Who Really Knows What the Business Needs Are?

31 May Who Really Knows What the Business Needs Are?

Posted at 09:00h in IMPLEMENTATION by Mark Nicholls

Last month covered how business needs and any software solution have to be aligned, and one specific example where the need for compliance placed the project at a critical juncture. One that could have been pivotal in its success.

The need for specificity in what a business needs, and whether a software solution meets those needs is a test for every organisation. The previous article was one way in which organisations get tested. But there are more.

One challenge is deciding what the business needs are, and who decides what they are.

In the previous article we raised the prospect that sometimes business executives don’t want business users involved in answering this question. They could be concerned that the same business users who are presiding over the current system are hardly the right people to be designing the new one. They have a point. But excluding them oversimplifies the problem (that they are not worthy), by oversimplifying the solution (by keeping them away) and creates other problems. Hence it was not recommended.

The job of defining requirements, designs and then testing is a task that requires balance between multiple perspectives. And by not involving one of those perspectives is not helpful.

Historical needs

Some staff will know very well how the current business operates and will see the world working best if they are replicated going forward. But nobody wants to invest a lot of money and potential disruption to have a more shiny and newer version that does the same thing that they have always done.

However, there can be some things that are currently done for good reason. This could be to comply with specific legislation or regulations or it could be due to agreements with staff or customers or others. Now that doesn’t mean you replicate it. But you will want to know it’s there and why.

And there can be some past practices that are highly complicated and not documented. Many organisations have these. Without knowledge of these, there is a big risk. That risk is not knowing how your own organisation works. Which means you can’t replicate it. That is possibly good. But you may want to replicate the outcomes it produced or the business rules that are applied even if you do not want to replicate how it does that. You will need that knowledge captured.

Person facing two chalkboard arrows pointing in opposite directions

Future needs and best or better practices

Some staff will aspire to this and some professionals you bring in will advise on it. This is good as it creates aspiration. But it’s not a panacea. Accepting the advice of best practice because it is said to be best practice is not smart. There will be dozens or more examples of “best practice”. Which version do you want? It is good to have this as an aspiration, but this needs to be tested to ensure it will deliver the results you need.

Target system operational constraints

Every target system will have many things it can do, and constraints because of what it cannot do. If your scope restricts customisations, then these constraints may be bigger. Admittedly COTS and SaaS solutions now have very significant functional richness in their capabilities but there will always be some constraints. Designing your new way of working or blindly adopting theoretical best practice without considering target system capabilities and constraints will lead to disappointment and rework.

And even if the system can be used in a particular way, some systems integrators and product providers have defined patterns that they like to implement. If they are assisting your implementation, then they may constrain how you set the system up regardless.

Change Constraints

Then there are the Change Constraints. This is the scale of change that results from the new designs, the delta between current and future practice. If this is wide then you have a bigger and more aggressive transformation, more change remediation, more leadership required, and more chance of users not adopting these new ways of working. Some organisations and some leaders may not want that risk.

Strategic priorities

And you have the strategic priorities of the organisation to support and benefits to deliver. This may place some objectives on the requirements to be met and the way your future system will work.

Influential and knowledgeable users

When it comes to the people you have in the team, there is the difference between those with the knowledge and those with the influence. They are not always the same. Every organisation has an informal structure that does not always match the formal structures. So while you may have the most knowledgeable people involved, if everyone listens to someone else who isn’t involved then you have a challenge to address. It may not mean you want that influential person involved, but you need to consider how you address that risk. And getting them involved will be one of several things to consider.

The available people

Talking about who is involved…who will choose what business people get involved? And on what basis are people being offered. Will you get the right people or the available ones. There are no shortage of projects who get the available ones.

Wants versus needs

And if you do have the right blend of expertise, how luxurious will they express their needs. Are they needs or wants? A good example is something like reporting. For any new system, ask about reporting and you will get a massive list of needs, wants, desires and wishes. They cannot all be delivered.

This is where scope plays a critical role. It creates the guardrails within which all decision making gets made, and is the tool to clean out the desires and wishes, and ensures wants are tested and perhaps discarded too.

Management perspectives

It is often said that middle managers, particularly those in large organisations, want the status quo to remain. They become the biggest blockers to change.

The reason is that they have risen up the ranks based on those systems, in many cases that they have had a role in creating. They created the current systems, they know the current systems and they are succeeding in the current systems. Why would they want change?

This is not always true. But it can be.

Executive perspectives

They have a strategy to implement or results to deliver. They will be likely to drive for improvement and change.

But they may also have risks to manage, and perceptions to maintain.

Who represents which interest?

Summary

Getting the right blend of expertise and perspectives is somewhat a balancing act. It doesn’t need to be perfect, it just needs to be mindful. And if you do that and don’t be ignorant of some sort of balance then you will be in the top half of most projects doing the same thing.

Good luck!

References

John P. Kotter, The Heart of Change: Real-Life Stories of How People Change Their Organizations. Kotter emphasizes the importance of understanding and aligning business needs with change initiatives, noting that successful transformations start with a clear and compelling description of the need for change that resonates across the organization.
Debra Paul, Donald Yeates, James Cadle, Business Analysis. The authors discuss the role of stakeholders in accurately defining business needs, suggesting that involving a broad range of stakeholders helps ensure a comprehensive understanding of requirements, preventing mismatches between expected and delivered solutions.
Prosci, “Best Practices in Change Management.” Prosci’s benchmarking reports underscore the significance of stakeholder engagement in successful change initiatives, highlighting that projects with excellent change management effectiveness are six times more likely to meet or exceed their objectives.
Geoffrey Moore, Crossing the Chasm. Moore advises on the adoption of best practices tailored to specific business contexts, arguing that while best practices provide a valuable framework, they must be adapted to the unique challenges and needs of the organization.
Jim Collins, Good to Great. Collins explores how successful organizations manage change by balancing the insights and perspectives of both executives and middle management.

Want a clearer read on how well your business needs and strategy are actually aligned?

Take the Digital Transformation Strategy Assessment

Mark D Nicholls
CEO and Partner, Information Professionals Group (IPG)

IPG provides independent leadership support for government agencies, utilities, health services, and growing organisations across Australia on ICT and digital strategy, program delivery, and technology transformation.

About
Latest Posts

Mark Nicholls

Chief Executive at Information Professionals Group

With experience across almost every industry, Mark brings more than 30 years of accumulated knowledge to each and every project, leading technology transformation within organisations across Australia.Mark understands and has seen first-hand the challenges around technology that organisations face today. He is dedicated to helping IPG clients find a way through these, helping them to do what they need to do, within their capabilities to achieve whatever success might look like for them. A member of the Australian Information Industry Association Board, Mark is at the forefront of technology transformation. Known for his ability to engage people at every level, he is adept at honing in on client priorities and finding the right formula to help organisations grow their way.