Thinking Backwards: From Vicious to Virtuous Circle

Posted by Verarius
10-11-2023

Did it happen again – a project started in a very promising way, the initial milestones were passed with flying colors, and then something started going hideously wrong? Don’t lose your hope, there is a way out of this vicious cycle! This is exactly what we are going to talk about today.

The relationship between people and incentives is very straightforward – people respond to them. By the way, it also extends to the animal kingdom: the carrot and stick apply to all kinds of species, not only to tailless monkeys. More to the point, being entangled in their roots, time preference, which we discussed here, and the responsiveness to incentives come as a duo in all sorts of classic and almost iconic studies like the Stanford Marshmallow Experiment or Iowa Gambling Test or serve altogether as the basis for theoretical models – like in the Ainslie-Rachlin Model. For the World Bank economist William Easterly, the responsiveness of people to incentives even became the basis for his seminal book “The Elusive Quest for Growth”, where incentives ultimately shape the development path of societies.

In the context of an organization, incentives get translated into KPIs, SLAs, goals, and all kinds of bonus and malus rules resulting from them. Hence, the task boils down to creating such a set of KPIs to govern your project that it will channel and focus the attention of the team on longer-term outcomes, instead of hopping from milestone to milestone, hoping that the rest will be sorted out later – preferably upon going live and by someone else.

So how do you approach this from a practical standpoint? First, most globally and strategically, think of the outcome and do some creative reverse engineering. Imagine the day when the project goes live. How would you know that it has been a success? What is mission critical here? It is a great idea to have a look at the business plan written to initialize the project – it will shake up your perspective a little bit. Then translate the gains and the outcomes into operational metrics that would apply to the department or the division and create a KPI out of it – not only for the department but also for the project manager. This principle applies to setting KPIs between the stages of the project. What are your milestones? What is really crucial when reaching them? This is no trivial question as humans will be optimizing for whatever metric you set for them, and as an old saying goes, when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure.

This approach would be, however, only the second-best for issues that result from split responsibilities. The unbeatable first-choice solution and the easiest way to nip the issue in the bud is to avoid having such a setup in the first place. Wherever possible try to have the planner and the implementer be the same person (ideally – this should be the same person who would “live” with the solution upon going live). If you still decide to have one person (team or department) initiating the project and another one – implementing or going live with it, there is still a way to make this ostrich fly. Make sure that you put such KPIs in place for the planners that you could assess and act upon first after the project goes live. With that, you will have to walk a fine line between sending the right message to your project manager that balances a good mix of short- and long-term incentives and getting their buy-in. This approach is not standard yet practicable in more organizations than you would suspect. At the very least, you can almost always devise a constellation that would “marry” the owner of the project’s outcome into the project at an early stage or do the reverse – tie a bonus or a different incentive for the project manager into the results of the implemented solution. Yes, this will add a layer of extra complexity in communication and decision-making during the project life and slow things down in the beginning. Nonetheless, you will get two benefits for the price of one inconvenience. First off, you will indeed use the “Define”-stage in the most meaningful way. Secondly, this will be a wise investment as it will help you have significantly less wear and tear upon going live – where wear and tear proves to be much more costly.

As a closing note: the moment you decide to give a “go” to a project that is being initiated by someone who has already made it clear that their days at the organization are counted – call me immediately. I will talk you out of this idea, and the more adamant they are about it, the faster you should dial the number.

Related Blogs

Posted by Verarius | 15.09.2023
The time has come to share a little bit of what has been cooking on the back stove. For almost a year now I have had the fortune and the privilege to support one of the major Expo centers in Germany in the development and implementation of digital signage. Not only has it been hugely rewarding to see the implementation bring about physical outcomes, but it has also been a fruitful terrain for fieldwork. So let me tell you today a little bit about it....
Read more
Posted by Verarius | 13.04.2023
Welcome to the Part 2 of the short cycle of articles on Change and Resistance to Change. In this entry, “Automation Addiction – and How Agriculture Helped us Get There” we will talk about why we have such an intrinsic drive to automate things, what this drive has to do with the law of the least resistance and why breaking a habit is similar to a withdrawal. ...
Read more
Posted by Verarius | 12.04.2024
A couple of days ago, this cozy blog reached its first anniversary. I'm delighted to share that I've remained faithful to my commitment of posting every two weeks, come rain or shine. Some articles have been better, some could have been better, but they have been coming sure as eggs is eggs. Making this happen meant building a new habit. While the memories are still fresh and the example is very much alive indeed, let’s see what heuristics have proved to be helpful....
Read more