It seems for the last couple of years as though we’ve been constantly running in crisis mode. To put it mildly, the worldwide economic situation got out of control 2-3 years ago and it doesn’t show signs of improving soon. Uncertainty abounds, fingers are pointed in every direction, and many of us feel powerless to do anything but wait and worry.

“What? Me worry?”
Alfred E. Newman

Crisis Management Is a Response…

The economic crisis has occurred and whether it was through our fault or not, we have to get it under control and fix it quickly as possible — that’s what crisis management is. Depending on the nature and extent of a problem, it may take considerable resources to fix. As we’ve seen, our current economic crisis has used up an enormous amount of resources and promises to swallow up many more before we even come close to a solution.

Unfortunately, it looks like many companies — but especially small-to-medium businesses – will simply have to do their best to ride out the economic storm. Too much is beyond their knowledge or control.

…Whereas Risk Management Is Strategic

Many people have laid the lion’s share of the blame for the economic crisis on the financial sector, or on government policies. Certainly they weren’t the only causes, however. Companies in every sector took unnecessary risks and didn’t implement a system of effective controls and oversight. Good risk management practices existed but they weren’t followed.

Risk management consists of identifying potential threats, assessing their likelihood and their impact (if they were to occur), and taking the necessary steps to eliminate or minimize risks. There are risks we’ll always be powerless to avoid or control (severe weather, earthquake, etc.), but we can cope with them — and many others — better simply by implementing effective risk management systems.

Management Philosophy

There is a management philosophy, mirrored by ISO 9001, that merely correcting a problem isn’t as good as identifying its root cause and taking steps to make sure the problem doesn’t recur. That’s called “taking corrective action“.

That philosophy also says that making sure a problem doesn’t happen again isn’t as good as preventing it from happening in the first place (aka, “preventive action“). It follows, then, that risk management is markedly preferable to crisis management. This is not to say you shouldn’t prepare to manage crises (after all, the best-laid risk management plans aren’t going to prevent every crisis…like they say, “Stuff happens”) but that crisis management should be your fall-back position.

Comments, anyone?

Why DO we write procedures? Anyone? (”Because we HAVE to!”)

Well, that’s one reason, though it’s not the best one. (”What do you mean, ‘not the best one’? The law says we need written procedures to be in compliance. If we’re not in compliance, we lose business.”)

Believe it or not, there are many excellent reasons to write procedures, and complying with regulations or standards, while it may seem the most important reason (because of the potential for fines and other penalties), is actually pretty far down the list. The best reasons for writing procedures include:

1. Documenting and analyzing process results in order to improve the process (in other words, you know if a process is getting better or worse by taking measurements and comparing them);
2. Communicating how you measure the effectiveness of a process (i.e., what your expectations are for the process (pieces per hour, zero defects, etc.));
3. Decreasing process error rates (moving the process closer to Six Sigma performance level);
4. Making it easier to replicate a process (that is, regardless of who’s working at it or when, the process remains the same);
5. Retaining and transferring valuable knowledge;
6. Documenting — and sharing — risks, hazards, and “lessons learned”;
7. Reducing the time you need to train (or retrain) workers;
8. Improving the consistency of process results (another way to put it is “your customers don’t like surprises”);
9. Simplifying access to — and understanding what is — important information; and
10. Solidifying the foundation for your company’s growth.

So, what do you think? Did I miss something? Do you know any other reason why written procedures make sense?

Like I say when someone wishes me good luck, “I hope it doesn’t come down to luck…but I won’t turn it down if it comes my way.”

Customers Say They Want A System for Sharing their Day-to-Day Operating Documents while Maintaining Control, Traceability and Compliance

Our customers cite ‘organizational improvement’ as their main reason why they purchase policies and procedures. From many conversations we have gleaned that customers want to implement a system for continuous improvement and compliance. In a system, procedures are continuously reviewed, revised, and updated. New issues need to be identified, now procedures written. Old procedures need to be replaced by new procedures.

To remain compliant with your industry standards, government regulations, and quality requirements such as ISO, document changes must be managed and traceable through the document management cycle: DRAFT | REVIEW | APPROVE | RELEASE. This cycle is the heart of compliant document work flow.

So Bizmanualz is currently testing an on-line document management software for driving document management and compliance. Because the software is available as an on-line service, organizations of any size can manage and share their policies, procedures, work instructions and other operating documents.

During this test period, Bizmanualz is providing a few customers with access to a prototype of our new document management software. The customers are providing feedback which is helping us improve the first release of the product which will take place soon (If you are interested in testing the software, please read this post. Also, see our frequently asked questions (FAQ), or call us at (314) 863-5079.)

For more background on how document management software can help you, please see our blog.

Walking Through Bizmanualz On-Line

In our pre-release testing program, we’re asking testers to perform common operations, such as logging in, setting up users (assigning permissions, etc.), loading documents, and organizing them. The work flow starts with drafting documents and includes reviewing, revising, approving, and releasing documents.

The following “use case” illustrates work flow in our new software. Use cases like this are provided to testers so that all testers are following a similar path, which makes it easier to evaluate their responses. As the software matures, users will need less instruction and use-cases will be more general.

To log in to the Bizmanualz On-line editing module, click on a link and enter a user name and a password that you received via e-mail. When logged in, users will see the following ‘Home’ Screen (figure 1), which shows announcements posted by the administrator and other users of the system.

Figure 1: Click screen shots for larger images.

To manage a document, click on the document tab (figure 2), which is the second tab from the left. Then click on the production department folder in the left-hand navigation to show production-department documents (Bizmanualz templates that you purchase come pre-loaded and you can upload your own documents).

Figure 2

Expand the folders by clicking on the plus sign in the Department navigation on the left-hand side (figure 2) to show its contents and browse for documents in the list in the main window (figure 3).

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

The document itself may be viewed from this window by clicking on the binoculars icon, or edited by clicking on the document-edit icon. Delete the document by clicking on the delete icon, which will issue a warning before deleting the document.

Managing Document Workflow

Workflow in the Bizmanualz On-line system is essentially a three-stage process of accept/reject review, approve/reject revision, and release/obsolete revision. We will look at the basics of each step here.

This guide assumes that you have created users, and set permissions at a department level. See those use cases for full information.

Set up Document Permissions

Here we will review the optional step of setting permissions at the document level, which override department-level permissions governing access to a group of documents.

System administrators can set all permissions for themselves and all users. They can submit drafts (DRAFT), accept or reject reviews (REVIEW), approve or reject revisions (APPROVE), and release documents (RELEASE).  This cycle—Draft | Review | Approve | Release—is consistent with all document management protocols, industry standards, government regulations and quality standards.

By default, authors cannot review or release their own work. But administrators can change work flow permissions and defaults for single documents in the People tab (figure 6), overriding department or group-level permissions. If you are logged in as an administrator, you will have access to the People tab while you are on the Details view of any document.

Figure 6

In this example, the administrator has granted himself full permissions, and another employee Approver and Reviewer permissions, overriding permission defaults.

Accepting and Rejecting Reviews

Dan has permissions as an author, which means that he can ‘Submit draft’, which causes the ‘Accept Review’ and ‘Reject Review’ buttons to light up (figure 7) per the permissions he set in the previous screen.

Figure 7

E-mail Notification

Reviewers are notified by e-mail when documents are ready for them to review. E-mails are sent when the document has to be submitted for review. All users who have review privileges for the document will receive an email (Figure 8).

The document may be attached to the e-mail so you can read it right away. But documents can only be released through the system. Any revisions you make to the attachment will not be reflected in the controlled draft or released document unless you upload it to the system.  If you do that, it will cause another work flow cycle to occur on the document you have uploaded. To avoid proliferation of documents, we suggest using the attachment for reference only doing all your revisions while logged into the system.

Figure 8

In this example, the revision number is still 0.0.0.0 because the document review has not yet been accepted. Clicking on the ‘Accept Review’ button which is lit up in figure 7, will create a document revision.

If you ‘reject draft’ you get a message that prompts you to enter a reason (figure 9).

Figure 9

Approving and Rejecting Revisions

Ultimately, revisions can be released by clicking the ‘release revision’ button (figure 10). You will only be able to release the document if you have permission to do so, per the settings on the ‘People’ tab. Talk to the document author or system administrator to find out what permissions you have.

Figure 10

When you click ‘release’ you will be asked if you would like to send the document via  FTP to a server other than the Bizmanualz server (figure 11). Select ‘yes’ if you are pushing released documents to SharePoint or another local server other than Bimanualz. If you are not sure, ask your administrator or Bizmanualz.

Figure 11

When you release a document for the first time, the version number changes to 1.0.0.0, indicating that the first release of the document has been achieved (figure 12). Note that many reviews may have occurred before e the first release.

Figure 12

Unreleased documents cannot be seen by the general user population. They will only see what you released to your customized Bizmanualz web site or to your SharePoint or Intranet. Only users of the Bizmanualz On-line editing module can see the drafts.

So, what do you think? Are you ready for Bizmanualz document management software?

In the Lean Business System group on Linked In this month, Paul Lowe of Brush Transformers Ltd., Nottingham, UK, asked, “Do SOPs hinder creative thinking which can ultimately stifle innovation?” The short answer is “No.” Standard work, creative thinking, and innovation are three separate concepts, all necessary in any healthy organization. Let’s look at how they relate to one another in an example at Bizmanualz:

Sometimes customers call Bizmanualz inquiring about our policies and procedures for sale, saying that their companies need documentation to increase their quality and gain compliance. Of course, we’re able to provide them with policy and procedure templates. We also suggest that quality is the result of teams working out the best way to do something, and quality is supported by documentation. Sometimes we hear, “We don’t have time to develop our own processes or documentation.” So, they start their project with our templates and we make it a point to check back with them later.

Focus on a small number of SOP’s. If it seems that your teams don’t have time to develop or even customize SOPs, they’re probably trying to document way too much. Only the work that repeats and is subject to continual improvement benefits from standardized documentation. Work groups can be overwhelmed by more than a handful of SOPs; anything more than that will be referenced rarely, if ever.

Developing SOP’s is creative. Developing SOP’s requires a clear sense of what activity is essential and what is nonessential, or “non-value added”.  With that understanding, you can create a focused procedure. Improving an SOP is also creative, in that a refinement must be conceived that drives out even more nonessential activity. The revision has to be drafted, reviewed, and released. It’s an iterative, creative process.

Process improvement will buy you incremental improvement. You might pass along single-digit cost reductions to your customers, or response times might improve by double-digit percentages. But even if your customers love every improvement, incremental approaches will only get you so far when customer’s expectations fundamentally change.

When your competitor delivers in seconds what takes you days, or sells for $100 when the going price is $1,000, the customer’s expectations shift and the rules change.

Like it or not, game-changing innovation must be on your agenda. Incremental improvements won’t get you there. So don’t confuse creativity applied to incremental improvement with innovation, another form of creativity entirely.

At Bizmanualz, we’ve applied incremental improvement to our policies and procedures business, improving for years. But now customers want tools to manage their SOP’s, policies and procedures. So we had to innovate and find a way to deliver what customers want.

Focus your innovation by asking your customers why they buy your products

We focused our innovation by asking our customers why they purchased our policies and procedures. As mentioned earlier, one reason is that they don’t have time to develop their own. But more often customers cite organizational improvement as their main reason. From many conversations we have gleaned that customers want to implement a system for continuous improvement and compliance.

Policies and procedures documents, per se, are not a system of continuous improvement. In a system, procedures are continuously reviewed, revised, and updated. New issues need to be identified, now procedures written. Old procedures need to be replaced by new procedures. With a deeper understanding of our customer’s needs, we came to understand the direction that our innovation must take.

Customer needs bound our innovation

Our customers told us they wanted a system for managing policies and procedures, so Bizmanualz is currently testing an on-line document management software for driving compliance, among other things. Looking carefully at customers’ purchase behavior and listening to what customers have told us has provided important boundaries for our creativity so that resources can be applied effectively. No amount of creativity will compensate for a lack of focus.

Our initial software release focuses on the document management features that will help our customers transform their static policies and procedures into a dynamic management system. For a discussion of features, please see our Bizmasterz web site. Also, see our frequently asked questions (FAQ), or call us at (314) 863-5079.

Incremental improvement helps you do a better job in your current business, but it won’t help you when the rules of the game change and innovation is your only option.  Creativity is a skill that you bring to work every day whether you’re taking small steps of making big leaps.

I wonder how many of our clients, on receiving our policy-and-procedure manuals, have asked themselves what in heck they got themselves into. (”There’s a lot of stuff here…where do I begin?”) Well, like a lot of things, it’s probably not as difficult as it looks initially. First, you took a step in the right direction by using our templates to develop your company policies and procedures. It’s always easier to start with some of the work already done for you, rather than you having to start from scratch.

Now, how do you proceed?

Understand Why You Need Policies and Procedures

You don’t need policies and procedures merely to comply with regulations or industry standards (like ISO 9001). Sure, there’s nothing quite like the threat of fines, legal action, and the scorn of the business community to motivate you, but that’s far from the best reason. Much better reasons for developing policies and procedures include:

• Communicating your business goals and priorities;
• Standardizing processes, behavior, and results;
• Training your employees consistently; and
• Identifying acceptable and unacceptable behaviors (and encouraging or discouraging them).

Prioritize Your Needs and Set Goals and Timelines

Now that you understand “why”, you need to decide “what”.  Of the policies and procedures you could work on, you have to determine which one(s) are going to provide:

• The biggest bang for the buck;
• A quick return on your investment; and/or
• The greatest good for the greatest number.

Only you know what you need.  I can offer you suggestions (like “start with a fairly simple process”) but only you have the intimate, day-to-day knowledge of your organization. It’s your company: you decide.

So, decide which process you’re going to document first.  If you have absolutely no idea (you have no metrics and no historical basis for evaluation), try any Bizmanualz policy or procedure.  Document your initial design and development process and use it as a baseline for further development.

Give the first procedure a fair evaluation.  Don’t look at your first policy-and-procedure development, point out all the flaws you can find, declare the project an abject failure, and pull the plug.

Introduce discipline into the development process by setting clear and meaningful (aka, “SMART“) goals and timelines.

Analyze Your Existing Procedure

If you already have a de facto¹ procedure in place, don’t throw it out in favor of so-called best practices that may or may not work for your firm.

“If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” (Anon.)

Now is as good a time as any to document your process.  Diagram it quickly in any manner and medium with which you’re comfortable. Simple is best (“Don’t make a big production out of it!”, Mom used to say).  Next…

Compare Your Process with Bizmanualz Best Practices

Bizmanualz has already looked at many companies’ procedures, blended them together to describe “best practices”, and reasonably modeled these procedures on the Deming, or “Plan-Do-Check-Act”, cycle. You may find that your procedure already looks very much like the PDCA model:

• You develop a set of objectives and a plan (process) for realizing those objectives;
• You implement the plan and immediately start collecting process data (in-process, end-of-process, etc.);
• You routinely analyze the data, to see if the process is performing in line with expectations; and
• You make changes to the process (procedure) in order to improve it and improve your results.

If that’s the case, you don’t have far to go at all. Next…

Make Our Procedure Your Procedure

Make the obvious and necessary changes to the Bizmanualz policy and/or procedure.  We wrote them generally, like ISO standards, so they’d have the widest possible application.  Any resemblance between our procedure and your process is coincidental; that is, you’ll have to customize our procedures – make them your procedures.  For example:

• Change every instance of “Bizmanualz” or “the company” to your company;
• Where you have an existing form (e.g., purchase order, customer order, invoice), use it – and make sure field names, etc., on the form and in the procedure agree;
• Change job titles in the “Responsibilities” section and in the procedure itself to reflect your circumstances;
• Change diagrams² as needed;
• Add visual aids – they add impact and meaning and they complement verbal descriptions very well (especially when they come from your office, your shop floor, your staff, etc.); and
• Leave out what you don’t need.  An entire procedure or just part of one — if it doesn’t apply to your situation, delete it.  Make your policies and procedures simple and direct.

Verify and Validate the Procedure

The people responsible for implementing the procedure have to put it to the test.  Oh, you could write a procedure and thrust it on an unsuspecting workforce but until it’s subjected to “real world” conditions, the results you see may not be the ones you want or expect.

And there’s more to it than procedure verification and validation. Some people call it “getting buy-in”. Whatever you call it, recognize that your employees are stakeholders in the company. They have a vested interest in the company, too – if it does well, they do well. So, keep them in the loop on matters that directly affect them, to ensure their understanding and cooperation.

Even if they’re not directly impacted by the procedure in question, keep all employees informed of this — and most — company matters.

Implement the Procedure

Now, publish the tested-and-verified procedure.  Distribute the procedure to those responsible for executing it, analyzing it, and training employees.  NOTE: A document management system, or DMS, will help you address publication and distribution, as well as improve document control.

Hold a training session on the procedure – make sure trainees are not only capable of doing the work, but that they understand the process and the objectives, as well.  Finally, execute the process.  Collect the data from measuring devices and routinely analyze it.  Look for anomalies and trends in the data, evaluate the process, and aim for continual improvement.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen, it’s just that simple! Any questions?

NOTES

¹Just because you haven’t documented it doesn’t mean you don’t have an effective process in place.  Example: my wife and I came to a quick understanding some time ago that I would clean tubs, showers, and toilets and balance the checkbook. It’s very effective, plus there’s no point in documenting such processes because (a) they’re easy and (b) she won’t ever do them.

²We’ve been using Microsoft Visio to build diagrams. Unfortunately, Visio is not automatically included with any version of MS-Office, so far as we know. There are many alternatives to Visio, though – any search engine will help you find them – so your organization need not be constrained by a lack of Visio³.

³No, that’s not a typo.

Remember when Ford’s tagline was “Quality Is Job 1″? No? Well, maybe this will jog your memory.

Back in the 1980’s, Ford, GM, Chrysler, and AMC¹ were quickly losing ground to Japanese automakers². Rumors that U.S. auto workers were deliberately sabotaging cars on assembly lines gained traction; these rumors were alleged to have been started to divert attention from the obvious and growing inequities between American and Japanese vehicles.

Fact is, American car buyers were turning away from domestic cars simply because their Asiatic counterparts were cheaper to buy and much cheaper to operate. The bad reputation American cars were saddled with then — a consumer perception of poor quality — persists to this day, even though Toyota — which leapfrogged all American automakers in 2007 to become the world’s #1 vehicle producer precisely because of its reputation for quality — has turned out to be the modern-day emperor with no clothes.  It looks as though quality took a back seat to profits.

Then there’s BP, whose failed wellhead in the Gulf of Mexico “will live in infamy”³, mainly because it appears the company would not spend a little on safety because that might eat into profits. This story has been thoroughly covered in the news, on blogs (including ours), and in company emails.

Now add the computer maker Dell to the list. Dell is now in court for allegedly selling millions of defective computers from 2003-2005 — computers that it supposedly knew were defective — hurting companies that relied on its reputation for quality manufacturing and customer service.

What’s the common thread running through all of these cases? Corporate hubris? Maybe.  A message running throughout these companies that “quality be damned — just get it out fast and make a big profit”? Quite possibly. Is their profit more important to you — the consumer – than a quality product and your satisfaction?

When do we, as consumers, demand that quality be placed before price? It catches up with the producer — eventually — but why wait for the inevitable? Why chase the elusive promise of “newer and better”? (Look at what Apple’s going through with the iPhone 4.)^{4, 5} Also, when do we, as corporate citizens, begin to see that our responsibility to give our customers quality isn’t incompatible with healthy profits?

It’s often said that we get what we deserve. If you think you deserve better, demand — and hold out for — quality.

Notes:

¹ Yes, they were still around, though not for long. AMC was put down for good in 1988.

² Except for body rust; that problem plagued Japanese auto makers for decades. My first two new vehicles were Japanese-made and I logged 18 years and several hundred thousand miles between them. If not for the severe case of “car cancer” they both caught, I believe they would’ve given me 20 or more years, combined.

³ My apologies to the late Franklin D. Roosevelt only.

⁴ http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/apple-iphone-hit-class-action-suit/story?id=11066239.

⁵ http://news.cnet.com/8301-30677_3-20008919-244.html.

Further Reading/Viewing:

1. Enderle, Rob, “Dell and the Cost of Cover-Ups“, IT Business Edge post, 30 Jun 2010.
2. Evans, Joel, “Is Apple Covering Up the Real Problem with Its iPhone?“, ZDNet blog post, 4 July 2010.
3. “Product Recalls“, Back in Black, The Daily Show, 6 July 2010.

I recently posed this question to the “Bizmanualz Policies Procedures Network“, or group, on LinkedIn:

“The same teams (Brasil, Italia, España, Deutschland, etc.) are perennially among the top contenders for the FIFA World Cup. Do you think it’s the personnel or the system that makes these teams consistently great?”

I’d like to know what you think, and why. To me, it’s sort of a “Heredity or environment?” question: it isn’t one or the other. I mean, you could have one or the other and you might do well. However, if you have both good personnel and a good system that optimizes their individual skills and experience and blends them…

Look at some of the great individual performers of all time, in team sports – Pelé, Michael Jordan, Wayne Gretzky, and Babe Ruth. As capable as they were, they didn’t reach the zenith of their respective sports until they were surrounded by other capable people and learned to work as a team, using a system. (I wish I could have John Facenda narrate those last two sentences.)

Strangely, we forget how much their coaches — and the systems they designed and implemented — had to do with their successes. Feola, Jackson, Sather, and Huggins — all devised systems that ensured quality and consistency. Management also scouted well and hired not just talented and hard-working player personnel, but those who understood the “team concept” and put the team ahead of individual accomplishments.

The same is true in business, of course. Some of your employees are undoubtedly star performers but until they have a system that coordinates — meshes – their actions with those of other capable people, and until everyone buys into the concept of “team first”, they’re never going to reach their potential. And as a result, neither will your company.

You have to have a management system that fosters quality, consistency, and ongoing improvement to the system and the people using it. And, you have to have the right players.

By the way, I may as well get a plug in for our LinkedIn policies and procedures group. We’re at http://www.linkedin.com/groups?gid=86367. If you’re not part of our group, or if you haven’t joined LinkedIn yet, consider this your invitation to join us.

I look forward to your comments — here, by email, and on LinkedIn. I’m especially excited when you challenge my “knowledge” or my way of thinking. (Or as they say in my favorite sport, ice hockey, “You wanna go?”)

Let’s get it on!

Toastmasters is the best environment I know of for personal and professional improvement. Here’s why.

The process of speechmaking — writing the speech, giving it, receiving an evaluation, and using the evaluation to improve is possibly the purest form of the Deming Cycle, or the “Plan-Do-Check-Act” cycle:

• Plan your presentation — research, draft, and rehearse it
• Do — give the presentation
• Check the presentation — a fellow Toastmaster evaluates your speech
• Act on the evaluation — take what you’ve learned and apply it

(Was W. Edwards Deming a Toastmaster? He should’ve been.)

Everyone in the club I belong to (and, I think it’s safe to say, every Toastmaster) understands and accepts the idea that improvement isn’t something achieved in a vacuum. Furthermore, your own improvement isn’t worth much if the club — meaning your fellow club members — isn’t improving, too. Instead of “me”, it’s about “us”.

You’re never going to get a completely unbiased, objective evaluation but you might be surprised how much more objective evaluations are when everyone is working toward a common goal. Our goals are: (1) to be the best Toastmasters we can be, (2) to help other club members be the best they can be, and (3) to have our club recognized as one of the best in Toastmasters International. You can’t have one without the other two.

Every evaluation is subjective, to some extent. There is no objective method for determining that one speech or performer is better than another, just as there’s no way to say one business project is more deserving of funding than another. But at least there are objectives for every speech and guidelines for every evaluation.

As an evaluator, I make sure the stated objectives were achieved, and I’m allowed to use my own judgment in arriving at my overall evaluation. It’s my duty to avoid presenting my opinion as fact. Furthermore, while I’m the official evaluator for a speech — standing before the group to present a spoken evaluation — every other member in attendance gives their own brief evaluation in writing. That way, it’s not just one person’s opinion.

This is what sets Toastmasters apart from the business environment. We freely acknowledge that our evaluations are, in part, based on opinion and they’re balanced out with dozens of other evaluations.

In the business world, we like to think our evaluations are entirely fact-based and completely objective. Office politics, personal biases, conflicting objectives, and a limited pool of funds for projects tend to blot out any hint of objectivity, though.

We have to continually keep in mind the “bigger picture”. Even if you’re in sales and I’m in IT and we don’t work “elbow-to-elbow” every day and you and I have different departmental and individual objectives…we are working for the same company, toward the same corporate objectives.

We’re not on opposite sides (though we often act like it). Instead of maintaining some semblance of objectivity and keeping our eyes on the same prize, we put our own goals above those of the company and the result of that is never good.

When projects are being presented to a management team for review, each member of the team must base his or her evaluation as much as possible on the facts of the case, keeping in mind the main goal of the review is what’s best for the company. Acknowledge that there is some degree of subjectivity in each person’s evaluation — get that in the open. There’s nothing wrong with having differences of opinion.

So, remember next time you go into a project review, a design review, a performance review…don’t go in with the goal of making yourself look good at someone else’s expense. Instead, evaluate for improvement!

Further Reading:

• Lucas, Suzanne, “Managers: Stop the Shuffling“, BNET Blogs, 12 July 2010.

The “Deepwater Horizon” disaster, unfolding in the Gulf of Mexico over the last three weeks, should serve as an object lesson in how NOT to manage a crisis. Here are just a few of the ways in which British Petroleum (BP) and its contractors made a bad situation infinitely worse:

1. You have to have a contingency plan. Whether through willful disregard or naked ignorance, it’s apparent that BP and its subcontractors, as well as the federal government, weren’t ready from the outset to handle the oil rig disaster. Compared with the final tally, which we won’t know until decades from now, the cost to prepare for a worst-case scenario would’ve been microscopic.  Good risk management would’ve helped, too.

2. Someone has to take responsibility. It’s one thing to say something went wrong but you won’t know what for sure until all the results are in. It’s another thing altogether to immediately start pointing the finger of blame at everyone else, as oil executives did before the US Senate in recent weeks. Who made the final decision to undertake the project? Who made the decisions to “do this” and “don’t do that”?  ISO 9001, as well as sound ethics and common sense, dictates that someone at the top must be responsible.

3. Quality is not an inconvenience. The Minerals Management Service (MMS) was not conducting monthly safety testing on the Deepwater Horizon in accordance with federal law. Furthermore, the MMS has reportedly granted drilling permits there and elsewhere without adequate environmental safety reviews.

The most important piece of safety equipment, the blowout preventer, was said to have been damaged weeks before the fateful explosion but not repaired or replaced. Countless other shortcuts were allegedly taken for the sake of time and money.

The sad part is that the parties involved - especially BP - could have easily afforded to take their time and do things right. (The oil business has been hugely profitable over the last five years, right? Well, what have they done with the record profits they earned?)

We all see the price to be paid for haste and carelessness. We can’t afford it.

* * * * * * *

Further Reading:

• Blowout: the Deepwater Horizon Disaster, CBS News, May 16, 2010 – http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/05/16/60minutes/main6490197.shtml
• Rig Explosion: the Blame Game Begins at Senate Hearing, Associated Press, May 11, 2010 – http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/business/deepwaterhorizon/6999804.html

It’s at times like these — when the business world is still unsettled after several years of turmoil and prevailing wisdom doesn’t see a quick end to the situation for any of us — that we tend to forget about the far horizon and concentrate on what’s directly in front of us. It’s only natural. Who can think about next year when you’re worried about next month?

This isn’t the time to be taking shortcuts, though. Take them and they will catch up with you. For instance, you have to train or retrain employees as the business contracts. You absolutely need well-developed, accurate, and up-to-the-minute policies and procedures.

If your policies and procedures are incomplete, inconsistent, or outdated, your people don’t get adequate training, steps are missed, and customer dissatisfaction grows. You fall further behind your competition, and even drop out of the race.

To be effective, your business procedures have to be easy to understand, easy to follow, and easy to update. To ensure that your procedures are effective and error-free, keep the following points in mind:

CLARITY - Write your procedures so they’re easy to read (or view) and easy to follow.

CORRECTNESS - Your procedures must be grammatically and syntactically correct. If they’re written procedures, there should be no spelling errors. If you plan on audio or video procedures, be sure the speaker pronounces words correctly, speaks clearly, and uses a style acceptable to the intended audience.

CONSISTENCY - This is not simply a matter of “look and feel”, or of references, terms, and resources. Those are all important, but what we’re really talking about is consistent actions and consistent results. This is especially true when training personnel on procedures that are new to them. If you assign the procedure to two people who’ve just been trained and you get two different results, it may be your procedure’s at fault.

COMPLETENESS - For obvious reasons, your procedures cannot have any gaps in information, logic, or design. Incomplete information and instructions mean you won’t get the results you’re looking for.

CONTEXT - Procedures must accurately and appropriately describe the activity to be performed and they must not exist in a vacuum. There is no such thing as a stand-alone procedure — all procedures affect, and are affected by, other procedures so it’s best if you put a procedure in context. From where do its inputs come and where do its outputs go?

CONTROL - Your procedures have to incorporate feedback loops and process controls to be effective. Get familiar with the Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle if you’re not already. (Think you are? Maybe, but a refresher certainly won’t do you any harm. Complacency is the enemy.)

COMPLIANCE - Every procedure is written to ensure compliance with something — user needs (stated and implied), regulations, company requirements, and other. Address all requirements, not just some, in your procedures.

Pay careful attention to these seven keys when writing your policies and procedures and get the results you want!