top of page

Get more of what you want by doing business cases. Better yet, you will not get out-positioned competing department managers who are better advocates than you. From the perspective of the decision maker, written business cases are the best way to separate the wheat from the chaff. This is a replay of a great discussion with Scott Parker and Francine Durso two years ago.


Oil platform burning with smoke depicted as dollar bills, symbolizing wasteful nature of not fully evaluating infrastructure and facilities.

US Coast Guard Electricians Mate Second Class Paul Frantz provided the visuals for this month's topic on Business Case Evaluations. "Dollars Up in Smoke" reminds us of decision making related to renewal, replacement, or staying with the status quo.

 

This month’s Ask the Experts is a one-on-one lightning round with asset management guru Scott Parker. Scott has served in a variety of roles ranging from chief financial officer to director of asset management. Scott recently served on a global initiative to improve business case evaluations in the water utility sector.


We were pleased to have my former colleague Francine Durso moderate the conversation. Francine is a former consultant with two international consulting firms and has served as a senior leader in two state agencies that consider and awards grants to units of local government. Some of Francine’s Fine Points are provided at the end of the exchange.


- J.D.

 

What is the primary advantage of doing a formal Business Case Evaluation?


SP: It significantly helps improve decision making, which is fundamental in asset management and capital improvement planning.

JD: I would say that the advantage is that everything gets documented in writing.

SP: Plus, you get the right people involved.

JD: Yes, and the right people are necessary not just for decision making but also for implementation.



Should non-financial or non-monetized factors be considered?


JD: Yes, the Triple Bottom Line is key. Social/human aspects and environmental aspects need to be considered along with the things we consider to be financials.

SP: Yes, and the non-financial factors are always very specific to the project under consideration.

JD: In most cases, non-monetized factors are usually more important on the larger or more strategic projects. Less strategic projects are usually based on the financials.

SP: Non-monetized factors are also important to different stakeholders. The non-monetized values help the decision maker understand that it may not just be about the money.



Should one person do the BCE or should it be done by a team?


SP: Definitely a team. I would say that a real BCE cannot be performed by a single person.

JD: Agree, needs to be a cross-functional team. They help us work through our discipline-specific biases.

SP: There are multiple aspects to a business case, so it is key to have different perspectives; usually one person does not have expertise in all the aspects. I usually recommend 5 to 7 people which is a workable size that can achieve consensus.

JD: Me too. My standard is 5 to 8 people.



Do BCEs Need a Project/Executive Sponsor?


SP: Yes, all BCEs need to include a project sponsor.

JD: Agree, and it needs to be someone who can direct the allocation of resources. Decision making, by definition, is about the allocation of resources.

SP: Upper-level management sponsorship lends credibility to the work, too. An executive sponsor can support and communicate the BCE information to those at a higher level.

JD: Often the project manager is simply a trusted advisor but does not have the influence within the C-Suite or Board of Directors that an executive sponsor has.



What types of people or functions should be included on the team?


JD: Financial, engineering, operations, maintenance, and safety.

SP: I agree with those. A little bit different, but I also include a data analyst.

JD: That is a good one. I have done the same and call them an excel junkie.

SP: The members of the BCE team often don’t have the time or the advanced skills that are sometimes needed. There needs to be someone on the team to crank the data.



How many pages should the typical BCE include (length)?


SP: I hate to be specific, but it needs to be at a digestible level. But, I have seen them as many as 50 to 100 pages.

JD: Wow, that’s crazy.

SP: Here are some guidelines. Decision makers need to be able to read it quickly and in one sitting. I normally use 3 to 5 pages.

JD: 2 to 4 is my recommended standard, plus maybe some attachments for large projects.



What are some basic sections in a BCE?


JD: Recommendation, Background/Problem, Alternatives, Financial and Non-financial.

SP: I agree. And sometimes the financials can get a little more detailed than simply costs, such as digging into the impact on customer rates.

JD: But keep each section brief. Just a few sentences, for example, on the background.

SP: And remember, the dollar sign is the universal language of understanding.



What aspects are most overlooked?


JD: Keeping it simple and brief.

SP: The benefits achieved by doing the process itself.

JD: Yes, we often overlook the benefits of coming to a common understanding.

SP: The BCE process itself allows for the organization’s larger goals and values to be made part of the decision-making process. Otherwise, these often get overlooked in the conversation. I think it’s one of the biggest reasons to do BCEs.



Where in the project development cycle should a BCE be initiated?


SP: In a perfect world, as soon as you identify an operational need that potentially requires capital.

JD: As early in the process as possible.

SP: The earlier you understand the nature of the problem, the better.

JD: The challenge is that financial and engineering types are not good with conceptual or imperfect data. A BCE is really a comparative analysis and not an absolute analysis. We can make good comparative decisions with order-of-magnitude data.



What has surprised you most over the years when developing BCEs?


SP: The power of creative minds to evaluate ideas that were not obvious at the beginning of the process.

JD: People within an organization see that you can get what you want when you do a BCE, so others want to copy it.

SP: The reaction of doing one well is always positive.

JD: The need for a good governance structure is important. BCEs should have a structured process and format while at the same time providing the forum and framework for creativity.



 

Francine’s Fine Points


  1. BCE’s force you to develop a very clear and concise problem statement.

  2. There is usually a lot of discussion about non-financials, but the decision often comes down to just the financials.

  3. It’s very important to include people in the BCE process who are the ones that are going to implement the outcome.

  4. Once people learn the process, I’ve seen organizations apply it to other situations.

  5. Some of the non-monetized factors often include protection of public health, long-term environmental protection, community character, resiliency, public acceptance, and new growth (economic development).


 

JD Solomon Inc provides services at the nexus of facilities, infrastructure, and the environment. Contact us for more information related to developing a new business case, providing a third-party review of a critical business case, or implementing an enterprise-wide business case program. Check out JD Solomon's workshops on the topic and his upcoming book later this year.


Accendo's logo of the sum over a circle.
Accendo Reliability is a consortium of professionals providing thought leadership to the techncial sector.

JD Solomon becomes a regular contributor for Accendo Reliability in mid-January. Solomon’s articles will be part of a new subject matter group called “On Systems Thinking ."His initial series is titled "Communicating with FINESSE" and focuses on more effective communication and facilitation. Solomon will be joined in the new group by root cause analysis (RCA) guru Bob Latino, who will focus on human aspects of physical systems.


Accendo Reliability is a consortium of two dozen leaders who provide thought content in reliability, engineering, and maintenance. Accendo Reliability was formed ten years ago by a small group of technical professionals led by Fred Schenkelberg. Accendo Reliability is not a trade magazine nor a professional society.


Bob Latino and JD Solomon share a common passion for physical and human systems. Latino is a second-generation reliability leader and currently a senior consultant at Prelical Solutions, LLC. He is the author of several books and software related to RCA. Bob is also a board member of the Community of Human and Organizational Learning, whose focus is on the human aspects of organization resilience, human performance improvement, data analysis, root cause analysis, and safety.


Communicating with FINESSE will provide insights on communication and facilitation from the perspective of systems with integrated physical and human components. The information will apply to a wide range of professionals at all organizational levels who work with complexity, uncertainty, and decision making. Visit www.jdsolomoninc.com for more information on services provided by our firm.


"I really liked the pre-workshop survey," responded an executive team member. "It enabled us to have a fast start and it helped everyone get on the same page."


No one wants to waste their time. As the leader of any workshop or series of meetings, it is crucial to understand what is effective and what is not. A well-executed pre-session exchange is one of the most frequently cited things that make a facilitated session more efficient, more effective, and more collaborative.


Defined

A pre-session exchange involves the facilitator (session leader) collecting information for the participants in advance of the session. The exchange usually takes place via face-to-face interviews, phone interviews, or online surveys. The pre-session exchange should be planned and structured in a manner equal to planning and structuring the main session.


Desired Outcomes

Some specific outcomes of the pre-session exchange include:

  1. Better rapport between session leader and participant

  2. Understanding of participant experience and preferences with facilitated sessions

  3. Understanding of participant experience in the subject matter

  4. Collection of subject matter information

  5. Confidential perspective on potential challenging aspects and troublesome participants


Strength and Weaknesses of Each Major Approach

Face-to-face interviews provide the best opportunity to build rapport, see first-hand the participant's work environment, and collect additional data or information that improves the session. The primary negative is that this approach is the most resources intensive. Practically speaking, not every facilitated session rises to the level of needing face-to-face pre-session exchanges.


Phone (or virtual) interviews provide the opportunity for some personal interaction with a moderate level of resources. The negatives include the loss of body language, which can lead to defensiveness or misunderstanding. Practically speaking, this approach is the most common but also the most problematic- not everyone is a good phone interviewer/interviewee and this approach is often chosen just to check the boxes.


Online surveys provide the most subject matter perspective, easily generate quality graphics with a neutral look, and are perceived to require the least interpretation. The biggest negative is that you lose the opportunity to develop rapport and personal insights before the main session. Other negatives include that developing meaningful surveys requires training, it takes quite a bit of time to create a meaningful, concise survey, and digesting the results takes much more effort than merely pushing a few buttons. Practically speaking, plan on the same level of effort for a pre-session survey as would be required for face-to-face interviews, absent major travel time.


What to Do

  1. Plan with Executive Sponsor the approach, scope, and expectations of the pre-session exchange

  2. Develop a realistic timeline (usually 4 to 8 weeks before the facilitated session)

  3. Visualize how the pre-session exchange information will be used in the facilitated session

  4. Develop questionnaire and survey

  5. Execute the approach

  6. Share and discuss pre-session exchange information with the executive sponsor

  7. Share pre-session exchange information with participants before the facilitated session

  8. Open the facilitated session with the pre-session information


Pre-Session Exchanges

A well-executed pre-session exchange is one of the most frequently cited things that makes a facilitated session more efficient, more effective, and more collaborative. A well-executed pre-session exchange produces better outcomes. No one wants to waste their time.


 

JD Solomon Inc provides facilitation at the nexus of facilities, infrastructure, and the environment. Contact us for more information about facilitation services ranging from Strategic Plans and Board Retreats to Criticality Analysis, Root Cause Analysis, and Capital Program Development.




Experts
bottom of page