This three-part series explores the relative value of people, of process, and of tools. In the first installment, the "People Premium", we explored the attributes of our people that make them indispensable to our engineering work, but at the same time cause problems. In this second installment, we will discuss the role of processes in compensating for our people's shortcomings.
People make mistakes, and those mistakes waste our time and money. They forget things, and those omissions force us to go back and rework what has already been done. And they are imprecise. What is "good enough" for one person may not be precise enough for another, and is often insufficient for the machines we must interact with.
Clearly, to gain the full benefits that people bring to our projects, we must look for opportunities to mitigate for their shortcomings. And this is the reason for processes. Effective processes enable our most precious resource -- our people -- to work their magic!
So, it is not a question of whether or not our people have (or should have) processes. Those processes exist, and people do follow them. Just as surely as they follow their morning routines, and their patterns for traveling to work, much of the project work they engage in is defined by processes that they follow. Most people may not call these things processes, and may not even be aware of these routines, but those things are processes nonetheless. Following processes is just part of being human.
So, why is the subject of "process" such a hot issue? Why do Agilists and others rail against them? It is because much of what is done in business in the name of "process" fails in the primary purpose of a process. It doesn't meet the needs of the people who must follow it. Our unconscious processes are invisible precisely because they meet our needs without getting in our way. A process becomes visible to us when it either fails to meet our needs, or it requires us to do things that are wasteful of our effort or time. These ineffective processes are what people complain about.
People make errors, so our processes must help us to mitigate for that propensity. Most of the time, a good process will help us to avoid making an error in the first place. A laundry process that includes matching socks before putting them away will prevent one from wearing mismatched socks to work. A morning routine that includes listening to the traffic and weather report can help us to choose the best method and route for our commute.
People also omit things. We forget to do certain steps, or do them in the wrong order, so our processes help us to do all of the things we must do, and to do them in the right order. In our morning routine, we tend to bathe, shave, brush teeth, dress, and eat in the same order each day. This consistency helps to ensure that we don't forget to do any of the steps. Just think about what happens on those days when your routine is upset! The results can be embarrassing (if you don't put enough extra thought and effort in to compensating)!
And people are imprecise. We don't always focus on important details, so our processes point us to the level of detail and precision that is required of us. Many of us have a process for picking out the clothes we will wear that includes rules about which colors and patterns go with others, and which do not. These guidelines help us to make appropriate choices without spending too much time and effort.
But not every error, omission or imprecision can be avoided, so our processes also include checks and balances that help us to detect and correct those mistakes before they cause problems. One last look in the mirror before we walk out the door allows us to detect and correct problems before they can ruin our day.
In the same way, the processes that we employ on our projects must be tailored so that they provide the needed support for the people who do the work, while helping them to be as effective and productive as possible. When processes meet peoples' needs, they truly become invisible; and people will often believe they are not following a process at all!
Achieving consistency does not necessarily require formality. The example we have been using (a person's morning routine) is almost never formalized, yet most of us follow it faithfully every morning. In fact, achieving consistency is usually pretty easy when the process meets your needs efficiently!
But in organizations, when many people are involved, process consistency becomes much more challenging. First, it is a rare process that can be tuned to the point that it is invisible to everyone who is affected by it. Each person, if left to their own discretion, may choose to do the activities in a slightly different way. While there are times when those minor differences are of no consequence, more often, those differences can result in problems
Therefore, most processes require someone to pay attention to the consistency with which it is followed. Whether that job is done by peer reviews of work, peer pressure to conform, a "coach" who guides the team members, enforcement by a manger, or double-checks by an auditor, it is generally important to use some mechanism to assure that processes are followed consistently.
Even in small organizations, there is often little that is written down. The founders of a company figure out how to work with each other, discuss problems that arise, and agree on future actions. Often these agreements are not written down. But as the company grows, the need to document operating procedures, guidelines, and processes grows.
The more people who are involved in the process, the more likely it will be that some amount of process documentation will be helpful in achieving the required consistency. When new staff is added, the documented processes help them to learn the rules and work patterns more quickly, and help them to know what is expected of them.
In large organizations, more process documentation is generally needed so that different groups or functions can dovetail their work effectively to assure that the needs of the organization as a whole are being met.
But it is possible to go overboard in producing process documentation. Some organizations pursuing an ISO 9000 certification or a CMMI Maturity Level Rating produce shelves and shelves of process documents that are aimed at achieving the certification or rating. Unfortunately, when the primary purpose of the processes (to support people in doing the work) is overshadowed by those goals, the resulting processes can be cumbersome. And, of course, if too much process documentation is written, then people won't read it, or will be unable to find in it the guidance they need.