The hidden risks of service assumption
When organisations ‘assume’, rather than know the full extent of their service offer they take on unnecessary risks.
This makes improvement hard and leaves failures hidden due to an absence of a realistic understanding of what is going on and why.
The problem
This can be due to several factors, but the two reasons for this I have come across most often are;
1. A misinterpretation of service ‘design’ vs service reality
In short, the assumption is that because something is ‘mapped’ or drawn it represents a service reality ‘today’ rather than an intended state. A state that needs support, management and continuous improvement to reach, one that also should represent an aim or outcome that success can be evaluated against.
2. An absence of a wider propositional context
Focusing on smaller procedural aims without looking at them in the context of the bigger picture. Over time many organisations can even lose a sense of their real purpose with processes becoming central to success rather than outcomes that define why they exist.
For example where processes are a part of a bigger journey and there is little understanding of the needs or view of that journey.
The impact
Both of these can cause a lot of problems, raising the risk of unexpected business failures, additional costs or the inability to take advantage of value within an organisation and missed opportunities.
1. Missinterpreation of service ‘design’ vs service reality
Misuse of service design tools can spurn a whole cottage industry of (costly) design documentation, simultaneously decreasing organisational capability to address and discuss what is happening.
Many kinds of documentation can be used inappropriately, but all show ‘wants’ or ‘intentions’. From technical architecture to governance to enterprise architecture, operational process and service blueprints. These are all useful tools so long as they are used appropriately and expectations set that they are ‘an intended state, not an actual state’.
Not all propositional service designs are equal. The less evidence the greater the risk. For example, a low value attributed to user-centred validation increases the riskiness of the ‘service design’ assumption. As proposed designs become more hypothetical and less evidence-based.
False sense of assurance in the face of increasing risk. For many people, documentation comes to equal some sort of assumed security while in reality issues or pain points may remain unknown, hidden behind a false view assumed view of how services work. Therefore in fact the level of risk is increasing with every ‘false’ document. Issues remain unaddressed and successes or new opportunities remain hidden.
Increasing risk, under the assumption of risk reduction. While ‘Documentation’ is often perceived as a tool to reduce risk by creating artefacts to define what is going on. By these being incorrect the process is increasing risk. Hiding more unknowns, more failures and building a false sense of security that doesn’t represent reality.
Rifts and blame when things don’t work. In a service space where designs and reality don’t mix people doing the work in an operational sense become sandwiched between the reality of what is happening and organisational perception. This can result in workarounds that further increase service complexity.
2. An absence of a wider propositional context
Abstraction of purpose to a focus on process. Not having a grasp of ‘why’, the purpose of service means that processes become disconnected from their reason for existing. In this environment, smaller pieces become the guiding star rather than any bigger picture intention, and the outcomes it delivers.
Success by doing what we said, rather than achieving an outcome. In this space as well success measures start to reflect achieving ‘what we said we would do’ rather than being attached to any intent or greater ambition.
Disconnection from purpose affects staff morale. Staff across the organisation lose a connection to why they are doing things. This can impact how people feel about their jobs, and a sense of purpose and connect with their role in the bigger picture.
The barrier to improvement and thinking beyond today’s worldview. This can also make it harder and harder to make improvements to service delivery as every idea is scoped by the processes of today.
This means that the organisation takes on increased risk as it is unable to make improvements.
How do we change?
The aim is to represent what is happening to build a cross-organisation understanding of what happens in services today. This should be a transparent and realistic view, from the point-of-view of the people who use the service (rather than the business) that connects to how it is delivered.
The approach that I use is you research the state of play to begin with. To build an understanding of the current user-centred service journey that shows every step the user goes through.
It is drawn as a user-centred system map from user goal to outcome. Allowing the organisation to see what is going on rather than what the business ‘intends’. It should show context before and after and triggers for entry to the service.
