Project vs Department
In companies with a matrix structure of organization, there are conflicts between project managers and departments from time to time. The struggle for human resources (hereinafter referred to as resources), deadlines for completing tasks and their priority, disputes about responsibility and decision-making, and so on. If there is no such thing in your company, then you are a happy exception confirming the rule.
Some managers believe that conflicts arising in the matrix structure contribute to the search for the most optimal solutions, since the interests of both parties are considered. But at the same time, the conflicts generated by the matrix, are the reason for the failure of the timing of tasks and the fall in productivity and efficiency.
There are compelling reasons that do not allow departments to be abolished so that all resources can be in projects. First, not all specialists are needed for the entire life of the project, and you need to decide what to do with them when the tasks end. Secondly, the project manager may not be competent enough to not only hire the right specialists, but also subsequently develop their potential in the company. Thirdly, the manager may not be competent enough to assess the correctness of solving problems.
The key to solving the problem is to build the right interaction between projects and departments. There is a competent approach to it, which I have come to over the last decade of working in IT.
')
What is the purpose of the company, if you are not Steve Jobs and “change the world” is not your main goal? Most will say that making money. This is written in any business book. It is this fact that is often overlooked when the division of powers and responsibilities between departments and projects.
Just the project is the driving force that creates a product / service and makes a company profit. A project is a conveyor that uses various resources to manufacture a product. Therefore, the distribution of powers and responsibilities should be directed, first of all, to support the project. Resources must be fully allocated to the project, and not be sprayed on the tasks in the departments. Why? Here are the arguments.
When a task is assigned to a department, it goes down to the backlog of tasks. The project manager must make a lot of effort to justify the head of the department, why his task is of higher priority.
It turns out that the project begins to depend on the personal prioritization of the head of the department. This leads to uncertainty with the timing of problem solving, because another project may set a task that they consider more important. This approach leads to the fact that the total time to solve a problem can significantly exceed the time actually spent on it. For a project manager, this is hell - coordinating tasks between departments and considering their dependencies. How can you make an exact project plan in such conditions?
For me, the most ridiculous situation is the allocation of a resource for a project for a certain percentage of time. For example, the project manager says that “only 70% of the resource is allocated to your project, while the other 30% go to another”. The rationale is that “not only your project has tasks”. Such an approach leads to the fact that instead of one “dissatisfied” project, we get two, since their tasks affect mutual deadlines.
Why should my project depend on another? Which is better: one project, made on time, or two projects, shifted in time? If there is a shortage of resources, do not try to catch time everywhere, but little by little. It is necessary to completely close the needs of one project and look for resources for another.
Making the budget and the project plan, the manager determines the necessary resources and the time for which they are needed. At the same time, one should not forget about external dependencies, the cost of purchasing equipment, software and services. But almost no one takes into account an important item of expenditure, which greatly affects the project.
Obviously, a project that has allocated resources located in the same room will be completed faster and at lower cost than a project in which tasks are transferred to the departments. Why is that? Alistair Coburn also described how the location of team members and their immersion in a project affects the cost of transferring a unit of information. If a resource is allocated to a project and has sufficient context, then to describe the task it needs to transfer a smaller amount of information than to a resource located within a department. The amount of information transmitted directly affects the duration of the project, and, consequently, the budget.
Try it yourself to calculate how much time you spend on the transfer of information. And as it will be better.
Judging by the startups in which everyone works in a single burst of creative enthusiasm, the dedication of team members directly affects the success of the project. There may be problems with such a drive if you are an employee of a department and today they give you a task from one project and tomorrow from another. Not having time to immerse yourself in a project, you become a machine for implementing features, and not a person moving it forward.
If the project manager wants the project participants to have the desire to live this work and drive, they need to be involved in the project for a long time. So they will feel the connection between their work and the success of the project. Their personal success will be equivalent to the success of the project, and vice versa.
For an Agile project, transferring tasks to departments kills the very essence of this methodology, since the performer is unknown in advance and it is impossible to create a team. There is one exception, this is when the whole team is in the department and at least within the department is allocated to the project.
To get the perfect project with maximum efficiency and high performance, you need to create a pipeline on which tasks flow seamlessly from “To Do” to “Done”. And for this project need to provide all the necessary resources. The traditional approach of transferring tasks to departments prevents the creation of a pipeline, and, consequently, efficiency and productivity.
The ideal department should have three main tasks:
- hire the best
- to ensure the continuous development of employees
- provide the best level of problem solving on the project
Some managers believe that conflicts arising in the matrix structure contribute to the search for the most optimal solutions, since the interests of both parties are considered. But at the same time, the conflicts generated by the matrix, are the reason for the failure of the timing of tasks and the fall in productivity and efficiency.
There are compelling reasons that do not allow departments to be abolished so that all resources can be in projects. First, not all specialists are needed for the entire life of the project, and you need to decide what to do with them when the tasks end. Secondly, the project manager may not be competent enough to not only hire the right specialists, but also subsequently develop their potential in the company. Thirdly, the manager may not be competent enough to assess the correctness of solving problems.
The key to solving the problem is to build the right interaction between projects and departments. There is a competent approach to it, which I have come to over the last decade of working in IT.
')
What is the purpose of the company, if you are not Steve Jobs and “change the world” is not your main goal? Most will say that making money. This is written in any business book. It is this fact that is often overlooked when the division of powers and responsibilities between departments and projects.
Just the project is the driving force that creates a product / service and makes a company profit. A project is a conveyor that uses various resources to manufacture a product. Therefore, the distribution of powers and responsibilities should be directed, first of all, to support the project. Resources must be fully allocated to the project, and not be sprayed on the tasks in the departments. Why? Here are the arguments.
The task passes through the department.
When a task is assigned to a department, it goes down to the backlog of tasks. The project manager must make a lot of effort to justify the head of the department, why his task is of higher priority.
It turns out that the project begins to depend on the personal prioritization of the head of the department. This leads to uncertainty with the timing of problem solving, because another project may set a task that they consider more important. This approach leads to the fact that the total time to solve a problem can significantly exceed the time actually spent on it. For a project manager, this is hell - coordinating tasks between departments and considering their dependencies. How can you make an exact project plan in such conditions?
Partial allocation of a working resource for the project
For me, the most ridiculous situation is the allocation of a resource for a project for a certain percentage of time. For example, the project manager says that “only 70% of the resource is allocated to your project, while the other 30% go to another”. The rationale is that “not only your project has tasks”. Such an approach leads to the fact that instead of one “dissatisfied” project, we get two, since their tasks affect mutual deadlines.
Why should my project depend on another? Which is better: one project, made on time, or two projects, shifted in time? If there is a shortage of resources, do not try to catch time everywhere, but little by little. It is necessary to completely close the needs of one project and look for resources for another.
Cost of information transfer
Making the budget and the project plan, the manager determines the necessary resources and the time for which they are needed. At the same time, one should not forget about external dependencies, the cost of purchasing equipment, software and services. But almost no one takes into account an important item of expenditure, which greatly affects the project.
Obviously, a project that has allocated resources located in the same room will be completed faster and at lower cost than a project in which tasks are transferred to the departments. Why is that? Alistair Coburn also described how the location of team members and their immersion in a project affects the cost of transferring a unit of information. If a resource is allocated to a project and has sufficient context, then to describe the task it needs to transfer a smaller amount of information than to a resource located within a department. The amount of information transmitted directly affects the duration of the project, and, consequently, the budget.
Try it yourself to calculate how much time you spend on the transfer of information. And as it will be better.
Passion for the project
Judging by the startups in which everyone works in a single burst of creative enthusiasm, the dedication of team members directly affects the success of the project. There may be problems with such a drive if you are an employee of a department and today they give you a task from one project and tomorrow from another. Not having time to immerse yourself in a project, you become a machine for implementing features, and not a person moving it forward.
If the project manager wants the project participants to have the desire to live this work and drive, they need to be involved in the project for a long time. So they will feel the connection between their work and the success of the project. Their personal success will be equivalent to the success of the project, and vice versa.
Agile
For an Agile project, transferring tasks to departments kills the very essence of this methodology, since the performer is unknown in advance and it is impossible to create a team. There is one exception, this is when the whole team is in the department and at least within the department is allocated to the project.
Ideal project
To get the perfect project with maximum efficiency and high performance, you need to create a pipeline on which tasks flow seamlessly from “To Do” to “Done”. And for this project need to provide all the necessary resources. The traditional approach of transferring tasks to departments prevents the creation of a pipeline, and, consequently, efficiency and productivity.
Perfect department
The ideal department should have three main tasks:
- hire the best
- to ensure the continuous development of employees
- provide the best level of problem solving on the project
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/147969/
All Articles