Digital transformation definition

Digitalization is generally understood to mean a digital conversion and representation or implementation of information and communication or the digital modification of instruments (Gabler Lexicon). “ The digital transformation is understood as the exponential and permanent change of society and companies based on technology “(Lindner and Leyh 2018). Petry (2016) sees the rapid technological development as the basis of digitization, which has become faster and faster in recent years and therefore speaks of the age of acceleration. Hoffmeister’s book also states that the basis of digitization is also a kind of domino effect: Existing technologies pave the way for further technologies.

The digital transformation describes change processes, due to digital technologies at high speed. Many sources cite changes in customer requirements as the driving force behind this digitization, which can only be served with digital technologies. A good example of this is the Spotify streaming service, which makes music accessible anytime, anywhere, anytime and inexpensively (to a certain extent even for free).

Overall, the academy differentiates between enablers and actors. “Enablers” are more or less “enablers” and include the following:

• to the first digital technologies (cloud computing, …),
• digital infrastructures (protocols, …) and
• Last but not least, digital applications (online banking, …).

On the basis of these “enablers”, new exploitation potentials arise in new areas. Companies are starting to explore these and try them out in initial pilot projects. Examples are: digital business models and digital value networks. Digital business models describe the change from analog to digital models. A good example here is the Deutsche Bahn online ticket. Digital value creation networks are, for example, virtual teams.

The digital transformation affects many People: Entrepreneurs, researchers and employees as well as numerous other citizens of the Federal Republic and beyond its borders. They can now communicate with each other in real time or share events from their lives with others in the live stream. Just yesterday I networked with my toothbrush. However, these new possibilities also have their downsides: A lack of data protection and information overload are just two of the negative consequences.

Are a different actor Companies . Here work is changing into so-called digital work – business models are also changing fundamentally. Are also affected Science and teaching in the form of new possibilities for archiving, publication and preparation of research as well as e-learning. Also offers the digitalization Numerous challenges for governments: The main task here will be to steer this transformation through laws and guidelines as well as the own transformation of official processes.

Driver of the digital transformation

But why are we talking about digital transformation now of all times – why is the speed fast enough right now? To answer this question (s) has Petry (2016) the following diagram as well as drivers for the digital transformation provided. At the beginning there is the exponential growth of companies with the core topics of networking, AI and Big data . The main consequences are changes in work itself, in customer behavior and in the general competitive situation.

But we’ve been digitizing for 50 years!

Currently, the greatest criticism of the thesis on digital transformation is that we have been digitizing ourselves for many years. That is correct and it hits the nail on the head. However, if you look at current literature or directly at the company, you will notice a major difference: While many years ago we were largely digitalising on the surface, companies are now moving towards more profound digitalisation. A good example is going to the hairdresser: Here I book my appointment using an app. This approach is definitely digital. However, the actual cutting process is still carried out in the same way. Classic people business is therefore not scalable, as one employee is required for each customer. Similar to consulting, in which many tools support the advisor, but the actual advice still takes place in analog form and the advisor has not yet been digitized. You can find more about this in the article about Consulting 4.0 . This shows two examples of classic people business. Of course, there are still no direct answers to these questions, but there is currently a clear trend towards deeper digitization with fundamental changes in behavior. Digital transformation is therefore a profound social change in people’s behavior through digital technologies. One example that already exists is remote work instead of traditional attendance.

Evolutionary stages of the digital transformation

In the blog of Social Collaboration Academy I also found a nice “statement” on the criticism that we have been in a digital transformation for ages: According to the article, there are 4 levels of digitization – but we have only been talking about a digital transformation since we tried it To network the real world and the digital world.

• The first evolutionary stage lasted from approx. 1990 – 2000 and dealt with the networking of computers.
• In the second evolutionary stage from approx. 2000 – approx. 2015 it was primarily about general acceptance and general everyday introduction and use of mobile devices.
• The one in front of us now third evolutionary stage The duration of which experts estimate will be around 2015-2030, focuses on topics such as the general maturity of systems and the Internet of Things.
• With the fourth evolutionary stage , which should start from around 2030, there could be a complete merging of the real and digitally networked world.

Transformation, change, evolution or revolution?

There are many terms for digital transformation and just as many opinions everywhere. Is it a digital transformation or not? A transformation has a beginning and an end. A change stands for a state that changes into another state. Evolution stands for the peaceful further development of something and revolution for a fundamental, often violent, innovation of a respective status quo. Also read my on this Article on the digital r (evolution) . Many also simply refer to the digital transformation as “digitization”. However, this would simply mean: something analog becomes digital. What do you think: which “label” should we give to digital change?

Digitization in German companies

Digitization is not a new topic in the German corporate landscape. Processes have been digitally supported or even fully automated for a long time. The main difference in the current discussion is the increased speed and complexity of the change processes, which can meanwhile result in profound process changes and even job losses (Lindner 2019).

I have already identified some examples in my PhD in Lindner (2019): Siemens to automate over 7000 jobs in administration by 2020 (Heise 2018). Deutsche Telekom is also testing the use of chatbots in customer service, which could change numerous jobs (Handelsblatt 2018) and DHL has been experimenting with the delivery of parcels with drones since 2014 (DHL Paketkopter T3N 2018). Another example is the efforts to create self-driving cars at Audi, VW and Daimler, which could fundamentally change all mobility in Germany (Manager Magazin 2018).

These few examples show that, according to the practical literature, digitization could bring about numerous far-reaching changes.

What is digital transformation?

Many companies have been driving the digitization of society for a long time. We are now talking about digital transformation because of the speed and profound digital changes. While digital technologies were previously often only used “on the surface”, there are now profound changes right through to the original business model. In summary, we are also talking about a digital change or a digital evolution or revolution. You can also read mine at this point Article on the digital (r) evolution – another recommendation is that Book by Petry .

Der Beitrag What is the digital transformation – definition? erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.

Everyone works with!

The trend has been going in one direction for years: A. ll should participate in the company and so far companies have always managed to do better. Driven primarily by digital technologies. When people talked about the “interactive web” in Web 2.0, apps and the Internet of Things made it much more interactive. Now there are numerous other possibilities through, among others, CloudServices. The goal of Futurework is now to adapt the workplace and work to this “hands-on culture”.

Work wherever you want (futurework)

Most of the articles on Twitter on futurework deal with the new workplace design. The articles speak of a result culture instead of a present tense culture. Under the topic: Activity based working, an “ultimate workplace” is defined, which is suitable for any type of work and in which there is a culture of trust and permanent networking. The illustration shows the idea behind the hashtag futurework and activity based working.

Futurework – a collection of office concepts?

Overall, the investigation of the hashtag shows a strong focus on room and office concepts to promote agility in the company. Sure, there is also talk of a cultural change and this is also dealt with in great detail, but mainly office concepts are evaluated. The following sentence sums up the topic very well: “The office is changing into a place of communication and networking. For this purpose, situation-oriented rooms are required that promote creative exchange or project work as well as offer retreats for concentrated and confidential work and optimally support routine activities. ” (Source Detecon ).

Is that agile?

Companies want agile employees. These should deliver high quality work, be creative, flexible and deliverable. I think the thesis that this is an important property in today’s knowledge society, I do not need to go into further. But are these new concepts really a factor in structural change in companies?
I have found many articles about concepts but have not yet found any direct case studies as to whether such a concept has really improved the work. Sure, these concepts in themselves promise really great work, but does every employee really want to work like this? To answer this question, I will conduct a case study with a company that has implemented such a concept and evaluate exactly whether and how this open space has changed the way we work.
[werbung]
Verwendete Quellen anzeigen

Der Beitrag Futurework – the agile working world? erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.

1. Increase the level of maturity step by step

A company does not become a digital leader overnight. It is therefore important to first determine the current level of maturity. If invoices are currently still being written by hand, then it makes sense to first map them using a tool or to support them with a Word macro instead of “digitizing” them directly in an ERP system. On the one hand, this is cheaper and, on the other hand, it is less overwhelming for the employees. Therefore, always try to determine the current level of maturity of a process and then increase it step by step.

2. Do not tie digitization to one person

“Mr. / Ms. X. You are now responsible for digitization and the company-wide ERP system!” I have never seen such a position successfully drive digitization in the company. In my opinion, digitization cannot be tied to one person, but must be driven by each department itself. So give each team the task of “digitizing themselves” and only offer the support of a “digitization officer”.

3. Digitize unloved processes and ask employees

If you are just about to start your first digitization projects, then you should first and foremost ensure that you support processes that nobody wants to do analogue anyway. For example, for my former customer, that was the travel expense report. It also makes sense to simply ask the employees: “ What should we digitize for you? “The advantage is that there is no headwind from the employees and new solutions can be used directly.

4. Avoid holistic solutions

Avoid holistic solutions. These are usually not halves or whole. In addition, they cost a lot of money and contradict the trend to remain flexible. So take one tool for each process step and link the tools together in a meaningful way. I would like to give an example of this in the illustration. A typical sales process is digitized here. Each relevant step has a specific tool. It is now the task of your IT to link these together in a meaningful way (keyword: workflow).
Reading tip: Example of process digitization

5. Use managed services and trials

The advantage of this small tool chain is that, especially as an SME, you do not have to bring in any large tools. Try a few tools for a process step. These are often available in a 30-day trial version. A manager once said to me: “We’ll get the 30-day trial version and if no one is using it after 30 days, we’ll cancel it and get the next one. “Furthermore, many companies notice that IT tool operation is not a lot of fun, so that it is worth simply having all tools serviced by providers. Since the tools often cost between 5 and 100 euros a month, this can be easily paid for.
Reading tip: Example of an IT organization

Conclusion: digitization is trial and error

These are 5 tips I was able to take away from my time as a consultant. I have seen many SMEs that have successfully achieved great success despite small budgets. I think that the digital change is still trial and error and that you should try a lot quickly and easily. I hope that my tips can provide some impetus and help one or two managers with digitization. You can find more about trial and error in mine Articles on digital business models .
[werbung]
Verwendete Quellen anzeigen

Der Beitrag Digital transformation – 5 tips for change in the company erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.

Generation X

If you look at that Portal Absolventa, one finds the following definition: For the so-called Generation X this is professional advancement the most important goal when looking for a job. At least that is what the study results of the personnel consultancy Robert Half read. According to the survey, this generation of 30 to 50-year-olds is also characterized as ambitious, individualistic and ambitious. The members of Generation X are well educated and work in order to be able to afford a materially secure life. In contrast to its predecessor generation, Generation X does not place work before other needs, but rather sees them as a means to an end.

Generation Y

To this she says Website Gründerküche : The representatives of Generation Y are considered to be comparatively well educated, often with a technical college or university degree. You grew up with the Internet and mobile communication, and you lead a technology-savvy life. Generation Y also differs from previous generations in terms of their attitude towards work:

• Generation Y particularly likes to work in virtual teams.
• She is suspicious of deep hierarchies, hierarchies by title anyway.
• Millennials are optimistic, confident and have little faith in the government.
• Fun and, above all, a deeper sense of purpose at work are particularly important to millennials.
• They also want to work independently on projects and realize themselves.
• The term work-life balance was almost invented for Generation Y: Hardly a generation attaches more importance to this eternal balancing act. But it’s less about free time and more about self-determination: the Gen Y representative wants to define himself when he works where.

Generation Z

Generation Z is currently only entering the labor market, so few well-founded facts are known about them so far. That’s why I’m going back to the definition in Portal Absolventa use: Today’s young people who will enter the labor market in the next few years belong to the so-called Generation Z. They are the generation that completely includes digital technologies grew up: Internet and smartphones are a natural part of her life – both at work and in private life. Unlike Generation Y, Generation Z differentiates more again between work and personal life. Fixed boundaries and clear structures are clearly wanted again. Taking the business laptop home with you after work is not an option. Self-realization is no longer only sought in work, but above all in work leisure and in social contacts.

Generation management in hybrid teams

If you look into that Book by Klaffke,  you read: “Happy cows give more milk.” This supposed and much-quoted farmer’s wisdom is gaining more and more supporters in business life in the figurative sense. From a common sense perspective, there is a lot to suggest that people who feel comfortable at work actually do better and walk the famous “extra mile” more often. Ultimately, this should have a positive effect on the success of a company – also in a monetary sense.
The point is to lead each of the three generations properly and to optimally align the company with them. But how does this work and with which instruments can this be done? Not all of the three generations like working in the home office and agility cannot solve all problems as an egg-laying pig. And now there are hardly any teams that consist exclusively of one generation.  Generation management is therefore increasingly becoming an important management tool.

Generation management X

On the Generation Z website you can find the following tips: Generation X workers rate work as a central part of life, but show a particular interest in a balanced relationship between professional and private life, whereby they always act for their own benefit. In private, Generation X tends to strive for an individual orientation and alternative lifestyles.
Clearly regulated working hours, a good salary and career as well as long-term security are important here. These generations are also said to have a high respect for hierarchy. So it is about that work as a necessity for the private  Realization is seen.

Generation management Y

Here shows that Magazine heap some exciting points on:  The young generation wants to be taken seriously, right from the start. She wants attention, recognition and challenging tasks that are fun and at the same time make sense (depending on the individual attitude, there are differences in weighting). Getting all information is important, as is having freedom of choice. Modern work equipment is a matter of course for Generation Y and supports working in teams and networks. Appropriate remuneration and individual development opportunities are of central importance.
Ergo, a lot here points to home office, flexible working hours, team events, agile teams with many role and project changes. Agile leadership is certainly recommended here. Above all, it is important to find an individual solution for each employee. So deadlocked processes and assembly line annual meetings are not effective here  Method.

Generation management Z

As mentioned earlier, not much in-depth data is known about this generation. However, it is currently evident that a different approach is primarily necessary. So puts the Young heart agency clearly :  More and more HR employees and recruiters are looking at ways to address Gen Z. Clever HR colleagues try out many exciting ways. Be it the application via WhatsApp, influencer marketing, the selection of a suitable manager via time-delayed video interviews, digital events at high school or personnel campaigns via Snapchat.
There are numerous studies that show that the requirements for Gen Z are largely the same as those for Generation Y. Personally, however, I cannot really believe this – some of the existing studies also indicate significant differences.
So can be found in the magazine the world :  Keywords in job vacancies such as work-life blending, i.e. the mixing of work and leisure, have a negative effect on young people. “Clear after-work hours” is now again an effective lure. Further calls the world as green:  That has nothing to do with laziness, but with the fact that work is possible anywhere and anytime in the digital age. ”If you are not careful, life will only consist of work.
After a little googling, I have an exciting one Study from Bremen  found. I have noted the results briefly and concisely in bullet points below:

• Overall, the working atmosphere is the most important criterion.
• Clear tasks, clear boundaries and a strict separation of professional and private life are important.
• A well-equipped workplace is desirable – no desk sharing and no open spaces.
• A clear structure and regulated work packages are important.
• By the way, older generations have to get used to the fact that their statements from Gen Z are immediately checked for correctness via smartphone.
• Hierarchical authority matters little to Gen Z. However, she is willing to show respect for experiences, arguments, and authentic behavior.

Conclusion: every generation is different

X, Y, Z – 3 generations have recently entered our job market at the same time. Each of the generations demands individual values and working environments. While Generation X comes with regular working hours and a focus on private life, Generation Y focuses on the search for meaning and self-realization. The result are new working models and agile methods that are conquering German offices. But now Generation Z comes and wants to turn it all around again? Time will tell! It remains exciting to see how Generation Z will be integrated into the existing models and how this generation will shape the world of work. But now I’m also interested in who my readership is: Which generation do you belong to?
[yop_poll id=”28″]
[werbung]

[fotolia]

Der Beitrag Generation management: Hybrid teams in the field of tension between X, Y, Z erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.

I first met Dominic via Twitter and then via Xing. In the course of our dialogue we began to deal with the current and pressing topic of “New Work”. In this context, Dominic wrote my last book “All Power for Nobody. Awakening of the Corporate Democrats “read and today he publishes the review here. In order for all of us to be successful in facing the challenges of a social transformation towards more participation, including in the world of work, closely interlinked cooperation and ongoing dialogue about the risks and opportunities of democratic work design are required. Today’s review is a step more in this direction, which I fully support and which of course delights me. You, dear readers, have fun with the following review.
Dr. Andreas Zeuch (* 1968) accompanies companies as a consultant, trainer and speaker on their way to more participation and corporate democracy. In addition to his books, Zeuch has published around 70 articles in specialist journals to date.

Democracy in Business?

“In our private life it is the rule to shape our own life. In contrast, most of the companies in the company have become accustomed to handing over their independent thinking and acting at the gate.” This is how the teaser for the book begins: All Power for Nobody by Dr. Andreas Zeuch. But what advantages can corporate democracy offer? After the feasibility of Democracy in companies has been examined, the potential of democracy will now be examined. For this purpose I have the publications of Dr. Andreas Zeuch identifies and gives a brief insight into his considerations.

Companies are challenged!

Why are companies challenged? What new events require us to include approaches such as democracy and the like in our considerations? Zeuch sees the business environment as the motivation for the idea of corporate democracy, which is much more dynamic and complex than ever before. Second, he lists the demands of Generation Y on employers. This means that, according to Zeuch, the following challenges arise:

• Decisions have to be made faster and more directly
• Innovations determine the future viability
• Leadership must create a framework in which inner motivation can develop freely.
• Co-determination and participation must be given in companies

Companies to have a say!

Zeuch criticizes the fact that formal hierarchies do not make decisions where they are necessary. Zeuch also claims in his book that decisions in democratic companies are faster and better. He therefore claims that a democratic decision is even faster and thus invalidates a prejudice against democracy. His consideration is as follows: Although it takes longer to find this decision, in contrast to a formal decision, it does not have to be communicated in an elaborate manner and everyone involved has to be “picked up and convinced”. Zeuch makes it clear that the implementation of joint decisions is more efficient and effective than lonely topdown decisions.
He also criticizes formal innovation management and “command and control” mechanisms. According to Zeuch, a particularly large number of ideas arise where employees are allowed to develop new products and prototype on their own, at least up to a certain budget. Bureaucratic corporations solve the innovation dilemma by either buying start-ups or starting up.

However, if employees are constantly being told what they have to do and what not to do, this will in the long run neither promote their creativity nor the will to contribute new ideas (Andreas Zeuch).

Does corporate democracy make companies more agile?

In summary, Zeuch sees the following problem: “Often there is also a lack of the necessary trust, instead there is a climate of mistrust, control and punishment”. Corporate democracy is supposed to change this dilemma. He wants employees to participate directly in the company through democracy and sees this as an opportunity to outsource management of the company directly to the interfaces between the market and customers.

The more people are involved in decisions, the more perspectives flow into it (Andreas Zeuch)

But when are companies actually democratic? How democratic does a company have to be in order to achieve the effects already mentioned? Zeuch divides democratic companies into 3 levels of maturity.
Weakly democratic are companies that allow their workforce to co-determine operational decisions, i.e. their own work.
Moderately democratic are companies that have a say in tactical decisions. These are decisions that go beyond your own work area and have a wider scope, such as hiring staff.
Strongly democratic are companies when, in addition to operational and tactical decisions, strategic decisions, i.e. fundamental, existential questions, are also determined by the employees.
So the possible effects occur with increasing democratization. Zeuch limits the fact that democracy does not automatically have to mean the end of hierarchy and leadership. So there can be managers who have been elected by the workforce for a limited period of time. I had a brief dialogue with Andreas Zeuch on this point and he made it clear that there MUST be leadership and that hierarchies are automatically set up if you try to abolish them. His key message is the distinction between formal, fixed hierarchies and dynamic leadership. On the other hand, executive elections are just one variety, according to Zeuch. There can also be rotating systems, or employees can propose themselves as managers and are then accepted – but do not always have to be formally elected.
Overall, Andreas Zeuch’s considerations and arguments promote the agile principles of research in modern and sustainable companies. The core of the book is made up of many case studies and interviews on the subject of corporate democracy. So it shows that Zeuch’s considerations apply and can offer companies added value. In addition to the round tables, a Bachelor thesis on this topic .
[werbung]
Verwendete Quellen anzeigen

[fotolia]

Der Beitrag Is corporate democracy agile? Foreword by Dr. Andreas Zeuch erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.

Consulting 1,2 and 3.0

The first legitimate question that comes to mind as a young management consultant is: What was actually before? What characterized Consulting 1,2 and 3.0? Unfortunately, I cannot name a clear source here, as I had to look for the information from various sites.
Consulting 1.0 is thus the classic solution advice for technical questions. Questions are answered by the consultant with professional competence.
Consulting 2.0 With process consulting, it should now also revolve around communication and interpersonal processes. Customers and consultants are moving closer together.
Consulting 3.0 Consulting is probably the way we currently know it. So with a high level of social complexity and the advisor as a specialist and process advisor. You realize your goals hand in hand with the customer and you are more closely involved.

Consulting 4.0

As a consultant you have recently received a lot of inquiries about tenders such as: Digital transformation consultant , Data scientist or Industry 4.0 expert . The customer’s requirements seem to have changed suddenly and the digital transformation has the industry firmly in hand. Consulting 4.0 seems to be the consulting firm’s answer to this fact.

Good times for specialists?

It wasn’t that long ago that the competencies were clearly defined: A proper management consultant had to be comprehensively trained; He needed special methodological knowledge, of course, but above all he had to be able to demonstrate experience and expertise across industries and specialist areas (Brand Eins magazine in the Consulting 4.0 edition). According to this quote, expert knowledge is primarily required. In-depth know-how and expert knowledge in an industry. The magazine brings many examples of highly specialized advice such as agricultural and forestry advice or “crowdsourcing advice”. There are also voices in the magazine from large consulting firms such as McKinsey: “We used to negotiate margins with the customer’s purchasing department. With our expert knowledge in a niche, we are unrivaled and no longer have to negotiate for margins ”
According to most voices, the focus is currently on digitization. The consultant as an expert for digitization in the customer’s industry. The questions move away from “What actually is digital transformation? “to” How do I lead my company into this new digital world? ”

“Mating season”

So what exactly does a new company look like after this “Consulting 4.0” trend? There are few answers here, but the tendency should be towards strong specialization in-house and the permanent acquisition of partners who are also highly specialized.

Risks and Criticism

What could such a specialization mean? On the one hand, it can mean for a consulting company that we have the following disadvantages:

• Dependence on a few customers
• high quality requirements as well as new employees and
• Danger of competition.

If we move into a niche, there will be few customers and as soon as 1-2 competitors also act in this, it will be tight. There are also high demands on employees every day and I see few opportunities for those starting out on the job.
For companies, this specialization can also lead to a greater need for coordination, as more service providers are required. As a result of specialization, employees could quickly lose interest in the job and the change rate could be very high. Specialists are also said to not have an eye for the big picture.

The traditional medium-sized company in danger?

I observe many medium-sized consulting houses, which have been producing individual software for customers for more than 30 years, increasingly in danger. Smaller houses are already in the red and larger ones are increasingly switching to “temporary work”. I don’t think it’s consulting when I deploy an employee full-time for a customer all year round. I think that traditional medium-sized companies in particular have extensive expertise and should now prepare this for the customer in internal workshops. A specialization could thus be achieved quickly. One thing is certain, however: if I loan my employees to customers all year round, they will change in the medium term. Either to the customer or to another service provider who has already made the transition to Consulting 4.0. I have also noticed a heated discussion here in which many employees ask themselves: Is this still consulting or is it already temporary work? That means, it should now be made a credo: Maintain expertise and train high potentials.

Already temporary work or still consulting?

So the question arises: temporary work or consulting? It is noticeable that medium-sized companies in particular tend towards temporary work due to a lack of expertise. This is mainly known from software development. Many of my interviewees expressed themselves here in such a way that they actually do a completely normal job as a developer for the customer. Wikipedia says: “ Temporary employment (also: Temporary work called or to ANÜ abbreviated) is when employees (temporary workers) are provided by an employer (lender) to a third party (hirer) for a fee for a limited period of time. “This seems to be absolutely the case in this case To become a personnel service provider because the internal knowledge is lacking. The formula is obvious: You get a consultant to a customer if he has more expertise in a topic than the customer. A temporary worker is usually given to a customer as soon as The third form, which is a kind of mixed form, is called service (often in Time & Material) in which a consultant supports a customer with various tasks from consulting and normal activities. Usually these are positions like that Support from a manager or a project leader.

Are you also a consultant?

[yop_poll id=”11″]

The eternal dilemma with travel time

Every consultant knows the following scenario: “The working time itself lasts at least 40 hours per week, since the customer pays five days of eight hours in almost all cases. The actual working hours are usually longer. Traveling around six to 16 hours a week without daily commuting between the hotel and the customer increases the free time to a minimum. With additional activities for the customer or a service for an internal project, the small amount of free time in the hotel is usually lost (source: Computer week ). It also clearly shows that travel is not good for health and social life. Many of my colleagues complain of a lack of fitness, weight gain and the desire to socialize outside of business. After almost 3 years, they actually “just want to go away”. Due to the large number of positions, it currently seems quite easy to get a position in a consulting company. But many of my respondents actually no longer want to go back to consulting, but rather “do something internally”.
In consulting, digitization has been carried out in customer projects for years, but its own industry has so far eluded digital change. For this reason the buzzword: “Consulting 4.0” was developed.

Regionalization against travel stress?

The problem with many consulting firms I have spoken to is that many applicants either quit because of the long travel time or do not even want to start. The goal is therefore: Regionalization . Consultants from Munich should stay in Munich, etc. But somehow this answer was not enough for me and I also believe that this has little to do with digital transformation.

The digital consultant

In the research area of the August Wilhelm Scheer Institute there are subject areas such as: eConsulting stores , virtual consulting, crowd consulting, Consult-Yourself Services and eConsulting Social Networks as an answer to the digital transformation in consulting. At the moment there is still little concrete information on both topics, but I would like to present the basic idea of Consulting 4.0.
The central question is why the consultant supports numerous digital projects and is supported by even more digital tools but has not yet been digitized. The consulting service is therefore still heavily dependent on the individual consultant. If this leaves the company, this leads to extensive damage to the project at the customer’s site.

New target group: Mittelstand advises SMEs

It has been proven that medium-sized companies have significantly lower R&D budgets compared to large companies and can hardly bear the costs of the traditional consulting they need themselves without any scale effect. This is a promising future, especially for medium-sized businesses. He can benefit from the advantages of consulting in a new way that is more suitable and compatible for this type of company (Werth and Greff IM +).
Thanks to digitization, SMEs will be able to use consulting much more efficiently in the future. Central questions in this context are how consulting has so far been used by German SMEs and how its use can be fundamentally optimized through digitalization instruments. It is particularly important to refer to the diverse software-side potentials that arise from topics such as remote consulting, platform markets, self or crowd consulting (Werth and Greff IM +).

Consulting Yourself Service

Consult-Yourself Services transfer self-service technologies, which enable customers or end users to use services independently, into the consulting industry.
The consulting industry is an expensive, not very scalable industry. A consultant can only provide one consultancy service at a time. Consult Yourself Services in management consulting can help to overcome these scalability limits and thus make a significant contribution on the way to digital consulting.

EConsulting store

Of the eConsulting Store is the online shop of the management consultancy. More precisely, it is a fully integrated web solution that enables both the sale and the processing of digital consulting services. During the purchase process, the customer is continuously informed by the switchable Online sales advice supported. Virtualized consultations are then activated in the form of links to the remote session in the ECS dashboard at the scheduled date. The links will also be sent as a reminder by email shortly after the appointment.

Summary

If we take these two examples, there are 2 different use cases for digital transformation in consulting. I think that the trend is towards “remote” and flexible work in which the consultant decides for himself how he works. The approaches are there and the question now arises: will the customers of such consulting houses accept this? Since I have been a consultant myself for almost 3 years, I estimate that the consulting houses themselves would be ready and the employees too. I see the strong process more in the hands of the “customer”. He always has the luxury of choosing from what feels like 100 different consulting firms, which are actually all almost equally well qualified. So the question would be justified: why should they then want to get used to a new system? I am definitely looking forward to the further results of the study.

What do you think?

In summary, every consulting company is required to specialize and to prepare services for the customer in a transparent manner. The traditional medium-sized company for individual software will no longer be able to exist in this form. But regardless of whether they are specialists or generalists state-of-the-art. I think the healthy mediocrity will prevail as always. Perhaps it is enough to simply set up a consulting firm a little more agile and react promptly and correctly to trends. Almost every senior consultant has industry knowledge and there are often numerous certifications. So the core is actually only in this consultant now practices of digital transformation, Industry 4.0 or Big data bring closer. Or what do you think, how and whether the consulting industry will change to Consulting 4.0? Have you already noticed changes in your work as a management consultant or as a manager in your work with management consultants?
[werbung]
Reading tip: Consulting 4.0 whitepaper
Verwendete Quellen anzeigen

Der Beitrag Consulting 4.0 – digital transformation? erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.

More humanity in management

According to the authors, successful organizations display a mature and humane culture. A paradigm shift from management X to management Y is taking place. Management Y serves the employee. People are not lazy, they are ready to make good contributions to something big. Living Management Y fundamentally changes our image of man from authority to serving management. Brandes et al. see the management of an organization as critical success factors and demand: “ Human maturity in key positions in the organization as a success factor for future viability “.

Organizations as social systems

Let’s take a look at the overall concept. “Bringing organizations to life together” is what the authors say and calling for a different understanding of organizations in order to shape, control and “revive” them. The authors put forward the thesis: “Leadership as a host” in an organization. We also see the Scrum approaches and the honest enthusiasm of employees. I like to compare this approach to sociocracy. Generation Y, to which I also belonged, needs incentives, i.e. meaning in everything they do. Companies must therefore honestly inspire employees through creating meaning and the defined purpose of the company. What I particularly like at the end of the book is that the authors are open and say: “Every organization can be attractive and sustainable”. I agree with the authors here and no matter which one Framework for agility You use: All seem to lead to success in their own way. Also read the articles about Holocracy and Democracy in Business . So there is still plenty of room for further research into how each of these frameworks can actually be implemented and what type of company it is suitable for.
[werbung]
Verwendete Quellen anzeigen

Der Beitrag Management Y and sociocracy erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.

Why do we need more agility?

• Structural changes due to the digital transformation will take place in all areas of the company
• IT and technology merge
• Classic departments will increasingly expire by 2025 (< 50%)
• The responsibility for the transformation will come from the management
• By 2025, companies will need fewer staff, but up to 25% will only rely on experts
• Knowledge has to be built up and maintained in-house

Swell: iOT study by Detecon

The need for agile structures is increasing!

Is this necessity of agile structures on everyone’s lips or do German entrepreneurs see this as no answer to the challenges of digital transformation. Apparently it does! 95% consider this to be important for the future viability of the company. The study (p. 19 and 21) shows not only the importance, but also the increasing proportion of agile structures by 2025. We are noticing a significant increase in agility in companies.

According to the study, agility will not only concentrate on IT, but will also affect many, even almost all, areas of the company far outside of IT. This agile reorganization will take place in the next 3 years. It is for this reason that we are dealing with precisely these agile departments in research (Detecon study p. 25/26). If you read deeper, you will notice that agility and the growth of technology in particular go hand in hand. Production and logistics are at the forefront after IT. Marketing and finance are also heavily affected by digitization. So in 3 years we will be faced with the situation that more than 65% of the companies have already completed the agile reorganization. So there is not much time left. I will accompany some of these 17%, which are already starting, with a case study on their journey. I am surprised by the involvement of HR, as some sources can be found here and I see a great need. Overall, however, the study shows that IT, sales, logistics and production will require a high level of agility.

The implementation is not yet entirely clear

A precise implementation of what an agile and sustainable company looks like is not yet clearly defined. In the course of the research were already Frameworks for agility found from literature. With the help of experts, case studies and round tables, we will jointly find a way to implement these and meet the digital transformation in companies with agility. Also read my other articles on the subject digital transformation and Digital leadership .
[werbung]

Verwendete Quellen anzeigen

Der Beitrag Digital transformation and agility erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.

Baumgartner et al. (2013, p. 3) show in the figure above that Scrum one process for all roles Are defined. In the picture you can see how this one process combines the roles of the project manager, requirements engineer and tester. “Test” as a discipline no longer exists in isolation from Scrum. Rather, like the other roles, the tester becomes part of the overall agile process.

In the representation of Baumgartner et al. (2013, p. 101) we see how the role of the new, agile tester is split equally into the tasks of test manager and tester. Thus, one person or the agile department takes on operational tasks on the one hand – these tasks include the tests themselves, measurements, as well as logging and tracking – and, on the other hand, strategic tasks such as planning, estimating and organizing the tests .

Agile Test – The role of the tester in the team

But where do we currently have to classify the tester in the entire team? Baumgartner et al. 2013, p.112 provide an answer in the diagram below: The tester is in close contact with the development team, which feeds him with information or which the tester gets by monitoring the process. He is also in direct contact with the PO (Product Owner) in order to be able to correctly evaluate the development based on the requirements set by the Product Owner, which in turn are specified by the stakeholders. Testers appreciate the Sprint planning now also reduce the testing effort and thus make an essential contribution to the product. As part of my research, I am reviewing these approaches. In his book, Baumgartner clarifies the relationships between the individual roles within Scrum: The tester checks the development based on the requirements of the PO.
In practice, there is a growing test effort in the course of the respective product development. However, according to Scrum, this growth is actually not beneficial, as the test effort should be constant throughout the process and should not increase towards the end, as can be seen in the figure below. In the first interviews we learn that testers work in advance and prepare the tests, so to speak, and estimate the effort. So the testing effort in the observing teams was still the same over the entire duration of the process. The quality was also very high at the beginning.

Basic principles of Agile Test

For this paragraph I am listing some tips for the agile test which I am going to use Wikipedia have found and summarize here.

• • Quick feedback: 2 weeks or less

• • High level of automation of the test

• • Low overhead in the form of test management

• • Dissolution of test roles (test manager, analyst, etc.)

• • Dissolution of the test levels from the V-model (unit, integration, system …)

• Close cooperation in the team (feature teams, tester also writes code from time to time)

[werbung]
Verwendete Quellen anzeigen

Der Beitrag Agile test and Scrum erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.

Baumgartner et al. (2013, p. 3) show in the figure above that Scrum one process for all roles Are defined. In the picture you can see how this one process combines the roles of the project manager, requirements engineer and tester. “Test” as a discipline no longer exists in isolation from Scrum. Rather, like the other roles, the tester becomes part of the overall agile process.

In the representation of Baumgartner et al. (2013, p. 101) we see how the role of the new, agile tester is split equally into the tasks of test manager and tester. Thus, one person or the agile department takes on operational tasks on the one hand – these tasks include the tests themselves, measurements, as well as logging and tracking – and, on the other hand, strategic tasks such as planning, estimating and organizing the tests .

Agile Test – The role of the tester in the team

But where do we currently have to classify the tester in the entire team? Baumgartner et al. 2013, p.112 provide an answer in the diagram below: The tester is in close contact with the development team, which feeds him with information or which the tester gets by monitoring the process. He is also in direct contact with the PO (Product Owner) in order to be able to correctly evaluate the development based on the requirements set by the Product Owner, which in turn are specified by the stakeholders. Testers appreciate the Sprint planning now also reduce the testing effort and thus make an essential contribution to the product. As part of my research, I am reviewing these approaches. In his book, Baumgartner clarifies the relationships between the individual roles within Scrum: The tester checks the development based on the requirements of the PO.
In practice, there is a growing test effort in the course of the respective product development. However, according to Scrum, this growth is actually not beneficial, as the test effort should be constant throughout the process and should not increase towards the end, as can be seen in the figure below. In the first interviews we learn that testers work in advance and prepare the tests, so to speak, and estimate the effort. So the testing effort in the observing teams was still the same over the entire duration of the process. The quality was also very high at the beginning.

Basic principles of Agile Test

For this paragraph I am listing some tips for the agile test which I am going to use Wikipedia have found and summarize here.

• • Quick feedback: 2 weeks or less

• • High level of automation of the test

• • Low overhead in the form of test management

• • Dissolution of test roles (test manager, analyst, etc.)

• • Dissolution of the test levels from the V-model (unit, integration, system …)

• Close cooperation in the team (feature teams, tester also writes code from time to time)

[werbung]
Verwendete Quellen anzeigen

Der Beitrag Agile test and Scrum erschien zuerst auf agile Companies.