Governance - WHAT A DRAG!

 

     MVG - Minimum Viable Governance     

         FD=½CPAV2    

 FACT:   Drag increases proportionately with the square of speed.      

 

The same principle can be applied to drag in projects,  the more urgently something is needed the greater the impact of those items that cause drag.  To be clear any activity that is not directly associated with producing the goods is a drag.  I.e. if you didn’t do them, in theory, at least, the project would still deliver.

 

By far the biggest drag on a project is GOVERNANCE. i.e., record keeping, planning, monitoring, report writing, progress updating, change management, risk management and  ATTENDING MEETINGS.  In other-words nearly everything the project management team does and would have the wider project team do (that is not actually expending effort producing the goods).

 

ANALOGY:       Germ Theory1 Louis Pasteur:

 

“Medicine had been „successfully‟ practised without the knowledge of germs.  In a pre-germ theory paradigm, some patients got better, some got worse and some stayed the same; in each case, some rationale could be used to explain the outcome..”

 

Louis Pasteur hypothised that germs were a significant cause of post operative deaths.  Whilst the patient would almost certainly die without surgery, without good hygiene, they would probably not get better (and probably die).  Hertzberg later applied the same principles to his Two Factor Theory of Emotion2. AKA Motivation/Hygiene Theory

 

Governance, in project management terms is, in Hertzbergian terms a hygiene factor in that it contributes little to the outcome, but has a significant impact on the chances of failure.

 

FACT:   Without governance projects are highly likely to fail (unproven)

 

So, there is a dichotomy - GOVERNANCE causes DRAG, slowing and adding risk to the project, but the project needs GOVERNANCE to assure SUCCESS!

 

SOLUTION:        Minimum Viable Governance or MVG

 

The objective of a MVG model is to apply no more governance than required for the project to achieve its goals with reasonable certainty. (i.e. sufficiently assure against failure)

 

Defining the level, breadth and depth of governance required to meet this objective requires a good understanding of a number of, often confounding variables and factors including:

 

      • Duration of the project
      • Scale and complexity of the project
      • Number of stakeholders
      • Demographic and geographic spread of stakeholders
      • Size of project teams
      • Make of project teams
      • Politics within the project
      • Politics surrounding the project
      • Public or private organisations
      • Governed or non-governed organisations
      • Type of products to be delivered
      • Certainty of outcomes
      • Clarity of objectives or vision
      • Likelihood of change throughout the project lifecycle

One should also look at what the project governance is intended to achieve.  This can range from simple delivery assurance, through risk mitigation/reduction, command & control, compliance to pure totalitarianism.  The latter serving only to assuage the sponsors’ paranoia.


It is incumbent on responsible project and programme management professionals to apply no more governance than is absolutely necessary to the projects under their leadership.  To do otherwise, risks governance for the sake of governance only which is likely to alienate project managemet from delivery teams and stakeholders alike, adding more drag and further reducing the likelihood of success.

 

 

However, successfully achieving MVG, is not an easy task and takes both effort and experience.  In the long term, however, the investment almost always pays off.

 

 

TIPS & TRICKS      Tailoring the governance to fit.

 

1.   PURPOSE:  Look at the purpose of each element of project governance and ask “why are we doing this?”


If there is no clear purpose or the answer is “because the text-book [APM, PMI, PRINCE2 etc etc] says we should” – don’t do it!


 

2.   OUTCOME: If the purpose is understood, then look at and agree the outcome required – from this the [minimum] breadth and depth can be easily understood and agreed

 

3.   CERTAINTY & VOLATILITY:  The more certain the outcome, how well the requirements are understood and how likely they are to change the less monitoring, management and control is needed.  The reverse is true, in highly volatile situations where the external landscape may be changing or in an agile “build fast/fail fast” environment – it’s essential that changes are communicated and recorded in detail.

 

4.   POLITICS:  Always a touchy subject, but the more politically questionable the environment (i.e. motives and morals of stakeholders) the greater the need to protect the entire project team from “poor recollection” or “altered facts”.

 

 

If you would like to know more click here https://www.cjshelton.co.uk/contact-chris

 

 

 

 FINAL NOTE:

 

AGILE:        It should be noted that whilst the Agile Manifesto espouses:

 

      • Individuals and interactions over processes and tools
      • Working software over comprehensive documentation
      • Customer collaboration over contract negotiation
      • Responding to change over following a plan

§   

It DOES NOT negate the need for a level of governance, far from it, agile projects frequently need higher quality governance than that of a traditional (waterfall/turnkey) project.

 

 

 

 

 

NOTES: 

1.     Pasteur, Louis (3 May 1880). Translated by H.C. Ernst. "Extension Of The Germ Theory To The Etiology Of Certain Common Disease". Comptes rendus de l'Académie des Sciences. French Academy of Sciences. 90: 1033–44 – via Fordham University Modern History Sourcebook.

 

2.     "Herzberg's Motivation-Hygiene Theory: Two-factor". Education Library. 2021-03-31. Retrieved 2021-03-31. 


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SEPs and Avoiding the Body Brothers

Image
According to “ The Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy ” [1] An S.E.P. can run almost indefinitely on a torch or a 9 volt battery, and is able to do so because it utilises a person's natural tendency to ignore things they don't easily accept, like, for example, aliens at a cricket match. Any object around which an S.E.P. is applied will cease to be noticed, because any problems one may have understanding it (and therefore accepting its existence) become Somebody Else's Problem. An object becomes not so much invisible as unnoticed. A perfect example of this would be a ship covered in an SEP field at a cricket match. A starship taking the appearance of a large pink elephant is ideal because you can see it, yet it is so inconceivable, your mind can't accept it. Therefore it can't exist, thus ignoring it comes naturally. An S.E.P. can work in much the same way in dangerous or uninhabitable environments. Any problem which may present itself to a person inside an S.E.P. (such...
Read more

When you're up to your neck in Crocodiles

Image
  .......It’s hard to remember that the original objective was to drain the swamp   (yes that is me……….and yes they are real life massive Alligators……………and yes they really are about 5 feet away)     AKA: THE IMPORTANCE OF DOCUMENTATION (and the Law of Sufficiency )   FACT:    Selective memory, confirmation bias and revisionism are common human traits from which stakeholders, sponsors and project teams are not immune. We also know that documentation is a drag.  Moreover, the time & resource spent documenting things, crossing the “T”s & dotting the “I”s, creates significant drag on a project.  There is a tendency therefore, to avoid writing stuff down and ignore the need to record key information and events and just get on with it (JFDI)…….After all, we all know what we’re doing?..............Don’t we?.   HUGE mistake!    It’s NOT AGILE – it’s incompetent.   FACT:    ...
Read more

Fuck the Problem........................Fix the People

Image
AKA:    It’s who you are, and how you do it!.........not what you do or what you’ve done!                                                                                                        When things go wrong, it’s stressful for all involved – it can also be a lonely disempowering place for those who are reliant on, but not able to contribute to the resolution.  The buyers and the customers who have no choice, but to sit and wait.   Providing a great fix is rarely sufficient to restore harmony.   BUT!............................. “ it shouldn’t have gone wrong in the first place!!! ”   An old mentor of mine used to say “F*** the problem, fix the people” a sentiment that is as true today ...
Read more