Dear Appraiser,
Sometimes I look at a new process and think, Really? This DAR (Decision Analysis and Resolution) thing just feels…silly. Aren’t we the experts here? Why do I need a bunch of overhead to make a decision I’m perfectly capable of making myself? ~Dan A Resulo
Hey Dan!
Make the call on your own? That’s so a-DAR-able! And it reminds me of a little story…”
A Story From the Trenches
Back in the early '90s, I was leading a team tasked with building a point-of-sale system for a major department store. It was a high-stakes, high-visibility project—and yeah, we were feeling pretty "RAD" back then.
My team was responsible for selecting a code library to handle basic retail functions. So, we did what most competent engineers would: we gathered names of known vendors, reached out for information, and asked what we thought were the right questions—platform compatibility, core functionality, cost, viability, etc.
Eventually, we narrowed it down to three solid candidates—all text-based, Linux-compatible systems—and one flashy new option: a Windows-based GUI with a touchscreen.
Yes, a touchscreen.
Cue the nerd excitement. Suddenly, the office was buzzing with words like "innovative", "sexy", and "groundbreaking". Text-based systems were yesterday’s news. Even our CEO declared that the new graphical interface would be the “soul” of the new system.
Our CIO, however, saw through the glitter. He found the touchscreen option functionally lacking and more expensive—and added a new column to our decision matrix: Pizzazz.
You can guess what happened next.
Spoiler Alert: It Didn’t End Well
The momentum behind the shiny new thing was unstoppable. Despite clear drawbacks, the touchscreen system was chosen. And predictably, it failed. The library didn’t even work. The project went over budget, missed deadlines, and turned into a full-blown disaster.
But from that painful experience, something good emerged: The 3 D’s.
The 3 D’s: A Better Way to Make Decisions
I’ve since made the 3 D’s a cornerstone of my approach to project and product decision-making. You may have heard them in one of my CMMI classes. They stand for:
1. Deliberate
Use a structured, fact-based approach involving the right stakeholders. It doesn’t need to be a 100-page document, but it does need to be systematic. Had we followed even a simple, deliberate process, we could have slowed the hype and made a smarter decision.
2. Durable
Make decisions that last. Not forever, but through reorgs, leadership changes, or the next tech trend. Durable decisions are adaptable—not just “solid” or “robust”—and they anticipate change rather than resist it.
3. Defendable
Every decision has political implications. Who’s involved, how you communicate, and how you justify your choice all matter. A defendable decision earns support—and helps neutralize those who’ll second-guess you the moment things go sideways.
How to Apply the 3 D’s
Start by identifying key decision points—the ones that carry real impact. Then follow a deliberate path: define criteria, involve the right people, gather data, and come to a resolution. Simple, right? Not always. But effective? Absolutely.
So the next time you’re tempted to skip the process and just “make the call,” remember: one flashy touchscreen can derail your whole project. Take a beat, remember the 3 D’s—and save yourself the pain.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.