We have rules but no solutions

The other day I was witness to an analogy in action.

Two people from neighbouring companies had parked their scooters in our company’s parking area. This is, apparently, not cricket. It’s not that there wasn’t space for them, nor were they obstructing anything or prone to cause a problem later when that space would be needed, as it wouldn’t be. No, there are rules about this. They were parked where they shouldn’t be parked so a solution had to be found.

Two colleagues, as ordered by the boss, started dragging the smaller scooter out of the parking area. It was obviously quite heavy so they were both straining a little. They parked it at a 90 degree angle in front of the parking area. They then proceeded to push the larger scooter away too before realizing the first scooter was now forming an obstacle. So two other colleagues moved the first offending article out of the way a bit, but then it became clear that the space they pushed it too was also in the way of the second scooter’s intended location.

When the intended location was pointed out an impromptu discussion erupted between the four colleagues as to what exactly would be the best location. Some fingers were pointed and arguments put forth. The small scooter was placed in area A, but it soon became clear the bigger scooter was too heavy to carry that far so was put in area B. Then the first scooter was repositioned from area A to near area B. Standing back and admiring their handiwork it was decided it wasn’t good enough. The first scooter was repositioned again to actually be in area B, next to the bigger vehicle but first the latter had to be repositioned, yet again, to make space.

The situation wasn’t ideal, but it’d have to do. The vehicles were simply too heavy to shove them about anymore. The matter was concluded, hands wiped clean and actual work resumed. It only took twice as many people three times as long as I would have had they thought it through from the start.

A more perfect analogy of Japanese game development cannot be found.

Better ways to have dealt with the situation:
Market research
Is there really a problem here? Are people waiting for a solution, a gap to be filled? In this case the boss had commanded action, so there was a presumption a problem existed that needed fixing. In reality, though, there wasn’t one and to avoid it ever becoming one in the future small notes could be circulated to neighbouring companies asking them to avoid parking in our area in the future.
Outsourcing
If the problem needed fixing a single person could be sent round to neighbouring companies to find out who the offending motorists were and ask them to remove their vehicles themselves. It may take a little longer but requires only one worker to go around making enquiries and to check afterwards if the outsourced work was completed satisfactorily.
Proper planning
If we decide to take action ourselves we should have looked at the situation and envision a solution; in this case figuring out where the offending scooters should go and how to best get them there. It would take two persons a fraction of the time had all this been decided in advance. Decide the final location, drag one of the scooters there, then the other. Planned, focused and executed. No need for retakes.

The only real difference with actual game development was the fact the boss didn’t come round afterwards to demand minute, labour intensive and unnecessary changes in the scooters’ positioning. “I want scooter A to be rotated 180 degrees, switched with scooter B, which I want blue, not red.” You know the kind of stuff.