Boundary activities and readiness for ... - Projekti-Instituutti

Results
“Domain” (a pseudonym). The rationale for the program stemmed from
several sources. There was a well-anticipated need to update the
infrastructure related to the service process. Also, significant changes were
foreseen in the markets and in the legislation that regulated Chain’s
operations. As the infrastructure for the central service process was
becoming obsolete, some pre-study projects had already been conducted
concerning the forthcoming investment needs. Also, scenarios on market
development had been investigated in separate projects. There was clear
pressure to cut costs and make changes due to the changing markets.
Instead of just making the standard replacement investments concerning
the infrastructure of the service process, the Domain’s management board
decided to establish a large-scale renewal program.
The change program aimed at transforming Domain’s key service
processes. The program called for significant investments, but it also sought
considerable cost reductions for the forthcoming years and pursued
competitiveness in the long run. The transformation was planned to affect
all parts of Domain’s central business process, and it included renewing the
infrastructure, reorganizing the operations in Chain’s regional units, and
developing and adopting new ways of working across the company. The aim
was to make the service processes more efficient by optimizing each process
phase and by increasing automation. The program also involved significant
changes in the services offered for Chain’s customers. Ultimately, the
program aimed at ensuring profitability in the changing markets.
The program idea was developed and the early program structure was
sketched during the Domain’s management board’s strategy seminar. To set
a goal for the program, the top management defined a figure for the desired
cost savings in Chain’s future operations. The key members of Domain’s
management board also designed the overall structure for the program. The
structure was based on three development areas that each included several
sub-programs, further consisting of projects. Additionally, support groups
were included in the program structure (see Figure 10).
112