Change Overload and Too Much Firefighting

Change Overload and Too Much Firefighting

Bruce Sherry (Senior Audit Manager, Tesco Bank) offers this insight about keeping track of the aggregate workload staff have:

‘Most organisations nowadays need to deal with changing customer requirements in an Agile way. This is something we have developed an increasingly strong capability in, for example, learning how to “pivot” when the COVID‐19 pandemic arose. And the good thing with Agile is that, at a project‐by‐project level, it helps you to tackle one thing at a time over a short timescale, so every time you complete a “sprint,” you have something tangible to show for your efforts.

But you need to keep a close eye on the number of things you are doing, the interdependencies between those and the number of times staff must switch from one task to another. This is often problematic because of the time and effort it takes to catch up with what you were last doing and with what everyone else has been doing.

Some organisations can get caught out by this subtle but essential detail. However, to its credit, most Agile projects don't like too much staff switching, precisely because of this problem.’

Andrew Wright outlines how he thinks about the workload of colleagues and how they approach work tasks:

‘You want an organisation to be productive and efficient. But you don't want managers to be too busy. This is something I look out for. The tricky bit is unpicking whether people are really overloaded or just not so good at prioritising, managing their time and delegating. This is where Lean techniques can help. You can say you are productive all you want. But you can't be sure unless you are using tried and tested methods to prioritise and squeeze out effectiveness and efficiency.

I think the other part of this is that people need some capacity to step back from day‐to‐day tasks at regular intervals. Being good in a business is about having the capacity to review management information and then dig into things, such as minor variations in production costs or potential market changes thoughtfully, rather than just operating in firefighting mode.

I admire managers who are good under pressure and who can firefight. But too often, I have seen instances where staff and managers pride themselves on their heroic efforts fixing one thing after another as if it's a badge of honour. I know this is commonplace, but this is a warning sign for the organisation around strategic thinking, prioritisation, capability, and resources. A manager who mostly does firefighting may be a hero for a while. Still, in the long run, they can be a liability. Modern business should be about more intelligent ways of working, not just working harder.

I'm not saying that I dislike managers who can get things done quickly under pressure, this is important, and it can be better to act quickly in some situations than to overanalyse and overthink. But it's about finding a balance.

One way to think about this is to clarify what is driving the pace of problem‐solving and decision‐making. If there is an external factor that means you must respond to something immediately, that's understandable. But often, I see people rushing at things out of habit to get things off their desk and show they are decisive and busy. But this is a huge mistake if you are a senior manager because rushed decisions at the top can generate chaos and stress elsewhere in an organisation.

My view is that if you have got some time, why not take it? A bit of time and effort to think things through at a senior level has a multiplying effect when it's translated into what goes on at an operational level.’15