When you're up to your neck in Crocodiles

 

.......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:       If you don’t write it down, it never happened!

 

This applies to:

▪           Contracts                       ▪           Proposals

▪           Requirements                ▪           Decisions

▪           Agreements                   ▪           Instructions

▪           Meetings                       ▪           Presentations

▪           Risks                             ▪           Issues

▪           Complaints                    ▪           Escalations

▪           Concerns                       ▪           Moans

▪           Acceptances                  ▪           Completions

▪           ANYTHING; and            ▪           EVERYTHING!!

 

Context, situation, culture are irrelevant, some of the most frequent phrases a PM will hear are “did I really say that?”, “I never agreed to that” or “that’s not what I asked for”.

 

MYTH:      Once written it’s cast in stone!

 

Far from it, once something is written, it merely becomes a datum point from which changes and alterations can be made.

 

What about decisions?  (They shouldn’t be un-made).  Even decisions can be changed if the assumptions, context or constraints around which the decision was based are recorded along side them.  If the assumption or context should change, then, of course the decision must be re-visited and, with evidence surrounding the context of the original decision changing it is a much less challenging.

 

Note:  People do not like having things written down because they may be held to account and despite the excuses, rationalisation, this is often a bigger driver of avoidance than concerns over “agility”.

 

SFW          How does this apply to draining the swamp?

 

If when the decision was made to send a man into the swamp armed with a pair of waders and shovel , a few key assumptions were also recorded.  Such as:

 

·          There no serious threats to life and limb in this swamp

·          There are no endangered species in the swamp

 

Additionally:  if there happened to be a risk register with the following:

 

RISK 1:                   TiaRT…. the operator may be attacked by wild-life

IMPACT:                 Serious injury or even death of the operators (leading to significant

                                fines and compensation claims)

Mitigation:             Use a boat and protective equipment.

 

RISK 2:                   TiaRT….there may be endangered species living in the swamp

IMPACT:                 Significant fines, protestors causing delays, cancellation of project

Mitigation:             Conduct an environmental study and relocate impacted species.

 

SO!! Had all this been written down, as soon as crocodiles were discovered work (as originally planned) would have stopped and the, pre-agreed, contingency plans kicked into action. Thus reducing the likely hood of being up to the neck in crocodiles with the boss screaming at me because I haven’t completed the task!!

 

 

THE LAW OF SUFFICIENCY!

 

Unfortunately, one can land in croc infested waters by doing, but also by NOT doing.  Spending significant time and resource documenting minutia is just as bad, or worse, than JFDI – A balance has to be struck.

 

So: to avoid getting into croc infested waters (all that is needed is SUFFICIENT documentation to prompt faltering and vague memories.  Luckily, the level of documentation required is entirely proportional to the size, impact  and risk profile⁶ of the project.

 

Arguably, if everything goes smoothly, the documentation will never be read again.  But what if it doesn't?  We are all familiar with the six phases of a project:

 

1.   Unbounded enthusiasm,                (JFDI)

2.   Total disillusionment,                     (What the F**, am I supposed to be doing?)

3.   Panic, hysteria and overtime,         (it’s never going to work!)

4.   Frantic search for the guilty,          (It wasn’t me!)

5.   Punishment of the innocent, and    (It was them! They did it!)

6.   Reward for the uninvolved.            (Bonus time …. Lovely Jubbly)

 

Phases 4 to 6 are entirely avoidable if a few key things are recorded for posterity things like - Who asked for what, what they asked for, WHY???, when it's needed, who did what, when they did it, who said what, when they said it, what changed (why and when) .... etc etc etc....  20:20 hindsight is a wonderful thing, but it is foresight that matters i.e. what the people knew, saw and assumed at the point in time they acted.

 

Remember also, just because you haven’t written it down, it doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been written down – so when you try and re-write history (Matt & Boris), do not be surprised if there is not an embarrassing exposé.

 

MORAL OF THE STORY 

 

When the “blamestorming” starts you’ll need a defence.  So, write down the important stuff, minute meetings and file it all in a safe place, you never know when you may need it.

 

Thank me later!!

 

 

 

FINAL WORD!         Version control your documents (i.e. time and date them) because documents, like decisions and history are not immune from being re-written too.

 

 

FINAL FINAL WORD!        The AGILE MANIFESTO SAYS:

 

     “we have come to value……… Working software over comprehensive documentation……..  That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more.

 

        Three points.

1. The agile manifesto says COMPREHENSIVE documentation (not ANY documentation).
2. The agile manifesto does place value on the items on the right – so does not mean or imply “do not write comprehensive documentation”
3. Regardless of what the Agilistas may say just document enough to protect yourself and avoid awkward questions at the end.

 

 

 

If you want help, advice or guidance on setting up your project, PMO or project governance, please use the “contact me” page at www.

 

 

 

NOTES:

 

 

1.   Selective memory:  Remembering certain facts over others i.e. not representing the whole truth.

2.   Confirmation bias:  Selecting facts that support the argument being presented

3.   Revisionism:  re-writing of history to fit the current context.

4.   Implicit memory bias, explicit memory bias, and anxiety Michael W. Eysenck &Angela Byrne Pages 415-431 Published online: 07 Jan 2008

5.   ANIMAL FARM: A novel by G. Orwell, published 1945. It is a satire in fable form on revolutionary and post‐revolutionary Russia

6.   Project RISK PROFILE:  The risk CAUSED by the project i.e. risk/likelihood of the project’s outcome having the desired effect (or there being an unintended consequence)