The “Iron-fist of Failure”

In my last blog post I described the process management lifecycle that enables process success. The first aspect of the process management lifecylcle is to ensure the process is followed. Most process management publications I have read refer to this as “process enforcement.” I wince when I hear those words used together. I don’t believe in enforcing process. I readily acknowledge I am likely in the minority when it comes to this belief. I am constantly asked “How do I force people to follow a process?” Or, “How do I get the authority to force people to follow a process?” I even had one CIO dismiss all of the “unnecessary effort” of fostering adoption and gaining acceptance when implementing a new process. He said he could save a lot of time by just telling everyone to do it because he said so.

Though it may result in short-term compliance, the iron-fist will eventually fail. The words “force” and “process” should never be used together. Force never succeeds when it comes to process compliance. Even the word compliance is problematic. Consider the formal definition:

Com—pli—ance

1. the act of conforming, acquiescing, or yielding
2. conformity; accordance
3. cooperation or obedience

I am comfortable with only one word in this entire definition—cooperation. That is the human behavior I am seeking if I want my process to be successful. I want people to willingly choose to participate in the process, as opposed to conforming, acquiescing, yielding, or obeying.

I’ve heard the question of how to force people to follow a process so often I have trained myself to not recoil or cringe when asked. I simply respond with a fictional story. In this story, I am the Director of the PMO and the Process Owner of all project management processes. (For those of you familiar with PMOs, you know this is not an enviable position.)

One day, a Project Manager approaches me and says, “This process is terrible!” Instead of responding defensively, my first reaction upon hearing this is to wonder to myself, “What is wrong with my process design?” I review the design and find it to be thoughtful, creative, meticulous and valid. My next thought is, “What did I do wrong when I implemented the design?” I review my implementation project deliverables and find I appropriately documented procedures, established tools and templates, thoroughly communicated to all stakeholders and successfully delivered training. So it wasn’t the implementation. My next thought is, “What is wrong with my management of the process?” I take a look and determine I am doing a good job of monitoring customer requirements, industry best practices, and process performance. I am responding to process issues and problems and making adjustments as necessary. So it is not my management of the process lifecycle. Well, if it is not a design problem, or a flawed implementation, or process mismanagement, then it must be problem with the person who is complaining.

This thought-process is the exact opposite of most reactions when somebody complains about a process. The reaction is much more likely to be the perception that something is wrong with the person complaining and somebody needs to figure out how to force the complaining project manager to follow the process. I contend in almost every one of these complaint cases the problem is not with the person, but with the process. It is due to either the design, the implementation, or the management of the process. It is almost never because the person is just a born pain in the butt.

Force is futile. I have yet to see force work when it comes to process compliance, or how it otherwise mistakenly referred, process enforcement. The iron-fist approach will always eventually fail. People will find a way to avoid something they don’t want to do and undermine something in which they don’t believe. When people complain about processes I feel very safe in my assumption that most enterprises have likely done poor jobs of designing, implementing, and managing processes.

How do you get people to follow the process? You get them to follow the process by carefully designing and thoughtfully and thoroughly implementing a reasoned and rational process—and then managing it. That is why the process management lifecylce I described in my last post depicted a “designed and implemented process” as the input to the process-compliance activity and the “ensure” stage of the model.

If an enterprise wants people to follow a process they must design and implement a process that makes the work required to delight the customer possible and practical. Once they do, the organization must then dilligently observe the process to determine if it meets that end. Following these two basic recommendations will increase the potential that people will willingly participate in a process. The cooperation bornof this willing participation cannot be forced. The iron-fist will always eventually fail.

~ Steve ~