Semaine 43 du 25 au 31 octobre 2010 N 145. Table des matières. Comment encourager les membres de votre équipe à s affirmer et à diriger 3

Transcription

1 Semaine 43 du 25 au 31 octobre 2010 N 145 Table des matières Écoute client Travailler pour et avec les clients cas pratique! 2 Comment encourager les membres de votre équipe à s affirmer et à diriger 3 Leading BPM Projects: Four Ways to Improve Your Success Rate 4 Making lean work in the real world 10 Lean start-up thinking that works for all 11 Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 1

2 Écoute client Travailler pour et avec les clients cas pratique! Un article de «Management» vante cette semaine les mérites du Service Après Vente de Leroy Merlin nouvellement équipé d un logiciel magique d analyse sémantique Ce logiciel récupère messages délivrés chaque année par les clients au travers de mails, messages téléphoniques enregistrés par une plate forme dédiée, courriers scannés, commentaires recueillis sur bornes en magasins Ainsi Leroy Merlin annonce améliorer le pourcentage des clients insatisfaits (qui se déclare à nouveaux satisfaits) qui passe de 80% à 97 %! Point clé de cette nouvelle organisation : le nouveau logiciel qui permet aux 550 salariés du SAV (quand même!) de se consacrer au client mécontent plutôt qu à l enregistrement administratif de la réclamation. Je ne peux que saluer cette initiative qui met le client au cœur de la démarche qualité au sein de Leroy Merlin Certes les performances du logiciel sont remarquables (l'investissement est conséquent ) : identification des mots clés, analyse, synthèse des données et alerte sur les points clés (à la fois sur les motifs de réclamations, les sources de dysfonctionnements en magasin et les attentes du client mécontent.., enregistrement des actions ) Mais au-delà de cette prouesse informatique, deux choses me frappent à la lecture de cet article : 1- la volonté de l entreprise d investir dans l écoute client associée à la conviction de rentabilité à moyen terme 2- les premiers résultats perçus par l entreprise extrêmement positifs qui sont, en fait, indépendants de la dimension technique de la solution mise en place : le recueil et l analyse globale des données permettent à Leroy Merlin de traiter plus vite les réclamations clients mais aussi d identifier de réelles pistes d amélioration de la sa- Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 2

3 tisfaction de leurs clients et donc de fidélisation ( à la fois sur des besoins latents mieux cernés et sur des dysfonctionnements statistiquement significatifs..). C est une excellente démonstration de ce qu est travailler «pour et avec les clients». Logique appuyée par trois fondamentaux : la formation des collaborateurs, la mise en commun des données et des résultats, le déclenchement d actions immédiates pour démontrer comment la voix du client est entendue.. Cela vous inspire? Par GILLET GOINARD FLORENCE Comment encourager les membres de votre équipe à s affirmer et à diriger Pour gagner sur le marché actuel, les membres de l'équipe doivent faire un pas en avant et se tenir prêts à endosser le rôle de leaders. Développer des compétences de leadership chez les autres n'est pas chose facile. Parallèlement, il est particulièrement important de comprendre que certaines personnes ne partagent ni vos objectifs, ni vos aspirations. Gardez une certaine ouverture d'esprit et utilisez différentes techniques pour donner envie à certains membres de l'équipe de s'affirmer et de diriger. 1. Lancez un défi - Proposez-leur de relever un défi. (Dans le climat économique actuel, vous en trouverez probablement beaucoup!) Certaines personnes ont besoin d'un défi spécifique pour se motiver. En formulant un défi à relever, vous définissez parallèlement un objectif très clair et mesurable que les membres de votre équipe devront atteindre. 2. Faites appel à des sentiments élevés - Nombre d'employés considèrent que leur travail n'est pas déterminant. En faisant appel aux motivations et valeurs d'une équipe, vous remontez le moral de vos troupes tout en rehaussant les standards attendus de ses membres. Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 3

4 3. Soyez compréhensif - Ne dites jamais à quelqu'un qu'il a tort. Même si vous êtes en désaccord, faites montre d'écoute et de compréhension à l'égard des idées et des désirs de l'autre. 4. Prouvez - Prouvez les idées que vous avancez. En avançant des preuves, vous apportez une crédibilité instantanée à vos idées. Si vous pouvez prouver ce que vous avancez, même les membres de votre équipe qui affichent un point de vue différent du vôtre tiendront compte de votre avis. 5. Écoutez - Soyez à l'écoute de ce que les membres de votre personnel ont à dire. Tous les employés ne briguent pas nécessairement un poste de dirigeant ; certains d'entre eux sont simplement satisfaits dès lors que leurs opinions et leurs idées sont valorisées. 6. Posez des questions - Plutôt que de donner des ordres directs, posez des questions pour conduire les membres de votre personnel à réfléchir aux problèmes et à apporter leurs propres solutions. 7. Valorisez votre équipe - Les membres de votre équipe doivent se sentir sincèrement importants. Confrontés aux défis économiques actuels, vos collaborateurs doivent être rassurés quant au fait que leur contribution et leur leadership ONT BEL ET BIEN une forte incidence sur la survie, la stabilité et la croissance de l'entreprise. Leading BPM Projects: Four Ways to Improve Your Success Rate Effective leadership has long been recognized as one of the elusive critical factors in organizational success, especially when it comes to improving operational performance. During the past decade, deploying BPM as one of many improvement methods, has gained popularity. Yet, the actual success rate in driving and sustaining change has been, and remains, dismal. In a 2008 a broad based survey of 3,199 executives around the world, it was found that only one transformation in three succeeds. The Standish Group s 2009 report on IT project success indicated Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 4

5 that only 32% of the surveyed projects were delivered on time, on budget and with the required features and functions. A recent article also suggested that nearly 60% of all corporate Six Sigma initiatives failed to yield desired results. Other studies over the past decade reveal very similar outcomes. It appears that, in spite of the abundant body of knowledge on leadership and change management, and the increasing array of tools and methods, including BPM, companies have not had more success in implementing change programs. What s the problem? Why does a lack of committed leadership typically surface among the top few barriers in practically every survey on the obstacles to successfully transforming operational performance? Why do leaders continue to struggle in this regard? This article outlines that while there are no pat answers, the success of BPM and other operational improvement projects can be enhanced if leaders were to focus on these four key areas: Understand the importance of pacing Avoid the most common pitfalls Craft a compelling case for change Emphasize the need to sustain improvements A Compelling Case for Change Creating a compelling case for change is the foundational first step in any operational improvement. The key components in crafting a compelling case for change include: State what improvement in operational performance is needed and why Address both facts and feelings Use simple, visually gripping support materials Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 5

6 Communicate (repeatedly) Operational Leadership A compelling case for change is typically built on either an imminent threat or a perceived major opportunity. Either, we must join forces and change how we do things to survive or we must join forces and change how we do things to prosper. The best tests of a compelling the case for change is whether people step forward as willing followers and whether they are motivated to act with urgency. Executives, middle managers and front line employees need to understand the point of change and also agree with it. That s why the case for change needs to tell a compelling story that speaks both to the head and the heart. This is where viewing operations from the customer s point of view becomes important. Many companies do not measure the performance factors that are truly important to the customer such as responsiveness (first time right) and flawless delivery of product or service (on-time, complete and error free). In building a compelling case for change, highlighting the gap between current and desired performance for customers can be a powerful way to touch people s emotions. Thoughtful leaders sense that employees are not motivated by the same things that matter to executives. Instead, employees are more likely to be engaged by stories around factors such as improving customer service, making a contribution to some greater social good, improving their own working environment and a potential for personal rewards through either bonus compensation or visible recognition. The likelihood of success in any significant improvement of operational performance is low unless the leader crafts a compelling case for change. There are simply too many people, too many departments, and too many competing initiatives involved. A compelling case for change must address the why and what of the needed improvement in operational performance and provide both logical and emotional reasons for people to be wholeheartedly committed to a common course of action. How do you know when you don t have a compelling case for change? What constitutes a fragile case for change? It s whenever one or more of the following Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 6

7 conditions exist. The reason for change is unclear. The scope of change needed is unclear. The needed collaboration from key departments is missing. The basis for the needed change in operations does not address both the heads and hearts of executives, managers and the front line. There is insufficient communication of the need for change. Pacing The right pacing is essential. Leaders must assure that project teams do not dive into too much detail in the early stages of an improvement project in terms of the time and effort needed for modeling and measurement. Leaders also look for ways to maintain momentum by way of early wins. These potential early wins are typically related to revising outdated policies and eliminating obviously non-value added activities and hand-offs. Generally, early wins can be implemented in a month or less, and do not require major IT investments. Given that major change can take a year or longer, especially if information technology and integration issues are involved in some significant way, planning for and taking action to assure early wins is one of the most important ways to maintain momentum. The ability to think at the right level of detail is one of the critical success factors in this respect. This means exercising discipline in early stages, at the getting ready stage, to think at a high level, and assuring that a customer s perspective is taken. Here, the leader s emphasis is seeking to understand and asking probing questions as opposed to coming up with solutions. In contrast, later on, at the taking action stage, it s important for leaders to think at a more granular level of detail, encourage the prioritization of the opportunities for improvement and push for the rapid implementation of the so called early wins to demonstrate progress and maintain momentum. Pitfalls There are many potential pitfalls in leading substantial change in operational performance via BPM. Failing to have a compelling case for change, diving into too much detail too soon, failing to have early wins to demonstrate progress, failing to promptly remove obstacles to change, not installing the right set of metrics, and not building aligned reward and recognition systems to sustain the change are some of the major pitfalls. Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 7

8 There are two particularly undesirable practices that leaders should attempt to avoid: Placing methods before outcomes Putting structure before workflow Emphasizing methods before or more than outcomes occurs whenever a selected method of improving or transforming operations takes on an identity of its own and overshadows the desired outcomes for customers and shareholders. This can happen with any codified improvement method be it Lean Six Sigma, BPM or Reengineering. Since most improvement methods require a shift in leadership mindset from a traditional stovepipe view to a customer focused, value chain point of view, it s understandable that there is a certain amount of fanaticism and proselytizing involved. However, it is problematic when the selected method of improvement takes on a life of its own and overshadows the underlying reasons for engaging in fundamental change. Putting structure before workflow is yet something else to avoid in leading operational change. This practice flies in the face of the long held dictum that form follows function in other words an understanding of workflow will reveal insights that are useful in determining organization design. While some degree of restructuring may be involved in improving workflow, it is best done after workflow considerations are understood and in a phased method. The wholesale restructuring of the organization chart, in advance of understanding the end to end business processes that create value for customers, have the tendency to encourage people to focus more on personal relationships versus on what needs to be done to better perform for customers. Sustaining Improvements Operational improvement projects, such as BPM, by definition have a clear beginning and an end. When it comes to sustaining these gains, the emphasis needs to evolve from a project mentality to governance and continuous improvement. While there is less data on historical sustainable performance, the general sense is that organizations track record in sustaining the gains from improvement efforts is not particularly good. Executives regularly express frustration on the challenges in sustaining Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 8

9 the gains from change programs. Process improvement professionals periodically remark on the need to improve/redesign the same process that was addressed just a few years ago. The relative lack of success in sustaining process change may be part of the reason that organizations drift from one method of process improvement to another over time. While most firms are becoming increasingly adept at executing improvements to their operations in projects of small scope, many firms continue to struggle when it comes to executing projects of larger scope requiring broadcross-functional collaboration. And this is amplified when it comes tosustaining the changes from dramatic improvements to performance. The major elements of sustaining change include the means to set commongoals, focus upon ongoing cross-functional commitment, assure the means forcontinuous improvement and engage in periodic celebration as an essential partof the organization s fabric. How do you know when you don t have the means to sustain changes?consider these points: The new, recommended performance measures are not incorporated into thesenior leadership team s scorecard Declaring victory before the new work practices become the way wedo things around here There is insufficient effort invested in establishing the infrastructurefor continuous improvement Shifting priorities lead to a decrease of continuing managementattention There are probably more ways to fail than to succeed on any largeoperational improvement initiative, including most large BPM projects. Yet,leaders can improve the odds of success by focusing on the four practicesdescribed in this article. Written by Andrew Spanyi Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 9

10 Making lean work in the real world Deploying lean management principles in the autobody repair industry has been a hot topic for years, but some owners struggle with successfully adopting these techniques. That's because many consultants and managers fail to address the cultural aspects of adopting this approach, says Joe Murli, principal at consulting firm Murli & Associates. Murli was originally exposed to lean principles when he was working in the aerospace manufacturing industry. "I was wrestling with the question of, how do we keep making these technical improvements, but we come back a year later and things have degenerated, or there was some kind of backlash to what we were trying to do?" Murli says. "Our Japanese coaches, while they were exceptional teachers on the technical aspects of how you flow work, they were really ill-equipped to talk about the cultural aspects and a human resources strategy." One big stumbling block in the collision repair industry is the collaborative nature of lean. Autobody techs are highly individualistic. "This is very much a 'lone ranger' type of industry," Murli says. "You have to get the body techs to collaborate with the front office and the mechanical guys and the painters. How do you get the whole value stream really thinking together and flowing the vehicle through the entire system so you have a satisfied customer on the other end?" Murli also says that most people tend to minimize problems in their daily work interactions the opposite of what lean requires, which is a frequent discussion about problems and how to solve them. "There's also an issue with leadership modeling," Murli says. "In autobody shops, the mangers who get promoted have worked their way up through the organization by being seen as a person who can fix problems. In lean, the leadership model is not focused on that, but on how well managers help build the problem-solving muscle of the whole organization. They have to train the employees how to think critically." Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 10

11 There are misalignments between the lean model and how the typical body shop operates throughout the repair process. Estimates are written before vehicles are torn down, and parts are ordered after repairs have already begun. "You keep going down the line, and you find that everybody is incentivized to do what's best for them individually, but there's nobody really incentivized to take that customer's car all the way through the repair process and make it whole, and get them back in their own car again," Murli says. To re-align with the lean model, Murli says shops should establish relationships with insurance companies based on credibility. "The insurance carrier needs to know that when the car comes out, the shop will have provided a high-quality repair in the shortest cycle time possible," he says. Shops also have to align incentives with their parts suppliers so that repairs don't begin (and parts don't arrive) until every part needed is available. By: Brian Albright Lean start-up thinking that works for all Not so long ago, management theorists and manufacturing scientists drooled over Toyota. Its production system represented scientific management at its best, the climax of a century that began with Frederick Taylor s time-and-motion studies, passed through Henry Ford s River Rouge plant, Alfred Sloan s General Motors and finally reached perfection in Toyota City, the vast complex of manufacturing and assembly plants east of Nagoya. A spate of recalls has recently dented Toyota s reputation. But its management principles are finding new life in a very different corner of business: technology startups. At the core of Toyota s philosophy is the idea of lean processes. The term is often misunderstood to mean cheap. In fact, a lean production system is one in which every step of every process is transparent and considered ripe for improvement. Thinking lean is about constantly measuring all you do, and being able to change quickly as fresh evidence emerges. Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 11

12 Apply this to starting a company or launching a new product within an existing company. The classic method is to look at the market for an opportunity, establish a business case, develop your product, test, validate and finally launch. At each stage, you gather resources, establish criteria for the next step and try to adjust as you go. The challenge these days, though, is that technology and customer tastes are moving so fast that the classic method is no longer adequate. Eric Ries, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur who has coined the phrase lean start-ups, happens to drive a new Toyota. While he s delighted with the car, he says its GPS system encapsulates the problem. Here you have a car packed with technology, but the GPS system is primitive compared with what he could download to his phone. The reason is that the innovation cycle time for car manufacturing is much slower than that for GPS software. So one part of the car will seem dated long before the rest of it. Mr Ries hit on the idea of lean start-ups after suffering one failed technology start-up and enjoying one success, the 3D instant messaging company IMVU, as well as observing the peculiar fortunes of many others as an investor and adviser. The classic start-up methods, built on linear management and innovation processes, he found, were not working for him or his peers. They kept blowing up in my face, he says. Such methods offered too little flexibility to deal with changes in available technology and in customer needs. Imagine that today you decide to launch a new product. You size the opportunity, talk to potential customers, gather the resources and set to work. By the time you re ready to launch, what are the chances your product is still relevant? Mr Ries and other new management thinkers notably Steve Blank, a former entrepreneur who now teaches classes at Stanford and the Haas Business School at Berkeley say the risks in any start-up can be reduced by constant interaction with potential customers during product development. Rather than waiting until you have all your ducks in a row, you iterate early and often by finding customers willing to help you refine your product and even buy it in its most primitive form. You don t waste your money by investing in an unproven product, but rely on customer feedback to tell you where to spend. Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 12

13 The ideas owe much to agile software development, an adaptive process that values customer collaboration, responsiveness and individual input over strict product road maps, tools and marketing plans. For the traditionalists, agile development may smack of ill- discipline, when in fact it is just a different kind of discipline. Technology companies are the most obvious seeding ground for these ideas. Facebook began with profile pages and a basic messaging service and has been adding features over time based on feedback from users. But Mr Ries says his ideas are equally applicable to larger companies. He recently returned from a trip to the UK and Ireland, during which he says he advised multinationals on their innovation processes. My own definition of a start-up is an institution asked to create something new under conditions of high uncertainty, he says. This has nothing to do with company size. One counter-argument to this is that some risks are better taken than minimised. Customer development may increase your chances of certain revenue, but not your chances of maximum revenue. Great product innovators, like great filmmakers or novelists, can develop in isolation, deposit their products on an unsuspecting market and still triumph. But that is a high-risk route. Not everyone can be Steve Jobs or James Cameron. For the more ordinary among us who have not founded Apple or had a 3D movie hit lean is a far better way to go. - By Philip Delves Broughton Performances Veille 2010 Performances MC Tous droits réservés 13