What You Don’t Understand Always Seems Simple

March 10, 2010 · Filed under People · Tagged , , ,

Most people have many opinions on the way things should be. They ask questions like, “why can’t it be like this?” “Why aren’t we able to do that?” “Can’t they deliver it to me like this?” It is a great thing to ask questions, everyone has an opinion. In fact, this kind of thinking is what makes the world better. It pushes us to change, try new things, and improve. But there is a fine line between asking questions and assuming the change is easy to accomplish.

At work, we observe sales people who don’t understand the difficulties with technology limitations yet, technology people are bewildered as to why sales people struggle selling technologically superior products. Customers wonder why products aren’t customizable to their exact likings and, customer service people are at a loss to understand why customers don’t follow directions. Again, all good stuff.

But when the conversation turns to asking “how tough can it really be?” then a line has been crossed. Wanting something different is one thing, passing judgment on how easy it is to accomplish is another. It moves from a simple want to an evaluation of a person’s or organization’s capabilities and, it is usually based on little fact or understanding. This is the classic case of what you don’t understand always seems simpler than it really is.

When your wants and assumptions are directed towards things outside your sphere of influence then, no hurt, no foul; but, when you do the same thing inside your sphere of influence where your opinions carry some weight, you can hurt others, make them defensive, and put them in a difficult position. You can do all of this with little to no true understanding of the situation, limitations, or capabilities. It’s not fair and not right.

A better way to move your desires closer to becoming a reality is to be open-minded and ask questions about what you don’t understand. If after you have asked for something different and are told it is not possible then make it known you really don’t know anything about the environment or situation but, would love to learn more about it. This will give you the opportunity to make sure your wants are understood and clarify anything that is incorrect with the other person’s understanding. It also gives you the opportunity to brainstorm about what it would take to make what you want happen. By doing this you become a partner and not a pesky opponent. It may not result in you getting your want but it will put you top of mind if there ever is an opportunity to make it happen.

Leave a comment »

Keep Your Process Pure

March 3, 2010 · Filed under Organizations, Project Management, Projects · Tagged , , , , , ,

No one needs to beat the drum about the importance of processes in business. Processes have been a valuable tool since the start of the industrial revolution, establishing uniformity and gaining efficiencies. Some processes are documented into formal procedures. Others remain informal but are still commonly understood. Most processes are composed of action steps with strategically placed gates points to obtain consensus or establish authority for moving forward. Pure processes are processes that are true to their intent, serve that function only and exert the least amount of effort while providing the most value. Processes that become contaminated usually do so in two different ways: by trying to accommodate for all possible situations and attempting to control malicious participants.

Processes That Accommodate for all Possible Situations

Processes are usually designed to accommodate about 90% of situations that occur. When an extremely rare situation presents itself and it leads to a negative result, management will be tempted to change the process in order to handle the rare situation when it occurs again (regardless of the impact on the process). The extra effort that is imposed to cover an extremely rare situation usually has no payoff. Furthermore, all processes have inherent risk but most of the risk is never encountered and, rightly so, is off our radar screen of concern. Just because we encounter a risk does not mean we should track it on our radar forever.

Processes That are Derived to Control Malicious Participants

Sometimes individuals feel they have special needs which compel them to deviate from the defined processes. It may be to avoid a gate point or to leverage a loophole so the individual can have greater access to resources for their personal gain. These deviations may or may not go unnoticed. But when they are noticed management always wants to include additional steps or gate points to ensure these abuses do not occur in the future. The addition of gate points due to one person’s actions is commonly known as “tyranny of the minority”. When tyranny of the minority occurs everyone has to expend additional time and effort into the process just because of the actions of one individual.

The best thing to do in this case is to address the behavior of the rouge individual. They will often play victim when confronted saying they didn’t know better or didn’t understand the situation, but do not hesitate or withdraw from your position. If the majority can follow the process then the rogue individual can too. It is up to them to learn what the right way is and how to stick to it.

Regardless of how they came to be, these appendages to the original processes are usually unjustified; stay past their need; and end up being followed blindly, wasting people’s effort and time. They diminish the value of the process and cause frustration.

Let’s take Alice for example. She is the manager of a systems engineering organization and her department is responsible for the integration of various spacecraft subsystems. Because these subsystems are being built in different parts of the country Alice’s team travels extensively. Her company has travel guidelines but because her department is currently over budget she has been keeping a close eye on travel expenditures. Over time Alice began to realize that one of her employees, Tim, was constantly exceeding the guidelines. He always had excuses and Alice has been struggling with how to rein him in. At her wits end, Alice decided to add an additional gate point in the travel procedure that requires everyone to get authority from her before they deviate from the guidelines. While this action did stop Tim from abusing the department’s travel budget but, it also caused everyone else on the team (who wasn’t abusing the travel guidelines) to put forth extra effort and time to get approval for unique situations they typically dealt with on their own. In one situation an employee, Jennifer, could not get authority to change her air travel plans to come home early because Alice was out sick. This resulted in additional lodging costs since Jennifer had to stay two days longer than needed, and not to mention a loss in productivity from being away from the office unnecessarily.

In your organization fight for pure process and procedures. Make it a personal campaign. It will mean moving away from a controlling mindset and towards personal responsibility. It will also entail moving away from risk aversion and towards embracing ambiguity. While doing this may be hard the end result will be a much more efficient organization.

Leave a comment »

Is Your Project Schedule Dynamic?

February 23, 2010 · Filed under Project Management, Projects · Tagged , , , , , ,

Most everyone starts their project with a schedule. They define the work that needs to be completed in the form of activities with varying levels of detail. They then identify the duration of each activity and sequence them based on interdependencies, and may also associate the level of effort (hrs) to each activity. When all is said and done the final product is a schedule that documents the overall duration of the project and perhaps the total level of effort as well. Great! There’s nothing better than a good plan at the start of a project.

Gannt ChartHowever, no sooner than the first week of the project something happens . . . things don’t go as planned. Activities that should be completed aren’t. Others that were scheduled to take the entire week finish early allowing for new activities to begin that weren’t originally scheduled to start until the following week. So much for a good plan. Now we have a schedule that doesn’t reflect reality.

There is nothing unusual about this situation. It happens to every project. But, one of the things that separate the good project managers from the bad is how dynamic their project schedules are.

As work begins on projects actuals-to-date are recorded and estimates-to-complete are re-evaluated for some subsets of activities. This often results in a change to the initial predictions; however, these changes may or may not be realized in a timely fashion depending on how dynamic the schedule is. Knowing the true current status of a project is paramount to delivering it close to the initial time, cost, and scope predictions. It’s all dependent on the frequency of the updates (actuals-to-date and estimates-to-complete) and the underlying structure of the schedule.

Highly dynamic schedules are always built using the full functionality of a project management software tool such as Microsoft® Project. There is just no way to get around it. Managing the current status of all the activities, maintaining the interdependencies, and calculating the estimated completion date on a weekly basis can only be accomplished with these tools. When updates are only accounted for once or twice a month and the underlying structure of the schedule is in the head of the project manager then scheduled updates will be infrequent and often not reflect reality.

This is what Kevin experienced when he was asked by the CIO of a Fortune 100 company to audit an ongoing $20 million project that would overhaul the financial applications for the company. He began his quest by interviewing the project sponsors, program manager, and project managers. The general feeling he got was the project was progressing well but was a little behind schedule. After his interview with the program manager, Jessica, he asked if he could get a copy of her schedule. Jessica inquired if he wanted it in the standard format; however, Kevin didn’t know a standard format existed. Jessica led him to the break room and showed him a large four foot by eight foot, six phase Gantt chart with a version date of seven weeks ago. Kevin’s stomach sank as he realized that the project audit was not going to go very well.

Small and simple projects can be effectively managed in the heads of the project managers using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to record major milestone dates, but don’t try this with larger more complex projects. It will lead to major surprises, lots of bad news, and missed opportunities. Build your schedules using a highly dynamic underlying structure and you’ll save yourself time and a lot of headaches.

Comments (2) »

Baselines: A Valuable Tool in Life and Projects

February 3, 2010 · Filed under Project Management, Projects · Tagged , , , , , , , , ,

We’re all very familiar with baselines in life. We may not call them by that name, but they’re all around us. They tell us when we should change the oil in our cars, how much we can afford to spend on vacation, how much our monthly payment is for our house, and what age our child needs to be to start school. Dictionaries define baselines as an imaginary line or standard by which things are measured or compared. That is why they are a valuable tool for us in life. They guide us and let us know if we get off course.

Project BaselinesIn projects, baselines are invaluable tools that help us navigate towards success. They’re communication devices that establish expectations between parties: when is the project going to finish, what is going to be delivered, and how many hours of effort will it take to complete the project? Yes, baselines are only estimates at the start of a project, but they also set the expectation that gets everyone on the same page. Baselines are often formalized in project charters and plans, requirements and design documents, schedules, and budgets. They are distributed broadly to establish a consistent set of expectations.

When baselines are compared to current progress and new estimates they produce variances. These variances let us know how far off we are from where we want to be, signaling we need to take strong action to get the project back on course. When these variances are monitored closely, they indicate trends that point to root causes of negative results.

Given that baselines are expectations between all project stakeholders, they need to be revered and protected. While it may seem like no big deal to quietly change some portion of the project baseline without letting everyone know, it destroys the trust and cohesiveness of all parties involved when it happens. Baselines should only be changed when approved by a configuration management process were all stakeholders are informed of the desired change and the ramifications of doing so. This is not to say project baselines should not change: quite the opposite. Baselines must change. Very few projects are completed as estimated at the start; therefore, the expectations must be aligned closer to current reality as the project moves closer to completion. It is always better to be proactive and announce less than favorable news as soon as it is known than to delay it until it becomes a bigger problem and more of a surprise.

People struggle with project baselines in three ways. They delay setting the baseline in the beginning until they get further along in the project so their estimates will be closer to what they actually deliver. They keep their distribution limited and don’t share their baselines broadly leaving people in the dark. And lastly, they never change the baseline during the life of the project which only disappoints stakeholders when the project is delivered. At the root of these three scenarios is the fear that the baselines will hurt them: they are seen as a weapon to be avoided, not a valuable tool to be embraced.

Take Becky for example, who was excited when she was assigned her first project to lead. It was a smaller project but it was her chance to move into the role of project manager. Becky built her project plan and established a schedule. She had it reviewed by her team, boss, and project sponsor and, once approved, she began work. In the beginning things progressed well and Becky was excited. One day her sponsor came to her office and told her he wanted to add one more item to her list of deliverables. She told him no problem, she would make it happen. A few weeks later her sponsor came by again and told Becky he needed the project to be finished three weeks early. Again, because things were going so well she thought she could meet his request. Then the project began hitting some tough times. One of her key team members got sick and missed two weeks of work. Then she realized it would take twice as long to produce the extra deliverable the sponsor requested. Now Becky’s schedule showed her finishing a month later than she first estimated, and almost two months after her sponsor wanted it finished. She told no one about the projected change in schedule and just hoped for a miracle. Becky felt that if she told her boss and the sponsor she would never get another project to lead in the future. For four months Becky didn’t tell anyone about how late the project would be delivered. When the expected date of delivery came she finally broke down and told her boss and sponsor. They were shocked and surprised. Both of them explained they could have helped her if they had only known.

Becky stumbled in two major areas related to baselines. She did not treat the baseline as sacred and changed it without going through the rigorous configuration control process. Changing scope, or end dates always has an impact that needs to be understood and communicated. She also failed to communicate the schedule variances and the need to align the baseline to the current state of the project. As a result, Becky limited her ability to take corrective action. The lesson to be learned is that if we don’t embrace the value of baselines it will not only diminish our effectiveness, it will handicap our project stakeholders and cause tough times for them. And, nothing good comes from a surprised and disappointed stakeholder.

Leave a comment »

You Are Not the Norm

January 21, 2010 · Filed under People · Tagged , , , , ,

It’s fun to encounter different cultures. Whether through travel or reading we marvel at the differences and share them enthusiastically with our friends. When traveling abroad we look forward to experiencing others and come to expect the oddities. It actually makes our travel experience more invigorating and personal.

But, when it comes to differences in our day-to-day lives others can throw us off. They frustrate us and make life more difficult, causing us to say things like “I can’t believe they thought that,” “do they really enjoy doing that”, “why weren’t they more concerned about what happened”, or “that’s not how I would have done it.” The root cause to all of this is our belief that we are the norm, the standard. We believe anyone who is different from us is odd, lesser than, wrong, or bad.

Bluntly stated though, you are not the norm. Your thought process is different than most people. Your background, lifestyle, political views, and religious beliefs are all different than most people. No matter how you see, do, say, perceive, or think about things, it’s not necessarily the same for others. You’re not always right, good, or better than others. You are who you are and they are who they are. Period.

So, why don’t we naturally see ourselves as the norm? Because we tend to associate and interact with people we are most like. Our friends have the same level of education and affluence, type of profession, and involvement in various hobbies and activities. This lulls us into the simplistic view that everyone else is just like us, making life appear more predictable and causing us less anxiety and fear.

But the reality is there is no one right way, superior perspective, or dominate viewpoint. There is many of each and this is what we must tackle to become better in our professional lives. We don’t need to change who we are, we just need to understand that others are different and that there are rewards to be gained in embracing this reality.

Take Eric who was tasked with leading a project to provide an automated tool for a customer service process currently done manually. This tool would be used by over a hundred customer service representatives in five different regions. He had a handful of team members and a short deadline. Eric interviewed several customer service supervisors to understand the current process and felt he had a firm grasp on the details. His team began designing and building the tool and he made several assumptions and decisions on behalf of the customer service representatives. He felt he could do so because of his detailed knowledge and his proven ability to refine processes. The application was delivered on time and with very few bugs, but it’s acceptance by the customer services representatives was a complete failure. The assumptions and decisions Eric made on the customer service representative’s behalf turned out to be completely incongruent with how they performed their work. As a result the application did not assist the customer service representatives as required in their work environment. Had Eric not believed his assumptions and decision for the customer service representatives were what most people would think and want, he would have pursued their opinions more aggressively and ultimately delivered a well received product.

Not seeing ourselves as the norm and searching out what could be different from how we are will make us better professionals. We will build better products, manage others better, motivate others more effectively, be more tolerant of others, and be less surprised and frustrated when dealing with others. But, it does take some work to get there.

To better understand and embrace other’s differences try taking the Myers Briggs assessment to understand yourself and how others are too. Learn in detail about another profession that is much different from yours. Get involved in an association that has a diverse social economic membership. Put yourself deep into other peoples shoes related to current events and seek to understand how they feel and think thing about the situation. All of this will expand your perspective and cause you to consider more intently how you see, think, and act related to others. You may even begin realizing there are just as may cultural peculiarities within your own country as there are outside of it.

Leave a comment »

Consistency Is The Difference

January 12, 2010 · Filed under Organizations, People · Tagged , , , , ,

It’s not uncommon for leaders of organizations to think that their organization’s performance is subpar when compared to similar organizations in other companies. They feel that others must be much more sophisticated and produce far better results. While these feelings may be true the reality is far from it. As with most things in life the distribution of performance follows the bell curve. A small percentage of organizations are spectacular and another small percentage are complete failures. The rest . . . well they are smack dab in the middle, not great, not bad, just good.

There is nothing wrong with being good, but when most leaders think about where they want their organizations to be they set their sights on being great. It’s common for them to believe that the quality of their people is the biggest impediment holding them back from being great. If they could just hire the best people they would be much further down the road to being a great organization. On the surface this seems to be a realistic plan but if you take a step back and look at the big picture the plan begins to crumble. Assuming that people’s performance follows a bell curve too, then there are only so many “best” people in the work force, the majority are average performers. No one organization can afford or entice all the best people to work for them. Therefore, the path to becoming a great organization must follow a different direction.

In athletics, they say that on any given day, any team or individual can beat any other team or individual. What that means is the talent, or raw potential, of any individual or team at the same level of competition is not the overall deciding factor in winning. All professional scouts, coaches and players know what makes great players and teams is the ability to take the raw potential they have and consistently perform at the required level to win. In sports there are individuals with great raw talent who can only intermittently perform as needed to win and there are others with less raw talent who have found a way to consistently perform.

So the question that needs to be asked is, “how does an organization take the raw talent it has in its people and consistently perform at high levels of achievement?” The answer, the same way athletic teams and individuals do.

Know how you are performing. Don’t guess, don’t generalize, just track your performance and find out exactly how you are doing. What this does is help you establish a range of good performance. If you can compare that range to industry standards, that would be even better. Professional baseball players know that if they hit over .300 they are doing really well. That means they get three hits out of every ten at bats. The last five World Series winners averaged a winning percentage of .583. Teams can only know these statistics if they track them. So track your organizational performance, you may be better off than you think. Then publicize it to all your employees. Keep it top of mind for them.

Also, know the best practices that are related to the functions your organization performs. Research it on the web or bring in consultants. You have to know what is possible. Then you can develop a common language around each function. Standardize the way functions are to be performed and identify check points that tell you if you are following the standards or are varying from them. Baseball pitchers have check points in their wind up that tells them if they are off or not. It helps them correct in the wind up or in the middle of an inning. They have a common langue amongst each other that facilitates communication when corrections are needed. They use terms like “stay within yourself”, “you’re rushing” and “get on top of the ball”.

Finally, cycle through the experience, observe, and refine the loop as many times as possible. Managers need to be coaches to their employees. They need to help employees break down their functions into smaller components to work on them independently to get better. Use peer reviews on actual experiences to enhance learning opportunities for everyone. Hitters have drills that help them with each component of their swing. Coaches tape them in games and batting practices to facilitate the experience, observe, and refine the loop. Coaches and players watch them together to gain input. No one gets beat up. There is only constructive criticism and the desire to help each other get better.

For the most part you have the right talent to be a great organization. Yeah, you may need to exchange out a few bad performers but the most important thing is to take what you’ve got and raise the level of consistency in your organizational performance. People will take notice. It’s a great reputation to have.

Comments (4) »

The Power of the Question

January 5, 2010 · Filed under People · Tagged , , , ,

It’s precious to watch a young child learn. They ask questions that reveal their naivety and inquisitiveness. Question after question, their minds churn taking in information and formulating new questions. There is a lot of power in the questions children ask, and because of this they are rewarded with information for growth.

Light Bulb - Power of a QuestionAs adults, the power of questions resides more in answering them, specifically questions that reveal information hidden within us. Self discovery is always a more powerful agent for growth than receiving information from outside sources. But, self discovery requires a catalyst, a person who is insightful enough to ask a discovery question instead of giving direct answers or feedback. It requires more effort to ask a discovery question but it also offers more benefits to the person requesting the feedback. Let’s look at two of the most common situations where discovery questions are most valuable: when we have judgments about others and when we are asked for direct feedback.

Judging Others
We all make judgments about people we encounter in life: he was rude to the sales person, she likes the lime light too much, etc. For those we are close to, both professionally and personally, our judgments carry more weight. Giving straight feedback to a coworker, subordinate, or friend may be efficient, but it can be received with defensiveness and resentment. Neither of these emotions will allow the person to learn and grow. For them, self discovery is a much more acceptable means for realizing faults. When you want to address a judgment you have regarding another person, instead of giving direct feedback, it may be more beneficial to ask a discovery question that helps the person see how their actions or words will affect others. There are definitive times when direct feedback is the best approach, but discovery questions can be very powerful in many circumstances.

For example, Jennifer was talking with her friend, Lisa, about how little respect her boss has for her personal time. He calls her on nights and weekends, asking her questions about work. Sometimes Jennifer has school events for her daughter that she wants to attend after work and her boss will ask her to complete a large project just before she is about to leave for the day. Jennifer continued describing her plight by telling Lisa how frustrated and hurt she is with her boss, but is somehow reluctant to tell him how she feels. Lisa remembered back to when Jennifer accepted the job, excited that it included a large potential bonus every year. It was clear to Lisa that Jennifer likes the money aspect of the job, but resents the level of work it requires. Instead of telling Jennifer this directly, and further angering her, Lisa chose to ask Jennifer a discovery question: “Jennifer, if you did not have the big potential bonus coming next month, how would you respond to your boss’s time requests?” Jennifer thought for a moment and said she would tell him he was being disrespectful of her time and would set stronger boundaries on when she would work. Thinking more, she then told Lisa that it appears her boss is not the issue. The issue actually had to do with her needing to decide if the money is worth the amount of time she has to work to earn it. Lisa sat back and marveled how quickly Jennifer resolved this issue for herself.

Direct Feedback
People often ask for our feedback on something they are working on. It may be a problem they are trying to solve or a plan they’ve put together. It could even be reviewing any old deliverable they are responsible for. What they are looking for is specifics that would make what they are working on better.  When offering feedback you could do just that, give them straight feedback, but a more powerful option would be to ask a discovery question. A question, in this situation, will force them to consider how they approached their work, resulting in growth and reducing the need for future feedback. Here again, self discovery is always more enlightening than a straight answer.

For example, Jerry was interrupted by one of his employees, Mark, who asked for some of Jerry’s time to talk through a product evaluation he was working on. Mark began by telling Jerry about the two products’ capabilities. He continued by communicating how hard it has been for him to choose the best product between the two. Jerry soon realized that Mark was focusing too much on the products’ capabilities and not enough on how the products would positively or negatively impact the business once they were installed. Jerry asked Mark to envision both products up and running in the business and then asked which product would give better results. After Mark thought through the scenario it became apparent which product was the best for his company. Jerry smiled and said, “Well done Mark.”

Asking discovery questions is a real art. It’s hard, but it’s needed to unleash the true power of the question. It requires one to disengage from the emotions of the situation, listen intently, resist the easy path of just blurting out what you are thinking, and creatively crafting the right question. It’s hard work with a great payoff: enlightenment through self discovery.

Leave a comment »

Project Management ROI

December 15, 2009 · Filed under Project Management, Projects · Tagged , , , , , , ,

All project managers see their job differently. Some are very lofty in describing their role; others seem lost still trying to discover it. There is talk of making customers happy, working with users, managing risk, and many other activities. But, if you ask a director of projects managers, “what is the role of a project manager?” they are very clear: plan the project, put a stick in the ground, and meet it.

A formal definition of projects management is predicting, with as much certainty as is possible or required, the project’s scope, time, and cost at completion, and then embracing reality and influencing activities to meet these predictions.

It is a very scary thing for project managers to predict where a project will end up because it holds them accountable, but it is imperative. If there isn’t an end point for the project manager to drive towards there won’t be any management or direction of the project, there is only drifting. Who wants a project drifter leading their project?

There is no such thing as “one size fits all” when it comes to project management. Every project has different constraints, requiring different levels of certainty when it comes to predicting and meeting scope, time, and cost. This is important because the amount of effort expended managing a project is directly related to the amount of certainty obtained. The relationship between certainty and effort is known as project management ROI. With just a little effort, a fair amount of certainty can be achieved. The more effort you apply, the more certainty you obtain. Today’s project managers often identify how much time they have available to manage a project and let the certainty be determined as a result. This tends to result in poor project results and dissatisfaction across the board. In fact, for this approach, the average cost overrun is 189%, time overrun is 222%, and scope reduction is 61%. While these results may be reasonable for some low priority projects, higher priority projects require more certainty.

The proper way to approach a project is to first identify the level of certainty required and then let the amount of effort be determined as a result. This approach will drive who is selected to manage the project, the expectations set for them, and whether they manage it fulltime or part time. It also drives the amount of process and rigger the project manager follows.

Know the importance of your project, determine the certainty needed, get the right Project Manager, have them predict the end result, and expend the required effort to bring it to a reality. That’s the pathway to project success.

Comments (1) »

How Work Gets Done

December 12, 2009 · Filed under Organizations, People, Projects · Tagged , , , , , ,

Most organizational leaders are compensated for executing on strategy and maintaining daily operations. While true, this is an overly glorified way of presenting their job description. Stated bluntly, leaders are responsible for accomplishing, producing, innovating, and providing value. You know, doing good things and getting work done. Their bonuses and annual pay increases are dependent on how well they perform at this.

Globe PuzzleGetting work done sounds simplistic, but it is actually very demanding. By definition, leaders do little of the work, relying on others to get it done, which means they are more focused on orchestrating than performing. These leaders may have succeeded in the past based on how well they did the work, but now the rules for success have changed, now they lead the people who do the work. In addition, their scope of responsibility has broadened, they are now pulled in many different directions. Leaders don’t always know what they don’t know, but they will soon enough, because it will knock them upside the head when they least expect it. Sounds like a lot of fun, huh? Getting work done can actually be very rewarding with just a little structure for focusing a leader’s attention, exploration, and energy.

So, how does work get done? It gets done through people, projects, and organizations. Now, there are a lot of topics under these major categories that make a leader’s job demanding. Knowing them provides a map for getting more and higher quality work done. Let’s take a look at these three categories in more detail.

People
People are our most prevalent resource in companies, they are also our most complex resource. People are highly unique, each with different strengths and weaknesses, not to mention likes and dislikes. There is no one size fits all when engaging and interacting with them. People are also very dynamic, they can change year to year or hour to hour based on circumstances.

Finding the right person for an open position is a mixture of science and intuition. Often, a number of frogs have to be kissed to find the prince. Finding the prince puts you on the path to good production, but being handicapped with the wrong frog effects work quality throughout. The affected work quality occurs not just with the wrong frog but also with the other people they interact with.

Helping people work better together has a lot to do with helping people relate well to one another. It starts with leaders relating to their subordinates and then continues on to all individuals. If people in the department don’t learn to play well in the sandbox together energy is diverted away from production to positioning and settling scores.

Managing performance is both proactive and reactive. Leaders must learn what motivates individuals and act on it. Make sure the training that individuals need keeps up with what the organization needs. Look for teachable moments, coaching and mentoring is required to help individuals get to the next level of performance. If people plateau, their value to the organization will deteriorate over time. Leaders must invest the energy to keep high performers producing high value. It will prevent employee churn and save the organization energy, time, and money.

Projects
Projects are the mechanism we use for moving our departments forward, one step at a time. Projects are what we use to chunk our initiatives, make our products better, organize our efforts, and turn “what could be” into “what is”. In reality, everything is a project. Some are big, some are small. Some require a lot of process and discipline; while others can be handled on the fly. There is a very specific set of skills and processes that are required to effectively and consistently get work done through projects.

Fleshing out the details of what needs to be accomplished keeps the horse before the cart. For some reason we humans are more interested in how to design and build something than what needs to be built. Many a project has failed because of this.

Matching the right approach for producing a product to the specific product being produced can be difficult. Is the product something you produce all the time or is it highly unique? Can the end result be easily envisioned or must the customer interact with it and give feedback many times before it is complete? Are the risks involved minimal or must we prove that critical pieces are feasible before we invest heavily? All of these factors influence the approach and can send efficiencies through the roof or deep down into the cellar.

Managing the efforts of all the project resources makes the project more predictable. That means finishing the project on time so it integrates with other codependent projects, not going over budget so the project does not have to steal funds from future projects, and releasing resources when other projects are expecting them to be added. Without predictability all projects currently ongoing or those projected to start in the future are at risk.

Organizations
Organizations provide the environment for people and projects to exist. They are an ecosystem for healthy effort and production. When organizations are at their best they are hardly noticed. At their worst, they are as restrictive as shackles and toxic as an oil spill. Organizations can create an emotional tie with people or drive them to a fight or flight response.

Knowing what to expect from the environment and providing guidance when operating in gray areas is accomplished through an organization’s culture. This is huge considering we as humans spend a lot of emotional energy keeping ourselves from unpredictable situations. Also, there are many more shades of gray than situations that are black and white.

Establishing a reasonable governance system is needed to bring about order and reap economies of scale. Policies and procedures are not bad, people often appreciate them when they are appropriate and thus ensure stability and guarantee justice. When policies are not appropriate they can incite people to game the system through covert means or outright rebellion.

Providing a purpose and vision gives individuals a sense of community and belonging. It helps them feel as though their efforts are multiplied when combined with others and that they are contributing to something bigger and better that will make a difference. Work takes on a special value that is worth the extra effort and sacrifice when a purpose and vision are provided. Without purpose and vision narcissism creeps in and destroys community. Work becomes just work, with no intrinsic value.

Mastering all of these areas is a momentous endeavor, but that does not mean energy should not be invested in trying to do so. As they say, knowing there is a problem is half the battle in overcoming it. Leaders that chip away at their people, project, and organizational weaknesses end up with highly functioning departments that get the work done.

Leave a comment »

Writing Good Requirements

November 24, 2009 · Filed under Business Analysis · Tagged , , , , , ,

Writing good requirements is frequently portrayed as a unique skill to business analysts, it’s not, it’s a unique skill to good writers. Requirements are simply a condition or capability needed by a stakeholder (user) to solve a problem or achieve an objective. Identifying requirements is a unique skill to business analysts; however, writing good requirements has more to do with what you learned in high school English class. Remember your English teachers? They would spend a semester teaching you to know your topic, be thorough and concise, eliminate ambiguity, and organize your writing to create a smooth flow for the reader.

We all can relate to this story: Your teacher gives you an assignment to write a convincing article on a popular debate in current events. Your first draft is due next week so you select and research a topic. You put the first draft together, review it, make changes several times, and hand it in. Your teacher reads it over the weekend and marks it up. She hands back the bloody red draft and asks you to address her comments. You can’t believe she marked it up so much. You spend the next few days rewriting it and hand it in for another review and it comes back with more red marks. You get incredibly frustrated. All you want is to be done with this assignment. You wish it wasn’t so hard.

Times haven’t changed much. Many business analysts find it hard to write good requirements. When they get assigned to a project there is a sense of excitement and anticipation. They start researching and interviewing stakeholders to find out what they need to be successful at their jobs. After compiling all the information, they begin writing the requirements. They work hard and put in a lot of hours, resulting in a cherished first draft. They send it out to the users and developers for review. When the comments start coming in they feel hurt and frustrated. They make changes and send it out once more for review. Again, comments come back announcing dissatisfaction and more work. At this point all a business analyst wants is to be done with this particular task.

If you can relate to the above scenario it may be because you struggle with writing in general or you are a little rusty at it. Let’s review what makes a good set of requirements:

  • First of all, you have to know in detail what the problem and solution is. You can’t have a casual understanding. If you do, it will sink you for sure.
  • Next, each requirement needs to be specific and concise. You are creating an image of the solution in the minds of your users and developers, one grain of sand at a time. Choose your words wisely, each one matters. Eliminate ambiguity by looking at what you have written from different points of view.
  • Lastly, organize your work so it flows smoothly for the reader. You are taking them on a journey, there should not be any holes in the image you are creating. Be thorough in describing all the facets of the solution.

If writing is not one of your strengths, work on it. Take a couple of English classes at a local junior college at night. You may not become John Grisham, but you will get better. Besides, what gave you trouble in English classes when you were younger most likely won’t materialize for you now. Life has a funny way of changing us without us even recognizing it.

Writing good requirements is hard and takes a lot of effort. It’s much harder than any writing assignment you received in high school. Of course, the consequences of writing bad requirements are far greater than any you encountered in high school too.

Leave a comment »

« Previous entries
Next Page »