How to Predict Success Using Workshops

Today I’m thinking about workshops, and what they can tell you about the success or failure of a project.  A former colleague approached me recently about running some technology deployment workshops for his current employer. The goal of these workshops is similar to those we had collaborated on before: to allow new customers to maximize the value of the technology they had just purchased.  In actual fact, these kinds of workshops have very little to do with maximizing technology, and a great deal to do with facilitating the discussion of how this new technology would change the customer’s operations.  Yes, that dreaded term, “process change management”.

I started remembering how, after a few of these workshops, it became easy to tell whether the attendees were just going through the motions as prescribed by senior management or truly committed to a successful deployment.

Stakeholder attendance: for me this is the single most telling indication of senior management commitment and interest, also known as, imperative to succeed. If there are VPs or CXO level managers at the table, it’s a good sign.  It sends the message down the ranks that this is a serious, strategic undertaking that the executives are monitoring closely.  If there is a cross-section of departments represented, it’s also a good sign because process change rarely happens in a vacuum and you want to be dealing with people who recognize this.

For example, if a field service group changes the way they troubleshoot on-site, there are implications for the technical support people who take the trouble call; there may be a requirement for product development to include or invent new features that support the new procedures; product management may need to review pricing structure for both product and support; sales may need to learn about the new service offering.  These groups need to be part of the discussion; quite often, they are the ones to contribute the most effective issues and solutions by filling in the missing pieces of the knowledge puzzle.

Workshop size: I’d rather have a small, focused group than a classroom size group of managers. The dynamics of a large group tend to turn it from a workshop to a lecture; people are less inclined to join in the conversation and more self-conscious about offering up ideas.  If the workshop is made up of decision-makers from each affected department, the ones who normally phone each other when glitches happen, it works much better.

Leadership, not cost savings: companies often use cost savings to justify the purchase because there is a pro forma to go through.  This happens even when the decision-makers can see that the technology will allow their business to take a leadership position and leap ahead of the competition.  When this is the case, it always comes out during the workshops.  Then I know that there is a champion or two who will drive adoption of the technology and come up with creative new solutions that get everyone so excited that the group will come to consensus on how to implement the basics (cost-savings, efficiency) just to get to a point where they are able to make that big leap.

Follow-up: During a workshop, I like to document the tasks that need follow-up after the workshop, and have members of the workshop volunteer or be volunteered for those tasks.  I don’t even need to check back 30 days later.  The responsiveness of the group says it all, as does the enthusiasm of the person who owns the project – how will he/she drive the process to execute on the plans?

If there is consensus on goals, priorities and requirements, then technical and operational planning become simple; which features to deploy and when, what are the logistics that need to happen, what are the internal and external communications programmes?

Sales carries a quota: in cases where the technology will impact the end-customer, and there are benefits to the company in having high customer adoption (of the new technology or service offering), if the sales executive is willing to have his/her team carry a quota or get bonuses based on adoption, it’s one of the best omens for success.

In conclusion:

The title of this blog is somewhat tongue-in-cheek because is it really possible 100% of the time to use a workshop to gauge the success of a new program or technology?  After all, a lukewarm campaign can find new life and a sizzling start can fizzle out.

With a technical audience, it’s hard to bill a workshop as “process change management”.  It can be technology deployment, it can be project planning, it can be road map prioritization, anything but those dread words “process change”.  So when the right people show up, play nice, and figure this out for themselves – it’s a good omen for project success.  It’s not a substitute for formal change management procedures, but it starts things down the right path because the most important ingredient for project success isn’t the technology, it’s the people.