[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Of course, people on the leadership team would bedeeply skeptical of many of these possibilities, so the next step was forthe skeptics to state what conditions had to be true in order for themto believe that a possibility would work.In other words, managers hadto shift from asking, What do I believe about this possibility? to ask-ing, What would I have to believe in order to support this possibility?In order to answer the second question, managers had to imagine thatideas that they did not like could actually be great ideas which wasno easy task.A leadership team could not start evaluating the possibilities untilthey understood the conditions necessary to make each possibility suc-cessful.Only then could they discuss which of the conditions neededfor the success of a possibility were the least likely to hold true.Skep-tics were important for this step, because they were the most likely tounderstand the biggest barriers to success.Lafley suggested that the person who was most skeptical be asked todesign a test to prove whether the barrier she or he saw was actuallyreal.The entire team had to agree that the test was valid and properjudgments could be formed on whether or not to proceed based on thetest results.Tests had to be detailed and focused on a single barrier to16.Information in this section is from A.G.Lafley, Roger L.Martin, Jan W.Rivkin,and Nicolaj Siggelkow, Bringing Science to the Art of Strategy, Harvard BusinessReview, September 2012. CHAPTER 3 DELIGHTED CUSTOMERS 95success.The biggest barrier was investigated first, because if it failed,no further investigation was needed, making the testing process rela-tively efficient.In those cases where the first test passed, less criticalbarriers were tested, one at a time, until the team was convinced thatthe possibility could succeed.To summarize the P&G approach to scientific planning:171.Frame a choice.Convert each business issue into at least twomutually exclusive options that might resolve it.2.Generate possibilities.Broaden the list of options to ensure aninclusive range of possibilities.3.Specify conditions.For each possibility, describe what must betrue for it to be sound.4.Identify barriers.Determine which conditions are least likely tohold true.5.Design tests.For each key barrier condition, devise a test theteam agrees is valid and sufficient to generate commitment.6.Conduct the tests.Start with the tests for the barrier conditionsin which there is the least confidence.7.Make a choice.Review the key conditions in light of the testresults in order to reach a decision.The best part about scientific planning is that it combats cognitivebiases through careful experimentation around a broad array of pos-sibilities.Product teams learn to ask challenging questions questionsthat designers would find familiar:1.What are the possibilities?2.What has to be true in order for a possibility to succeed?3.What experiments can we run to see if those things are true?Anna: I like the idea of using the scientific method to de-velop strategy.I like decisions that are based on data.M&T: We like the fact that a scientific process tends tokeep people from jumping to conclusions.We also like theidea that skeptics are forced to play devil s advocate against theirown skepticism.17.Ibid. 96 THE LEAN MINDSETA Design ToolboxAs Theresa Smith noted earlier in this chapter, there are many well-known tools and techniques that designers use to help them createengaging experiences.We will list a few here along with references forthose who wish to explore these tools further.Establish EmpathyThe first step in creating the right product is to help the product teamestablish empathy with their audience.There are many approaches todeveloping empathy; among our favorites are journey mapping andadoption chain analysis.Journey map:18 A journey map is a visualization of the experienceof potential customers as they struggle trying to do some job ajob that will be improved by the new product.A journey map issimilar to a value stream map, only it is a map of the customer svalue stream, not the product team s value stream
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]