Our era seems destined for ever-increasing complexity, bringing with it its share of excesses, including within businesses. Should we give in to this temptation or resist it? The answer probably lies somewhere in the middle.
The complexity of a product, a process or a technique must never be an end, but the natural consequence of a clearly defined objective. A few examples illustrate this challenge:
• Is the technical virtuosity of a concert pianist the ultimate objective, or is it merely a means to serve the interpretation and emotion conveyed to the audience?
• For the discerning enthusiast, is the assembly of a watch with six or seven complications essential, or do aesthetics, the beauty of the craftsmanship and the intention behind it take precedence?
• Are a building’s sophisticated technological tools the key to its effective management, or are they merely a passing fad to ‘keep up with the Joneses’?
It must be acknowledged that, in everyday life, the sophistication of actions, procedures and products has often become an end. This trend poses a major challenge for businesses: it is extremely costly.
Let there be no mistake: this is not a call for a return to the Stone Age, nor a renunciation of the advances brought about by research and development. It is, above all, a matter of rediscovering common sense and applying the famous ‘KISS’ principle (Keep It Simple and Smart).
However, this is where the real challenge begins. Whilst this principle may seem accessible to all, practice shows that we quickly stray from it when faced with the numerous and unrealistic demands coming from certain middle and senior managers.
How can we resist to:
• Producing twenty versions of a presentation, dictated by incessant demands focused on form rather than substance?
• The temptation to add technical indicators to a system that was not designed to accommodate them.
• Adding processes to an unsuitable IT tool, at the risk of having to completely reprogram it with every new version?
• The purchase of sophisticated analytical tools that no one has the time or expertise to use.
• The implementation of cumbersome procedures, multiplying the layers and stakeholders to the point of losing sight of the goal?
The list could go on and on.
It is time to get back to basics: first define the objectives and the steps to achieve them before indulging in intellectual ‘fun’. This does not mean banishing reflection or prohibiting innovation, but rather returning to an essential question: what are we really talking about?
The pressure of financial burdens and the rapid pace of technological change may well be the best remedies against this temptation towards excessive sophistication.
Enjoy reading and give it some thought.