Wednesday 19 August 2009

Powerpoint & Information

This is about Information,
and how Powerpoint,
as an example of IT in common use, can be used to provide useful information
- or not.

It's also about how we may have a tendency to rely too much upon IT Itself.

For example, Powerpoint came on to the scene in 1984. Has it helped or has it hindered?

What happens when we're too reliant on Information Technology? What happens when IT becomes an end in itself, rather than a means to an end, albeit a powerful means?

What is or should be the central aim of IT
in this Information Age?
Simple! It's INFORMATION VALUE!

And how might Information Value be defined?
How about this:

  • The central aim of Information Technology
    (at least in the business organisation working environment),
    is Information Value, which is:


    information for effective knowledge work,
    and/or
    information for customer value (including internal customers),
    and/or
    information for business performance,

    - information that's relevant, reliable and rapidly available,

    - as, where and how needed.

How does our use of Powerpoint, as an example of IT in common use, help in achieving this end-purpose & aim?

One of the next big things in computing will be natural interface with the computer. It's about the human computer interface (HCI). But will advances in HCI help or hinder, or both, or might it depend on how it's used? Will it be like Powerpoint?

When you hear you're about to sit through another Powerpoint presentation do you say something like:
Oh no, not another, boring batch of bullet bits!

The conventional, corporate way of using Powerpoint
is to use standard templates complete with bullet point format.

But, as the old saying goes:
A picture (or an image) is worth a thousand words.

And then, as Albert Einstein said:
Make things as simple as possible;
but no more simple than that.

So it's a balance between:
- Information Overload via a batch of boring bullet bits
and/or
- A simplistic set of colourful, image/picture-based slides, like a children's TV programme.

What would Winston Churchill or Abraham Lincoln have thought of Powerpoint, and how might they have used it?


Monday 10 August 2009

The NHS and Systems Thinking

Break up the NHS, was the previous posting.

Now a Conservative Party think tank is saying:
Break up the NHS IT.

They say it would create huge savings for the Taxpayer.

Why?

Because the £12 billion NHS IT programme launched in 2002, which is now five years behind schedule, which is the world's largest civilian IT project, and which is already billions of pounds in the red - is too big!

So what if it's too big?

To recapitulate the tenth of the ten Systems Thinking principles in the last posting:

Every system has an optimum size beyond which it ceases to be viable, due to (1) intra-relationship complexity and, (2) for organisations and project in organisations, bureaucracy and loss of human identity with the system as a whole.

An independent review of the NHS IT, commissioned by Health Minister Stephen O'Brien, concluded that:

  1. The project had been too centralised, making it too big, inefficient, and costly for the taxpayer
  2. 50% of the IT vendors/suppliers involved had already pulled out of the project.
  3. The handling of the project to date had been "shambolic".
  4. Its bureaucracy had been "hugely disruptive for the NHS " - with negative cost & care implications for patients.
When large, Stalinist, central planning government embarks on projects such as this, albeit with good intentions, they show themselves blind to the real choice-needs of people, the cost impact implications for the taxpayer - and an ignorance or denial of Systems Thinking.

For the sake of society, for the sake of us all, this and future governments need to embrace Systems Thinking.

The previous posting says why.



Friday 19 June 2009

Break Up the NHS

The NHS needs to be broken up. That's the first conclusion from the application of
Systems Thinking to the NHS.

Bottom-line: if the NHS were to fully adopt Systems Thinking
it wouldn't just save billions.

We'd also end up a lot more satisfied;
NHS people, patients, public.


Why bring this up now? Well it was recently announced that Britain's National Health Service is facing a huge budget short-fall and the BBC Today programme has been canvassing opinions on "where savings might be made".

But this is not quite the issue. It's more about how the NHS organisation can be more cost-effective - which is different, because it first looks at what the organisation's real aims are (and that of each part of it), and how well they're being accomplished.

So this means not piddling about with Systems Thinking (because the NHS does have courses on Systems Thinking, and it is used for trivial issues). It means
adopting Systems Thinking into the culture and fabric of the NHS.

Systems Thinking isn't about computer systems; although these are included. It's about seeing everything as a system - in fact as a system within a system, with systems within it.

You are a system. A tree is a system.
The Universe is a system. You and your laptop are a system. A football team is a system. The London Stock Exchange is a system. Every business & government organisation is a system. The NHS is a system.

This may all seem a bit academic at first, but Systems Thinking is practical and proven. It's a strategic yet structured way of looking at an organisation and each part of it, especially it's processes.

Here are ten Systems Thinking principles:

1. Everything is a system within a system, with systems within it.

2. Every system has a purpose, whether known or unknown.

3. Synthesis before analysis:
first determine the subject system as a whole in terms of it's boundaries, and then the external/contextual environment with which it inter-relates.

4. Every system must inter-relate effectively with its external/contextual environment environment to survive and remain viable.

5.a. The parts must intra-relate effectively for a system to inter-relate effectively with its external/contextual environment.
5b. Human organisations need effective dialogue and collaboration to inter-relate effectively with their external/contextual environments.

6. Synergy is where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts;
it results from the actualisation of ideal intra-relationships between the parts, for the respective purpose of each intra-relationship, within the overall purpose of the system.

7. Every part of a system is dependent on the other parts.

8. If each part of a system operates as efficiently as possible in itself, then the system as a whole will be ineffective.

9. First look to the idealised design based on the purpose of the system, regardless of practical constraints.

10. Every system has an optimum size beyond which it ceases to be viable, due (1) intra-relationship complexity and, (2) for organisations and projects in organisations, bureaucracy and loss of human identity with the system as a whole.

These principles have deep implications for the NHS, and indeed for any business or government organisation. There are a few organisations around the world whose leadership has made Systems Thinking happen in their organisations, and it has made a big difference.

So which of these principles is the NHS especially in need of recognising and/or adopting?

The most apparent is that the NHS should be broken up. It's the biggest per capita organisation in the world. True, the Chinese Army and the Indian Railways are bigger, but these two countries have much bigger populations.

If it's to be more cost-effective the NHS needs to be
broken up, de-centralised, and federalised.

P.S.
One last thing: Systems Thinking cannot happen unless the leadership of an organisation gets behind it.

At the same time, neither can it happen unless NHS people are also behind it. There is a way of doing this which, like Systems Thinking, is also practical and proven. It's called Genuine Action Learning (GAL), as originally developed by Professor Reg Revans, and successfully applied in many different contexts around the world.

It's a form of DIY change management, and it has been described by a very successful business leader as "The most powerful management tool ever identified."

But this blog article is already long enough, so Genuine Action Learning must await a future posting.




Friday 30 January 2009

How IT Can Save The World






In our day to day working life the pressures of time, information and task naturally lead us to be concerned with the immediate issues on the plate; how to resolve this, make it easier to do that, get better at something else, or even what to do about the job itself.

But there is a huge issue which overshadows every other issue
- at least when it comes to Business and Information Technology (IT).

It's an issue that's right at the top of the Business Agenda and, if it could be resolved, it would affect for the better virtually everyone and every company, if not the national economy.

It has been called the "Holy Grail" of Information Technology in Business, and it's the issue of:
How to get Business & IT truly integrated, aligned and joined up.

By this is meant:
Joined up
Business Needs & Opportunities
with
IT Capabilities & Resources
.

If it could be achieved it would lead to significant payback:
1. For people.
2. For your organisation.
3. For the national economy.

If, or perhaps when, this joining up (as it's called here) can be achieved, it will enhance our working lives in the form of reduced stress, enhanced satisfaction, and greater achievement. That is, we'll be able to get things done more effectively, efficiently and enjoyably.

It will make the organisation we work for more cost-effective, profitable, and achieving of its aims. And it will, or at least could, improve if not restore the viability of the national economy itself. Even further, it will enhance the quality of life across society as a whole.

These are grandiose claims! In fact they appear similar to the recent Freudian slip made by the head of government who claimed that financial measures about to be introduced through Parliament would "save the world".

And yet the potential rewards in the microeconomic, macroeconomic and sociological effects of joined-up Business-IT in the aggregate, across the national and international scene, are simply staggering!

Few have been able to see this Big Picture Impact of joined-up Business-IT. Many have instead been bemused or bedazzled by the technology, regardless of its people and business net-benefit.

And some will not be aware that we have a problem
- or an opportunity.

For surveys repeatedly show a huge gulf between the priorities of people and business on the one hand and what IT could contribute on the other. As evidence of this we occasionally learn of big IT failures, even though these are just the tip of the iceberg.

So there are trillions of dollars, euros, and pounds sterling being wasted every year, and thousands upon thousands of lives being negatively impacted.

But, notwithstanding the wonderful advances in IT, the answer is not in new technology, for IT in business is a double-edged sword. It can be a blessing or a curse; it all depends upon how it's developed, managed and used. So what's the answer; how do we get joined-up Business-IT?

The answer is in a holistic approach. That is to say, there is no silver bullet; not in better business process, project management, development methodology, data cleansing, protection against malware, software testing, or whatever. Joined-up Business-IT and its benefits can only be achieved through a holistic approach.

A forthcoming book by the author of this article, The JUMP Model: Joining Up Business and IT, follows upon several years of global research with leading academics, with business leaders , with people 'on the ground', and with feedback from sharing with professional and corporate audiences.

The JUMP Model and its accompanying Process is not a development methodology. It is a holistic, practical, action-oriented approach for getting Business Needs & Opportunities joined up with IT Capabilities & Resources.

As a professorial friend of mine at a leading MBA school said: "So James, do you think you've got this Alignment Thing finally sorted out? My answer: "Well since you ask, yes, I believe I have".

It's the reason why this blog posting is the first for quite a few months; the author has been busy!

P.S.
The photo of the first BlackBerry President of the United States is a supreme example of a non-IT person who has grabbed technology with both hands (or with one hand, at least), and put it to effective use in (a) beating the competition, i.e. getting elected, and (b) doing his job. An examplar for joined-up Business-IT!