Incident Record Concerning Project Name Before Project
Summary of a recurring incident in which naming precedes the thing being named by a margin of several weeks.
Incident Record: Project Name Before Project Incident Type: Recurring Classification: Personal preference elevated to shared procedure Status: Open
Summary
A person begins a creative project by naming it. The project at time of naming consists of: a feeling, a rough direction, and no deliverable. The name is finalized before any of these elements have resolved. The project may or may not eventually resemble the name. In most cases, this is not checked.
Timeline
T+0: Idea occurs. Enthusiasm is present.
T+0 to T+45 min: Name selection begins. The person considers several options. They evaluate each for sound, implication, and whether it would look correct on a thumbnail. They select one.
T+45 min to T+3 hours: Name is registered in relevant systems. Folder is created. Name appears in file names. The name is now the project.
T+3 hours onward: The work that would justify the name is attempted. Progress is variable.
Contributing Factors
The step looks like part of making something. It is not distinguishable from making something at the moment it occurs. It produces a visible artifact: the name, the folder, the header of the document. The artifact looks like progress. Progress has a known positive effect on continued effort. The name therefore functions as a procedural accelerant that delays the phase it was meant to accelerate.
The contradiction: the step delays the part where uncertainty cannot be controlled. Naming is a controlled task. The project is not. The controlled task is selected first.
Escalation Pattern
The first instance of project name before project is treated as a personal preference. No one regulates naming order. A second person observes the pattern and begins doing it. The preference now resembles shared procedure.
Eventually a newcomer can violate the rule without ever having been told the rule exists. They begin working before naming. They are not corrected. They feel slightly irregular. The name arrives later. This is noted by no one but experienced by the newcomer as an incomplete start.
Governing Rule
No one may correct project name before project unless they are willing to own the replacement procedure. The replacement procedure would require: an account of when naming is appropriate, criteria for distinguishing premature naming from useful naming, and a name for the replacement procedure. The replacement procedure would then be named before it was built.
The incident recurs. Records are maintained.