玩偶姐姐

Running a high-performing IT function today requires more than just keeping the lights on. With limited resources, high customer expectations and the rapid emergence of new technologies, IT leaders are being asked to deliver greater impact with fewer resources. That means making deliberate choices about where to focus and where to step back. 

Over time, I’ve come to rely on four core levers that consistently help my team deliver better outcomes with limited resources:

1. Eliminating waste
2. Simplifying workflows
3. Standardizing the operating model
4. Applying automation with purpose.

Together, these have enabled me to scale capability, improve IT services, and stay aligned with business objectives without overextending our people or budget. 

Eliminating waste starts with asking what no longer helps 

One thing I look at when trying to free up resources is waste. It’s not always easy to spot, but once you start digging, it becomes clear that many tools, processes and projects continue to consume effort without delivering the required outcomes. 

• Software licences are a common place to start. Many applications operate on a subscription model, so it’s easy to lose track of what’s being used. It’s common to find software that’s still being paid for despite no longer playing an active role in operations. Reassessing toolsets with accurate usage data often uncovers savings that can be reallocated more effectively.
• Idle or underutilized infrastructure is another issue that often arises. This can include physical servers, cloud-based resources or networking assets that were provisioned for previous needs but have since been left running. If not reviewed regularly, these assets quietly generate ongoing costs with little operational value.
• Custom solutions and internal integrations are another area worth examining. Sometimes they were built to solve a specific issue quickly, but over time, they can duplicate functions found in newer platforms or become difficult to maintain. Unless these integrations deliver unique value, they can become a burden more than a benefit.
• We’ve also found that it is important to step back and review projects that are consuming resources but are no longer aligned with the organization’s strategic direction. It’s easy for projects to continue past their relevance. However, holding on to work that no longer fits the current business goals drains attention from the initiatives that do. A clear-eyed reassessment of each project’s alignment with broader objectives helps ensure resources are directed where they can have the greatest impact.
• We’ve made it a habit to revisit vendor agreements, service contracts and internally developed tools. In doing so, we’ve found cases where systems were being maintained simply out of inertia. Reassessing these areas with a clear view of value has helped us focus our energy on what matters most. 

Addressing waste requires a clear and disciplined process. Instead of relying solely on a comprehensive operational review, organizations can build a habit of continuous review as part of day-to-day operations, embedding evaluation into the way teams interact with tools, platforms, workflows and support structures. This approach helps surface mismatches between usage and intent or where cost outweighs value. Each item is then assessed based on its relevance to business goals, security needs and integration requirements.

With this ongoing insight, decisions about what to decommission, consolidate or reinvest in become more straightforward. While periodic in-depth reviews may still be necessary, ingrained habits of operational review make them easier, faster and more impactful. The goal isn’t simply to cut, but to refocus effort and investment where they can drive the most value. 

highlights a proactive approach that extends beyond merely cutting expenses; it advocates for eliminating or reducing costs before they are committed through contracts. 

Simplifying workflows makes room for better delivery 

There was a time when we prided ourselves on having exhaustive process documentation. It covered every edge case, exception and detail. But over time, it became clear that most people weren’t following it or even reading it. This kind of documentation was thorough, but in most scenarios, it was too difficult to be practical. Teams would often bypass it, relying instead on verbal shortcuts or assumptions. That had consequences, mistakes, inconsistent delivery and time lost to clarifying steps that should have been obvious. 

This led to a shift in approach. I recommend developing one-page summaries of key processes that focus solely on the essential information people need to complete their tasks effectively. These brief documents outlined the essential steps, highlighted ownership and clarified decision points. It marked a shift from a box-ticking approach to one focused on clarity and practical value. The result? People used them. Teams aligned faster, fewer questions were escalated and we spent far less time re-explaining the basics. These single-page guides became our reference points, onboarding tools and day-to-day companions, an approach that did more with less by cutting friction, not corners. 

This shift also helped us take a hard look at what was truly necessary in our processes. When you try to condense a workflow into one page, you’re forced to confront whether every step is worth keeping. We found multiple instances where legacy steps had hung around without a clear reason. Once simplified, those processes ran faster, with fewer bottlenecks and clearer accountability. What started as a documentation exercise became a change lever in its own right. 

We followed this up by collapsing approval chains, removing unnecessary checkpoints and introducing shared, real-time dashboards that removed the need for repetitive reporting. These changes made our processes lighter and easier to follow, and our teams more confident and independent. 

This was never about stripping out governance; it was about making it workable. When teams can follow a process without navigating pages of rules, they’re far more likely to stick to it. 

In the healthcare sector, a study published in SpringerBriefs in Health Care Management and Economics discusses . The study presents a case where the number of steps in a process was reduced from eight to three, demonstrating how systematic analysis can lead to significant efficiency gains. 

Standardizing the operating model builds stability and scale 

Consistency is underrated. When each team works in its own way, its own tools, terms and cadences, it becomes harder to coordinate, harder to support and harder to scale. That’s why standardizing our operating model has been one of the most effective ways to build efficiency into the way we work. 

At its core, a well-standardized model acts as a foundation that enables teams to move faster with fewer missteps. It minimizes the overhead required to make decisions, clarifies expectations and allows delivery to scale without adding new layers of management. When resources are tight, having a shared approach makes it possible to get more from every hour spent and every system in use. 

We focused on building alignment, not rigidity. That meant agreeing on how we track work, manage incidents and communicate across teams. By documenting and sharing our model through a digital playbook, it’s saved time, reduced errors and meant that we spend far less energy reinventing the basics for each activity. 

This kind of clarity also reduces duplication. When people know what tools are in play, what practices are expected and how services are supported, they don’t waste time chasing alternatives or building from scratch. In a resource-constrained environment, that clarity is essential. 

We also aligned our team cadences, bringing applications, infrastructure, projects, governance and operational teams onto a shared rhythm. That’s helped avoid delays, reduced friction at the handoff points and made it easier to plan across functions. The cumulative effect is real: fewer surprises, quicker delivery and stronger collaboration. 

In addition, Six Sigma provides a detailed overview of how by reducing variability, improving quality and enabling consistent delivery across teams. Their insights reinforce the idea that a stable, repeatable operating model is a key enabler of scale and efficiency. 

Strategically automating processes 

Automation can be a powerful tool, but I’ve learned not to treat it as a blanket solution. Early on, the commitment to full automation of complex workflows often introduced more complexity than it removed. What’s worked better is an intentional, incremental approach. 

Rather than automating entire processes, focusing on streamlining key bottlenecks has proven to be an effective way to drive meaningful change with minimal effort. 

One of the most practical benefits of automation has been its impact on business cost structures. By digitizing repetitive processes, we’ve reduced the reliance on manual oversight and increased consistency in delivery. These changes have helped decrease overtime hours, improve response times and reduce error rates, which ultimately translates into a lower cost per transaction or interaction. 

We’re also exploring how AI and machine learning could help streamline specific workflows, especially where decisions tend to be resource-intensive or delay-prone. This can include areas like infrastructure capacity planning, where predictive models may help anticipate demand or flag issues early. While we’re still in the early stages of evaluating these tools, we see their potential to shift staff time from reactive problem-solving to more strategic initiatives. This could prove particularly valuable when budgets are tight or resourcing is constrained, as it may allow us to maintain service quality without increasing headcount. 

Process automation and AI also help standardize decision-making. Instead of relying on individuals to remember exceptions or spot trends, our systems now surface recommendations and trigger the right actions. That means faster turnaround times and a more consistent experience for internal and external users alike. 

In many cases, partial automation has been more sustainable. It helps the team focus their effort where it’s most needed, without overwhelming us with upfront configuration or downstream maintenance. 

We’ve also learned that automation efforts work best when they’re cross-functional. Involving those who do the work, developers, operations and business users, from day one, helps ensure we solve real problems, not just automate tasks for the sake of it. 

For those looking to understand the broader organizational impact, offers clear evidence that strategic use of automation can significantly reduce operational costs and boost productivity. Their findings highlight how organizations using intelligent automation at scale have seen measurable gains in both service quality and workforce capacity. 

Small levers deliver meaningful outcomes 

Doing more with less isn’t about heroic effort. It’s about knowing where to focus. I am highlighting these four levers, eliminating waste, simplifying workflows, standardizing delivery and automating with intent, to become embedded in how the IT team works. They help us stay flexible, reduce friction and keep pace with the business. 

You don’t need a full transformation to get started. Small, focused changes, especially when they become habits, can build the momentum needed to shift how a team delivers. 

If there’s one thing I’ve taken away from this journey, it’s that discipline beats disruption. Build a system that works and improves with time, and you’ll find that doing more with less becomes a matter of design, not luck.

This article is published as part of the Foundry Expert Contributor Network.
Want to join?