Which Process To Explore? Facilitating A Discovery Session

Why is it so hard to get work done around here? You might have heard these words at the water cooler recently and now you're ready to let your colleagues put their money where their mouth is...in a "Discovery Session". You're willing to facilitate a cross-functional session; but you're not quite ready and these tough questions are keeping you awake at night: When would a meeting like this be useful? What could be gained? How would you prepare? Whom do you invite? How much time to plan? What will be revealed?

Don't lose any more sleep! This article can assist you in facilitating a productive session. It provides background on "System Mapping" concepts and "how to" tips for facilitation. Your goal is to collaborate with others and create a broad, systemic understanding of how work gets done. Then you can begin to diagnose the root causes and pick the "right" processes to improve.

When Is It Useful?

If it is "...so hard to get work done around here..." we know intuitively that we need to change something. Trouble is, what needs to change? A "Discovery Session" can be useful when you have a hunch that it's not just one task or one activity that's in trouble. You might already know which breakdowns cause other breakdowns. Just as winning a relay race depends upon all runners hitting top speeds, not just those at the end of the line, it's important to see how interim breakdowns influence or drive others.

For example, at a medical services company, the Project Manager lamented, "This process had been a pain in the rear for so long...not only did we use a heavy amount of paper to get the job done, we sensed it was the most expensive process out of everything we do". Since their hunch revealed that it was not just one area that needed to be evaluated but the whole process, they started their search for solutions with a Discovery Session. It gave them a sense of where to begin. And it created strong buy-in from the organization.

If you have a particular area that's not performing up to par, or if your customers or suppliers are complaining about a certain part of your business, then this is a useful activity to jump-start your improvement efforts. The Discovery Session effectively addresses areas that affect many functional groups.

What Could Be Gained?

The Discovery Session can help you:

• Bring a "systemic", big picture perspective
• Create an initial diagnosis of the root causes of problems
• Create organizational support ("buy in") to key issues
• Identify interdependencies, or linkages, of problems
• Keep the focus on the customer

Essentials, Part I: Performance "Gaps" and The "SIPOC" Model

The Discovery Session is a practical, hands-on session. It's a time to wrestle with your operational performance "gaps" and how they play out in your organization, or system. Your are probably asking, "What are gaps and how does the System Model or "SIPOC" Model help?"

Operational performance gaps are issues or problems - they exist anytime what is expected or specified does not meet reality. A simple example: a customer expects that an organization's Help Desk will answer the phone in one ring and the Help Desk answers the phone in three rings. Those two rings are the gap. Perhaps your employees expect to work in a stress-free environment and the culture is one of chaos and reactions. These are gaps. The gaps are what you recognize as "...why it is so hard to get things done around here..."

With the System, or "SIPOC" model (Supplier, Input, Process, Output, Customer), you can create conceptual perspective of how work gets done in your organization. When you can describe your organization in terms of the Suppliers, their Inputs to the process, what is the Process, what Outputs does it create and the Customers, you have context and boundaries for your session.

For example, an Accounts Payable staff person might describe what he does as, "well, the construction sites send me the invoice packages, which I enter into the computer. Then we print the checks and mail them to the vendors for any invoices due this week." In a simple paragraph, he has described the SIPOC model as follows:

S = Construction site personnel
I = Invoice packages
P = Accounts payable
O = Checks
C = Vendors

Essentials, Part 2: Defining Output Gaps, Process Gaps and Input Gaps

Once we apply the SIPOC Model, we can begin to create categories for the "gaps" that are observed. Here are some useful definitions:

Output Gaps - these occur between what the process produces and what the customer expected. Another way to say it is, the difference between what the customer expects and what they got. For example, a customer expects software to work all the time, when in reality there may be some bugs that occur under certain circumstances.

Process Gaps - these occur within the process, within the organization. It is the difference of the process potential and how it really works. These are the things that make us so frustrated. We know it doesn't need to be so complicated, but that's how work gets done. Process Gaps are often cross-functional but may be task-level, such as "it should not take so long to get this done". For example, a gap would be the delays in getting authorizations to purchase materials, which affects the production department's ability to manufacture finished goods.

Input Gaps - these occur when what you need in your process and what you expect from your suppliers doesn't meet what the supplier gives you. For example, if your organization has told the supplier to deliver the raw materials in 24 hours from time of order and they deliver in 72 hours, this is an input gap.

Essentials, Part 3: Pay Attention! Suppliers Might Be Customers and Customers Might Be Suppliers

One caveat: Sometimes the "input" provided by a "supplier" might actually be an order from a customer!

For example, if the customer is late in ordering, your process must then over react to provide that customer the output requested. In this case, the customer is actually performing the supplier ROLE as well as the customer ROLE. The Input gap is "late customer orders" and that manifests into a "process gap" called "overtime" so that you don't have any "output" gaps.

The same is true for your external vendors. If you are late in providing an output called a Purchase Order, (an "output gap") then the vendor is playing the customer "role" and this may cause your supplier (that vendor) to cause an "input gap" of late delivery of goods.

In your session, it is helpful to agree on these terms before you begin. Remember that "suppliers" or "customers" can be any of the stakeholders in a system. The acronym SOCCER is useful to remember the Suppliers, Owners, Customers, Community, Employees, and Regulators that fill the supplier and customer roles.

The Discovery Session Itself

How To Prepare

To preparing for a Discovery Session, it's important to select the "right" participants, prepare the materials and environment and set expectations or "norms" for the session.

1. Select the right participants - The most effective number of participants is 12 or less. It is best if the participant group represents as many of the impacted functions as possible. You'll gain a lot if you can also have a representative from the "supplier" role as well as the "customer" role.
2. Prepare the materials and environment - You'll need plenty of sticky notes (like Post-It Notes), fine tip markers, masking or painters tape, cellar or scotch tape and flip charts or butcher paper. This is a high-touch, low-tech session! The room needs to have a place to position your flip charts on the walls, next to each other. It's best if you have lots of elbow room for the participants to stand near each other without crowding because of desks or other furniture.
3. Prepare Flip Charts - Hang 3 sheets of flip chart paper on the wall. Write on each chart the headings: Input Gaps, Process Gaps and Output Gaps headings.
4. Set Expectations or Norms - It's helpful to review "sticky protocol " and ensure that "everyone writes". The "everyone writes" rule allows for organizational buy-in. When you run the session, you'll provide 10 minutes of "silent time" for everyone to sit and think about all the "gaps" they can. Sometimes it's helpful to set the expectation of the participants that they will be expected to sit in quiet to think about the issue at hand. It's also helpful to review concepts and definitions (above) both before the session and at the very beginning of the session.

During The Session

Plan to spend 60 - 90 minutes all together.

Begin the session with introductions and an overview of the concepts. Before offering "silent time" ensure that all participants understand the notion of gaps and offer some examples.

It is also helpful for everyone to agree what the "process" is. Ask the participants to explain what they believe are the "top four or five" activities that occur in this process. Then challenge them to say what is NOT included. Clear up for everyone what is "excluded" as well as what is "included" in this process.

When the boundaries of the process are clear, offer 10 minutes of "silent time." Have participants write down all the gaps they can think of; don't worry about organizing them by category at this point. You'll be surprised how many some people can come up with!

After "silent time", ask the participants to place their gaps on the appropriate flip chart: Input Gaps, Process Gaps or Output Gaps. Allow the participants to place their stickies where they believe they go and facilitate "affinity" groupings. Help the participants "stack" the gaps directly on top of each other if they are exactly the same, or place "next to" each other if they are similar. Remind them they can talk and discuss AFTER they have placed their stickies on the charts - don't discuss until they've tried to do so or you'll have a bottleneck in the progress.

Challenge the participants to streamline and simplify the affinity groupings. Are they really that different? Is it really an OUTPUT gap or does is occur on the INPUT side? Spend some time discussing and really narrowing down the findings.

When all the gaps have been identified, connect the gaps. Circle the gaps that have a common affinity and mark a line that connects the issues together.

Ask the participants to help - show them how to do it and then pass the pen to someone else. The more they are involved, the more buy-in you'll achieve.

Wrap up the session with a "what does this mean?" and also a "lessons learned" discussion. You'll find you have some "next steps" as well; usually in terms of "we need to gather more data around that issue". About 20 minutes is needed to fully "get" what happened in this session - allow more time if you can. This is when the real insights come alive!

Following Up From The Session

At the end of the session, it's helpful to use scotch tape over all the stickies so that they don't fly off when you roll up the flip charts.

Your follow up may depend on the findings. If you feel like you've found representative issues in the links, you can use software tools such as Excel or Power Point to create an electronic version of this chart. E-versions facilitate communication and can be used to archive your findings.

Ask for feedback from your participants - what worked for them in the session and what didn't.

The next steps normally become a project plan for attacking a certain area, or process, that's been the focus of this session.

Stories of Discovery Sessions

1. Medical Group Example

The Medical Group's administrative division had a long-standing challenge with their Authorization process. This process includes activities to assess, recommend, authorize and provide treatment. The complexities in the process come from the authorization constraints prior to treatment and if unauthorized, what happens to the request and subsequent activities. The authorization request process may include verification of insurance benefits, medical review of appropriateness for the condition, location of service for the recommended treatment or review by the Medical Management Team.

What prompted the need to find a solution? The Project Manager (PM) explained, "This process had been a pain in the rear for so long...not only did we use a heavy amount of paper to get the job done, we sensed it was the most expensive process out of everything we do".

Methodology:

In November '01, work began on a 5-phase project to address the authorization process.

Phase I - Discovery Session:

This phase delivered education on process- and systems-thinking, creation of an "Informal System Map" for the Authorization process and development of a draft Project Charter document. This session provided definition, context and importance to the problem.

The PM explains the key discoveries. "In a short amount of time, we could step back out of the box and determine the process's future. We had spent a long time stuck in a way of thinking that precluded using everyone at once. Our organization had many functional experts to do functional jobs but there was too much "white space" between these functions. This session gave us all insight into the process. Mapping helped us bring in, or include, more players and extend the buy-in needed for the broad changes. Ultimately, the ball began to rest with the team and not "them", the Executive Group. These collaborative efforts allowed us to communicate everything to everyone. This was different from our previous "need to know" communication approach. After this day, everyone in the team and their representative functions knew what the status of the project was. All were responsible to communicate to everyone else."

Using "Informal System Map", the team discovered linkages between all the issues, or gaps, in the process. For example, lack of education on the need for complete patient information created "administrative denials" when the information was missing. These denials were costly and delayed treatment to the patient.

The team also discovered what they didn't know. They found certain areas for which they had no metrics, or comparisons.

Actions taken as a result of the session included:

• Benchmarking against other Medical Group Payers, to learn how other organizations (in the industry as well as other industries) handle authorization requests.
• Standardizing the communications to all the internal functions.
• Researching other projects that were separately trying to solve the same issue.
• Finalizing the Project Charter from developed draft.
• Agreeing upon progress meetings to discuss findings in the benchmarking area and to finalize the communication and Project Charter documents.

The e-version of the "Gap Map" is here.

2. Project Management Services Organization

A Project Management Services Organization felt their Project Execution Process did not create consistent, repeatable, predictable results. The Director of Engineering believed that the Senior Leadership needed a common perspective regarding project management process performance improvement needs and opportunities in areas of risk, quality, scope, budget and schedule.

In collaboration with the "Chief Knowledge Officer", they organized a "Discovery Session" in order to develop a roadmap of solutions for coordinating and integrating the operational areas of risk, quality, scope, budget and schedule that would result in increased and sustainable efficiencies and effectiveness.

The session evolved through a discovery of "gaps" in the "Project Execution Process." There was general discussion around various gaps and pain points. The four participants created an "Informal System Map" to identify links between output gaps, process gaps and input gaps. These links guided the team to define the start and end of the project execution process, which to this point had not been explicitly defined.

The results of the Discovery Session with the collaborated Informal System Map, included these agreed upon findings:

• Customer satisfaction issues are not raised early enough
• Unclear project manager role and expectations drives inconsistent project delivery
• Lack of consistent process understanding contributes to misunderstanding of project manager roles and expectations
• Existence of a strong "independence" culture contributes to misunderstanding of project manager role and expectations
• Lack of buy-in from project managers to the value of consistent project processes (goes against independence culture)
• Lack of process measures and therefore lack of link to Balanced Score Card

The team determined the need to have a facilitated process mapping session with a core group of project managers representing the key lines of business. The purpose of that session was to explore both process gaps as well as the common framework of project executions, utilizing the work completed in this session as a starting place.

The Informal System Map is provided here.

Conclusion

By using a Discovery Session outlined above, when the question "Why is it so hard to get work done around here?" comes up, you'll not lose any sleep, and you'll be ready for providing a solution to your organization.

With essentials on System Mapping concepts and "how to" tips on facilitating the session, you can successfully create a collaborative, systemic understanding of how work gets done. Now you can pick the "right" processes to assess for improvement.

---

Since 1993, Orion Development Group has been the de facto leader in process mapping trainer. More than 20,000 professionals and managers have completed our Process Mapping seminar in the last 15 years. It is the de facto standard of the industry. Mr. Robert Boehringer, Orion's Vice President -Process Management- is the author of the highly regarded text Process Management Memory Jogger.

Click here to see a video of Mr. Boehringer discussing the importance of why it is very important to understand As Is conditions before implementing a new business or IT solution.

Back to top of page...