Discussion on:
View:
Show:
That team member who doesn't understand the work doesn't need more detail in the WBS. He needs training and or coaching. I woold as a general rule only break down tasks to the level at which they are assigned. It's the "Tell people what you want them to do, not how to do it" principle.
is able to work at that level. I have inherited a team member that doesn't do anything other than what is expressly said, i.e. how to do it.
I have project plans with tasks and dates. I explain what needs to be done, who is assigned and about when I need it done. I then have them review and provide feedback. This way, before the project plan is published everyone has had input into what tasks need to be done, how long they will take, etc.
The problem is that I don't get into specifics. I feel we are all professionals and have skills to do our jobs. If you need help that is one thing, but to do something different because you don't agree is another. For example (and this is silly, but was the final straw) I have someone who was told to fill in a specific spreadsheet as they completed certain tasks. The columns were all layed out for them, what I got after 2 1/2 weeks of argument was a different spreadsheet with ONLY what was completed instead of all the things to do.
As a tech lead I have to provide analytics on how our project is progressing. I can't do that if I don't have all the information. The persons response when I again explained "how to do it" was that I should do it since I was the tech lead. They had done enough by doing the tasks.
One of the tasks was to fill out the spreadsheet for tracking.
I'll have to go back and re-read the article though. It could be helpful for the rest of the team, but every once in awhile you get someone who doesn't need coaching because they are uncoachable.
I have project plans with tasks and dates. I explain what needs to be done, who is assigned and about when I need it done. I then have them review and provide feedback. This way, before the project plan is published everyone has had input into what tasks need to be done, how long they will take, etc.
The problem is that I don't get into specifics. I feel we are all professionals and have skills to do our jobs. If you need help that is one thing, but to do something different because you don't agree is another. For example (and this is silly, but was the final straw) I have someone who was told to fill in a specific spreadsheet as they completed certain tasks. The columns were all layed out for them, what I got after 2 1/2 weeks of argument was a different spreadsheet with ONLY what was completed instead of all the things to do.
As a tech lead I have to provide analytics on how our project is progressing. I can't do that if I don't have all the information. The persons response when I again explained "how to do it" was that I should do it since I was the tech lead. They had done enough by doing the tasks.
One of the tasks was to fill out the spreadsheet for tracking.
I'll have to go back and re-read the article though. It could be helpful for the rest of the team, but every once in awhile you get someone who doesn't need coaching because they are uncoachable.
Your point is exactly what this article is missing! Actually, this article doesn't address the question posed at all - it doesn't specify the minimum task length!
But the point about "micro managing" is crucial, especially when you're working with professionals. I had a PM that actually broke tasks down into as little time as 2 hours! OMG, what a total lack of respect for my knowledge, abilities, and experience. Even still, his estimates were *way* off, so he would have been much better off to collaborate with his team members in preparing the WBS, much less going ahead and assigning resources to it.
But the point about "micro managing" is crucial, especially when you're working with professionals. I had a PM that actually broke tasks down into as little time as 2 hours! OMG, what a total lack of respect for my knowledge, abilities, and experience. Even still, his estimates were *way* off, so he would have been much better off to collaborate with his team members in preparing the WBS, much less going ahead and assigning resources to it.
Isn't project management about 'managing the work' rather than 'doing the work'? If you know what the project is going to deliver - let's call them 'products', then a project manager should schedule at the product level. If the person responsible for the delivery of a product wants to break product development down into smaller tasks, then so be it. The project manager can 'uplift' this breakdown - but, and I think that it's a big BUT, the proejct manager shouldn't be micro-managing how the product is developed. They manage what is to be delivered, its quality, when it is to be delivered and its cost of delivery.
If responsibility for delivery of a product is allocated to some-one who doesn't know how to deliver it, then the project manager has created a for bigger problem for themselves than 'what size should an activity be?'!
If responsibility for delivery of a product is allocated to some-one who doesn't know how to deliver it, then the project manager has created a for bigger problem for themselves than 'what size should an activity be?'!
I hear you there PeterLeach and i agree, many times the managers "manage" times based on there knowledge or what they think that it will take when they actually must negotiate with the product developers. I say this because I see it every day hearing and watching my manager negotiate some ridiculous short times of some really heavy hard projects that he things that are easy.
I think the article is suggesting a way to help you get to a relevant level of detail no matter what your role. I expect all my staff to be able to plan well. Depending on their role this may be planning a project end to end (e.g. a PM) or planning the development of a specific system interface (e.g. software engineer). One of my projects at present involves many interfaces which a specific SE may be responsible for implementing. To achieve this he must produce the WBS for the development which the the PM will collate into the overall schedule. Each one could use the measures suggested in the article to breakdown their part into sufficient detail to plan adequately. If you only expect PM's to be able to plan well you will hit problems sooner or later.
Just like "too many cooks spoil the broth" and all that, too many managers/planners can unnecessarily overcomplicate the management process and induce unnecessary overhead.
The thing that has worked the best for me is to assign the tasks and get feedback from the assignees on how much time they feel it will take them to get things done. I publish the entire schedule and this encourages people to be accurate in their estimates because 1) they are assessed on meeting deadlines (managerial side) and 2) they are assessed by their peers based on the difficulty of the work they are performing. If the unforseen arises, then they are highly motivated to notify me immediately to adjust the schedule.
The thing that has worked the best for me is to assign the tasks and get feedback from the assignees on how much time they feel it will take them to get things done. I publish the entire schedule and this encourages people to be accurate in their estimates because 1) they are assessed on meeting deadlines (managerial side) and 2) they are assessed by their peers based on the difficulty of the work they are performing. If the unforseen arises, then they are highly motivated to notify me immediately to adjust the schedule.
What do you think about reporting earned value prior to a full WBS being created? We currently create a WBS for each phase of a project, i.e. planning, design, implementation/closure. Each phase is included in the schedule. Because of the unknowns, a complete WBS doesn't get created until right before the implementation phase begins. Until we have a full WBS, some phases are just estimated. We are reporting earned value throughout, which causes the numbers to sometimes have significant fluctuations for the Cost Performance Index and the Schedule Performance Index. Is this an industry best practice to do it this way? Would it be better to have a full WBS before reporting EV?
In my experience, I've had to break activities down to hours which in my mind is ridiculous, and gets to be unmanageable. Preferrably, depending on the relationship I have with my team and their abilities, I'll ask for a deliverable and request % complete as status. Some newbies, I'll ask them to break the deliverable up into chunks and track completion that way. Preferrably nothing less than 8 hrs in duration. The most important thing I ask from my team is that if they run into ANY trouble that could/would impact their delivery, they notify upfront so we can address contingency plans if needed.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
