USM and Decision Making

When I first viewed some of the tools and templates the SURVUZ Foundation makes available to USM Professionals, the decision-making template seemed onerous. Now I understand.

The Unified Service Management method helps the enterprise establish a service management system, and it is based on systems thinking. But it wasn’t until I read Russell Ackoff’s article, Why Few Organizations Adopt Systems Thinking that I began to really understand the uphill roll I’m on.

Ackoff argues that most organizations still operate under a mechanistic, reductionist paradigm that views businesses as machines to be optimized. This leads to a focus on parts (e.g., departments, tasks) rather than on the relationships and interconnections that define the entire system.

Ackoff calls for a shift to systems thinking, which involves understanding organizations as dynamic social systems where purpose, environment, and interactions matter more than isolated processes. He talks about decision making:

• Record every decision of importance, whether to do something or not.
• Monitor the decisions to detect any deviation of fact from expectations and assumptions.
• The choice of a corrective action is itself a decision and should be treated in the same way as the original decision.
• The decision by an organization not to adopt systems thinking should be treated in this way.

Rob England’s Open Management echoes this shift by promoting a management model that encourages transparency, decentralization, and empowerment, aligning well with systems thinking. Open Management advocates for openness in decision-making, distributing authority to where the knowledge is, and fostering adaptability through continuous feedback—principles that go hand in hand with Ackoff’s systemic perspective.

At first, I couldn’t understand why enterprises wouldn’t welcome the USM method’s service management architecture and system with open arms.

The USM method’s service management architecture and system’s simplicity, universal application, and ability to streamline service management seem like obvious solutions to the complex issues organizations face.

But when we start talking about managing enterprise routines --- which include processes, procedures, and work instructions ---- I can see how stakeholders might think paperwork. USM transforms 'paperwork' into a lean, efficient documentation practice that serves to clarify and guide rather than overwhelm:

• standardization means fewer documents to maintain and review.
• USM reduces documentation clutter and focuses only on the essential variations needed for execution
• USM integrates guidance from frameworks (like ITIL or COBIT) at the procedure or work instruction level. This integration avoids redundant documentation, as the same foundational process model supports different practices, streamlining documentation efforts.
• USM provides standard workflows and templates that can be used repeatedly across different contexts. Instead of starting from scratch for every new service or change, organizations can leverage these templates, saving time and reducing documentation complexity.
• Stakeholders only deal with what is necessary to ensure clarity and effectiveness, rather than maintaining excessive and often redundant documents.
• By using a single management system that applies to all services (not just IT), USM eliminates the fragmentation caused by multiple, isolated management approaches.

I understand resistance to change and entrenched practices, but the allure of overly complex frameworks can slow down even the best ideas. Don’t make an error of omission by not re-thinking your service management system (and I don’t mean your toolset!)

An error of omission occurs when an individual or organization fails to do something it should have done. – Russell Ackoff

Real and lasting improvements have always been an uphill roll…but isn’t that the point?

Join the USM Revolution and be prepared for the digital future.