In this time of austerity, and the upheaval of change being experienced through all tiers of the public sector - everyone is looking for new ways of doing things, no – not tweaking things – but radically overhauling how services are delivered, and in turn saving money for frontline service delivery.

The Government has issued a challenge to the public sector www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/spendingchallenge, with David Cameron’s challenge to all

“Don’t hold back. Be innovative, be radical, challenge the way things are done. If you think you can make things better for less money don’t just complain to your colleagues about it – tell us about it so we can make it happen”

Debate rages as to the role of ICT in helping to address the challenge – is it just another overhead – or is it an effective means to facilitate change and save resources? Are organizations undertaking ICT projects, business change projects or transformation projects?

Part of the motivation (IMHO) for such debates – are that many ICT projects fail to deliver, and this is more common in the public sector than in the private sector, according to organizations such as the National Audit Office.

Here at Singularity – successful project delivery is the product of 2 things – agile technology AND an appropriate methodology – which when combined – can leverage very powerful results. So how does it work? Today I’m going to cover project initiation – which is a critical launch point.

For business problem solving and project initiation – we use a technique called HotHousing
• The objectives and scope are set in advance by an executive sponsor
• Cross-functional teams – with representatives from relevant parts of the organization, are picked in advance to go head-to-head
• The event itself happens over a fixed period of time – 3 days (for reasons which will become obvious)
• The outcome is judged by the executive sponsor – at the end of each day, and at the end of the HotHouse there is a winning team
• The outcome can include solutions, a viable business case, a project plan and requirements
• It is entirely permitted (encouraged in fact) to take and use the ideas of the opposing team, and adapt those

The reason this works (so well) – and reflecting the key aspects of making projects successful
• It builds in executive sponsorship from the outset
• It is aligned with senior management objectives – who wouldn’t want to please their boss?
• Competition does truly drive innovation
• It leverages the skills, experience and front-line experience of staff – working in cross-functional teams
• It starts to deliver from the outset – so that people can see results, be encouraged by it – and spurred on to deliver
• It focuses on business value versus cost incurred so that priorities are established early on
• It builds teams and ownership amongst those who are then responsible for delivery

This is a powerful technique – which does deliver results, and sets successful projects on the correct footing to meet business needs. It also addresses many of the key reasons why IT projects fail which are recur in reports from organisations such as NAO.

Ultimately ICT is just an enabler – to help motivated teams to deliver on aligned outcomes, in a timely fashion!

Author: Paul O’Neill, Singularity

Public sector services are definitely facing a period of upheaval, with conflicting views of needs and impacts, but clearly underpinned by two priorities, preserving frontline services, and achieving that more efficiently!

I came across a topical article to this extent, regarding what is likely to happen in relation to magistrate courts and comments from Ken Clarke the Justice Secretary. http://www.ukauthority.com/?tabid=64&id=2833

This brings to mind one particular aspect of work that we did with a large central government agency. This project relates to a new piece of legislation which provides a non-court based alternative to bankruptcy – whereas the latter does actually require a role for the courts. The courts system is one which moves at a certain speed (and substantial cost), and perhaps is not one which has adapted to the advent of new technology – therefore not responding to the needs of a society which is more mobile, 24/7-oriented and operating via multiple channels. These are all challenges that many public sector organisations, and local authorities in particular, are facing today – causing them to look at new service delivery models, and the use of their real estate.

Delivery of the project was based on the following:-
• It operates in tandem with approved 3rd sector intermediaries – who would typically already be engaged as part of debt counselling services – in effect a “1-stop shop” approach
• An application is made electronically via the intermediary, rather than on paper
• Fees associated with the process are substantially less than before – about 80% less – and can be paid electronically via a number of different convenient ways. (This is also a key outcome for citizens in terms of how the service is achieved!)
• Once initiated – the service is highly automated, with relevant legislative checks being applied – to ensure entitlement initially. This saves a substantial amount of effort – and ensures that the service is delivered both quickly and cost effectively.
• Communication with affected stakeholders is streamlined – whether this is to the applicant or the relevant stakeholders
• The design of the service delivery aims to provide maximum technical support to the staff who are operating the service – again facilitating efficiency

Overall I think that this project has a lot of relevance to modern public service delivery in terms of
• Intelligent design of public services – e.g. in association with intermediaries and more cost-effective channels
• Using the right technology, such as the Singularity Process Platform to integrate people, process and technology
• Providing the right support to staff on which to deliver effective and efficient services
• And finally …  an agile and adaptable platform on which to meet the challenges of an uncertain future

To read more about how Singularity have helped one large central government agency please click here

The fact that this project picked up the Customer Service award from Government Computing this year demonstrates that this is how citizens expect such public sector services to be delivered - and is perhaps a guide going forward for future projects.  For more information please see http://www.guardian.co.uk/gcawards/winners-2010

Author: Paul O’Neill, Singularity

Email has had a relatively short history compared to the overall history of computing! As someone who has worked in the IT industry for quite a few years – I have witnessed what it was like before the advent of email, and the impact that email has had since.

Whilst it has proven to be a great boon for many – for others it can be a real nightmare!

Many system administrators are pre-occupied with the management of email systems, the storage that they consume – and ensuring that they provide suitable uptime in support of the organisation.

However I believe there are much more fundamental challenges centred around email use within organisations.

As with the use of Excel in organisations for tracking application, email has become a type of ad-hoc glue which is used to bind varying resources together, to try to expedite an outcome. But it can be a very wasteful and inefficient glue for the symptoms outlined above. Everyone advises “appropriate use” of email – but let’s face it – it only takes a few email offenders – and the system breaks down very quickly.

Excessive email is a symptom of a lack of appropriate process and supporting technology to aid staff in delivering required services.

Organisations should be adopting BPM technology such as the Singularity Process Platform to switch from highly inefficient email-based processes.

So as you sit for another day ploughing through a deluge of how email – just imagine how your life could be transformed by BPM technology like the Singularity Process Platform.

Author: Paul O’Neill, Singularity

I recently read some interesting material in relation to “Context Management” in the Health Sector. Specifically the key point was about how “context” is managed across a number of different computer applications – as a patient is progressed from one stage to the next OR in terms of how a practitioner works across different systems – whilst focussing on a single patient at a time.

This is, in many respects, a focus of BPM technology – and perhaps more specifically the Case Management aspect of BPM technology. So how can I say this so glibly – very easily – the process is the context!

Whilst we often talk about processes and process management – from a business point of view – what we are delivering are services or managing cases.

So whatever you do as an organisation – whether its private sector or public sector – and you need to better manage the context of what you do – perhaps you should be looking at suitable BPM technology!

Author: Paul O’Neill, Singularity

I find travel one of the real joys in life - I’ve been lucky enough to have visited many countries as part of my Business Development role, but Norway had always managed to elude me. Last week I got the opportunity to visit Bergen as part of the Microsoft Government Solutions Forum 2010. Singularity, as a sponsor, took a table and we had a hugely interesting and inspiring two days attending sessions, and sharing with Microsoft and the other attendees how Singularity is uniquely placed to offer Case Management for the Microsoft family of products. A number of case studies were presented which showed how greater efficiency in Government services is being pioneered by a number of cities - given the financial pressures and challenges many government departments will face in the near future we believe that Business Process Agility and Case Management have a pivotal role to play. We will shortly be publishing some thoughts and experiences in this area, so please come back in a few weeks, or get in contact directly at m.savage@singularity.co.uk. Finally - my personal thoughts on Bergen ? A stunningly beautiful city populated by fantastic people. Walking back to the hotel at 11:30 on a warm summers evening, but in broad daylight I thought, sometimes being away from home and family has its tiny compensations. Check it out on the internet – it’s a fantastic place. 

Author: Manus Savage, Singularity

From the point at which get up in the morning until we go to sleep at night, as sentient beings we are constantly thinking and making decisions.

Thinking is not so much an end in its own right (unless you’re a philosopher) it allows us to process the available information in order to make a decision and plot a course of action.

Decisions occur at many levels for example what to wear, what to eat, what to buy, how to spend our time and so on. In work, (particularly in the Western world) as we have moved away from manufacturing towards office-based or service based jobs, in which decision-making has become evermore important.

In an increasingly sophisticated society, decision-making has come under increased scrutiny and is open to be challenged at multiple points in time.

As organisations, we want our staff to make decisions
• as quickly as possible
• as cheaply as possible
• taking all relevant information into account
• in accordance with policies and procedures
• and in a manner which can be audited should the need arise to defend it occur

One only has to watch the tv news to see high profile cases appearing in court, following poor or untimely decisions which have resulted in negative outcomes for one or other side.

Systems which support effective decision-making, and which support consistent outcomes irrespective of who was assigned to make a decision, have a significant role to play in modern organisations.

In Davenport’s “Thinking for a Living” seminal work, perhaps we ought not to label it as thinking rather as “Decision-making for a living”.

We are all decision-makers to a greater or lesser extent, and some are tasked to make decisions on a routine basis which affect individuals and society as a whole. Therefore surely it is worthwhile equipping our staff with technology which supports the decision-making activities according to the criteria set out above.

If you don’t agree with this, consider the decisions that you or your staff make on a routine basis, and the consequences of what has happened with some of those decisions when they have been less than ideal. Finally consider the impact on individuals who have been affected by such decision-making.

The public sector exhibits many examples of organisations whose staff routinely make decisions that affect citizens and society as a whole, surely we want those decisions to be the best they possibly can be.

Often when you strike up a conversation with someone who you haven’t seen for a while, comments such as “I can’t believe how quickly time has flown” or “it just seems like yesterday since…” are often quite common.

Everyone comments how busy we all are, and how many things we all have to do or how much juggling of spinning plates we do.

It’s the same in our work lives there are many threads of activity running in parallel all seeking to command attention. Some tasks fare better than others, with some to-do items languishing at the bottom of the list on a semi-permanent basis.

Time is a precious commodity both in terms of time spent and elapsed time.

For organisations, time is a critical factor in many ways dependent on the nature of that business. There are few that I can think of, if any, where time is not relevant.

In many organisations that I visit for the first time, I find that they have evolved spreadsheet-based tracking systems in order to manage their performance against time. The human effort to keep such tracking systems current and accurate is not insignificant, equally it provides no support for actually getting the job done on time. Other organisations may lack tracking capability and wonder why complaints arise due to untimely actions on their part. Organisations which are slow to respond then face unnecessary demand to respond to chaser calls and letters (this is “failure demand” in “systems thinking” terms or non-value adding time in activity based costing terms).

The most agile organisations have a keen eye on time, act in a timely manner, avoiding unnecessary work and are admired for providing timely service.

In the workflow and BPM domain, time is a key facet of the technology. The Singularity Process Platform provides extremely comprehensive facilities to support organisations in keeping on top of time, whether this is through defining the timescales over which processes and tasks execute, or for tracking the amount of time spent on work (as part of work performance) or finally in terms of effective escalation management. Finally the ability to have an accurate chronology of how you have dealt with something could well be a last line-of-defence when challenged on this front.

Without these facilities at your disposal, your organisation risks being at the beck and call of time, rather than it being yours to manage for the benefit of your organisation and customers.

Perhaps its TIME to look at how your organisation is performing on this front in order to improve how you are doing.

Over the past 18 months or so, we have collectively witnessed economic turmoil which few expected. Had we asked organisations at that stage what their plans are for the next couple of years, undoubtedly organisations would have been planning for growth. This just shows how fickle fate is, no one truly knows what lies ahead, and what challenges we shall meet.

In the information technology world, we have long used a methodology called waterfall, where each stage progressively builds on the previous stage, founded on an initial set of requirements which were relevant at the very outset. Organisations embarking on a waterfall project usually have to guess the current and future requirements at the beginning of the project as the founding stone on which the rest of the project is to be built.

When the world is in such a state of financial flux, information technology projects risk being seriously out of line with business reality given the typical timescale over which a waterfall project might execute. Requirements change, businesses evolves, new challenges arise, business models crash and burn - hence a linear progression of ICT projects from start to finish based on an out of date business vision represents a compromised methodology in which to support your business.

At times I have also found a disconnect between the effort associated with individual project requirements and the value that they have for the business. Embellishments are added to cater for some far off scenario which may or may not arise.

Information technology is not a special discipline, somehow different from every other function in business - it is there to support the business as a whole, and in a timescale which is valuable to the business.

This is why agile-based methodologies are becoming increasingly popular, because
• the timescale is the critical factor - taking place in a timeline that is relevant for the organisation
• functionality is prioritised according to business value and cost
• it constantly engages the business to ensure that real needs are being satisfied on an ongoing basis
• evolving requirements are welcomed rather than punished
• it reflects the evolving nature of business, and the fluid world in which we live

Singularity has fully embraced agile delivery both internally and on behalf of our customers. We have also bolstered the methodology with other business-relevant techniques which support the fact that ICT is a means to an end, not an end in its own right. It also ensures
• that a project is worth initiating in terms of return on investment before progressing unduly
• the voices of relevant stakeholders are heard at the outset, i.e. that the “Eureka moment” occurs at the start of the project rather than the end
• that executive sponsorship is in place from the start, demonstrating that this is worth doing
• business priorities are reflected in ongoing plans for project delivery
• things happen in timescales that are relevant to your business today, rather than being irrelevant at some distant point in the future

If your organisation is less than happy with ICT delivery, and hasn’t looked at agile before, perhaps it’s worth a look. After all, who wouldn’t want to be agile?

Of late in the BPM space, the topic of “Case Management” has been growing both in terms of coverage and interest, and a number of IT companies have rapidly being trying to “re-position” themselves into this area, but more by obfuscation rather than by delivering the capabilities that are required to meet this very real challenge.

I have had an interest in this area for a number of years now, based on the opportunity to work with real clients on the ground. Singularity based on ongoing feedback from such customers and real engagements has evolved our product over several years to meet this challenge.

A number of suppliers have tried to make out that case management is really just dealing with ad hoc processes. Nothing could be further from the truth. If you could picture that every case management oriented organisation began each day awaiting the chaos of entirely ad hoc processes, the ensuing results just don’t bear think about.

If case management was just ad-hoc routing of content around an organisation – then Microsoft’s Exchange and Sharepoint products would dominate this market – clearly that’s just not so!

Some key characteristics of case management are, in my opinion, as follows:-

• Specific paths within the case are very well-defined, and can be ascertained in advance, they certainly aren’t ad hoc
• the need to execute those different paths is based on external and/or internal events and decisions. So the case needs to be able to respond to an evolving picture over time
• there are often interdependencies between the different optional paths (or fragments) within the case, e.g. an event in one path may pause or terminate another parallel path. Several paths may block and wait until another parallel stage continues - this is typical of the case “pattern”
• equally these fragments may be executing entirely independently of one another, perhaps dealing with different stakeholders involved in the case

Some products may claim to support this capability, and can put up a good argument that this is so.

The acid test can be determined by asking how the product supports parallel yet interdependent processes in a single case instance, with dynamically shared and also private data, and complex synchronisation features between independent threads.

If you see overly complicated process maps with many loop backs, which are constantly monitoring for events in the other paths in the case, then look out, problems lie ahead for you.

If suppliers tell you that you only need to be able to route an electronic case folder containing documents etc on an ad hoc basis between participants, then in my opinion this is really no more than traditional workflow and is insufficient for dealing with case management scenarios.

I realise that this can be somewhat subtle for organisations who are moving into this area for the first time, however there is a very useful white paper from Singularity which explains this in much more detail. It is an excellent place to start your case management journey.

It’s been a while (too long) since I last posted. It has been a very busy time over the past few months – I’m not sure if this is because of or despite the current economic climate, however our technology just appears to be more relevant all of the time.

Irrespective of the actual technologies in use out there - there are many techniques and approaches in use across the public and private sectors. Whilst there is a lot of debate around which ones are best, I see many of them as related and actually supporting each other to deliver successful outcomes.

1. Systems Thinking (rather than Lean which is more manufacturing oriented)
   I particularly like the concepts around “Value Demand” and “Failure Demand” from Systems Thinking. Whilst some of the debates allied to this approach can be somewhat “confrontational” – there is undoubtedly a lot of benefit in the approach and very many supporters out there.To put it simply, Value Demand happens when a customer, client or citizen asks an organization for something that is beneficial to them. Failure Demand happens when there is failure to deliver the requested service, and this creates a service demand to deal with that request. Thus whilst “service desks” provide what they believe to be a beneficial service – they often exist to deal with the consequences of failure demand. This is the type of interaction which is measured through the infamous NI14 indicator.

   In the “Systems Thinking” view of the world, the best way to visualize what your complaints department or support service desk should be, is more akin to the video advertisement showing the Carlsberg “Complaints Department”.

   This technique also encourages a whole-system view of the world, appreciating that things are linked – and that we should fix the whole rather than fixing isolated pockets of operation – i.e. problems, not symptoms. In many respects this is linked to the infamous BPR (Business Process Re-engineering by Hammer and Champy), which unfortunately became associated with many of the major organizational changes linked to downsizing.

   Fundamentally Value Demand vs Failure Demand is based on simple concepts, which can be applied by anyone in any organization. If you spend more of your time dealing with failure demand than value demand – you’ve got a problem!

2. Business Process Modeling
   As described – this is now a well established technique. If you don’t think that business processes are important in your world, then think “service modeling”. Services are what organizations deliver, and consist of one or more business processes which represent the cross-cutting actions that your organization takes to accomplish the desired outcome. For many years we have talked about the “supply chain” – this is nothing more than the collection of business processes spanning organizations to deliver what a customer requests.In addition to simple process flows – swimlane diagrams can be used to represent different views of the process – e.g. by participant, by timeline, by cost – so that the process can be analyzed according to the relevant criteria. These help to visualize the issues at hand, crystallizing the problem and hopefully leading towards a solution. Thus modeling the “to be” process allows the organization to understand the impact of the change before it actually takes place.
3. Rough Cut ABC
   In many respects this is a variant of aspects of Systems Thinking, and utilizes Business Process Modeling techniques. In this approach activities within a process are broken into Value Adding(VA), Non-Value Adding (NVA) and Sustaining Non Value Adding (SNVA).Clearly the objective is to eliminate waste or NVA tasks (as in Lean), as they incur cost – and add no value. When analyzing processes and classifying activities within them – perhaps you should consider whether an entire process is adding value or not. Analyzing processes is critical to this technique, and leads to insight as to the detail of the process, however it is important to ensure that you retain perspective on the overall purpose of the process.

   Another challenge in this area going from “as is” towards “to be”- is that you may also need a vision of where you are trying to get to – this is the transformational element of the technique. All too often if this step-change is not sought, organizations just end up with something that is a bit better than what went before.

4. Hot-housing
   This brings together a number of the techniques referred to above, however definitely leverages them in a VERY compelling manner. There are some similarities to the Kaizen Blitz Event – but there are some particular aspects of hot-housing which make it quite different and quite compelling!The hot-house event adds one ingredient in particular which really moves things up a gear – competition! Competition is one of the most important factors to drive us as individuals and organizations towards success.

   Another aspect of hot-housing is immediacy – both in terms of the presence and availability of key stakeholders, but also in terms of the time-line over which it takes place. Timing is ALL important – neither too short nor too long.

   How many projects get kicked off that probably ought not see the light of day? Unless there is a viable and tangible benefit to be had which can be realized then there is no point in progressing further.

   Finally – if you read many National Audit Office reports in relation to project failure – an oft-quoted critical factor is lack of clear senior management leadership and buy-in. This is one of the intrinsic features of Hot-housing – you can’t start a hot-house without it!

5. Agile
   Finally – all of what has gone before are just pre-ambles to delivery. Unless you can actually deliver on your vision, then you have incurred cost for no discernible value.Many projects begin by promising “jam tomorrow”. Costs are incurred now, but benefits will be realized later – (hopefully). Tracking progress is difficult because nothing has been realized as yet, except cost.

   Unfortunately we live in the real world – things change – methodologies which work on a “freeze-frame” view of the wider world, particularly one which is convulsed in economic change at present – presents very different challenges than were envisaged at the outset.

   Methodologies which can cope with change, and can deal with re-prioritization and discovering what works for all concerned, definitely respond better to reality.

   Constantly witnessing the evolution of project delivery, and obtaining value at the required stages – ensures that organizations stay the course on projects. Beginning a project with a defined duration and drop-points sets realistic expectations which are achieved in a relevant time-scale. Prioritization of business benefit versus cost is a more realistic way to run projects compared to an unending project. Equally agile delivery avoids the often encountered scope-creep whereby there is another “opportunity” identified, which requires another feature to be delivered, which adds more cost – and inevitably delays the project further.

   Agile is not a revolution, it is just a realization that simple techniques can be routinely applied to achieve successful projects on an ongoing basis.

6. Conclusion
   There are a wide range of techniques out there today, many of which are supportive of one another. A number of these are now well established, however emerging techniques are very worth while evaluating and using.The concepts and techniques behind Systems Thinking are simple and effective. Hot-housing is an effective way to solve business problems and initiate justifiable projects. Agile is a proven way to run and manage projects with effective controls, delivering in a time-scale that is pertinent to the organization. I commend them all to you.