Telecom & Technology Consulting
Productivity and efficiency are the two pillars of measuring IT performance. Leaders want their teams to get the most accomplished in the least amount of time. When the results fall short of expectations, the default conclusion is that there must be a flaw in the process or workflows. After all, what else is to blame for missed deadlines and results that don’t quite align with project plans?
But in many cases leaders need to extend their vision. It’s not that processes need to be upgraded – you may need to tear down the entire IT structure and build it again from scratch. Of course, it may not be obvious whether to change the process or the structure.
For starters, assess if IT output is slowing down. More specifically, is the team merely piecing things together in order to meet the minimum requirements, rather than going the extra mile like they did in the past? If so, that may be sign for a restructuring initiative. Shuffling around who reports to whom won’t achieve a thing without repairing the actual structure of the team.
Don’t be fooled by the perception that a “busy” team means they’re working at maximum productivity. That’s not always the case. What’s often occurring is a lot of movement within an outdated structure, which ultimately doesn’t produce much of value. To be sure, it’s usually time to restructure when there’s a consistent, documented decrease in the speed and quality of technology deployments.
Begin to restructure by defining specific products and processes, and how development may be bottlenecked. From there, choose the types of responsibility necessary for the structure, and use that to drive the formation of teams and specific roles.
It’s common for tech leaders to witness projects fire fast out of the gate, only to see productivity wither away over the ensuing months. This is usually caused by a lack of sustained enthusiasm for the mission at hand, which indicates a need to shift something in the team structure. This could be an operational, organizational, or strategic aspect of the structure. Identify where and why passion has decreased, and then create a phased plan to rebuild the team’s architecture.
Whatever you do, be sure to clarify to the team the rationale for the restructuring, and how it will benefit not just the organization, but also their individual careers. Without an explanation, you are likely to cause uncertainty about their future with the company, and importantly, resistance when implementing the new structure.
Resistance to AI initiatives is another indication that structure, not processes, need to change. Ignoring AI is not only a monumental blunder from a competitive standpoint, it also points to a dearth of innovative thinking within the ranks. At minimum, IT should be at least brainstorming ideas and testing select concepts for viability. But if AI isn’t even a consideration, the best process in the world won’t prevent complete organizational disaster. Look at the structure.
It’s also worth elaborating about innovation. This isn’t only a quality that may be an aspect of one’s personality; innovation is, ideally, a spirit that’s weaved into the entire company culture in general, and into the IT department specifically. Without innovation, you might as well close the business and sell the URL.
As we mentioned regarding AI, changing a process (or two or three) won’t conceal or make up for the void in company imagination and creativity. Teams and individuals must come up with new, forward-thinking ideas all the time. And often, there are people who have that ability, yet their creativity is stifled due to the structure.
If you’re not growing, the solution may simply be a matter of shifting perspective. Look at the structure, not the process.
