ProjectFlightDeck

Concept: Trends, threshold breeches, and dramatic changes in I/C$Tot trigger actions. The specifics of each triggered response are unique, but the pattern is the same: analysis, planning, and remediation.

The urgency of the analysis, timeframe of planning, and extent of remediation vary depending on what tripped the alarm and the extent of adjustment required.

Practice: The cost of noncompliance, R_Tot and I/C$_Tot, along with allowances for uncertainty, guide decisions on when to take action on deviations and how to do it.

Previous posts have described when to take action, specifically for variance in the cost of Impediments and Constraints. Whether it is a trend headed away from the baseline, a breach of threshold values for Contingency and Reserve, or a sudden, dramatic shift of 20% or more, further action is demanded.

The specific tasks required to correct the deviation vary with each situation. The generic response, however, is the same across deviations. Here is the pattern of the response with a brief explanation of each step.

Identify Potential Problems. When action is triggered, there’s a tendency to “jump to solution” and to start trying fixes. The approach rarely works. Instead, nail down what the problem is that you’re trying to fix. For example, suppose that the I/C_Tot exceeds Contingency. Is that the problem or just a symptom of the problem? Investigation is required. Say it uncovers the fact that a set of I/C-tasks is running late—that is the problem that must be solved.

Find Root Cause(s). To solve the problem, identification alone is not enough. Instead, find the root cause(s). Otherwise, proposed solutions won’t prevent the problem from recurring. For example, suppose quality assurance is reduced to get late I/C-tasks back on schedule. What if the root cause is a lack of training? Until that is addressed, the delays will continue. [1]

Plan for Remediation. Once the problem is known and its root cause identified, identify fixes. Break the fixes into specific deliverables and lay them into the schedule. That sets the baseline for remediation.

Remediate. Execute the plan. Remediation often entails changing the budget, timeline, staffing, and/or deliverables—significant, but necessary, adjustments. Monitor results versus the plan. If it’s not working, repeat the cycle, starting again with problem identification.

Communicate. Finally, troughout the process, communicate, communicate, communicate. Both for the team and for stakeholders explain deviations, correction plans, and progress. Doing so avoids nasty surprises that can bring the project to an abrupt end.

The urgency of the analysis, extent of remediation, and type of communication vary depending on root causes and remediating actions.

Here are some rules-of-thumb on gauging the urgency of response.

If I/C_Tot is in the red zone (Figure 1), accelerate execution of the steps. At the same time, avoid acting precipitously, for example, by skipping analysis and planning in order to take action immediately. Until the root cause is identified, there is little chance that such action will work.

Figure 1

For I/C_Tot in the yellow zone, the response is essentially the same, but it is moderately paced, involves smaller adjustments, and employs low-key messaging. Readings in the green zone usually do not require remediation.

Finally, although it is not called out as a separate step, it is important to monitor the results of remediating actions. It is only by doing so that the efficacy of the solution can be assessed and further adjustments can be made.

Thus, the impact of impediments and constraints can be quantified, systematically assessed, and used to shape actions to improve schedule performance.

Notes: