You as you like, and I did
Some time ago I came to one conference , and talked about the experience of accelerating the work of programmers. Everyone liked it, many wanted to repeat this experience in their own. We started asking questions, both methodological and technical, on optimizing our own task management system.
Then I went to another conference, told me again. Again they came over with questions, they were eager to change something.
I answered - pf, what's the problem? You programmers, take and make! Add task measurement, proper priority system, competency accounting, etc.
')
But, oddly enough, almost no one rushed to change their system. Now, being engaged in several projects to speed up the teams, I continue to be surprised - damn, what's the problem? I wrote about everything, how and what to do. For example, in "1C, not pain . " But no, they sit, do nothing, they just say: we want to accelerate, we want to earn more money, we want to progress.
In general, I was upset and decided to make this system myself. It turned out the management of tasks Flowcon. I hasten to boast - maybe it will push you to change your system?
Task management in Flowcon is two in one: configuration for the 1C platform and cloud service. They can work as a pair or separately. The configuration can, and should be put on any other corporate information system used in the enterprise. Because the tasks in isolation from the data are much less effective.
The configuration grows like a snowball in a good way. The further, the more useful and functional it is. We ourselves use it, and constantly enrich with new ideas - both ours and our users.
The key difference in Flowcon task management is that it is a configuration implemented by the method. This is not another solution in which "you can customize your business processes."
You probably know the simple truth: the problem is in the process, not in its automation.
We have developed a method of managing tasks and projects that improves work efficiency for several years. And on internal automation, when working in factories, and on the development of mass products, and on implementation projects for external customers.
This technique became the basis of Flowcon, and the task management configuration simply automates its application.
Accordingly, I want to warn those who want to repeat my path: if it is fundamentally important for you to work as you used to, then such decisions may not be suitable for you. Maybe that's why no one modifies their system?
Something, of course, will work out; it may become more transparent, or simpler, or more interesting, but you will not get the main thing - increasing efficiency.
If your efficiency does not increase, or is not measured at all (the “yes everything is ok” rating is not a measurement), then the problem is in the process, in the task management technique. What then is the point of taking or creating another solution, adjusting it to your processes, and getting the same result?
So be prepared for change. Otherwise, you will be disappointed - the effectiveness will not increase.
Efficiency improvement is the main purpose of Flowcon, both as a technique and as an automated system.
A brief history of the Flowcon methodology is not that brief, because it lasted more than 10 years. But we tried to cut as much as we could - that’s the article .
The process of moving tasks is very simple, consists of three participants - the initiator, the responsible and the performer. In our practice, this is the most common case.
The initiator is the one who sets the task. This can be an internal customer, like a head bookkeeper, or a boss, or a person can set a task for himself. The person in charge is the coordinator who distributes the tasks. Maybe the head of the unit, or team leader, or just a coordinator - such posts also occur.
The performer is the one who directly implements what is written in the task. Artist chooses responsible.
Of course, all these roles can be performed by one person - I myself, basically, do this, because I use a bottle for myself. In order not to spend a lot of time on choosing oneself, we attached quick buttons.
In the Flowcon methodology, the life cycle of a task is extremely important. For each of them, at any point in time, it should be clear who should do what. Accept, complete, check the result, appoint the executor, etc.
The life cycle looks like this:
1. The initiator creates the task, indicates the responsible person, writes what he wants;
2. The responsible person has two options - to take the task into work, or send it for revision, if the statement is not suitable:
3. At any time, until the task has passed the entire cycle, the initiator can cancel it;
4. If the responsible person sends the task for revision, the initiator can either meet him, or cancel the task:
5. When the task is finally accepted into the work, the executor should be appointed - this is the responsibility of the responsible person;
6. The performer is not many options - he can only complete the task
7. When the performer has finished, the task flies to the initiator, who has two reasonable options:
8. If the result suits the initiator, then the life cycle of the task ends. If something is wrong, then the task is returned to the performer.
The history of status changes, that is, the life cycle of a task, is preserved:
History is needed in order to assess the loss of time during the approval stages, and to correlate it with the execution time in the relevant reports.
The current status of the task is displayed as in the form of a document:
So in the form of a list of all tasks:
Basically, a task can be in three ways:
1. You need someone's decision;
2. It must be done;
3. You need to forget about it.
About the implementation let's talk further, but for now - about making decisions. Acceptance to work, appointment of the performer, clarification of the statement, verification of the result, refinement are all states in which someone must make a decision.
The Flowcon methodology says that decisions should be made as quickly as possible, because as long as there is no solution, the task hangs at the appropriate part of the life cycle.
In order not to torment users, we divided the task list into three principal sections: to make a decision, to execute, and just a list of all tasks.
On the “In Work” tab, all tasks are collected for which the current user of the system must be decided:
The beauty is that you do not need to look for anything. I entered the task list form and immediately saw where your solution was needed. All scattered, and engaged in the execution. The normal state of the “Make a decision” list is empty.
But the bottle would not be a bottle if it did not control decision making. For each type of solution there is a time standard in the Flowcon settings:
It is clear that in real life you cannot describe all the users with the same standard - someone cannot really make a decision within an hour? Therefore, it is possible to set individual numbers in the user extension:
Accordingly, the response time is displayed in the “Make a decision” list so that a person does not experience:
The parameters of the task are the score, the urgency / importance and the deadline:
Assessment of the task in points is the most important thing. In Flowcon's technique, a whole section is devoted to this, so I will not repeat.
Set the task date, or not, decides the initiator. I do not have an unambiguous recommendation on whether a task needs a deadline or not. It is important to understand what this term means.
The only thing I would like to note is that there should be a certain period, otherwise the system of priorities (see below) will make the task never be solved. Therefore, we have two options in the settings:
A reasonable time limit is a certain default time, which is assigned to all tasks, if the initiator does not specify the exact date. The checkbox “Always set the deadline” is a clean interface, it cocks the checkbox “We need to complete the deadline” in each new task.
Urgency and importance are priorities on the Eisenhower matrix. Realizing that the opinion of the initiator and the responsible may vary, we are able to prioritize for each. It is not necessary to fill in these details.
The system of priorities is one of the most important parts of the bottle. Much has been written in the methodology about why it is important to remove the possibility of choosing a task for the performer as much as possible - efficiency will only benefit from this, and the person will not suffer.
We have long thought about how to arrange a system of priorities, and came to the simplest solution - the summation of individual assessments of each factor affecting the priority. Now there are five such factors (there will be more):
You simply give priority points to each factor, and the system looks at the task, and if a factor is present, adds them to the overall priority figure. For example, if you chose only one factor - the urgency of the initiator, and gave him 2 points, then the urgent task will have priority 2, and not urgent - 0.
A little more say about the status of the buffer. The buffer is the length of the time interval from the date the task is taken to work until the deadline set. For example, let it be 10 days.
At any moment we are at some point of this segment. One day passed - it means behind 10% of the segment. Three days passed - 30%, etc.
Accordingly, there is a reverse figure - how much time is left before the deadline. If one day has passed, then 90% remains. If three days have passed, then 70% remains, etc. This is the buffer status.
Well, then everything is simple. You set the number in the priority setting, which is called “Buffer Status Limit” - this is the amount added to the priority when the buffer status is zero, that is, the task has reached its due date. In the meantime, the time has not come, this figure multiplies the length of the time traversed.
For example, you set a score of 10. If 30% of the time has passed, then 3. will be added to the priority. If the task has just been completed, then 0 will be added. If there is no time left, then 10 will be added.
And if the deadline has already passed, then more than 10 will be added. For example, if 150% of the time has passed, then 15 will be added. Thus, no task will be lost, and will not be lost.
Priority settings are stored in the Queue Settings directory. Since this is a reference book, it is clear that there are plenty of settings. The main default one is specified in Flowcon settings. For a specific artist, you can override it in the user extension.
The main point that we put into the system of priorities is simplicity. And settings, and use. The system of priorities needs to be set up once, and for a long time to forget about it - it will work by itself.
If the priorities for the Eisenhower matrix are static, then the buffer status is dynamic. The system will not forget that time is ticking and will automatically move tasks in the queue in order to prevent a delay.
Each task is assigned and the number in the queue is automatically recalculated. The queue is tied to the current artist, i.e. everyone has their own.
The current queue number and priority can be seen as in the task form:
So in the list of tasks for execution:
The task list is, of course, sorted by number in the queue. The performer should simply take them in order, and do. And if it does not, then the bottle will show it.
The executor observes the sequence, or not, can be seen in the report “Schedule of deviations from the queue”:
When the contractor closes the task as performed, the system remembers which position in the queue it was at. Well, it draws on the chart the amount of deviations for the period. Deviation is the difference between the position in the queue at the time of closing, and the unit.
As you can see, we have big problems with Oquekosoft. And when they switched to the bottle, and saw, they grabbed their heads and began to correct - the schedule went down.
The second report is “Performance Graph”. This is the most important report, which will see the growth of performers' performance. The graph displays the number of points of completed tasks, in relation to the period.
For example, this is what happened with our efficiency:
It is clearly visible when we went on vacation - March and August, there was a failure in the amount of points. Although, in general, the trend is positive and very impressive.
A no less important report, required, first of all, to the coordinator every day is the “Control of Performers”.
This report is all in one window. No need to jerk anyone, asking who how it works, who how much did. I went in and looked.
What is important is that the execution of tasks is divided by periods in order to avoid the influence of “flashes” - for example, if the performer has completed one big task today and has not done anything since the beginning of the month. Here you can see at once a month, a week, and today. A red backlight will help to understand who the speaker is normal, and who - the difficulties. Great reason to talk.
The number of reports will grow, while - only those without which it is impossible to do.
The most important direction of development of the system is instantaneous assessment. Since we know the speed with which the performers work, how they observe the line, how they fit the deadlines, we can make predictions. For example, how much real time the task will take.
The instant grades functionality is not yet complete, as long as there is only one parameter - the current speed, i.e. how many points of tasks a person performs per day.
It can be seen in the form of artist selection:
Responsible, knowing the assessment of the problem, can immediately figure out who is better to entrust it, based on the current speed.
What is a no-debate task management system? We also have - comments.
Comments are hierarchical, so you can see who is responding to whom. Records of comments are kept, so the bold list of tasks contains those where there is something to read:
The technique of the vial says that people should cooperate. It often happens that one person helps another to solve a problem. It is important for us that the contribution of each was taken into account, so the task can clarify the list of performers and determine for each the labor participation rate (KTU):
Points for the task will be divided between the performers, in the proportion of KTU. So, sort of, honest.
By the way, while writing the article, my entire task list for making a decision turned red:
So far, it seems, everything.
Then I went to another conference, told me again. Again they came over with questions, they were eager to change something.
I answered - pf, what's the problem? You programmers, take and make! Add task measurement, proper priority system, competency accounting, etc.
')
But, oddly enough, almost no one rushed to change their system. Now, being engaged in several projects to speed up the teams, I continue to be surprised - damn, what's the problem? I wrote about everything, how and what to do. For example, in "1C, not pain . " But no, they sit, do nothing, they just say: we want to accelerate, we want to earn more money, we want to progress.
In general, I was upset and decided to make this system myself. It turned out the management of tasks Flowcon. I hasten to boast - maybe it will push you to change your system?
Task management in Flowcon is two in one: configuration for the 1C platform and cloud service. They can work as a pair or separately. The configuration can, and should be put on any other corporate information system used in the enterprise. Because the tasks in isolation from the data are much less effective.
The configuration grows like a snowball in a good way. The further, the more useful and functional it is. We ourselves use it, and constantly enrich with new ideas - both ours and our users.
Technique
The key difference in Flowcon task management is that it is a configuration implemented by the method. This is not another solution in which "you can customize your business processes."
You probably know the simple truth: the problem is in the process, not in its automation.
We have developed a method of managing tasks and projects that improves work efficiency for several years. And on internal automation, when working in factories, and on the development of mass products, and on implementation projects for external customers.
This technique became the basis of Flowcon, and the task management configuration simply automates its application.
Accordingly, I want to warn those who want to repeat my path: if it is fundamentally important for you to work as you used to, then such decisions may not be suitable for you. Maybe that's why no one modifies their system?
Something, of course, will work out; it may become more transparent, or simpler, or more interesting, but you will not get the main thing - increasing efficiency.
If your efficiency does not increase, or is not measured at all (the “yes everything is ok” rating is not a measurement), then the problem is in the process, in the task management technique. What then is the point of taking or creating another solution, adjusting it to your processes, and getting the same result?
So be prepared for change. Otherwise, you will be disappointed - the effectiveness will not increase.
Efficiency improvement is the main purpose of Flowcon, both as a technique and as an automated system.
Brief History of Flowcon Technique
A brief history of the Flowcon methodology is not that brief, because it lasted more than 10 years. But we tried to cut as much as we could - that’s the article .
Process
The process of moving tasks is very simple, consists of three participants - the initiator, the responsible and the performer. In our practice, this is the most common case.
The initiator is the one who sets the task. This can be an internal customer, like a head bookkeeper, or a boss, or a person can set a task for himself. The person in charge is the coordinator who distributes the tasks. Maybe the head of the unit, or team leader, or just a coordinator - such posts also occur.
The performer is the one who directly implements what is written in the task. Artist chooses responsible.
Of course, all these roles can be performed by one person - I myself, basically, do this, because I use a bottle for myself. In order not to spend a lot of time on choosing oneself, we attached quick buttons.
Task life cycle
In the Flowcon methodology, the life cycle of a task is extremely important. For each of them, at any point in time, it should be clear who should do what. Accept, complete, check the result, appoint the executor, etc.
The life cycle looks like this:
1. The initiator creates the task, indicates the responsible person, writes what he wants;
2. The responsible person has two options - to take the task into work, or send it for revision, if the statement is not suitable:
3. At any time, until the task has passed the entire cycle, the initiator can cancel it;
4. If the responsible person sends the task for revision, the initiator can either meet him, or cancel the task:
5. When the task is finally accepted into the work, the executor should be appointed - this is the responsibility of the responsible person;
6. The performer is not many options - he can only complete the task
7. When the performer has finished, the task flies to the initiator, who has two reasonable options:
8. If the result suits the initiator, then the life cycle of the task ends. If something is wrong, then the task is returned to the performer.
The history of status changes, that is, the life cycle of a task, is preserved:
History is needed in order to assess the loss of time during the approval stages, and to correlate it with the execution time in the relevant reports.
The current status of the task is displayed as in the form of a document:
So in the form of a list of all tasks:
Regular management
Basically, a task can be in three ways:
1. You need someone's decision;
2. It must be done;
3. You need to forget about it.
About the implementation let's talk further, but for now - about making decisions. Acceptance to work, appointment of the performer, clarification of the statement, verification of the result, refinement are all states in which someone must make a decision.
The Flowcon methodology says that decisions should be made as quickly as possible, because as long as there is no solution, the task hangs at the appropriate part of the life cycle.
In order not to torment users, we divided the task list into three principal sections: to make a decision, to execute, and just a list of all tasks.
On the “In Work” tab, all tasks are collected for which the current user of the system must be decided:
The beauty is that you do not need to look for anything. I entered the task list form and immediately saw where your solution was needed. All scattered, and engaged in the execution. The normal state of the “Make a decision” list is empty.
But the bottle would not be a bottle if it did not control decision making. For each type of solution there is a time standard in the Flowcon settings:
It is clear that in real life you cannot describe all the users with the same standard - someone cannot really make a decision within an hour? Therefore, it is possible to set individual numbers in the user extension:
Accordingly, the response time is displayed in the “Make a decision” list so that a person does not experience:
Task parameters
The parameters of the task are the score, the urgency / importance and the deadline:
Assessment of the task in points is the most important thing. In Flowcon's technique, a whole section is devoted to this, so I will not repeat.
Set the task date, or not, decides the initiator. I do not have an unambiguous recommendation on whether a task needs a deadline or not. It is important to understand what this term means.
The only thing I would like to note is that there should be a certain period, otherwise the system of priorities (see below) will make the task never be solved. Therefore, we have two options in the settings:
A reasonable time limit is a certain default time, which is assigned to all tasks, if the initiator does not specify the exact date. The checkbox “Always set the deadline” is a clean interface, it cocks the checkbox “We need to complete the deadline” in each new task.
Urgency and importance are priorities on the Eisenhower matrix. Realizing that the opinion of the initiator and the responsible may vary, we are able to prioritize for each. It is not necessary to fill in these details.
Priority system
The system of priorities is one of the most important parts of the bottle. Much has been written in the methodology about why it is important to remove the possibility of choosing a task for the performer as much as possible - efficiency will only benefit from this, and the person will not suffer.
We have long thought about how to arrange a system of priorities, and came to the simplest solution - the summation of individual assessments of each factor affecting the priority. Now there are five such factors (there will be more):
You simply give priority points to each factor, and the system looks at the task, and if a factor is present, adds them to the overall priority figure. For example, if you chose only one factor - the urgency of the initiator, and gave him 2 points, then the urgent task will have priority 2, and not urgent - 0.
A little more say about the status of the buffer. The buffer is the length of the time interval from the date the task is taken to work until the deadline set. For example, let it be 10 days.
At any moment we are at some point of this segment. One day passed - it means behind 10% of the segment. Three days passed - 30%, etc.
Accordingly, there is a reverse figure - how much time is left before the deadline. If one day has passed, then 90% remains. If three days have passed, then 70% remains, etc. This is the buffer status.
Well, then everything is simple. You set the number in the priority setting, which is called “Buffer Status Limit” - this is the amount added to the priority when the buffer status is zero, that is, the task has reached its due date. In the meantime, the time has not come, this figure multiplies the length of the time traversed.
For example, you set a score of 10. If 30% of the time has passed, then 3. will be added to the priority. If the task has just been completed, then 0 will be added. If there is no time left, then 10 will be added.
And if the deadline has already passed, then more than 10 will be added. For example, if 150% of the time has passed, then 15 will be added. Thus, no task will be lost, and will not be lost.
Priority settings are stored in the Queue Settings directory. Since this is a reference book, it is clear that there are plenty of settings. The main default one is specified in Flowcon settings. For a specific artist, you can override it in the user extension.
The main point that we put into the system of priorities is simplicity. And settings, and use. The system of priorities needs to be set up once, and for a long time to forget about it - it will work by itself.
If the priorities for the Eisenhower matrix are static, then the buffer status is dynamic. The system will not forget that time is ticking and will automatically move tasks in the queue in order to prevent a delay.
Each task is assigned and the number in the queue is automatically recalculated. The queue is tied to the current artist, i.e. everyone has their own.
The current queue number and priority can be seen as in the task form:
So in the list of tasks for execution:
The task list is, of course, sorted by number in the queue. The performer should simply take them in order, and do. And if it does not, then the bottle will show it.
Reports
The executor observes the sequence, or not, can be seen in the report “Schedule of deviations from the queue”:
When the contractor closes the task as performed, the system remembers which position in the queue it was at. Well, it draws on the chart the amount of deviations for the period. Deviation is the difference between the position in the queue at the time of closing, and the unit.
As you can see, we have big problems with Oquekosoft. And when they switched to the bottle, and saw, they grabbed their heads and began to correct - the schedule went down.
The second report is “Performance Graph”. This is the most important report, which will see the growth of performers' performance. The graph displays the number of points of completed tasks, in relation to the period.
For example, this is what happened with our efficiency:
It is clearly visible when we went on vacation - March and August, there was a failure in the amount of points. Although, in general, the trend is positive and very impressive.
A no less important report, required, first of all, to the coordinator every day is the “Control of Performers”.
This report is all in one window. No need to jerk anyone, asking who how it works, who how much did. I went in and looked.
What is important is that the execution of tasks is divided by periods in order to avoid the influence of “flashes” - for example, if the performer has completed one big task today and has not done anything since the beginning of the month. Here you can see at once a month, a week, and today. A red backlight will help to understand who the speaker is normal, and who - the difficulties. Great reason to talk.
The number of reports will grow, while - only those without which it is impossible to do.
Instant grades
The most important direction of development of the system is instantaneous assessment. Since we know the speed with which the performers work, how they observe the line, how they fit the deadlines, we can make predictions. For example, how much real time the task will take.
The instant grades functionality is not yet complete, as long as there is only one parameter - the current speed, i.e. how many points of tasks a person performs per day.
It can be seen in the form of artist selection:
Responsible, knowing the assessment of the problem, can immediately figure out who is better to entrust it, based on the current speed.
Comments
What is a no-debate task management system? We also have - comments.
Comments are hierarchical, so you can see who is responding to whom. Records of comments are kept, so the bold list of tasks contains those where there is something to read:
Cooperation
The technique of the vial says that people should cooperate. It often happens that one person helps another to solve a problem. It is important for us that the contribution of each was taken into account, so the task can clarify the list of performers and determine for each the labor participation rate (KTU):
Points for the task will be divided between the performers, in the proportion of KTU. So, sort of, honest.
By the way, while writing the article, my entire task list for making a decision turned red:
So far, it seems, everything.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/441878/
All Articles