Shipulski On Design

Archive for the ‘Decisions’ Category

With companies, there are always competing demands and too few resources.  Always.  Don’t feel special. And there is always noise in the signals.  Always.  And it always comes down to a single question:

What do we do next?

Don’t believe me? Think about your meetings last week.  During the meetings, there was discussion about the current situation followed by discussion on what to do next.  And at the end of the meetings, there were lists of things to do next.  Those things may not get done, but there were lists of things to do next.

The competing demands create the set of possible problems to address.  And the problems are inputs to the critical decision: What do we do next?  The demands are not fully defined, which adds noise to the decision process, and there is no agreement on the underlying problem, if the problem is formulated at all.  This adds noise to the signal.  There are more demands/problems than resources, and they compete with each other for the small pool of unallocated resources and the sea of double-booked resources.  This creates emotional stress and also adds noise to the signal.

Situation Normal for all companies: Partially formed (competing) demands, disagreement on the relative priority of the ill-formed demands, incomplete (or missing) problem formulation, limited understanding of the required resources other than everyone knows there are more demands/problems than resources, and immense pressure to violate resource constraints.

I cannot give you a recipe to answer the all-important question (What do we do next?), but I can suggest ways to reduce the noise and better assess the options.

Spend some time formally fleshing out the demands before the meeting.  Dig in.  Bring data.  What is the output required? Who is asking for it? What are the inputs? What happens if we do it?  What happens if we don’t?  Come to the meeting with your analysis, but call it “a draft”.  Let others ask questions and challenge your assumptions.  Don’t be defensive.  They are not attacking you; they are trying to improve understanding to make a better decision.

The cost of making a bad decision is immense, so it makes sense to spend a lot of time preparing a good description/assessment.  The cost of over-preparing is low, so over-prepare.  Here’s a rule:

For big decisions, preparation time should be at least ten times longer than your first estimate.

Another type of assessment is often overlooked.  It’s the assessment of how well the opportunity fits with what you do well, with how you do things, and with the dispositional state of the larger system.  In short, you’re trying to answer: Is it easy?

Here are some things to consider to answer the “Is it easy?” question.  If the opportunity requires new knowledge, skills, and abilities, it will not be easy. If it requires you to work in different ways with new partners, it will not be easy.  If it cuts against an industry trend, it won’t be easy.  This is not an exhaustive list, and you should come up with your own assessment themes.  To be clear, though, these lines of assessment are different than “How many people do we need?”

Here’s a rule:

You can’t run a marathon wearing running shoes that are three sizes too small.

There is nothing wrong with having too many good opportunities and too many competing demands.  In fact, I think that’s a good sign.  I think it says you are in high demand.  And there is nothing wrong with having too few resources because, again, it means you’re in high demand.  I’ve never met a profitable company that had too few opportunities and too many resources.

Image credit — Mitchell Hirsch

AI may be wonderful in some contexts, but AI makes it more difficult to be an effective engineering leader.  Using AI in engineering elevates the training, development, and mentorship requirements that companies must address to make their engineering leaders successful.

When asked questions, AI gives answers.  The answers may be correct or not.  In day-to-day life, that’s not such a big deal.  But in engineering, that’s not good enough.  In engineering, the answers must be right.  Not almost right.  Not maybe right. Not kinda right. The answers must be right. When engineering leaders design products, those products must work, function as advertised, satisfy customers’ needs, meet the cost target, and not hurt people.  If an engineering leader follows AI blindly, there’s no guarantee the product will be successful, profitable, or safe.

When asked the wrong question, AI gives an incorrect answer to the question that should have been asked.  If an engineering leader misunderstands the context, there’s a good chance they’ll ask the wrong question.  And they won’t know it. At best, this will create rework and project delays. And in the worst case, the company could launch a product that hurts people.

And there’s an even more troubling situation: when the engineering team presents solutions to the engineering leader without informing the leader that AI was used to generate the solutions.  To protect against this failure mode, the engineering leader must recognize when AI has been used and dig into the questions/prompts the AI was given.  From there, the engineering leader must use their knowledge of the design context to decide whether the prompts were valid and whether the answer is useful or viable.  This is a heavy lift and requires highly capable engineering leaders who have been trained to recognize AI use and verify the validity of its solutions.

Can your engineering leaders use their knowledge of the design context to provide the right prompts to an AI?

Can your engineering leaders challenge the applicability of an AI’s answer even when they think they’ve provided good prompts to the AI?

Can your engineering leaders detect when their teams have used AI to generate solutions?

Can your engineering leaders challenge the engineering teams when they suspect AI has misled the engineering team?

I hope the answer to those four questions is yes.

Image credit — Richard

When you start something, by definition, you will end it.

All good things come to an end.  So do all bad things. That’s how it goes with things.

All new things start with the end of old things. That’s how things are.

What does it say when a phase of your life comes to an end?

Doesn’t the start of a new phase demand the end of an existing one?

When something ends, do you curse it or celebrate it, do both, or neither?  And how do you decide?

If you stay with the old thing too long, what does that say?  And how do you know it was too long?

Can you know it will be too long before you stay too long?

If you leave too soon, can you know that before you leave?

The follow-on results of a decision do not determine the quality of a decision.

There is no right decision to make.

Make the decision and then make it right.

Image credit — Karissa Burnett

When do you bring your whole self to the endeavor?  You can’t do this every time, and that’s okay.

What are the conditions that cause you to engage fully?  Full engagement is expensive.  Spend wisely.

What about the situation causes you to run toward the problem? Solve the right ones, but leave some for the rest of us.

Which situations bring out the best in you?  Sometimes your best isn’t very good, and that’s okay.

When do you block yourself from jumping into the adventure?  All adventures aren’t worth the jump.  Block wisely.

What are the conditions that cause you to phone it in? Sometimes the best choice is a phone call.

What about the situation causes you to give others a chance to run toward the problem?  There’s nothing wrong with that.  Save yourself for the right problems.

Which situations demand that you protect your best self?   It’s okay to protect yourself and live to fight another day.  That’s why they make bulletproof vests.

Sometimes we get caught up in the heat of battle and bring our energy in an unskillful way.  And sometimes we are lulled into inaction when bringing our energy is the more skillful action.

I have found that maintaining awareness helps me allocate my energy wisely and skillfully.

May you be aware of your surroundings and your self.

Image credit – Jan Mosimann

If a decision can be unmade, it’s okay to make it quickly.

Delaying a decision is a decision.

When a decision remains unmade, there’s a reason. However, that reason is often unspoken.

The effort to make the right decision is proportional to the consequences of getting it wrong.

Decisions are sometimes made without the non-deciders realizing that they were made.

Trouble arises when the decision maker is not the customer of the consequences.

Decisions are made slowly when people are afraid to make them.

When you don’t know a decision was made, you’ll continue to behave as if it wasn’t.

If five people are responsible for the decision, who is responsible for the decision?

Even if you are unaware that a decision was made, you’ll likely be expected to behave as if you knew it was.

If no decisions will be made at the meeting, don’t go.  Just read the minutes.

Documenting decisions is not standard work, but I think it should be.

Decisions can be made, not made, unmade, re-made, and re-unmade.

Decisions aren’t decisions until behavior aligns with them.

When a decision is yet to be made, you can influence the decision by behaving as if it was made in your favor.

If you wait long enough, the decision will make itself.

Image credit — yawning hunter

Sometimes when I have a good idea, my body recognizes it before my mind does.  I believe my body has been doing this since I was young, but only over the last five years have I developed sufficient body awareness to recognize the sensation my body generates.  And now that I know the sensation is a signal, I know my body knows more than I do.

My body’s signaling system is usually triggered during a conversation with someone I trust.  While they are speaking to me, one or two of their words help my body flip the “knowing switch” and send its signal. Sometimes I stop listening and wait for the idea to come to my awareness.  Sometimes I say out loud, “My body thinks there’s something important in what you said.” Sometimes the signal and idea come as a pair, and I tell my friend about the idea after they finish their sentence.  All this takes some time for my coworkers and friends to understand and become comfortable.

My body can also send signals when it recognizes wrong paths or approaches that will cause conflict or confusion.  It’s a colder sensation than the one described above, and the coldness distinguishes it as a signal of potential wrongness, conflict, or confusion. Like above, it’s usually triggered during a conversation where a coworker’s words help my body flip its knowing switch and send the cold sensation.  Sometimes I stop listening and wait for the knowing to arrive.  Sometimes I acknowledge I just received a knowing signal. And sometimes I tell my friend about the knowing as soon as there’s an opening.  This, too, takes time for others to understand and become comfortable.

For my body to be able to do this for me, it must be well-rested, well-exercised, and grounded.  To do this, my body must be standing on emotional bedrock.

I think I’m more effective because I can connect with my body’s signals.  I can become aware of better ideas, I can become aware of skillful approaches, and I can become aware of ways to protect my friends from conflict and confusion.

Bessel van der Kolk says The Body Keeps The Score, and I agree. And with deep calm and awareness, I think the body can do much more.

Image credit — darkday

X: We need a strategic plan.

Me:  Why do you need one of those?

X: Everybody needs a strategic plan.

Me: Okay.  That didn’t work. Let me try it another way.  What makes a plan strategic?

X: You start with a strategy and you create a plan to make it happen over the next three years.

Me: So, you plan out the next three years?

X: Yes. Or four.

Me: Doesn’t the plan assume you know how the Universe will behave over the next three years?

X: We know our market, we know our customers, we know our technology, and we make a three-year plan.

Me: And what if something changes, like COVID, tariffs, or a new competitor brings to market something that obsoletes your best product?

X: You can’t plan for that.

Me: Exactly.

X: You’re talking in circles! What do you mean?

Me: If your three-year plan can’t plan for unplanned things, what kind of plan is that?

X: I told you.  It’s a strategic plan.

Me: Hmm.  Let me try that again.  What happens when something unexpected arises and your plan needs to change?

X: It’s a strategic plan.  Those don’t change.

Me: Arrg.  Do you mean the plan should change, but you don’t make the change? Or strategic plans never change?

X: Strategic plans don’t change because they’re strategic.  We put a lot of time into creating them.

Me: They don’t change because they take a lot of time and effort to create?

X: Well, yes.  We have long planning meetings, and our best people spend a lot of time creating it.

Me: Do you think the Universe cares how long it took you to create your plan?

X:  There you go again with the Universe thing.

Me: What I mean by that is there are many factors outside your control.  It’s a big world out there. And you can’t plan for everything.

X: What do you mean? We put everything in the strategic plan.

Me: That’s not the type of everything I’m talking about.  I’m talking about things outside your control that you cannot possibly know.

X: Are you saying we don’t know what we’re doing?

Me: No, I’m saying you know everything you’re going to do over the next three years.  And that’s the problem.

X: You are frustrating.  First you tell me it’s impossible to plan for everything, then you tell me we have a problem because we plan for everything.  What’s wrong with you?

Me: That’s the right question.  There’s a lot wrong with me. I have a good idea that turns out to be wrong, so I change my plan. I think I understand what’s going on, but I learn that I’m wrong, so I change my plan. I have a plan, but something unexpected happens and turns my plan from good to wrong, so I change it, even if the plan is strategic, whatever that means.

Image credit — Geoff Henson

Tariffs.  Economic uncertainty.  Geopolitical turmoil.  There’s no time for elegance.  It’s time for the art of the possible.

Give your sales team a reason to talk to customers.  Create something that your salespeople can talk about with customers.  A mildly modified product offering, a new bundling of existing products, a brochure for an upcoming new product, a price reduction, a program to keep prices as they are even though tariffs are hitting you.  Give them a chance to talk about something new so the customers can buy something (old or new).

Think Least Launchable Unit (LLU). Instead of a platform launch that can take years to develop and commercialize, go the other way.  What’s the minimum novelty you can launch? What will take the least work to launch the smallest chunk of new value?  Whatever that is, launch it now.

Take a Frankensteinian approach. Frankenstein’s monster was a mix and match of what the good doctor had scattered about his lab.  The head was too big, but it was the head he had.  And he stitched onto the neck most crudely with the tools he had at his disposal.  The head was too big, but no one could argue that the monster didn’t have a head.  And, yes, the stitching was ugly, but the head remained firmly attached to the neck.  Not many were fans of the monster, but everyone knew he was novel.  And he was certainly something a sales team could talk about with customers.  How can you combine the head from product A with the body of product B?  How can you quickly stitch them together and sell your new monster?

Less-With-Far-Less. You’ve already exhausted the more-with-more design space.  And there’s no time for the technical work to add more.  It’s time for less.  Pull out some functionality and lots of cost.  Make your machines do less and reduce the price.  Simplify your offering and make things easier for your customers.  Removing, eliminating, and simplifying usually comes with little technical risk.  Turning things down is far easier than turning them up.  You’ll be pleasantly surprised how excited your customers will be when you offer them slightly less functionality for far less money.

These are trying times, but they’re not to be wasted. The pressure we’re all under can open us up to do new work in new ways.  Push the envelope. Propose new offerings that are inelegant but take advantage of the new sense of urgency forced.

Be bold and be fast.

Image credit — Geoff Henson

Here are the questions I ask myself when I’m asked to take on new work….

Do I know what the work is all about?

Is it well-defined?

Would it make a big difference if the work is completed successfully?

Would it make a big difference if it’s not?

Is it clear how to judge if the work is completed successfully?

Is the work important and how do I know?

Is it urgent? (The previous question is far more important to me.)

Is there more important work?

Who would benefit from the work and how do I feel about it?

Would I benefit and how do I feel about it?

Am I uniquely qualified or can others do the work?

Am I interested in the work?

Would I grow from the work?

Who would I work for?

Who would I work with?

Would my career progress?

Would I get a raise?

Would I spend more time with my family?

Would I spend more time in meetings?

Would I travel more?

What does my Trust Network think?

Would I have fun? (I think this is a powerful question.)

These aren’t the questions you should ask yourself, but I hope the list helps you develop your own.

Image credit — broombesoom

Efficient – How do we do more projects with fewer people?

Effective – Let’s choose the right project.

Would you rather do more projects that miss the mark or fewer that excite the customer?

Efficient – How do we finish the project faster?

Effective – Let’s fully staff the project.

Would you rather burn out the project team or deliver on what the customer wants?

Efficient – How do we reduce product cost by 5%?

Effective – Let’s make customers’ lives easier.

Would you rather reduce the cost or delight the customer?

Efficient – How can we go faster?

Effective – Let’s get it right.

Would you rather go fast and break things or get it right for the customer?

Efficient – How many projects can we run in parallel?

Effective – Let’s fully staff the most important projects.

Would you rather get halfway through four projects or complete two?

Efficient – How do we make progress on as many tasks as possible?

Effective – Let’s work on the critical path.

Would you rather work on things that don’t matter or nail the things that do?

Efficient – How can we complete the most tasks?

Effective – Let’s work on the hardest thing first.

Would you rather learn the whole thing won’t work before or after you waste time on the irrelevant?

If there’s a choice between efficiency and effectiveness, I choose effectiveness.

Image credit — Antarctica Bound

We wait because we don’t have enough information to make a decision.

We wait until the decision makes itself because no one wants to be wrong.

We wait for permission because of the negative consequences of being wrong.

We wait to use our judgment until we have evidence our judgment is right.

We wait for support resources because they are spread over too many projects.

We wait for a decision to be made because no one is sure who makes it.

We wait to reduce risk.

We wait to reduce costs.

We wait to move at the speed of trust.

We wait because too many people must agree.

We wait because disagreement comes too slowly.

We wait for disagreement because we don’t subscribe to “clear is kind.”

We wait when decisions are unmade.

We wait because there is insufficient courage to stop the bad projects.

We wait to stop things slowly.

We use waiting as a slow no.

We wait to reallocate resources because even bad projects have momentum.

We wait when we dislike the impending outcome.

We wait for the critical path.

We wait out of fear.

Image credit — Sylvia Sassen