http://demandingchange.blogspot.com/2009/07/redesigning-banana.html

The “flaw” statement was not in response to your comment :> When I said: “If you see major flaws in my argument, note that I am writing in the dark, without my glasses, as I’m falling asleep” “flaws” was about MY NEW response that I had just posted. It was a call for you to let me know if you see any flaws in that one. I had just laid down a rather speculative model, and wasn’t even sure if I believed it at the time. I re-read and see how it could have been misinterpreted. However, it was not in response to your comment; it was my fear of my own tentative text.

Trust me, your comments are always lucid and powerful and certainly appreciated! You make a very good case that process owner and process user are tightly intertwined, perhaps even to the point of being one and the same, depending on the lens used.

Your point, “we can almost always put any given system or process into an alternative frame, thus making sense of things in multiple ways” reminds me of classic SSM. Rich picture analysis shows this to be true. Perfect point!

Thanks. I don’t know where I first picked that view up, but it was clearly from a wise friend, probably a fellow analyst. I think the original comment was “the process owner is the one with the KPI in his/her end of year appraisal.” I liked that, but wanted to make it even more pungent, ergo he who loses the most sleep is the process owner.

Often the people who have the most at stake if it fails aren’t the people you’d think of first. It might just be the people “on the ground” at the heart of the process, since its effectiveness has a direct impact on their own personal performance, productivity and job satisfaction.

Of course there is a big picture impact further up the organization in profitability and overall organizational performance, but this comes as a by-product of the collective efforts of those who truly care about taking ownership of processes within the organization.

The banana tree has spent a lot longer evolving the banana skin than various primates have spent working out how to open it, or how to use it for comic effect. Does that count as “fretting”?

My comment wasn’t intended to point out “flaws” in your argument – merely to offer a different perspective. My underlying point would be that we can almost always put any given system or process into an alternative frame, thus making sense of things in multiple ways.

This of course, brings us to recursive descent into “who is the ultimate process owner.” If I say it’s X, then you can probably find a logical connection to X prime and make that case. Then, it’s my turn again. The last one to say, “God owns the process” has to buy dinner, but he/she does win philosophical bonus points from me.

The definition I use is simple: “The real process owner is he/she who stays awake the longest, fretting over a performance problem, while nursing a bottle of gin in his/her hand.” This harkens to a Solomon-like anti-wisdom that says, “let’s split the baby” as a way to finding out the truth. It only harkens to Solomon, it does not grab him with a bear hug. The process owner is the one who cares the most about the quality of the process, and who has the most at stake if it fails. “Take the child” is only something a true steward can say.

Humor aside, great point – as usual – Richard! If you see major flaws in my argument, note that I am writing in the dark, without my glasses, as I’m falling asleep. It could also be because I spent five hours in a lecture by George Singleton and have inhaled so much of his creativity that this is exactly what a “sentient banana tree” response deserves – My first requirement for process owners is that they must be able to hoist a glass of gin. Monkeys, CEOs, bad teenagers – all love a good glass of gin. Banana trees abstain. So, I am told by my local pine forest.