Systems That Aren’t Being Used—Organizations That Can’t Call It a Failure Can’t Change
Does your company have systems that were introduced but aren’t being fully utilized?
Groupware, business management tools, RPA, AI assistants—we frequently hear about the challenge of systems being introduced but not utilized effectively or producing results.
How does your organization judge this situation?
Are you thinking, “We’re still in the adoption promotion phase, so it’s not a failure”?
The Premise Was “Usable,” “Will Be Utilized,” and “Will Produce Results”
When introducing a system, there must have been decision criteria.
- This tool should be usable by the field
- Implementation should improve operational efficiency
- It will be utilized and produce results
These premises existed, which is why you spent budget and time deciding on implementation.
However, when you look at reality after implementation:
- It’s not being used
- It’s not being utilized
- Results aren’t appearing
This state means the premises at the time of implementation have collapsed.
If the Premises Have Collapsed, That’s a Failure
There’s a common response: “We just haven’t entered the adoption promotion phase yet.”
But consider this.
The basis for the implementation decision was the premise that it would be “usable,” “utilized,” and “produce results.”
If those premises aren’t being realized, that means the implementation decision itself was wrong.
It’s not “the next step”—it’s currently in a failed state.
Failure Isn’t a “Confirmed Result” but a “State Requiring Improvement”
What’s important here is the definition of failure.
Failure doesn’t only refer to a “confirmed result” where a project has completely collapsed.
A state where initial objectives aren’t being achieved = a state requiring improvement is also a failure.
- Implementation objectives: operational efficiency, promotion of information sharing, swift decision-making
- Current state: not being used, no results appearing
- In other words: there’s a gap between objectives and reality = it’s failing
It can be corrected through improvement. However, you need to acknowledge that it’s currently in a failed state.
If You Don’t Acknowledge Failure, Improvement Won’t Begin
What happens if you continue thinking “it’s not a failure”?
The opportunity for improvement won’t emerge.
- What the problem is doesn’t get analyzed
- Who’s responsible remains ambiguous
- Specific improvement measures don’t appear
If you continue postponing the unutilized state as “still to come,” the system will be abandoned and the investment wasted.
Acknowledging failure is the first step toward improvement.
Implementation Is Not the Goal but the Starting Point
The purpose of system implementation is not “putting in a tool.”
Changing operations and changing how the organization moves is the true purpose.
However, in many companies, the following vicious cycle occurs:
- The system was implemented, but the field continues with traditional methods
- Results don’t appear, so it’s judged as “a field problem”
- No improvement occurs, and the system is abandoned
The mindset that “implementation = completion” is the most expensive failure.
Visualizing the Unutilized State
Whether a system is being utilized should be judged by numbers, not feelings.
- Which functions aren’t being used?
- What’s the utilization rate?
- What voices are coming from the field?
Without grasping these, saying “adoption promotion is coming” doesn’t clarify what should be improved or how.
Acknowledging the current unutilized state, analyzing causes, and executing improvement measures—it’s important to cycle through this process.
The Courage to Acknowledge Failure Changes Organizations
How do you receive the fact that a system isn’t being utilized?
Do you postpone it as “still to come,” or do you acknowledge it as “currently failing”?
This difference determines organizational growth.
Acknowledging failure doesn’t mean the end.
It means standing at the starting point of improvement.
Does your organization have that courage?