A receita clássica é:
"1. Visualize Key Operational Processes. Identify the key operational processes, including those that create value, growth or innovation as well as those that consume the most resources, time and assets. Develop visual operating models that show linkages both inside the enterprise as well as outside, to customers, suppliers and partners.Isto é tudo muito certo mas existe um problema de base para as empresas que só dependem desta abordagem.
2. Design Workflow and Predefined Responses. Model the workflow for each key process, identifying the actions, resources and workers required for each step. Then define a standard response to handle large variations in workflow volume outputs or inputs.(Moi ici: A primeira acção de formação intra que dei, depois de obter o CAP, era sobre um pomposamente designado "PLASFOCO" (PLano de Ataque a Situações FOra de COntrolo, onde, com base na ideia dos "Troubleshooting Guides" dos electrodomésticos, se definiam acções standard para reagir a não-conformidades no produto ou no processo)
3. Develop Metrics and Gauges. Establish measures for normal workflow and develop systems or methods that report workflow volume outside the normal ranges. Ensure that workflow reports are received by the stakeholders responsible for each operation.
4. Operate Functionally, Measure Systemically. The functional operating manager responsible for workflow, using the predefined responses, operates the workflow by making any changes necessary to adapt to changing volume, inputs or outputs. Functional managers interact with upstream and downstream operating mangers to ensure optimal end-to-end performance.
5. Drive Continuous Improvement. As operating experience grows, make adjustments to the workflow design, predefined responses and performance measures, to continuously improve overall system performance."
"Lazaridis had learned the danger of resting comfortably on existing heuristics and algorithms.(Moi ici: Recordar que os processos são os algoritmos) “Motorola lost because it didn’t embrace the future,” he says. “It was too damn good at what it was doing.” Seduced by reliability, Motorola had stopped thinking like a designer."...
"To acknowledge that algorithms have their limitation is not to disparage their very real business value. When a business has sufficiently honed its heuristic knowledge and moved it along the knowledge funnel to an algorithm, costs fall and efficiency increases, to the benefit of the organization and its stakeholders. But an organization that defines itself as being primarily or exclusively in the business of running algorithms is taking a high risk, even though highly reliable processes are supposed to eliminate uncertainty. What organizations dedicated to running reliable algorithms often fail to realize is that while they reduce the risk of small variations in their businesses, they increase the risk of cataclysmic events that occur when the future no longer resembles the past and the algorithm is no longer relevant or useful."Como vivemos tempos em que a duração média do tempo de validade de um modelo de negócio é cada vez mais baixa, é cada vez mais perigoso depositar a esperança apenas na melhoria da eficiência. Não me interpretem mal, a busca da eficiência não é má, mas se for elevada à categoria de único instrumento, é muito perigosa.
Depois, quando um seguidor da religião absoluta da eficiência vê um concorrente a aparecer e a conquistar mercado, sente que o concorrente deve estar a fazer alguma ilegalidade porque ele não consegue ver alternativas para lá ad eficiência pura e dura.
Trechos retirados de "The Design of Business" de Roger Martin.