You are here: Fellowstream » Project Management »

Be Flexible with Processes

Be Flexible with Processes

If you’ve ever worked for a project manager (or heaven forbid, you are one like me), then you know we love processes.  We like to plan ahead, bring stability and keep things moving forward.  All these things require processes that let everyone on the team know what to do.

I love processes just as much as the next project manager.  I have my favorite processes too: daily team stand-up meetings, task-tracking, and of course, roadmaps and schedules.

A word of caution, though, to those who love processes: You must be willing to be flexible.

Processes, just like any other workplace staple, need to be reviewed.  If you keep hearing “Why do we do it this way?” and you can’t justify why, it’s time to rethink your processes.  And just like other fields (engineering, marketing), you’ve got to keep up with the times.  Too often team members hear “Well, that’s the way it’s always been done.”  This answer may have worked well 10 years ago or even 1 year ago, but project managers must be savvy to new techniques and be willing to try them, even if it might cause temporary disruptions.  I advocate team reviews of what worked and what didn’t after a project has completed.  That’s a good time to take a hard look at your processes and see what needs to be changed.

A lot of people I’ve worked with aren’t huge fans of processes at first.  “They just slow me down” is a common complaint.  However, you don’t see these same people talking when things are running smoothly with the process they’ve instilled. On the flip side, though, it makes a project manager’s job even more vital to instill only good processes in their team workflow.  If it doesn’t work for the team, they’ll resist changing to new, better processes in the future, and that can slow you down.

-Deborah Fike

Related Posts :

  • My sister's family is in town, partially to visit relatives and partially to celebrate her son's birthday.  Will has absolutely fallen i ...

  • I used to work for a software engineer with horrible estimation skills.  Our boss always wanted him to give the rosiest estimates possib ...

  • While outlining Fellowstream's "min spec" (i.e. the most barebones version of Fellowstream we were willing to create for launch), we ask ...

  • You've just started a new project. You have the expertise to finish your portion of the tasks. You've got reasonable deadlines, the ri ...

  • I've noticed in Fellowstream's Google Analytics data that a lot of people get to the site by reading some past articles I wrote on self- ...

Discussion

  1. Jake LaCaze says:

    Processes, like anything else, are great as long as they're effective and efficient. I've had bad experiences with morning meetings when I've had to sit and listen to two department heads go back and forth about something that didn't concern me. I've sat in 45-minute long meetings so that I could give a status update that took 5 seconds to deliver.

    Processes and routine can promote efficiency, or they can hinder efficiency. Managers have to be aware of whether their processes are helpful or hurtful.

    • Deborah says:

      Sounds like you've had experience similar to mine, Jake. I've found that usually processes were put into place for a good reason, but over time, they need to change. It's not re-evaluating processes that usually nips people in the bud.

  2. Cara says:

    Spot-on, Deborah. What's interesting to me is that with the advent of modern technology, the most efficient processes to get things done are changing constantly. Constantly! 150 years ago, I think it would have been far less necessary to be in a state of constant review regarding processes, as things changed far more slowly. A side effect of this is that if people aren't as technologically aware or connected, I have observed that sometimes they view those of us who are constantly observing and critiquing processes (in order to make them more automated, more efficient, more human-friendly, whatever) as unnecessarily critical. They think as long as something is getting done ("the way it's always been") that there is no need to constantly re-examine the process by which it's being accomplished. They truly don't recognize how modern technology has now made this a virtual requirement for just about anything that's getting done in most corporate and educational settings (and social settings, too, I might add). I had a grad-school professor who often asserted that "the medium is the message," and although I don't fully agree, I do partially agree. The *way* in which something is accomplished (the process, if you will) as opposed to the actual *product* has become far more highly elevated in importance since the advent of high-speed technology, I believe, if you look at the historical background of change, process, technology, product, etc.

    Very interesting food for thought, Deborah, as always. Thanks for the post.

    • Deborah Fike says:

      Technology does play a factor, but a lot of time, it isn't even technology that needs to be reviewed. It's policy. Why we have to do A, B, and C to finish our project when X works just as well, plus takes 1/3 of the time. In order for this to happen, managers have to be comfortable taking more risks. Risks means things might fail, but that's okay, as long as your failure rate is lower than your overall gains via success.

Leave a Reply