For several years running, many large corporations have attempted a series of initiatives designed to drive cross-functional efficiencies into the organization. These include innovation, supply chain management, process re-design, shared services business models, Six Sigma, lean manufacturing and ERP’s. All of these represent significant strategic solutions to critical business problems requiring multi-million dollar investments. They promise an ROI of tens of millions of dollars. And they all require a cross-functional approach to implementation.

 

 

These initiatives share one other significant commonality: All are candidates for the 70% sub-optimization rate experienced by major change efforts. Simply stated, in the majority of cases, strategic problems aren’t solved, implementation costs far exceed budgeted estimates, and the actual ROI is quite disappointing. So instead of creating the intended business suite of integrated solutions, the organization ends up with a set of complex implementation challenges that ferociously consume scarce resources. 

 

Each of the strategic initiatives is susceptible to predictable barriers, including:

 

As the organization seeks to implement these types of cross-functional changes, it faces a complex set of challenges. The movement from a silo’d organization in which information, control, and focus move up and down, to a horizontal organization where these boundaries cease to exist, creates implementation chaos, as the conventional bureaucracies, political dynamics, and functional business processes are unleashed to the winds of change. 

 

Yet, ironically, many organizations pursue cross-functionality in a silo’d fashion. Each initiative is viewed in isolation, rather than being managed as a portfolio of organizational change. To further complicate matters, different implementation approaches are deployed for each cross-functional effort. It’s not unusual for an organization to attempt to simplify a highly-complex change by narrowing the focus to managing one key barrier; for example, building a strong communication plan, or honing in on one element of the culture.

 

 

For enterprise-wide change to “beat the odds”, a systemic approach must be followed. It makes good sense that the organization must pursue the desired state—cross-functionality—in a manner that is itself cross-functional. In addition, the implementation approach must address the predictable barriers to enterprise-wide execution, be scalable and replicable, and it must be practical and customizable. Without such an approach, it is virtually impossible to implement a single cross-functional change, let alone multiple changes, and expect the desired results to be achieved on time, on budget, and with all business, technical and human objectives met.

 

The Accelerating Implementation Methodology (AIM) provides a structured process that addresses all the requisite criteria for success. It includes a set of data-driven tools that enable the organization to measure the specific strengths and weaknesses that will be encountered when multiple enterprise-wide initiatives are deployed. Equally important, it provides the structure to develop the strategies and tactics to mitigate implementation barriers and leverage the strengths.

 

Enterprise-wide change is difficult and complex. On the business side, it requires change to strategy, structure, operations, and technology. On the people side, changes in employee expectations, perceptions, behaviors and skills are required. The complexity can only be successfully managed with a common language and structured approach that purposefully integrates solutions to create “One Company.”