XLA goes to Genba
Imagine a user frustrated with slow loading times, impacting their productivity and well-being. While an SLA might report acceptable uptime, their subjective experience paints a different picture – they are frustrated.
This article explores how the key Lean concept of Genba can improve the effectiveness of XLA. It explains how XLAs enhance the value of SLAs, and warns against relying too much on explicit data where tacit knowledge is required. It posits that Genba can help with a deeper understanding of user needs and therefore more effective adoption of XLA principles and practices. Finally, it points out that this approach requires a significant commitment and that - to the relief of the believers - it will be too much for many of their competitors to handle.
XLA and the system as imagined
XLA stands for Experience Level Agreement, and shifts the focus from traditional Service Level Agreements (SLAs) that prioritize technical metrics to the emotional well-being and overall satisfaction users have with IT services. It goes beyond simply meeting pre-defined service levels and aims to fulfill – and sometimes exceed – user expectations by understanding their subjective perceptions, frustrations, and even anxieties when interacting with IT. It entails better understanding, better agreements, and better interactions.
Metrics often fall short
Traditional metrics and reports, often the basis for SLAs, can paint an incomplete picture, representing the "system as imagined" rather than the "system as found"[1]. XLA is predicated on understanding the individual and dynamic user experience, which can vary based on context, emotions, and expectations. But even experience data can fall short. Surveys capture what users say, not what they truly think and feel. Digital Experience Monitoring (DEM) tools provide additional insights, but this data is indirect and inferred.
Complexity demands more than numbers
In IT, we're conditioned to rely on data, information, and knowledge. This data-driven approach works wonders in predictable systems, but it stumbles in the complex[2] world of user experience. Why? Because user behaviour within IT systems doesn't exhibit linear causality. It's emergent, meaning it arises from the dynamic interplay of individual experiences and the environment. This complexity demands more than just numbers. We need to bridge the gap between the explicit (codified) data we collect and the tacit (experiential) knowledge users hold.
Explicit and tacit knowledge
Traditional data-driven approaches capture explicit knowledge, like system uptime or survey responses. But user experience is more than just numbers. It's about tacit knowledge, the emotions, frustrations, and unspoken needs hidden beneath the surface.
Genba and the system as found
This is where XLA goes to Genba. Genba, meaning "the actual place" in Japanese, refers to the physical location where the work happens. It is famously used by Toyota but also by other organizations. Toyota uses the term "genchi genbutsu"[3], which emphasizes the importance of going to the actual place observing without assumptions and taking immediate action with the practitioners based on what you learn. In the context of IT, it's about observing users interacting with your systems in their natural environment. Think of it as going beyond reports and surveys to witness firsthand how users struggle, succeed (or not), and navigate your services. Genba isn't a rejection of data, but rather a recognition of its limitations. Direct observation is the missing piece in deeper understanding and improving the user experience.
Digital anthropology
The most valuable truth is found by moving beyond data-driven assumptions and actively seeking user feedback, observing their interactions, and listening to their stories. As an anthropologist. But it could also be an inconvenient truth. Going to Genba and observing users in their natural environment takes an effort. Not only the physical effort involved but also the emotional labour of dealing with the messiness of real people.
Dancing with the elephant in the room
People who are interested in the XLA domain often focus on agreements, metrics, measurements, and tools. Consciously or not, they dance around the most important part: actually improving how the service is experienced. Genba is about dancing with the elephant.
Analogue ambiguity
So, is taking XLA to Genba worth it? Are you up to ditching your digital comfort blanket and embracing analogue ambiguity? The payoff is deeper understanding, happier users, and a successful adoption of XLA. If you’re still up to it, read on...
Adoption
Many Lean experts point out that adopting Genba and other Lean principles and practices effectively can be challenging, especially in large organizations with complex processes and hierarchical structures and cultures. The organization needs to foster a culture of learning, experimentation, and problem-solving. Leaders must be willing to go to Genba themselves and create an environment where employees feel empowered to share problems and propose solutions. Extensive training is needed before leaders and employees can act effectively without supervision and guidance.
领英推荐
Realistic expectations
In his seminal work "The Toyota Way," Jeffrey Liker shares a fundamental concern. He suggests that if the top executives' vision lacks a focus on adding value through sustained excellence, if they aren't committed to developing people for the long term, or if there's no continuity in their philosophy, then they should resign themselves to short-term benefits. These benefits come from the (often mechanistic) implementation of Lean tools that include Genba. These benefits run the risk of decay from organizational entropy unless countered by positive energy and continuous improvement by work groups at the Genba. Although this seems depressing, it is also good news: enthusiastic people - if they make and keep up the effort - can sustainably improve their pocket of work within a larger organization, transforming their mechanistic adoption of Gemba into more organic integration.
Application
Principles
Bearing this in mind, the general principles of Genba in the context of XLA ("Genbaxla"?) are:
Examples
The way you can apply these principles, varies according from organization to organization. Here are some examples, all with the goal of identifying potential improvements and, in so doing, improving the relationship with user organization.
An enterprise software company could establish a dedicated team to conduct on-site visits to client offices where the software is used. The team would observe how users interact with the software in their daily workflows and how they contact the service desk, noting pain points, inefficiencies, and areas for improvement.
A healthcare provider could task IT staff to accompany healthcare professionals during their daily rounds, observing how they use electronic health record systems, medical imaging software, and communication platforms.
An e-commerce retailer could get its IT team to conduct usability testing sessions with real customers, both online and in-store, to understand their browsing, purchasing and support experiences.
An educational institution could task its IT personnel to engage with students, faculty members, and administrative staff in focus groups and workshops to gather feedback on existing IT systems and services.
These are just examples. One of the core Lean tenets is that you have to face your own problems and think for yourself, resisting the temptation to "implement" a so-called best practice for a quick fix. It you can't resist the temptation, at least ensure that you critically monitor the results of your experiment, and adjust accordingly.
Start in the system as found
Some people will be discouraged by the effort involved. But if your true competitive advantage lies in understanding your users better than anyone else, then these challenges may actually inspire you. As with many things in life, it boils down to your desire and ability to care. Just take it step by step. Start in the system as found, not as imagined.
IT Strategy, Architecture & IT enabled process improvement, ITIL & LEAN Six σ accredited
5 个月Well stated Mark! The take away I appreciated is that practitioners in many realms or frameworks can become quite dogmatic - This way or the highway thinking. As an ITSM and LEAN practitioner, sometimes pulling a tool out the other belt can be of benefit. An example - larger organization, strong ITSM processes & tools for change etc. But in a deeper review, service requests could be at 20+ days and counting. The reason? push back questions of Why? Who? What? on the submission. While that may be found in "continous improvement" - in LEAN that screams of "waste" pick rework or overproduction for starters. Another LEAN concept, mistake proofing and standard work (See the outline of the hammer on the peg board? yes, that is where the hammer goes) In this example, perhaps a checklist of what questions must be answered during the submission to avoid the wasted back & forth later
Retired after 53 years in IT. Industry Ambassador for itSMF UK. Paul Rappaport Lifetime Achievement Award 2025. Volunteer for Demelza Children Hospice.
1 年No place like Gemba
Fixing the process root cause of weak IT support - the end to unmanaged backlog, weak communication, chased tickets, & more
1 年Great article and final sentence... "Start in the system as found, not as imagined." We could identify that there are three types of "problem" in IT: Incident; Operational; and as this article interestingly articulates, Real Experience Problems too.