Author: Kelly Therrian
Best Practices are a great starting point for designing a process or system from scratch, but in an established industrial context, this term can be a slippery slope. “Best Practice” is a term that is thrown around all the time. Often, it is used when someone is trying to justify their point of view on how a topic or issue should be addressed. The Oxford dictionary definition of “Best Practice” is “commercial or professional procedures that are accepted or prescribed as being correct or most effective”.
If using the definition above, what is “Correct” and what is “Effective” for you? There are no shortage of theories and methods which claim to be the answer to issues organizations face, but they all seem to have one theme in common… you must conform to the theory, rather than the theory conforming to you.
Quickly think of some of the “Best Practices” you know or have been told:
X number of people should work on this
A system should have XYZ characteristics and functions
The process should flow this certain way
Typically, if a proposed solution does not fall exactly in line with the “Best Practice” it is dismissed as incorrect by the purists. This thought process can be extremely difficult due to the interconnectedness of an organization’s business processes. When making changes to one area or process, it almost certainly will affect several other parts or processes of the organization. If the organization is several years or decades old, many of their ways are set in place and difficult to change. For instance, a minor change in one of your areas may have a large impact on accounting practices, and making changes to the accounting system may cause issues with the procurement department. Is there enough value in your change to warrant that additional work?
Complexity is added if the individuals attempting to make the changes do not have the final decision authority, or don't understand all the impacts of the changes. This disconnect can create frustration within, and between, groups discussing the change.
I feel that the heart of these issues is integration. The integrations of processes have a big impact on their effectiveness and efficiency. After all, Effectiveness is doing the right things, and Efficiency is doing things right. Even if a “Best Practice” is fully implemented and may be effective, but is not properly integrated and supported with existing processes, it will be inefficient and eventually fail. Harmony and flow must remain a focus, and constraints to that flow have to be removed.
Some questions to consider when looking at implementing “Best Practices” should be:
What is the effort to reward ratio of trying to adopt the “Best Practice”?
Will a lesser change to existing practices give you the desired result?
How many other parts with the changes affect? (job description/ duties, business processes, quality, etc)
Can the work be phased, or does the change need to be sudden?
Do we have the support system to sustain and excel with the new practice?
If the answers to these questions point you to adopting an exact “Best Practice”, then that is fine, and a good scenario to find yourself in. If the answers do not support the adoption of a “Best Practice” then there is no need to worry. Find a solution that will work best for your organization, with your real world constraints, and make the adjustments required. Just because it is considered a “Best Practice”, doesn't mean it's the best option for your organization at this time.
Note About the Author
Kelly Therrien is one of ReSourceYYC’s virtual members. He has over 20 years of experience in various manufacturing and mining environments. He is currently the Director of Operations at Hyperi Group Inc. which focuses on helping organizations build Reliability, Sustainability and Technology implementation programs.
You can follow Kelly and Hyperi Group Inc on LinkedIn
or, check out their websites: