How would you answer the question: Do you believe there can be innovation without disruption? I was asked that question by Thomas Wailgum of ASUG News this week at a video panel with my colleagues Martin Gillet and Jarret Pazahanick. And my answer was pretty blunt: “No.” Of course, I went on to explain it a bit more.
Not all innovation is good, and not all disruption is bad
Where’s the line between change and innovation? Much of what SAP delivers in their HCM Support Packages is what I would call change, not innovation. And that’s OK, as long as we can rely on having high quality changes - and SAP is getting better with that quality. The Enhancement Packages deliver more innovation than change, but it is usually more incremental, small innovation. I think of it as additional features, which isn’t quite innovation. Once again, we need those Enhancement Packages to deliver high quality. If we have high quality changes, features, innovation - pick the term - then the amount of unplanned, unpleasant disruption is reduced. And I think it is that unplanned, unpleasant disruption that SAP is trying to avoid. But still at this point, Support Packages and Enhancement Packages fit into that category of known unknowns - we know there will be some unknown issues to resolve, we just don’t know exactly what they are.
The iPhone and iPad disrupted my work-life, but in a good way. I am more productive than before. The way I work has changed and that required some effort to make those adjustments. Not all disruptions are bad, but they do require effort to adjust what we do and how we do it. Let’s say that an SAP HCM client chooses to implement some new functionality that comes in an Enhancement Package (or enable a feature in SuccessFactors, Taleo or any other SaaS system), and let’s assume it works perfectly and requires minimal configuration. Clients still have to deal with their business process change and implementation. How does the current process change, what does the new process look like, how does it fit into or impact other processes, how do we communicate it to employees, how do we adjust support desk processes? There are all sorts of questions like those that don’t always have much to do with changing or enhancing the technical system, but are a result of that change.
The impact of disruption is related to openness and ability to respond to change
My work is changing! My work is changing! The sentences are the same, but the sentiment can be very different. Some people - and organizations are collections of people - embrace change and innovation easier than others. But even if we are open to change, some organizations make it pretty difficult to keep that attitude. Some setup practices and policies aimed at creating a stable, productive environment that actually discourages change and innovation. So you want to enable a new ESS service that comes with Enhancement Pack 5? Show me your project charter and if it gets approved next month then we can see if it can be scheduled for the next Business/Maintenance Release that goes live 6 months from now. Never mind that it takes just a week or two of effort. The same can be said for changes and innovation that require adjustments to how HR does its work - have you ever heard ‘well, we’ve done it this way for so long and it works so why change it?’ Stability isn’t always the concern - there are all sorts of vested interests in how things are done today.
Moving Forward
I really do like SAP’s attitude to deliver innovation without disruption, but that is more a marketing slogan than a methodology for integrating innovations into an organization. To deliver on that slogan requires two key actions: SAP has to deliver high quality changes that clients can trust and really use, and clients have to structure their business to embrace disruption to the point it’s just ongoing evolution. Challenging? Sure is.