Gap Analysis: How to Avoid the Common Pitfalls Associated with Change

Are you happy with your organization’s competitive standing? Are you looking for ways to improve your procedures to make them more efficient? If your business is like most, you are constantly evaluating processes to find ways to be more productive. Usually you have a good idea of what your company is capable of achieving, but at the same time you can visualize a more efficient way of doing things. Finding a way to bridge the gap between where your business is today and where you want it to be is the crux of gap analysis.

Whether you are evaluating processes on a small scale, or trying to facilitate communication and interoperability between systems throughout your enterprise, it is helpful to have procedures in place to ensure that any upgrades that you are considering for your organization will lead to improvements to the system as a whole. Internally, a business may understand the operational lift that it can get by implementing a new technology such as workflow, but it may not have the IT expertise to implement change. After performing an ROI or cost/benefit analysis, a company may choose to do a gap analysis to determine ways in which it can improve upon existing practices. A gap analysis can help to bridge the division between different disciplines within a business, such as customer services and IT; at the same time, it can provide the perspective to advance your business well into the future.

It is often helpful to get an outsider’s perspective when conducting a gap analysis. An outsider may be better equipped to evaluate industry trends, and can provide helpful information regarding the benefits of suggested changes. An analyst can usually shed light on disaster recovery recommendations, efficiency gains, and upfront costs, and can suggest enhancements to help your organization to do more with less.

It is important to remember that for every technology “improvement,” the potential exists for processes to go horribly awry. It is possible that a business will close a gap in technology infrastructure, only to discover that it has created personnel gaps in which end-users do not have the expertise or training to use new technology to its fullest potential. The temptation may be to incorporate quick fixes to preclude an investment of both time and money. With this in mind, it is important to be aware of three major pitfalls that can be associated with gap analysis:

1. Staying the course

Organizations usually have a comfort zone. Frequently, they rely on older technology and familiar operations for their key processes, without investing time or money to improve their present systems. Users are comfortable with the existing equipment; consequently, transitioning to a system with upgraded capabilities can be a challenge. Regardless of this comfort zone, businesses need to dedicate the time and the resources to examine the big picture in order to remain competitive. Focusing solely on day-to-day operations without considering ways in which to make your system more efficient can be extremely harmful in the long run.

2. Treating the symptoms instead of the cause

It is important to have a thorough grasp of your organization’s current capabilities (or lack thereof) before you implement any improvements. Companies risk failure if they do not initially identify underlying reasons for their shortcomings. Often, businesses that are struggling with a lack of system interoperability will build highly customized pieces to address symptoms (in this case, the inability for two systems to communicate) instead of underlying causes (the need to upgrade an antiquated system). They end up paying for services and consulting fees to receive a high number of customizations. Ultimately, they frequently end up with a customized system that they do not understand, and have difficulty adding additional software down the road. If companies insist on addressing their issues solely with multiple customizations and do not address fundamental underlying problems with their infrastructure, they often end up spending the same amount of time and money as they would have on a complete systems overhaul.

3. Failure to look to the future

Typically, whether businesses are dealing with claims, student admissions, accounting, or other types of processing, they use some sort of internal software as the driver for their processes. For companies that are using antiquated technology, the challenge is to somehow enable their current system to communicate with other, more modern systems. When organizations rely upon older technology, it is imperative that they close the gap—or at least consider the gap—between older and newer technologies in order to support future add-ons. Merely customizing the present system does not necessarily make it interoperable with future technologies.

A gap analysis is an important tool that can help an organization to evaluate and implement change successfully, which is a necessity in today’s business environment.

Regardless of whether you seek an outsider’s perspective for a gap analysis or hope to implement change based upon internal input, a well-conceived plan can help to smooth your transition.

Bridging the Gap

• Identify the gaps. The first step involves getting a clear picture of the current system. Know what is implemented and how the technology is being used. Try to recognize and articulate the problems with your existing system, and visualize a more efficient way to accomplish your goals. What is the best way to move forward? Companies must budget for change and determine at which point to implement that change. If you hope to implement a more modern system within five years, make sure that future software purchases have the ability to communicate with the proposed system.
• Discuss ways in which to proceed. Assign a team of people from different departments who will be affected by proposed changes, and encourage their participation in the process. Consider including a consultant, or your vendor’s professional services team, so that you have an outsider’s perspective. Talk about the problem, and the pros and cons of suggested solutions. Which people need to be involved? As a team, talk about problems that are associated with the gap and how to close it. It is helpful to have one decision-maker who is not biased toward one particular department.
• Determine and communicate solutions. Create a project plan. Focus (as a team) on how to move forward. Because change usually requires a financial investment, it is helpful to develop a timeline and a budget. Meanwhile, keep the users on board, communicate, implement change gradually, and welcome feedback. You can have a smooth transition if you are inclusive and encourage involvement.

For more information or to schedule a demonstration, please Contact DocFinity now.