The first and most important step is to clearly identify the requirement(s). What specifically does the organization want to do? When must it be done?

Reviewing the organization’s top goals can be an effective means of identifying requirements. Often, one or more of these goals will emerge as good candidates. Another good place to start is by reviewing the organization’s strategic plans and other studies that have been conducted in the past, but whose recommendations for one reason or another have not yet been implemented.

Sometimes one requirement will create an additional requirement that must be satisfied first. For example, before an organization can build a new facility, it may need to find a way to free up funds for construction. Generating funds in this case becomes the prerequisite requirement.

Once a requirement has been identified, management should identify what is driving it. Why does the organization need to undertake this action? Perhaps the requirement is being driven by a new regulation, a management directive, changes in market conditions, or an shift in the organization’s mission.

Information about what drives a requirement is useful for assigning project priorities and for justifying the initiative to decision makers. It can also be used to develop metrics for evaluating project success. Both positive and negative drivers should be evaluated. Positive drivers describe the benefits of undertaking the action under consideration, and negative drivers describe the consequences that will result if the action is not taken.

The next step in our SR&O process is to assess the organization’s resources. Start by listing the resources needed to help satisfy the requirement. Resources can include money, land, buildings, people, space, capabilities, time, knowledge, experience, and so on. As in all steps in the SR&O process, strive to think innovatively and asymmetrically.

Include in the assessment resources owned by stakeholders who have an invested interest in the success of the venture. Also, consider inviting individuals and organizations with compatible goals to become participants or partners.

When identifying potential partners, it can be helpful to think in terms of concentric circles. In the middle circle are the people and resources in the organization that are integrally involved in carrying out the mission. In the next outward concentric circle list the organization’s partners and operational stakeholders. And in the outer concentric circle are the people and organizations that have some degree of interest in the success of the venture. Evaluate all with an open mind.

Next, identify internal and external constraints that could adversely impact costs and schedules. Consider what could potentially limit the leveraging of assets and the engagement of partners. Possible constraints might include data that may be difficult to obtain, permissions that must be granted, legal hurdles that must be overcome, restrictions that must be observed, and scheduling conflicts that must be resolved.

For example, assume that a government agency has a piece of real estate that is sitting idle. This land may seem to have no connection to the requirement, but if it can be sold, the cash from the sale could be used to fund the requirement. So, this asset should be included in the evaluation process.

To carry this example one step further, assume that this land has some environmental issues that restricts how it can be used. Perhaps it could not be used for building an apartment complex, but it might be satisfactory for a paved parking lot. Armed with this evaluation, management might decide that instead of spending millions of dollars to clean up the land to meet the highest environmental standards, they might sell it for use as a parking lot. This is an example of how one asset can be reshaped and monetized so it generates cash for a requirement that many would have considered unrelated.

When developing the plan, make every effort to adopt a holistic, multidisciplinary mindset. The mind, when left to its own devices, will resort to familiar approaches that may have worked in the past but will not be the best for the future. Consider the issues from environmental, financial, engineering, political, real estate, policy, and operational perspectives. When ideas generated by these different perspectives are combined and integrated, new and better solutions often emerge.

SR&O uses innovative, multidisciplinary thinking to identify the highest and best use of resources. Think in terms of “divest, reshape, and invest.” Assets should never be disposed of for less than their realizable value.

In the example of the land cited above, the easiest course would have been for the governmental agency to simply continue to let the land remain idle. But this would have required annual funding for maintenance, and no benefit would have been received in return. The land would simply have continued to drain money from the budget year after year that could be put to much better use.

An alternative course of action from an operational standpoint would be to clean up the land and sell it to the highest bidder to be used in a manner consistent with market dynamics. But this option could be prohibitively expensive for the governmental agency, and the sale of the land may not generate a value high enough to justify the cost to clean it.

The SR&O approach would be to identify the best use of the land by evaluating multiple possibilities. Data is collected and analyzed to determine the comparative economic and technical feasibility of these various alternatives, and an implementation plan is developed to achieve the recommended alternative.

Once the plan has been developed, the vision can be clarified, goals can be set, and metrics can be specified. The plan should designate responsibilities and reporting relationships, establish timelines and benchmarks, and specify a budget. As mentioned previously, metrics will be based primarily on the drivers of the project, and become an essential feedback loop for decision makers to verify the purpose and intent of the requirement is achieved.

Establish systems to monitor performance during and after project implementation to ensure the requirement is achieved and that it accomplishes the desired results (i.e., ROI, mission, operational efficiency, employee retention, etc.). Reporting occurs on an ongoing basis to account for personnel and organizational changes. A project that is not consistently monitored can go off track over time or simply cease to function.

In addition, continuous reporting incentivizes responsibility and accountability. For example, if a leader who authorizes and oversees a specific project knows that the results of this project will be reported to others, they are likely to be more invested in its success.