LEADERSHIP

14 • LEADERSHIP
the boss or customer is ranting, "More! Sooner! Faster!" Even
for those who realize that starting a little slower and fully exploring
the project's "physics of success" likely reduces risk,
lowers costs, and speeds things up, it's almost impossible not
to be swept up in a group-think stampede. And once a stampede
has started—whether it consists of American Bison, Type
A Executives, or the lesser species (Corporate Lemmings)—
nothing short of superpowers can avert the headlong plunge
to disaster. Take note: stampedes are easier to avoid than to
stop.
Experience validates that taking enough time to understand
your project enables better planning. In turn, better
planning is the catalyst for improved communications, control,
execution, problem solving, and, ultimately, speed. If
forced to skip adequate planning, you'll likely work harder,
take greater risks, and burn through more time and resources
than you would otherwise need.
The question the project team needs to answer is not,
"Should we plan for this project?", but rather "How much
should we plan for this project?" The amount of effort spent
defining and planning a project is always a judgment call. It's
best to think in terms of diminishing returns. At the onset of
definition and planning activities, every dollar or minute
spent returns itself many times over. However, in most projects
the overall benefit diminishes at an increasing rate, depending
on a host of factors. These typically include the
project's size, complexity, and anticipated risks. At some point,
additional effort poured into planning fails to appreciably reduce
risk, time, or cost.
Obviously, a small, simple project with little or no risk
doesn't need as detailed a plan as would a large project with