If you can execute a process successfully in more than one way, should you? I define a process as an activity with predictable inputs and predictable outputs that can be repeated within a defined area of tolerance.
One of my colleagues said today, “You can do it either way. It doesn’t matter.” I disagree, it does matter how you choose to execute a process. The reason it matters is because people are involved and when you give a person a finger, they’re liable to take the whole hand. When you give someone the opportunity to execute a task in multiple ways, it’s quite easy for that person to apply this freedom to all tasks and suddenly the processes are out of control.
When it comes to training, the potential multiple ways of execution are most likely going to cause confusion for the trainee. When you are new to a task you need explicit instructions so that you can test the waters and build your confidence step by step. Freedom of execution is for the experienced. It is something to be earned and it is not to be taken for granted.
Does this mean that there is no room for creativity in processes? Well, improvement is one form of creativity and process improvements are always welcome. But in general, no, processes do not leave any room for creativity. If someone is looking for creativity, they should look for an art or a practice instead of a process.
An art is very “human” with undefinable inputs and unpredictable outputs. An example of an art is when someone writes a song or draws a sketch. For an artist, inspiration usually happens “magically” and the way the result was achieved may be impossible to repeat. A typical characteristic of art is the “one-off”. There are millions of “one-hit-wonder” bands out there and they all find it difficult to repeat their initial success.
A practice is a man/machine activity, i.e. it can be done by a human alone, more efficiently with the assistance of a machine, but never by a machine alone. A practice is characterized by “fuzzy” inputs, i.e. creativity, but with predictable outputs. An example of a practice could be the selection of a strategic supplier for you company.
I defined a process above (fixed input/output) and it is very much a machine activity. What I mean by this is that a process is possible to model (not necessarily so easily) or simulate and that the activity by it’s very nature (well-defined parameters, non-creative), is more suitable to be executed by a machine than a human. An example of this could be the process for filling coca cola cans with sticky, dark liquid. A machine can do this faster, more efficiently and with a higher degree of quality than any human could ever hope to achieve.
Many times we talk about processes, when in fact we mean practices. Since we are talking about the wrong thing, we get frustrated when the result doesn’t meet our expectations or when employees find it difficult to follow the instructions.
So, does it matter how we execute an activity? I most definitely think it does and it’s just as important that we classify that activity correctly, i.e. as an art, practice or process. There is only one way to execute a process currently, but that may not be the best way and improvements can change the process in the future.
