# How to track a project and its cycles When planning, take advantage of the team's natural strengths. - Most managers fail by focusing on improving weaknesses directly, but people individually tend to fix character defects by using their strengths. - If the workers are fast, but the work requires more patience, intentionally set more time aside for the tasks and mandate they slow down if needed. - Find ways to motivate slower workers by giving incentives they want (which is usually more pay) or spurring more competition with other workers. ## Progress-tracking systems There are many progress-tracking systems that can help evaluate where a team is and where it's likely going. - Each one is capturing [certainty](understanding-certainty.md) from a specific [perspective](image.md). There are [many ways to track whether the team is effective at what they do](mgmt-4_status-theories.md), but they tend to only be rough estimates that don't consider complexities within the project. - Unless the tasks are repetitive (e.g., prefabricated houses, factory work), each action will have its own adaptations from the previous task. - People tend to learn as they go and work faster when they're near completion, so the last 10% will often take as much time as the first 20%. - If there are [technological implementations](https://trendless.tech/mgmt/) or required research, there will be *no* progress for a while, then it'll finish very rapidly. - Some logistical factors are literally impossible to [plan ahead for](https://notageni.us/risk-mgmt/) (e.g., natural disasters). Very often, a team will require at least 2-4 models to gain any useful analysis on what to do next. ## Making schedules People almost never work as much as they say they do. - The hourly pay structure incentivizes being physically present at a location, but not necessarily busy. - Most people figure out *very* quickly that [appearing](image.md) busy can get them out of more work. - Typically, they will *not* respond well if you give them more work without a reward for their efforts. - If you want them to work more, create better incentives. - If someone does the work of 2 or 3 people, they deserve to be paid double what they currently make. For most industries, you'll get more work out of them relative to their hourly rate if you give them a smaller 4-day work week. - Four-day weeks are a good idea when the project is long-term (e.g., [software developers](computers-programming.md), [actuaries](math-stat.md)), but not for short-term tasks that require a person's physical presence (e.g., retail, construction). - Do *not* use a four-day week for tasks that only need a human being physically present (e.g., security guard, cashier). ## Checking status If you have the right team, you can simply tell people what to do and expect them to create results. - Bad hires will create more work for you than complete [disorganization](organization.md). However, different parties may still need to know the current or near-future status of a project: - Investors or donors may need to know if the project will meet deadlines. - Customers or recipients may need to know of any delays or potential risks. - You will often need to notify suppliers for additional resources ahead of when the workers will need it. - If you have multiple teams, they'll need to be notified on deadlines and when they'll need to act. Most managers over-track their workers for a few simple reasons: - They feel [out of control](unknown.md) and don't [trust](understanding-certainty.md) their workers. - They believe managers *ought* to track their workers, or they're simply imitating what they've experienced themselves when they were a worker. - They're trying to [predict the future](imagination.md) based on the workers' results. You should *very* clearly understand why you're tracking their work. - Beyond a routine status update, more tracking creates worse results. - Every minute you're asking for status updates is a minute they (and you) aren't working on something else. - Tracking devices (e.g., monitoring internet traffic, GPS trackers) can be time-consuming for you. - You often may only need to track their work for a short window of time. - If they're under-performing, you may need to put them on watch, with clear indicators of when to *not* watch them anymore. - High-risk situations and crucial tasks need close monitoring, but only when they're high-risk or crucial. - Any tracking that goes beyond standard [social expectations](people-culture.md) for the industry can foster a toxic work environment the workers will want to leave. Unless you're planning to relocate them or redistribute resources, *never* directly track members to maximize their efficiency or give rewards. - They'll only become more efficient is if you [improve their motivation to perform](mgmt-6_morale.md). - When you closely monitor someone, you'll have to *constantly* monitor that person because they're only acting from [fear](mind-feelings-fear.md) of losing their job or role. - Every moment you're monitoring a lagging worker, you're *not* working on something else. - [Goodhart's Law](lawsaxioms.md) will apply to *any* key metrics, and the smartest workers will have a perverse incentive to exploit the system. - Sales goals inspire members to game the system to maximize sales, even when people will demand a refund later. - Budget goals will mean members will hold off on purchases until predetermined "losing" periods. - Measuring time on tasks will encourage rapid and ineffective solutions or poor-quality service. - Measuring customer satisfaction will motivate inefficient people-pleasing. - There is an answer to Goodhart's Law: 1. Cut out incentives entirely. 2. Pay all the roles well. 3. [Hire correctly](mgmt-3_teams.md). 4. Tell them to work to the best of their ability. 5. Use at least 2-3 metrics, with at least one of them hidden from the members. 6. Reward them frequently, generously, and privately over their performace. - Unless the system is in good faith (i.e., only for incentives), workers will always find [creative ways](mind-creativity.md) *around* any tracking system you use: - If the tracking drives [incentives and punishments](mgmt-6_morale.md), they'll find ways to [hack](hacking.md) the system. - If the tracking only drives punishments, they'll find ways to shut it off or spoof it. - And, even worse, some of them will use it to get their rivals in trouble. - If tracking only defines rewards, they'll probably work harder, but some of them will try to [exploit the system](hacking.md). While it will vary by industry and type of work, requests for status updates should generally be once a week. - Unless you intend to give immediate and public feedback, avoid weekly status update [meetings](mgmt-5_communication.md) with everyone present. - If you don't trust them, or they're particularly high-maintenance, you may need to check on them once a day. When you must be *constantly* present, work alongside them. - Besides constantly observing them, working alongside them will set an example and typically [boosts their morale](mgmt-6_morale.md). - Maintain the the humility to accept that your [specialization](jobs-specialization.md) as a manager makes you worse at the actual tasks than them. - Even when you've done their job for *decades*, you haven't kept the skills as sharp as them, and you're older, meaning they have more energy to do the work than you. While an open-office environment is easy to track workers, it has repeatedly been proven to cause more [stress](mind-feelings-happiness-stress.md), [conflicts](people-5_conflicts.md), and [employee turnover](jobs-1_why.md). - The extra invasion of privacy generally forces people to retreat into their mobile phones or headphones. - While they're convenient for managers (since they can look over *everyone's* shoulder at once), they stifle everyone's ability to focus on a task without distractions. ## Quality control Take routine samples of everyone's work. - If you can, try to sample their work as randomly as possible, and without them knowing. Examine the quality of their work by testing it against an ideal. - The ideal should be reasonable, and should be routinely updated to conform to what is legitimately possible given the circumstances. ## Redistributing load Whenever you see someone taking on more responsibilities than everyone else, try to redistribute the workload. - Give the harder-working person higher-intensity work. - Give more incentives for their extra work relative to the others. However, be careful with publicly sharing pay bonuses if everyone else didn't have access to the same bonus for those same efforts. If you trust anyone, feel free to give them more responsibilities. - Politely ask "can you help me with something?", then give them silence for them to respond. - If you find them particularly capable and they like the work, you should be informally training them to do *your* job someday. When you have idle workers, you have several options: 1. Prevent *all* idleness by giving them something to do (e.g., restocking, cleaning). - It makes more financial sense, but comes with the risk of dissatisfaction or burnout. - Over time, it'll magnify turnover, then foster a culture of hard-working and potentially workaholic people. - If you prefer it, provoke the workers to leave the worksite so the boundaries are clearly defined (i.e., it's a work site, so they should enjoy the rest of their life elsewhere). 2. Re-balance the idle workers to be prepared for future spikes in workload (e.g., stand at attention). - It makes more social sense, but isn't the most efficient financial approach. - It's the best all-around solution for morale if the incoming workload vacillates. - If you prefer it, explain *why* the extra work is necessary. 3. Do nothing at all and give the workers complete freedom to relax. - It requires no work, but will allow workers to exploit the system to get out of work. - While this is the best solution for worker morale, it can also instill a culture of complacency. - If you prefer it, expect them to respond slowly to an increased workload. Don't give confrontational or lazy workers critical tasks. - By giving them important tasks, you're indirectly influencing the group's culture toward becoming more confrontational or lazy. - Their trouble performing or working with a team will almost ensure they'll fail. - The only time you'd *want* them to fail is because you need a good reason to fire them and the project's failure is worth the sacrifice. Only [lie](people-lying.md) to a slacker/jerk about the importance of their task (to make them feel important and maintain temporary harmony with the group) under a few conditions: 1. Nobody else on the group should like that person. 2. Tell the honest truth to the rest of the team (and your superiors). 3. Make sure whoever you tell knows to *not* tell the slacker/jerk. 4. You have the intention of [getting rid of them](mgmt-7_changes.md) soon. ## Thinking ahead Beyond organizing people, most managerial work involves 2 other things: 1. Thinking ahead and preparing for future [logistical](logistics.md) needs. 2. Performing miscellaneous second-degree tasks ahead of time to prevent any delays or interruptions to the work or projects. Get equipment and supplies *before* the workers need it: - Not having enough supplies will create shortages and incur rush delivery costs, wasted labor hours, project delays, and worker mistakes. - Even seemingly minor items like pens or paper can bring an organization to a grinding halt at the wrong time. *Always* consider their suggestions for supplies. - If the cost for any particular supply is less than a day's labor for one worker, it's *always* worth the investment. - While you may need controls for theft, any [bureaucracy](bureaucracy.md) over needed materials will foster a culture of distrust. - The cost in most nonessential supplies (e.g., readily available soft drinks) pays for itself with worker morale. *Never* cut costs on tools they regularly use. - Cheap tools make the work twice as long and three times more frustrating. - While [free software](legal-ip-floss.md) may get the tasks you need done, it sometimes comes at the cost of convenience. - If you prefer free software, hire a sufficiently qualified tech industry specialist who can also diagnose frequently and train the workers. As much as possible, give as few logins as you can for their computer software. - Paying to add a few features to existing software can remove the need for multiple programs. - It sometimes may cost more, but the extra convenience will typically make them more productive. - Generally, features on software will save more money long-term than buying new software. - If you need to change software, be prepared for the [group's changes](mgmt-7_changes.md) to respond at the same psychological level as moving physical locations. Let them choose their computer upgrades. - Feel free to ask them, but only upgrade if they actually want it. - [Technology](technology.md) upgrades always cost [money](money-1_why.md), so they may not be worth it unless they intend to use it. Protect the organization's assets. - Install [GPS](logistics-navigation.md) tags on everything that could be stolen. - Use [cloud storage and backup](computers-distsys-cloud.md) to prevent data loss from hard drive failures. - Teach everyone [basic computer skills](computers.md), or keep them away from computers as much as possible. - Practice [basic cybersecurity](computers-cysec.md) including password policies, antivirus software, and a VPN. Clearly demarcate roles to prevent any one person (including yourself) to have full control. - While you may *like* being in control, every bit of control you have also exposes you to at least some [liability](legal-safety.md). - While you should have complete *override* control, all your responsibilities should be delegable to others. ## Finalizing Projects After the project is finished, assign people to the project's continuity plan. - Do *not* move everyone to a new project as soon as they're finished with their [specialization](jobs-specialization.md). - There may be wrap-up work, or they may want to stay to finalize a few more details. - Instead, keep around anyone who would *prefer* to maintain the project: - People who want to maintain projects clearly [believe](understanding-certainty.md) in it, so they'll do a better job than someone else who is highly skilled person but doesn't care. - [Maintenance](https://adequate.life/fix/) is typically easier than [creating](creations.md), so you won't need the best workers for it, and the creators are the most familiar with the project. Anticipate anyone assigned to maintaining that project to be a little bit less productive on future projects (~5-25% less). - If you need more effort toward a new project, consider *other* older projects you can close down. - If multiple past projects may interfere with future projects, group them all together as a "project cleanup" project that will streamline, simplify, or retire them.