About Us

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to Coffee Conversations:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to working@PXLTD:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

« Basecamp and Cloud Computing | Main | The Curse of Knowledge »

December 08, 2009

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83452e31569e201156fb48453970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Commander's Intent:

Comments

car dealerships in ct

This seems like the most comprehensive blog on this niche

mip

While I agree with the idea of Commander Intent in general, I think that a person (or company) should ensure the proper checks and balances are in place so that driving solely toward the goal post to meet the CI doesn't in the process harm the person (or company).

In war, the soldiers are unified in a single mission. Some may not make it through, but ultimately, the objective is to complete the mission - to carry out whatever that Commender Intent is. In war however, there isn't the focus on the "next" mission. Only the current mission. That can be dangerous in business. Project teams cannot become tunnel visioned on a single project with the idea of meeting the Commander's Intent, if it means being unable to safeguard the well being of the business itself. Companies are more than a single project. Companies are built over years of experience. In war, too often, the brave group of soldiers are expendable. That is less applicable in business. In business, if the Commander's Intent threatens the well being and future "safety" of the corporation, there needs to be the ability to adapt and put aside the overarching CI to ensure that a company is around to "fight another day"

Jim

I think Mip's point is well taken and the Commander's Intent is meant to be the high level goal of a mission. Often people get so intent on doing the prescibes steps in the plan they ignore the intent.
I have observed many certified project managers manage the prescribed steps of a plan but ignore the intent of the project. The point is as reality disrupts the best laid plans the team must focus on the Commander's Intent, not the next step in the plan.
I have experienced people trying to meet the prescibed steps in a "Quality Approach" ignoring the fact that the project is totally off the rails. For example, if the project will not meet the business requirement because new information has come to light, continuing on with the old plan makes no sense. However I have seen many people just continue to execute the plan.
I think MIP's point is that the Commander's Intent must not be so focussed on the project that it ignores the overall success of the company. Ideally the intents are alligned.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search

  • Google

    WWW
    pxltd.typepad.com

Google Ads




Other Items of Note

  • Tags

    Project X Ltd

    Toronto, Ontario, Canada

    Stephen Hayward, Graham Boundy

    Database, Datawarehouse, Data Warehouse, DB2, Netezza, Oracle, SQL Server, Teradata, Enterprise Data Warehouse, Active Data Warehouse, Data Mart

    Data Integration, ETL, ELT, EII, ESB, AB Initio, Ascential, Informatica, Ipedo, Sunopsis, Data SOA, Information as a Service

    Business Intelligence, Reporting Tools, Business Objects, Cognos,Hyperion, Microstrategy

    eBusiness, xBusiness, web, SOA, EAI,AJAX, Web Services, Service Oriented Architecture, Actional, Systinet

    Advisory Services, Consulting, Corporate Strategy, Alignment, Project Management, Sourcing Strategy, Offshoring Strategy, Software Delivery Models, Rapid Results, Breakthrough, Innovation, High Performance Organizations

    Offshore Vendors: Infosys, iGATE, Wipro, Satyam, Tata TCS, Hexaware, Patni, HCL, Keane, CGI, IBM

    Systems Integration: CGI, EDS, Cap Gemini, Keane, IBM, CSC

    Datawarehousing: Adastra, Thoughtcorp, Loyal Metrics, Red Sky Data, Keyrus

    Advisory: Accenture, McKinsey, AT Kearney