An extremely detailed Project planning is essential to mitigate risks, ensure transparency and better communication to stakeholders, ensure deadlines are met, and optimally use allotted resources. I haven't worked in the industry, but if I speak about academic projects, the importance of detailed planning still doesn't fade. If the project is funded, the allocation of funds will be smoother. It will be easier to troubleshoot anything going back to the previous stage without much hassle, and it will be easier to add collaborators at the required stages. A detailed project plan of the past can be helpful to lay out a base for entirely new work or if some unprecedented event occurs.

While it may seem that the more detail the better, I believe that there is such a thing as "too much detail" in the project planning. From my personal experience in the industry side, I have found that the more information from previous projects a team has, the better it is for assigning tasks. This helps a team because an individual can have a specific task assigned to them and it could be a similar task from a past project, they can find the relevant documentation and get more detail on the tasks, without the overall project plan not being overly detailed and possibly confusing.

However, it is also possible that this project could be a new type of project that doesn't relate much to those in the past. This is where the importance of documenting the tasks for the future projects comes into play so the tasks in the future do not need to be over detailed or over complicated. My opinion is that that the too much or too little detail depends on the specific type of project and those involved within it, but the importance of documentation can greatly help with future project plans. 

The project planning stage needs to be as thorough as possible since it is setting up the projected schedule of tasks with deadlines, a targeted budget, and an effective and efficient team. If a solid well thought through plan is not in place before the project is fully executed, problems will definitely arise and hinder the progress of the project. It could also cause delays and even be costly, which could impact the set budget. So being detailed orientated is a definite must at this stage.

However, there is a point where being too detailed oriented can cause a hindrance to the project. Though the planning stage needs to be thought through and be detailed in each task, this can be very time consuming and in industry, time is money. If the project leader is spending too much time planning every single aspect of the project to the smallest detail, it can hinder the progression of the execution stage of the project. My professor for my senior project (capstone) used to always warn us of "analysis paralysis" and "to not play in the leaves without looking at the trees." Essentially, while planning out a project, you need to make sure you aren't hyper focused on the small details because that could cause you to not look at the broader picture. I definitely experienced this while working on my senior project because when faced with a singular hypothetical problem, we would spend so much energy and time trying to figure out a solution --- again this was a hypothetical problem that we didn't even come across, so there was no need to expend so much time into finding a solution. I think what is important when in the planning stage is to be sure you are thorough and detailed in your project plan, but to also remember to not hyper focus on one aspect and instead look at the project as a whole. 

Similar to what the consensus seems to be, I also believe that the project planning phase needs to be as meticulous as possible but that it is also possible to go too in depth. 

An example that I'd like to use is a big project that I was part of. Because I was an intern, my role was pretty much on the outskirts of the project and should not have theoretically impacted it much. However, due to poor communication between the different task managers, when the work was reassigned to me, we found out that the documents I was to update were impacted by other team members of different tasks. Essentially, I had to obsolete a few documents that were referenced in other documents that were handled by two other teams. An unfortunate circumstance was that the work was reassigned to me very close to the hard deadline and that the updates the two other teams worked on were close to being implemented. To fix this, the team members had to pull back their document changes and update their references to remove my documents and get reapproved. Another unfortunate circumstance was that this happened at the end of the year, where many of the employees/approvers were on vacation, and getting the changes to move quickly was just not happening. In the end, everything turned out fine, but I was left wondering: would this have happened if all of the task leaders were on the same page? The people I reached out to had no idea that the documents that I was assigned would be removed. Again, I don't know much about the whole project, but from my perspective, it seems like the task managers divided the documents amongst themselves and handed it off to their respective teams. If they had a list of the specific documents to be obsolesced, I believe that they could have let their members know to keep an eye out for its reference and remove it, citing that another team is working on obsoleting the document. Regular updates to the information in a document would not have caused such a chain reaction as references would only mention the document by name and number. Obsolescence, on the other hand, requires that mention of the document be removed and that the correct next document be referenced instead. 

The situation I mentioned is a little tricky in the sense that at the time, I wished that the managers had looked more in depth at the documents that were impacted by obsolescence, however, I also recognize that it is our job to find those impacts as well. If the managers were to do this, then they would have gone too in depth into the planning and done our work for us. In all, the situation ended up being a lot more stressful than it needed to be and was very close to the deadline, making me believe that it was not planned as effectively as it should have been. 

I would have to agree, as the planning stage is crucial in determining the success of the rest of the project. However, you pose a great question and I believe that there is no such thing as too much detail as long as the planning phase is done correctly. In saying this, I mean that it takes a good project manager who is able and willing to communicate with the rest if their project members during this phase of a project. Communicating with team members early in the project cycle allows the project manager to get a better idea of their project team's capabilities, thus enabling a thorough, feasible, and detail oriented planning phase. A project manager that allows for the opinions of the people who are vital in the execution phases, such as team members, will successfully perform a detailed planning phase that will enable an easier rest of the project. Overall, communication is essential in every aspect of a project cycle and establishing early communication will help the project manager find the right amount of detail needed during the planning phase for any project.

@sandra-raju I can appreciate your heeded warning. I can agree that too much detail can become detrimental. I think project planning can become hindered when the customer is overly invested. I have supported clients throughout the SIP installation process and there is a forum to follow that helps to team to answer any questions that could arise, but I have noticed when the client is included in details that could be answered based on the application then it sparks a bit of confusion. Confusion then leads to additional detail and the project is then held up.

I think that there is no universal rule for project planning. It has to be customized to fit the projects unique needs. However, its definitely a good idea to let team members have some flexibility in how they do their task as long as they hit the project's main goal and keep up the quality. And, of-course to keep the communication flowing within the team so that if someone sees problem's with the plan or such they can speak up and get things fixed in timely manner. So, I believe the best thing is to have the right balance between being super detailed and giving some flexibility and this comes with experience over time. 

Hello,

Project planning holds an imperative role in the project life cycle. Creating the right balance of detail within a project plan is a challenge in project management, and it hinges on several factors. First, consider the complexity of the project; highly intricate endeavors often require more meticulous planning, whereas simpler projects may suffice with a broader overview. Additionally, the expertise of your team plays a crucial role; experienced professionals may benefit from greater autonomy in determining task execution methods. It's essential to identify critical tasks and dependencies within your project, as these warrant more detailed planning to prevent potential delays.

From my experience both in a research lab and in industry, having "too much detail" depends on the task at hand. For instance, if I am running a rodent behavior study and I have preliminary data from a previous experiment, I need to follow the steps from the initial study exactly to make sure they are comparable. Another time having a surplus of detail is important is when an individuals' safety is at risks. This could be surgery, human testing, or any dangerous experiment someone can perform.

On the other hand, on certain projects, tolerance needs to be taken into account. When planning a project, you need to determine how important each individual task is. Some tasks may need to get done by any means necessary where a specific protocol does not need to be followed. Other cases have specific protocols that need to be followed in order for the final product to be completed.

I think it is also greatly important take into account the variety of teams. If you have been working with a team for multiple projects and have a high level of trust in the members, you may give them more freedom with the way they complete their tasks. In other cases, where you are the project manager of new team members, you may have to be stricter at the begin but can quickly ease up as you begin to know how they work. I also believe that a project manager should make time for their employees to come to them with new ideas that they may come across when working on the tasks.

@mk959 you provide really interesting perspective by saying you think it depends on the setting; I agree. Looking through several of the other replies in this thread, I noticed that the general consensus seemed to be 'No there's no such thing' or 'Mainly no, but there can be too much detail'. I'm in the camp of depends on the project people, and industry. I noticed that there weren't really direct examples of how exactly this might look in the work place. To give an example: I work as an engineer in the process dev dept. Over time I realized/noticed that when I included too much detail into things I'd present, or emails, people wouldn't pay attention. 

I've legitimately had peers tell me "too long, didn't read". Of course one can make the argument that this is a technical writing issue-and that's true. But, based on what I've seen and experienced, I firmly believe this applies to all stages in a project. The amount of detail needed depends on your audience. A project that has more detail will always start off well, but what many don't realize, is that in real life industry, things don't always go smoothly. Something will go wrong-unexpectedly with your machine that you're working on developing to produce these parts. The tool maker made too many changes to the grippers used in the welder, and now the welder needs to be reprogrammed entirely to accommodate the new grippers. The PMs were never done on the CNC machines to be used and the floor supervisor is so spread thin they didn't catch it; and because of that, the CNC machines are producing out-of-spec parts and it takes a very long time to find the simple root cause to the issue. 

A good project leader will plan for such potential issues. A great project leader will plan for such issues and allow their schedule to be flexible by not breaking down every single detail-especially on processes they may not know much about themselves. A great project leader also understands that if they inundate their team with all the details, they may lose attention and understanding. 

Well very good answers from everyone. From my perspective, it is a very challenging task to balance between too many details and little details. To resolve this problem we can focus on some important details. Therefore, we will only have important information rather than less important and too much details information. First of all, we should focus on deliverables. It should be defined clearly. Secondly, the Responsibility of each person in the project. Thirdly, the purpose of the project. It should be said clearly. 

I totally agree with that too much detail can become unnecessarily complicated.  but this can be only applied when their is early planning, good communication, adaptability, and understanding within the team members. When it comes to flexibility employees do need room to adapt their methods. Some freedom in how they complete tasks can encourage new ideas and better problem-solving. The key is finding a balance where the plan is clear enough to keep things on track, but not so strict that it limits creativity. This also helps to let people think outside the box and adapt when needed.