232 lines
8.2 KiB
Markdown
232 lines
8.2 KiB
Markdown
# Course Correction Task
|
|
|
|
## Purpose
|
|
|
|
Execute strategic course correction when projects deviate from planned outcomes, requirements change, or new constraints emerge. Provide systematic analysis and actionable recommendations to realign project trajectory with business objectives.
|
|
|
|
## When to Use Course Correction
|
|
|
|
### Trigger Scenarios
|
|
|
|
**Requirement Changes**:
|
|
- Significant business requirement modifications
|
|
- New stakeholder priorities or constraints
|
|
- Market conditions affecting project scope
|
|
- Technology or resource limitations discovered
|
|
|
|
**Quality Issues**:
|
|
- Multiple quality gate failures
|
|
- Technical debt accumulation
|
|
- Performance or security concerns
|
|
- User feedback indicating major misalignment
|
|
|
|
**Timeline/Budget Pressures**:
|
|
- Schedule delays requiring scope adjustment
|
|
- Budget constraints necessitating priority changes
|
|
- Resource availability changes
|
|
- External deadline pressures
|
|
|
|
**Technical Challenges**:
|
|
- Architecture decisions proving problematic
|
|
- Integration complexity exceeding estimates
|
|
- Scalability issues requiring redesign
|
|
- Technology stack limitations discovered
|
|
|
|
## Course Correction Framework
|
|
|
|
### 1. Situation Analysis
|
|
|
|
**Current State Assessment**:
|
|
- Document current project status and deliverables
|
|
- Identify specific deviations from original plan
|
|
- Quantify impact on timeline, budget, and quality
|
|
- Assess stakeholder satisfaction and concerns
|
|
|
|
**Root Cause Analysis**:
|
|
- Identify primary causes of deviation
|
|
- Distinguish between symptoms and underlying issues
|
|
- Assess whether causes are internal or external
|
|
- Evaluate preventability of identified issues
|
|
|
|
**Impact Assessment**:
|
|
- Business impact of continuing current trajectory
|
|
- Technical debt and quality implications
|
|
- Stakeholder confidence and relationship effects
|
|
- Market opportunity and competitive implications
|
|
|
|
### 2. Options Analysis
|
|
|
|
**Option 1: Scope Reduction**
|
|
- Identify features/requirements that can be deferred
|
|
- Preserve core business value while reducing complexity
|
|
- Assess user impact of reduced functionality
|
|
- Plan future phases for deferred features
|
|
|
|
**Option 2: Timeline Extension**
|
|
- Realistic schedule adjustment based on current progress
|
|
- Resource reallocation to critical path items
|
|
- Stakeholder communication and expectation management
|
|
- Risk mitigation for extended timeline
|
|
|
|
**Option 3: Resource Increase**
|
|
- Additional team members or specialized expertise
|
|
- Cost-benefit analysis of resource investment
|
|
- Onboarding time and knowledge transfer considerations
|
|
- Quality impact of team size changes
|
|
|
|
**Option 4: Architecture/Approach Changes**
|
|
- Alternative technical approaches or frameworks
|
|
- Simplified implementation strategies
|
|
- Technology stack modifications
|
|
- Design pattern or architecture adjustments
|
|
|
|
**Option 5: Phased Delivery**
|
|
- MVP identification and prioritization
|
|
- Staged rollout with incremental value delivery
|
|
- User feedback integration opportunities
|
|
- Risk reduction through smaller releases
|
|
|
|
### 3. Decision Framework
|
|
|
|
**Evaluation Criteria**:
|
|
- **Business Value**: Preserved value vs. original objectives
|
|
- **Technical Risk**: Implementation complexity and success probability
|
|
- **Timeline Impact**: Schedule adherence and delivery predictability
|
|
- **Resource Efficiency**: Cost-effectiveness and resource utilization
|
|
- **Quality Assurance**: Maintainability and technical excellence
|
|
- **Stakeholder Satisfaction**: User and business stakeholder acceptance
|
|
|
|
**Decision Matrix**:
|
|
```
|
|
Option | Business | Technical | Timeline | Resource | Quality | Stakeholder | Score
|
|
| Value | Risk | Impact | Efficiency| Assurance| Satisfaction|
|
|
--------------------|----------|-----------|----------|-----------|----------|-------------|-------
|
|
Scope Reduction | 7 | 8 | 9 | 8 | 7 | 6 | 7.5
|
|
Timeline Extension | 8 | 7 | 5 | 6 | 8 | 7 | 6.8
|
|
Resource Increase | 9 | 6 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 8 | 6.8
|
|
Architecture Change | 6 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 9 | 7 | 5.7
|
|
Phased Delivery | 8 | 8 | 8 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 8.0
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
### 4. Implementation Planning
|
|
|
|
**Selected Approach**: [Based on decision matrix analysis]
|
|
|
|
**Action Plan**:
|
|
1. **Immediate Actions** (Next 1-2 days)
|
|
- Stakeholder communication and alignment
|
|
- Team briefing and role clarification
|
|
- Priority adjustment and resource reallocation
|
|
|
|
2. **Short-term Actions** (Next 1-2 weeks)
|
|
- Revised project plan and milestone definition
|
|
- Updated requirements and acceptance criteria
|
|
- Risk mitigation strategy implementation
|
|
|
|
3. **Medium-term Actions** (Next month)
|
|
- Progress monitoring and adjustment mechanisms
|
|
- Quality assurance process modifications
|
|
- Stakeholder feedback integration processes
|
|
|
|
**Communication Plan**:
|
|
- **Executive Summary**: High-level situation and recommended approach
|
|
- **Team Communication**: Detailed implementation changes and new priorities
|
|
- **Stakeholder Updates**: Impact assessment and timeline adjustments
|
|
- **User Communication**: Feature changes and delivery expectations
|
|
|
|
## Course Correction Template
|
|
|
|
```markdown
|
|
# Course Correction Analysis: [Project Name]
|
|
|
|
## Situation Summary
|
|
**Current Challenge**: [Brief description of primary issue]
|
|
**Impact**: [Business, technical, and timeline implications]
|
|
**Urgency**: [Critical/High/Medium/Low priority for resolution]
|
|
|
|
## Root Cause Analysis
|
|
### Primary Causes
|
|
1. [Root cause 1 with evidence]
|
|
2. [Root cause 2 with evidence]
|
|
3. [Root cause 3 with evidence]
|
|
|
|
### Contributing Factors
|
|
- [Factor 1]: [Description and impact]
|
|
- [Factor 2]: [Description and impact]
|
|
|
|
## Options Analysis
|
|
### Option 1: [Option Name]
|
|
**Approach**: [Description of approach]
|
|
**Pros**: [Advantages and benefits]
|
|
**Cons**: [Disadvantages and risks]
|
|
**Timeline Impact**: [Schedule implications]
|
|
**Resource Impact**: [Resource requirements]
|
|
**Business Value**: [Value preservation assessment]
|
|
|
|
[Repeat for all options]
|
|
|
|
## Recommended Approach
|
|
**Selected Option**: [Chosen approach with rationale]
|
|
**Key Benefits**: [Primary advantages of selected approach]
|
|
**Risks and Mitigations**: [Identified risks and planned mitigations]
|
|
**Success Criteria**: [Measurable indicators of successful course correction]
|
|
|
|
## Implementation Plan
|
|
### Phase 1: Immediate Actions (Days 1-2)
|
|
- [ ] [Action item 1]
|
|
- [ ] [Action item 2]
|
|
- [ ] [Action item 3]
|
|
|
|
### Phase 2: Short-term Adjustments (Weeks 1-2)
|
|
- [ ] [Action item 1]
|
|
- [ ] [Action item 2]
|
|
- [ ] [Action item 3]
|
|
|
|
### Phase 3: Long-term Monitoring (Month 1+)
|
|
- [ ] [Action item 1]
|
|
- [ ] [Action item 2]
|
|
- [ ] [Action item 3]
|
|
|
|
## Communication Strategy
|
|
**Executive Briefing**: [Key messages for leadership]
|
|
**Team Communication**: [Developer and stakeholder messaging]
|
|
**User Communication**: [Customer-facing communication plan]
|
|
|
|
## Monitoring and Review
|
|
**Progress Metrics**: [How success will be measured]
|
|
**Review Schedule**: [When progress will be assessed]
|
|
**Escalation Triggers**: [Conditions requiring additional intervention]
|
|
|
|
## Lessons Learned
|
|
**Prevention Measures**: [How to avoid similar issues in the future]
|
|
**Process Improvements**: [Changes to improve project management]
|
|
**Early Warning Indicators**: [Signals to watch for in future projects]
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
## Quality Criteria
|
|
|
|
**Analysis Quality**:
|
|
- Objective assessment based on data and evidence
|
|
- Comprehensive evaluation of alternatives
|
|
- Clear rationale for recommended approach
|
|
- Realistic implementation timeline
|
|
|
|
**Communication Effectiveness**:
|
|
- Clear explanation of situation and recommended changes
|
|
- Appropriate messaging for different stakeholder groups
|
|
- Transparent about risks and trade-offs
|
|
- Maintains team morale and stakeholder confidence
|
|
|
|
**Implementation Feasibility**:
|
|
- Actionable steps with clear ownership
|
|
- Realistic timeline and resource requirements
|
|
- Built-in monitoring and adjustment mechanisms
|
|
- Addresses root causes rather than just symptoms
|
|
|
|
## Success Indicators
|
|
|
|
- **Project Realignment**: Clear path forward aligned with business objectives
|
|
- **Stakeholder Confidence**: Renewed trust in project success
|
|
- **Team Focus**: Clear priorities and reduced ambiguity
|
|
- **Risk Mitigation**: Identified risks addressed with specific mitigation strategies
|
|
- **Delivery Predictability**: More reliable timeline and scope commitments |