Skip to main content

Posts

Stop Guessing When to Escalate: Build a Simple Escalation Matrix

Stop Guessing When to Escalate: Build a Simple Escalation Matrix A project issue appears on Tuesday morning. It is not yet a disaster, but it could affect several teams and push a milestone. One person wants to tell the steering committee immediately. Another says the team should sort it out quietly. A third is unsure who has the authority to decide. By Friday, the issue is bigger, and the first real conversation is about why nobody escalated it sooner. This is a common workplace problem. Most teams know escalation matters, but many have never agreed on what should be escalated, when it should happen or what a useful escalation looks like. The result is predictable: some issues are raised too late, while others are sent too high and create noise. Why escalation is a system, not a personal judgement Escalation is often treated as a judgement call: experienced people are expected to know when something is serious enough. That approach is fragile. New team members hesitate, confident peop...
Post a Comment
Read more
Recent posts

Training Is Not Adoption: Build a Simple Change Scorecard

Training Is Not Adoption: Build a Simple Change Scorecard The new process has launched. Most people attended training. The slides were sent, the recording is available and the project plan shows the activity as complete. But staff are still using the old spreadsheet. This is the gap between delivery and adoption. Training is important, but it is only one input. A change has taken hold when people can perform the new task, use it in real work and achieve the intended outcome without creating harmful workarounds. A simple change scorecard makes that visible. Why this matters Projects are often measured by outputs: system configured, communications sent, training delivered and go-live completed. Those outputs show that the project did work. They do not prove that the work changed the service. Output-focused goals can create a false sense of accomplishment. Good measurement connects a baseline, user behaviour, service outcomes and action on early trouble signals. A change can look...
Post a Comment
Read more

Before You Paste That into AI: Run a 60-Second Information Check

Before You Paste That into AI: Run a 60-Second Information Check You have a messy document, a long email thread or a spreadsheet full of comments. An AI assistant could summarise it in seconds. Your cursor is already in the prompt box. Pause before you paste. The risk is not only whether the AI gives a wrong answer. The information you submit may include personal details, confidential material, security information or context that should never leave an approved system. Even a routine request can create a problem if the wrong data goes into the wrong tool. A one-minute check can prevent that. It also improves the prompt, because it forces you to decide what the tool genuinely needs. Why this matters Workplace AI feels conversational, so it is easy to treat the prompt box like a blank document. It is not. Entering information into an AI service is a use and potential disclosure of that information, subject to the organisation's policies, the tool's settings and applicable ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stop Rebuilding the Same Excel Report: Use Power Query Once, Then Refresh

Stop Rebuilding the Same Excel Report: Use Power Query Once, Then Refresh The monthly report is due again. You download four files, copy rows into a master workbook, fix the date formats, remove blank lines, repair a formula and update the PivotTable. You have done it before, but the work still depends on remembering the same sequence. This is exactly the sort of task Power Query is designed to improve. Power Query—called Get & Transform in parts of Excel—can connect to data, record a sequence of cleaning steps and run those steps again when the source changes. The goal is not to create a clever spreadsheet. It is to make routine reporting easier to repeat, check and hand over. Why repeated copy-and-paste reporting is a problem Manual reporting often looks harmless because each action is simple. The risk comes from the chain: selecting the right file, copying the right rows, applying the right filters, preserving formulas and remembering exceptions. When the rules live o...
Post a Comment
Read more

Don’t Just Capture Lessons: Turn Them into Changes People Own

Turn a review conversation into a few owned, testable improvements. A project milestone finishes, the team takes a breath, and someone says, “We should capture the lessons.” A document is opened. People add a few polite comments. The file is saved, and the next project repeats the same delays, unclear hand-offs and avoidable rework. The problem is not that teams fail to collect lessons. It is that they stop at collection. A useful learning review does more than record what happened. It turns experience into a small number of changes, gives each change an owner, and checks whether the change actually improved the work. That makes the review part of delivery, not an administrative ceremony after delivery. Why this matters The Australian Institute for Disaster Resilience describes lessons management as a cycle of collection, analysis, implementation, and monitoring and review. Although its handbook was developed for emergency management, it says the principles can be used by a...
Post a Comment
Read more

Before You Announce the Change, Map Who Has to Work Differently

Before announcing a change, map how the work will differ for each role. A polished all-staff email is not a change plan. Before you announce a new system, process or policy, ask a more practical question: who will have to work differently on Monday morning? A project can be approved, a system can be nearly ready and a training session can be booked, while the people doing the work still do not know what will change for them. The problem is not always that communication arrived too late. Often, the project moved to communication and training before it understood the operational impact. A simple change-impact map makes that impact visible. It compares today’s way of working with the future way of working for each affected role or group, then connects the difference to a practical support action. Why this matters A change can look small in a project plan but feel large to the person doing the work. Replacing a shared mailbox with an online form may sound like a technology chang...
Post a Comment
Read more

Before Go-Live, Prove the Service Is Ready: A Six-Part Operational Readiness Check

Check operational readiness before the project team hands over the service. A project can look finished on paper and still be unready for real life. Testing is complete, the launch date is booked and communications are drafted. Then someone asks: Who handles the first support request on Monday morning? The room goes quiet. That question exposes the gap between delivery readiness and operational readiness. Delivery readiness asks, “Did we build what we agreed?” Operational readiness asks, “Can people run, support and improve this service once the project team steps back?” Both matter. A successful go-live needs more than a completed deliverable. Why operational readiness matters Projects are temporary, but services continue. Without clear ownership, training, support, contingencies and measures, the project team becomes the unofficial support team and operational knowledge stays in people’s heads. PMI’s guidance on project closing warns about this exact handover gap. The peo...
Post a Comment
Read more