Communication Discipline

Communication

So abused a word. There are so many aphorisms that exist stressing its importance, its rarity, etc.

Here's the deal for me. Communication happens all the time. When we talk, email, text, blog, twitter, even when we don't say anything. The problem is that people do not realize that their communication doesn't always make sense to everyone that sees it. I am guilty as anyone in this regard.

I am of the opinion that as project managers we should be the best communicators on the deck. My preferred comm style is to be as unvarnished and concise as possible, this more often than not does not help me win friends, but what it does help me do is illustrate issues that need to be addressed. Format and spacing and whether or not you put a little ":)" in it never come into play.

Why so hard? Doesn't the more bees with honey adage apply? No. Here's the reason why and its an inflamatory statement but that's ok I have a thick skin.

Communication requires some sort of mutual understanding, typically the understanding is centered around a shared vision or goal or something that the one or both participants can agree upon or desire. The more simple and easily articulated the goal the more likely mutually beneficial outcomes come to fruition. Sounds easy right?

Here's the rub. As PM's we are often in the difficult position of trying to establish communication channels, plans, responses etc. We are charged to do this with team members with vastly different experience sets, agendas, and perspectives. What one participant understand can be vastly different than the other. It is imperative that the PM and stakeholders are clear and succinct to identify the mutually agreeable goal. Why do you ask? If there is no discipline and understanding of how difficult communication and collaboration is the team will tear itself apart trying to come to a resolution.

Communication Discipline - adhereing to a code of conduct typically "taught" or "trained" in regard to communicating with others.

If someone was taught that 5000 emails a day was status quo and that was the extent of their discipline then it is exponentially difficult to get those individuals to do something else or communicate with them that there are alternatives to their current level of communication discipline.

Repetition, patience and working on clarifying goals become the only effective means to improving the situation.

-Optimal Optimus

Dependencies, Critical Path, Float... who needs em?

* Dependencies?
* Critical Path?
* Float?

In the game/consumer product development world those things are laughable.

Dependencies? Of course there are dependencies probably hundreds am I going to track them all in some sort of master map of a schedule and plan when they change daily as we innovate or find new ways to do things or move in a different direction. That in and of itself would be a full time job. How much value add do I provide saying oh yeah based on dependencies we have lost 4 days of work

Critical Path?
When everything has to happen doesn't that mean everything is on the critical path? There's an equation to Critical Path the "sequential tasks with the longest duration" Oh yeah but you throw that into mix with the maze of Dependencies how do you make the critical path worth tracking?

Float?
Time you can leverage to move resources and effort to other parts of the project in hopes to get it back on schedule? Is there such thing as spare time in a product development environment. Shouldn't we be working full tilt from inception to launch?

Everything has its place and so do these concepts. The important thing to remember is that the context changes depending on the environment. There are dependencies in Product Development environments as well as float and a critical path. However they are all treated differently and "managed" differently.

In a Product Development organization dependencies are acknowledged and worked through on a tactical level, so that the schedule concentrates on what going to be delivered next, not how the past is affected it. If dependencies are not being met they are raised as an issue(s) and resolved by the appropriate management level.

Critical Path is the entire project, every task, every item. How do you manage it? Issue Management. When things like dependencies put the delivery of the product at risk it immediately becomes the most important item on the critical path. Every item that stops the forward motion of the project is the "Critical Path" and needs scrutiny and resolution.

Float? there is no float, float is an illusion, a luxury of those who do not realize that at any given moment if we don't judiciously apply our efforts and resources we end up slipping. Its the job of every Product Development group to be fully leveraged at all times on delivering the product or game since I happen to be in the game business.

- Optimal Optimus

A post on Corporate America

This is a great show. Definitely captures the essence of being a late 20's early 30's in the new millenia. Part of me is sad that I'm actually 3 years older than the main stars in the show. The comedy is sharp and relavent. Cobie Smulders is ridiculously haawwwt. But my favorite character and probably the favorite character of many is the character of Barney Stinson.

In this newest episode Barney doled out an "Awesome" insight in the world of corporate america as evidenced by the youtube clip above.

The episode centers around the gang talking about resumes in hopes of helping Robin's character from being deported due to visa violation. Barney relates what Corporate America is looking for in an employee.

As we watch Barney's ridiculous video resume about randome non relavent buzzwords with flashy images and no mention of anything he has done. The gang points out that resume has nothing about what you do and Barney looks up and says exactly.

"Corporate America doesn't want people that do. Corporate America wants people that look like they do but don't; in fact doing anything ... that will get you fired." (or something to that effect)

A more true statement has never been uttered. I have had my share of hiring and firings and let me tell you from my experience more people are hired on flash than substance and when substance is provided they are usually punished for it.

I get all kinds of excuses for it:

"Nature of the Beast"
"Welcome to Corporate America"

Excuses aside doesn't change the fact that its not right. If you stretch it a little all our economic woes stem from the tolernance of this line of thinking.

"Sell a good game and don't deliver. Then protect your sale by doing as little as possible as cheap as possible possible."

Sounds like a winning solution set to me.

I founded Generation-Joe and its professional oriented R-Cubed Project Management (the more professional oriented sister site/blog) to take a stand against sentiments like that.

We should stand on principles

• If you can make a difference then make one.


• Speak your mind without fear of reprisal


• If you are going to speak make sure it makes sense and its not bullshit


• Never give up


• Fight for what's right


• Don't be a passive aggressive dick


• Take Risks


• Don't believe your own press

- Optimal Optimus.

Project Management and Web 2.0

SO I have been thinking. Yes I know its not often but I have my moments.

This Web 2.0 business:

* Wikis
* Social Networking
* Twitter

All of this stuff what's it mean to the practice of project management. I mean the extent of web 2.0 to project management IMO has been the leveraging of Sharepoint. The concept of project work spaces and such is hardly news but what is news is that the communication that Web 2.0 starts bringing and taking it to the mainstream means we as project manager can start driving communication by the tools we use.

Does a client need the strict hierarchies of Sharepoint? Are they fluid and flexible that they like some sort of wiki implementation. Do they leverage an artifact tracking system? Web 2.0 provides fast and easy implementations that allow the PM to concentrate on the communication model rather than implementing a tool. I think its pretty cool.

For the record I am following the following tools

*dekiwiki
*ning
*boonex

Either way its definitely an interesting time to be a PM.

"The PM Matrix" Integrated tith Ning's Social Network Platform


- Optimal Optimus

An Agile Understanding

Some excerpts from a presentation I gave to people looking for help with Agile Project Management and SCRUM. Credit to the Dilbert folks J of course.

So what is SCRUM and Agile Project Management?

Not going into any overly specific jargon or canned answers:

• Agile is a Project Management Methodology that focuses on
• Iteration
• Interaction
• Transparency
• Product Delivery
• SCRUM is a meeting and project tracking format used heavily in organizations that practice Agile Project Management

Traditional Project Management and SCRUM/Agile Project Management

• Traditional Project Management places emphasis on
• Milestones
• Artifact management
• Historical reporting
• Minimizing Change
• SCRUM/Agile Project Management places emphasis on :
• Iteration
• Product oriented delivery
• Transparency
• Extensive Product Owner Involvement
• Change is expected and incorporated in the process to provide value add.
• Does not rely heavily on historical or artifact management but rather how much work remains moving forward.

The Agile Manifesto

Individuals and interactions over processes and tools

Working software over comprehensive documentation

Customer collaboration over contract negotiation

Responding to change over following a plan

Pasted from <http://agilemanifesto.org/>




Iterative Development

• Developing End to End, a working product with the assumption that improvement and gains can be made throughout the development iterations
• The product may not have 100% of the feature set but could be used in production
• The general concept is to flesh out and improve over each iteration to meet the requirements/expectation of the business



SCRUM… What's it all about

• SCRUM is the default process for Agile Project Management and has the following assumptions in its pure form:
• Senior Team Members
• Dedicated Team
• 100% Product Owner Involvement
• Product Backlog
• Sprint Backlog
• Daily Meeting
• The Burndown
• Sprint Planning Meeting
• Pigs - Committed
• Chickens - Not Committed



The Daily Meeting

• 15min or less
• What are we doing?
• What is planned?
• What is blocking us
• Take a look at the "Burn Down" or whatever graphical representation of the project the team uses
• That’s it. No muss no fuss

Pitfalls of the Daily

• "Lets talk about implementation details" - Good Idea, wrong time
• "Logorreha" - The idea is to keep meetings short so the communication used is supposed to be boiled down, too much talking and team members not on your portion of the sprint loose interest and slows morale
• "What are we supposed to be doing" - No product owner no sprint is what I say, he's the guy/gal that breaks ties on what has to happen and should be the definitive authority on the project Prioritizing and Deprecating as the process moves forward.
• "Scrummaster does that? Right?" - Scummaster doesn't do very much but act as the alarm for the team and escalate issues and run interference for the development team (Pigs and Chickens)



The Burn Down

• This is the Graphical Representation of Agile it measures velocity of completing a sprint.
• It looks to work remaining as the metric as opposed to how much is done.
• Seems counter intuitive but from a line perspective it allows the resource to see what is remaining and how much its going to take as opposed to looking at the Gantt and seeing what was done and have no idea how much its going to take given the current time frame.



Question 1:

• Are Unplanned items usually unexpected production support related issues? What else is unplanned?
• Well from my perspective we prioritize the production issues and weigh them against the constraints to hitting the sprint as negotiated by the product owner.
• If the product owner says this product support issue trumps the feature the issue gets the effort and the feature gets pushed to the product backlog for reallocation .
• Remember because of the Transparency (in this case finite resources and product owner involvement) Delivery expectations match what the product owner wants.
• Note: as soon as the Product Owner assigns the task to a sprint and gives it a priority it stops being unplanned.

Question 2:

• If we determine part of the way into a sprint that existing code (Created before the Sprint) needs refactoring, should that be included as an unplanned item
• In the sprint the User Story should take into account potential unplanned tasks and reflect it in the Complexity Points (If you use them)
• At the very least be brought up as a blocker in the Daily for discussion on inclusion into the sprint and requiring Product Owner resolution.

Question 3:

• If we start work on a story and realize the initial estimate of the story was way off, do we modify the total number of points in the sprint?
• I wouldn't. This should be brought up in the daily that the sprint as it currently sits is in jeopardy and that the product owner needs to re-assess the Sprint as a whole and reprioritize the Tasks/User Stories as it would meet the expectations of the Product Owner and end users.

Question 4:

• If we start work on a sprint and the product owner decides he/she doesn’t want a story anymore do we modify the number of points in the sprint?
• Yes. However it's been my experience that the Product Owner never wants to take things off without adding more. The reason is typically to assign more work.

Question 5:

• What sort of requirement gathering process do you go through before you start a new sprint?
• I have a pre-planning meeting with the Product Owner and Lead Engineers, review the product backlog, and then pick the brains to identify additional work.

Question 6:

• If we have a project that is only 1-2 weeks worth of work would you recommend setting this up as a spring? If not how would you choose to handle it?
• I would assess is it really an independent initiative or if I could roll it up as a User Story in the forthcoming sprint.

Death by Band-Aid

Working in the industry I've noticed a few things. People always look at Band-Aids vs. Solutions. Even within the realm of project management or some might say particularly in the world of project management.

Classical Band-Aids:

• Communication is poor, instead of increasing frequency and quality of interaction an often response is to document it.
• Schedules are slipping consistently, so lets through more people/money at it.
• Morale is low, let's give em the pep talk and a hand shake, a pat on the back, and tell them to soldier on.

Sound familiar? Of course it should these wouldn't be "Classical" Band-Aid approaches to business issues if they weren't seen often enough to approach cliche.

So why Band-Aids over a solution? Why?

Solutions are:

• Expensive
• Complicated
• Often Embarrassing

How so?

Band-Aids are easy. Low Hanging fruit in the consultant world. Often picked to show immediate gains and validate hypothesis. But cutting to the root of a problem or issue takes more effort, more commitment, and lastly ownership and the last thing anyone wants to do in the "corporate" world is own up to a failing in their organizational operations.

Expensive - Solutions often mean paradigm (yeah I used the word paradigm) shifts in how they approach the issue/problem. These changes mean re-training, resistance and sometimes buying new machines, software, and people. All daunting prospects. How does all this stack up if we can go to the classical Band-Aid of saying ok we need to document this...

Complicated - Solutions at least good ones are end to end endeavors. They address a business problem/issue end to end. They aren't stop gaps. This means it crosses over organizational silos, human capital relationships, and the political barriers in addition to their overall pure business impact. Honestly who wants to step on the feet of the powers that be to solve a business problem that has been affecting the higher ups but obviously has been assumed as "nature of the beast". It doesn't get much more intimidating than that.

Embarrassing? How so? In order to solve a problem you must admit that there is a problem to begin with. Telling a "C" Level exec that his decision to adopt a particular stance on technology is killing his competitive advantage is the nightmare for any management type and similarly a line engineer telling his co-worker in production that their process may not be revealing the end all to the products woes.

So what to do what to do?

Get over it.

An unpopular viewpoint I am sure but I didn't join the the workforce to be popular. I have tons of friends. I joined to workforce to solve problems and provide an unquestionable value proposition. I leverage Project Management and Scientific Management principles to enact such solutions. Sometimes it casts light to places where others would rather remain within the umbra and there are consequences for that, I bear many a scar from such altercations. But it changes nothing. Solutions not Band-Aids are what is called for in times of doubt and uncertainty.

You don't go to the hospital with abdominal pains and say "My insides feel funny? Can you slap a "Band-Aid" on me doc? I think I can handle it"

You wouldn't want that doc to say "Oh I've seen this 1000x no problem, here's a Band-Aid call me if it gets worse"

Call me crazy but I would be looking for like "Ok. Let's see tell me the syptoms, when did it start, how intense, and I am going to assume you want me to fix this, ah ha based on this I think you have a ruptured appendix. I am going to schedule surgery to fix this... I hope you have insurance... ;p "

What's the alternative, soldier on and die a septic death? Pass.

Solutions are much more desirable than a slow agonizing death.

The video is from Heartbreak Ridge(1985) I thought it appropos.

-Optimal Optimus

Situational Awareness

Many people talk about Situational Awareness but few people understand it.

To me its really like the Matrix concept of "Bullet Time" the ability to move or respond to stimuli far beyond normal ken. Everything moving in "Slow Motion"

How does that apply to project management?

Simple PM's serve as the situational awareness for an organization. We should be able to perceive stimuli and respond faster than humanly thought possible. Our processes should support this dynamic.

Situational Awareness is analogous with Clarity of Vision, that people who have experienced high pressure and intense situations and triumphed have related that it was as if you could see everything and it was all moving in slow motion and it felt right.

Project Management should provide that clarity that awareness that no matter how risky or how chaotic that the right move the most expeditious move is clear and ready to be taken.

That's how important situational awareness is.

I included a little "Matrix Bullet Time" for an example.

-Optimal Optimus