Project management and spaghetti therapy: how to de-dramatize one's relationship with the unexpected by distinguishing complicated and complex?

 

BOEING 747 VS SPAGHETTI

 

"It's just too complicated!" Sharing our dismay at a project, a task or a change has the consequence of spreading a negative emotional charge and validating the feeling of being trapped in a situation that is beyond us.

 

At the same time, the ICCPM (International Centre for Complex Projects Management), whose 11th conference is to be held in Macao from 27 to 29 September 2020, confirms that projects are becoming more complex with regard to the digitalisation of processes, the globalisation of trade, technological innovations, new economic models and limited resources.

 

But how can the distinction between complicated and complex be beneficial in our relationship to the project?

 

And by trickle-down, in our actions towards our stakeholders: customers, employees, suppliers...?

 

 

In his wonderful book "Les 10 Règles d'Or du Changement" (Eyrolles Editions, 2014) , Eric Delavallée compares a complicated object such as a Boeing with the complexity of a dish of spaghetti *. On the one hand we have one world predictable, controllable and manageable because despite its hundreds of thousands of parts, an airplane can be reproduced identically. And on the other hand we have our pasta (with hot sauce and a lot of parmesan for me!). unpredictablesnever completely controllable.s and non-reproducibles.

 

By accepting the idea that these two dimensions intervene in any project and not only what is reducible to analysis, we detach ourselves from our will to be all-powerful and we give up trying to master every molecule.

 

Not that traditional project management tools are not important, they remain paramount. But if we add a new string to our bow, which is the ability to embrace change and take advantage of the unexpected then we can embody project leadership.

 

A HUMAN FACTOR NOT TO BE UNDERESTIMATED

 

Here is an example from my experience in developing spirits that illustrates how the world of controllable spirits is never fully controllable: suddenly the label of a spirit that is to be placed in an ice bucket is no longer water-resistant. We've never encountered this kind of problem with this paper, selected for its waterproof qualities.

 

At first glance, it's impossible to differentiate this production from the previous ones except that once in the ice, you end up with a crumpled label floating on the surface of the water like toilet paper.

 

The traceability policy put in place with the bottler allowed us to put the bottles concerned aside while we investigated. And fortunately, it was the brand's president himself who noticed the problem before customers discovered it with bottles shipped all over the world. The phone starts to heat up and so do my ears because we realize that there is a hole in the quality control racket and a supply shortage is looming...

 

At first, exchanges with suppliers are painful. A first analysis carried out (scientifically) with the bottles concerned in the paper manufacturer's laboratory concludes that it is the right waterproof reference that is used. The printer confirms that the right paper was used for the labels. They all conclude that it was the bottler who did not apply the labels correctly.

 

Despite the analysis report, I maintain that the paper is not waterproof: the truth is in the ice bucket! So what else is possible?

 

At this stage it becomes important to reassure the customer (in this case the spirits brand) and to see an opportunity in this situation. This is an opportunity to get suppliers to tighten the lines with their end customer (my customer) in order to build a value chain. This is what we modestly call 'framing resistance'.

 

A second laboratory analysis is organized, this time on the incriminated bottles and those of a previous batch. The result is indisputable: the paper is not waterproof (!)

 

After investigation, it turns out that it was a printing company employee, less experienced than the one who is usually in charge of the papers and on sick leave at the time, who selected the wrong roll: it is the same paper but not in its waterproof reference...

 

The unknown remains concerning the first (scientific) analysis at the manufacturer: how could it come to a wrong conclusion the first time? Orientation of the results? Negligence? Error? A paper supplier who covers for his printing customer to the detriment of a less important end customer?

 

Advice for the quality manager: carry out your analyses at an independent company in addition to the supplier in case of a problem with your materials (corks, labels, bottles, etc.).

 

THE UNPLANNED, THIS FRIEND WHO WANTS YOU WELL.

 

Today, each production is systematically tested in refrigerator, oven and ice bucket.

 

This feedback is the result of parameters that are beyond our control. But if it is exploited within the framework of a policy of continuous improvementit enriches our knowledge and brings surplus value to our client.

 

Welcoming the complexity of any project as a gift is what makes the difference between the leader from the manager.

 

Would you like some more spaghetti?

 

JEROME SAVOYE

 

 

* An example borrowed from Hervé Sérieyx (consultant and author of books on management)

 

PS: Download your spirits marketing map for free on www.myspiritfactory.com on the home page to get an overview when developing your product.

 

PS 2 : Ask for a free 45mn discovery call to discuss your project here : www.myspiritfactory.com/diagnostique-gratuit