Focus on the Process Requirements – and Enable Them

Situational Variables differ at each enterprise, at each function, at each location.

Keep that in mind. I try to.

As Rigorous as Required, and as Flexible as Feasible

That’s the way to go IMO.

And I contend that it is better when all the variants start from some common ground, with common metrics.

From an Effectiveness first and Efficiency second, but none-the-less achieved as well – perspective/mindset/orientation.

Effective and Efficient Performance.

And Effective and Efficient Performance Improvement as well.

Focus on the Process Requirements – and Enable Them

It’s not about Learning. Or Lean.

It’s about the Process – or Processes – that add value for enough of the stakeholders.

Processes are complex. There are long ones and short ones, critical ones and nice-to-have ones. Short-term and long-term ones. Etc.,

And most organizations exist in functional organizations, versus being organized by the processes, or value chains, etc. They are in functional structures that impact what’s important – if left unchecked. But I digress.

Process exist within functions, and also cross through them.


Those that Cross through can sometimes be found at the Core level in my model above, sometimes when part of the value chain – but processing someones pay, while important isn’t part of the direct Value Chain. But it is Core to the Payroll Department (or Function).

Many shared processes exist, in my model, even more often at the Leadership level, or the Support level – of my 3-level approach to initially sorting all of the processes of a team, a department, a function. a whatever, to begin to make sense of their current and ideal process flows, in a systemic manner, using a systems view, or system view, yada, yada.

Stakeholders are Complex

Just one potential view.

Stakeholder Hierachy Example 1

This view puts Society, as in Social Responsibility, at the top.

Your situation may vary.

And remember – that these Stakeholders – have Stakeholders themselves.

If you’re into predicting what might change, Stakeholder Requirements-wise.

My Big Picture View of EPPI – Enterprise Process Performance Improvement

The 3 levers for performance improvement are 1) the Process itself, or Processes. 2) the Environmental enablers. And 3) the Human enablers.

Or your 2 could be my 3.

Both need to be be in some zen state of good enough balance – for ideal performance to be achieved.

And of course, the enterprise systems that get that enabler stuff to the Process, adequately, need themselves this type of inspection/audit/analysis/assessment, etc.

More on that later.

My Tier 1 View

Look at the organization as everyone else looks at it.

In a functional design. A BOM so to speak.

But also look at the Functions (Divisions, Function, Departments, Teams, etc.) in a process-centric way.

Here is mine…with 3 types of Processes in each org unit, at any level.


My Tier 2 View

Next is the heart of the Analysis – and Design.

The Process or Processes. The flow, the tasks, the assignments, the outputs, etc., etc. is what you can capture and report on a Process Map. Very helpful.


My Performance Model format gets all of that along with a gap analysis – on the same page, so to speak.

Complimentary Views IMO.

My Tier 3 View

These are where the enablers are derived,organized by both the structure of Tiers 1 and 2, but also of the “type of enabler category” it may fall in.

Enablers are complex.

Beware. But don’t shy away.

Don’t shy away to a pre-packaged set of Competencies – that are written to sound right, but when you look for applications in the real work, there is a gap. Step up to a review of the real performance requirements  it takes to make that happen.

And then address the gaps in the environment and people enablers, or in the process itself if it has not been designed for the real world.

Get real.

EPPI Tier 3 View

But Where to Start?

Start with the Process or Processes.

Map them or Model them.

I prefer to Model them via Performance Modeling.

But whatever.


Then systematically derive the enablers.

Of ideal Performance, not some unreachable blue sky.

Don’t guess. Don’t poll. Derive.

Have Master Performers and other SMEs derive these. Let them own the content while you own the process.

The EPPI enablers…

EPPI Fishbone v2012 - 1- The Process

Adopt what you can and Adapt the rest.

And Then What?

And how does one get to the root – to the systems/process and people who “enable these enablers?”

What are the Provisioning Systems that get this right stuff to the right place at the right time at the right costs, yada, yada, yada?

My view – my analytic/design framework – to help me determine the next target for assessment/analysis/evaluation are framed and determined using the specific view of the enterprise in the model below – to be adapted as the reality is uncovered

PC at the Worker Work and Workplace levels

Using frameworks like these – intended for both analysis and design – are very necessary IMO. Especially for teams approaching this time of efforts, internal or external.

What have you got to lose?

What have you got to gain?

What could be the R for the I in targeted investments in learning – to perform?

The ROI for Improvement to the Levels of the Master Performers

That my be worth a little effort at some basic math.

To get a rough idea.

Of the potential R for the I.

# # #

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.