When you begin work on a new project it is usually an exciting time when anything seems possible. Everyone is brimming with new ideas and a strong desire to do everything right. The initial optimistic view is that this time we’ll develop the perfect product following the perfect plan using the perfect team. It would be truly wonderful if that would be the case, but typically life intervenes to throw you some curves (see The Best Laid Plans … and Then Life Happens!). Aiming for perfection may be a noble objective, but achieving perfection is another thing entirely There is a quote from Voltaire from 1764 that literally translated is, “The best is the enemy of the good.”, but this is more commonly cited as, “The perfect is the enemy of the good.” What this means is that pursuing the “best” or the “perfect” solution may end up doing less actual good than accepting a solution that, while not perfect, is effective. As you’re undoubtedly aware by now, my blog posts, newsletters, and my consulting practice are all about effective solutions. George Patton may have said it a bit better for more modern times: “A good plan implemented today is better than a perfect plan implemented tomorrow.” The reality in virtually every case is that perfection is never realized. People often use the promise of perfection (or the expectation of perfection) as a rationale for doing nothing, rejecting actions that would achieve beneficial but not perfect results.
Here’s a fairly simplistic example from my distant past where a “good” solution enabled a design to move forward quickly, where a “perfect” solution would have taken significantly longer with no real impact on the outcome. Way back when, in the days before microprocessors (I’m clearly showing my age J), I was tasked with implementing an iterative algorithm using gate-level logic that theoretically required a number to be divided by 18. Well, dividing by 18 in those days was difficult, to say the least. However, dividing by 16 was trivial, consisting of shifting the binary number 4 positions to the right. Since the algorithm was iterative, part of a tracking loop, it homed in on the same result whether dividing by 18 or 16. So a “good” approach took almost no time at virtually no additional cost, where a “perfect” approach would have taken far longer, at significantly higher cost, and would have yielded the exact same result.
A good way to think about “good” versus “perfect” can be found in the 80-20 rule that applies broadly to most things in life; that is that 80% of the benefit typically comes from 20% of the work. [In my specific example above it was more like 99-1; that is 99% of the benefit came from 1% of the work.] The 80% of the benefit is the “good” solution. The last 20% of the benefit, achieving the “perfect” solution, most often requires four or considerably more times the work. People who believe that perfection (100% benefit) is only slightly more expensive/difficult than good (80% benefit) are deluding themselves; it simply isn’t true! Perfection is a mirage. You can’t reach it, and the more you try to get to it, the more time you waste. More often than not, the time and cost required to achieve perfection results in a product not being released or a service not being performed at all. In most situations it is far better to know when good enough is enough and not to worry about making the perfect choice. It is better to get something done imperfectly than to get nothing done perfectly!
You’re a manager and you’ve asked a member of your team to do a job. You’ve told him what the job involves, and you’ve given him the timeframe it needs to be done in. He agrees to do the job, says he understands what the job entails, and promises to deliver it in the required timeframe. You walk away confident that this job is in good hands, and will be done well and on time. You feel comfortable that you can move on to other critical people and items you are responsible for within and outside of your team.
You hear nothing from this person, and assume all is going well (Your first mistake! Never assume!). You periodically check in with the owner of this job, and he tells you that while the job is going well, he is seeing problems in one area, but that you don’t need to worry about it; everything is under control (another warning sign!). Then you hear from others about some other problems this person has mentioned to them that make you question what you heard directly from him. So you go back to him and check again. Now he starts to tell you about more problems and gives excuses about why it’s not his fault, or about how he’s not getting what he needs from someone else, or myriad other excuses. The excuses start to grow, but you hear about them only when you approach this person (not the other way around).
Then he misses a critical milestone, and when you ask why, he gives you excuses and more excuses. Some sound reasonable; others do not. When you dig deeper, you learn that he has been having problems all along and seems to be in way over his head. When you confront him, the number of excuses rapidly cascade even more, with blame placed on everything and everyone but himself. He admits he’s in deep trouble, but that it isn’t his fault! (Waa!) So much for promises, and say goodbye to delivery! [See Promises and Delivery] If you were aware of the problems from the outset, corrective action would have been possible (e.g. involving others with more direct experience). However, since the problems were hidden from your view (were they really?), the situation has now reached a critical point. His actions are disruptive to your organization, likely to other organizations, to the point where the overall project may now be in jeopardy!
What can you do to prevent such situations?
“If people like you, they'll listen to you, but if they trust you, they'll do business with you.” ~ Zig Ziglar
What’s the difference between a bad and a good organization? How about the difference between a good and a great organization? How about the differences between bad, good, and great leaders? Clearly there are many elements that differentiate organizations, including their leaders, their people, the work they’re doing, the work environment, and much more. Likewise, with leaders there are elements such as knowledge, capabilities, abilities to understand and explain, abilities to work well with people, and much more. However, I postulate that one of the biggest differentiators between bad, good, and great organizations and likewise with leaders is the level of trust that exists in those organizations and with those leaders. For organizations and leaders to operate effectively there must be trust.
"Trust is the highest form of human motivation. It brings out the very best in people. But it takes time and patience, and it doesn't preclude the necessity to train and develop peple so that their competency can rise to the level of that trust." ~ Stephen Covey: The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People
What has been your experience when you work with people who you truly trust? It has been my experience that in such situations you really look forward to going to work and to working with people you know and trust. You believe that as a team you can conquer the world.
Who do you respect more? Someone who promises and delivers, or someone who promises and fails to deliver? Obviously, someone who promises and delivers. How about between someone who under-promises and over-delivers versus someone who over-promises and under-delivers? Your immediate reaction would likely favor someone who under-promises and over-delivers, but it really isn’t so clear. It depends on how much is under-promised versus how much is over-delivered, or in the other option, on how much is over-promised versus how much is under-delivered. In both of the latter two cases, it also depends on the stream of excuses you can expect to receive, and on how many you will tolerate. The excuses can absolutely drive you to distraction! We’ll go into all of these scenarios.
Let’s start with the person who simply promises and delivers, consistently and repeatedly. What does this mean? This is someone who says what he means (his promises), means what he says (his integrity), and does what he says he’ll do (his delivery). [See Say What You Mean, Mean What You Say, and Do What You Say You’ll Do!] This is typically a person who doesn’t even think about the possibility of over- or under-promising; he just promises what he realistically and capably can do, and does it. This is a person who you can trust! [See Trust Me, I’m Not Like the Others!] When you have someone like this in your organization, you have a real gem, and this is a gem you should treasure. This is a gem who others should emulate and admire. No muss, no fuss, no excuses. He just does the job at the high level of ability he knows he has, and consistently delivers on his promises! Build your organization around this person and encourage your other people to follow his example.
You and everyone in the company are called to a company meeting and you head out with reservations, since you’ve attended such meetings in the past and have come away disappointed, with perfunctory messages, carefully manipulated company results, berating words for people or groups who have been unable to deliver on unrealistic expectations (see Unrealistic Expectations), and obligatory congratulations for a few people or groups. But this meeting sounds different. The big boss conveys a truly inspiring message and sounds like he really gets it. He lays out a vision for transforming the company in new and exciting ways (see Poor Company Vision Clouds Everyone’s View). He points to a future that holds great promise and potential. He discusses a plan of action that can make a real difference and a call to action to make it happen. He points to changes that will take place starting immediately, and envisions a bright and hopeful future that will bring excitement and success to the company and its people. Everyone is charged up and anxious to get started and leaves the meeting with a new spring in their steps. Then … very little happens. The promised changes are always about to begin, but never really do. Those changes that do begin go nowhere with little real support. The hope in everyone’s minds diminishes with each passing day. You have just been subjected, once again, to style over substance, and its result can be devastating. In fact it can be considerably worse than if the promising message had never been given. People’s expectations get built up, only to be torn down. They watch the bubble grow, only to see it burst; the bigger the bubble, the bigger the mess when it inevitably bursts.
Unfortunately, we see style over substance everywhere, and the consequence is that people are becoming more jaded and cynical. We see it in politics, where promises to “give” people this, that, and the other thing fly left and right from all parties, with few, if any, of the promises backed up by anything real or meaningful; but that doesn’t diminish the non-stop pandering. We see it in companies and even in work, community, and social groups. In smaller group settings it is generally easier to identify who is delivering style over substance and who is really delivering substance, and to do something about those who don’t deliver.
You’re a project manager tasked with putting together the schedule for a new and critical project. You are told by senior management that this is an extremely critical project, and that it is essential to the company’s future success that it is delivered as quickly as possible and that whatever delivery date you come up with absolutely must be met. You are told that Sales is basing their forecasts on the availability dates you provide, and that Finance is basing their revenue and net income projections based on your schedule. The whole company is depending on you delivering on your commitments without fail.
You know you want the schedule to be as aggressive as possible to get products to market as soon as possible, but recognize that it must also be realistic and achievable, and that it must be met. You meet with all of the appropriate people, define all of the necessary tasks and their anticipated durations and dependencies, and incorporate the critical interactions among and between organizations (including organizations within and outside of your own company). You do your best to push back on people to make sure what they tell you is truly achievable and can be counted on. You apply what you feel to be an appropriate level of contingency on critical path tasks. Still, you have some level of discomfort that you’re missing something in the schedule you’ve put together.
Before you finish and present the final schedule as complete, do at least one more check (really considerably more than one). Make sure, to the best of your ability, that no part of the schedule is based on “Sunny Day Scenarios”, where the people giving you task duration and dependency estimates base their estimates on everything going just right, or on other people providing what they need just in time. “Sunny Day Scenarios” can and will kill a schedule, and over time you will watch your carefully put together schedule fall apart, and your credibility in the organization with it. [See also Failing to Plan Means You Are Planning to Fail!, What Gets Measured Gets Done!, and Plan Based On What You Do Know, and On What You Don’t!]
What are some of the “Sunny Say Scenario” pitfalls you need to look out for? They can be categorized as Schedule, People, and Management related.
You’re just getting started on the development of an exciting new product or program. The product/program definition isn’t really flushed out yet and the real magnitude of it is not understood, but everyone, including you, is energized about the prospects of what this new product/program can bring to the company. They have visions of money growing on trees! The management team says they really have to have this by a certain date in order to have the impact they would like. They ask you, as a project/program manager if this can be achieved. Optimist that you are, not knowing the product details, and making some assumptions, you indicate that you think it may be possible (see Take the Time to Think!). Congratulations! You have just set unrealistic expectations that you can be quite certain will not be met.
No one intends to set unrealistic expectations, but it happens all the time. Everyone wants new systems, products, or programs delivered yesterday, with outstanding quality, even if they don’t have a clue about the amount of work involved in delivering a quality product/program that is aligned with critical business objectives. People are pressured to estimate what it will take to develop something that is not fully (or even mostly) defined. When that estimate is viewed as too long (which is almost always the case), they are asked to pull time out of the schedule (see The Schedule Estimate Extortion Game). Then, as the product/program definition starts to come together, additional features and functions are identified and are determined to be mandatory. It is often realized that the needed resources needed are not currently available. However, the end date (that was very broadly estimated in the first place, and then shortened by pressure applied early and continuously) is not allowed to be modified, unless it can be pulled in. Assumptions and caveats are forgotten. [What happens when you 'ass/u/me'? You make an 'ass' of 'u' and 'me'!]. When anyone then tries to adjust the date, they will then hear, “I didn’t set the date, you did!”, or "Don't confuse me with the facts!" (see Don't Confuse Me With the Facts!). Many other departments become dependent on that date, and when you don’t or can’t deliver, it is entirely your fault. Then it turns into 'floggings' (see Floggings Will Continue Until Morale Improves!).
How can unrealistic expectations be avoided or at least reduced?
You’ve just gotten involved in a new and important project, and you’re grateful to be involved, as it promises, if successful, to be a major driver of new business for the company, and can provide positive visibility for you. You go into the initial project meetings with a positive outlook and a ‘can do’ attitude. However, when the meeting gets started you notice there appears to be discontent between some of the representatives of the various organizations involved. Even more disconcerting, the discussions quickly veer off a path of respectful discourse to displays of snarkiness, animosity and even outright disrespect. This makes no sense to you, as it is clearly counterproductive and unnecessary. You expect common courtesy to be the norm, and can’t understand what you’re seeing or why. Unfortunately, bad behavior and a lack of common courtesy is becoming all too common in the workplace and out of it.
Where has common courtesy gone? It used to be that people, within and outside of the workplace, treated each other with courtesy regardless of the circumstances, even during very trying times. But manners, courtesy and civility seem to have taken a turn for the worse. Why, and what can be done about it?
There are many potential causes for the decline in common courtesy and civility.
You’re a manager who has just been given control of an important new project, and you want to do absolutely everything you can to make it a sterling success with features and functions that will guarantee strong market success (generating great revenues), outstanding quality, on (or ahead of) time delivery, and within budget. You’ve been given some range of freedom in building your new team; some to be chosen from among existing employees, and the authority to hire some new employees specifically for your project. Most of the available existing employees have been around for a while, and have a mix of capabilities and motivations. You know most of these folks, to varying degrees, and can learn more about them from peers and others. Your new hire budget (as with your overall budget) is, of course, fixed, but you have a choice of how you want to spend that money. You can bring in a good number of inexperienced (and less expensive) people, or fewer (and more expensive) experienced people, or a mix of both. What should guide you in building your new team, and how should you go about it? In the words of my good friend Lee Beaumont**, “Hire adults, expect results!”
First let me clarify what I mean by experience and by adult.
Experience in this instance should be viewed as directly applicable and applied knowledge about one or more aspects of the project that are essential to its success. Experience in this definition has little to do with age. There are people straight out of school who may have specialized experience that may be absolutely critical to success, and there may be people who have been around for a long time, but whose experiences, while significant and valuable elsewhere, may not be at all applicable in this project. If you want to succeed, you will need experts with the right kinds of experience.
Being an adult has far more to do with behavior than with chronological age. It has to do with levels of personal responsibility, integrity, and trust. Adults are people who can be trusted to honor their commitments and deliver honest and reliable results in the times they said they would (see Say What You Mean, Mean What You Say, and Do What You Say You’ll Do!). With adults, you don’t spend your time babysitting and resolving stupid conflicts, picking up dropped balls, listening to “can’t do” excuses and other childish behavior. With adults, you get a level of initiative, creativity, and leadership that can emerge and transform the team and project to a new level; breakthrough products can result. With adults, new people in the organization have excellent role models to learn from, and a healthy mentorship relationship can develop that brings benefits to the mentor, apprentice, team, and project (see Learn from Good Role Models; Learn More from Bad!). With adults, you have people you trust to talk to and collaborate with in problem solving. With adults, problems can be foreseen, anticipated, and avoided much earlier and at much less cost. With adults, people rise to the occasion, and delivering on commitments becomes expected and fun. In my career I have known people straight out of school who exhibited outstanding adult behavior, and well-seasoned, even experienced people who still behave like children. Some children (of any age) can be trained, and some cannot! Being an adult does not mean you shouldn’t have fun in your work. Adults can still have fun at work, but not at the expense of others or the project. In fact, having fun should really be a prerequisite, since it is one of the key elements that motivate responsible adults to look forward to going to work every day.
You recently left a prior position of your own accord, because you didn’t find it a fit, or the work environment was unacceptable, or for whatever reason (see Know When to Fold ‘Em, and When It’s Time to ‘Walk Away’, Don’t Turn Back!). Prior to leaving, you looked around for a good opportunity that would be a good match to your background and interests, and that would provide good opportunities for growth. You’ve just accepted a position in what you believe to be a promising company. You’ve been told what your job will be by your hiring manager, by the folks you interviewed with, and by Human Resources. You believe that job description to be a perfect match to your experience and interests, and you’re really looking forward to getting started. But when you start, your first assignment is actually fairly far removed from what you were told. But you do it well anyway. Then your second job builds upon your first, and is also far removed from what you had been told. As you move forward in your new job you find that, while there may be a passing resemblance to what you were told you would be doing, the reality is actually pretty far removed from that job description. What’s going on, and what does this mean for you going forward?
The mismatch of actual job assignment to what you were told it was going to be is typically not due to any ill intent on the part of anybody involved, but more due to the concept of ‘sh!t happens’, and what has happened, totally outside of your control, requires you to get deeply involved in these job assignments somewhat outside of what you expected (see The Best Laid Plans … and Then Life Happens!). You need to decide whether you want to adapt, or find something elsewhere that is more in keeping with what you expected (see Take the Time to Think!).
A reality of life, at least for knowledge workers at almost every level of a company, is that the job you expect to be doing often bears fairly little resemblance to the job you will actually be doing. This can be true for a wide variety of reasons.
