The authors of the article pay special attention to process improvement. In particular, they focus on common factors that lead organizations to failure, even when they have allocated vast investments to improving performed processes. They mention the primary limitations and risks connected to process improvement that prevent organizations from achieving better economic outcomes and meeting or even exceeding customer expectations.
More specifically, the authors claim that the major limitations of process improvement are resource-intensiveness, an increased risk of failure, and an inability to address all business needs and create competitive advantage. Moreover, there are significant risks related to the cost-inefficiency of investments, as sometimes changes do not satisfy stakeholders and costs commonly surpass benefits. Finally, process improvement cannot solve all of an organization’s problems or help management cope with all existing challenges because, in fact, a new process is likely to aggravate current issues and create new ones (Guo & Hariharan, 2016).
Based on the arguments mentioned above, the authors point to the fact that process improvement is not necessarily the best option for all businesses. In addition to the above-mentioned risks and limitations, this statement can be explained by several other factors. For instance, regardless of some process issues, businesses may still remain competitive by offering desirable products because, in fact, it is the product (or service) that determines the company’s success.
In this way, if a product is innovative or unique enough, there is no need for process improvement, especially in the case of limited resources. Furthermore, senior management should always give preference to organizational, rather than operational, excellence and seek ways to operate in correspondence with available resources, market demand, and the state of the national or international economy based on the company’s size and level of operations.
The authors do not criticize the methods or the very concept of process improvement because, in most cases, it is efficient and does benefit organizations. Instead, they call for management to perform an adequate estimation of the company’s needs and resources and to make decisions according to them in order to avoid the potential risks and drawbacks connected to hasty and poorly developed business strategies.
In my opinion, this article is a comprehensive guide for all senior managers interested in process improvement. In a concise manner, the authors describe all significant potential pitfalls and draw attention to the cases in which there is no need for process improvement. For me, this article is a sort of revelation because I generally fall into the category of those who believe in the overall positivity of this popular trend.
Therefore, the strengths of the given article are its clarity of arguments—especially as it recalls real-life companies that pay little or no attention to process improvement (e.g., Walmart or small restaurants offering unique dishes)—as well as its focus on organizational, not operational, performance. Nevertheless, the opinion of the authors is somewhat limited; although they claim that the article is not an attempt to criticize process improvement, the article’s general stance does not correspond with this statement. In fact, mentioning some positive aspects of this business phenomenon would be beneficial because it would make the article more comprehensive and persuasive.
Still, regardless of this minor weakness, the authors do answer the central question they sought to investigate and do help managers, especially those without significant business experience, understand that process improvement is not the ultimate solution to all problems or the universal secret to success.
Reference
Guo, L., & Hariharan, S. (2016). Is process improvement the ultimate solution? Physical Leadership Journal, 3(5), 26-30.