respond with one paragraph on 3 discussion answers

I personally agree with author’s approach of “do more better”. I believe by focusing on tasks at the microscopic level is an example of Muda. The over planning is adjacent to over production as one of the seven types of waste. Individuals know to turn a door knob before opening a door, therefore the tasks should simply state open door. Such minimal tasks are not needed in a large project. Each project could and should be separated into different phases then broken down into smaller processes. One project with 1000 tasks requires a micromanagement approach in which task have no leniency in the approach.

Where I work, we have work instructions to show steps on how a process should be completed. The length of a work instruction depends on the individuals involved in the development and updating of the document. Although the tasks could be very simple, it will have 25 steps. This causes issues because some of the steps are not critical. An auditor, who has no knowledge of the process, sees that one insignificant step was not followed, which could result in a fine. I understand a work instruction and a project are not a direct correlation but it demonstrates the negative impact of over analyzing.

Leach, L.P. (2014). Critical Chain Project Managment (3rd edition) Norwood, MA: Artech House

1. Address the claim by Leach (2014) that project managers assume legitimacy of the conventional system and encourage a “do more better” (p. 37) approach while ignoring the design of the project management system itself. Do you agree or disagree and why?

Moderation must exist between the PM managing the legitimacy of the conventional system versus ignoring the design of the project. Project managers should be in tune with the project itself. If miles of paperwork and procedures are added to the execution of the project, the results will only be convoluted. To me, project management is like swinging a baseball bat at a ball. A batter should have an understanding of the mechanics, skills like how to swing and keeping your eye on the ball. These skills shouldn’t be ignored while on-deck, because its necessary to get a hit. On the same token at it is not in the best interest of the batter to be reviewing a manual on best practices of swinging a bat with the bat laying at his/her feet. If having to choose a side, I would side with Leach in this regard. The examples used in the book describing legitimacy is “One study showed that their buildings cost them four times as much per square foot as local construction by nongovernment purchasers to build a simple office building.”(Leach, 2014). When a project yields, or will yield waste at this magnitude, not only should the project manager consider a reality check, but some of the stakeholders involved should as well.

In the same analogy above, in order for the batter to be successful, the requirements need to be clearly defined. For example how heavy and long is the bat, how wide is the strike zone, or how many strikes are allowed at each at bat. According to Leach (2014) “do more better” is no different. “If your objective is to reliably complete projects to the scope, schedule, and cost, you must define those requirements accurately.” (Leach, 2014).

Rational decision making from a top down saves a great deal of strife and offers guidance. But it is also capable of fostering scope creep and waste. Much like safety, everyone has a responsibility to “do more better”, including the PM. Working for the federal government I am exposed to in some cases a comedic amount of “red-tape” to get a particular process completed. Project plans are held in high regard by everyone. That means a project will have input from everyone and be so cumbersome by the time the project execution is initiated it is nearly impossible to complete on time.

Leach, L.P. (2014). Critical Chain Project Management (3rd edition) Norwood, MA: Artech House Inc.

Address the claim by Leach (2014) that project managers assume legitimacy of the conventional system and encourage a “do more better” (p. 37) approach while ignoring the design of the project management system itself. Do you agree or disagree and why?

I agree with Leach that the project managers consider the legitimacy of the conventional system and encourage a "do

more better " approach. It leads to project plans with thousands of activities which will result in over-planning and makes the project plan lengthy (Leach, p.18).

The project manager is accountable for reducing the problems encountered in making sure that all planning strategies are well executed. In one case, the agency canceled a project after having spent over a billion dollars on it (Leach, p.17). When "do more better" approach is used by the project managers, it leads to additional planning, additional procedures and can also lead to increase in costs like in the case mentioned above.

If the project is to be successfully performed, the details should be characterized appropriately. The project managers should work with the sponsor and stakeholders to guarantee that there is a natural approach of what the project will bring when it will be finished, how much is the cost, how the job will be performed, and what the advantages could be.

Reference

Leach, L.P. (2014). Critical chain project management. (2nd Ed.). Boston: Artech House.