Every DC manger has a list of projects that must be completed in a given amount of time in order to continue to move the organization forward. This is true for managers across all business sectors. Upon closer examination, you will see that getting those projects done, and achieving the desired objectives, hinges on planning.

The Case For Planning

Can you imagine doing even a relatively simple project like painting a room, without first thinking it through and doing the basic planning? While actually painting the room is no big deal, when you consider all of the planning that is necessary just to get started, it can be a bit overwhelming. No, I am not going to bore you with a list of all the details – trust me, the list is quite long even after you have reached agreement on what color to apply. Those of us who have successfully painted a room know that the preparation far exceeds the actual painting. And, then when you have finished applying the final coat of paint, there’s the cleanup, putaway, and returning of the room to its intended purpose.

Still, you have to admit there is some satisfaction in accomplishing a project that adds value, not to mention being able to scratch one project off the list.

I used this panting a room analogy because most everyone can relate to it and the processes are common to projects in general. You have to know what you’re going to do, how much you’re going to spend doing it, when you are going to start and how long it will take to complete.

Three Key Project Planning Factors

Michael Ensby, a quality and organizational development consultant, instructor and director at Clarkson University School of Business, who contributed to an article on this subject some time ago, acknowledges that when you break it down you discover that there are really only (3) key factors in planning any project; performance, cost, and time:

1. Performance – This is all about getting straight on what you want to accomplish. Ref. the above example - what’s the problem with the room and how will painting it fix the problem? What are the options and alternatives to getting it done?
2. Cost – How much will it cost to achieve the objective? Does it produce any returnable value?
3. Time – What is the schedule for starting and completing the project within the budget?

Because the above planning factors can, and often will, conflict with each other, they need to be prioritized. Again, using on our example - if the budget for painting the room is set at $100 bucks, you will not be able to hire a professional painter, which brings into question the capability and availability of internal resources to get the project done on time.

Ensby says, “One of the problems you run into in poorly managed projects is everybody wants maximum capability right now for nothing. That’s a theoretical impossibility. What you have to do is sit down early with the stakeholders and get them to agree on the scope characteristics and where tradeoffs are going to happen.”

He goes on to recommend breaking down project requirements into “musts”, “wants” and “likes” Then you need to make sure the musts can be achieved within the time and budget parameters. This is important because by focusing on musts you can prevent scope creep – which happens when new tasks and objectives are added on during the latter phases of a project that contribute to delays and cost overruns, i.e., adding new window drapes to the newly painted room.

As important as the above three factors are, getting everyone on-board is essential. That starts with establishing a common project goal, something that can be stated in a few words and that nobody can forget. This is especially true for big projects like an organization-wide change initiative. Using software tools like Microsoft Projects and other such charts can help manage the details. But, if you haven’t established the goals and have buy-in, computerized charts aren’t going to help, because the details will never come into play.

Final Thoughts

The more projects you do the more you realize that most of your conflicts occur in the implementation stage when things aren’t going well.

Ensby makes that clear when he asks, “What if you had that conflict in the definition and planning stage and everybody stated their case, and fought for their position, and provided hard evidence for why they have that position, and then you collaborate on an optimal outcome that respects everybody’s position?”

It’s hard to argue with this logic. Think about how much less conflict there would be in the implementation stage and how much more support there would be for future projects.

Agree or disagree with Holste's perspective? What would you add? Let us know your thoughts for publication in the SCDigest newsletter Feedback section, and on the website. Upon request, comments will be posted with the respondent's name or company withheld.

You can also contact Holste directly to discuss your material handling or distribution challenges at the Feedback button below.