Someone once asked me which do you prefer : projects which are “top-heavy” or “bottom-heavy”? He was referring to the project management context. My knee jerk reaction was that nobody would want either. But thinking about it later allowed that the challenges that firms face plays significant role in how projects can be effectively organized.
Top-heavy systems have an excess of management resources. It potentially risks having a bigger hierarchy with a corresponding loss in efficient communication. Bottom-heavy systems have more task-specific professionals. It potentially risks underutilization of resources due to lack of tracking and loss of direction.
Some roles can be classified as part of “management” hierarchy and give the appearance of top-heavy projects. Roles such as Project Management Admin, Change Management, Bridge-to-business, Training roles can be classified as management lending the appearance that projects are top-heavy. There can be no one-size fits all guideline on whether the roles should require a specific specialist or should be consolidated into team lead/project management roles. Project size and complexity dictates whether such roles are required.
In my view, projects that are true-top heavy are characterized by low span of control and many levels of hierarchy, not withstanding specialist project roles mentioned above. In my experience, very few SAP projects in Australia are run this way. The projects that I have had the privilege of joining have dual hierarchies representing joint ownership between clients and the implementing partners. Most often, the inefficiencies arise out of role-conflict between parties owing to different parent company allegiances rather than the sheer number of personnel – whether specialists or management oriented.
So if the number of personnel types is not the primary question to ask for effective project organization, what is?
The top-end plays more than just an administrative role. They play a role in developing a position for long-term goals. In self-managing teams, the top-end administrative tasks are almost negligible. The bottom end, on the other hand, concentrates on the finishing the task at hand. So for example, if the project relates to long-term strategies impacting values on market positioning or internal culture change, then do not shy from a top-heavy structure. In contrast, fairly task oriented, specialist development can be done bottom-heavy.
The challenge that the firms faces plays a significant role in how projects can be effectively organized. The two ideas I am advocating here are : (1) position management levels for strategic leadership and ; (2) enable task specialists to effectively self-organize and adapt to changing market requirements.
Tuesday, March 31, 2009
Sunday, March 29, 2009
Break... F1
Away from the business app issues this week.
Formula 1 was on. I think F1 did a great thinking with the introduction of KERS and the capping of the team budgets. The introduction of KERS showed some surprising agility from F1 to respond “in spirit” to the global climate change issue. The capping of testing time and team budgets is a partial response to the global financial crisis. It also serves the F1 well to level the playing field slightly and make the F1 slightly more watchable. I agree with it. There’s an argument about F1 about being the best of the best. But there is a point of decreasing returns at which it takes a horrendous amount of capital and human energy to gain a marginal improvement. At which point, the best of the best argument gives way to responsible leadership.
KERS – Kinetic Energy Recovery system is a technology that allows the cars to store kinetic energy under braking and release it for acceleration. The teams had scrambled to get it developed. The top-6 at the finish line did not have KERS on which only goes to show the technical difficulties in developing the technology.
The rave of the race is the 1-2 finish of newcomer (Virgin!)Brawn-GP. Ross Brawn is the former Ferrarri technical director from Schumacher’s winning days. He bought the former Honda team when it bowed out of the league last year. Jenson Button and Rubens Barichello were staring at the end of their careers when Brawn GP picked them up and gave them the ride. Both drivers were ecstatic and did not disappoint.
‘Rock-star’ Virgin CEO Richard Branson was prominent at the event, having picked up the sponsorship only days before. Brawn-GP’s an awesome name, but I reckon Virgin Brawn would be a much bigger advertising coup. Virgin Brawn being a play on words that means “raw power”.
Local hero Mark Webber of Red Bull Racing had a frustrating meet. He crashed into Rubens on the first corner and was relegated to the back of the pack for the rest of the race. (Good on him for finishing though) . Teammate Sebastian Vettel wasted a chance. He was second late in the race when failing soft tyres resulted in a corner collision with Robert Kubica.
The McLarens cars were pitiful. Both cars were out of the top 10 in the qualifying. Mclaren star Hamilton did an amazing job to pick up third after having had to start at the bottom.
It will be an interesting season. There is a controversy about the (Virgin)Brawn-GP rear diffusers. Oz-GP allowed it, but expect it to be challenged in the FIA courts. With Ross Brawn’s clout however, it’ s bound to be carried through.
Formula 1 was on. I think F1 did a great thinking with the introduction of KERS and the capping of the team budgets. The introduction of KERS showed some surprising agility from F1 to respond “in spirit” to the global climate change issue. The capping of testing time and team budgets is a partial response to the global financial crisis. It also serves the F1 well to level the playing field slightly and make the F1 slightly more watchable. I agree with it. There’s an argument about F1 about being the best of the best. But there is a point of decreasing returns at which it takes a horrendous amount of capital and human energy to gain a marginal improvement. At which point, the best of the best argument gives way to responsible leadership.
KERS – Kinetic Energy Recovery system is a technology that allows the cars to store kinetic energy under braking and release it for acceleration. The teams had scrambled to get it developed. The top-6 at the finish line did not have KERS on which only goes to show the technical difficulties in developing the technology.
The rave of the race is the 1-2 finish of newcomer (Virgin!)Brawn-GP. Ross Brawn is the former Ferrarri technical director from Schumacher’s winning days. He bought the former Honda team when it bowed out of the league last year. Jenson Button and Rubens Barichello were staring at the end of their careers when Brawn GP picked them up and gave them the ride. Both drivers were ecstatic and did not disappoint.
‘Rock-star’ Virgin CEO Richard Branson was prominent at the event, having picked up the sponsorship only days before. Brawn-GP’s an awesome name, but I reckon Virgin Brawn would be a much bigger advertising coup. Virgin Brawn being a play on words that means “raw power”.
Local hero Mark Webber of Red Bull Racing had a frustrating meet. He crashed into Rubens on the first corner and was relegated to the back of the pack for the rest of the race. (Good on him for finishing though) . Teammate Sebastian Vettel wasted a chance. He was second late in the race when failing soft tyres resulted in a corner collision with Robert Kubica.
The McLarens cars were pitiful. Both cars were out of the top 10 in the qualifying. Mclaren star Hamilton did an amazing job to pick up third after having had to start at the bottom.
It will be an interesting season. There is a controversy about the (Virgin)Brawn-GP rear diffusers. Oz-GP allowed it, but expect it to be challenged in the FIA courts. With Ross Brawn’s clout however, it’ s bound to be carried through.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Insure against Knowledge loss by using Collaborative Tools
I was bemoaning the lack of collaborative tools in one of my clients. The recent impact of the economic crisis has downsized the company and the job cuts has gone to an extent where critical skills and knowledge has been lost.
In a recent exercise, an interface to a manufacturing subsystem has to be modified as a machine has to be allowed for the interface. It just so happens that the same machine type has been used in other sites and for a slightly different manner. No available documentation pointed to the business rules. With the help of business colleagues, it took me 2 days to understand the dilemma and the exercise to manage the change has not yet been completed to date.
In this particular case, there was sufficient skill left to piece together a good-enough picture. But there are other areas that are not so lucky.
I was thinking perhaps if the company had a library of wikis and blogs, the effort would not be so hard. Collaboration tools has been in the market for a while....Sharepoint comes to mind (See Sharepoint and Enterprise 2.0: The good, the bad, and the ugly by D.Hinchcliffe).
Australian firms value the nature of human capital as evidenced by emphasis on HR and Talent Management Systems. It is a far bigger challenge to change the culture of firms to take advantage of collaborative systems so that they capture the value in complex relationships and highly unstructured information.
In a recent exercise, an interface to a manufacturing subsystem has to be modified as a machine has to be allowed for the interface. It just so happens that the same machine type has been used in other sites and for a slightly different manner. No available documentation pointed to the business rules. With the help of business colleagues, it took me 2 days to understand the dilemma and the exercise to manage the change has not yet been completed to date.
In this particular case, there was sufficient skill left to piece together a good-enough picture. But there are other areas that are not so lucky.
I was thinking perhaps if the company had a library of wikis and blogs, the effort would not be so hard. Collaboration tools has been in the market for a while....Sharepoint comes to mind (See Sharepoint and Enterprise 2.0: The good, the bad, and the ugly by D.Hinchcliffe).
Australian firms value the nature of human capital as evidenced by emphasis on HR and Talent Management Systems. It is a far bigger challenge to change the culture of firms to take advantage of collaborative systems so that they capture the value in complex relationships and highly unstructured information.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Beautiful design
I am a regular visitor to TED.com. Recently, I ran into an old talk by Dan Norman. He spoke of designs that make people happy to use them or own them. He spoke of the problematic Jaguar that every owner loves. He spoke of the orange juicer he used as a home decoration piece.
The message goes on to explore why the functional capabilities are not the only basis for beautiful design.
I wondered how to extend the sentiment into ERP application design. Paradoxically, the one biggest strength of structured applications is that both processes and applications are centered on functional capability. The complex nature of business processes means that a generalization of commercial applications tend towards the complex. There is a tendency to trade-off intuitive usability.
In contrast, Dan Norman's example of the o's in the Goooooogle search engine is simple, almost unnoticeable to the user and yet delivers the search functionality it wishes to deliver. Beautiful intuitive design.
The message goes on to explore why the functional capabilities are not the only basis for beautiful design.
I wondered how to extend the sentiment into ERP application design. Paradoxically, the one biggest strength of structured applications is that both processes and applications are centered on functional capability. The complex nature of business processes means that a generalization of commercial applications tend towards the complex. There is a tendency to trade-off intuitive usability.
In contrast, Dan Norman's example of the o's in the Goooooogle search engine is simple, almost unnoticeable to the user and yet delivers the search functionality it wishes to deliver. Beautiful intuitive design.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Rethinking the environment
I am writing this in the middle of the global financial crisis. The media already compare it to the 1930's recession in the United States. I don’t blame them. With 650,000 jobs lost over the last month in the US, it could well be.
At any rate, it is a good time to think about how to approach the changing environments for those of us who are independent consultants. Our living is based on servicing companies with an appetite for innovation. In the current environment, capital is tight and we should be mindful that there is a high bar for the rationalization of projects.
The only respite is that the crisis will force companies to change. Perhaps this is even more so in a volatile environment, as companies adapt to resize their capabilities to match the shrinking market size. Alongside that change is a demand for the update of IT systems. And there will be demands for optimizations of IT systems to do more with less. And there will be demand to automate transactions to alleviate load pressure resulting from reduced workforces.
There will be a temporary demand for support roles instead of innovation/project roles. Independent consultants who hunger for the leading edge projects need to assess their choice for roles as the nature of availability will change.
At any rate, it is a good time to think about how to approach the changing environments for those of us who are independent consultants. Our living is based on servicing companies with an appetite for innovation. In the current environment, capital is tight and we should be mindful that there is a high bar for the rationalization of projects.
The only respite is that the crisis will force companies to change. Perhaps this is even more so in a volatile environment, as companies adapt to resize their capabilities to match the shrinking market size. Alongside that change is a demand for the update of IT systems. And there will be demands for optimizations of IT systems to do more with less. And there will be demand to automate transactions to alleviate load pressure resulting from reduced workforces.
There will be a temporary demand for support roles instead of innovation/project roles. Independent consultants who hunger for the leading edge projects need to assess their choice for roles as the nature of availability will change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)