This Month’s Pattern *

20 One Throat to Choke

There is a clear mapping between each project task and a single responsible individual. Each person knows precisely which responsibilities are his own and which belong to his colleagues.

In a well-run restaurant, the responsibilities for work are clearly divided among the team members. The saucier makes sauces; the pâtissier is responsible for the pastries; the maître d’ tends to greeting and seating; the sommelier focuses on the wine; and the scullery maid washes the dishes. If you observe the work patterns, you see how each person focuses on the tasks for which he is responsible. The waiter pins an order onto the orders clipboard and takes a basket of bread to the table. The head chef scans the order and shouts the dishes’ names to each specialist. The fish chef cooks the halibut; the saucier makes the sauce; the vegetable chef prepares the watercress garnish; and the presentation chef puts the dish together. When the dishes are ready, the waiter is summoned and carries them to the table. Each individual knows what he has to do, when he has to do it, and just as importantly, what to expect of his colleagues. The atmosphere is alive, busy, and purposeful. When you find this pattern in a project, you can feel the same buzz of excitement and achievement in the air.

What is actually going on here is that people thrive on having responsibility and knowing exactly what that responsibility is. The business analysts know what is expected of them; the testers know what their connections are to the deliverables; the business users know precisely what is expected of them; the developers know where their tasks start and stop; the project manager knows his responsibilities for steering and allocating tasks . . . every individual on the team is confident of what he has to do and how he will know when he has done it.

In accepting the singular responsibility for any piece of work (a component, assignment, objective, or action item), the individual knows and accepts his responsibility because that work is clearly mapped to an expected outcome. The individual thinks, “It’s up to me; everyone is counting on me for this—I am responsible for my work.” Similarly, each person on the team knows the responsibilities of others and thinks, “I can count on specific colleagues for these things.”

An organization that has this pattern can also cope when unforeseen things happen and nobody is responsible for dealing with them. People are used to having responsibility and consequently are not afraid to take charge of a task that needs an owner.

Having sole responsibility does not preclude asking for help and getting critical input from colleagues and any other relevant sources. The point is that the designated individual is still responsible for the agreed component. That person knows and agrees that “for this component, it is my head on the block. . . .”

This is very different from giving someone a job title and assuming that everyone will interpret the responsibilities of that title in the same way. What happens in these cases is that nobody really knows precisely what is expected of anyone. The consequence is uncertainty, fear, erosion of confidence, waste of human effort, and a great deal of pfaffing around.

Some projects operate on the basis that everything is everybody’s responsibility. The thinking, on the surface, may seem admirable: “We are a team. We pull together, and if anything needs doing, then it is everyone’s responsibility to make sure that it gets done.” Not surprisingly, this approach rarely works. Imagine such a team running a restaurant. In between cooking soufflés, the chef would be worrying about making reservations; the waiter would add some extra salt to the soup; the maître d’ would wash the odd dish, to ensure there were enough for table 22—everyone would be worrying about (or interfering with) everything and not doing anything particularly well.

The power of having one throat to choke comes from the confidence that people get from understanding what is expected of them. And this provides a clue for how to encourage this pattern in your own projects. You need to be able to characterize a component so that there is an objective indicator of what it is and how everyone will know if it has been delivered. The component may be the delivery of a specific module of software, the responsibility of providing feedback to the developers on the quality of their design, or the development of user training for a new product. The issue is that the component can be characterized so that everyone has the same understanding of what it is. If you can do this, then you can allocate singular responsibility to an individual and have everyone reap the benefits of improved work facilitation and personal confidence.



* Each month we plan to publish here one of the patterns from our Jolt Award book, Adrenaline Junkies and Template Zombies — Understanding Patterns of Project Behavior. (Watch this space for a mere 86 months and you'll have read the whole thing.) The book is published by Dorset House Publishing, in the US and Hanser Verlag in Germany. It is available at Amazon and also as a Kindle book.

events

Moscow, The Guild Way Towards Great Projects
28-Mar-2012 to 30-Mar-2012

The Guild Way Towards Great Projects. Three days with the Atlantic Systems Guild bringing you key insights for successful projects. This event is hosted by Careerlab and SoftwarePeople. Details here.  

Oslo, Mastering the Requirements Process
11-Apr-2012 to 13-Apr-2012

Suzanne Robertson teaches Mastering the Requirements Process. For more information on this popular course, contact Den Norske Dataforeningen. This course is almost full.

Rome, Mastering Business Analysis
12-Apr-2012 to 13-Apr-2012

James Robertson teaches Mastering Business Analysis. Contact Technology Transfer for details of this new course.  

Rome, Mastering the Requirements Process
16-Apr-2012 to 18-Apr-2012

Sassenheim, Mastering the Requirements Process
18-Apr-2012 to 20-Apr-2012

Brussels, Mastering the Requirements Process
25-Apr-2012 to 27-Apr-2012

Melbourne, Mastering the Requirements Process
21-May-2012 to 23-May-2012

The Robertsons present Mastering the Requirements Process. Please contact Software Education  for details and registration. 

Melbourne, MRP part 2
24-May-2012 to 25-May-2012

Suzanne Robertson teaches Mastering the Requirements Process part 2. Contact Software Education for details of this advanced class. 

Sydney, Mastering the Requirements Process
28-May-2012 to 30-May-2012

Suzanne and James Robertson teach the popular Mastering the Requirements Process sponsored by Software Education.

Sydney, MRP part 2
31-May-2012 to 1-Jun-2012

Suzanne Robertson and Mastering the Requirements Process part 2. Please contact Software Education for details of this advanced class. 

Auckland, Mastering the Requirements Process
11-Jun-2012 to 13-Jun-2012

Wellington, Mastering the Requirements Process
11-Jun-2012 to 13-Jun-2012

The first New Zealand presentation of the year of Mastering the Requirements Process. For details please contact Software Education.  

Auckland or Wellington, Mastering the Requirements Process part 2
14-Jun-2012 to 15-Jun-2012

Suzanne Robertson teaches Mastering the Requirements Process part 2. Details for this advanced class at Software Education.

in depth

James & Suzanne Robertson challenge the accepted wisdom of the agile community and point out how agile projects don't always deliver value to the organization. Download the pdf from Cutter Consortium.


In the November, 2011 issue of IEEE Software Tom DeMarco asserts that "All Late Projects Are the Same."   Do you agree with Tom or not?  Take a look at "All Late Projects Are the Same."



Suzanne Robertson was interviewed by Penny Pullan on the subject of 'The Business Analyst Working with the Project Manager'. This interview is part of the Business Analysis Summit, November 2011. Listen to the interview at volere.co.uk



Tom DeMarco and Peter Hruschka interviewed by Markus Voelter on Software Engineering Radio about the process and the discoveries from writing Adrenaline Junkies and Template Zombies.


Tim Lister discusses risk management. This was part of an assignment for Cutter Consortium in Mexico. Watch the Video.


Tim Lister analiza la gestión del riesgoVea la versión en español.


Listen to Tom DeMarco's 10-minute interview on Coping With Sea Change, part of Andreas Heilwagen's ongoing "10-Minute Project Management" series.


Suzanne and James Robertson's popular Mastering the Requirements Process is now available as a Kindle edition.


The Guild's 2009 Jolt Award book, Adrenaline Junkies and Template Zombies is now available in a Kindle edition.


Tom DeMarco and Tim Lister's perennially popular book Peopleware is now available in a Kindle Edition.