Command low. DoD’s Low-Level Radioactive Waste Program: JMC and ACC-RI Partnership Explained

How does the Joint Munitions Command manage DoD’s Low-Level Radioactive Waste Program. What role does Army Contracting Command – Rock Island play in this process. How are contractors selected for LLRW disposal services.

The Evolution of DoD’s Low-Level Radioactive Waste Management

The Department of Defense’s Low-Level Radioactive Waste (LLRW) Program has undergone significant changes since its inception. Initially established in the early 1990s, the program was a response to a Government Accountability Office report highlighting the potential benefits of centralized LLRW management within the DoD.

In 2009, the Army Contracting Command – Rock Island (ACC-RI) began supporting the LLRW Program, marking a crucial partnership in the program’s history. The U.S. Army, initially serving as the Executive Agent, transitioned to the role of Lead Agent in 2017, further streamlining the process for all military branches.

Key Milestones in LLRW Program Development

• Early 1990s: Program establishment following GAO report
• 2009: ACC-RI begins support for the LLRW Program
• 2017: U.S. Army transitions from Executive Agent to Lead Agent

The Crucial Partnership: JMC and ACC-RI in LLRW Management

The collaboration between the Joint Munitions Command (JMC) and ACC-RI forms the backbone of the LLRW Program’s operations. This partnership leverages the strengths of both organizations to ensure efficient and compliant disposal of low-level radioactive waste across the Department of Defense.

How does this partnership function in practice? ACC-RI provides JMC with access to waste disposal services through Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contracts. These contracts are exclusively awarded to 8(a) contractors, which are small disadvantaged businesses specializing in radiation protection and waste disposal.

The LLRW Disposal Process

1. Customers submit requirements and funding to JMC
2. JMC prepares a requirements package
3. ACC-RI solicits proposals from approved contractors
4. Contractor selection based on location and waste type
5. Disposal services execution

Contractor Selection and Qualification for LLRW Disposal

The selection of contractors for LLRW disposal is a rigorous process overseen by JMC. What criteria are used to approve contractors for the LLRW Program? JMC requires potential contractors to possess either a Nuclear Regulatory Commission license or an Agreement State license issued by a state operating its own licensing program under NRC agreement.

Additionally, contractors must employ a broker with specialized skills in low-level radioactive waste disposal. JMC reviews contractor qualifications annually, ensuring ongoing compliance and expertise.

Essential Contractor Qualifications

• NRC or Agreement State license
• Employed broker with LLRW disposal expertise
• Annual qualification review
• Specific broker qualifications for new program entrants

The Scope of LLRW: From Common Articles to Historic Waste

The LLRW Program handles a diverse range of radioactive materials, spanning from everyday items with small radioactive components to historic waste dating back to the 1940s. This broad scope necessitates a flexible and comprehensive approach to waste management and disposal.

What types of waste does the LLRW Program typically handle? Most requirements involve inventories of common instruments and articles used by military services that contain small radioactive components. However, the program also deals with more complex waste scenarios.

Notable LLRW Sources and Projects

• Residual contaminants from 1940s atomic weapon testing
• Ongoing remediation at former naval bases in California
• Disposal of waste from the 2011 Fukushima disaster aftermath

Historical Context: LLRW from Atomic Testing to Modern Day

The LLRW Program’s scope extends far beyond contemporary waste, encompassing historical contamination from pivotal moments in military and nuclear history. One significant source of LLRW dates back to the 1940s, when ships returning from atomic bomb tests at Bikini Atoll in the South Pacific were contaminated with radioactive material.

These ships were brought to naval bases in California for decontamination, leaving behind residual contamination that continues to require identification, removal, remediation, and disposal efforts to this day. This ongoing work underscores the long-term commitment and expertise required in managing LLRW.

The Fukushima Connection

In addition to historical waste, the LLRW Program also handles more recent contamination events. Following the 2011 earthquake and tsunami in Fukushima, Japan, U.S. ships and aircraft were exposed to radioactive fallout from the damaged nuclear power plant. The program now includes disposal projects for waste generated from this event, highlighting its role in managing contemporary radiological incidents.

Efficiency and Expediency: The ACC-RI Advantage

The partnership between JMC and ACC-RI brings significant benefits to the LLRW Program, particularly in terms of efficiency and response time. How does ACC-RI contribute to the program’s effectiveness? By providing a streamlined contracting process, ACC-RI enables JMC to execute requirements quickly and efficiently.

This rapid turnaround is especially crucial for certain types of waste, such as low-level mixed waste. These materials are subject to strict accumulation time limits set by the Environmental Protection Agency, making swift disposal essential for regulatory compliance.

Benefits of the JMC-ACC-RI Partnership

• Streamlined contracting process
• Rapid requirement execution
• Compliance with EPA time limits for mixed waste
• Flexibility in contractor selection based on specific needs

The Future of LLRW Management in the DoD

As the LLRW Program continues to evolve, it faces both ongoing challenges and new opportunities. The partnership between JMC and ACC-RI positions the program to adapt to changing needs and emerging technologies in radioactive waste management.

What potential developments might shape the future of LLRW management? Advancements in waste treatment technologies, changes in regulatory frameworks, and the ongoing need to address legacy contamination sites are likely to influence the program’s direction.

Potential Future Directions for the LLRW Program

• Integration of new waste treatment technologies
• Expansion of contractor base and capabilities
• Enhanced coordination with other federal and state agencies
• Development of more sustainable LLRW management practices

The Department of Defense’s Low-Level Radioactive Waste Program, through the collaborative efforts of the Joint Munitions Command and Army Contracting Command – Rock Island, continues to play a crucial role in managing radioactive materials across the military. From addressing historical contamination to handling contemporary waste, the program demonstrates the importance of specialized expertise, efficient processes, and strategic partnerships in tackling complex environmental challenges.

As the program moves forward, its ability to adapt to new challenges while maintaining its core mission of safe and efficient LLRW management will be key to its continued success. The ongoing partnership between JMC and ACC-RI provides a solid foundation for meeting these future challenges, ensuring that the DoD’s approach to LLRW management remains effective, compliant, and responsive to evolving needs.

The LLRW Program’s work not only addresses immediate waste management needs but also contributes to broader efforts in environmental stewardship and public safety. By efficiently managing radioactive materials from various sources and time periods, the program plays a vital role in mitigating potential environmental and health risks associated with these substances.

Moving forward, the program’s success will likely depend on its ability to balance efficiency with thoroughness, leverage emerging technologies, and maintain strong partnerships across various agencies and sectors. As new sources of LLRW emerge and regulatory landscapes shift, the flexibility and expertise embodied in the JMC-ACC-RI partnership will be invaluable in navigating these changes.

The story of the LLRW Program is one of continuous adaptation and improvement. From its inception in response to identified needs for centralized management to its current state as a sophisticated, multi-faceted operation, the program exemplifies the DoD’s commitment to responsible waste management and environmental protection.

As the program continues to evolve, it will undoubtedly face new challenges and opportunities. The ongoing remediation of historical sites, management of waste from unexpected events like the Fukushima disaster, and the need to stay ahead of emerging radioactive waste issues will keep the LLRW Program at the forefront of specialized waste management efforts.

The collaboration between JMC and ACC-RI in managing the LLRW Program demonstrates the power of inter-agency cooperation in addressing complex, long-term challenges. This partnership model could serve as an example for other specialized waste management programs, both within the military and in other sectors.

As environmental concerns continue to grow in importance globally, programs like the DoD’s LLRW initiative take on added significance. They not only address immediate waste management needs but also contribute to broader efforts in environmental protection and public health safety.

The program’s focus on using qualified, specialized contractors highlights the importance of expertise in handling hazardous materials. This approach ensures that LLRW is managed by those best equipped to handle it safely and efficiently, minimizing risks to both personnel and the environment.

Looking ahead, the LLRW Program may need to expand its scope to address emerging radioactive waste challenges. This could include dealing with new types of radioactive materials, adapting to changing international regulations, or developing innovative disposal methods that further minimize environmental impact.

The program’s ability to handle both routine waste and materials from significant historical events showcases its versatility and importance. From managing the legacy of early atomic testing to addressing contemporary incidents like Fukushima, the LLRW Program plays a crucial role in mitigating the long-term effects of radioactive contamination.

As the program continues its work, ongoing research and development in radioactive waste management will likely influence its practices. Staying abreast of scientific advancements and incorporating new technologies and methodologies will be crucial for maintaining the program’s effectiveness and efficiency.

The LLRW Program’s focus on compliance with environmental regulations, particularly in handling mixed waste, underscores the complex regulatory landscape of radioactive waste management. Navigating these regulations while maintaining operational efficiency is a key challenge that the program continues to address successfully.

Education and training will likely play an increasingly important role in the future of the LLRW Program. Ensuring a continuous pipeline of skilled professionals in health physics and radioactive waste management will be crucial for the long-term sustainability of the program.

As the program moves forward, increased collaboration with academic institutions and research centers could provide valuable insights and innovations in LLRW management. Such partnerships could drive advancements in waste treatment technologies and disposal methods.

The LLRW Program’s work also highlights the importance of long-term planning in environmental management. The ongoing efforts to address contamination from events decades in the past demonstrate the need for sustainable, forward-thinking approaches to waste management.

Public awareness and transparency about the LLRW Program’s activities could become increasingly important. As environmental concerns grow in public consciousness, clear communication about the program’s methods, safety measures, and achievements could help build trust and support for its mission.

The program’s experience in handling diverse types of radioactive waste positions it as a valuable resource for knowledge sharing within the DoD and potentially with other government agencies or even international partners facing similar challenges.

As global concerns about nuclear proliferation and safety continue, programs like the LLRW initiative may take on added geopolitical significance. The expertise developed in safely managing and disposing of radioactive materials could be valuable in international efforts to secure and dispose of nuclear materials.

The LLRW Program’s adaptability in handling both routine and unexpected sources of radioactive waste demonstrates the importance of maintaining flexible, responsive waste management capabilities. This flexibility will be crucial as the program faces future challenges and evolving waste management needs.

As the program continues its work, it may need to address emerging ethical considerations in radioactive waste management, such as intergenerational equity in long-term waste storage and the global distribution of disposal sites.

The ongoing success of the LLRW Program underscores the importance of sustained funding and support for environmental management initiatives. Continued investment in this area is crucial for maintaining the program’s capabilities and addressing long-term environmental challenges.

Looking to the future, the LLRW Program may need to explore more sustainable disposal methods, potentially including advanced recycling techniques for certain types of radioactive materials or innovative containment technologies for long-term storage.

The program’s work also highlights the interconnected nature of environmental challenges. Managing radioactive waste effectively contributes to broader goals of environmental protection, public health, and national security.

As the LLRW Program continues to evolve, it stands as a testament to the DoD’s commitment to responsible environmental stewardship and the power of targeted, specialized programs in addressing complex challenges. Its ongoing work ensures that the legacy of past nuclear activities and current radioactive material use is managed safely and effectively, protecting both present and future generations.

ACC-RI team supports Joint Munitions Command’s Low-Level Radioactive Waste Program | Article

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL, Illinois (March 14, 2023) – The Munitions and Industrial Base Directorate at Army Contracting Command – Rock Island partners with Headquarters Joint Munitions Command to execute disposal services for the Department of Defense Low-Level Radioactive Waste, also known as the LLRW Program.

Cindy Wagoner, contracting officer, stated that her team started supporting the LLRW Program in 2009, but the program was established prior to her arrival. Wagoner added that back then, the U.S. Army was the Executive Agent but recently transitioned to the Lead Agent.

Cyrus Turner, health physicist with JMC, said the Executive Agency came into existence in the early 1990s after the Government Accountability Office published a report which concluded that the DoD could benefit greatly from one agency managing its LLRW. The command selected for that mission was JMC.

“The Army stepped up and said that they will do it for the other branches, and as suspected, there is definitely a streamlined advantage for the other branches to use the capabilities of the Army’s program,” said Turner.

The Executive Agency formally became the Department of Defense Lead Agent in 2017.

Today, ACC-RI provides JMC access to waste disposal services using Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity, known as IDIQ contracts. All requirements issued through this partnership are sole-sourced to 8(a) contractors: small disadvantaged businesses. Radiation protection is a field known as Health Physics and radioactive waste disposal can be a core qualification or competency of the companies within this industry.

The partnership follows a common process to get disposal services.

“The scope of the requirements and funding come from customers into JMC,” said Wagoner. “Whenever the customer has low-level radioactive waste that needs to be cleaned up or disposed of, they send those requirements to JMC. JMC puts together a requirements package and then sends it to ACC-RI.”

ACC-RI then solicits a request for proposal from one of the JMC-approved contractors. Much of the work is similar in nature, in that each requirement contains an itemized inventory of excessed or unwanted radioactive material. The inventories are typically common instruments or articles that the military services use, where the commodity itself has a small radioactive component. It is this small radioactive component that requires specific management prior to disposal and there are only a few disposal facilities in the United States that can receive LLRW.

Selection of the contractor is based on several factors, such as the location of the requirement and the type of waste that is being disposed of.

JMC approves each contractor before requesting ACC-RI to open an IDIQ contract.

“Initially, we look for the contractors to have either a Nuclear Regulatory Commission license, which is the federal license, or an Agreement State license which is issued by one of the states that operates its own licensing program under an agreement with the NRC,” said Turner.

JMC also requires the contractor to employ a broker with the skills related to low-level radioactive waste disposal.

“We review their qualifications annually,” said Turner. “If they are new to our program, we ask them to submit the qualifications of their broker initially and we look for very specific things.”

Although most of the requirements are inventories of common instruments and articles, the program handles waste that dates back to the 1940s and consists of the residual contaminants left over from testing some of the first atomic weapons.

Phil Kantor, contract specialist, explained that in the 1940s, some of the former naval bases in California had ships return after being near the testing of the bombs at Bikini Atoll in the South Pacific. During these tests, Navy ships were contaminated with radioactive material from the explosion and some of these ships were brought to the bases for decontamination. There is still ongoing identification, removal, remediation, and disposal efforts taking place at these bases.

In addition to these clean-ups, there are also disposal projects with wastes generated from the aftermath of the 2011 earthquake and subsequent tsunami in Fukushima, Japan. In 2011, U.S. ships and aircraft were contaminated with fall-out after the explosion of the nuclear power plant.

Kantor explained that if JMC didn’t have this partnership with ACC-RI, a lot of their requirements wouldn’t have as quick of a turnaround. The strategy for award is contemplated by requirement to execute it, both, quickly and efficiently.

An example of the need for expediency are requirements with low-level mixed waste. This type of waste is subject to a time limit in which the waste may be accumulated by rule of the Environmental Protection Agency. Kantor said this means the waste must be off site within a specified number of days, otherwise the requirements generator may fall out of compliance. When those requirements come in, we work to issue a task order and remove the waste before this deadline.

“If we didn’t have these contracts, the process would slow down and it would take longer to do things,” said Kantor. “There would be other avenues to do it, but it wouldn’t be as efficient. ”

An example of efficiency under this partnership, are contracts that become what JMC calls multi-site “milk-runs.” Turner said that JMC sometimes coordinates with a few service branches to develop a “milk run” which are projects where a single conveyance, such as a truck, travels through-out a region and services several sites consecutively.

“We can identify and plan these multi-site projects together,” said Turner. “ACC-RI offers us the flexibility to respectively create one contract for several inventories. Otherwise, if someone had to travel to each one of those sites to do a solo pickup, there is a cost associated with that. We can connect the dots while developing the scope and then select the best contractor to do it. This is a cost-effective option for several customers that have small inventories near each other.”

By supporting JMC, Kantor has touched the Health Physics industry which has increased his awareness of the important mission that he supports. Even though there is a limited number of qualified 8a contractors, and the program has evident ties to health and safety, the partnership continues to successfully provide services to customers across the DoD. The work requires high affinity for problem-solving, coordination, and administration to supply the best acquisition strategy for the Lead Agent and their respective customers.

“The overall success of the program revolves around both teams, JMC and ACC-RI, coming together to find creative solutions for customer demands across the DoD network”, said Kantor. “In short, the customer wants or needs their waste off-site and our teams are a one-stop shop to support their requirements in the most efficient and cost-effective manner possible.”

start | Microsoft Learn

Edit

Twitter




LinkedIn




Facebook




Email

• 
  Article
• 
  02/03/2023
• 
  

Starts a separate Command Prompt window to run a specified program or command.

Syntax

start ["title"] [/d <path>] [/i] [{/min | /max}] [{/separate | /shared}] [{/low | /normal | /high | /realtime | /abovenormal | /belownormal}] [/node <NUMA node>] [/affinity <hexaffinity>] [/wait] [/b] [/machine <x86|amd64|arm|arm64>] [<command> [<parameter>... ] | <program> [<parameter>... ]]

Note

The machine parameter is currently in PREVIEW for Windows 11 only. The parameter is available
beginning with the Windows 11 Insider Preview Build 22557.
This information relates to a prerelease product that may be substantially modified before it’s
released. Microsoft makes no warranties, expressed or implied, with respect to the information
provided here.

Parameters

Parameter	Description
<"title">	Specifies the title to display in the Command Prompt window title bar.
/d <path>	Specifies the startup directory.
/i	Passes the Cmd.exe startup environment to the new Command Prompt window. If /i isn’t specified, the current environment is used.
{/min \| /max}	Specifies to minimize (/min) or maximize (/max) the new Command Prompt window.
{/separate \| /shared}	Starts 16-bit programs in a separate memory space (/separate) or shared memory space (/shared). These options aren’t supported on 64-bit platforms.
{/low \| /normal \| /high \| /realtime \| /abovenormal \| /belownormal}	Starts an application in the specified priority class.
/node <NUMA node>	Specifies the preferred Non-Uniform Memory Architecture (NUMA) node as a decimal integer.
/affinity <hexaffinity>	Applies the specified processor affinity mask (expressed as a hexadecimal number) to the new application.
/wait	Starts an application and waits for it to end.
/b	Starts an application without opening a new Command Prompt window. CTRL+C handling is ignored unless the application enables CTRL+C processing. Use CTRL+BREAK to interrupt the application.
/machine <x86\|amd64\|arm\|arm64>	Specifies the machine architecture of the application process.
[<command> [<parameter>... ] \| <program> [<parameter>... ]]	Specifies the command or program to start.
<parameter>	Specifies parameters to pass to either the command or the program.
/?	Displays help at the command prompt.

• You can run non-executable files through their file association by typing the name of the file as a command.

• If you run a command that contains the string CMD as the first token without an extension or path qualifier, CMD is replaced with the value of the COMSPEC variable. This prevents users from picking up cmd from the current directory.

• If you run a 32-bit graphical user interface (GUI) application, cmd doesn’t wait for the application to quit before returning to the command prompt. This behavior doesn’t occur if you run the application from a command script.

• If you run a command that uses a first token that isn’t a command or the file path to an existing file with an extension, Cmd.exe uses the value of the PATHEXT environment variable to determine which extensions to look for and in what order. The default value for the PATHEXT variable is .COM;.EXE;.BAT;.CMD;.VBS;.VBE;.JS;.JSE;.WSF;.WSH;.MSC

  Note the syntax is the same as the PATH variable, with semicolons (;) separating each extension.

• start searches for a specified executable file, and if found the executable will launch regardless of the current working directory. When searching for an executable file, if there’s no match on any extension, start checks to see if the name matches a directory name. If it does, start opens Explorer.exe on that path.

Examples

To start the Myapp program at the command prompt and retain use of the current Command Prompt window, type:

start Myapp

To view the start command-line help topic in a separate maximized Command Prompt window, type:

start /max start /?

• Command-Line Syntax Key

Feedback

View all page feedback

Nine Ways to Make Teamwork More Effective [2020] • Asana

Almost every week, even the best teams face problems that hurt efficiency. Inconclusive meetings, cluttered emails, and lack of information about what colleagues are working on — all this prevents employees from completing tasks from the to-do list and doing quality work.

The effectiveness of the team is the amount of effective work that it can do if it stops being distracted from the most important thing. Team effectiveness is not about being productive for the sake of being productive, rather it is about building a quality workspace that promotes productive team interaction in the workplace and improved overall productivity.

How to improve team efficiency?

To increase the effectiveness of the team, you need to reduce the number of barriers to effective work that the team faces every day. According to the Anatomy of Work study, globally people spend the majority of their time (60%) organizing work, with only 27% going to skilled labor. If you improve the efficiency of the team, then it will be possible to return to the employees this time, which they can devote to the most important.

Read Business Efficiency and Efficiency – Why Your Team Needs Both

The Nine-Step Guide to Improving Team Performance

If you want to improve the efficiency of your team, use the following nine tips to improve your project management skills and increase the speed and quality of your employees.

1. Eliminate Unnecessary Meetings

As Dave Berry once said, “If I had one word to explain why people have not and never will be able to reach their full potential, I would say meetings.”

One of the easiest ways to increase team efficiency is to eliminate unnecessary meetings. It’s not that they’re all that bad. Meetings can be productive when there is a clear agenda, the right people are there, and everyone is willing to take part in solving the problem, but this is not always the case.

When there is no clear agenda or goal, even short thirty-minute meetings take away time from the team that it could spend on tangible tasks. So ask yourself and your colleagues if you really need this meeting.

Q: How do you know if a meeting is important?

Before making an appointment, ask yourself if it is really necessary. Sometimes we call meetings simply out of habit, even when other ways of sharing information would be more effective. By eliminating unnecessary meetings, you give everyone the opportunity to focus on the really important work. For example, when you set up a meeting to talk about the status of a project, wouldn’t it be easier to send digital updates to colleagues?

Alternatives to meetings:

• Instead of a meeting to share the latest news, send a project status report.

• Use a whiteboard instead of a team brainstorming meeting.

• Instead of holding a meeting to exchange information, share context asynchronously.

You may also be invited to a meeting that you do not feel is necessary. Are you needed there if you weren’t clearly told why you were invited? Perhaps you should ask the meeting host if you really should attend?

Read article Wasting Time in Meetings? Find out how to make things better.”

2. Make your meetings more efficient

Some meetings are really important, and working together produces great results. Whatever meetings you have planned, there are simple ways to make them more productive and effective:

1. Prepare an agenda ahead of time and share it before the meeting. To improve efficiency during a meeting, each meeting should have a goal. It is also helpful to define what is not the purpose of the meeting so that the discussion does not get sidetracked. Prepare an agenda for the meeting and share it so everyone understands what the discussion is about. If you have any additional materials, please attach them to the agenda.

2. Decide on meeting standards. No matter how meetings take place, in person or virtually, a team or company needs to set some rules. Should employees put away laptops? If it’s a conference call, do I need to turn on the video? If several people want to say something, who should speak first? Communicate these rules to everyone before the meeting.

3. Take useful notes. Before the meeting, select the person who will take the minutes. Ideally, the minutes should be kept in the same place as the agenda. In addition to notes, write down assignments with deadlines and performers.

4. Listen to opinions to improve efficiency. Frequently ask employees how important meetings are to them. If it turns out that some meetings are of little use to anyone, consider changing the format to an electronic distribution of information or a project status report.

Free Meeting Agenda Template

3. Prioritize work by key results

On any given day, an employee can have a dozen different tasks from different projects. Each of them may seem important and urgent. Where to begin? Where do you devote most of your time and intellectual resources to do a good job?

Of course, some tasks and projects are more important than others. Just for this, you need to have clearly defined goals and an understanding of how the work of the team is connected with them. Short-term goals form a solid foundation for achieving long-term goals, such as a product roadmap or launch management plan. Having a clear idea of ​​what tasks are related to the goals of the entire company or department is important in order for everyone to work together and be able to make decisions that will positively affect the overall state of affairs.

How to link the goals of the company and the work of individual employees

When you have a good idea of ​​how your work is related to the goals of the company, it will be easier for you to determine which projects and tasks are more important. By the way, according to the Anatomy of Work study, the level of motivation among employees who understand exactly how their work affects the organization’s activities is twice as high as those who do not have such information.

Focus on those tasks before moving on to less important ones. If tasks or projects aren’t related to your company’s larger, more general goals or mission, consider whether they need to be done at all.

Claire Kneble, Chief Marketing Officer at Ritual, leads a highly effective team of professionals who put the customer first. “Before launching any campaign, I spend a week getting to know how our clients think. I try to learn as much as possible about them, often through informal conversations, trying to understand how they live every day.

4. Remove, postpone, delegate, or reduce low-priority work

It is impossible to avoid situations when team members have too many tasks. Without a proper system to allow them to delete, defer, delegate, or reduce low priority work, their productivity will suffer. According to a recent study, 85% of employees say they feel overwhelmed, and 42% say team morale suffers from too much work.

It is possible to increase the efficiency of the team and improve the psychological climate in the team with the help of high-quality workload management. One of the simplest ways to throttle workload is to remove, delay, delegate low priority tasks, or reduce the time to complete them. Look at the big picture of the project and, after performing a needs assessment, determine what work needs to be done and what tasks are priorities:0053 delete her.

Q: How do I start managing downloads?

Workload management is the process of distributing work within a team. To start managing workload, you first need to determine the amount of work available to employees and the productivity of the team. You can track this information with a workload tracking platform that gives you the ability to easily see the volume of tasks your team is facing. Then, having compiled a complete list of all the tasks and work assigned to your specialists, it will be possible to allocate team resources based on its performance. This information will also help to adjust the workload of the team as needed, so that no one is overwhelmed and does not sit idly by.

Read about how to effectively manage your group’s workload

Claire Kneble, director of marketing at Ritual, recommends choosing three high-priority tasks for the week. “As a rule, you can complete no more than three large tasks in a week. The first one should be important and strategic. The second should also be important, but at the same time a little easier so that it can be completed early. And the third task should simply support ongoing processes.

5. Consider the strengths of team members when assigning tasks

No two employees are the same. Everyone has different experiences, different strengths and weaknesses that make people valuable team members. Besides, different people like different jobs. For example, one person enjoys doing research and reporting on it, while another would rather shoot himself in the foot for not summarizing research.

Knowing who on the team is best at each skill and finding ways to empower people to do what they love can help streamline work on tasks and projects. In addition, if a person is particularly interested in certain tasks, then they are likely to work better and faster on them. By giving professionals tasks that inspire them, you help them perform at their best.

6. Think about how the team will work before starting the project

Once you have determined what needs to be done and who will do it, you need to develop an action plan that the team will follow. Having a well-thought-out and well-defined plan will save you from additional “organization work” in the future.

First of all, make sure that every team project has a clear plan. Project planning from the start ensures that there is a realistic time frame for each project milestone through to completion. Everyone will know who is responsible for which element of the puzzle, and understand what is being worked on now and what has already been completed. After that, plan all your projects according to the program that will allow you to use the team’s time most efficiently.

The seven important elements of a project plan

1. Goals

2. Success rates

3. Stakeholders and team roles

4. Budget

5. Milestones and expected results

6. Timeline and charts

7. Communication Plan

Read how to create a project plan that keeps you on track

Using a work management platform will help you create all the small tasks that lead to the big goal. The use of templates in Asana allows you to repeat a process that has already worked well before, so that you do not miss any important step.

7. Encourage collaboration between departments

Just because you belong to different departments doesn’t mean you can’t work together. After all, you are all doing this to achieve one common goal. Information about what other departments are doing helps members of different teams work together in situations where their goals and objectives overlap.

Work management tools allow employees to gain insight into the work being done in other departments by linking each stage of a project to a single set of goals. These tools can serve as a single point where you share information about your work with colleagues and define areas where people from different departments can collaborate. With a single source of trusted information, you can improve teamwork and reduce the barriers to efficient completion of important tasks.

Gina Kim is a compliance officer at Carta, a US Securities and Exchange Commission certified transfer agent that helps public and private companies issue and manage securities, uses Asana to encourage collaboration across business units, see who is working on what, and understand how the projects of different teams affect each other.

“For example, support staff come to work and suddenly realize that something has changed in the product. Of course, they need a way to find out about such changes,” notes Gina.

8. Have a meeting-free day

Having to attend meetings can have a negative impact on efficiency because it throws you off track and prevents you from completing the project. When you have at least one day dedicated to important work – a wonderful period of time that you can devote entirely to a project – this is a significant contribution to increasing efficiency and productivity.

At Asana, we have a No Meeting Environment policy that allows everyone to do work without distractions. We ask employees not to schedule internal meetings on Wednesdays and to take into account the schedule of colleagues. Thanks to this, specialists have a significant amount of time when they can do work, and not talk about it. As a result, the team has more time to analyze, execute, and review critical project processes. Many employees cite “non-meeting Wednesday” as their favorite day of the week, and we often see projects being successfully completed in the middle of the week.

Read six tips on how to keep your work flowing

9.

Determine the purpose of the different communication channels

Every team has a range of communication tools, but they are only truly useful if people know how and when to use them. Most bands already have too many instruments; On average, employees have to switch between 10 apps every day. This throwing between programs is not only tiring, but also leads to the fact that in the future it becomes more and more difficult to find the necessary information.

To avoid this situation, it is necessary to clearly define the purpose of each communication channel. Use e-mail to exchange information with suppliers and customers. Use Slack to quickly answer questions. And to plan, manage, and discuss work tasks, use a work management tool like Asana.

Q: How do you know if there are too many tools?

Communication tools can make a team more efficient, but their inconsistent use can be a source of unnecessary work. If you see that the assignment of the application is performed by another program (which also has additional benefits), you need to refuse it. As a result, your team will have fewer tools to interact with, all of which can be put to good use.

A work management platform like Asana can integrate all the business tools you need. Then the team will have access to all the necessary information in one place.

Help the team achieve maximum efficiency

Improving efficiency is an ongoing process. It may seem very complicated, but simple tools and techniques can increase the productivity of each employee. And when you and your team learn how to use these tools, efficiency will become commonplace and an integral part of any project. Learn more about how you can improve your productivity with Asana and find ideas you can implement in your organization.

Low Cohesion, Architecture and Team Organization

This article discusses the relationship between code structure and organization structure in software development. I discuss why software and teams don’t scale easily, what lessons we can learn from nature and the web, and show how we can decouple software and teams to overcome scaling issues.

The article is based on my 20 years of experience in building large software systems and on the impression of the book “Accelerate: The Science of Lean Software and DevOps: Building and Scaling High Performing Technology Organizations” (Nicole Forsgren, Jez Humble and Gene Kim), which provides research data to support most of my claims here. This book is highly recommended reading.

Software and commands are not scalable

Often the first release, perhaps written by one or two people, is surprisingly simple. It may have limited functionality, but it is written quickly and meets the requirements of the customer. The interaction with the customer at this stage is great because the customer is usually in direct contact with the developers. Any bugs are fixed quickly, and new features can be added fairly painlessly. After a while, the pace slows down. Version 2.0 takes a little longer than expected. Fixing bugs is more difficult, and new features are given, it’s not so easy anymore. The natural response to this is to add new developers to the team. Although, it seems that every additional employee added to the team reduces productivity. There is a feeling that as the complexity of the software grows, it will atrophy. In extreme cases, organizations may find themselves using programs with very expensive support that are almost impossible to change. The problem is that you don’t have to make any “mistakes” for this to happen. This is so common that one could say that it is a “natural” property of software.

Why is this happening? There are two reasons: related to the code and to the command. Both code and commands do not scale well.

As the codebase grows, it becomes more and more difficult for one person to understand it. There are fixed human cognitive boundaries. And, although one person can keep in mind the details of a small system, but only as long as it does not become larger than his cognitive range. Once the team grows to five or more people, it becomes almost impossible for one person to keep abreast of how all parts of the system work. And when no one understands the whole system, then there is fear. In a large, tightly coupled system, it is very difficult to understand the impact of any significant change because the result is not localized. To minimize the impact of changes, developers are starting to use workarounds and code duplication instead of identifying commonalities, creating abstractions and generalizations. This further complicates the system, reinforcing these negative tendencies. Developers stop feeling responsible for code they don’t understand and are reluctant to refactor. Technical debt is on the rise. It also makes the job unpleasant and unsatisfying and encourages “talent churn” when the best developers leave, who can easily find work elsewhere.

Commands are also not scaled. As the team grows, communications become more difficult. A simple formula comes into play:

c = n(n-1)/2

(where n is the number of people and c is the number of possible connections between team members)

As her team grows, her communication and coordination needs grow exponentially. Above a certain size, it is very difficult for a single team to remain a coherent structure, and the natural human social tendency to divide into smaller groups will lead to the formation of informal subgroups, even if the leadership does not take part in this. Communication with colleagues becomes more difficult and will naturally be replaced by new leaders and top-down communications. Team members are transformed from equal stakeholders of the system into ordinary production workers. Motivation suffers, there is no sense of ownership due to the effect of diffusion of responsibility.

Management often intervenes at this stage and formally approaches the creation of new teams and management structures. But, whether formally or informally, large organizations find it hard to keep motivated and engaged.

These scaling pathologies are usually blamed on inexperienced developers and poor management. But it’s not fair. Scaling issues are a “natural” feature of growing and evolving software. This is what always happens if you don’t find the problem early, understand the point of rejection, and put in the effort to fix the problem. Software development teams are constantly being created, the amount of software in the world is constantly growing, and most of the software is relatively small. Therefore, quite often, a successful and developing product is created by a team that does not have experience in large-scale development. And it’s unrealistic to expect developers to recognize the inflection point and figure out what to do when scale issues start showing up.

Nature’s scaling lessons

I recently read Geoffrey West’s excellent book “Scale”. It talks about the mathematics of scale in biological and socio-economic systems. His thesis is that all large complex systems obey the fundamental laws of scale. This is a fascinating read and I highly recommend it. For the purposes of this article, I want to focus on his point that many biological and social systems scale remarkably well. 7. How does nature use the same materials and structure for organisms of such different sizes? The answer seems to be that evolution has discovered fractal branching structures. Look at the tree. Each part of it looks like a small tree. The same is true for the mammalian circulatory and nervous systems, they are branching fractal networks where a small part of your lungs or blood vessels looks like a smaller version of the whole.

Can we take these ideas from nature and apply them to software? I think we can learn important lessons. If we can build large systems made up of small parts that themselves look like complete systems, then it will be possible to contain the pathologies that affect most programs as they grow and develop.

Are there software systems that scale successfully by several orders of magnitude? The answer is obvious – the Internet, a global software system with millions of nodes. Subnets really look and work like scaled-down versions of the entire Internet.

Signs of loosely coupled software

The ability to isolate separate, loosely coupled components in a large system is the primary method of successful scaling. The Internet is essentially an example of a loosely coupled architecture. This means that each node, service, or application on the network has the following properties:

• A common communication protocol is used.
• Data is transferred using a clear contract with other nodes.
• Communication does not require knowledge of specific implementation technologies.
• Versioning and deployment are independent.

The Internet scales because it is a network of nodes that communicate through a set of well-defined protocols. The nodes communicate only using protocols, the implementation details of which should not be known to the interacting nodes. The global Internet is not deployed as a single system. In it, each node has its own version and deployment procedure. Individual nodes appear and disappear independently of each other. Obedience to Internet protocols is the only thing that really matters for the entire system as a whole. Who created each node, when it was created or deleted, what version it has, what specific technologies and platforms it uses, all this has nothing to do with the Internet as a whole. This is what we mean by loosely coupled software.

Signs of a loosely coupled organization

We can scale teams by following the same principles:

• Each sub-team should look like a small software development organization.
• The internal processes and communication of the team must not go beyond the team.
• The technologies and processes used to implement the software should not be discussed outside the team.
• Teams should communicate with each other only on external issues: common protocols, functionality, service levels and resources.

Small development teams are more efficient than large ones, so you need to break up large teams into smaller groups. The lessons of nature and the Internet are that subgroups should look like one small software development organization. How small? Ideally, one to five people.

It is important that each team looks like a small independent software development organization. Other ways of organizing teams are less efficient. It is often tempting to divide a large team into functions. Therefore, we have an architect team, a development team, a DBA team, a test team, a deployment team, and a support team, but this does not solve any of the scaling problems that we talked about above. All teams should be involved in the development of a feature, and often iteratively if you want to avoid waterfall-style project management.

Communication barriers between these functional teams become a major barrier to efficient and timely delivery. Teams are highly connected because they need to share important internal details in order to work together. In addition, the interests of different teams do not coincide: developers usually receive an award for new features, testers for quality, support for stability. These different interests can lead to conflict and bad results. Why should developers bother with logs if they never read them? Why should testers care about delivery if they are responsible for quality?

Instead, we should organize teams by loosely coupled services that support business functions, or by a logical grouping of functions. Each subteam must design, code, test, deploy, and maintain their software. Most likely, the members of such a team will be generalists, and not narrow specialists, because in a small team these roles will have to be separated. They should focus on automating processes as much as possible: automated testing, deployment, monitoring. Teams must choose the tools and design the architecture for their systems. While the protocols used to communicate between services should be defined at the organization level, the choice of tools used to implement them should be delegated to teams. And this aligns very well with the DevOps model.

The level of independence a team has is a reflection of the level of connectedness of the entire organization. Ideally, an organization should care about the functionality of the software and, ultimately, the business value that the team provides, as well as the cost of the team’s resources.

In this case, the software architect plays an important role. It should not focus on the specific tools and technologies the teams use, or get bogged down in the details of the internal architecture of the services. Instead, it should focus on the protocols and interactions between different services and the health of the system as a whole.

Inverted Conway’s Law: The structure of an organization should model the target architecture

How do software loose coupling and team loose coupling fit together? Conway’s Law states:

“Organizations that design systems are constrained by designs that replicate the structure of communication in that organization.”

This is based on the observation that the architecture of a software system will reflect the structure of the organization that creates it. We can hack Conway’s law by flipping it. Organize our teams to reflect our desired architecture. With this in mind, we must reconcile loosely coupled commands with loosely coupled software components. But should it be a one-to-one relationship? I think ideally, yes. Although it seems to be good if a small team works on a few loosely coupled services. I would argue that the scaling inflection point for teams is greater than for software, so this style of organization seems to be acceptable. It is important that software components remain separate, with their own versioning and deployment, even if some of them are developed by the same team. We would like to be able to split the team if it gets too big, with the development of services being transferred to different teams. But we won’t be able to do this if the services are highly coupled or share a process, versioning, or deployment.

We must avoid multiple teams working on the same components. This is an anti-pattern. And, in some ways, even worse than having one big team with one big codebase, because communication barriers between teams lead to an even greater sense of lack of ownership and control.

Collaboration between loosely coupled teams creating loosely coupled software is kept to a minimum. Let’s take the Internet as an example again. It is often possible to use an API provided by another company without any direct communication with them (if the process is simple and there is documentation). When teams interact, intra-team development and implementation processes should not be discussed. Instead, functionality, service levels, and resources should be discussed.

Loosely coupled teams producing loosely coupled software should be easier to manage than alternatives. A large organization should focus on providing teams with clear goals and requirements in terms of functionality and service levels. Resource requirements should come from the team, although they can be used by the organization to measure return on investment.

Loosely coupled teams develop loosely coupled software

Loose coupling in software and between teams is the key to building a high performing organization.