Home » - OPM model

- OPM model

O.P.M.: Organization Performance Model

O.P.M.: Organization Performance Model - SOS.BIZ - Giuseppe De Giovanni


All Organizations are Perfectly


Designed to Get the Results they Get



Giuseppe’s  approach is based on O.P.M., Organization Performance Model, tool which analyses holistically the core/enabling business processes, first running an Analysis, then proposing a Design.

In fact there are two processes that have proven to be absolutely critical for implementing an organizational improvement effort and making it manageable. These processes are (i) organization assessment and (ii) design; it is important to keep assessment and design in their proper perspective which can be synthetized into a simple statement:

 

All organizations perfectly deliver the results the design permits !

 

What it means is that every organization has ways of balancing out the many demands for its time, attention, resources and energy. Depending on the balance the system will be able to perform, or deliver results. We have to think of this balancing act as "design". Design is not just structure. It is not always formal or conscious. This balancing of resources is not always fixed - we may not do things the same way every time and our results may vary (even drastically!) from month to month. But, we can't really argue with the statement - the fact that certain results occur (and not others) verifies that some design has been perfectly executed.

 

From this statement ("All organizations perfectly deliver the results the design permits !") spring two corollaries:


 

1. To get better results, you need to improve the design of the organization.

Again, the term "design" here refers to more than just formal structure.  It is describing this total balancing act for time, attention, resources and energy.

 

2.  If we change the design, we need to be careful not to disturb what's working well now.

Every design has some features which are worth keeping.  Any change we contemplate will probably have both good and bad connotations for whatever current design and objectives are. The art is to replace negative features with positive ones without disturbing what's working well now. This requires a careful and accurate assessment of how the system is currently operating.

 

To sum it all up, assessment is the process which tells the manager what is out of balance and what is functioning effectively.  Design is the process whereby the manager tries to achieve a better balance to achieve better results.


 

 To summarize:

 

1. First, the competitive advantage in the organizational arena is the ability to produce true performance improvements that are enduring.  This requires two things:

  • Changing the basic values and assumptions - the core culture - when they are out of sync with business requirements.
  • Structurally reinforcing work behaviors through the design of the organization to be congruent with the desired culture.

 

2. Second, the processes of assessment and design can make a difference in creating and sustaining improved organizational performance. These processes not only provide the rational analysis for structural integrity, but also develop commitment (even passion) in the necessary critical mass. It goes without saying that these processes are iterative. Improving performance isn't something that you launch and then revisit in 10 years.

 

3. Third, many organizations attempt to assess their effectiveness. The real art is to be able to distinguish critical issues from extraneous ones and focus on true systems "leverage points" rather than "quick fix" solutions.

 

4. Finally, many organizations understand the need for missions, work teams, pay for contributions, etc. But few are able to build real understanding and commitment in a critical mass so that assumptions and behaviors are changed. This is the real "art" of design work.

 

All of this presents a big challenge to those working to improve an organization's performance.

Creating high performance is one of the most difficult undertakings we can think of. It would certainly be easier to issue executive orders, run training seminars, revise policy manuals, and mediate boss-subordinate conflicts.

 

Without fitting under the umbrella of a true systems strategy, however, each of these will probably be of little lasting value.

 

Remember:

All organizations perfectly deliver the results the design permits !

 

The processes of assessment and design processes provide a systematic way to bring about increasing organization effectiveness.