Which of the following is an advantage to the top down planning approach over other planning approaches?

Planning is a crucial aspect of a successful construction management process and the overall success of a construction project. It is highly recommended that you have established a planning style prior to project execution.

Top-down and bottom-up planning methods are two of the most popular approaches used in the construction industry when it comes to planning. Whilst these two planning models represent opposite approaches, they illustrate parallelism in identifying a company’s key objectives.

In short, top-down planning proceeds from the general to the specific of things, while bottom-up planning moves from the specific to the general. Top-down planning is the most popular approach in traditional construction.

However, in recent years, a lot of organisations have switched to bottom-up planning. Some construction companies use a combination of both approaches to create an agile planning process and pave the way for a building process with fewer interruptions and increased profits.

There are various things to consider when choosing a planning approach: the company culture, business environment, executive management, stakeholders, and construction planning tools. Selecting a planning model is an important decision that impacts each and every aspect of a construction business and its construction projects.

What is the difference between bottom-up and top-down project processing?

Processing takes place from top to bottom as well as from bottom to top. Other than for planning, these processing methods are also used for defining company goals and the next strategic steps to achieve them.

In top-down processing, the main construction project objectives are defined and the tasks needed to support them are determined. The newly-defined activities are then divided into smaller tasks and spread across the different members of the team to begin their development. In that sense, top-down processing is a diverse approach.

With bottom-up processing, things are different as smaller goals are initially defined and activities start from the lower organisational levels of the company. These narrower goals will at a later stage be connected to the primary project goals and strategies, making it a convergent approach.

Traditionally, top-down planning involves the clear definition of construction project goals and their division into specific construction job goals, which are dealt with in different construction phases. Sometimes referred to as retrograde planning, top-down planning is a planning approach that focuses on gradually moving from the top to the bottom level of a  particular project hierarchy.

The construction project management team usually provides the plan that includes the project goals based on the expectations and targets set by the project owner, the contractor and the rest of the project stakeholders. This construction plan is then broken down into sub-plans of smaller construction jobs and activities and specified in the subordinate levels of planning including detailed jobs for subcontractors. This approach provides a structured control over a construction project.

Find also: Critical Path Method for construction: What you need to know

Bottom-up planning or progressive planning, on the other hand, aims to create a plan at a lower but meaningful level and then progress it to the next level up to the higher project levels. For example, bottom-up planning can focus on a particular desired functionality of a project and the entire build would be based around it.

The planning would start with small-scale organisations and piecing these smaller individual elements together to create a larger and more complex structure. This method would provide a more experimental approach that is open for restructuring and editing based on unpredicted impacts of the design.

What are the advantages and disadvantages associated with top-down and bottom-up planning?

Both top-down and bottom-up planning have their own advantages and disadvantages. Starting from top-down planning, a great advantage involves the correspondence of the sub-plan goals to the overall objectives of the project and the organisation. With a much more structured control, the top-down approach creates a plan faster by eliminating complex and time-consuming coordination tasks. Its biggest disadvantage, on the other hand, is the unrealistic and unattainable targets that result from the disconnect between management and individual departments.

With bottom-up planning, one of the greatest advantages is having more realistic plans created directly with the employees involved. Along with this, employees appear to be more motivated as they have a more meaningful role in the entire process. Nevertheless, time and coordination are the biggest bets when it comes to bottom-up planning. There is also the likelihood that sub-plans can contradict each other, which can set the bar low for the overall project goals.

Why delivering on time should be your only concern

Determining which planning approach to use ultimately depends on the nature of your construction business and the resources available to you. As a business in the very competitive construction industry, you need to decide how much control you want over the strategies you need to implement so you can achieve your key project objectives and avoid costly project interruptions and delays.

Remember, the construction process is a chain of critical activities and events that the smallest of issues can break the link and create huge setbacks. Whatever planning process you think would work best for you, the top-down or bottom-up, or even a combination of both, your main concern is to link strategies and activities with each other the best way you can to deliver your project on time and on budget.

To optimise the use of both top-down and bottom-up planning, we have found out that combining both of them produces a planning method that allows an efficient target-focused implementation of the project goals while including all other construction aspects, departments and processes. This combined method can pave the way for a data-driven construction project with fewer reworks and budget overruns.

Below you can find some tips that can be of use to you in your effort to keep your construction projects and by extension your construction company on the right path:

1. Set your project targets from the top-down, while preparing them from previous bottom-up forecasts.
2. Define goals and objectives to create sub-goals and sub-plans for respective departments and activities that align with the higher project goals.
3. Coordinate the sub-plans from the bottom up and let project management communicate better with employees per construction task that makes up a construction job.

How to deliver on time

Whatever planning approach you use, your main focus should always be delivering on time. And the reason is simple. If you deliver according to plan then everything else around your project will come into place, as well.

So regardless of whether you prefer top-down planning or bottom-up planning, at the end of the day what really matters is being able to flag critical issues quickly and communicate with the other project teams in a timely manner.

This will help you detect problems before they become a threat to your project and will offer you the data you need in order to add predictability to your present and future projects.

If you want to dive deeper into how you can keep your organisation competitive, download for free our insightful ebook on 6 keys to staying competitive here.

The top-down approach to management is when company-wide decisions are made solely by leadership at the top, while the bottom-up approach gives all teams a voice in these types of decisions. Below, we cover the details, pros, and cons of top-down vs. bottom-up management.

The top-down approach to management is a strategy in which the decision-making process occurs at the highest level and is then communicated to the rest of the team. This style can be applied at the project, team, or even the company level, and can be adjusted according to the particular group’s needs.

Many teams go with the top-down approach because it eliminates confusion, reduces risk, and keeps initiatives organized across larger teams. Below, we break down how the top-down approach compares to the bottom-up approach so you can decide which best fits your leadership style.

What is the top-down approach to management?

In the top-down approach to management, a team or project manager makes decisions, which then filter down through a hierarchical structure. Managers gather knowledge, analyze it, and draw actionable conclusions. They then develop processes that are communicated to and implemented by the rest of the team. You may hear this style of management referred to as “command and control” or “autocratic leadership.”

The top-down approach is probably what you think of when you think of the management process. Traditional industries like retail, healthcare, or manufacturing typically apply the top-down management style.

In this free ebook, learn how to structure your organization to prevent silos, move faster, and stay aligned in the face of change.

How the top-down approach works

When approaching a project from the top down, higher-level decision-makers start with a big picture goal and work backward to determine what actions different groups and individuals will need to take in order to reach that goal.

The entire project planning process takes place at the management level. Then, once an action plan has been created, decision-makers communicate it to the rest of the team to be implemented (usually without much room for adjustment ).

The top-down approach can be effective because it remains the same from project to project, allowing teams to establish a well-practiced process that grows more efficient over time. Since the nature of the top-down style is so steady and reliable, many organizations (think: IBM, The New York Times, and other legacy organizations) choose to operate their entire companies according to this approach.

When to use the top-down approach

Today, very few organizations apply a purely top-down approach to management. Most teams apply a hybrid approach that falls somewhere along a spectrum of combinations between top-down and bottom-up management styles. 

The top-down approach is more rigid and structured, so teams with multiple sub-teams, many different project parts, or any other factor that makes processes difficult to keep organized will benefit from incorporating elements of top-down methodology. Smaller teams or teams with a narrower project focus will have the freedom to lean more heavily on the bottom-up style.

Advantages of top-down management

There are benefits to a top-down management style, especially for larger teams that consist of multiple smaller teams or groups that function together in a broader organizational hierarchy.

The top-down management style is common, which means there’s less of a learning curve for new hires if they came from a company that uses this structure. As a team leader, you can help new team members adjust more quickly by incorporating some familiar elements of top-down methodology into your management style.

Greater clarity

The top-down approach results in clear, well-organized processes that leave little room for confusion. Because all decisions are made in one place and all communication flows in one direction, mix-ups and misunderstandings happen less frequently than with other management styles.

More accountability

When problems or inefficiencies do occur, the top-down management approach makes it easy to track them to their source. With clearly defined teams that each have their own separate responsibilities, it’s easier to locate, diagnose, and solve problems quickly and efficiently.

Quicker implementation

Since the decision-making process takes place at just one level of management, they can be finalized, distributed, and implemented much more quickly than decisions that require input from multiple leaders or project stakeholders.

In this free ebook, learn how to structure your organization to prevent silos, move faster, and stay aligned in the face of change.

Disadvantages of top-down management

Though top-down methodology has some advantages, there are also drawbacks to consider in how this approach might impact individual team members and overall team morale. Ultimately, top-down management doesn’t work for everyone. It can limit creativity and slow down problem-solving, so it may not be the best choice for teams that require greater flexibility and responsiveness.

Since all decisions are made at the top, a mismatched project management hire can have a bigger impact on the success of the team. Many process problems are only visible at the lower level, so project managers who fail to solicit feedback from individual team members before making decisions can inadvertently cause significant problems, delays, and losses.

Less creativity

With all communication flowing from leaders to team members with little room for dialogue, the top-down approach allows fewer opportunities for creative collaboration. Less interdepartmental collaboration may also eliminate fresh perspectives and stifle innovation.

Team disengagement

One challenge with the top-down management approach is that it requires proactive work to keep non-leadership team members feeling engaged, connected, and respected. When all decisions are made at the top, the rest of the team might feel that their feedback and opinions aren’t valued.

Greater distance between decision-makers and decisions

While a bottom-up approach allows decisions to be made by the same people who are working directly on a project, the top-down style of management creates distance between that team and decision-makers. This can lead to poorly-informed decisions if leadership doesn’t ask for input or feedback from their project team.  

When approaching project objectives from the bottom up, a team will collaborate across all levels to determine what steps need to be taken to achieve overall goals. The bottom-up approach is newer and more flexible than the more formal top-down strategy, which is why it’s more commonly found in industries where disruption and innovation are a priority. 

Examples of bottom-up management include:

• Hybrid OKRs: broader objectives are set at the company level, but KRs (key results) are set by teams and individuals.

• Scrum teams: the daily standup meeting brings the entire team together to coordinate collaboratively. 

• Democratic management: leaders work with team members to determine what decisions should be made at each level, allowing for better collaboration while also maintaining structure.

The bottom-up style of management solves many of the problems that come with the top-down approach. This approach has advantages that make it a great fit for creative teams and industries where collaboration is key, like software development, product design, and more.

In collaborative settings, those who work directly on projects and oversee project management can speak to the decisions that will impact their future work. Upper managers work directly with team members to chart a course of action, which prevents potential process blind spots that might otherwise appear when decisions are made without team input.

Better team morale

The bottom-up approach encourages greater buy-in from team members because everyone is given the opportunity to influence decisions regardless of seniority. It also facilitates better relationships between colleagues by offering members of all seniority levels an equal opportunity to influence project outcomes. In doing so, this approach increases the likelihood that all members will be invested in the team’s success.

More room for creativity

In top-down processes, there are fewer opportunities for teams to give input or suggestions. Collaborative approaches like the bottom-up approach, on the other hand, create opportunities for feedback, brainstorming, and constructive criticism that often lead to better systems and outcomes.

Of course, there’s a reason that the bottom-up approach hasn’t been more widely adopted: it comes with a number of challenges that make it incompatible with certain types of teams, projects, and industries.

A purely bottom-up approach to solving a problem might result in “too many cooks in the kitchen.” When everyone in a group is invited to collaborate, it can be harder to arrive at a decision and, as a result, processes can slow down. 

To avoid this: Consider assigning one to two group leaders who take into consideration all of the input and then make a decision based on feedback. 

Shift in team dynamics

Though it’s important to give team members the opportunity to provide feedback, not everyone is comfortable doing so—especially with leadership in the room. Keep in mind that everyone has different comfort levels and pushing too hard for feedback might stifle honesty or creativity. 

To avoid this: Offer different environments for team members to contribute, like in small group breakout rooms, 1:1 meetings, or quarterly anonymous feedback surveys. Encourage more senior team members to find ways to break the ice with new contributors so everyone feels comfortable participating.

Lack of high-level insight

In many ways, it makes sense for project decisions to be made at the project level. However, projects are still impacted by higher-level factors like company goals, budgeting, forecasting, and metrics that aren’t always available at the team level. Processes designed from the bottom-up can suffer from blind spots that result from a lack of access to insights  from upper management.

To avoid this: Create a communication flow that provides team leads with summaries of information from the company level that may be relevant to project-level decisions. As a team lead, you can pass along information to your team as you see fit to ensure team decisions are aligned with company-wide positions and goals.

Cross-functional team management tips

The key to implementing a management approach that works is to invest in your people as much as you do in your processes. The challenges of the top-down management approach can be alleviated or even eliminated entirely if the people at the top of the process aren’t just good managers, but are leaders too. 

Build relationships outside the management team

Since process-related communication flows top to bottom in top-down companies, it’s easy for individuals and groups to become siloed and eventually feel isolated. Create opportunities for communication across departments, teams, management levels, and even geographical locations to help ensure that your team members can build meaningful relationships with each other.

Facilitate cross-team communication

Whether your team uses a top-down or bottom-up approach, provide purpose-built opportunities for collaboration between teams that don’t normally work together. Though not part of your day-to-day processes, these additional brainstorms can help stimulate creativity, build relationships, and lead to creative solutions that can later be implemented to benefit the greater group.

Supplement with additional forms of feedback

Non-management teammates may feel less invested when their opinions and perspectives aren’t considered by the people making decisions at the top. Build new channels for bottom-up feedback to not only increase buy-in with lower-level team members, but also give decision-makers valuable insight into gaps or issues with processes.

Great management is all about balance

When it comes down to it, effective managers know how to balance the efficiency of the top-down approach with the collaborative and creative advantages that come from the entire team. 

By blending elements of different management styles, you can find an approach that works best for you and your unique team. Once you decide the right approach, you can establish streamlined workflow management. 

Test out Asana’s workflow management software to build and track your team workflows and communication all in one place. 

In this free ebook, learn how to structure your organization to prevent silos, move faster, and stay aligned in the face of change.