jhC Articles

Intro - Overview
Services - Projects
Resume - Articles
Contact

“I’ve got five man-months of engineering, prototype costs, and enough heart-burn to fry a steak, and (customer) says, ‘What’s this?’”
Engineering manager
machine tool part supplier

“We thought you meant . . .”: A Case for Being Clear

Confusion costs more than mistakes. A mistake merely misses success; confusion doesn’t even recognize it on the way past. A mistake is 1 + 2 = 4 ; confusion requires higher math.

Large projects are fertile ground for confusion. Customers hand requirements to companies, who hand them to projects managers, who hand them to project teams, who work on their parts then hand them to other project teams, who work on other parts then hand them back to project managers, who hand them to customers.

That’s a lot of handling.

We know the path from what-is-meant, to what-is-said, to what-is-heard, to what-is-done is imperfect. On projects – especially those creating something new – the machinery that codes and decodes direction is dangerous. Toss in multiple languages, inexperienced teams, complex sourcing strategies, and modern management methods and the route becomes downright perilous.

Consider a simple transaction. Direction is given and clarified before work is done and delivered. If the product is not accepted, parts of the cycle are repeated.

At a distance large projects look like simple transactions. But, up close, each project is a complex network of interdependent transactions connecting some initial direction with a final delivery. Fixing the results of confusion on a large project can be more complicated than just starting over.

Certain confusion is normal. We all have those moments when down looks like up; dumb looks like smart. Or we know where to go but just can’t find our keys.

As used here, confusion is the result of unclear, incomplete, or contradictory, and un-clarified direction. It sends good teams the wrong way, or in circles. It wastes valuable time and energy. And, left unchecked, it pervades project activity causing bad results, dispirited teams, and disappointed customers.

Why don’t we clarify better? Maybe we don’t think a stitch in time will save nine. Or we don’t think anyone knows the answer. Or we just can’t bring ourselves to ask awkward questions.

This article is about being clear. It doesn’t promote massive overhauls of business processes and systems. However, it does promote expecting all who participate in projects to give clear direction and to clarify what is received. It contains these sections:

            Five ways to direct
            Five ways to clarify
            Five reasons why TOP

Five ways to direct

Here are five ways to direct:

Product requirements We should define exactly what the final product should do and how well; how big, small, and heavy; within what tolerances; and how much it should cost to make (not buy). Product requirements should be unambiguous, say no more/less than needed, and, of course, be verifiable.
Product plan We should define our product structure: Who owns each piece; what requirements pertain to each. We should state what assumptions apply, what design concept is current; and how we will know when the product is done.
Project plan We should define what work is required to accomplish the product plan on time: Who does what; who gives what to whom and when; how much resource is available. Continually refined and updated, the plan provides a yardstick for measuring progress, variances, and risk, and, more important, for knowing what to do next.
Work assignment We should assign work based on project plans: What we want whom to do; what do we want them to deliver to whom and by when. We should avoid telling them how. If they don’t know, we’re already in trouble.
Deliverable specifications We should tell others exactly what we need from them: What specific form and content is required and when. Who knows better than we do? Despite what our planning tools suggest, most intelligent turnovers take far more than a day. This period should be accommodated in both providers’ and receivers’ project plans.

Giving good direction is harder than it looks. Creating requirements and plans for new products requires us to think strategically in a tactical environment. Finding people willing and able to think forest and trees -- and to reconcile the two -- can be difficult, especially when other people are standing around waiting to get to work.

In addition, assigning work and specifying deliverables are often done by two different parties. The prior is typically done by line managers; the latter by deliverable recipients who have no authority over those doing the work. This provides us with endless opportunities for contradictory direction often without the well-oiled organizational machinery for resolving thorny conflicts. TOP

Five ways to clarify

Here are five ways to clarify direction:

Act like adults Our roles as contractee, contractor, or the contractor’s project team are complementary. We should avoid the unattractive qualities that infect pre-contract courtship. We should act like consenting adults, business partners, and co-conspirators; not like parents and children; adversaries; or best friends.
Just ask   Rejoice in the power of simple questions that clarify direction by:
     Filling in holes
          When do you need that?
          What exactly are you expecting on the January 13th?
          What is the minimum allowable flow rate?
     Confirming what was said
          You said five parts here by noon on August 23rd. Right?
          So we're going with Option A and should stop work on B?
          Is the rumor that Option C has been dropped correct?
     Begging other questions
          Requirements A and B are inconsistent: Which is correct?
          Should we give you a change proposal before we start?
          Since we can’t do both, should we do C or D first?
Assume out loud Assumptions fill holes in direction. If, after all available direction has been received and critical gaps remain, we should boldly go where others wouldn’t. A well crafted and labeled assumption stated out loud in front of all stakeholders will resound. It should be repeated and adjusted, as necessary, until all say okay.
Have a chat Management systems provide essential means to communicate direction. Requirements databases, work plans, deliverables lists, issue lists, change logs, and other project controls help to describe who should do what and when. However, at their best, they are crude tools that struggle to contain the intricacies of what we really need.

As much as we should use management systems, we should recognize their limitations. Mere printed words are rarely adequate to describe anything on a complex project. We should grab people in the hall, call them, have a meeting, and chat about what we really expect to give and get before they assume (quietly) they already know.
Get it down and out   All that glitters in the air does not look like gold in writing. If it influences what is done, we should write it down and send it out to all who will use it, or use something that uses it. Just the facts with a thin sugar coating: No discussion, no analysis, no criticism or sarcasm, no fancy words.

     Hi, Bob.
          Based on our chat today, we are going to use a safety
          factor of 4 instead of 3 to cover any future gasket
          solution. I’ll email our report by tomorrow noon.
          Nice work on that design!
     Joe
     PS Betty, confirm you got this.

And we should only attend meetings worth documenting with minutes.

When project teams are small and work in the same area, direction is self-correcting by proximity. As our projects grow in size and complexity, the number of team members we don’t know, don’t like, don’t trust, can’t see, can’t understand, or can’t get a hold of increases.

Expecting our business processes and systems to glue us into a unified whole is optimistic. The horrible truth is that, even in great organizations, successful projects often get done in spite of the “management infrastructure,” not because of it. People work through it, around it, and under it by picking up the phone and making unexpected calls. TOP

Five reasons why

Misdirected work renders deliverables that are late, incorrect, or both. Here are five reasons to do better.

Saves time and effort Late deliverables make providers spend more time and effort getting to the same point. It also makes receivers waste time standing around waiting.

Incorrect deliverables inevitably become late deliverables. But they also add the time and effort to realize, find, and fix the problem.

The better the direction and clarification, the more time and effort is saved. The more frequent the informal product and product reviews are held, the sooner misdirection is caught and corrected.
Saves money The total wasted time and effort by providers and receivers multiplied by a fully burdened labor rate is just part of the cost. Add to that the direct cost of prototypes and testing related to nonconforming products. Add to that the costs of revising production tools that couldn’t wait for the development train to arrive. Add in the cost of indirect staffs, facilities, and equipment that had to be kept around waiting for project completion.

There is money that we could have used for something else.
Creates opportunity The hours we spend reworking designs are not spent improving, checking, and testing them. The money we spend revising tooling is not spent on technology reducing material usage.

Clearer direction enables investment in opportunities to reduce production, warranty, and product liability costs.
Creates expectation Clarity begets clarity. Questions about our unclear, incomplete, or contradictory direction tell us that we need to do a better job. If we expect to improve product quality, cost, and delivery, we will be expected to deliver better direction in the future.

The sincere inquiry “Do you have any questions?” establishes the expectation that, despite our best attempts, we may need to do more. That “clarify” comes before “work.”
Improves reputation Saying “We thought you meant . . .” makes us look silly. It diminishes our managers’, customers’, and fellow team members’ confidence in our ability to pay attention, to take direction, to know what we need to do work, and to be successful.

Clarifying directions not only increases the likelihood of our success, but also establishes our reputation as engaged, no-nonsense, straight-shooting people who mean business. And, if not modern day folk heroes, at least nice to have around.

Successful projects render great products and profits. More than that, they affirm our ability to accomplish important things with others. This feeling makes us think we can do anything.

With good ideas and clear direction, maybe we can. TOP

Request free reprints in booklet form. Specify Article 215.

Return to Articles page