Not a "To Do" ListThis "to do" or "laundry list" approach is usually linked with another fallacy. Namely, that the project plan should be a step-by-step procedure for doing everything in the project in case we have to do it again. If the PM is managing the wrong things, this may be handy because we increase the odds of having to do this project again. Sponsors encourage these fallacies by marveling at monstrous project plans because that makes it seem like the PM has "thought of everything." Unfortunately, on significant cross-functional projects, there is absolutely no chance that the project manager will think of everything. The subject matter experts and specialists are the ones we must hold accountable for that. The result of these fallacies is that PMs produce project plans with hundreds or even thousands of tasks. Many of them have durations of a few hours or a few days. Does this level of detail give us better control and lead to successful projects? In our view, a "to do" list approach does not give effective control and it interferes with the achievement of a successful end result. The Laundry List ApproachFirst, the laundry list approach leads to, and even encourages, micro-management of the people working on the project. Micro-management is appropriate when you have slackers and nincompoops working for you, but few project teams are composed entirely of these losers. The majority of your project team members will not thrive under micro-management. This style tends to encourage dependency on the project manager rather than independence where people are held accountable for their results. Second, PMs are consistently more effective when they hold people accountable for reaching measured achievements rather than completing a list of tasks. How often does it happen that people complete a list of tasks and achieve nothing? When we base our assignments and monitoring on well conceived and measurable achievements, no one loses sight of the desired end result. Third, the laundry list approach is hard to maintain. People have to report on many tasks which decreases the odds of receiving accurate and timely status reports. The PM, with or without clerical support, has a great deal of data entry to do to input all this status data. Amid the pressure of on-going multiple projects, tracking can fall behind and may even be dropped because the amount of effort is too large. This may sound like a stupid and improbable solution but it happens with alarming frequency, even on large and important projects. The logic is "No one is looking at all that detail anyway, so why spend all that time to catch up?" As a general rule, we like to see the majority of assignments in a project plan have durations that are between 1 week and 8 weeks long. Coupled with this, we advocate weekly status reporting of hours worked, percentage complete and an estimate of the hours of work remaining to complete the assignment. This combination allows the project manager to maintain good control while placing the responsibility for achievements on the team members. Using the work breakdown structure (WBS) for cross-functional corporate projects, you have the opportunity to design an assignment and monitoring process. As part of our achievement-driven approach, we recommend breaking work down into "packets" of achievements for which you will hold people and teams accountable. Learn how to craft a WBS that makes your projects more successful by working with a PM mentor in our on-line courses |
||||||||||||||||||||
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Templates Based on Project Size
Unfortunately, too many academics and academic textbooks teach the work breakdown structure as a big "to do" list. They ignore the impact on the PM's ability to track progress and make good assignments. Many people who have taken these project management classes spend very little time learning the work breakdown structure and, as a result, think it is just a list with "to dos" for every team member. The results are disastrous as we will discuss below. Work Breakdown Structure in Practice In practice, many project managers follow a "to do" list approach as discussed above. The result is that their assignments for the team members are vague and the performance expectations are unclear. On those project teams the estimates are always inaccurate because it is very hard to estimate the work or duration of a "to do" list item when the deliverable is too general. As a consequence, the team members are guessing about what is expected and routinely have to redo assignments when their guess doesn't meet the current performance expectation of the project manager. It is this "to do" list approach to the work breakdown structure that is one of the major causes of the overall 70% project failure rate. WBS "Best Practices"In the Real World In the typical situation project managers face in the real world, we have no formal authority over the team. But one thing we can do is decompose the work breakdown structure into a measured definition of success on each deliverable. No matter how limited our authority over the team, we can still follow best practices on the WBS. We start from the overall project acceptance criteria which is a measurable definition of success. Then we continue the decomposition, identifying the major deliverables and defining success on each one in quantified terms. We don't want to have to guess about whether we produced the right deliverable; we want to be able to measure it at the end of the work. As an example, a task such as, "improve service on customer phone calls," is a typical "to do" list item that might be included in a work breakdown structure. It makes a terrible assignment and invites scope creep. On the other hand, if we decompose our deliverables properly, that work would have a metric defining success such as: "95% of the customers experience hold time of less than 15 seconds." It is difficult to come up with these measured outcomes primarily because we have to decide exactly what we want. However, the benefits are enormous in terms of more accurate estimating, more confident team members who know what success is before they start work, and tighter control of the scope because the precision of these definitions helps us keep out unnecessary work. |
||||||||||||||||||||
Deep Dive on this Topic With Additional Articles:
How To Construct a Work Breakdown Structure
Is Your WBS Designed for Success?
