OutCompete Software

Business Functional Modeling

OutCompete Modeler® software supports facilitation of ahead-of-time discovery of opportunities to improve various business processes in order to gain sufficient competitive advantage.

OutCompete Modeler® supports two business process improvement tactics:

1. Functional approach
2. Addressing the dilemmas

Our Intentions and Real Situations

For every situation we are in, for every process we design, its closeness to our intention is the best indicator whether or not everything is OK.  This unique role of our intentions is of key importance for success of problem solving: customers accept solution only if it can transform the situation from “how it’s happening” into “how they want it happening.”

The “secret” is rooted in human psychology.  Human life is devoted to satisfaction of needs; as Abraham Maslow explained, these needs are “engraved” in subconscious minds.  Each “record” comprises two components: the need itself and the underlying process, i.e. basic way to satisfy this need.

“From the customer's perspective, products and services are used to help them better execute some underlying process. A product is simply a point-in-time solution designed to help execute a process. Customers have a clear knowledge of the underlying processes they are executing and the elements of that process that are important to them.” (Ulwick, A., and Eisenhauer, J., Customers Do Not Know What They Want.  Or Do They? Strategyn).

Intentions toward any situation or process present a combination of multiple underlying processes; if real situation does not fit, with tolerable “slack,” any underlying process, people feel dissatisfied, and call it “a problem.”

Hence, the duty of business process / situation improvement could be formulated as follows:

Transform the real situation in such a way that its outcomes loosely, but tolerably fit expectations (underlying processes) of the “situation owner.”

Functional Modeling of Situations

Customers define their real expectations while describing how the situation was intended, designed, expected to happen, or how they would like it to happen.  In author’s opinion, the most adequate way to make this intention obvious for both customers and consultants is visualizing this “story” in form of cause-and-effect “functional” diagram (flowchart, process map, etc.) as defined by IDEF0.

In order to discover the difference between “real” and “intended” situation, customers pinpoint the function which outcome disappoints them, i.e. Target Event, and explain how the “real” and “desired” outcomes of this function look like, thus clearly defining the objective of problem-solving project: change situation so that outcome of Target Event changes to “desired.”

…Change the Things Which Should Be Changed

In any situation, only three “things,” i.e. functions, should be changed:

1. Function which outcome disappoints us (Target Event)
2. Functions that directly or indirectly influence the Target Function (Influential Functions)
3. Functions that are directly or indirectly influenced by the Target Event (Influenced Functions).

On the other hand, only those functions should be changed that can be modified by customer.

…Accept the Things That Cannot Be Changed

One should accept that there is no reason to even try changing the following things:

1. Functions that comprise the situation, but do not belong to three “things which should be changed”
2. Functions that are not involved in the situation or are not influenced by changes in the situation
3. Functions that cannot, for various reasons, be modified by customer.

…Distinguish the One from the Other

With functional model of intended situation, it is easy to be wise by applying two rules:

1. Select Target Event and all functions connected with it by links, then
2. Unselect those functions that are out of direct control of customer.

As a result, the “maximum scope of project,” i.e. all the functions whose changes should be considered for comprehensive problem-solving, is overtly defined.  The real scope of the project, however, will be even more limited by project timeframe.

A Time to Cast Away Stones and a Time to Gather Stones Together…

Now, start altering the functions away from their current state; “cast away stones.”

The extent of this transformation should be “surgically accurate”: insufficient change does not satisfy the customers, while excess may cost too much without adding any satisfaction.

The following rules hint at such accuracy:

1. Modify the Target Event so that this alteration alone grants the desired outcome of this function.
2. Modify an influential function so that this alteration alone grants the desired outcome of Target Event.
3. Modify an influenced function so that this alteration alone grants the desired outcome of this function, under the condition of current outcome of Target Event.

Documenting of all information, ideas and opinions is crucial at this stage of work.  List even ones that obviously “won’t work.”

When “flow of thoughts” runs dry, utilize TRIZ Tools such as Principles or Standard Solutions as additional hints for possible alterations.

Then, new “stones” should be gathered together into the Solution.

If Solution “does not work” or “does not meet the criteria,” then appropriate dilemmas should be formulated and addressed.

Divide and rule.
- Caesar

Modeling the Dilemma

The dilemmas arise as the roadblocks to implementation of Solution: either something “does not work” under particular conditions, or Solution cannot meet imposed criteria.

In other words, dilemma occurs when attempt to improve a situation is associated with a trouble (see Fig. 1).

Figure 1. Dilemma: attempted improvement is associated with trouble

There are only three types of such association:

1. Improvement produces an undesired, intolerable side effect (Fig. 2)

Figure 2. Dilemma-1: attempted improvement has undesired side effect

2. Improvement violates some important requirement (Fig. 3)

Figure 3. Dilemma-2: attempted improvement violates requirement

3. Improvement is impeded by some important or unavoidable condition (Fig. 4)

Figure 4. Dilemma-3: attempted improvement is impeded by unavoidable condition

In all cases, attempted improvement is the “focus” of dilemma: without this attempt there would be no trouble; with this attempt, improvement is accompanied with intolerable trouble – which manifests the dilemma.

Divide…

Dilemma is hopeless because people usually take an attempt to improve as something

• ‘Undividable and immutable’
• ‘The only one able to do the job.’

Figure 5. Separation: improvement is divided into two parts

Attempt to improve should be divided into two (or more) parts: Improvement+ contributing to achievement, and Improvement- related to a trouble (see Fig. 5).

…and Rule