August 19, 2014 Leave a comment
Spent part of yesterday reviewing one of the projects I’m on to analyze the risks and trajectory its on. Part of this analysis brought up adapting an old technique my father taught me when he was managing large defense projects. It relied upon the law of large numbers but still seems valid today given all the interdependencies. Instead of tracking expenses which are shown in the example, I substituted level of effort (LOE) in mhrs. Along with the trend line function in Excel I was able to project likely outcomes. Added to this was the interdependence risk DSM(s) I has previously started using which indicated where the highest risk elements in the project would occur. I’ve yet to add a social or influence analysis to the tool kit but expect to have that as another DSM.
The one significant issue using techniques like such is bringing the team along with the insights: As some people will not get it at first, Others will think you’re being a negative person, and still others will want to argue the validity of the analysis or its inferences. Presented in the light of discovery rather than blame helps (i.e., mapping out my understanding yields this….is this right? If so what should we do about it?). This only works however, if you’re in a ego”less” culture and those you bring up have a vested interest in the successful outcomes. That is if they don’t see the issue you bring up as core to their success, they are unlikely to care to address the situation, even if its for the greater good of the company (Ref: Tragedy of the Commons Systems Dynamics Archetype).