you: we take some time to understand your business, discuss the capabilities of your team and then you ask us for a cost estimate. By the very nature of statistics, your team could very well be above average - we must take your word for it, but can we make this position more secure? Can we work together to guarantee that your team is better than average? Can we use that process to collectively create the best team possible to deliver maximum benefit into your business in the shortest time possible and with the most efficient cost?
Valuing skills in project estimation
So how do we get to the real cost/value? How do we make sure we partner in the most effective way, deploying the right skills in the right place and giving you the best, most accurate estimate?
Ultimately, you’re right, as a Microsoft implementation partner, we’ve done this before; we’ve done it more than 100 times before and it’s been different every time. Why? Our team is the same, they are trained to a similar standard, they work with the same software, the business problems are similar. Every organisation is different, of course, but we also find a real difference in the skills, knowledge, personalities and experience of your team.
This puts us in a dilemma – how can we take into account the varying skills of your team; particularly given we have typically had little time to get to know them at this point? We aren’t generally able to make an informed decision on how well equipped they are to deliver project success, so must assume ‘average’ in the hope that this will balance out in the project, particularly when trying to ensure we remain competitive.
This provides you with an opportunity, If you have an amazingly well prepared, well-educated team, our estimates are likely to be pessimistic. Consequently, is it worth investing in training and upskilling? Would that investment pay back in delivering the desired benefits earlier (and more robustly), AND in reducing the overall project duration?
If your team were ‘appropriately qualified’ would that make the RACI for the implementation project more obvious? If your ‘appropriately qualified’ team were permanent staff, then would that make embedding change easier? Would this enable you to transition to BAU quicker and more easily, realising the benefits of the project sooner?
An above average team
Experience is important, and understanding a role in depth means that appropriately motivated individuals with flexible brains can understand the impact of a proposed change, and work to maximise the opportunity associated with it. However, doing the same thing for 30 years does not necessarily count as valuable experience: on occasions it can mean resistance to change.
I’ve personally found a real ‘magic’ recently working with HSO Graduates: they ask the questions that you either are not brave enough to ask (because you think you should already know the answer with your ‘experience’). This is tremendously valuable, simply explaining the challenge increases your own understanding.
In my role, understanding supply chain theory allows you to work towards a tangible objective. Following the teachings of Martin Christopher, Simon Porter, Simon Sinek, Richard Wilding, Eli Goldratt et al, challenges you to be better, to apply their structures to your world.
Understanding the pros and cons of DDMRP, S&OP, IBP....... not only allows you to pick and choose the benefits right for your organisation, but also to relate to your implementation team, understanding the language they may be using and the perceived goals that they think you should be working to.
I’ve had the privilege of working with F1 teams, rescue organisations, food manufacturers and major distributors and there are massive similarities and some brilliant potential synergies. In fact, there are more common practices than there are differentiators.
So, what makes up the right team then Mike?
Balance… diversity in the workplace makes a significant difference in having enlightening and powerful conversations. In this article, however, I would like to encourage that EVERY team involved in a project has diversity of thought. I believe it should include a visionary, the wise old sage who has been there and done it, the graduate who asks the penetrating questions with enthusiasm, the academic who has seen the theory and includes the individual with a variety of experience.
Potential team focus points:
Industry knowledge
Be clear on the problem, be aware of how others have addressed it, be cognizant of the evolution of the industry.
What can your supplier do?
A few questions for you…
- Would it be appropriate for your prospective supplier to assess your employees?
- Would it be helpful if your prospective supplier did a capability assessment of your employees prior to an implementation?
- How would you accept it if your prospective supplier pointed out that your team needed to undertake upskilling to ensure successful project delivery? Would you do anything about it, or would it influence your opinion away from that prospective supplier?
- Then…
- Would it be appropriate for your supplier to offer suggestions for training? Perhaps deliver that training?
If you’re buying a new truck/HGV, your supplier will likely offer training and assistance to make sure it’s adopted properly…should this be different for a new business system?
What about your leadership, direction and governance? Is it appropriate for your supplier to assess the clarity of vision, the commitment of leadership to that vision and the presentation of your organisational values from the top down? Is it appropriate for them to assess the alignment and relevance of the message and the likely challenges? Would it be appropriate to offer some course correction advice upfront to ensure success, or could that be a bruising experience and make you more likely to select the supplier who says they want to follow your wishes?
From my implementation experience, customers that are flexible, open to conversation and professional at every level are more likely to make sure that their systems and processes deliver against their anticipated benefits plan (as well as having a much less stressful journey).
So… before you set off on your implementation journey, it’s prudent to carry out some internal due diligence before looking for an implementation partner. Once you have identified the right partner for you, build a partnership with them, forming a team of critical ‘friends’ who help you to achieve your goals in the most effective way possible.
Why HSO is the right partner for your Microsoft project
Discover how to make your Microsoft project a guaranteed success.