Simplifying an organisation: what added solutions can conceal

When something goes wrong, proposing an additional measure immediately feels constructive. The managerial question is more precise: before choosing an improvement, have we genuinely considered removing an element of the existing process?

What the literature establishes

Gabrielle S. Adams, Benjamin A. Converse, Andrew H. Hales and Leidy E. Klotz (2021, Nature) show that participants in experimental tasks overlook advantageous subtractive changes. Their findings suggest that this asymmetry is not simply a preference for addition: some solutions involving removal are not spontaneously considered. Explicit prompts to consider subtraction make these solutions more accessible.

The starting point can constrain the search

David G. Jansson and Steven M. Smith (1991, Design Studies) show that examples provided in design tasks can fix the search for solutions on some of their features, including problematic ones. Their study does not directly address the removal of procedures, but it illuminates a related mechanism: a solution already in view can restrict exploration. Starting from the current organisational chart or approval workflow is therefore not necessarily a neutral way to seek an alternative.

The premature conclusion

One might infer that good decisions involve removing rather than adding. These studies do not establish the general superiority of subtraction: they examine how options are generated before they are evaluated. Removing a useful check can be as damaging as adding an unnecessary procedure. (our executive and employee training programmes)

What the evidence cannot promise

Experimental tasks do not reproduce all the interdependencies, regulatory obligations and responsibilities within an organisation. They cannot quantify the benefit a Valais business would obtain by removing a step. Apparent simplification can also transfer work to another team: measuring only the department making the decision would conceal that shift.

A practical check in Sion

As part of SHR's « Decision-making » programme, an exercise in Sion could focus on a non-critical administrative workflow in hydropower, healthcare, viticulture or Alpine tourism, without altering safety or compliance requirements. Before deciding, record an additive option, a subtractive option and the option of retaining the existing process, then calculate the proportion of cases in which the subtractive option was actually examined. Where removal is selected, test the change within a limited scope and compare total processing time and required rework with a baseline period defined in advance, including any teams that might receive displaced work. The first measure checks whether the search has broadened; the others check whether simplification actually delivers a benefit. To go further: explore the Decision-making training in Sion in the canton of Valais, or browse our executive and employee training programmes in Switzerland.

In pictures: Decision-making in Sion

• decision-making
• Sion
• research
• training sion