Irrational Deadlines

The term deadline dates to the 1840s, according to the Google Books Ngram Viewer. A hundred years later, two new phrases appear: hard deadline and soft deadline. They refer to deadlines that are, respectively, inflexible and flexible, a curious distinction, considering that the original connotation of deadline was inflexibility.

In project management, the need to distinguish deadlines by their flexibility arises, in part, from the hope that we can schedule projects as precisely as, say, showings in movie theaters. Scheduling projects is tricky at best, because uncertainties inherent in the work always intrude. We're almost always late, and at times really, really late. Sometimes, we don't finish at all.

Even when late, we maintain our schedule illusions. We actually have a word for adjusting schedules — slip — that makes re-scheduling seem like a minor, unavoidable mishap. And every time we slip, deadline loses more of its connotation of inflexibility. By now, its connotation of inflexibility is so eroded that we need a way to restore it. The phrase hard deadline meets that need. And if we have hard deadlines, we must have soft deadlines. It's only fair.

What we really need are rational deadlines.

Rational deadlines are set according to the estimated duration of the work — no other factors enter. When we set deadlines to meet other needs, we risk departing from reality. Here are some of the needs that lead to setting irrational deadlines.

Managing the budget

Some managers use deadlines as budget control tools. They believe that tight deadlines limit spending by simply terminating budget authority. But when the deadline nears and the work is incomplete, we extend both schedule and budget, sometimes repeatedly. Oh well.

Motivating people

When leadership skills and compensation-based incentives don't motivate people to work soul-killing hours, some managers hope that tight deadlines can help close the gap. Burnout is a common result.

Compensating for late starts

Decision makers sometimes make decisions with considerably less urgency than they impose on project teams, hoping that tight deadlines for project execution can compensate for lengthy pre-execution decision cycles. To some extent, they do compensate, but the price is lower quality and higher turnover.

Keeping secret schedule reserves

Some believe Rational deadlines are set
according to the estimated
duration of the work —
no other factors enterthat because projects are always late, telling teams the actual need-by dates is foolish. Instead, they tell teams some earlier date, to impose enough pressure to get the job done on time. Unfortunately this practice deepens the distrust between managers and the managed.

Compensating for revenue shortfalls

When in financial distress, some organizations seek revenue from new offerings. The pressure to produce these products and services can be intense, often appearing as irrational deadlines. But financial salvation remains elusive, if the root causes of the financial distress include anything other than gaps in the company's product lineup.

Setting objectives that address real organizational needs is sensible. Setting irrational deadlines for projects isn't sensible — it merely intensifies those real organizational needs. Setting irrational deadlines is management malpractice.  Top    Next Issue

Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Project Management:

The Politics of Lessons Learned

Many organizations gather lessons learned — or at least, they believe they do. Mastering the political subtleties of lessons learned efforts enhances results.

Managing Non-Content Risks: I

When project teams and their sponsors manage risk, they usually focus on those risks most closely associated with the tasks — content risks. Meanwhile, other risks — non-content risks — get less attention. Among these are risks related to the processes and politics by which the organization gets things done.

Scope Creep, Hot Hands, and the Illusion of Control

Despite our awareness of scope creep's dangerous effects on projects and other efforts, we seem unable to prevent it. Two cognitive biases — the "hot hand fallacy" and "the illusion of control" — might provide explanations.

Design Errors and Group Biases

Design errors can cause unwanted outcomes, but they can also lead to welcome surprises. The causes of many design errors are fundamental attributes of the way groups function. Here is Part II of our exploration.

Down in the Weeds: I

When someone says, "I think we're down in the weeds," a common meaning is that we're focusing on inappropriate — and possibly irrelevant — details. How does this happen and what can we do about it?

See also Project Management and Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming October 17: Overt Belligerence in Meetings

Some meetings lose their way in vain attempts to mollify a belligerent participant who simply will not be mollified. Here's one scenario that fits this pattern. Available here and by RSS on October 17.

And on October 24: Conversation Irritants: I

Conversations at work can be frustrating even when everyone tries to be polite, clear, and unambiguous. But some people actually try to be nasty, unclear, and ambiguous. Here's Part I of a small collection of their techniques. Available here and by RSS on October 24.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenVWWsdxZyNjFTdbmvner@ChacaAdtfyWNMFioQsccoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power

Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented 6:00 PM June 29 (Eastern Time), Monthly Webinar, Technobility Webinar Series. You can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.