Process Strategy 2.0 - Valuable But Not So New

http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/12/in_my_last_post_i_1.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+harvardbusiness+%28HBR.org%29

This recent HBR blog post suggests that:

"Process Strategy 1.0" = Lean, Six Sigma, and Business Reengineering

"Process Strategy 2.0" =
1. To streamline customer experiences in end-to-end processes, Process Strategy 2.0 will require aligned goals and supporting systems to manage work between partners.
2. To manage the rising tide of knowledge work performed by a younger generation of employees, Process Strategy 2.0 will depend heavily on social collaboration tools.
3. To speed operations and improvement, Process Strategy 2.0 will make greater use of quick experiments and more agile management processes.

Although the value of the concepts are right on, this is not new in concept.  More than a decade ago CISCO pioneerd these very same concepts in defining a "virtual" organization.  Like 3M, they fostered an environment of "innovation without punishment".  To be agile they quickly moved on new concepts and adjusted on-the-fly to make them work.  This included collaboration tools and integration of systems and processes both their business and their BPO partners' businesses.  All acted in concert to create one customer experience.  Customers often didn't know when they were interacting with CISCO or a BPO partner, the way it should be.  See the following link:

http://www.sba.oakland.edu/Faculty/LAUER/downloads/MIS625/Readings/Cisco%20case.pdf

To qoute Led Zepplin "Her style is new but the pay's the same as it was so long ago..."

The tools are better, but not the primary inhibitor to innovation.  Management must create a culture for innovation that promotes change and tolerates failure.  3M is a prime example:

http://www.businessweek.com/stories/2006-05-09/3ms-seven-pillars-of-innovation