Impact and time horizons

We’ve been thinking lately about how our team can make the most impact possible, and how we can succinctly articulate it to others. Whilst it’s reasonably easy to talk about improvements as a whole, it’s much more difficult when time horizons are factored in; when do we need to do this by?

Living downstream of others

As an in-house studio, we’re naturally downstream of other functions; our outputs—and ultimately, outcomes—are heavily influenced by the inputs we receive from others. This could come down to the quality of a brief; the completeness of content, or; the scope and timing of the work.

Living downstream is difficult; whilst many people think about the priority and scope of their own work, our team has to think about competing priorities and how the scope of one project positively or negatively impacts the scope of another. Every project is seemingly important and urgent.

The benefit of this position is that we can more easily spot where projects are attempting to do similar things, or where they complement one another and might benefit from collaboration between project owners. With any luck, this results in projects that are better aligned.

What you ship is what matters

There is a reason we care about this: what you ship is what matters. Unless there’s an unlimited time horizon on all of the projects, it’s likely that some will need to be completed sooner than others. It’s also likely that quality will be higher when more energy is dedicated to a project.

Here’s the thing: shipping things is hard; finishing projects is hard; prioritisation is hard. I was recently reading An Elegant Puzzle by Will Larson, and a graph in the book—which I’ve shamelessly recreated almost identically below—has stuck with me ever since.

When you’re only looking at whether progress is being made, it’s easy to feel confident about any number of initiatives; when time horizons are factored in, it’s easy to see how focusing on too much in parallel could create a scenario where you’re left with many half-finished projects.

There are many things that force time horizons: market conditions; a public event; a national or international holiday; a move by a newcomer or a competitor. They could also be fabricated to promote urgency and focus internally. However they come about, they alter the conversation.

That conversation should shift to focus on how you can get projects over the line; how you can ship work, and then measure and iterate upon it. One or two shipped projects is better than a string of nascent ideas and half-finished projects that take mental space and physical energy.

Helping others help you

If you’re on a team that lives downstream of others, try taking a look at the work coming your way: how does it interact; what is the true priority of the work; where are there opportunities to collaborate or to consolidate multiple tasks or projects? A rising tide lifts all boats.

Focusing on fewer projects—whilst increasing the energy spent on each—could help to improve quality whilst reducing the time required to ship the work. Look at the trajectory of your projects and ask yourself: are you likely to make the impact you need to within the given timeline?