So You Have Project Overload?

The current flavour, or fashion, in shared services centers spanning finance and accounting, human resources, etc., is to kick-off improvement projects. These projects would broadly be categorized under the umbrella of transformations/reengineering, Lean, Six Sigma and IT/automations. However, what happens when there are multiple projects initiated in the shared services center? How do you prioritize when there is an overlap between these projects? What is the aftermath of taking the decision to abandon some projects? While the intent to initiate projects and contribute to business objectives is welcome, it gets diluted in a scenario with multiple projects and overlapping or similar priorities. From my own experience, multiple projects generate WASTE in the organization – as a result of mis-use of resources, breed conflicting priorities, and a slow-down in the progress of desired business outcomes. Furthermore, they sow frustration in employees who have toiled hard to complete project tasks but are faced with the possibility of the project being scrapped. There is evidence that multiple projects divert the bandwidth of frontline managers from core tasks (coaching, resolving customer escalations, performance management, etc.) to project tasks. Plus, employees find themselves caught in the swirl as departmental heads introduce projects as part of departmental goals. An interesting scenario I experienced was when a transformation project continued from one year to the next, by incorporating cosmetic changes in the charter. The new project manager reworded the title of the project and made superficial changes to the business case. He then convinced senior management that his new approach was more viable compared to that of the previous project manager. Why do some people nevertheless persist in pushing multiple improvement initiatives? There are some "perceived benefits" – none of them valid: camouflage senior management by projecting that you and/or the department are spearheading several key improvement initiatives protect your department and yourself in the event of any organizational realignment/consolidation of functions influence management to inflate your headcount and thus position your department as a critical business unit increase organizational silos and thereby safeguard your own turf against any possible threat impress clients by showcasing your abilities in multi-tasking and handling multiple priorities enable a parallel projection to slow down any decision from top management to simplify organizational structures which might reduce number of projects dress up a business case for travel to client locations and increase discretionary allowances Oftentimes, there is a preference to convert tasks into projects and then extend them for a longer period of time – say, two years. For example, in one of my previous organizations the task was to change the shift timings of a particular business unit due to corresponding changes in time zone. The same could have been communicated in a written or verbal format or maybe through the Intranet. Instead, the business unit head converted this into a project, assembling a cross-functional team, and continued it for more than a month. Project members would cringe at spending additional hours in the office to complete assigned tasks and they’d end up spending less time with their colleagues. In another example, a change related to a billing code in the ERP system was converted into an elaborate project spanning two months. Faced with these kinds of project proliferation circumstances, the roles of senior management or executives assume significance. They must adopt a deep dive approach to sift through the numerous projects and evaluate the pros and cons. Moreover, a robust project prioritization document should be prepared and subjected to an extensive debate in the boardroom. In one outsourcing set-up, the number of projects to be completed in a single financial year exceeded one hundred, however, the management board insisted on the project lead prioritizing projects, aligned to business goals. As a result, the number of projects scaled down to thirty. Internal chaos resulted, as project teams were disbanded. Multiple projects are likely to increase the risk of business failure, which translates to missed commitments to customers and cost overruns. Too many projects in a shared services set-up foretell of a majority being set up for failure. This causes strain and demands multi-tasking from the PMO (Project Management Office). It also leads to project overload and multiplies risk, as managing the entire spectrum of projects is a cumbersome task. While proponents may preach that a large number of projects gives exposure to employees, it also breeds animosity between employees, which cannot be ignored. There is evidence that project team members, including project managers, often view other projects with a degree of scepticism. At times, employees participating in multiple projects compete against their own colleagues to gain mileage, and thus side-line the value of team work and collaboration. Plus, project team members rush to complete the tasks thereby weakening project controls and quality. Evidence of multiple projects may cast doubts in employees’ minds as to whether leadership has any clarity on business outcomes. Just consider how often employees request clarification on multiple projects in town halls, management meetings, webinars and surveys – which later leads to a course correction by leaders and causes internal embarrassment. Multiple projects can also give the impression of a diluted organizational vision, leading employees to consider opportunities elsewhere. The solution is a well-rounded and robust project selection strategy – a wise fit for shared services centers to lessen organizational complexities. Furthermore, the successful execution of a few projects will create a ‘PULL’ for more employees to participate and contribute to projects. I am reminded of the phrase coined by architect and furniture designer Ludwig Mies Van der Rohe: "To Do Less Is To Do More," which is increasingly resonating as a management principle in some organizations. Whether shared services centers will play the Pied Piper remains to be seen… [inlinead]

So You Have Project Overload?

Upcoming Events

Craft a Right-fit Target Operating Model for Finance with aTOM

Why GPO Authority and AP Evolution Depend on Visibility

WorkX

How Finance Leaders in Mid-Sized Businesses Can Leverage AI

How Agentic “AI Colleagues” are Transforming Shared Services

Next-Gen GBS: Leveraging AI to Lead in the Big Finance Age

Follow Us

Latest Webinars

Today’s AI for Tomorrow’s Finance: The Future of Accounts Payable

Inside ASP’s AP Transformation: What It Really Takes to Modernize Global Invoice Processing in SAP

The Top 5 Priorities of Forward-Thinking CFOs in Midsize Businesses

Recommended

22 Years of SSON Excellence – SSO Week 2018 Review

Cyber Security – the New ‘Top Risk’ for your Shared Services?

SSON Podcast Series: Kelly Switt, Citi – "selling automation as a concept"

Winning the War for Talent – in a Ballroom!

How can Asia deliver more value – faced with the “threat” of robotic process aut...

A New Services Triumvirate Powers Up Asia: Technology, Talent, and Data

Podcast with Western Union's Ricardo Badillo: Costa Rica and Careers

Continuous Improvement: a Little "Retro" is a good thing

Site Tour: How do you transform your services? Sodexo’s multi-functional SSO ope...

SSON Report: New Opportunities Define Malaysia’s Service Proposition

In a World of Global Business Services: How to Control Your Destiny

Is There a Long-term Career in Shared Services?

FIND CONTENT BY TYPE

SSON COMMUNITY

ADVERTISE WITH US

JOIN THE SSON COMMUNITY

So You Have Project Overload?

Upcoming Events

Follow Us

Subscribe to our Free Newsletter

Latest Webinars

Recommended

FIND CONTENT BY TYPE

SSON COMMUNITY

ADVERTISE WITH US

JOIN THE SSON COMMUNITY