People First, Always

Half Double frees up time to focus on value creation 

Interview with digital health researcher Ulrik Bak Kirk about his experience with the Half Double methodology

1. Could you briefly introduce yourself and tell us a bit about your background in project management?

My name is Ulrik Bak Kirk and I am a researcher in digital health. I have a background in the humanities, where I supplemented my history studies with the more practically orientated film and media studies. Already during my studies, I got used to producing something for a given time in a very practical way. This experience, combined with a student job in healthcare, gave me the courage to make a product for general practitioners to ease the transition from medical school to having my own clinic, with a focus on everything non-clinical.

To better equip myself for this task, I chose to self-finance some IPMA courses because the theoretical introduction to project management was completely absent from my study programme. This gave me a theoretical base to complement my practical experience and through my project for GPs (Praksis Plus) I had the opportunity to run a project from start to finish - it was a great learning journey.

Five years ago, I moved to Aarhus and joined a research centre focusing on digital public health. Here I became acquainted with other ways of running projects, not least agile methods such as Scrum. Hence, I had worked with both a traditional and a more agile project approach before I came across Half Double.

2. How did you start working with Half Double?

It was in connection with a large EU project on endometriosis (FEMaLe), which I managed to put together a team and obtain EU funding for. During the application process, we searched the market to find an agile method with a special focus on value creation. Through a project manager colleague and then Per Svejvig, I was introduced to Half Double. I realised that it covered both domains, both the traditional and the agile approach, and it was really exciting in our context, because in the large FEMaLe project we had 10 quite different work packages that required different tools.

3. How has the Half Double methodology changed your approach to project management?

The systematic focus on the 'Impact Case' is the overall thing that makes a huge difference. We have broken the large, complicated and multi-year project down to one impact case per work package, where we work in a cycle of six months at a time, so we get out of the box. In this way, we've broken down the complexity of the project, which has been very beneficial.

Then there's the visual planning, where we use a large Miro board to strengthen our dialogue and create an overview. The flow part of establishing a fixed rhythm is another one of the very low-practical things that just works really well in terms of creating momentum.

That said, the big change for me compared to previous projects has been the management approach with the close connection to the project owner, which in my case is my head of department. It makes a huge difference in practice.

It's also been really nice to get methodological support for the importance of a 'people first' perspective, which - perhaps because of my humanities background - I intuitively found natural and important.

I really like that we not only focus on the product, but also focus on adoption and who needs to do something different in order to achieve real change. How do we use the product? How do we create a good learning environment? What is the next step? It gives credibility to have a methodology that inherently incorporates this dimension, because it is crucial to achieve a noticeable and measurable effect.

4. How do you measure success in your projects, and how does Half Double help you achieve and evaluate this success?

With our ‘sponsor’ the EU, we have a very long contract with specific requirements, which in some ways is actually very anti-Half Double because it doesn't really say anything about the value we create. So we use Half Double and specifically the impact case we make for each work package to keep a tight rein on how we create real value. This also means that we continuously change our behaviour if we can see that something is not having an effect both quantitatively and qualitatively. We create KPIs for each work package and hold regular intensive meetings where we also nudge people to focus on value creation.

At the same time, we systematically communicate things internally and externally so they can make a difference. Conversely, we don't burden each other with purely ritual reporting that steals time from the core task without creating real value - and that's something a busy clinician or researcher likes.

Now we've decided to scrap our newsletter because it didn't create enough interaction. What we do concretely is that we co-create KPIs in the work packages, and it is in that process that we ensure behavioural change. We make sure we systematically get things out there and constantly learn new things.

5. How has Half Double affected your role and daily tasks as a project manager?

My role has become more free because I have secured dialogue with the project owner and I know how far my mandate goes. 

I always say that you need tools to think with, and Half Double has really given me that. There are some things that need to be met and then there's always local translation I need to take into account. I find that I can more easily meet project participants right where they are and, in this way, provide input for changes that make a real difference.

6. Are there situations or types of projects where you think Half Double is not the best approach? If so, why?

Absolutely, and there are some parts of the FEMaLe project where we have had to fight for the methodology's right to exist. For example, in certain research environments where people may not be used to working in a project-based way and find it difficult to decode that the concept of 'business impact' does not only make sense in a commercial context. The great strength of the methodology is its reflexivity, so if you have a project with low complexity and a high degree of predictability, then in my opinion there's no need for Half Double - you're shooting sparrows with guns.

However, if you have a project with high complexity and several unknowns, where you need to meet often to fine-tune and need concrete tools to carry out the work, while keeping your organisation on board from the start, then Half Double is great.

7. How do you integrate Half Double with existing processes and tools in your organisation?

It's about being flexible and helping to translate the concepts into a language that people understand. For example, I don't insist that people use Half Double terminology as long as we agree on what we are doing and what the purpose is.

8. Have you faced any challenges when implementing Half Double and if so, how did you overcome them?

It takes time to implement a new methodology, and this is also true for Half Double, although it is certainly very accessible compared to a number of other project models. You have to accept that, like any other implementation process, it takes some time until you become fully competent.

9. How do you ensure that there is a common understanding of the Half Double methodology among all project members?

We have decided that people in key positions in the project should be trained in Half Double. It was important to get a common starting point quickly so that several of us could take the Half Double course together and discuss methodological considerations with each other. It was a good investment.

10. Has the clear focus on people in Half Double affected engagement and collaboration in your team and among stakeholders?

Yes, I was just talking to a colleague yesterday about how, for me, what's really important in the Pulse check in Half Double is that you look at people's purpose - that is, do you find meaning in going to work? Do you feel that you create value? After all, that's what makes you deliver. It's extremely important to me that the project participants who are involved also own it. We know from the theory behind it that this is why you shouldn't have too many projects at once, because then you lose focus and ownership.

We have monthly pulse checks and then we talk about what has been achieved and what needs to be changed. It takes place in a supportive, appreciative environment where we don't just look at the specific deliverables, but at the big picture that is important for creating value. It's not just an APV that we quickly throw in the drawer, but something we actually act on. In an often complicated role as a project manager without formal power, it can really make a difference in terms of getting people to pull together.

11. Half Double consists of the three main elements Effect, Flow and Leadership, each of which is supported by three tools. Which tools and techniques from Half Double do you find most valuable and why?

We use all the tools to some extent, and that's part of the point, but if I have to emphasise one: the Impact Case is just so good as a guiding star. The same goes for Impact Solution Design, where we define which products, processes and people we include; it's super strong there.

For me, the direct contact with management has been very valuable. The university is a fairly hierarchical environment, so having an excuse to have direct dialogues with the head of department and being able to advise and guide both ways has been really valuable. So organisationally and strategically, the undivided attention from the project owner has probably been the most important thing.

12. Local translation to the individual culture, organisation and type of project is a cornerstone of the Half Double methodology. How has it worked in practice in your projects?

I think it has worked well, but it requires a particularly strong focus on reflective practice. Local translatiom is not just a free pass to do whatever you want, but you can easily adjust your approach along the way if something is not working optimally. It’s important to align expectations with management, and it can be a challenge if there are too many changes in the different teams. Fortunately, we’ve been able to onboard new people via peer-to-peer training in a relatively smooth way.

13. You are both Foundation and Practitioner certified in Half Double. What has that given you?

The Foundation certification is absolutely fundamental to get an introduction and some tools, and it's been great. I chose to add a Practitioner certification because I like the reflective practice. It's not just another multiple choice test. You actively reflect on what you've gained from using the tool and get external eyes on your strengths and points of attention that you can work on. I think it has given me a lot.

14. How has Half Double affected your career development and opportunities in project management?

I think it gives me a competitive advantage because I show that I'm riding the wave of not thinking of project management as either-or. Half Double offers a flexible approach that provides more leverage in the toolbox, so for my own career development, I think that's a big strength.

I think it's really important to get certified. Of course, it's okay to be self-taught, but certification is important to ensure that the professionalism of the methodology is not diluted, and it also shows that you know the jargon, the concept and the community. For me, certification in and use of Half Double is a really good first step in a more modern project management direction.

15. What would you say to a project manager in your network who is considering using Half Double in their organisation - either as a standalone methodology or in combination with another standard?

I just visited VisitAarhus and gave them an introduction to the methodology because they are looking for new inspiration. My encouragement to them and others is 'just try it - it doesn't have to be all or nothing'. Get more people from your organisation certified and try using the method or parts of it on selected projects and see how it works and adapt your approach as you go. That's one of the benefits of the methodology, it's so flexible.

16. What advice would you give to organisations to help them successfully implement Half Double?

Get management buy-in and respect that local translation takes time. If it doesn't work initially, adjust your approach - that flexibility is really a strength of the Half Double.

17. Anything else on your mind?

It's been a really great experience! It's a relatively accessible methodology that is intuitively accessible to many as it builds on already known tools. It's not written in knotty academic language and is super useful.

I've been working with the Half Double methodology for a number of years now and have observed that different tools dominate at different times in the project. And if something is not going as it should, you can very quickly identify the problem through reflective practice and use the tools to get back on track. So yes, a warm recommendation to try the Half Double methodology.