Profile
A high-tech company in the travel
industry has bagged a contract from a reputed Client for data migration with
phased delivery over a period of ten quarters.
The project plan was created
based on the requirements available. Since the project spanned in time, the
data points presented covered only a year, which was deemed good to start by
stakeholders. The visibility was for only
one year and hence the limitation with data available – which is expected and accepted
in this kind of engagement. The budget for the said timeline was apportioned. The
team identified to undertake the project was present in different locations as
a strategic call.
The Pain Point
It will be the assumptions that
will turn out to be the worst of risks. The stakeholders agreed it was a long
tunnel but not quite certain about the length. Since it was a time bound, the requirement
gathering was focused for the first quarter as agreed by the stakeholders and
signed-off.
Assumptions can become one of the
major risks. The team initially settled on a framework only to change after the
first sprint. The change would impact the team composition calling for ‘sourcing’
soon after launch that sent the human resources scrambling for talent. The need
of the hour is never met and that’s the lesson learnt and hence due diligence
paid to the selection from talent pool.
With new resources inducted, there
was already burn on time and cost, the knowledge transfer turned out to be to
be too steep and the project plan revisited to factor the changes. There were
different verticals within the team which started concurrently, and it was the
approach of the scheduled milestone that sent the alarm bells ringing as one of
the core development team failed in meeting the deadline and thereby derailed
further developments adversely impacting other teams as the output will be the
primary feed for them to move forward. It had a typical domino effect shaking
the entire team.
When the causal analysis was
conducted, the results unearthed many issues that seemed to be swept under the
carpet. Communication weren’t open and transparent; accountability absent and
leadership clueless as team members tried passing the buck and concerned about
safeguarding their position. The most baffling will be the lack of attention to
basic details. There should have been a single point of contact for escalation;
People Management and Stakeholder management. The root cause clearly spells poor
communication and lack in understanding.
The bottleneck undoubtedly was communication management. Clearly the
opportunity would have been squandered if not for the milestone. It was the
worst wake-up call for a company known for its intellectual capital and track
record.
Analysis revealed that the actual
against planned in the project plan left a gaping hole and lacked foresight for
risk mitigation particularly to problem
faced as such a scenario was never
contemplated. How? That’s why the
absence to attention on basic details. Too much rode on assumptions.
The impacts due to the imbalance resulted in
# changes
in the team composition which proved too expensive at that point in time as investment
and Knowledge Transition and team ramp-up
# Conflicts
in the mid-management
The squabbles stressed the need for conflict resolution through
effective people management and stakeholder management.
Troubleshooting
It was back to basics about team-building with open
communication, more transparency and greater accountability. The team met frequently till all onboard were
on the same page. Having ceded grounds, it’s more prudent to save and salvage
and move on. Since it was the first milestone, the impact on the short-term goal
was severe and long-term could be contained. The positive impact can be
captured as
# Commitment
from the stakeholders on requirements and delivery
# Transparency
/Clarity to all the stakeholders
Recommendations
- The Plan B that somehow missed the plan should be prepared.
- The alternate scenario for worst cases should be assessed and addressed.
- The assumptions must be studied again and stakeholders should provide clarity in closure.
- The team should be cohesive and engage effectively to expedite delivery.
- The Start of the Day and End of Day of meeting must analyze the day’s target and plan for next day deliverables.
- The leadership to introduce SPOC and take stock at regular intervals (smaller intervals as possible) till things are streamlined and then schedule the standard stand-up meetings
No comments:
Post a Comment