3 ms·
First, author recommends challenging but feasible deadlines, not "arbitrary" deadlines. Second, the "small increments" approach you describe is quite compatibl
by jimbokun 2y ago
First, author recommends challenging but feasible deadlines, not "arbitrary" deadlines.
Second, the "small increments" approach you describe is quite compatible with the approach of having workers give a status update every Friday. Requires determining what can be accomplished in a week, so you have something tangible to report on Friday.
- pyrale 2y agoYeah, one man’s "challenging but feasible" becomes the next man’s "arbitrary". The difference between small increments and giving a status updates every week is that if your task needs multiple status updates, it’s not small increments. Also small increments mean a piece of work that can measurably be evaluated as done. A status update is not a "done" status. If someone fails to deliver a small increment, you find out soon, and the team can re-assess, and it doesn’t carry the stigma of missing a deadline.