Skip to main content
Project Management

Return to Answer

added 225 characters in body
Source Link
David Espina
David Espina
  • 37.2k
  • 4
  • 35
  • 92

Your goal is not to cut down the communications. It is a symptom of a lack of a process to escalate problems, which is amazing that you went live without it.

You did not say what the project or tool is but a problem management process is quite extensive, is not cheap, and you can get a lot wrong if you don't build it well. You have to design the work flow, the controls, the service levels, how you will measure performance...all while keeping those costs at a minimum. All of this should have been done long before the project went live.

If you try to control comms now without a viable alternative IN PLACE, you risk creating other, more severe issues for the company and its work. This is a "fix one thing, break two others rule. For example, trying to have the communications flow through a single source, especially if that source filters, you risk a bottleneck, inappropriate filtering, bypassing, and most importantly exacerbated user rejection.

So do not focus too much on the symptoms. Stop the bleeding, but focus on the source.

Your goal is not to cut down the communications. It is a symptom of a lack of a process to escalate problems, which is amazing that you went live without it.

You did not say what the project or tool is but a problem management process is quite extensive, is not cheap, and you can get a lot wrong if you don't build it well. You have to design the work flow, the controls, the service levels, how you will measure performance...all while keeping those costs at a minimum. All of this should have been done long before the project went live.

If you try to control comms now without a viable alternative IN PLACE, you risk creating other, more severe issues for the company and its work. This is a "fix one thing, break two others rule. So do not focus too much on the symptoms. Stop the bleeding, but focus on the source.

Your goal is not to cut down the communications. It is a symptom of a lack of a process to escalate problems, which is amazing that you went live without it.

You did not say what the project or tool is but a problem management process is quite extensive, is not cheap, and you can get a lot wrong if you don't build it well. You have to design the work flow, the controls, the service levels, how you will measure performance...all while keeping those costs at a minimum. All of this should have been done long before the project went live.

If you try to control comms now without a viable alternative IN PLACE, you risk creating other, more severe issues for the company and its work. This is a "fix one thing, break two others rule. For example, trying to have the communications flow through a single source, especially if that source filters, you risk a bottleneck, inappropriate filtering, bypassing, and most importantly exacerbated user rejection.

So do not focus too much on the symptoms. Stop the bleeding, but focus on the source.

Source Link
David Espina
David Espina
  • 37.2k
  • 4
  • 35
  • 92

Your goal is not to cut down the communications. It is a symptom of a lack of a process to escalate problems, which is amazing that you went live without it.

You did not say what the project or tool is but a problem management process is quite extensive, is not cheap, and you can get a lot wrong if you don't build it well. You have to design the work flow, the controls, the service levels, how you will measure performance...all while keeping those costs at a minimum. All of this should have been done long before the project went live.

If you try to control comms now without a viable alternative IN PLACE, you risk creating other, more severe issues for the company and its work. This is a "fix one thing, break two others rule. So do not focus too much on the symptoms. Stop the bleeding, but focus on the source.