Technology isn't the only thing to consider ...

“You think you've got a hold of it all
You haven't got a hold at all”
    Get the Balance Right, Depeche Mode (1982)

Suppose that you're working to make significant improvements in a part of your business, and have developed an organizational transformation strategy to do so. What is the correct balance of workflow, behaviour, and technology that is required for your project to be successful?

At last month's Digital Energy conference in Houston, Melody Meyer, President of Chevron Energy Technology, suggested in her keynote speech that a “digital energy” transformation strategy should be 15% workflow, 80% behavioural/mindset, and 5% technology. Melody's position resulted in considerable discussion among conference participants (and probably some discomfort among the software vendors present): how can a strategy that's closely linked to technology be so much more focused on people and processes?

Based on my own experience in the information technology industry, I would not quantify the elements of a transformation strategy in the way that Melody did (what does 5% technology mean? 5% of total effort? cost? attention? time spent? importance?). But I completely agree with the important role they all play. I liken these elements to the legs of a three-legged stool: without all three in place, with suitable dimensions, your transformation efforts—like the stool—will fall over.

It's absolutely critical to align all three elements to address business needs in a harmonious way. Sometimes a technology solution will appear to meet those needs, but there will be important people- and process-related issues that must be dealt with before that technology can even be discussed. This alignment issue is relevant at all levels of the organization, and in projects large and small. For example, I often demonstrate Actenum RAS to prospects who immediately see the value it brings to drilling operations management. Sometimes, they want to move ahead quickly to run a proof-of-concept exercise to introduce it into their organization. That all sounds good to me, as a software vendor! But there are important questions that everybody must consider before anything else is done; questions that have little to do with technology:

• Who would be the sponsor for this project? (behaviour/mindset issue)
• What are you doing now, and what will be the difference when you use an application such as RAS? (workflow and behaviour/mindset)
• What role will your IT organization play in the project? (workflow/mindset)
• What's the business value we expect to receive from this initiative? (the big, difficult question)
• How does the existing process/workflow that you're using hinder you, and what should be done to tune it if we proceed with implementation? (workflow)?

As you can see, there are no questions about the technology in this partial list.

We have an extensive list of such questions that we address on the first day of our initial workshop with an organization. Ensuring that we have a thoughtful discussion on each of the issues that underlie the questions ensures, in turn, that we have a successful project and implementation. Selecting a technology that's not appropriate can be costly, and, in some cases, disastrous. Ignoring the organization's appetite for change (or lack of appetite) can block forward progress. Likewise, expecting step-change improvements in a process using existing technology can be completely unrealistic and reduce productivity.

Melody Meyer is correct in pointing out that you have to focus on the business, what people are doing to move it ahead, and how you commence the strategy. But you have to look at the whole picture from a holistic perspective, all the way through the transformation strategy into execution: assigning numbers to the elements of a strategy has little meaning.

Get the balance right.