But what will our staff do if we don't focus on their utilization?
From the Easy in theory, difficult in practice Blog
by Kiron Bondale
My musings on project management, project portfolio management and change management.
I'm a firm believer that a pragmatic approach to organizational change that addresses process & technology, but primarily, people will maximize chances for success.
This blog contains articles which I've previously written and published as well as new content.
Recent Posts
Leading Through Crisis Means Leading Through Context
"It's the end. But the moment has been prepared for." - retirement lessons from the Doctor
Just because they are non-critical, doesn't mean they are not risky!
Just because they are non-critical, doesn't mean they are not risky!
How will YOU avoid these AI-related cognitive biases?
Categories
Agile,
Artificial Intelligence,
Career Development,
Change Management,
Communications Management,
Decision Making,
Governance,
Hiring,
Kanban,
Lessons Learned,
Personal Development,
PMO,
Portfolio Management,
Project Management,
Resource Management,
Risk Management,
Risk Management,
Schedule Management,
Scheduling,
Tools
Date
Lean thinking encourages us to focus on maximizing value delivered to stakeholders rather than maximizing the utilization of the people, equipment or material resources contributing to value streams.
Two reasons for this recommendation are:
- Systems which are run with no free capacity will have no tolerance for any impact which causes a greater utilization of resources than was planned, resulting in delays to the value we were expecting to deliver. While we don't expect such special cause variations when managing operational processes, with project work, Murphy's Law is often par for the course.
- It is extremely rare that there is a perfect balance of the resources supporting every activity within a value stream. If we have one or more bottleneck, by insisting on maximizing the utilization of all resources contributing to the value stream we would end up overloading others or resort to unhealthy multitasking.
While managers might accept the above in principle, they might raise some concerns. If we don't maximize the utilization of our team members, how will they be adding value when they aren't contributing directly to the value stream or streams they are part of? After all, we are paying them for a full day's work so shouldn't we expect a full day's work out of them?
While some managers might worry that their team members' slack time will be misused for slacking off, there are multiple productive ways to use this freed up capacity including:
- Learning new things. When the focus is maximizing utilization for "billable" activities, learning often gets pushed outside of normal working hours. With down time during the work day, staff with spare cycles might use that time to increase the depth or breadth of their skills.
- Reducing bottlenecks. One way to reduce a knowledge bottleneck is to hire additional staff. This is a good short term fix but rarely does a company have sufficient funding to solve all of their bottlenecks that way. A better long term solution is to encourage methods for cross-training including job shadowing and non-solo work. Such approaches require that the existing staff have some free capacity.
- Making things better. Value streams don't improve on their own. When left unattended entropy increases within them. Staff need to have some free time to identify opportunities for improvement, explore possible solutions and run experiments.
- Enhancing organizational assets. There is a cost to developing and enhancing templates, playbooks and other forms of codified knowledge. In previous articles, I'd written that one of the common challenges with traditional approaches to capturing lessons learned is that practitioners rarely have the time to curate and refine the "raw" lessons identified over the life of a project.
Without some free capacity, your team members might be inspired to quote Scotty from Star Trek: "I've giv'n her all she's got captain, an' I canna give her no more."
Posted on: October 04, 2020 07:00 AM |
Permalink
Comments (13)
Please login or join to subscribe to this item
Amrapali Amrapali
Field Marketing Manager| Keysight Technologies
Hounslow, United Kingdom
Great article. How can employees working in the research and development co relate with this?
Thanks Amrapali -
R&D work might still be done as a series of projects and if the focus of the leadership for that group is maximizing utilization, the same issues will emerge. While value might look different with an R&D group than a product development one, the focus on maximizing value should remain the same.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing.
Hi Kiron, this is an important piece and it represents the ways of getting at the ends of attaining a culture of innovation. These are topics that I coach, reward, and discuss all the time to promote that innovation and individual development, but not as well as you put it.
Thanks a lot for the kind feedback, Darren & Eduin!
Ashleigh Kennett-Smith
ICT Project Manager| Australian Red Cross Lifeblood
Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
Hi Kiron, I am going to be somewhat cynical and say that (as per one of your comments) unfortunately many organisations seem to expect 100%+ on a day to day basis and then 150%+ in "emergencies". The attitude seems to be around keeping costs down as opposed to being innovative (growing value) or fair. After all if "you" don't want to work like that, there are plenty of other people out there who will. I see this as a real tension between wanting the cheapest, most robotic, and yet somehow a highly skilled (with current skills) and innovative workforce. As an aside it appears that training seems to be a real issue for some organisations. They want to externalise costs including training ie don't want to pay staff to gain skills (after all they'll just leave) but internalise profits (which on one level is a good business model, but can be anti investment and long term strategy too).
Ashleigh -
This is unfortunately true in many companies. The good news is that in pretty much every industry there are companies where the leadership team treats their staff with respect and as professionals and over time, the better workers will migrate towards those organizations.
Kwiyuh Michael Wepngong
Community Champion
Financial Management Specialist | US Peace Corps
Yaounde, Centre, Cameroon
This is such a sensitive topic that raises some tensions in some institutional corridors.. Organisations must learn how to utilize their staff, it's a source of motivation and self improvement.
Thanks Kwiyuh - it is definitely a very sensitive topic, especially when managers' compensation is tied to how utilized (or not) their staff are.
Dave Hamel
PM I| Société Québécoise des Infrastructures
Shannon, Quebec, Canada
Thank you Kiron, that is Gospel Truth! I think organizations are afraid to allow for slack time for employees because they don't have the foresight to structure it for the uses you highlight, i.e. learning and improvement.
I have often felt that in the organizations I have worked for there was a lack of long-term work efforts for just that type of endeavor, that is not urgent but important and that could be planned around standard "line work". Instead, more often than not specialized staff departments are created out of the value stream to do that work and in the end these departments end up putting the effort back on the regular staff because that's where the SMEs are.
It seems to me that such an organization could achieve at least similar if not better results and more employee engagement by putting slack time to good use. The employer should still expect some form of reporting for that "slack work", to be able to provide feedback to employees as needed to insure their initiative is in line with corporate needs. In that sense I see a failure in leadership to make good use of that necessary slack time.
Peter Rapin
Subject Matter Expect; Project Delivery| Independent Consultant
Ontario, Canada
This is so true in the project delivery industry where we strive and are committed to deliver value yet are measured on utilization. I vividly remember a chat with my executive some years ago after the successful (time, cost, quality) delivery of a project to the client's total satisfaction however my team's utilization was at 76.5% rather than the target 80%. The project was a success but me - not so much.
This mentality seems to be driven by concerns of staff time stealing or personal ineffectiveness. The few bad apples make life miserable for the rest of us. In my experience, yes there are some that abuse the system but these are few and far between and even fewer when you treat all with respect. Once you label (or suggest) someone a thief there's a greater risk that they will become one.
Utilization is a useful measurement to understand effort requirements for application to future considerations. What it is not is a validation of value.
Thanks Dave & Peter! To paraphrase Deming, we need to trust our people and hence fix the system that they work in such that they can deliver awesome results.
Very intersting ! Thanks for sharing
Please Login/Register to leave a comment.
|
"The amount of money one needs is terrifying..."
- Ludwig Van Beethoven
|