Most technologists work for a company that has business goals as well as technology goals. These two should should be in lock synchronization. When a company is first started, they are. However, over time, the business direction and the technology direction can vector apart, become misaligned, even orthogonal. When that happens, there are obvious telltale clues: shrinking backlog, declining sales, increasing maintenance costs, complaining customers, cancelled contracts, uncertain direction in business growth, yet accompanied by an escalating demand for research and development dollars. All are evident signs that the technology goals and the business goals are divergent.
Excellent research is still being done, of course. But, is it the right research? “Huh,” all my technologists say, “If we are getting new ideas, creating new products, and within our budget, doesn’t that define technology success?” No. Just because you design and make a product does not mean your company can or should sell it. How big is the market? Have you considered manufacturing costs? Maintenance? Profit Margin? Competition? Does it fit your business model?
I was having lunch with my good friend, John McDonald, who reminded me of a project we worked awhile back. A company exhibited all the symptoms above and our job was to identify the root causes.
When we stood back and looked at the problems, everyone from the president on down identified a different cause and a likewise different solution. The problems were diverse, complex, and convolved and the solutions were all over the map.
The first thing we did was set up Current Reality Trees. Reality Trees premise that seemingly divergent problems arise from only a few Root Causes. So, we interviewed all the organizations to find out their problems. (In decision theory, these problems are called Undesirable Effects (UDEs)). For each UDE, we asked the organization to identify what caused that UDE. Now, if this were the end of the game it would be called a survey. The real power of Decision Trees lies in the next few steps. You query, well what caused the cause? Why do you have this problem? Then you ask the question again and dig deeper. Usually, this must be done to about five why-levels before you really get to the root cause of any one problem.
It goes like this. You ask Sales, “Why are sales down?” They reply, “Our product is no longer competitive?” You ask, “Why? (Why number one) ” They say, “Because Engineering doesn’t provide us competitive bells and whistles for our product”
Then you ask Engineering, “Why don’t you provide competitive bells and whistles to Sales?” They say, “Because we don’t have any specifications or knowledge of what our customers are wanting.” This is the second why and we are digging deeper.
Then, you ask Marketing, “Why haven’t you given Engineering some new product specifications so they can build competitive bells and whistles?” They say, “Because we don’t have budget for that. Our budget is drained with just trying to market our current product. Hasn’t anyone told you that sales are way down and we have a warehouse full of unsold product?” Now, we’re at why number three.
So, then you go to Finance and ask why there is no budget in Marketing to do a competitive analysis. They say, “There never has been a budget in Marketing for competitive analyses. We expect Engineering to keep up with what the competition is doing.” The fourth why.
Then, back to Engineering and you say, “Why aren’t you keeping up with the competition and leap-frogging them with new bells and whistles?” This is the fifth why from which you now realize there are many UDE’s (lack of Sales, increased Marketing budget, increased inventory costs, and so on) that are linking to one root cause.
Engineering says this time, “Because all our time is being spent on this new product idea we have. ” “Who has?” you ask. “We have,” they reply. We have this idea for a product that will revolutionize our company and solve our Sales problem.” “Who authorized this?” you ask. They reply, “What do you mean who authorized it? We’re within our budget and actually ahead of schedule. It’s our job to leap-frog the competition and this new product will do it, we think, once we get it complete.”
So, you asked why five times and now you found the root cause of several UDEs: Engineering is not providing bells and whistles and don’t plan to; they are working a totally different product and think building that new product is more important than improving the current product that Sales is selling, and Marketing is marketing, and Finance is financing. Why? Is this the right direction for the company? Well, who knows? That requires a visit to the decision makers to inform them you have found the root cause and to tell them they need to make a decision. The decision makers can decide what they want to change and how to change it, but you have told them where to focus. Root Cause identified.
In practice, multiple UDE’s arise from a single root problem, but you have to dig deep to get to the root. As you see, there is an enormous amount of work in interviewing all these groups, asking the right questions, asking the right persons, and in making connections between the different explanations and the ultimate root cause. You must be tactful, yet gutsy, and often overbearing. Two of these come natural to a technologist.
Nevertheless, there are usually only a few root problems and these can be identified in a structured, logical process. The company direction can change and you can become The Persuasive Wizard.