Ndumiso Khan

7/8/2016

Mind-Mapping

Challenge: Describe your challenge, including all relevant information.

We have recently partnered with an external Content Provider A, in order to expand our

product offering and thus be more competitive in our local marketplace.  However, the

partnership has created some challenges in these early stages - which is to be expected.

Multiple departments are affected by this new integration, which negatively impacts the

time they have to focus on their own unique KPIs.  This partnership is new, and people

naturally avoid what is unfamiliar – not ideal when trying to iron out the creases of a newly

introduced additional process.

We needed to improve internal synergy in order to seamlessly intergrate the external

Content with our existing SaaS platform, and manage consistent timely delivery to our

Clients.  For example, if our Clients notify us of missed/delayed content – from this external

Partner - what can we do internally to optimize the speed of resolution when multiple

departments are involved, and how can we best manage this new relationship with Content

Provider A?

Selection: In your own words, briefly describe the tool you selected (e.g., what it is and why

you selected it for your challenge -- including any appropriate video lecture references).

I selected Mind-Mapping as the appropriate tool.  In order to design an optimal internal

process involving many people from multiple departments, we need to first accurately

define the Current Reality, and then brainstorm solutions in order to establish a Design

Criteria Statement: the conditions our design must satisfy in order to solve our internal

roadblocks.

“Mind Mapping is a great way to align the organization around a common understanding  of the current reality. This can be a big help as you move forward in the design  process.”

Application: Describe how you applied the tool you selected to your challenge (e.g., what

you did and how the tool was applied effectively or ineffectively).

Session I: Each department in isolation

Individual sessions were held with each department (e.g. one session with Customer

Relations, one session with SalesOperations, etc.) to establish their Current Reality – the

challenges at hand.  We used a large white board split into four columns, headed by the

open-ended questions below:

1. Why are we failing to act quickly?  What is the impact on our Clients?

2. How can we increase the speed with which we react to delivery issues?

3. What is the ideal flow of tasks across each department:  from Client Relations, all the

way through to liaising with Content Partner A?  If everything went according to plan,

executed flawlessy, what are our Design Criteria?

4. How do we measure our Department’s success?  What does success look like?

Session II: All departments together

We then grouped the departments together for a final session.  There were 23 people in

the room.  Every person was given a stack of Post-It Notes and a marker.  Each department

was given different colour Post-Its for easy identification.

To start the session, I reiterated the WHY – why we were gathering and sharing ideas, the

value to the company and our Clients, and promoting a more streamlined workflow

through inspired teamwork.

On the board I drew a basic flow of the Phases, from “Client Issue”, right through to

“Engaging with Content Partner A”.  Under each Phase, I wrote down the solutions from

each department on how to optimize each Phase.

Every person was then asked to vote on each suggested Solution by pasting a note next to

their preferred Solution,. Each preferred solution was opened up for further debate by

posing it as a hypothesis, flagging potential pitfalls, and making more suggestions – an

open debate.   This became the Blueprint for “What does Success look like?” for each

Phase.

I then asked everyone to vote for their preferred candidate to take ownership for each

phase.  Again using post-it notes, this time folded and placed in piles.  Thus nominating

Phase leaders.

Insight: Describe the insight you gained from applying the tool you selected to your

challenge (e.g., how an insight affected your thinking about the challenge and about design

thinking more broadly).

When people are given the opportunity to express their own ideas, it’s amazing how the

momentum can build.

Indeed in Phase I, in the individual sessions, I tried to challenge every proposed solution

with at least 3 “Why’s?” – if the person could not answer further, others were encouraged

to step up.

I was surprised by the level of buy-in demonstrated in the voting stages, and how often

people would vote for the ideas of other departments.

All in all, it was a conversation – an ind-depth conversation where every attendee’s input

was valued, creativity was encouraged, and solutions collectively designed and agreed

upon.

In terms of synthesizing a new plan of action, the tool was effective.  The next step will be  to have a conference call with all nominated Phase Leaders to find out how effective we are  being, if there has been visible improvement, and measure proactivity and implementation  on a scheduled basis.  If one phase or department is lagging, this can be addressed  quickly.

Approach: Describe what you might do differently next time -- applying the same tool you

selected or a different one -- and the reason(s) why.

What I would do differently next time is have a representative from each department do a  quick 2 minute introduction in the Group Session (Phase II) on how their department were  previously struggling with managing its time and KPIs with the introduction of this new  priority.  This would have provided better context for all involved, a better understanding of  the Current Reality.    I also would have had a group exercise of a mock Client complaint, splitting the room into  4 groups, who would then implement the solution for each phase in real time.


Ndumiso Khan 7/8/2016 Mind - Mapping Challenge : Describe your challenge , including all relevant information . We have recently partnered with an external Content Provider A , in order to expand our product offering and thus be more competitive in our local marketplace . However , the partnership has created some challenges in these early stages - which is to be expected . Multiple departments are affected by this new integration , which negatively impacts the time they have to focus on their own unique KPIs . This partnership is new , and people naturally avoid what is unfamiliar – not ideal when trying to iron out the creases of a newly introduced additional process . We needed to improve internal synergy in order to seamlessly intergrate the external Content with our existing SaaS platform , and manage consistent timely delivery to our Clients . For example , if our Clients notify us of missed / delayed content – from this external Partner - what can we do internally to optimize the speed of resolution when multiple departments are involved , and how can we best manage this new relationship with Content Provider A ? Selection : In your own words , briefly describe the tool you selected ( e.g. , what it is and why you selected it for your challenge -- including any appropriate video lecture references ) . I selected Mind - Mapping as the appropriate tool . In order to design an optimal internal process involving many people from multiple departments , we need to first accurately define the Current Reality , and then brainstorm solutions in order to establish a Design Criteria Statement : the conditions our design must satisfy in order to solve our internal roadblocks . “ Mind Mapping is a great way to align the organization around a common understanding of the current reality . This can be a big help as you move forward in the design process . ” Application : Describe how you applied the tool you selected to your challenge ( e.g. , what you did and how the tool was applied effectively or ineffectively ) . Session I : Each department in isolation Individual sessions were held with each department ( e.g. one session with Customer Relations , one session with SalesOperations , etc . ) to establish their Current Reality – the challenges at hand . We used a large white board split into four columns , headed by the open - ended questions below : 1 . Why are we failing to act quickly ? What is the impact on our Clients ? 2 . How can we increase the speed with which we react to delivery issues ? 3 . What is the ideal flow of tasks across each department : from Client Relations , all the way through to liaising with Content Partner A ? If everything went according to plan , executed flawlessy , what are our Design Criteria ? 4 . How do we measure our Department ’s success ? What does success look like ? Session II : All departments together We then grouped the departments together for a final session . There were 23 people in the room . Every person was given a stack of Post - It Notes and a marker . Each department was given different colour Post - Its for easy identification . To start the session , I reiterated the WHY – why we were gathering and sharing ideas , the value to the company and our Clients , and promoting a more streamlined workflow through inspired teamwork . On the board I drew a basic flow of the Phases , from “ Client Issue ” , right through to “ Engaging with Content Partner A ” . Under each Phase , I wrote down the solutions from each department on how to optimize each Phase . Every person was then asked to vote on each suggested Solution by pasting a note next to their preferred Solution , . Each preferred solution was opened up for further debate by posing it as a hypothesis , flagging potential pitfalls , and making more suggestions – an open debate . This became the Blueprint for “ What does Success look like ? ” for each Phase . I then asked everyone to vote for their preferred candidate to take ownership for each phase . Again using post - it notes , this time folded and placed in piles . Thus nominating Phase leaders . Insight : Describe the insight you gained from applying the tool you selected to your challenge ( e.g. , how an insight affected your thinking about the challenge and about design thinking more broadly ) . When people are given the opportunity to express their own ideas , it ’s amazing how the momentum can build . Indeed in Phase I , in the individual sessions , I tried to challenge every proposed solution with at least 3 “ Why ’s ? ” – if the person could not answer further , others were encouraged to step up . I was surprised by the level of buy - in demonstrated in the voting stages , and how often people would vote for the ideas of other departments . All in all , it was a conversation – an ind - depth conversation where every attendee ’s input was valued , creativity was encouraged , and solutions collectively designed and agreed upon . In terms of synthesizing a new plan of action , the tool was effective . The next step will be to have a conference call with all nominated Phase Leaders to find out how effective we are being , if there has been visible improvement , and measure proactivity and implementation on a scheduled basis . If one phase or department is lagging , this can be addressed quickly . Approach : Describe what you might do differently next time -- applying the same tool you selected or a different one -- and the reason(s ) why . What I would do differently next time is have a representative from each department do a quick 2 minute introduction in the Group Session ( Phase II ) on how their department were previously struggling with managing its time and KPIs with the introduction of this new priority . This would have provided better context for all involved , a better understanding of the Current Reality . I also would have had a group exercise of a mock Client complaint , splitting the room into 4 groups , who would then implement the solution for each phase in real time .