Why you’re in project pitfall hell – and how to start climbing out

Why you’re in project pitfall hell – and how to start climbing out

Think back to the last big project you delivered on time and on budget. Chances are it might be hard to remember. A recent Quickbase survey of more than 1,000 decision makers across industries found that the majority of projects … in fact, 64 percent of projects are impacted by project delays at least 20 percent of the time.

These delays are pervasive, resulting in lost productivity, employee frustration, and ultimately, projects that fall behind and go over budget. Your organization and your employees are likely spending more time doing repetitive, disconnected and unproductive gray work toggling between multiple tools, keeping them from delivering on the critical work that drives revenue.

In so many places, work moves so quickly that no one has time to plan for the year ahead, let alone the next five. The result is a : fiefdoms of small teams all using their own processes and tools just to keep projects moving. That approach may work for a while, but – sooner, not later – challenges arise that are complex, and teams need to be able to work together in a more coordinated fashion.

Yet they can’t, and so the library of bespoke processes and tools keeps growing and teams keep operating in silos, leaning on more and more disparate systems that inhibit collaboration. For example, when we asked survey respondents how many different software solutions they use, the answers averaged out at 10. Further, the majority (65 percent) of our survey respondents said that multiple software solutions prohibit them from easily sharing project-related information with others.

It’s crucial for organizations to understand the actual costs and consequences of all these Band-Aids. There are many, including multiple software solutions creating chaos and overwhelming employees; time wasted navigating a web of DIY fixes and hunting down information; manual workarounds compounding the employee struggle to get work done; and a general feeling of frustration from miscommunication, disconnection and wasted time.

Our survey shows just how much time, energy, and effort is being lost. Survey respondents reported spending an average of ten-plus hours a week on non-value-add activities like data entry/data transfer and syncing across different systems and tools. Again, it’s no wonder that so many projects aren’t being delivered on budget or on time

Test this out in your own organization. Run your own survey and/or convene some roundtables among different teams, asking about their experience in getting work done and why their projects might be falling behind. This will give you a realistic sense of where your organization is spending its time.

Very likely, you’ll discover something similar to our survey, like how 58 percent of respondents spend less than 20 hours per week on meaningful, results-driving work on key projects. It should quickly become clear the connection between lost time and late, over-budget projects.

Once you’ve identified where Band-Aids are and understand the cost to your projects, teams, and employees, it’s time to act. But beware that common knee-jerk reaction of “Technology can fix this!” Organizations that run out and get a bunch of new software run the risk of compounding the problem.

Take a step back instead. Consider that the way we work now is so different from even 10 years ago, as is the way we want to work. That’s why we at Quickbase spend so much time thinking about the changing nature of dynamic work.

Consider the people at the core of its processes, perhaps both the most important and messiest part of it all. In an ideal state, you’d get people together and ask: How do you all work together? When driving a complex project, do you have phases? An order of operations? A project plan? And what challenges do you see when looking at how those teams, processes and plans all connect together?

It’s rare to see organizations bring people together and map out all that. Instead, it’s more common to see a fragmented set of processes that overlap, and – rather than diagnosing the factors and mapping them – organizations opt for the latest splashy tool to paper over those gaps and holes. But if you’re laying technology onto an unstable foundation, it’s like building a house on top of mud.

Here’s a different approach: To help others get a better understanding of a work process, develop, and share a workflow diagram. Mine looks like a bunch of swim lanes, showing how a request from Team A is passed to Team B, then put into System C, creating a visual understanding of how work flows between teams and across projects – something many organizations struggle to visualize. Implementing a technology without that perspective forces processes onto the tool. A focus on mapping out the people and process part first can ensure the right choice of core platforms, tools, and technologies you need.

This is where you should start, no matter whether you’re trying to get one small department to deliver something on budget and on time or managing the kind of massive mega-projects that frequently run into delays and overblown budgets. Acquiring that understanding of where your organization is spending its time will enable you to combine your people with your processes and tackle the increasingly complex problems of our modern day.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *