In the past two days, the Didi incident has been all over social media, and we hope that another tragedy does not occur on Didi’s ride-sharing platform. In light of several recent accidents involving Didi, the focus of discussion has shifted to Didi’s slow response and the rigidity of its processes.
At this time, I happen to be researching topics related to processes, so I would like to take this opportunity to discuss the essence of processes, why we need them, and how they should be optimized.
This topic is quite broad, so I plan to break it down into several discussions during my spare time. Everyone is welcome to participate actively, and I also encourage you to share and comment; your contributions can help more people enjoy the fun of project management!
The Essence of Processes
When we discuss the rigidity and bureaucracy of processes, have you ever thought about what a process is and why we need processes? If processes are rigid, why did we introduce them in the first place and promote them vigorously across various industries? For example, Huawei introduced IPD, many automotive, tire, and shipping companies have adopted management systems, and the software industry has embraced the waterfall model.
Based on the principle of first things first, let’s start thinking from the following scenario.
For instance, your company needs to organize an outdoor event and you need to move a row of tables from a large conference room to the grass outside. As the person in charge, you call a few colleagues to help. Suppose each person moves one table from inside the conference room to outside. Then they return for the next one. When you assign the task, you notice that everyone has a different method of moving the tables. Some use both hands to lift the short sides of the table and carry it to the side, while others lift the long sides and move it in front of them. Some even just pick the table up and carry it out. During this process, if one person is moving a table out while another is coming in, you might find that they could bump into each other, and if the person in front stops, the person behind can only wait…
At this point, you wonder if there is a way to streamline and standardize the process of moving the tables. When we say we need to move tables, everyone should follow the same method. This way, anyone, even without prior experience, can quickly learn how to do it by following the instructions, thus achieving the project goal.That is when processes come into play; originally, processes were designed to define how tasks should be done.
Next, you realize that if one person moves one table at a time from start to finish, they will need to rest before starting again. You also notice that some colleagues work together to move tables; two people can carry two tables at once (one on top of the other). One person leads while the other follows. If they walk in sync, they can easily move the tables outside without needing a break, and they can return to move the next set. From an efficiency standpoint, the time taken for two people to cooperate and move two tables is even less than the time one person takes to move one table, creating a greater than one plus one effect.
So you start to think thatdivision of labor and cooperation can lead to even greater work efficiency. But how can we ensure that everyone can effectively divide tasks and cooperate? This is where processes come in again. By defining different job responsibilities (for example, in the table-moving scenario, some need to stack the tables, while others need to move them), we can assign different people to different roles, allowing everyone to work effectively according to the defined process.Through the cooperation of different assembly lines, we can achieve higher work efficiency, creating a greater than one plus one equals N effect.
The division of labor and assembly line work is also the foundation of modern scientific management, as proposed by the father of scientific management, Mr. Taylor.
Thus, when we rethink processes, we must first return to the essence of processes. Initially, processes were designed to define the sequence of work, and later they were used to solve issues of division of labor and cooperation, enhancing organizational efficiency.
In the industry, IKEA is an example of taking processes to the extreme (surprising, right? 
). You can refer to “IKEA Uses Just One Blueprint to Overthrow the Restaurant Industry!” for further reading.
Since processes are originally meant to enhance organizational efficiency, why do we now have a fear of processes? Why do people increasingly feel that processes hinder and constrain them in large organizations?
Next time, we will discuss how to optimize processes.
Everyone is welcome to participate actively in the discussion, and I encourage you to share and comment; your contributions can help more people enjoy the fun of project management!