Shipulski On Design

Posts Tagged ‘Lessons Learned’

Breaking up work into small chunks can be a good way to get things started.  Because the scope of each chunk is small, the cost of each chunk is small making it easier to get approval to do the work.  The chunk approach also reduces anxiety around the work because if nothing comes from the chunk, it’s not a big deal because the cost of the work is so low.  It’s a good way to get started, and it’s a good way to do a series of small chunks that build on each other.  But what happens when the chunks are successful and it’s time to scale up the investment by a factor of several hundred thousand or a million?

The scaling scenario.  When the early work (the chunks) was defined an agreement in principle was created that said the larger investment would be made in a timely way if the small chunks demonstrated the viability of a whole new offering for your customers.  The result of this scenario is a large investment is allocated quickly, resources flow quickly, and the scaling work begins soon after the last chunk is finished. This is the least likely scenario.

The more chunks scenario. When the chunks were defined, everyone was excited that the novel work had actually started and there was no real thought about the resources required to scale it into something meaningful and material.  Since the resources needed to scale were not budgeted, the only option to keep things going is to break up the work into another series of small chunks.  Though the organization sees this as progress, it’s not.  The only thing that can deliver the payout the organization needs is to scale up the work.  The follow-on chunks distract the company and let it think there is progress, when, really, there is only delayed scaling.

The scale next year scenario.  When the chunks were defined, no one thought about scaling so there was no money in the budget to scale.  A plan and cost estimate are created for the scaling work and the package waits to be assessed as part of the annual planning process.  And as the waiting happens, the people that did the early work (the chunks) move on to other projects and are not available to do the scaling work even if the work gets funded next year.  And because the work is new it requires new infrastructure, new resources, new teams, new thinking, and maybe a new company.  All this newness makes the price tag significant and it may require more than one annual planning cycle to justify the expense and start the work.

Scaling a new invention into a full-sized business is difficult and expensive, but if you’re looking to create radical growth, scaling is the easiest and least expensive way to go.

“100 Dollar Bills” by Philip Taylor PT is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.

Before you decide which project to start, decide which project you’ll stop.

The best way to stop a project is to finish it.  The next best way is to move the resources to a more important project.

If you find yourself starting before finishing, stop starting and start finishing.

People’s output is finite. Adding a project that violates their human capacity will not result in more completed projects but will cause your best people to leave.

If people’s calendars are full, the only way to start something new is to stop something old.

If you start more projects than you finish, you’re stopping projects before they’re finished.  You’re probably not stopping them in an official way, rather, you’re letting them wither and die a slow death.  But you’re definitely stopping them.

When you start more projects than you finish, the number of active projects increases.  And without a corresponding increase in resources, fewer projects are completed.

The best way to reduce the number of projects you finish is to start new projects.

Make a list of the projects that you stopped over the last year.  Is it a short list?

Make a list of projects that are understaffed and under-resourced yet still running in the background.  Is that list longer?

A rule to live by: If a project is understaffed, staff it or stop it.

If you can’t do that, reduce the scope to fit the resources or stop it.

Would you prefer to complete one project at a time or do three simultaneously and complete none?

When it comes to stopping projects, it’s stopped or it isn’t.  There’s no partial credit for talking about stopping a project.

If you want to learn if a project is worthy of more resources, stop the project.  If the needed resources flow to the project, the project is worthy.  If not, at least you stopped a project that shouldn’t have been started.

People don’t like working on projects where the work content is greater than the resources to do the work.  These projects are a major source of burnout.

If you know you have too many projects, everyone else knows it too.  Stop the weakest projects or your credibility will suffer.

“Circus Renz Berlin, Holland 2011” by dirkjanranzijn is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0.

When things are overwhelming to you but not to others, it’s okay to feel overwhelmed for a while.

When the seas are rough, you may think you are alone, but others may see it differently.

What’s worthy of your attention is defined by you, though some make it easy for you to think otherwise.

When you disagree with someone’s idea, that says nothing about them.

Judging someone from the outside is unfair, and it’s the same with judging yourself from the inside.

When everyone around you sees you differently than you see yourself, it’s worth looking critically at what you see that they don’t and what they see that you don’t.

You aren’t your thoughts and feelings, but it can feel like it in the heat of the moment.

Self-judgment is the strongest flavor of judgment.

“Object from the exhibition We call them Vikings produced by The Swedish History Museum” by The Swedish History Museum, Stockholm is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

When choosing projects there are two competing questions: Is it big enough? And, is it small enough? The project must be big enough to generate the profits required by the company’s growth objectives.  Larger growth objectives require larger projects.  Yet the project has to be small enough to be completed within the time constraints defined by the growth objectives.  Tighter time constraints require smaller projects.

When the projected revenue generated by the candidate project is less than what’s needed to meet the growth objectives, the project is deemed “not big enough.”  But what if the candidate project is the largest project that the project team can imagine? Does that say something about the project team’s imagination or the growth objectives?  Open question: How do tell the difference between a project that is too small to meet the growth objectives and growth objectives that demand projects larger than the project team’s imagination?

When the projected launch date of the candidate project is later than the date of first revenue defined in the growth plan, the project plan is deemed “too long.”  The team is then asked to sharpen their pencils and return with a launch date that meets the revenue timeline.  And when the revised schedule also violates the revenue timeline, the project is deemed “too big.” Open question: How do you tell the difference between a project that is too big to meet the revenue timeline and a revenue timeline that is too stringent to allow a project of sufficient size?

Theoretically, there are candidate projects that are big enough to meet the growth objectives and small enough that their launch dates meet revenue timelines.  But in practice, candidate projects are either too small to meet growth objectives or too large to meet revenue timelines.  And, yes, I have seen candidate projects that are both too small and too large.  But this says more about the growth objectives, revenue timelines, and the number of projects that run concurrently (too few resources spread over too many projects).

Growth objectives are good, and so are projects that fit with the team’s capabilities to deliver.  Incremental revenue that comes sooner rather than later is good.  And so are project timelines that are governed by the work content, resources applied to the projects, and good product development practices.

Truth is, we need it all – projects that deliver the sizzle that sells and projects that launch sooner rather than later.  And year-on-year, we need to get better at delivering on all of it.  And the best way I know to do all that is to ritualistically invest in the people that do the work and the tools they use.

“Horse Yin and Yang” by onecog2many is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

When a car’s battery is low and doesn’t have enough energy to start the car, you change your expectations about travel plans, hook up the battery to a charger and give it the time it needs to charge.  You don’t keep trying to start the car because the already tired battery gets more tired.  You know the signs – every time you turn the key, the engine turns more slowly and at some point, the slow whirring decays into a clicking of the solenoid.

People don’t run on batteries, but like batteries, we sometimes run low on cranking power.  But where we accept the reality that sometimes a car battery will not start the car, we don’t see the degradation of people’s performance the same way.  Sure, the signs are more subtle – reduced ability to concentrate, reduced productivity, variability in output, and the like – but the signs are there for all to see.  And where the car simply refuses to start, sometimes people blame themselves for their low battery and over-exert themselves to keep the projects moving, even when it’s not in their best interest.

It’s vacation season.  Take the time you need to charge your battery and don’t feel guilty about it.  Try to hold onto the fact that you’re not helping things in the long run by blocking yourself from the rest you need now.  And, sure, you’re good at your job, but the company can handle things while you’re on holiday.  Or, better yet, why not flip it on its head and declare your time away as a growth opportunity for someone on your team to fill in for you and test drive your job?

They will get the chance to interact with different people in the organization and likely get a broader picture of what’s going on at the company.  They will get a chance to share their thoughts and ideas, which will feel good, and other leaders will see them in action.  It’s a win for everyone.

And while you’re away, don’t check in.  That’s just like pulling the plug on the battery charger before it has a chance to do its work.

“Old Ray-O-Vac Batteries” by deanj is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

With inflation on the rise and sales on the decline, the time to reduce costs is now.

But before you can design out the cost you’ve got to know where it is.  And the best way to do that is to create a Pareto chart that defines product cost for each subassembly, with the highest cost subassemblies on the left and the lowest cost on the right.  Here’s a pro tip – Ignore the subassemblies on the right.

Use your costed Bill of Materials (BOMs) to create the Paretos.  You’ll be told that the BOMs are wrong (and they are), but they are right enough to learn where the cost is.

For each of the highest-cost subassemblies, create a lower-level Pareto chat that sorts the cost of each piece-part from highest to lowest.  The pro tip applies here, too – Ignore the parts on the right.

Because the design community designed in the cost, they are the ones who must design it out.  And to help them prioritize the work, they should be the ones who create the Pareto charts from the BOMs.  They won’t like this idea, but tell them they are the only ones who can secure the company’s future profits and buy them lots of pizza.

And when someone demands you reduce labor costs, don’t fall for it.  Labor cost is about 5% of the product cost, so reducing it by half doesn’t get you much.  Instead, make a Pareto chart of part count by subassembly.  Focus the design effort on reducing the part count of subassemblies on the left.  Pro tip – Ignore the subassemblies on the right.  The labor time to assemble parts that you design out is zero, so when demand returns, you’ll be able to pump out more products without growing the footprint of the factory.  But, more importantly, the cost of the parts you design out is also zero.  Designing out the parts is the best way to reduce product costs.

Pro tip – Set a cost reduction goal of 35%.  And when they complain, increase it to 40%.

In parallel to the design work to reduce part count and costs, design the test fixtures and test protocols you’ll use to make sure the new, lower-cost design outperforms the existing design.  Certainly, with fewer parts, the new one will be more reliable.  Pro tip – As soon as you can, test the existing design using the new protocols because the only way to know if the new one is better is to measure it against the test results of the old one.

And here’s the last pro tip – Start now.

Image credit — aisletwentytwo

If when you write your monthly report no one responds with a question of clarification or constructive comment, this may be a sign your organization places little value on your report and the work it stands for.  If someone sends a thank you email and do not mention something specific in your report, this masked disinterest is a half-step above non-interest and is likely also a sign your organization places little value on your report and the work it stands for.

If you want to know for sure what people think of your work, stop writing your report.  If no one complains, your work is not valuable to the company. If one person complains, it’s likely still not valuable.  And if that single complaint comes from your boss, your report/work is likely not broadly valuable, but you’ll have to keep writing the report.

But don’t blame the organization because they don’t value your work.  Instead, ask yourself how your work must change so it’s broadly valuable.  And if you can’t figure a way to make your work valuable, stop the work so you can start work that is.

If when you receive someone else’s monthly report and you don’t reply with a question of clarification or constructive comment, it’s because you don’t think their work is all that important.  And if this is the case, tell them you want to stop receiving their report and ask them to stop sending them to you.  Hopefully, this will start a discussion about why you want to stop hearing about their work which, hopefully, will lead to a discussion about how their work could be modified to make it more interesting and important.  This dialog will go one of two ways – they will get angry and take you off the distribution list or they will think about your feedback and try to make their work more interesting and important.  In the first case, you’ll receive one fewer report and in the other, there’s a chance their work will blossom into something magical.  Either way, it’s a win.

While reports aren’t the work, they do stand for the work.  And while reports are sometimes considered overhead, they do perform an inform function – to inform the company of the work that’s being worked.  If the work is amazing, the reports will be amazing and you’ll get feedback that’s amazing.  And if the work is spectacular, the reports will be spectacular and you’ll get feedback that matches.

But this post isn’t about work or reports, it’s about the power of stopping.  When something stops, the stopping is undeniable and it forces a discussion about why the stopping started.  With stopping, there can be no illusion that progress is being made because stopping is binary – it’s either stopped or it isn’t.  And when everyone knows progress is stopped, everyone also knows the situation is about to get some much-needed attention from above, wanted or not.

Stopping makes a statement. Stopping gets attention. Stopping is serious business.

And here’s a little-known fact: Starting starts with stopping.

Image credit — joiseyshowaa

If you want to improve the work, ask the people who do the work.  They know the tools and templates. They know the ins and outs of the process. They know when and how to circumvent the process. And they know what will break if you try to change the process. And what breaks is the behavior of the people that use the process.

When a process changes, people’s behavior does not. Once people learn the process, they want to continue to work that way.  It’s like their bodies know what to do without even thinking about it.  But on the other hand, when a process doesn’t meet the need, people naturally modify their behavior to address the shortcomings of the process.  And in this case, people’s behavior doesn’t match the process yet they standardize their behavior on circumventing the process.  Both of these realities – people like to do what they did last time and people modify their behavior to address shortcomings of the process – make it difficult for people to change their behavior when the process changes.

When the process doesn’t work but the modified behavior does, change the process to match the modified behavior.  When that’s not possible, ask the people why they modified their behavior and ask them to come up with a process that is respectful of their on-the-fly improvements and respectful of the company’s minimum requirements for their processes.

When the process doesn’t work but the people are following it anyway, ask them to come up with ways to improve the process and listen to their ideas.  Then, run a pilot of their new process on the smallest scale and see what happens.  If it makes things better, adopt the process on a larger scale and standardize on the new way to work.  If it makes things worse, stop the pilot and try another improvement suggested by the team, again on a small scale.   Repeat this process until the process performs satisfactorily.

When the people responsible for doing the work are given the opportunity to change their processes for the better, there’s a good chance the broader population that uses the process will ultimately align their behavior to the new process.  But the change will not be immediate and there may be some backsliding.  But, because the keepers of the process feel ownership of the new process and benefit from the change, they will continue to reinforce the new behavior until it becomes new behavior.  And if it turns out the new process needs to be modified further, the keepers of the process will make those changes and slowly align the behavior to match the process.

When the new process is better than the old one, people will ultimately follow the new process.  And the best way to make the new process better than the old one is to ask the people who do the work.

Image credit — Old Photo Profile

Our behavior is a result of causes and conditions. One thing paves the way for the next.  Elements of the first thing create a preferential path for the next thing. If someone gets praised for doing A, more people will do A, even when A is the wrong behavior.  If someone gets chastised for doing B, B won’t happen again, even when B is the right behavior.

The most troubling set of causes and conditions are those that block people from telling their truth. When everyone knows it’s a bad idea, but no one is willing to say it out loud, that’s a big problem.  In fact, it may be the biggest problem.

When people think they won’t be taken seriously, they keep their truth to themselves. When people know they will be dismissed, they keep quiet. When people feel the situation is hopeless because there’s no way they’ll be listened to, they say nothing.

When people see others not taken seriously, that creates conditions for future truths to be withheld.  When people see others being dismissed, that creates conditions for future truths to be kept quiet. When people see others in others from not being listened to, that creates conditions for future truths to remain unsaid.

And causes and conditions are self-strengthening.  The more causes and conditions are reinforced, the more the behaviors become ingrained.  The more people are stifled, the more they will keep quiet.  The more people are dismissed, the more they’ll shut up.  The more people’s truths are ignored, the more they’ll remain unsaid.

Here are three rules for truth-telling that will help you and your company move forward:

1. Without truth-telling, there can be no truth-telling.
2. The longer truth-telling is stifled, the harder it is for truth-telling to reemerge.
3. Truth-telling begets truth-telling.

Image credit — Jinterwas

Did you engage today with someone that needed your time and attention, though they didn’t ask? You had a choice to float above it all or recognize that your time and attention were needed.  And then you had a follow-on choice: to keep on truckin’ or engage.  If you recognized they needed your help, what caused you to spend the energy needed to do that?  And if you took the further step to engage, why did you do that? For both questions, I bet the answer is the same – because you care about them and you care about the work. And I bet they know that and I bet you made a difference.

Did you alter your schedule today because something important came up?  What caused you to do that?  Was it about the thing that came up or the person(s) impacted by the thing that came up? I bet it was the latter.  And I bet you made a difference.

Did you spend a lot of energy at work today? If so, why did you do that? Was it because you care about the people you work with? Was it because you care about your customers? Was it because you care enough about yourself to live up to your best expectations? I bet it was all those reasons.  And I bet you made a difference.

Image credit — Dr. Matthias Ripp

When you were wrong, the outcome was different than you thought.

When the outcome was different than you thought, there was uncertainty as the work was new.

When there was uncertainty, you knew there would be learning.

When you were afraid of learning, you were afraid to be wrong.

And when you were afraid to be wrong, you were really afraid about what people would think of you.

Would you rather wall off uncertainty to prevent yourself from being wrong or would you rather try something new?

If there’s a difference between what others think of you and what you think of yourself, whose opinion matters more?

Why does it matter what people think of you?

Why do you let their mattering block you from trying new things?

In the end, hold onto the fact that you matter, especially when you have the courage to be wrong.

“Oh no, what went wrong?” by Bennilover is marked with CC BY-ND 2.0.