Most processes start off as an ad hoc process -- meaning it was initially built for a single particular purpose. But has it evolved...?
All processes usually start out as an ad hoc process. By definition, ad hoc means created for a single purpose. And that's what people do -- they build the best process they can with the tools they have to get a specific thing done. However, as the business volume grows and requirements evolve/expand, the process must also evolve and stretch its capacities.
“People do the best they can with the tools and skills they have to get what is needed done. But, that might not mean it's a well defined and mature process."
Processes should mature overtime - moving from a single-purpose ad hoc process to a Stable process, then a Standard process, and finally an Optimizing process maturity level. Actually, the level of maturity needed depends on the criticality of the process to the business. The business needs to define "criticality" to them by considering the process' contribution to revenue, the level of expenses, customer satisfaction, competitive advantage, etc., etc.
Below are the criteria to judge if your process is ad hoc. It does not need to meet all of the traits, but certainly if it meets a majority of these concepts, then, yep, you probably have ad hoc process.
Governance perspective
Ownership
Unfocused process oversight: An ad hoc process owner is less engaged and less focused on this specific process. It does not mean they are a bad leader. They might not be focused on it for many reasons, but usually it is because they have bigger more important processes that they are being held accountable for -- as in measured and rewarded.
Expectations
Undefined capacities & roles: When the process is new, there just is not enough historical information to understand the process' capabilities. So it's difficult for the process owner to clearly define process expectations that can be consistently met regarding scope, cost, time, and quality. Meanwhile, others within the organization also have preferred expectations on what the process should do. Therefore, there are no agreed upon expectations internally and certainly not externally with customers.
Measures
Manual data analysis: Typically, there won't be any system tracking the work through the process in a structured manner. As a result, no one can easily count how many process work items are in-progress, obtain a count of completed work, provide an average cycle-time, etc. Sure, there might be data people can scrap together using various information like emails and estimated / guesstimated values, but this is not structured data available from more mature processes.
Process perspective
Methods
Rough process definition: Even though the process steps might be known by the team, they are typically undocumented at this maturity level. While this is true for brand new processes as the team is figuring it out for the first time, it might also be true even for older processes. When the process is performed and described differently by the team that is a good indicator the process is still ad hoc. And another indicator is when there is no clear definition or agreement of functional area responsibility and handoffs between groups.
People
Limited resources & training: At this level, personnel are usually not dedicated or focused on the process. While these folks work hard and want to deliver high quality work, they also are likely have other higher priority work they are held accountable for. And, like the process owner, they are held accountable in how they are measured and rewarded. From a training perspective, there is limited (or maybe none) on-the-job training from fellow employees.
Comments