That’s how it should be approach

Managing processes in the business-as-usual and changes usually goes as follows. There is a question type. That is being investigated. This leads to proposals for a solution. One of them is chosen. That solution proposal is elaborated and new processes, tools and IT are developed. The whole is then implemented. There must be a business case, i.e. there must be a financial benefit.

There is always some form of division of labor, in which tasks are well distributed among the jobs that have certain responsibilities. There is a sequence of activities that are then subdivided into phases. Such approaches developed for the eventual delivering of a product. Every action taken is focused on deliviring that final product.

Important features of these approaches are that they

>  are instrumental in nature, i.e. the work to be done revolves around the final product and the tools needed,

>  are procedural, i.e. there are standards that managers and workers must adhere to when performing work

>  be hierarchical. Characteristic of this are the command/control processes. Then there is always a question of power relations. Think of manager/employee, the system is determined, the customer is king (is that always the case?)

>  In this approach, this approach ignores the fact that more than 80% of the work is done by people. That therefore has a greater share in the business-as-usual and change processes than the content.

At the moment there is a lot of attention for that human. Many techniques are taught to managers to be more successful. However, the ‘The way it should be’ approach remains and that is the reason that the human in the core does not receive the attention that is needed.