The word “process” is described as A systematic series of actions directed to some end (Dictionary.com), A series of actions, changes, or functions bringing about a result (American Heritage Dictionary), A series of events that produce change or development (Kernerman English Multilingual Dictionary).

It is the fact that virtually everything we do (not just work) falls under the definition of the word “process” that makes it such a powerful building block for us to organize ourselves around “doing things” and to manage these things “we do.” The connotations of using “process” in work implies only a limited set of characteristics… there are actions, changes, functions or events that produce an end, a result, a change or a development.

This is a fantastic LCD (Lowest Common Denominator) for us to work with as these basic requirements exist in everything we do.

But this article is not about the word “process,” it is about the observation that we do not always understand what process we are actually in - or perhaps I should say we do not always understand the nature of the process we are in until we go through that process.

Consider how often we enter into a process that has clearly defined actions, functions and events. The result or end of the process is clearly know to someone, but it also may be significantly different (at least a variation of) the result or end we believe the process is intended to produce.

We at the Bennu Group share in this experience with the rest of you. We engage with people in processes that we “think” of as one thing, but that turn out to be something completely different once we engage with the process. We don’t know this until we are engaged in the process.

For example, in working with an potential client for training we became engaged in a process that was completely different from what we thought we were engaging in. Because we offer the option for our training programs to be brought inhouse to our clients that prefer this method, we have our understanding of our “inhouse training process.”

Now if I was to capture that process (from our perspective) it would look something like this it seems very clear (to me) that it is a relatively simple process. Cover terms, select dates, invoice, deliver class, payment, end.

Yet this is not necessarily the process the customer may think they are engaged in. What is missing? That depends on the customer!

Customer’s can Create Process Bloat

While it is very easy to rant and rave at all of those businesses stuffing their processes with non-value add, customer unfriendly bloat the shoe can fit on the other foot. Sometimes the customer can be the source of process inefficiency where they create additional requirements of a process that introduces more Moments of Truth, Break Points and Business Rules.

Here are some examples we have run into with our Inhouse courses process:

1) Your company must be setup up in our accounting system first

2) Terms and conditions (typically payment) must go through negotiations

3) Our legal department must create a legal contract for this transaction
(this spawns multiple other MOT, BP, and BR)

4) You have to enter into a legal consulting contract with us before we can approve the purchase of your services

Now I am not saying that these additional process elements are bad - or that they may not be appropriate. Yet their existence fundamentally changes the process, increasing the process Points of Failure and Causes of Work which thereby Reduces Revenues, Increases Costs and Degrades Customer Satisfaction.

The impact from situations like these can range from virtually insignificant to extremely significant. In our case, the extreme case is characterized by termination of the business relationship. That is a harsh reality for some of our potential clients but we know who our customers are and they are not those companies that create significant unnecessary work in the front-end process.

Granted, these companies are in greater need of our techniques and methods than our target customers but sometimes you have to belly up to the bar with a proactive move if you really want what you need. Some of our customers in this situation have done just that, at least creating a “one-off” process instance that is sufficiently streamlined to gain them access to our services.

For others, the “system” has been granted too much power and they are subject to its “processes” as if they were fundamental laws of the universe.

The important take-aways form this article are actually rather subtle (so far). We need to clearly understand who our target customer is, they are the reason we are in business. We need to learn to identify when a customer is not our target customer, and be willing to move on without their business. We need to clearly understand what is reasonable (within our context) and what is not - and act accordingly.

We also need to work hard on reviewing ourselves from this perspective (that’s our old friend Outside-In thinking). We get a very good sense for what it is like to interact with the processes of businesses we work with where we are the customer but it is much harder to experience that same understanding when we are the business.

I’m sure there is plenty of room for improvement still, for all of us and that certainly includes those of us at Bennu Group.