Why is a timeline of Information Assets a lot better than a workflow?

Can we avoid digitised bureaucracy?

We are slowly moving away from the chaos of the desktop to more focused and integrated ways of working. But which approach is really fit for purpose?

I guess following the introduction of the production line by Ford, we all think in terms of workflows in one way or another. We feel comfortable in thinking of events follow and connect to each other in front of our eyes or in the ‘eye of our mind’. For example, I can easily visualise that I will put this in place so then I can add this which means that I can finish this action and then add it to that module which another ‘production line’ has produced. Of course, this is a very simplistic description of a very sophisticated method and process for producing very diverse goods – tangible or intangible.

But here is an interesting thing. Toyota very quickly discovered that the more complicated the just-in-time production line process became, the more difficulties were created along the complete production line. The issue was that the knowledge of the employees became too narrow in focus and by missing the big picture, more and more mistakes were made. The solution was obvious: rotation of responsibilities and training.

Are these lessons applicable to our information-saturated world? Yes, very much so and with enormous impact. Why? Simply because if the speed of physical production line is limited by the speed of human (or robotic!) actions, the speed of information-based work is limited by two factors:

1.       The rate we can absorb and act on information, and

2.       The rate we can scrutinise and accept/reject Artificial Intelligence input when this capability becomes main-stream

One way to tackle the rate we can absorb and act on information is to use workflows. In essence, a workflow translates the business logic (what we want to achieve) to a step-by-step process for staff to follow. It is in other words, a map of what a business does in order to achieve the sought-after result.

Does it work? Well, if you need a strictly controlled process, then yes, it works. For example, if you produce flammable gas, you certainly need a very controlled environment to avoid any catastrophic explosions. However, if your business is research and development of flammable gas then such a strict environment will rather stop any progress.

Why is that? Why workflows are not delivering what we expect? The answer lies in how we humans think, draw conclusions and act. We think in context and make decisions with reference(s) to events. Both of these components are dynamic (life is dynamic!). A workflow, no matter how sophisticated, cannot foresee, predict and reflect every eventuality.

Workflows do not work not because the method is bad - far from it! They do not work because they allow us, all of us, to tranfer our bureaucracy to the digital space. We can apply lean methods, reviews, PDSA etc. to optimise our workflows before digitising them. Do we do this? Do we do this every time a new process is interoduced or an old one becomes inefficient?

i4cu reflects this human-thinking environment ansd the need for always efficient processes: a time-line with all the context and references for decisions for every business activity. In other words, i4cu beautifully simplifies the complexity of our information flux without missing the detail so we can focus our work on decisions and actions without the complexities and restrictions of a rigid or inefficient workflow.