NOTE - 21/10/202 - resurfaced as it appears part II has been dropped from the Alinement Network, I've dropped it here for reference and will tidy up later as there are a few issues below. and it was written a long time ago.
The most challenging aspect of the pragmatic approach is its simplicity. It appears blatantly apparent, and for some readers, there may be a sense of 'You're telling me to suck eggs.' Yet, keeping this practical perspective in mind is at the core of the pragmatic approach.
Reflecting on the descriptions of Cowboys and Zealots provided in Part 1, you will recall two unique approaches to 'Best Practice.' The zealot tends towards a Just Do it; model. That focuses on the Framework or method as the solution. As an example, apply ITIL out of the box. It'll do it.
Compare that to the cowboys who aim to drive a pure quick win approach without considering long-term plans. That is, Do something, anything, but nothing against a plan. The fundamental principle that both methods omit is that One company's best practice can be another company's burden.
The above sentiments are, in fact, indicators of the difficulty inherent in a pragmatic approach. That is an approach that endeavors to manage the business urgency and expectations to articulate the business problem or opportunity to be addressed using the Framework of the method or best practice to assist in planning (and prioritising) the way forward.
If there is a crucial differentiator for the pragmatic approach from that of the zealot and cowboy, it is the adherence to Deming's principles of Plan, Do Check, Act. Concentrating on upfront planning.
Many of you would have heard of the 5 P's - Poor Planning Prevents Proper Performance or a derivative of this.
The following Pragmatic approach has come about through hard-won experience in problem management, project salvation/closure, and turn-around situations, all of which in some shape or form have been dependent or impacted by 'Best Practice' thinking.
Pragmatism is focused on ensuring a practical, matter-of-fact approach is used to assess the situation and solve problems or drive opportunities. It is in no way absolute and continuously improves from scenario to scenario.
The Pragmatic approach (in brief) consists of the following five steps; Note these five actions can be mapped against the principles of the plan, do, check, and act:
1. Define and confirm the business problem/opportunity
2. Define your scope, approach & principles
3. Create & Communicate Direction
4. Check, correct, and communicate
5. Iterate or complete
Step 1, focusing on the problem/opportunity definition, is critical. Often your sponsor may have a loose or high-level idea of what the problem or opportunity is. It would help if you didn't simply run with this perception, taking some time to understand the scenario objectively. Often involving interviews, observations, and other formalised methods to ensure the rounding out of the problem or opportunity to be addressed.
Once you have evolved a solid understanding of the situation (i.e., do your analysis), arrange to quote back and revisit the mandate with your sponsor, ensuring that your primary stakeholder has a clear understanding and agrees with the opportunity you have defined.
Step 2 of this pragmatic approach is the establishment of some Guiding Principles for the work to be done.
Examples of recent guiding principles used by teams I am working with include:
- Accountability through demand
- Adopt and Go!
- Org structure (functional model) does not equate to a hierarchy.
The core idea behind the principle-based approach is that they are clear and concise. With all of your stakeholders able to comprehend, associate with and adhere to during the initiative. These principles are for testing your solution and implementation in the future.
SCOPE is the nemesis of any best practice initiative. Control the scope; make sure it is agreed upon. Any changes to the scope are to be approved and accounted for appropriately. The risk for anyone involved in an improvement initiative is that discovery and business demand will always tempt away from your original goal.
Step 3: Create and Communicate Direction (CCD) 1 . We have all heard of or experienced initiatives on varying scales that have failed due to the lack of communication. The concept of CCD is the idea of answering four key questions for each of your major stakeholder groups. These are:
- Why are you communicating with them?
- What is it you want to tell them?
- How should they respond or participate?
- What next/if/else.
Naturally, messages will be more complex and complete. Being able to answer the above questions for any of your stakeholders at any time, be it in an elevator, presentation or meeting will help you improve your chance of success.
By the time you hit step 4 of the pragmatic approach, communications should almost be second nature. At this point, you work with the relevant stakeholders and team members to confirm your progress against the original problem/opportunity statement, guiding principles, scope, and proposed solution. Taking corrective action where
required as well as communicating the success and challenges of the program thus far.
Finally, upon completing all the above activities, you will either iterate through another cycle to deliver on the following priority or complete the task at hand. The rationale behind the need for iteration is that this particular approach is not meant to be a complete project management methodology and provides the opportunity for small
iterative cycles within a larger project or program of work.
As stated earlier in the document, the approach we have outlined above is in no way absolute or complete; it is provided in the hope that you will see one or two ideas in here that grab your attention. If you have any thoughts or observations, do not hesitate to add comments to this post. As stated, we are continuously trying to improve this idea of a 'Pragmatic' way of doing things.
No comments:
Post a Comment