Don't Make Gates Optional, Make Them Flexible

The story centers around Pam, a product manager, and Hopper, the Head of Product, as they navigate the challenges of implementing approval checkpoints for large projects. Hopper's initial policy of requiring a formal Business Case for all large projects creates an impossible meta-decision for Pam, forcing her to weigh the risks of moving forward unilaterally versus slowing down the team with formal approval processes. However, when Hopper switches to a required but flexible approval, Pam can move forward with confidence, knowing that Hopper is in the loop even for smaller decisions. This approach allows attention to be reserved for the decisions where it is needed most, making the approval process more efficient.

The concept of required but flexible approval checkpoints is not new and can be seen in other contexts, such as code reviews in software engineering teams. The story highlights the importance of using multiple knobs to adjust the level of formality and scrutiny, rather than simply making approval optional. This approach allows teams to move faster and more confidently, while still maintaining the necessary level of scrutiny. The story also notes that if the complexity of a project is never high enough to warrant a thorough review, the approval checkpoint may not be providing value.

The implications of this approach are significant, as it allows teams to strike a balance between speed and scrutiny. By making approval checkpoints required but flexible, teams can reduce the risk of misjudging the complexity of a project and increase the likelihood of successful outcomes. This approach also allows leaders to maintain oversight and control over key decisions, while giving teams the autonomy to move forward with confidence. As teams continue to navigate the challenges of large-scale project management, this approach is worth considering as a way to improve efficiency and reduce risk.