BACKWARD PLANNING
Plans that really work!
|
Untold resources
are expended every year by organizations creating elaborate plans – annual plans, new product or service introduction
plans, sales/marketing plans – and are beautifully bound
in leather notebooks only to gather dust on the bookshelf of executives. Why – because
they simply don’t work!
The most effective plans of which I am aware were those created
by NASA in the lunar landing program. |
 |
In 1961, President John F. Kennedy established
a goal for our country; “we will land a man on the moon
by the end of this decade.” |
|
The
reaction of everyone – scientists,
engineers, test pilots, members
of Congress, ordinary citizens – was “how are we
possibly going to do
that, we don’t have . . . ?”
|
|
|
 |
A few scientists, including
Werner Von Braun, responded, “sure
we can but we are going to need one heck of a plan and that plan
will be composed of technology, equipment, concepts, 90+% of
which haven’t even been invented!” |
|
|
 |
“How’d they do that”? |
|
| NASA modified and adapted techniques and processes pioneered in
the development and production of America’s first nuclear submarine – the
first project of its scope ever to be completed early and under
budget! |
 |
They worked backwards! |
|
| NASA led a remarkable process, involving thousands of resources,
of inventing the plan by starting from the end. |
“What
are all the things we have to think about, solve and do
to make that happen?”
They started with “where will he land?” With the three-fourth’s
of the Earth’s surface being water, whatever vehicle he’s
in will have to be able to float!
|
|
|
The next question back from “where will he land?” was “where
will he be coming from?” Scientists knew that it simply wasn’t
feasible to send a vehicle from Earth directly to the Moon and then
return directly to Earth.
Long hours of discussion, research and debate focused on the “Earth
orbit” or “Moon orbit” alternatives. The combination of Earth orbit and Moon orbit was adopted.
“But what do we do
with the fact that the gravitational field on the Moon is only
one-sixth that of
the Earth?”
Clearly, some kind of combination vehicle was required.
|
 |
On and on NASA scientists and engineers went until the questions
were resolved and guidance could be given to the design of components.
NASA did not start with “what kind of propulsion system or
rockets do we need?” or “at the beginning” as
most executives and managers do. In fact, that set of decisions
was actually
made towards the end of the process although simultaneous development
was taking place.
The same kind of process can be used to
create meaningful, integrated and “do-able” plans for organizations – from
new product design to organizational change.
Step 1
Imagine all the key leaders of the organization
in one large room. Butcher paper covers the walls and each person
has a packet of ‘post-its’ and
pens.
|
 |
On the right side of the room, participants establish the GOAL.
Begin at the end and work backward!
|
 |
|
Don’t forget: H.W.I.K.I.W.I.S.I? How
Will I Know
It When
I See
It?
Too often stating the goal, what we are trying to achieve, is couched
in very general and amorphous terms. We must be as specific as possible
throughout this process. Avoid generalities such as “global
marketer” – what specific markets do you mean – literally,
worldwide or the Asian rim?
“
World class producer”. What does that mean? BE SPECIFIC! Step 2
|
Identify all the streams of activity that makes up our goal.
Culture, products/services, markets, organization, recognition,
compensation, market share, profitability, learning/development,
etc.
|
 |
|
| Step 3
For each of those
streams of activity, identify the last thing
that will be in place in each when we are at our goal.
|
|
|
Step 4 |
ABOUT FACE! |
Step 5
 |
After working
backward for each activity stream, in step 5 we reverse the direction.
This “reversal” provides
another view of each stream of activity, the sequence of events
or steps that
will be required to move from today.
During this step, for each activity stream we must identify: who,
what, when, how, resource implications, and potential
integration needs with other streams of activity.
Step 6 The really difficult part
Most plans fail for two distinct but related
reasons: inaccurate forecasts of resource implications and the
absence of integration.
Working on our plan in both directions, the resource implications
and potential integration needs will become apparent.
Historically, working forward from today does not indicate either
resource implications or integration needs. We are, mentally,
so accustomed to that form of thinking that we overlook items/needs
and/or make subconscious assumptions that are not valid. Too
often they lead to plans that look a little like this:
|
 |
Step 7

|
Pull the entire
plan together with a keen and realistic eye on the accuracy
of resource requirements and the absolute necessity
of integration. We can’t do B until A is completed. Doing
activity stream C requires coordination with steps 3 and 4
in activity stream F. |
|
Backward planning is difficult
work precisely because we are unaccustomed to thinking and planning
that way…and that is precisely why
it should be done! |
Step 8
Periodic ‘reality checks’ on the plan content and
its implementation must occur. Regardless of how well the planning
is accomplished, ‘things’ never work out completely
as planned.
- periodically
assess progress
- constantly check changes
taking place in the world around you
- accept that any plan
must be a ‘living document’ where
change is a fact of life. CAUTION! When the inevitable
changes do occur, repeat revisit steps 6 and 7 to insure that
the revised
plan is still doable and can be adequately funded with
resources, etc.
|
If we do it right, we will
have an ever-evolving, reality based,
integrated plan that will actually work!
|
|
|