Good enough is not the goal of CX and transformation initiatives

This is a story about how seeking a "good enough" state in business process change is not the right answer.

We recently posted a webinar on how to get started with robotic process automation (RPA). What I loved was the feedback from one of our former clients:

"The salient point for me was the idea to never automate what isn't fully understood and locked down. A couple of times my team has been asked to automate process X, only to find not only is there little documentation, but also 'diversity of opinion' on current state. 'I'm sure whatever you build will be better than what we are currently doing' is the kiss of death."

It is like trying to build a house ad hoc, without a plan or an understanding of how things need to come together: building without knowing where, or how large a hole, to dig for the foundation.

The misconception stems from the notion that most business challenges are rooted in technology, or that the "right" technology will cure what ails us. In reality, technology is the enabler of a well-architected business process. If people in the organization don't know exactly how the process works, they can't appreciate all its shortcomings, so they can't design them out. The pressure then falls on the technology team to solve a challenge that truly belongs to a process architect.

Would anyone invest thousands of dollars in a project that would yield a "good enough" state?