Using Operational Resources within Projects Part 1 of 2

1. The Issue 

I raised the following question in a LinkedIn group: 

 A common (unsolved?) problem  

How would you recommend addressing the following issue that is common in internal projects in enterprises that are not project-based? 

 The objective is: “to use internal technical personnel as resources on internal improvement projects, without jeopardizing day-to-day operations”.  

 The situation is as follows: projects need predictable availability of human resources; operations needs to be able to address unforeseeable situations immediately they occur; there is not enough project work to justify dedicating technical project resources.  

 The conflict is as follows: projects need to be able to rely on advance resource planning with the required resources available for a given period at a predefined time; operations needs to have priority without notice for the same resources. 

How would you analyse this in more detail so as to propose realistic solutions to allow projects to deliver reliably? 

I received a number of responses. They are provided below and confirm that the problem does not currently seem to have a satisfactory solution. These contributions do, however, explain the challenge in more detail. 

2. One approach 

One person responded with: 

 This is a great question and one that resists easy solutions. Let me restate the problem statement in order to position an approach: is it possible to manage projects successfully when human resources availability is unpredictable? 

 Experience says yes, but with difficulty and two major rules of engagement: 

 1 – the end date cannot be predicted with high accuracy, so the project sponsor needs to understand it will move and likely more than desired. This will also drive less predictability in budget achievement as well since a drawn-out project is more expensive than one that finishes quickly. 

  2 – there will be a higher project management load and therefore expense, as continuous replanning will be required in tandem with more effort on resource management and negotiation. It’s also likely the QA team will need more effort since discontinuity of resources drives more handoffs and more opportunities for unforeseen misunderstandings. 

 So overall it’s a more expensive way to run a project, but as long as the sponsor is willing to make the appropriate trade-off, it can be made to work. It’s no one’s favourite kind of project to manage, though. 

2.1 Remaining issue 

The analysis of the impact of unreliable availability of project resources is quite correct. It suggests one solution: to set realistic expectations. 

 However, if that solution is unacceptable to the organisation – i.e. the business requires timely, predictable delivery, how do you suggest that this organisational problem could be addressed? 

3. Proposed approach  

I suggested another approach: change to way the organisation works – adapt the interrupt-driven operational mindset to work less disruptively with the planned project view. 

So I asked the question:
Can anyone suggest how to move this revolution forwards? 

3.1 The challenge 

This is the answer I received: 

From my experience this is not really going to work. My advice: find a way to separate the project and operational work. Ring fence the project (or be prepared for a nightmare). 

In fact you probably can estimate a delivery but with all that contingency……
�
Normally your operational staffing level is optimal for the operational tasks. i.e. little spare-time already.In fact the guiding criterion for success is “occupancy” – keeping people busy – rather than “throughput”-getting more projects to complete, faster.
�
By nature the operational “Keep the Business Running” activities will always be erratic. It is not so much a mindset but more a service level issue. In any case using support staff on projects will always jeopardise the project planning and possibly also the quality. Interrupted tasks will also take longer in actual hours with start-up activities and re-activation and so on. Also there is an increase in project management and probably other management time. Project delay or contingency pushing out delivery dates will obviously delay any benefit etc. In short there is an important impact on cost (and credibility).
�
This can only work if the projects in question have little urgency or value to the business and nobody cares if it is delivered or not. The other side of the coin is to accept lower service levels i.e. operational tasks are left undone longer – a risk to the business. 

The solutions could be:

 Since none of these approaches provides a satisfactory solution, the challenge remains open. A different view will be provided next but … 

4. Can it be solved? 

I will propose a solution next month to this problem, but would like you to think about it and get in touch through the blog with other readers and with me on how you see the issue – and how you would address it!