How to balance process intensity with Creative Freedom

One of the biggest challenges companies face with project management is determining the right level of “process” for the teams to follow.

On one hand, a highly structured process drives consistency across the project portfolio, facilitates the advancement of individual project manager and project management office (PMO) capabilities, sets clear project expectations for management, helps balance the many project trade-offs necessary to optimize customer and business value, and can increase predictability of getting across the finish line.

On the other hand, highly structured processes can stifle innovation, create frustration, lead to turnover of key personnel, and actually slow projects down by requiring the team to perform unnecessary and/or excessive work. After all, one size doesn’t fit all. The team members are the subject matter experts and we should give them the freedom to run the project as they see fit. But how much freedom should they be trusted with?  

Where is your organization on the spectrum from being too process-oriented (having difficulty innovating) to being too creative/flexible (having difficulty getting projects completed)? This article discusses the thinking behind balancing these competing priorities – in a way that helps you move your projects forward, faster while still delivering on promised results.

As you know, project management doesn’t exist in a vacuum. The most effective teams know how to apply project management processes and practices to their specific situation whether it be developing a new manufacturing process, upgrading to a new version of ERP, implementing a new customer service workflow, etc.. For the remainder of this article, I’m going to be applying project management processes to New Product Development (NPD) as the example for exploring the “what’s the right level of PM process” question. However, similar logic can be applied to other project situations as well.

Like other complex projects, a New Product Development project must pull together several individual processes and make them work together. Some of these processes include:

Project Management - The process of initiating, planning, and executing the NPD projects. This includes the highly visible project schedule, but also scope, resources/cost, stakeholder management, project risk management, team structure/roles, status reporting, etc.

Phase Gate - The process of moving the project through phases of increasing investment and corresponding (business/technical/commercial) risk reduction, which are separated by governance/gate reviews.

Quality System - The processes that NPD must follow when the product being developed is within a regulated industry. For example, for medical devices to be marketed in the US, the FDA requires NPD to adhere to “design controls” as defined in 21CFR820.30.

Technical/ Business - The processes, systems, and tools that the various subject matter experts (SMEs), functions, and/or company have deemed to be effective for developing, industrializing, and commercializing the product, e.g., the processes for software development, the product document management system, the requirements management system, regional market shaping and pricing, supplier qualification, procurement, installation and servicing, product surveillance, complaint handling, customer support, etc..

Getting these four broad pieces, as well as their respective sub-processes to work together seamlessly is a key to project success. As you can imagine, this is no easy feat for companies especially when adherence to quality system processes may look different from project to project and there may be multiple (different) technical/business processes, systems, tools in play from project to project.

Figure 1. Product Development Framework Overview. 

Project management is the mechanism that connects the dots between the multiple other NPD processes and subsequently, is the glue that holds them together for the project. Within NPD, project management has proven itself to be an invaluable tool in “getting things done” within today’s complex matrixed organizations. However, there are also stories of failed attempts where the “processes” eclipsed the project itself - where the team/organization became so obsessed with following the processes they lost track of the project objectives. The challenge for management in general or the Project Management Office (PMO) specifically, is in maximizing the benefits of project management (speed to market, efficient organization of complex efforts, and meeting customer and business needs), while minimizing unintended consequences.

How Bad is the Problem?

It’s helpful to think beyond the details of the respective processes to the actual results that you’re seeing from them. Consider the following scenarios to perform a quick assessment of your specific situation:

New products deliver the expected financial results.

This is the ultimate measure of success for a NPD project. A “yes” indicates that the organization is realizing the sales and profit numbers that were projected in the project business cases (that were used to justify the projects in the first place).

New products are delivered predictably to plan.

This is a reflection of the team’s capability to properly understand the customer/user needs, define the requirements for the new product, create a plan for developing, manufacturing, and commercializing the new product, and then execute to that plan. A “yes” indicates that on average, NPD projects do a pretty good job of producing products that meet customer needs, on time, and on budget.

Management and teams would agree that the “process intensity” is right.

This is a reflection of how “tuned-in” the people feel the business/technical processes are for the business. “Process intensity” considers elements such as; product complexity, experience of team members, managers, and the business overall, maturity of the various technical/business processes, and clarity around quality system processes (if applicable). A “yes” indicates that people feel that the process intensity is about right and facilitates them doing a high-quality job.

This is obviously a simplified assessment and a deeper dive would enable you to target the specific areas to go after, but directionally should inform you whether or not you have a process problem.

Project Management Process Intensity Q&A

The following are excerpts from an interview conducted by PM Network Magazine and published in 2010 where the original answers were modified to encompass the wider breadth of new product development:

What does being over-processed look like?

The process feels like a non-value-added weight slowing the team down.

Although organizations need some level of structure/process, there is the very real possibility that they become too bogged down in them. And that can lead to a loss of the agility, creativity, and flexibility needed for projects to be truly successful.

Is process always needed—or are there times to loosen up?

Being able to strike the right balance between structure and the freedom to do your own thing is arguably one of the foremost PM success factors – at the organizational, functional, and individual levels. Unfortunately, there is no easy answer, because finding the sweet spot is very specific to the organization, the marketplace, the products, and the project situation.

Also, I want to point out that the success factor here should be focused on the “processes” (and practices) and not the “individuals.”  There’s no doubt that the team members are critical to project success, but if you focus on only the individuals, you’ll miss the bigger picture of the overall project environment. When management puts the onus totally on the individuals, they’re really passing the buck and looking for personal heroics to carry the day, i.e., You’ve probably seen the so-called “tiger team” assigned to a high-visibility, mission critical project where they perform miracles and launch a great new product? Most companies can do this on a one-off basis, but few can replicate it across all projects in the portfolio and/or sustain that performance over the long-term.

HOW CAN ORGANIZATIONS IMPLEMENT FLEXIBILITY IN THEIR PM PROCESS?

Start by recognizing that process is scalable. Also, it’s easier to scale down than up. So I like to see organizations start with a comprehensive structure at the project management office (PMO) level with scalability guidelines, then allow the project manager and team to scale it down based on the project situation at hand.

Think of scalability as the mechanism that dials-in the process intensity to match the project/product situation at hand. 

What about the people?

On the people side, team members—and the functional managers that assign them to projects—need to be well trained on what it means to work in the project environment. The best teams are able to quickly make the cross-functional trade-offs, based on the defined priorities, to deliver optimized business and customer outcomes. This means that team members need to know how to give and take while balancing the project/product objectives with functional objectives.

In companies that struggle with the so-called silo mentality, a common complaint from team members is that they’re so focused on their specific area that they don’t understand the big picture of the project. In general, companies underestimate how powerful a motivator it is when individuals can see how their contributions impact customer and business value through projects. So think about what level of process is needed to fill this need.

Also, functional managers must focus on building functional capabilities and delegating the right level of authority to their respective core team members, rather than parachuting into project meetings to address every issue that comes up.

When is process most important?

While there are many variables, three characteristics to consider when trying to determine the level of process required include:

1. The goals of the organization (short vs. medium vs. long-term)
2. The culture of the organization (size and organizational complexity, how power is balanced, decisions are made, and work is accomplished)
3. The specific project/product at hand (new/novel, similar to past projects, an extension of an existing product, etc.) 

All of these are arguably complex in themselves and span the spectrum from one extreme to the other. However, an example that might warrant the most structured processes would be a weak-matrix, siloed organization with a long-term investment perspective, developing products that are largely similar to past ones. Say a large company working on regular incremental improvements to already successful products.

In this scenario, having a focus on processes enables continuous process improvement across the board, which will improve the company’s PM and NPD capability over time.

Is there any situation in which process is not as important?

The opposite of the above situation: a strong matrix organization, with a short-term investment horizon, performing highly innovative, never-been-done-before product development projects. For instance, a start-up high-tech company with an exit strategy of being acquired in the next 12 months. Of course, these examples are broad generalizations.

Does too much emphasis on process cause companies to lose their competitive edge?

Certainly, if your company fits the bill of the high-tech / short-term focused company described above, then too much structure will slow you down, thus dulling your competitive edge.

However, if you’re like the weak matrix company example mostly working on extensions of existing products – a robust structure that enables you to consistently and predictably deliver new products will arguably provide a long-term competitive advantage.

Can too much freedom and creativity cause organizations to lose control?

If the level of freedom is not warranted by the business or project situation at hand, then yes, you’ll put yourself at risk for losing control. It’s very important to take an objective perspective when trying to properly balance an organization or you can find yourself in the situation where the “tail’s wagging the dog,” i.e. the teams/individuals are asking for less process and oversight, but the business actually needs more.

How can organizations create a balance between process and creativity?

Process is largely within the realm of the organization, while creativity is largely within the realm of the individual. Organizations that strike a good balance are ones that allow individuals to be creative yet have installed the process boundaries that will keep everyone moving in the same general direction. The level of creativity required to perform a job successfully varies from job to job and the boundaries should change to match the job, so providing the space to be creative is not an all-or-nothing proposition. Too much creative space—a lack of boundaries—can be detrimental to those jobs, individuals or situations that need the structure. Most people have complained about the “rules” at one point or another, but many—including project managers themselves—don’t know what to do in the absence of structure.

Whose responsibility is it to create that balance?

I see this as a shared responsibility between senior management, the PMO and the individual project managers/SMEs. First, senior management needs to work with the PMO to build a NPD process framework to complement its culture and goals. Second, the PMO should work with the project managers, SMEs, and functional managers to understand how the boundaries within the framework can change based on the needs of the specific project at hand. And third, the team needs to scale as appropriate to bring out the value of the structure. And these three steps must take place in order. If steps one and two are solid, then most project managers will do fine on the third. However, without steps one and two, we’re back to depending on individual heroics, which is really hit-or-miss.

Summary

It’s very important to take the long view when modifying / adjusting your organization, processes and personnel skills. A few things that should be considered, when trying to balance process with creativity:

• Project management doesn’t exist in a silo. For example, a NPD project must pull together multiple other processes to deliver quality products, including phase-gate, quality system, and various technical/business (functional specific) processes systems, and tools.
• Processes should be customized to the organization’s culture, project goals, and business goals. Some companies require a more stringent approach than others.
• Effective project management “connects the dots” across the organization and breaks the silo mentality by providing an end-to-end view that enables individuals to see how their specific contribution fits into the larger picture.
• (Senior) management must buy-in and set the processes, but it’s up to project managers to adapt them to the project at hand.

About the Author:

Gary Chin has 20+ years of experience in medical device new product development as a consultant, project manager, and engineer. In addition to blogging on the topic of accidental project management, Gary is Vice President of Client Solutions for Action for Results, Inc, a consulting firm focused on connecting strategy and execution for life sciences product development. Opinions are his own.

This article originally published on Gary's personal blog.