21 Sep Common process improvement mistake #4: Incomplete and inaccurate terminology definitions
We get it. It’s hard to hold a bundle of terms in your head and know when to throw one down correctly. It’s easy to just use the one that guy over there used yesterday. It seemed correct and if it’ll move this conversation along, well, good enough.
One of the troubles with just following along with whatever terms and words are used by someone else is meaning becomes squished. Context is flattened to dust. Deep understanding? A mere ‘huh’ in the wind. Use value? Not applicable. Same page movement? Volumes apart.
Terminology matters. Definitions matter more. Usage of both in cooperation matters the most. When words are interchanged with the idea everyone understands what you – specifically, in this moment – “mean”, you fail on every point trying to be made. No one knows what you mean, only what they know in relation to what you say.
Such is the case with the term ‘process’. Many many many people throw this word around indiscriminately which then makes even more people do the same just to stay in the conversation. But the term is often misused, misunderstood, and misaligned in context. That usage in that one conversation last year? Well, it morphed into five thousand permutations taking flight in every direction except the one you want or need. You’ve lost control of meaning when you fail to capture collective terminology understandings before walking into a room.
And it’s not just this term; it’s all the ones used within the same process-related orbit. Process improvement. Business process. Process optimization. Business process classification. Activity. Procedure. Mapping. And so on. Failure at the terminology stage = failure in the action stage.
Process Practice Suggestion
➤ ACKNOWLEDGE
… you may be interchanging process-related terms in your mind and through your voice based on what you are ingesting from elsewhere thereby consistently, persistently, perpetuating inaccuracies.
SO YOU CAN: Write down each term you use in relation to process work and your personal definitions and then research existing standards so you can work through the question – “Can I identify the differences between these terms and how I use them?”
➤ RESIST
… ignoring the personal acknowledgement step. This is fundamental. Foundational. Imperative.
SO YOU CAN: Properly articulate your understandings of the process-related terminology and assess – “What are the terminology gaps and alignments with my colleagues and with the methodologies I/we employ?”
➤ PIVOT
… to burning the terminology and definition clutter by bringing people together who do similar work to discuss differences and alignments in terminology understandings.
SO YOU CAN: Create a standardized reference document clear in intent and succinct in scope so the only answer is ‘yes’ when asking – “Does everyone understand the work we need to focus on and why?
Clarity is never wrong. It’s just scary. Words hold meaning far beyond their intended purpose. The struggle exists when words and terms are used too frequently without care or consideration they start to lose meaning and value.
Process is one of these words. Use it in a business context and people will nod their head and go along because it seems so simple, so easy, so known that they can’t possible not know. But agreement without actuating a common understanding is just a ‘go along to get along’ performance.
And this performance is going to bite you in the butt every time you choose consensus over clarity when it comes process-related terminology.
