Here’s the pattern:
- Identify the owner
- Have the owner describe the problem and solution in a doc
- Invite stakeholders to comment on the doc
- If discussions on the doc linger, schedule a meeting to finalize
- Document conclusions in the doc, to facilitate communication and closure, and for future reference
This may seem obvious, but I often forget it, especially in cases where a task starts small and grows in complexity. A problem may seem too small to formally “own”. A solution may seem too trivial to document. Stakeholders may attend a meeting without context. A meeting may conclude with stakeholders feeling like they’ve expressed themselves, but there’s no actionable plan to resolve the problem.
Identifying one person from a group of stakeholders to own the project and be responsible for leading work to completion reduces organizational ambiguity.
Documenting the problem and proposed solution in writing reduces ambiguity by capturing ideas from a variety of mediums in a single, relatively objective place that stakeholders can comment on.
Documentation alone may achieve closure, but it may also spawn extensive commentary. Meetings are relatively expensive, but scheduling a meeting to drive closure reduces ambiguity by distilling commentary on the document into conclusions.
Documenting conclusions reduces ambiguity by rendering them in an objective form all stakeholders can agree on.
A few symptoms that indicate when this pattern might be useful:
- Endless back-and-forth in chat, bug comments, etc, which can give the impression of progress, but never resolve the issue
- Multiple and/or cross-functional stakeholders, which can obscure priorities
- Multiple people opining on a solution and/or answering questions, which can obscure ownership
- A problem that drags on, which can indicate it’s important, but inappropriately owned
This ties into larger discussions around project planning (e.g., managing planned vs unplanned work), and meeting efficiency (e.g., inviting stakeholders, assigning pre-work and clarifying outcomes), but the point here is just to succinctly identify an organizational pattern and when it can be helpful.