#QuPlan - A Quantum of Planning - Episode 2015/6 - Close, Transition, Thesaurize

Page 1

#QuPlan #QuPlan discusses the current status of planning and project management, and then builds up on “unconnected” dots to derive a potential evolution of planning concepts

#QuPlan is part of the “Connecting the dots” series, short pragmatic books (generally, up to 60 pages), based on experience and aiming to inspire re-thinking your business ways #QuPlan Episodes Expanding on the #QuPlan book, this (free. online) series of booklets (“episodes”) is a walkthrough within the lifecycle of a fictional business case concerning a regulatory programme

This last “episode”, published three years after the previous six (still retaining the 2015/6 title, as it was drafted back then), is focused on learning from experience and communicating.

See the back cover for the full list of the episodes

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning



•any issue that is known can be managed as a risk •any risk has to be managed to lower its impact •no “pushing downstream”

•awareness independent from a hierarchical mandate •those who know by being on the frontline, notify issues •aggregate their notifications and potential solutions

No Whodunnit

•No tolerance for "corporate whodunnit" •teamwork has to be routinely multidisciplinary


•Consistent and continuous thesaurisation of lessons learned, and availability of tools to support that

Do you remember this table from Episode 2015/0, opening the “Method” chapter? It has been a while since Episode 2015/5 was published (July 2015), and meanwhile… I had the chance to apply again at least part of the material.

But, as stated in Episode 2015/0, the table above lists some key elements of the corporate culture, and therefore whatever you read in the previous 200+ pages has to be adapted to your specific corporate culture.

This episode is about thesaurization and communication- therefore, it is both a summary of all the previous ones and a discussion of the (potential) next steps.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro


Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

As discussed in the Episode 2015/5, whatever



the purpose of your project or programme, you will have three main actors whose motivation and involvement have to be balanced.

Whatever compliance initiative you carry out,


there will be always a modicum of change, and this generates a stream of ongoing negotiations between conflicting interests.

But already in the 1990s many stated that, in our data-intensive society, personal data privacy and overall consumer rights would be at the forefront of any XXI century human rights discussion, and there will be a new approach to compliance- as any product, service, device would “embed” personal data.

In January 2014 I published a book on the use of personal devices in a corporate environment where I stated the obvious: be proactive- GDPR is just a confirmation1.

Soon, you will be expected to embed within your corporate culture approaches that prevent the need for compliance, regulations, etc: “by default” you will do the right thing at the right time (maybe it will even be part of basic business training and licensing), so that your “business ecosystem” will play by the (shared) rules. More free material is on http://robertolofaro.com/byod and http://robertolofaro.com/gdpr

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning



Too many organizations define details, not content- also if it seems the opposite. That could be fine if, as when I was designing a methodology and associate documentation for a banking outsourcing / BPO in the early 1990s, you aim is to have “standard” systems that you develop once and reuse across multiple sites.

Actually, in that case, processes and systems- I will skip details that I discussed elsewhere (you can read it for free online2).

But, unless you run a company that grows by acquisition and then “clones” itself while keeping the “shell” (and products, and services) of the companies it acquires, also M&A usually implies retaining and expanding the value of what you acquiredand killing its culture isn’t the best way (I would skip quoting “alienation” and its side-effects in a corporate environment).

Therefore, in Episode 2015/0 within “Documentation” in “Method” (page 18) I suggested three phases, starting with the definition of the “contractual basis” to define what is expected, then a second phase where you continuously document activities, and, finally, a third phase where you cross the Ts and dot the Is.

But documentation is not just about compliance with corporate standards, and certainly not about building a defense line when you see that something is not going as planned (I saw many projects with “communication spikes” just for that). http://robertolofaro.com/bfm2013

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

If compulsive document-writers are an issue, equally wasteful is to produce documentation ex-post that gives only what was chosen, and not why.

Sometimes (often), decisions are made under constraints (budget, time, people, technology, etc.) that might eventually disappear or evolve into something else.

Sometimes (often), another team will be called out to fix what was implemented in the first, “heroic”, phase.

Both for that reason, and of course to enable your organization to identify and solve potential issues that transcend the scope of your project, the rationale of your choices, and at least a cross-check of what was disqualified, should be within your documentation- somewhere, somehow.

A further caveat: no matter what you write, documentation should be easily accessible to all those that might be concerned.

And this implies that, in the XXI century, your “what”, the documentation, should be stored where it can be searched, retrieved, reused.

Ideally, you should use something more structured than Microsoft Word. Routinely I discouraged the rampant misuse of Powerpoint as a documentation tool- too many hours are spent in preparing slides that are either Word-inPowerpoint or cryptic assumptions that are then explained verbally.

In both cases, this is nothing that can be really considered “thesaurisation”. © 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning


Probably this table, adapted from the book #QuPlan, might help to understand how the “what” changes across the “when”. Timeframe Keyword Temporary Organization

XX century You decide when and for how long It has a structure and “social” reference


Somebody is the project owner


Somebody has the lead in choosing it



Already Agile changed it, but generally you still have to “see” business products delivered according to an agreed business case

(late) XXI century You converge and synchronize It can be also just emerge by interaction, based on the constraints associated with the (financial, human, knowledge) resources It is a negotiation and choice akin to selecting a suit: off-therack, with changes, tailored There might be no delivery at all- just a concept, followed by delivery when needed (call it “universal just-in-time” with both undefined customers and suppliers)

As you can see, it is not rocket-science: structure, level, density, all are dictated by the old triad… motivation, opportunity, resources.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

There is a time for everything: just because you have spare resources in your team focused just on documentation, this does not imply that you have to flood the mailbox of all your stakeholders (or current and potential bosses) with tons of carefully (and expensively) crafted presentations that… nobody will read.

A quick point that I was taught decades ago: if you want to slip information through, just adopt a standard, verbose way of writing, and then alter in each new version or new release only few words.

If you do that long enough, you can be quite confident that most of you readers will simply not see what you added: it is akin to hiding in plain sight.

Now, if that is your purpose, you might get along with it for a while, then, unless you are bumped up, prepare for some side-effects when your trick is discovered.

If, instead, you did it only because you were used to, or taught to, start considering what you are documenting, and who is your audience, and what is your purpose.

Do you just want to be able to say “I wrote you so”? It is not really useful, from a company perspective, but in corporate politics could make sense.

If, instead, you want to highlight and obtain explicit feed-back, or if you have something critical, maybe a (spoken) word of pre-emptive warning might be useful.

Obviously, you have to be the judge on which channels to use when and how- it depends on your corporate culture and… corporate politics (yes, even in small companies and non-profit organizations).

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning



As I wrote in my books and articles online since 2003, early in my career (or when on a new assignment) often I ended up being the one documenting- just because I was either the cheapest or the less critical for delivery.

It is probably fine to have “document writers” if you are confident that you can transfer to them all the knowledge required, and that then those who really know can revise the material before it is released.

I remember that the even the old COCOMO 3 model, at least in the version that I used (detailed and by phase) before discouraging its use, contained in each phase also a quota of “documentation”.

It is not just in our agile times that “documentation” seems something irrelevant, and I saw too many projects whose documentation seemed as good as somebody reporting about others having a meal at a restaurant and trying to sell that as their own feed-back on the food and wine…

In my experience, there might be a place for professional documentation writers, but thesaurisation is a task for all those involved in a team- if somebody really dislikes doing it, you end up, if you want relevant documentation, with the additional cost of an “assistant” acting as a human recorder and note-taker.

And you have to cope with the side-effect of boredom on the note-taker’s quality. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COCOMO

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Nowadays, thesaurisation is more a matter of ensuring internal consistency and coherence of documentation, along with cross-referencing with other existing documentation and taxonomy, than “standardization”.

In modern times, when knowledge retention and dissemination tools are able to dig into your documentation, once the documentation follows some basic shared guidelines, what matters is that it contains enough information to be accessible and re-usable, and that both those who created it and those who could need to use it are still able to retrieve, modify, read, etc. the documentation from whatever system you are using.

Asking them, or having some kind of “knowledge management priesthood”, to restructure documentation beyond recognition is the best way to have wonderful KPIs on knowledge retention, but awful knowledge dissemination and knowledge “relevant retention” (a.k.a. update).

Increasingly, your workforce will include people who are used to work with multiple devices, and probably their “documentation” will be distributed “virally”.

Technically, I am not a Millennial, but practically I am used to adopt new methods and technologies if it makes sense- and also to pre-empt methodology needs.

Over the last 15 years, the occasional messaging or mobile text message containing snippets of requirements, questions, approvals became the continuous stream of Lync conversations mixed with phone calls mixed with Office documents and links: rethink your documentation and knowledge retention approach.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning



A recent change in a national law [reference] extending on a European Directive for consumer protection [reference] introduced, with just one line within the law, the need for the creation of a new information service.

The stated aim is to ensure that agents and distributors of our products and services are always compliant with regulations that could potentially affect their business operations, and how they interact with customers obtaining our products and services through them.

The costs for both the activation and delivery of the service have to be absorbed by our company (the law currently doesn’t allow billing for the service).

The new law includes an automatic draconian measure for non-compliant suppliers that repeatedly fail to deliver: any existing warranty on any product or service delivered to consumers is extended automatically by a further 24 months.

It has been decided to adopt an approach that will allow formal compliance at a minimum cost, but, should the new law be confirmed, enable to expand the service, e.g. to convert the new requirements into a business opportunity, by increasing the loyalty of both customers and agents or distributors, as well as providing information useful to reduce the time-to-market and risks associated with new products and services1.

Yes, those paragraphs were “verbatim” in Episode 2015/0 published in 2015.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Over the last [reference] months the 18 projects initially identified have all been carried out, using teams lead by a “subject matter expert” from our existing staff.

The initial choice to allocate only team members currently working or who had already worked with our organization within the last 24 months minimized the coordination time, as both internal and external resources were familiar with our current systems and processes.

The delivery deadline of November 1 2015 has been met, and the service has been fully operational since January 1 2016.

Following the results of the monitoring carried out in November and December 2015 (before the service activation) and from January until June 2016 (first two quarters), the monitoring activities have been structured and embedded within the operational activities.

During the first half of 2016 the documentation delivered by teams has been reviewed by team leaders and then consolidated with the support of Knowledge Management, while phasing out all the teams.

In the second half of 2016, once the project teams have all been disbanded, HR and Knowledge Management have been conducting a series of interviews to further identify additional commentary to integrate documentation and assess potential issues to consider for future initiatives. [In this section the key KPIs would be summarized, including of course the results of monitoring any impact on customers’/agents’ satisfaction and retention level].

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning


Note: as Episode 2015/6 is a summary of the previous ones, “business case” has a different structure, focused on what would be done during the “thesaurize” phase, instead of discussing the sample.

In many project management approaches, “thesaurize” is often embedded within the “close” or “transition” phases.

In my experience across industries and methodologies from the 1980s, frankly that is an opportunity wasted: you learn lessons also in the first phase of service- so, outsourcing completely a process or system as soon as it is ready is business blunder, as you lose visibility needed to adapt and evolve.

Within a real environment, you need to both deliver and to ensure that what you deliver is sustainable from an operational standpoint- across the whole lifecycle of what you deliver: otherwise, you save a penny and lose 100 dollars/euro.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

As discussed within the “method” chapter, thesaurisation execution can be delegated to staff, but content and coordination must be considered part of the managerial roles identified.

Moreover, thesaurisation has to be carried out across the whole set of activities, from inception to close, transition into “business as usual” (including when then is outsourced to a service-only supplier), and what was hinted at within the “Executive Summary”.

It is not just a matter of reporting on choices made, but also the rationale and potential background: and this requires both knowledge and a more confidential approach.

Sometimes choices are shared and straightforward, but their motives are based on the distribution of roles and relative (past, current, potential future) positions within the organization, not just neutral choices.

Unless the activities are really simple and choices are already fully dictated by the task, this background information on motivations underlying choices might be either worth of immediate confidential escalation, or stored confidentially until after the end of the activities, included within the documentation (or provided within the “ex-post” interviews focused on collecting lessons learned).

This is even more relevant in case of roadblocks: sometimes the fastest path of action is winning some, losing some- but that is anyway a sub-optimal choice that must be reported as such, to enable the future adoption of pre-emptive actions.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning


Whenever in projects or activities I talk about “communication”, here comes a communication plan, if you are lucky (often communication is quite unstructured).

Nice concept, but often over the last 30+ years I saw a difference between communication as was meant, and communication as I meant.

The traditional “communication” is about transparency, while there might be times when only either Forrest Gump or somebody keen on “management by gossip” would communicate what he received or was told.

I do not believe in the latter (i.e. let others run your communication errands, a kind of “talking to Peter so that Paul understands”): it isn’t just a moral choice, it is an inefficient tool, unless you are so naïve that you believe that in our times nobody can really assume to be able to control all the time 100% of the channels.

Overall, it creates too many overlapping communication short-circuits. So, both by inclination and by choice my experience is that you have to make choices (not just in business, also in other activities pre-business, including political campaigning and negotiating to provide supplies while in the Army for those that we were sending on a trip to join field exercises).

There are times when you have to be direct, and times when you have to agree to disagree in a more nuanced way- and maybe even postpone challenges.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

When you close activities, you should have at hand a “thesaurus” of what was collected across the activities, probably partially unstructured and just classified by time.

The “Transition” phase is, of course, about making the transition from “project” to “operational” phase as smooth as possible- notably when you hand it over to an external team (e.g. because your organization builds but then service delivery is done by a third party).

Moving onto “Thesaurize”, you need to re-consider whatever was delivered so far, in terms of documentation and communication, and recover also what was, for various reasons, left “off-the-record”.

There might be something that still has to be off-the-record (e.g. whenever closing activities I routinely remove messaging conversations that were informal, unless I had discussed with the other party their inclusion in minutes or emails).

And there might be something that you will need to paraphrase but still report in terms of risks or issues to look for.

In this business case, I selected on purpose “subject matter experts”, as they would think beyond the scope and relationship of a single project; but anybody having to report something should be involved in “Thesaurize”- in agile environments, even junior software developers sometimes might have had interactions with Business Users that were kept off the book, but influenced the course of events; it is up to the leader to be accountable about what was reported in this phase.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning


In previous episodes, this subject was discussed in detail, in its various aspects. From choosing the tools (Episode 2015/0), to defining roles and presentation tools, to what monitoring and support staff should do, to how to cope with “en route” changes to your carefully crafted plan.

Now, what is left, and while in this Episode on closing, transition, thesaurize (yes, I do switch between thesaurize and thesaurise)?

To paraphrase what a famous general reportedly said, it is not the plan that matters, but the planning exercise.

I saw way too many projects planned considering only some distant delivery, details of the current phase, and a vague concept of “standard steps”.

Well, as you can imagine, that is the best way to obtain a result: go off-plan. Because, in the end, you had no plan to start with. Marking the time is something different- it means that also at the beginning, when often you cannot set a date for in-between activities also if you already have a deadline, you work backward to identify what is needed to end as required.

The typical plan is based on the WBS- breaking down projects into tasks and subtasks: but there is more than that, into planning.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Digression: in the 1980s I was lucky enough to work with the first portable PCs, at a time when software solutions were often just based on experience, not on marketing plans.

I remember a nice MS-DOS-based tool that was able to do PERT charts- and all the calculations required, cheaply.

Well- have a look at Episode 2015/0 for an introduction on PERT, a tool that when you have to do a first plan I still find useful.

When thinking about impacts, activities, etc., PERT allows to better understand where issues could be, as you can correlate activities without wasting time with all the visual niceties of Microsoft Project (Excel is totally useless and misleading for project planning if you have no clue about dependencies).

At the beginning you probably do not even have a guesstimate on how long an activity will last- but PERT diagrams allow you to identify and (re)define “buffers”.

Then, unless you have a tool that automatically updates your PERT… switch to Microsoft Project and CPM.

This is even more important when you are closing activities or transitioning toward a service team, as often there are plenty of concurrent phase-in and phase-out activities to be taken care of.

As for communication of your progress… keep it simple, and avoid routine meetings.

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning


Confession: since the late 1980s, I designed processes, methodologies, set up control and monitoring offices, worked repeatedly as PMO or PM or account manager, therefore… I am probably guilty of many of the above mentioned “routine meetings”.

If not as the initiator, certainly as the instigator: guilty as charged of wasting time. Now, that’s one of the reasons why, since I had been in charge of directly delivering the above, I tried to minimize meetings and also shrink down reports production and Powerpoint usage.

Luckily, at the same time I had to work with senior managers and Cxx to design models or “data summaries” (KPIs, dashboards, management reporting, data warehouses, datamarts- you name it: 30+ years of acronyms).

So, I do not assume that my audience will read numbers in the way I present themthey will follow what matters to them, what matters is that everything is coherent and supported by what you present.

Moreover: less is better. If you send a progress report, ask yourself: is really needed? Was asked for? How much makes sense? Did you get any feed-back on previous reports?

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro


Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Maybe those 20 pages look wonderful to you, but from a senior management perspective, looking just at one bit here and one bit there, it represents countless hours paid to produce something that nobody asked for.

Even now that I am not working on a specific daily diet of calls and meetings whose interactions fill my mailbox, my mailboxes… fill on a daily basis with plenty of messages from organizations that assume you will forget about them unless they send you at least half a dozen messages each week…

I do not know if you read the book #QuPlan2, but these episodes were designed to enable you either to read each episode, or focus just on the method, business case, thinking side of each episode (or all the episodes).

The concept is that of summarizing: the book contains pointers, each episode focuses on a phase, but then each chapter, and each chapter across all the episodes, follow “one side of the story”.

Personally, decades ago I proposed to customers to factor in the cost of meetings into a project’s costs, and over the last few decades I saw increased support to my thesis- all across the world; so, I rest my case: less meetings, and moreover less routine meetings.

To summarize implies not just shrinking down what you are writing, but also considering the value added for all the stakeholders involved- more within the “thinking” chapter. Have a look at some free material from that http://robertolofaro.com/quplan

© 2015-2018 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning


This episode is really about managing time dimensions: past (thesaurisation), present (closing and transition), future (again, thesaurisation)

Thesaurisation implies thinking about how lessons learned could help your future activities- including those lessons nobody wants to talk about.

Now, look at this chart, and think how you would position your products or services.

© 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Whatever business you are in, you have to consider that your business will actually thrive only if it can, beside analysis, also deliver governance on your products and services impacts across all the four dimensions.

It might happen just with your own internal resources, as in the XX century “butter to howitzer” conglomerates- but there is a smarter way that increases your organizational resilience and ability to cope with new emerging trends faster.

As discussed in Episode 2015/5, certifications are a form of branding, useful both with customers and (current and potential) business partners.

Actually, certification is also a loyalty-building tool, e.g. as with the “badges” provided by any social network to its members in recognition of their contributions in terms of content or networking: overall, it is part of the “gamification” trends.

Anybody who has been a member of any association or club knows that those “badges”, and enticing people (and consumers, including corporate buyers) into doing something has been with us since our societies were composed of villages.

Pick up a book on cultural anthropology, read a couple of books studying society in Classical Antiquity, and if you look at it from a post-Internet, post-Facebook perspective, you will find something eerily familiar (or the other way around) 1.


Review at http://robertolofaro.com/portal/books/suggested-readings/165-gelzer-the-roman-nobilityisbn-063111940x-3-5-5

© 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Gamification2? It is a more structured way to describe a set of practices, and probably a 2017 book on how to design products and services 3 and how to design market places4 could be useful to avoid re-inventing the wheel.

Don’t listen to consultants (including myself) who extol the virtues of gamification and forget reality: in the end, it all boils down to “creating value added”.

Too many loyalty schemes are just annoying intrusions- as when a shopkeeper, after you pay with your loyalty card, just asks for your postcode (no benefit to you).

In corporate environments, too many certification schemes de facto push part of your processes onto your supply chain without any benefit for those involved.

If you do not consider an appropriate balance, you add a cost for staying in business with you, without generating any additional value for your customers or distribution network.

And, in business, usually that cost is eventually transferred: either to you, by becoming a less-preferential customer, or to the price paid by end consumers, as discovered by many that pushed down on the supply chain too many costs, and eventually saw that their end customers were paying the price. 2

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamification Review at http://robertolofaro.com/portal/books/suggested-readings/231-eyal-hooked-isbn9780241184837-3-5-5 4 Review at http://robertolofaro.com/portal/books/suggested-readings/215-roth-who-gets-whatmarket-design-isbn-9780007520787-3-5-5 3

© 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro


Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Consider that, if you carry out thesaurisation as described in this episode, you have all that is needed to make it worthwhile for all those involved.

Moreover, you have to consider the mix of roles and channels more appropriate for your specific activity.

An excerpt from a chart on the integration of social media and traditional marketing/events in advocacy activities that I published few years ago 5 might help:

In any communication, there is always somebody who is considered “the face” and assumed to be accountable if something does not work as expected.

So, “don’t shoot the messenger”- look over to the “informal” watchdog who is expected by the audience to know what the messenger is saying.

In thesaurisation, whoever was in charge of the activities should cover that “knowledge release” (i.e. “watchdog”) role: delegating doesn’t mean dumping downstream ownership.


© 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning


What is the key issue in thesaurisation and communication? As discussed within the “method” chapter, you have to remember that both are across the whole life of your initiative, programme, project- and should involve all the stakeholders, and an implicit or explicit certification scheme is probably the easiest way to keep the quality of what is trendy to call “ecosystem”, more now in 2018 than in 2015, when the episodes up to 2015/5 were released.

To repeat the summary in Episode 2015/5 (see for details), if you set up a certification scheme, you are actually doing few things:     

Differentiating your business and your distribution network Creating a method to legally drop from your network unreliable partners Protecting your IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) Generating a feed-back cycle that could help evolve your IPR …

If you use in your projects and change initiatives the right mix of information and, why not, gamification, you could actually create incentives to do business with you.

This mix of incentives is, in the end, what has been used in manufacturing and other services for decades, under titles such as “co-competition”, “cooperation”, “joint development”, or, for the financially inclined “cost-plus” approaches to pricing.

© 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Moving back to the overall theme of these episodes, have a look at the back cover.

What you see is a storyline, more than a “phased approach”- the first three episodes defined the territory (2015/0, business case and tools), and then outlined a potential organizational structure (2015/1 and 2015/2).

The other three episodes focused instead on showing how even something as annoying as a change initiative due to compliance might be turned into a business opportunity.

This second half of the series started with 2015/3 (converting compliance into opportunities), continued with 2015/4 (using opportunities as a cost-reduction), ended with episode 5 (on coping with evolutionary regulations such as GDPR).

Reading a 250 pages business case to support a 50 pages book might seem quixotical, and therefore the next section discusses a roadmap.

If you read more than one episode, you know that they share the same structure: color-coded chapters, three chapters (method, business case, thinking) in each episode.

Anyway, the concept is actually to allow you to read separately just the “method”, “business case”, or “thinking” chapters.

A roadmap through the material, but also a roadmap for implementation. © 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

ROADMAP 2015/0 Business case and Product comparison

•shows the initial decision points, i.e. an outline of the overall programme, key fact-finding, and the choice of methodology, tools, key staff selection guidelines

2015/1 Background Support process

•focused on the “cocoon” built around the programme to ensure that each project is focused just on its own activities, while retaining overall programme coherence

2015/2 Background Monitor process

•focused on “reality check” and "feedback management” activities required to ensure coherence with both corporate guidelines and the mandate received

2015/3 Ongoing Removing the free-riders

•(along with the next two) aims to convert changes in compliance requirements into opportunities- in this case, to increase retention and profitability

2015/4 Ongoing E-service incentive

•(as the previous and following ones) aims to convert changes in compliance requirements into opportunities- in this case, to reduce costs.

2015/5 Ongoing Certification

2015/6 Close, Transition, Thesaurize

•(and the two previous ones) focus on changes in scope and compliance requirements into opportunities- in this case, business impacts of a certification. •published three years after the previous six (still retaining the 2015/6 title, as it was drafted back then), is focused on learning from experience and communicating.

© 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Method 2015/0 Business case and Product comparison

•06 Introduction, 08 A sample/simple method, 10 Tools scenarios, 12 Audience overload, 14 Communicating, 16 Engagement tool, 18 Documentation

2015/1 Background Support process

•06 Introduction, 08 The rationale, 10 People-orientation, 11 Should you create two separate offices?, 12 Tools and aims, 13 A minimum set of tools for the XXI century support roles, 14 Documentation, 15 How not to document

2015/2 Background Monitor process

•06 Introduction, 08 The rationale, 10 Compliance, 11 What compliance should really deliver within any organization, 12 Pre-empt thesaurisation, 13 Thesaurisation isn't garbage collection

2015/3 Ongoing Removing the free-riders

•06 Introduction, 07 Overheads, 08 The rationale, 09 Change, 10 The (expected) results, 11 Integrating

2015/4 Ongoing E-service incentive

•06 Introduction, 07 Externalization, 08 The rationale, 09 Future, 10 The (expected) results, 11 Building

2015/5 Ongoing Certification

•06 Introduction, 07 Harmonization, 08 The rationale, 09 Emergence, 10 The (expected) results, 11 Triaging

2015/6 Close, Transition, Thesaurize

•06 Introduction, 08 What, 10 When, 12 Who

© 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Business Case 2015/0 Business case and Product comparison

•22 Executive Summary, 26 Requirements, 28 Constraints, 30 PRJ 1: Identify Feasibility, 34 Appendix: Tools

2015/1 Background Support process

•18 What is expected, 20 What is feasible, 22 A support roadmap, 24 Appendix: tools

2015/2 Background Monitor process

•16 Plan, 18 Action, 19 A short "laundry list" of the type of activities carried out by monitoring staff, 20 Transition, 21 Partial example of the evolution of the monitoring role during a transition

2015/3 Ongoing Removing the free-riders

•14 Plan, 16 Action, 18 Transition, 19 "Laundry list" of the activities to "embed" the changes

2015/4 Ongoing E-service incentive

•14 Plan, 16 Action, 18 Transition

2015/5 Ongoing Certification

•14 Plan, 16 Action, 18 Transition

2015/6 Close, Transition, Thesaurize

•16 Executive Summary, 18 Ongoing, 20 Communication, 22 Marking the time, 24 Summarizing

© 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro

Access to the online version of “#QuPlan – A Quantum of Planning

Thinking 2015/0 Business case and Product comparison

•44 Change & Compliance, 45 Scope & Planning, 46 Mapping the territory, 48 Gantt CPM PERT, 50 PERT: Introduction

2015/1 Background Support process

•28 Costs and benefits, 30 Proactive support, 31 A corporate support net, 32 Pre-empt thesaurisation, 34 Coping with change

2015/2 Background Monitor process

•24 Prevention as a remedy, 26 Scope & Plan, 27 Communication plan, 28 Ensure continuity

2015/3 Ongoing Removing the free-riders 2015/4 Ongoing E-service incentive 2015/5 Ongoing Certification

2015/6 Close, Transition, Thesaurize

•22 Why not?, 24 Change = Opportunity

•22 Riding the virtual wave, 24 Don't build a new box

•22 Branding, 24 Your investment

•28 Dimensions, 32 Recap, 34 Roadmap

© 2015 Roberto Lofaro http:/www.linkedin.com/in/robertolofaro