Overload 2.0 ?

The phenomenal rise in the use of Web 2.0 facilities by business is something to behold – but is it the technology being exploited or perhaps people with yet more new responsibilities to discharge up and above their already busy schedule ?

Twitter, Blogging, Social Networking – all fantastic methods of getting a message out to huge numbers of people instantaneously but where is it all leading?

Are we spending too much time contributing and not enough absorbing ? Is everyone doing the same ? Are we fooling ourselves that people are better off as a result of our post – or would we be better off taking the same amount of time to pick one interesting article read and digest it in depth and contemplate how we could use the concepts for our own / our company’s benefit.

Has the actual amount of useful information increased in line with the diversity of technology created to disseminate it – or have we just buried the forest of knowledge in 140 character string leaf litter ?

True growth and enlightenment takes time – read, absorb, challenge, re-think, apply, assess – surely this is better than tweet, blog, e-mail and post ?

As ever I would welcome your views.

Six Sigma or Sick Schema

In these challenging times how many businesses are lowering their quality standards either knowingly or through a reduction in their attention to detail.

In many communities the need to ensure personal data accuracy is regulated in law but many business process outsourcing organisations remain passive in ensuring the data they hold remains accurate - relying upon their clients to inform them of issues - normally after mistakes have been made (many of which are costly - either monetarily or reputationally) .

Active monitoring and cross referencing of data is essential to spot potential problems and allows outsourcing organisation to offer a much more intelligent and proactive service to their customers - and if done comprehensively - could even for a revenue stream for them.

Understanding the data models and semantics for the information being held is the key to success - but this is not rocket science - as people, after all, (despite how certain organisations behave), are "real world beings" - so the information held is normally logical and understandable - therefore mapping between systems is simple even if volumes sometimes cause a problem.

Once customers core records are established and checked processes to keep the data accurate have to be embedded - and there is nothing better than confirming with the individual whether something is right or not - whilst people will often not volunteer a change - most will very quickly inform you of a problem - and if done properly will be welcomed.

Six Sigma is an excellent method and philosophy for addressing process deficiencies within organisations but perhaps common sense and a good service mentality are pre-requisites for achieving a higher level of quality in basic people data management.

I would welcome your views.

Employee Protection - Help or Hinderance ?

Employee Protection regimes like the UKs TUPE Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) regulations are seen as a positive sign of a civilised society and developed economy - However in today's market conditions are such laws detrimental to the population at large ?

Whilst it is quite often the thought of pension liabilities (which sit outside the realms of such regulation for the majority of employees) which put off prospective outsourcing bodies bidding for particular work (particularly in the public sector) - How many contracts which are take up are delivered with underwhelming performance because despite the injection of new thinking much of the work carried out by an outsourcer is delivered by the same people who carried out the job before a transfer. Whilst retaining skills and knowledge are fundamental to delivering a successful service - so are energy, enthusiasm and openness to new thinking - some of which can be drained by the transfer process itself - which frequently can be fraught - usually through uncertainty of the unknown and the fear that results.

Could costs to business and the public sector be reduced if such regulation were relaxed to an extent - and could performance be improved through a greater injection of new talent, new thinking and avoiding the "well its always been done this way" attitude, and the historical burdens of knowledge which frequently cause interruptions to peoples delivery of their new roles.

Whilst controversial - perhaps if looking at a macro level, allowing outsourcing organisations to deliver services back without an excessive burden of responsibility re staff transfer just might deliver services of a higher quality at less cost to the benefit of both parties.

This is not to say that staff should not be moved across - as all too frequently good transferring employees feel invigorated by the new challenge and contribute greatly to the success of a new service - however it is perhaps those whose performance has been less than good over a period and has been left unchecked who could unfairly benefit from the protection and reduce the overall performance of the new relationship at the expense of the customer and the economy as a whole.

Is it time to change or at least reflect upon the regimes in place today for the benefit of the nation as a whole. After all we all want better service at lower cost - should we not therefore look for every opportunity to influence this outcome?

I would welcome your views.

Achieving Optimal Potential in Government Shared Services / Outsourcing

With most governments of the world seeking significant efficiencies to help deal with the fall out of the global financial crisis – the placement of shared services and outsourcing arrangement within the government hierarchy has never been more important.

Whilst in most circumstances local accountability and knowledge are primary concerns – these pressing times dictate that government bodies structure their shared services or outsourcing arrangements in the most appropriate fashion to achieve efficiency savings – which after all is a requirement for all departments and areas of public service.

Whilst many bodies at a national, regional and local level have established various arrangements already – now is the time to review the situation to ensure that the optimal results are being obtained for the tax payer.

The benefits of aggregation, standardisation and simplification can yield high returns but placing services or partnership arrangements too low in the government hierarchy can lead to sub-optimisation and unnecessary duplication of effort (with the associated waste of resources) – especially in indirect areas like procurement, human resources and finance.
Whilst tax-payers are the final beneficiary of savings, the government bodies themselves can benefit from :

- A better utilisation of resources / fewer key people dependencies
- Access to a wider range of skills / pool of knowledge
- Improved management information
- Greater purchasing leverage
- Access to wider range of national / international suppliers
- Reduced Risk
- Improved leverage of investment
- Access to Best Practice processes

Also achieving optimal efficiency within an internal shared service facility means any future outsourcing arrangement with a commercial body will not unnecessarily leave the tax-payers money on the table as easy pickings.

This is not just a matter of placement of services in a hierarchy however. Arbitrage opportunities should also be considered. With appropriate skills being available across a wide range of geographies, government bodies at all levels could benefit from tapping into more cost effective resource perhaps outside their normal catchment areas for employees. One of the unfortunate side effects of the economic downturn is the shedding of highly skilled workers by commercial organisations - Such skills may have the potential to bring a higher return per employee if the pockets of talent are appropriately exploited by government bodies at the right level. With communications costs being so low and tele-presence technology being so pervasive today, geography is no longer the issue it used to be.

These are just a few suggestions, that if exploited, have the potential to deliver a much more cost effective support basis for government bodies at all levels.

I would welcome your views and experiences.

Business Process Outsourcing - Making it Work
There are many articles written on the reasons to outsource including:
- Cost reduction
- Service improvement / Internal issue resolution
- Focus improvement / Core competency execution
- Skills access / Capability release
- Risk sharing
- Investment avoidance / Funds attraction

All are potentially achievable, but how many services fail through organisations being too greedy and essentially seeking something for nothing or providers over committing to things not attainable within the constraints they are accepting?

Success in an outsourcing relationship can only be achieved with a level of openness between the parties involved.

Customers should:
- Be truthful with themselves about the objectives they are truly seeking to achieve and not use the published lists of reasons as being their shopping list of benefits - this is just being unrealistic.
- Remember the past and fully recognise the benefits being delivered by their partner and certainly not try to over-manage them when history may show that the service they handed over was failing - how can new benefits to achieved if old management styles remain
- Understand there must be something in the relationship for both parties for it to be successful - starving your partner will just lead to under-investment and eventual service failure - Why go down paths where the negative outcome is so predictable?
- Understand their role in the services being delivered and ensure their contribution (or perhaps lack of it) is not undermining the overall outcome of the arrangement

Providers should:
- Be open with their customers about the benefits that can realistically be obtained from the starting point they are presented with and the timescales to achieve them. Also be clear about the responsibilities of the customer in achieving the desired outcomes. (Outsourcing is not, and never can be, a set and forget process).
- Focus on delivering benefit to the relationship not generate internal distractions (however academically brilliant they may appear to be)
- Fully understand (and convey) the investment requirements over the life of the relationship and ensure they have sufficient risk appetite, and customer buy-in to embark upon the journey before it commences and certainly in advance of starting to commit funds.
- Understand the role people (and personal aspirations) play in the on-going development of the relationship. The retention of appropriately skilled resource to deliver the service is key as is the understanding and management of customer stakeholder viewpoints. No amount of technology investment can change these requirements.

These are just a few of the points, that if observed, would lead to a more satisfying and fruitful relationship between organisations and their outsourcing partners.

I would welcome your views and experiences.