The heart of the MPV (Maximum People Value) model is built on the premise that value is not just about financial dollars and profit – rather, value exists in multiple forms within your organisation.
Everything we do in a digital workplace will always have these three components as part of the design. In the past, these three Focal Points were often owned and managed in isolated ways, which gave rise to power struggles, siloed mentality, and less-than-optimal outcomes.
If you want to maximise people value, it’s imperative that these three Focal Points are in complete alignment and that this is accepted by all owners and contributors. A single Focal Point cannot operate optimally unless the others two are given equal consideration.
A critical aspect of this model is that the three Focal Points impact each other in a bidirectional manner. In the past, for example, the IT function may have provided a piece of software to Operations or Finance, with the understanding that the receiving department took functional ownership of the software, and IT would maintain the technology. This is an example of a one-way relationship. In a digital workforce, this is no longer an appropriate response, as we are in a continuous state of flux.
The Maximum People Value (MPV) framework highlights seven Enterprise Influencers, shown on the out edge of the model.
These Enterprise Influencers provide an important reality check, giving you a snapshot of how you are currently operating. By exploring these Enterprise Influencers, you will have a greater appreciation of your ability to maximise people value in any project or business activity undertaken.
Enterprise Influencers moderate the maximum People value you are able to attain. For example, if communication is an excellent attribute of your organisation, then you are likely to find immediate value by introducing Microsoft Teams as your collaboration platform.
The higher the seven Enterprise Influencers rate individually and collectively, the greater the opportunity is to maximise your people value. The converse is also true – the lower the importance, the less likely your people (and other) values will achieve their planned objectives.