As published in The Mandarin November 1, 2024 by Kiah MD John Glenn 

Most of us have to get stuff done – at least at work! For some, it’s simply done by managing a process. Start at the beginning, work through the process, end up with an outcome. For most who read this, life is more complicated, we have to deliver an outcome. However, too often, the process for reaching that outcome is unclear. Even when we settle on a process that seems clear, for some reason it doesn’t unfold as planned.

How do you actually get stuff done?

I say “actually” because there are so many methodologies on offer that if you don’t like one wait for tomorrow, there will be a new one. Our business is founded on getting stuff done, when the outcome is ambiguous, and the processes we might employ are unclear. We have never had the luxury of waiting until the pathway becomes clear (or the problem goes away).

Project management advocates will have us believe that it is easy – become expert in the pillars of project management, apply the learning diligently and it will work. Safety in process.

Except it doesn’t work. According to the Project Management Institute 80% of major projects fail, 89% are more successful when they break from traditional PM methods.

Systems engineers divide systems into two broad types: the deterministic and the stochastic. In deterministic you do get the same output from the same input. In a stochastic system there is uncertainty in the process, so probabilities are assigned to processes, and outcomes may vary.

It’s useful, at times, to sit outside a system and consider how it operates. What happens, though, if you are thrust into the middle of a system where the probabilities of which process will apply can’t even be determined?

The International Centre for Complex Project Management, an Australian government led initiative largely formed by contribution by multiple Defence departments, suggests complex projects are characterised by ambiguity, uncertainty, dynamic interfaces or external influences. This is true. Still short on the ”how”.

What to actually do?

As the saying goes – all models are wrong, some are useful.  We have found the Cynefin Framework useful in describing the problem and how to approach designing an approach. The Cynefin Framework describes five problem spaces:

• The Clear (I like Simple) – established procedures work, cause and effect are obvious. Engineering problems sit in this nicely, as does simple project management.
• The Complicated – cause and effect are related but may not be obvious. Choosing the process needs analysis.  More often it needs multiple simple processes operating coherently to deliver an outcome.  Most big projects are seen this way.
• The Complex – cause and effect are only apparent in hindsight. Solving these problems needs experimentation, adaptation and learning.  We found most real-world problems sit in this domain. We also found that try something, evaluate, adjust was not a welcome approach. It was too uncertain for most clients, at least in the beginning. 
• The Chaotic – the world is out of control, and it requires action to regain control and stability.
• Disorder – the domain where it is unclear which of the other domains apply. These problems are unsolvable so break them down into smaller problems that sit in one of the other categories.   

There’s more to Cynefin than this simple view, but it has become more complicated over the years and less immediately applicable. We value the simplicity of four quadrants in guiding us towards the choice of approach.

The response to COVID is a great example. When Covid hit we were in Chaos. We gained control by locking down society and imposing restrictions until we were as safe as was reasonably possible.

We then tried things like spaced restaurant seating, quarantine, and masks. This was the try, value, adjust, repeat approach of the Complex section. As we became more confident in the actions we were taking, the process became more open with short lockdowns for outbreaks by suburbs. Finally, we moved to the Clear/Simple stage with vaccination.

Dealing with complexity takes courage, and it can’t be done tactically. If you are tactical, the complexity is overwhelming and events drive you, and you don’t drive to outcomes.

You need coherent activity – a strategy.  But what is the strategy?

Good strategy, Bad strategy

Even at quite low levels in an organisation, strategy is important. It may not be grand, enterprise-wide strategy, but it’s your part of the enterprise. You have an outcome to deliver that contributes to a whole.

Too many textbooks by old generals with approaches that just don’t seem to fit a modern world. So many grand business books with plans, processes, diagrams that simply don’t look like they apply to the public sector.

There is one that I truly like (“Good Strategy, Bad Strategy,” Rumelt, 2011) if just for one concept—you don’t have to be a movie director to know it’s a bad movie. It is the same with strategy. It has a lot more and is recommended reading.

We have adapted it for even more pragmatic application in public sector environments.

Strategy is built around objectives

Strategy is ultimately about objectives, boundaries and manoeuvrability.

Avoid the plethora of documents, detailed plans and explanations.  As a general remarked to me once, when deployed overseas, “I don’t give orders I give intent”.

Set an outline that provides stakeholders and participants with clarity of objective, and the intended, coherent, pathways to achieve that outcome.  

The power and influence come from the simplicity of its articulation.

Engage stakeholders in developing it, use design thinking, workshopping, and process that best engages rather than dictates.  Having a say is often more important than what is said.

Know when you will be satisfied

A clear objective is key, but it can be broad. Don’t define it with a sharp pencil but a fat, broad brush.  It will change as the activities and responses to your actions unfold. New opportunities that you should exploit will become apparent. However, be clear on the direction you are taking otherwise you are directionless.

Spend time understanding when you will be satisfied otherwise you will not know when you have got there.

Understand the boundaries, the rules. Don’t cross them without approval, but also don’t take them for granted. If they don’t make sense, challenge them.  Be aware of the rules that are your constraint but be cautious of interpretations of the rules. The Commonwealth Procurement Rules which bound Federal government procurement consist of about 30 pages.  There are literally tens of thousands of pages of policies and procedures implementing those rules – in one agency alone!

Too often we see myth rather than fact being applied. Good intentions and loud voices are not enough. Don’t rely on the claims of “I have 20 years’ experience”. It might be bad experience. It might be one years’ experience 20 times.

Finally sequence the activities and apply a timeline.  What and who first? What and who next? This is somewhat akin to a project plan except that you might have multiple pathways. You are looking for ways to the objective and sometimes you may be unsure which one will be the correct one.  It might depend on the actions of other parties.

Avoid blockers and build alternate pathways should a blocker arise due to the actions of another. What-if questions help.

Some pathways will be structured and well ordered, and you can deal with them using tried and proven methodologies. Others will require a test, measure, adapt approach.

Conclusion

The world is complicated – and there are few tried and proven answers that you can pull out of a book. Methodologies are simple ways to scale, but if they worked so too would projects. If you choose the wrong methodology, it will deliver the wrong answer. If you choose appropriate methodologies but fail to tailor, adapt and change according to circumstances—you will most likely end with the wrong answer.

Without a clear objective and adapting to the changing influences and constraints over time, success will not be a deliberate outcome it will be the result of luck.

Doubling down and doing more of the same, throwing more resources at a work program that isn’t working is futile. It’s the cause of schedule and cost blowout, and the accompanying reduction in functions and service, that so often characterises current projects and programs of work.

You will need flexibility, and a spoonful of courage. Don’t set your processes and sequence of activities in stone. Earlier choices may prove to be wrong as the strategy unfolds. New options will arise in response to the other party’s behaviour and external influences. None of these outcomes mean the objective is wrong, just that a pathway needs adapting.

Measure progress and adapt your processes and approach as circumstances change. Successful delivery requires experimentation in the face of change, not dogma. Try, test, adapt.  

Whether running a project or a program, a business process or a business unit, strategy is the game—a clear objective, recognising boundaries and constraints, coordinating coherent activities that will get you to your goal, and adapting to change. Consider starting the New Year by approaching things differently.

Building executable strategies and executing them, at all levels, is part of our hard-earned experience built on theory and practice of others. We share our knowledge and wisdom through our Practical Practices training programs at Kiah Academy.

If you want to talk about uplifting the capability of your team, or even about building your strategy, email us at [email protected].