Some may view this post as bold, questioning the status quo and unconventional. But I strongly believe one may not be against this idea totally. If that is achieved, I have succeeded in my efforts.

Re-engineering

Re-engineering is basically a drastic re-design of an organization’s processes, especially its business processes. Rather than organizing a business into functional specialties, complete processes that go into various functions will be considered in the re-engineering attempts. Thus normally the firm is re-engineered into a series of processes.

Normally people hold the view that too much time is wasted in passing on tasks from one department to another. They claim that it is far more efficient to appoint a team who are responsible for all the tasks in the process. They extend the argument to include suppliers, distributors, and other business partners.

Many recent developments like cross functional teams, management information systems, enterprise resource planning, supply chain management, knowledge management systems, group ware and collaborative systems, human resources management systems and customer relationship management systems have all developed as a result of re-engineering attempts and efforts.

Le-engineering

Well. Coming to Le engineering, let us look at its present focus and meaning. A simple google search reveals Le engineering is nothing but light engineering or language engineering.

I would like to look at Le engineering as an attempt to leverage engineering capabilities to gain synergic benefits so that more business volumes could be handled. That is to gain something beyond what Re engineering can offer.

Le engineering can take roots in more than one form – internally and externally. Internally, latent but yet to be tapped engineering capabilities can be enhanced and reaped. Externally, the tools and accessories that are used can bring out additional capabilities for exploitation.

Advantages of Le engineering over Re engineering

Massive layoffs can be avoided in le engineering. The displaced employees can be engaged in other newer opportunities coming up due to le engineering. Thus there may not be any need for downsizing as it happens usually in re engineering attempts. Thus the organization’s reputation is not tampered and the key internal stakeholders would totally support such le engineering attempts and efforts.

Re engineering has been viewed with suspicion always as it assumes that the factor that limits an organization’s performance is the effectiveness of its process (which may or may not be factual) and offers no means of validating that assumption.

Since le engineering’s focus is on gaining synergic advantages, in addition to processes (a simple approach), it will offer new or hitherto unexploited openings or capabilities.

Re engineering assumes the need to start the process of performance with a clean slate i.e. totally disregard the status quo.

However, le engineering will begin and continue to assure the status quo but make all attempts to provide further gains.

Thus our le engineering will focus on maximizing the organization’s capabilities.

Re engineering can truly become a challenge to Theory of Constraints advocated by Eliyahu M Goldratt as it will focus only on the inherent capabilities of the organization.

Any takers for this thought - Le (verage) engineering capability (internal and external) to enhance organizational performance?

I strongly believe successful organizations may be already following le engineering without realizing it.

Then why not we dump re engineering and vote for le (verage) engineering?