Value Networks

 and the true nature of collaboration

   

Chapter 2: Mapping the Value Network

Roles and Participants

Roles and Participants 

People play many different roles.

Shifting the mindset to roles instead of job titles 

opens a world of possibility.

You cannot administer a network, you can only serve it through the roles you play. 

 

In successful value networks people are very clear about their roles within the network. No one can manage or control the entire value network - or indeed any complex adaptive system - but we can and do manage our roles. 


We often speak of the many different "hats" we wear. Those hats are actually different roles that we play. In Value Network Analysis (VNA) these different roles are represented as nodes in the network. In traditional organizations most work is organized around either a process or a job function. The concept of role is quite different, and evokes a different mindset about how work gets done. 
value network map of roles in a case study about mobile workers
In the value network graphic above, the images do not have names of people, as the person may change while the role remains the same. The complete paper for this case study, "Designing Productive Workspaces for Mobile Workers," is available for download at the left.
Roles are NOT job titles. For example, when doing a VNA: You would not use a job title such as Manager Level III, but would define a role perhaps as Coordinator or Resource Provider. Or, instead of Accounts Payable, the name of an organizational function, you might identify the role as simply Payer. The goal is to move to generic language for the role, not how it might be defined on an organization chart.

Roles are filled by real people or groups of people who can generate transactions, send deliverables and messages, engage in interactions, add value, and make decisions.

Roles are persistent and endure over time regardless of who might step in at any particular moment to play that role and complete the tasks. One could say the role doesn't care who plays it. For example, in a business network three or four different companies (groups of people) could fill the role of "manufacturer."
Case Study: Procedure Scheduling in Healthcare
Note: The context for this case was shown on Value Network Mapping Basics.

In the VNA project the group started with the roles involved in the formal procedure for scheduling a health procedure. The roles are shown here.
Figure 1 - Scheduling: Roles in Procedure Scheduling in Healthcare.
During the mapping, another key activity role emerged - that of the Surgery Coordinator. 
The map in Figure 2 shows the value network, completed with transactions and deliverables. What we are interested in here is that the view is of a role-based value network.
Figure 2 - Scheduling: Role-based value network showing the scheduling process.
Ctrl-scroll to see larger.
Identifying participants

Participants in a value network are individuals or organizations that play a particular role.


Any value network can be mapped with the names of individuals who play the roles in the activity. Below is a simple notation device for designating some of the people who actually fill the roles in procedure scheduling.
Figure 3 - Scheduling: Role-based value network showing 
participants filling the roles.
The participant-based value network 

If you wish to better understand all the participants and the individual interactions you may define the value network at the participant level. This allows a finer level of detail in the mapping.


The participant-based view shows the actual individuals who are engaged in the activity and how they handle the deliverables. Because multiple people fill the roles, transactions are repeated in the view and the participant-based value network is typically more complex than the role-based value network.
Figure 4 - Scheduling: Participant-based value network.

The deeper detail of the participant-based map revealed that Barbara, in the role of Surgery Coordinator, was informally influencing the scheduling procedure. The unstructured nature of her role left too many key human interactions outside the formal process, resulting in delays and process breakdowns.

 

The work team reconfigured the process to eliminate the redundant role.


This case study will be further developed in Transactions and Deliverables and Sequencing.
The complete case study, Procedure Scheduling in Healthcare, is in the Case Studies chapter.
Where is identity?

The role perspective makes a lot of sense as organizations become more networked and people are allocated to different responsibilities in the organization. More and more people view their functional title or department as simply a "home base" where they have regular tasks to perform. They are often resourced to project teams or network projects, frequently in an ad hoc way.

The role perspective provides a way to more effectively deploy talent across the many tasks in the organization.

 

The image below shows how companies are reaching for this more role-focused, networked way of working. This is a simple diagram showing the matrix type of organization structure at Cisco, courtesy of Dart Lindsley.

Actually the challenge is even more complex because there are multiple lines of business activities that do't fit neatly into either the horizontal or vertical areas in the diagram. Network modeling and visuals can provide valuable insights into how companies can better address this kind of complexity.

 

One characteristic of a living system is that boundaries are permeable - allowing nutrients and waste to flow in and out. In organizations, permeable boundaries mean that people are continually negotiating their roles and interactions for adaptability, learning, effectiveness, and continual renewal.

FAQs for roles

Why can't a role be a computer or a database?
Work is a social activity. Humans may create technologies that mechanize certain tasks, but machines do not make their own decisions about which activities they engage in. Only people make those decisions, determining what activities and transactions are important, and assigning the tasks either to real people, or technology enablers such as applications that can complete the tasks.

  

But don't applications sometimes take the place of humans to play roles?
Yes, they can and do. As technologies become more sophisticated a software program may well be capable of filling a role. An example might be using an online reservations program to book airline travel. In that case the technology supports fulfillment tasks by acting in the role of "travel agent" or "reservation service provider." So even though a software program is capable of filling that role it is fulfilling it based on the way a real human would typically behave in that role. The technology is merely a mechanism for a role to be executed. Focus on the role first; then consider what might be the most effective mechanisms to support the role activities.

  

I work in a small company and we all play multiple roles. Will this approach still work for us?
This is actually an ideal approach for a small company, because it helps people avoid the trap of organizing the company around key people rather than around the roles that are core for the business activities.

  

How do we represent roles the organization is planning to add? 
You would first do the "as is" map of the current value network. Then you can create a "future state" map where the new roles are defined.

 

What if we have more than 8-10 roles? 
You can of course create value networks with more than 8 roles. However, when you are using a visual map it is challenging for people to read more than around twelve roles and 50 or so transactions. With technology support, much larger networks can be combined. Even when visuals are too complex to read, other performance indicators provide insights into network performance.

 

What if we have loops going back into roles?
VNA is focused on what happens between roles, not within them. If you are creating circular loops then you probably have two roles packed into one and need to separate them. Or you may be drilling down into a level of detail that is not really necessary for the level of map you are working with.

  

What if we have different understandings from multiple people playing the same role?
You will need to reconcile the differences either by aggregating their responses or having the people who play the role come together to define it together. 

Facilitation tips for manual mapping

- Try to think ahead to how many interactions you might anticipate between different roles. Keep the nodes small and arrange them so there will be clear open areas or "white space" where you can draw the arrows. As you place each role on the page, ask whether that role will have many or few interactions.


- The open space also leaves room for the labels on the arrows. The value network focus is on the interactions between the roles and that is where you need the most room to draw. Using a sticky for the role name helps you keep the nodes small and allows a bit of shifting around.

 

- Place those roles with a lot of interactions closer to the center of the page in proximity to each other. Place roles with few interactions closer to the edge. It will take a little practice, but after you have done a few maps you will see how a little thinking ahead will help you create much neater diagrams.

 

- Caution: Try to avoid the red/green color combination as that is the most common challenge for those who are color blind. You are usually safe with blue and green - but ask the group if anyone is having difficulty, and adjust the colors if needed.

 

 

  

TOP OF PAGE

Next page: Transactions and Deliverables