Continued from page 1
3.3.1 Issue Status
A decision is made about
next state of
issue. (The previous state was "new".) The next status of
issue reflects
nature and timing of
action to address
issue. It is one of
following:
- open: immediate action will be taken to address
issue - deferred: action will be deferred until some future time
- referred: action will be taken by some other group, probably because
issue is beyond
current scope - cancelled: no action will be taken now or in
future
3.3.2 Categorize
issue
A first attempt at categorizing
issue was made when it was first recorded. But, now during
initial review
category can be refined.
The proper issue category is helpful when prioritizing
resources required to address issues. It is especially useful for reporting purposes.
Action item: Discuss with
team how best to categorize
issues you expect to get, and document
categories that will be used.
3.3.3 Rank
issue severity
The severity reflects
importance of getting
issue resolved. Obviously, you want to direct resources at
most important issues before
lesser ones.
Action item: Choose a small set of severity codes that have a clear ranking. For example: Trivial, Standard, Important, Critical. Some people prefer: Low, Medium, High, Very High.
3.3.4 Assignment
From
start,
next person to take action on
issue must be assigned to
issue and notified. Issue Tracker[http://Issue-Tracker.GLM2.com/] will automatically notify
person assigned to
issue via email.
If
issue description is incomplete,
issue can be assigned to
appropriate party to gather
information necessary to make
issue description clear.
Assign a person and not a group. Experience has shown that assigning issues to individuals leads to greater accountability than assigning issues to groups. An individual can be confronted about lack of progress, it is much harder to confront a group of people. A group can be represented by a group leader, so you can assign an issue to
group leader who will take action to reassign
issue to correct group member who will actually address
issue.
3.3.5 Ownership
It should be possible to decide which stakeholder is
owner of
issue. Having an issue owner is a way of recording who is accountable for
issue's resolution.
Owners must review
issues they own for progress to resolution. If
progress is not sufficient
issue manager should be told so that
situation can be remedied.
3.4 Taking Action
The process to address an issue iterates over
following sub-steps until
issue is resolved.
- The person assigned to
issue, takes action to address
issue. - The person assigned to
issue, documents
action taken as an issue event in
central repository. An issue event has
person's name,
date and a description of
action taken. - Some issue processes require an approval step before further action can be taken. This approval should take
form of signing off on a proposal. While paper based signatures are acceptable, an automated system is better. Issue events in Issue Tracker[http://Issue-Tracker.GLM2.com/] can by used to sign off, since a user is required to log in to identify themselves, this is as good as a paper signature. - If there is documentation to support
action taken, like a cost-benefit analysis of a proposed system change,
supporting files are attached to
issue. - The process of finding a solution may help refine
issue description. This refinement should be reflected in updates to
issue description and title, as well as attaching further supporting files. It may also require that
issue be re-categorized. - If
next iteration is
responsibility of another person
issue is reassigned. - If
issue is resolved in this iteration,
status is updated to reflect
fact that
issue is inactive.
Notice that
action taken may involve reassigning
issue, changing status, refining
issue description, changing
category of
issue. All of these changes should be recorded in
central repository. Changing of status, category and severity are automatically logged for you in an automated system like Issue Tracker[http://Issue-Tracker.GLM2.com/].
3.5 Ongoing Oversight
Consistent and continuous evaluation of issues by
issue manager and
team must take place to bring
issues to resolution. This can take place through a periodic review of all active issues in
central repository with
team and a separate review with
stakeholders.
Escalate issues as needed by re-assigning or by changing issue ownership.
Report and communicate progress on all issues to upper management and to
team, subscriptions can be used by upper management and
team to follow progress on individual issues. This reporting can be integrated into project status reporting.
Analyze issue progress and adapt actions. The central repository should be able to provide feedback on how efficiently
issues are proceeding from creation to resolution. If it is taking too long to resolve important issues, then
issue manager must find ways to improve
turn-around time.
4. Finally
The following are a few further action items
Action item: Distribute copies of this issue management methodology to team members and stakeholders so that everyone knows how and why issues are managed.
Action item: Adapt and scale this issue management methodology to suit you project's scale and quirks.
Action item: Create your central repository, and get started today.
This issue management methodology has evolved over many years. It evolved from experience on projects with budgets from $500,000 to $50,000,000 which had a total number of issues ranging from a few hundred issues to many thousands. In half
cases
project team was physically dispersed in several countries.

Grant Murray is project manager and enterprise application architect specializing in technical project leadership strategy. Email [email@grantmurray.com] for questions or comments regarding this article, or if you require project management consulting. Issue Tracker