Capacity?

Do we have the individual and organizational capacity to implement a new product, service, program or practice?

How do we know?

As foreshadowed previously, failed implementation as well as the failure to implement effectively and efficiently is attributed to implementation intelligence or the lack of.  Assessing capacity is foundational to implementation intelligence.  Here’s why -

No system can produce or perform beyond 100% of what it was designed to do or produce.   

To do so, requires a system adjustment, modification, update, refresh, modernization or retrofit to improve the design and thus performance.  In essence, by doing one or more of the aforementioned actions, the system capacity is reset.  

I actually learned this while having work performed on my 1995 Suburban.  The "Burb" as it is fondly referred to, is closing in on 20 years of service.  Some 240,000 miles later, the vehicle is still in pretty good working order.  There are some parts that are no longer manufactured and in the situation I recently found myself, there aren't "after market" or previously used parts readily available or cost effective to use.  

Enter my 21st century "technician" who, after explaining "our" challenge, turned his screen around and showed me there were at least three solutions to solve the problem, increase performance, and would permanently eliminate the possibility of the original problem ever occurring again.

After some additional conversation I learned that the original system design or function of this particular part was to mitigate limitations caused by what can only be classified as then state of the art technology that became antiquated.  With the advent of new technologies that could easily be installed, the part I needed to replace was simply no longer needed.

I asked what he thought were any liabilities or downside to this action.  He said, “none”.  “Would the vehicle still perform as good without the original part”, I asked.  He said, “It will actually perform better”.  He went on to say, “The solution we are using wasn’t available when the system was first developed.  It is now and in fact has become standard on all vehicles.”

Over my career I have experienced many failed attempts to implement incredibly powerful products, services, programs or practices designed as solutions to system design limitations.  Almost universal, successful as well as failed implementation can be attributed to individual and organizational capacity, competence, and confidence.  These three components are interdependent and are essential if implementation fidelity is the goal.  Teetering on the obvious – it is!

How do we assess capacity?

Time, energy, and effort are good starting points.

How many initiatives are currently in motion?  What are they?  Why are they?  When did they start?  How are they being monitored? Measured? Are we the getting the desired or expected results?

A slight variation of an oft-used metaphor about forests and trees is apropos.  Without initiative mapping individuals and the organization "can't see the forest from the trees".  

Utilizing an “affinity process” or other quality tool, leaders can quickly begin the initiative mapping - a critical component of capacity assessing.

As stated earlier, capacity is but one of three critical components.  Leaders must assess, focus, plan and monitor all three if implementation fidelity is the goal.  

Next, I will unpack competence.