Resource Projection Best Practice 1 – Standardized Assumptions

StrategyDriven Resource Projection Article | Resource Projection Best Practice 1 - Standardized AssumptionsUnderstanding the resource cost of activities is key to creating confidence that assigned work can be completed successfully and on time. Regardless of whether activities are frequently recurring and therefore well understood or one time efforts to produce a unique product or service, the use of standardized resource assumptions greatly helps the organization anticipate the quantity and type of resources needed to perform its approved work.[wcm_restrict plans=”25541, 25542, 25653″]

Standardized resource assumptions offer several benefits to the strategic planning and tactical business execution of an organization’s ongoing activities and one time initiatives. Applying standardized estimates to a given activity:

  • establishes performance standards for both managers and individual contributors
  • eliminates the need for constant renegotiation of resources for major ongoing activities
  • increases the efficiency the long-range resource projection, monthly/weekly capacity planning, and near-term scheduling
  • enables comparison to competitor organizations as a way of benchmarking performance and identifying improvement opportunities

Standardized resource assumptions should be periodically challenged and updated to account for changes in the processes, workforce, and equipment used to perform work. This typically involves assessing resource consumption information gathered while performing the activity. Optimally, data gathered during the performance of several like activities is analyzed in aggregate to ensure estimate updates reflect efficient work performance and not a single, inefficient effort.

Deviations to standardized assumptions should not be taken lightly. In cases where deviations need to be made (and there will be occasions where deviations need to be made), they should, at a minimum, be approved by the activity owner. Establishing such an approval mechanism maintains the credibility and reinforces the use of the standardized resource estimates while at the same time providing flexibility to accommodate the localized differences that occur within all businesses.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”25541, 25541, 25653″]


Hi there! Gain access to this article with a FREE StrategyDriven Insights Library – Sample Subscription. It’s FREE Forever with No Credit Card Required.

Sign-up now for your FREE StrategyDriven Insights Library – Sample Subscription

In addition to receiving access to Resource Projection Best Practice 1 – Standardized Assumptions, you’ll help advance your career and business programs through anytime, anywhere access to:

  • A sampling of dozens of Premium how-to documents across 7 business functions and 28 associated programs
  • 2,500+ Expert Contributor management and leadership articles
  • Expert advice provided via StrategyDriven’s Advisors Corner

Best of all, it’s FREE Forever with No Credit Card Required.

[/wcm_nonmember]

Additional Resources

StrategyDriven Contributors recommend the following resource that elaborates and compliments the Standardized Assumptions best practice:

A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Third Edition
by the Project Management Institute


About the Author

Nathan Ives, StrategyDriven Principal is a StrategyDriven Principal and Host of the StrategyDriven Podcast. For over twenty years, he has served as trusted advisor to executives and managers at dozens of Fortune 500 and smaller companies in the areas of management effectiveness, organizational development, and process improvement. To read Nathan’s complete biography, click here.

Strategic Planning Best Practice 7 – Shared Accountability

StrategyDriven Strategic Planning ArticleOrganizational silos act as barriers; hindering the performance of business units, work groups, and individuals as they strive to achieve the organization’s shared goals. Nowhere in the organization are silos more destructive than if they exist within the executive team. Here, silos prevent the free flow of information and resources needed to successfully execute cross-functional initiatives with the barriers to collaboration cascading downward though the entire organization. To help prevent these silos from forming, all strategic plan goals must be shared equally by all executives.[wcm_restrict plans=”40654, 25542, 25653″]

Shared accountability for the organization’s strategic plan implies that all executives will be personally and consequentially involved with the organization’s mission driving initiatives and activities. While one executive may serve as an activity’s sponsor, all are committed to supporting the activity with their knowledge, insights, and controlled resources.

When accountability is shared, all individuals are motivated by the success of the project. Commonly shared accountability implies that both the rewards of success and losses associated with failure will be shared by the entire executive team. This highly personalized incentive scheme motivates executives to breakdown the organizational silos and other barriers that might otherwise inhibit information and resource sharing.

To be fully effective, shared accountability should be extended to the organization’s managers and staff. As this occurs, workflow constraints diminish and the organization as a whole becomes more effective.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”40654, 25542, 25653″]


Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.

Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library

Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually).

Not sure? Click here to learn more.

Buy the Article

Don’t need a subscription? Buy access to Strategic Planning Best Practice 7 – Shared Accountability for just $2!

[/wcm_nonmember]

Additional Resource

StrategyDriven Contributors recommend the following resource that elaborates and compliments the Shared Accountability best practice:

Silos, Politics and Turf Wars: A Leadership Fable About Destroying the Barriers That Turn Colleagues Into Competitors
by Patrick M. Lencioni


About the Author

Nathan Ives, StrategyDriven Principal is a StrategyDriven Principal and Host of the StrategyDriven Podcast. For over twenty years, he has served as trusted advisor to executives and managers at dozens of Fortune 500 and smaller companies in the areas of management effectiveness, organizational development, and process improvement. To read Nathan’s complete biography, click here.

Recommended Resource – Bringing Out the Best in People

Bringing Out the Best in People
by Aubrey C. Daniels

About the Reference

Bringing Out the Best in People by Aubrey C. Daniels illustrates how executives and managers can motivate their workforce to goal achievement through a system of positive reinforcement. Dr. Daniels’s process shapes worker behaviors by identifying an individual’s recognition and reward reinforcers, establishing a fair performance monitoring system, and providing effective, continuous feedback.

Benefits of Using this Reference

An organization only becomes truly StrategyDriven when all of its members share a common vision, maintain focus on that vision, and continuously exhibit a commitment to successfully achieving the vision. StrategyDriven Contributors like Bringing Out the Best in People because it provides a very direct means of gaining and maintaining employee commitment to the organization’s goals. The system of positive reinforcement presented by Dr. Daniels is powerful because it is readily actionable. Many of the best practice recommendations found on the StrategyDriven website compliment the programs prescribed in Bringing Out the Best in People; making this book a StrategyDriven recommended read.

New Model Released – Strategic Organizational Alignment

StrategyDriven contributors are pleased to announce the release of our second model, Strategic Organizational Alignment. This model depicts activities and resulting products created at various levels within an organization that foster strategic organizational alignment.

Resource Management Best Practice 2 – Categorical Activity Prioritization

StrategyDriven Resource Management ArticleAn organization’s mission defines its purpose for being. Making the mission measurable and then prioritizing those measures helps create a sense of where the organization should focus its efforts. However, prioritization at this level does not create the clarity needed for individuals making resource allocation choices between their day-to-day activities, especially if the activities all serve the same mission measure.[wcm_restrict plans=”40879, 25542, 25653″]

Categorically prioritizing the organization’s major ongoing activities helps focus efforts on the twenty percent of activities that tend to offer eighty percent of the organization’s value. Activity categorization starts by identifying the value adding products and services the organization provides. All activities uniquely related to the creation of an item are placed in an activity category together. Excluded from these activity categories are the common, supporting processes such as human resources and finance which are grouped together and labeled as supporting processes. Next, a simple, relative prioritization scheme is created, often having three to five priority levels. Each activity category, except that of the supporting processes, is placed within the relative priority scale in order of the value provided by the product or service represented. The most value adding item is assigned to the highest priority and so on; with the least value adding item assigned the last position in the lowest priority level. The resulting prioritization list is then broadly communicated and reinforced; shaping resource allocation decisions at all levels of the organization.

It must be remembered, however, that scheduling is as much of an art as it is a science and that this priority system should be used as a general guideline and not as an etched in stone rule. At times, due to resource restrictions, a company may better realize needed value from performing lower priority activities than would be received from performing higher priority activities having significantly greater resource requirements and/or longer time horizons. In all cases, managerial judgment should augment and, as necessary, supersede any pre-established priority system.[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”40879, 25542, 25653″]


Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.

Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library

Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually).

Not sure? Click here to learn more.

Buy the Article

Don’t need a subscription? Buy access to Resource Management Best Practice 2 – Categorical Activity Prioritization for just $2!

[/wcm_nonmember]


About the Author

Nathan Ives, StrategyDriven Principal is a StrategyDriven Principal and Host of the StrategyDriven Podcast. For over twenty years, he has served as trusted advisor to executives and managers at dozens of Fortune 500 and smaller companies in the areas of management effectiveness, organizational development, and process improvement. To read Nathan’s complete biography, click here.