Q: What do you really mean when you say simpler is better?
Rick Schaffer: Well we need to set a little context I suppose. We work with government organizations every day, and these organizations, across the country, deal constantly with information and technology issues. They have antiquated systems, data warehouses, and proprietary software that effectively keep a lot of their data locked up.
Q: So they have a hard time getting their work done?
RS: Right. They need to run reports, cross-reference data, extract or share specific information, and so on. It’s often difficult or cumbersome for them just to accomplish fairly basic tasks. So they logically go looking for new solutions to solve their needs.
Q: And this is where you come in?
RS: Yes. And this is where simpler is better comes in.
Q: How so?
RS: Well, organizations are so conditioned to think a certain way when looking for IT solutions that they might have a tendency to look for a complex solution when a simple one is actually more effective, less resource intensive and faster to implement.
Q: Take me through the process — how might one get to a simpler solution?
RS: Two things are critical. The first is a long look inward at what the real needs are. The second is being aware that there may be other ways of solving those needs beyond what you already know.
Q: What do you mean “real” needs?
RS: It’s surprising how often organizations will leapfrog over what they really need and go right to solutions. Grab a pen and paper and list the actual, real-world needs. For example, “Need to share data between departments A, B, and C. Need to extract data from systems X and Y and combine for cross-checking. Need report containing data from Locations 1 through 6.” And so on.
Q: Sorry, but isn’t that kind of obvious?
RS: I think most people lump all of the needs together and just figure they need a better data warehouse or better software system to handle it all — because that’s what they know. But if one were to make that list, and then for each item ask the question, “What is the simplest way to accomplish this?” they might land on a very different solution and save themselves a lot of headache.
Q: Take the last example you gave about needing data from six locations — how can that be simple?
RS: So you get specific with the real needs: “We need these monthly reports that total and compare and contrast specific data from six locations.” Now let me chart out the two different approaches...
|
Complex Approach |
Simple Approach |
|
1) Find comprehensive software
solution that: a. Meets/exceeds functionality of old
system b. Shares data between six locations c. Has required reports, or customized
reports 2) Purchase/install new system a. Expensive/Resource intensive b. Lots of IT involvement c. New hardware? 3) Re-train all employees a. Time consuming b. Change management c. Glitches & errors |
1) Once a month, have each location
upload their entire dataset to the Web 2) Using simpler/gov, designated user accesses all of the data and
generates needed reports |
Q: Wait a minute. The Simple Approach sounds too easy. If I order now do I get a free Ginsu knife?
RS: [smiles] Well you can slice and dice the data any way you like with simpler/gov.
Q: Seriously though, you must be over-complicating and over-simplifying the two approaches for effect?
RS: Not at all. Not even close. I mean sometimes it’s a new data warehouse instead of a new software solution, but we literally see organizations layer more and more complexity and cost on top of a problem, when they could easily solve their needs at literally a fraction of the rollout time and cost.
Q: Is there resistance to the simple approach?
RS: Sometimes. Humans sometimes seem to think complexity is better for some reason. We disprove that again and again. If the data is all there, end users just need access and tools to work with it — done.
Q: I can hear people out there saying, “That’s great, but there’s no way that kind of a solution is going to meet all of our needs.”
RS: Okay, in some cases that might be true. So what if it solves 80% of the needs? Is it more efficient to solve 80% of your needs right now, or invest untold amounts of time, money, and resources into a so-called 100% solution that will take several months or even years to implement? And even then, by layering on more complexity and confusion and problems, there’s no guarantee it will work.
Q: If this is all true, why isn’t everybody using simpler/gov or something like it?
RS: [laughs] Now THAT is a good question! They just don’t know about it yet — it’s still a new paradigm. But when we show people what it does and how it can easily solve so many of their needs, light bulbs come on and then there is no going back.