Planning complexity – dealing with complexity

Contrary to the widespread view that far-sighted action is a sign of wisdom and responsibility, I maintain that it is nothing more than an attempt to compensate for feelings of insecurity and to suggest that reality can be controlled. Plans are based on idealization and that is precisely the reason why they are so often impossible to keep. They create false expectations and focus on input, activities, milestones and short-term results. But once again:

To set implementations on a successful course, you need to focus on the result, the desired goal, and only report on progress criteria that document that you are getting closer to this goal. While additional effort in conception primarily has a positive effect on execution and ensures significant productivity, speed and momentum, the statement “planning reduces effort” is not true in my experience. The exact opposite is the case. Overly detailed implementation planning does not ensure productivity, but rather destroys it.

We have to say goodbye to the idea that we can predetermine reality with plans:

• Thinking through long-term plans (more than one to three weeks) automatically leads to focusing on activities and losing sight of the reason for the plan, namely the desired result.
• Wherever activities come to the fore, those involved think of more and more supposedly necessary activities – an unpleasant, resource-consuming snowball effect.
• Where activities are planned, they are also adhered to; what has been discussed and agreed is also implemented. Unfortunately, this attitude, which is commendable in itself, often leads to unproductivity, because incorrect plans are adhered to with the same consistency – even when they are recognized as such. The result in the implementation process: unnecessary substantive work and a lot of unnecessary effort, loss of time and energy as well as stress.
• Things that are planned are also reasonably controlled. The two negative effects of this are Planning takes a lot of time, as does monitoring. In addition, monitoring creates an attitude of justification based on plans and not on results. The result is a false culture of implementation that blocks rather than motivates.

Planning complexity correctly implemented

Most people would like to have a plan for upcoming changes. As it is generally not possible to plan the implementation of strategies in the strictest sense, other orientation parameters are needed: According to the motto “the journey is the destination”, you should always have the destination in mind as a guideline for all the steps you need to take in your plan. Always proceed by sight – especially when planning – even if it feels unfamiliar and causes some uncertainty. Try to follow the following principles:

• Good implementation management has a clear idea of how to proceed and only ever plans on sight (activities are scheduled on a weekly or bi-weekly basis).
• A good implementation manager answers the question about the exact procedure with: “I don’t know that either. But I can tell you how we can tell or measure that we are making progress and what the next steps are.” Because nobody can say what will happen in two months’ time. The approach must be well thought out, have a structure and system and three to five selected criteria that indicate whether you are approaching the goal or not.
• Progress is monitored using these criteria and not by ticking off activities. Use a maximum of five criteria to check the progress of your project again and again to determine whether you are still on track towards the general goal or whether you are getting lost in the details.
• This type of focus and effectiveness requires a high degree of flexibility. It enables us to deal professionally with vagueness and uncertainty and gives us the necessary confidence to handle dynamic plans and decisions.

I experience time and again that stakeholders, steering committees, etc. in particular first have to be convinced that the aim is to achieve results rather than milestones. That’s why it’s very important to me that management clearly defines to stakeholders when the implementation project is successful and what criteria are used to measure progress. This requires a completely different type of management and control than is demonstrated in the usual project management jours fixes, when each sub-project manager reports on what they have and have not achieved in their project.

As part of a change project aimed at increasing internal customer appreciation over the next five years, a detailed communication plan was drawn up that specified exactly what content was to be communicated to whom and in what form. The sub-project manager responsible for communication also ensured that the activities listed in the plan were completed and ticked them off one by one. The result: the employees did not feel involved by the management and were not reached despite communication. This is not uncommon in companies! It is always the same phenomenon: the focus is on well-intentioned plans and activities and not on the desired result.

The communication sub-project manager should have reported his progress based on the following criteria – this would have been the better alternative:

1. Coverage level Feedback Manager Communication
2. Emotional feedback Employees (target group)
3. Content feedback Employees (target group).

In his report on how he is getting closer to the goal, he would have noticed the communication deficits and could have looked for ways to eliminate them.

The only thing that is absolutely necessary in a change project are a few, but clear criteria that can indicate whether progress is being made in terms of the objective and also in fact. These result criteria should be as specific as possible. Even a soft statement such as: “Meier and Schulz have the feeling that we are making progress” can help, because you now know who you have to stick to and have to ask them why they feel good.

The statement is perhaps somewhat more precise:

Employee satisfaction is increasing or cooperation between areas A and B is showing less friction or, to put it bluntly, the cancellation rate has fallen by 8 percent. So it’s not just about hard and verified facts, authentic and honest assessments are also used as an indicator of the implementation process.

Don’t make the world more complicated than necessary! Follow the principle of goal-oriented planlessness and continuously focus on what is really important before and during implementation: the result again and again.

Back to overview