Recently I've taken on a role as a production scheduler at my company, so in terms of being a "leader" for one of the management sectors I've taken on planning for some of these projects. I think one of the biggest challenges in planning is having something surprise you. You can be planning for a project and have all your risk assessments done and believe that you should have everything figured out, and then all of a sudden something happens that brings a whole new complexity to the project. For me, that part of planning is difficult but it's also something that I enjoy, as there is always some problem solving to be done in planning. I think also getting the team to also have their input in planning can be a challenge as well. Most people want everything to be laid out for them and all they have to worry about is execution, but I believe a project doesn't become successful without the input of those involved in the execution in the planning process. It's so important to have a good baseline at the planning stage, and without that key information, it can be disastrous for the rest of the project timeline.

I agree with what njq3 has said about planning and surprises, as unexpected events can throw the trajectory of a project completely off course. Additionally, for planning, things like troubleshooting, the time it takes to coordinate, or back-and-forth in regulation may not get fully captured, leading to issues in scheduling. Something else that I think causes issues between sectors is false alignment. Everyone might think they are on the same page because of the documentation that has been signed off, but each team might interpret the scope slightly differently. In execution, when things don’t fit together, the issue becomes clearer. 

Another issue I see that could potentially arise is overly relying on historical data. The slides for this week mention how teams can use past projects for estimates. However, in medical devices, new technology and new regulations can make old data very misleading. There can also be a lag between making decisions and the impact that these decisions have later down the line. A decision that is made in scope or procurement might not cause clear harm until weeks later during the testing or validation phase. This will become more expensive to fix later on, so having models or ways to see the impact of certain decisions down the line would be very beneficial. This also plays a role in assumptions as well. In planning, assumptions that become too locked in/relied on too early can lead to many issues in planning and budgets. In the third simulation we just completed, our team made an assumption that we never confirmed regarding the molecular specificity of the surfactant. This assumption made our solution take two posts longer than it could have, since we locked in our assumption without confirming it. From a planning sector standpoint, this could cost thousands of dollars and many weeks in real life, showing the impact of assumptions. Additionally, other sectors will use the assumptions made in planning, and then the issue becomes intertwined in the fabric of the entire project. 

How do you think teams can detect false alignment or assumptions early on, before it shows up during execution or testing? Have you experienced a situation where an early assumption led to major downstream issues? Additionally, do you think relying on historical data helps or hurts more in innovation projects like medical devices?