The Two Plants

The physical processes of producing our products or services are well understood. We have designed increasingly sophisticated tools to replace ourselves in these processes, greatly increasingly productivity. Consequently, increasing capital investment has been committed to the design, construction, and maintenance of these primary physical work processes. We have come to think of these investments as the “Physical Plant.”

The sophistication of the Physical Plant requires higher value services with a high information content to support them. The automation of the “Physical Plant” has moved more people into the service delivery workflow processes. These service delivery processes can be thought of as the “Workflow Plant.”

The problem with the Workflow Plant is that it has grown up as a reactive response to the needs of the Physical Plant. We find ourselves today in the situation where our Physical Plant is well designed, based on sophisticated science, and productive. The Workflow Plant, where most of our workers are now engaged, is haphazard, devoid of science, and unproductive.

Why Fixes Fail - Scope vs. Focus

When a process breaks, it draws attention to itself. Focusing on what’s broken - especially if there’s a sense of urgency - generally leads to a fix that brings in new tools. But the very urgency of the problem often prevents a manager from “taking the time” to look at the broader context within which the break occurred. That is, the broken piece focuses our attention so that it is hard to see the true scope of the problem that may reach beyond tools to processes, data structures, and even strategic objectives.

Return to "Problem with Fixes"