Why do some system implementations fail?
Was there something missing from these projects?
Is there a secret ingredient that makes projects successful?
Welcome to episode 2 of a fourteen-part series by John Broadbent from Realise Potential.
It was Peter Senge, the American systems scientist, who once noted that "Business and human endeavours are systems. We tend to focus on snapshots of isolated parts of the system, and wonder why our deepest problems are never solved."
That's such a truism, and so when it comes to implementing systems, it's critical that there's alignment between three key components. What are they?
People, processes and the systems themselves.
Too often, a new system is put in place and it fails to deliver the expected outcome, simply because there was little to no change management or training. That's the people piece. Or the processes it was designed to improve were not properly understood, not well defined in the first place, or worse, were already broken.
And this applies just the same to any smart factory and Industry 4.0 projects too. In fact, an Internet of Things research paper from Cisco, where respondents were asked which was more important, data, process, people or the Things themselves, they noted that 40% related to the data, 27% to the process, 20% to people, and only 13% attributed to Things.
Let's take a look at each of these to perhaps understand why this might be the case.
When it comes to data, my experience is that manufacturers are already data-rich, drinking from the proverbial fire hose by not only having too much data, but also not doing a good job or efficient job with the data they already have. Sadly, this makes them information-poor.
When it comes to process, if we digitise a broken process, not surprisingly we get a broken digitised process, and in many cases, this can be worse than what was previously there, as often the human element that would have picked up on an error, might no longer be in the loop.
It's imperative that a business understands its processes and has them fully mapped, well before embarking on any digitising project.
Then we have the people component, covering aptitude, training, change management, ease of use, and the need for user-friendly systems.
As I said in the introduction, I've experienced software system projects fail miserably, simply because the people component was not done well, if at all.
Then finally we have the Things themselves, and with a projected increase in growth from 8.2 billion to 85 billion things from 2017 to 2025, that's a 10-fold increase in just 8 years, we're going to have even more data to contend with.
Of course, referring to Peter Senge's quote, we need to approach all of these in a holistic way, otherwise, we run the risk of never solving our issues. 
This web article from another Cisco survey back in May 2017, screams a not-so-glamorous headline where 75% of IoT projects were failing:
If you read it, you'll discover that the human element, cross-collaboration, knowing the processes, leaning on external expertise and building a healthy relationship with failure, were all components of the 25% that did succeed.
The only way any project will be successful is where we ensure we have alignment between people, processes and the systems that support them.
Yet over and over again, projects fail simply due to this misalignment.
If you're having a light bulb moment watching this, hopefully, it sparks some realisations that you might wish to ponder before you embark on your next project to ensure you're not simply focusing on isolated aspects.
If you need help, don't hesitate to reach out to me, and we can connect. Stay safe and well, and may all your projects be successful.
John Broadbent
Watch John's original LinkedIn video here.
