Going with the flow
How to thrive in unpredictable projects
It doesn’t matter if you’ve got the perfect plan, timeline, or methodology—when you’re working inside complex organisations, success is all about how well you adapt.
Too often, rigid project plans get locked in upfront, with unwavering dedication to the almighty Gantt chart. Deliverables are set in stone, timelines are nailed down. But in reality? Things change. Stakeholder availability is patchy. Priorities shift. The unexpected happens.
A long time ago, we learned the art of adapting and have been putting it to good use ever since. When a project team can flex, you get better outcomes, more useful outputs, and a smoother experience for everyone involved.
We’re lucky enough to be a nimble design agency, and here’s how we made adaptability work for an emergency services client.
The challenge: designing for a moving target
It doesn’t matter if you’ve got the perfect plan, timeline, or methodology—when you’re working inside complex organisations, success is all about how well you adapt.
Too often, rigid project plans get locked in upfront, with unwavering dedication to the almighty Gantt chart. Deliverables are set in stone, timelines are nailed down. But in reality? Things change. Stakeholder availability is patchy. Priorities shift. The unexpected happens.
A long time ago, we learned the art of adapting and have been putting it to good use ever since. When a project team can flex, you get better outcomes, more useful outputs, and a smoother experience for everyone involved.
We’re lucky enough to be a nimble design agency, and here’s how we made adaptability work for an emergency services client.
Organisations responsible for emergency response live in a world of unpredictability. While they see the value in long-term improvements, their number one focus will always be responding to critical events as they happen. That means external projects like ours often take a backseat when the situation demands.
This particular project came with a few extra layers of complexity:
-
Timelines that couldn’t be pinned down - Emergencies could pause the project at any moment.
-
A wide mix of stakeholders - Full-time staff and community volunteers had different priorities, availability, and comfort levels with digital tools.
-
A history of failed attempts - Previous stakeholder alignment projects hadn’t quite landed, creating a healthy dose of scepticism.
-
A fuzzy goal - The organisation wanted alignment and whatever form of assets would get us there. So the way we worked had as much impact on success as the work we did.
Each of these constraints shaped our approach..
How we built adaptability into the project
1. Planning for disruptions
Rather than just reacting when things went sideways, we started by mapping out potential risks before the project even kicked off. We knew that:
-
Key stakeholders might be unavailable at short notice.
-
Some people wouldn’t be comfortable with digital collaboration tools.
-
The organisation’s priorities could shift, affecting engagement.
So, we set up contingency plans upfront, making sure we weren’t scrambling when disruptions inevitably happened.
Key takeaway: Planning for adaptability isn’t about predicting every problem—it’s about having a framework that lets you respond quickly when things change.
2. Giving the timeline some breathing room
Rather than sticking to a rigid schedule, we built in a four-week overflow period. That meant if the organisation had to hit pause for an emergency, we wouldn’t lose momentum or compromise on quality.
This flexibility was a game-changer. It allowed us to pause when needed without blowing out costs or pushing the project indefinitely. The client felt reassured knowing we could adapt without everything falling apart.
Key takeaway: A project timeline should be a guide, not a constraint. Flexibility prevents unnecessary stress when things inevitably shift.
3. Letting the deliverables evolve
One of the biggest wins was not locking in a rigid deliverable from day one. Instead, we took an iterative approach where the output evolved based on stakeholder feedback.
-
We started with a low-fidelity wireframe so the client could see where we were headed.
-
We created a hypothetical version of the final output and refined it through engagement.
-
We co-designed the deliverable with the organisation, rather than just handing them a polished product at the end.
This meant we weren’t just delivering something—we were shaping it together in real time, ensuring it stayed relevant as things changed.
Key takeaway: Fixed deliverables can create friction. Iterating with stakeholders keeps things useful and aligned.
4. Offering different ways to engage
With a mix of full-time staff and volunteers, we couldn’t rely on one-size-fits-all engagement. Instead, we provided multiple ways for people to get involved:
-
Live workshops and interviews for those who could join in real-time.
-
Asynchronous options (like workshop walkthrough videos and summary reports) for those who couldn’t.
-
Facilitated discussions instead of digital tools for those who weren’t comfortable using platforms like Miro.
By meeting people where they were, we captured insights from a much wider range of voices.
Key takeaway: A one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work. Giving people flexible ways to engage leads to richer insights.
5. Keeping things on track through leadership changes
Midway through the project, the client’s project lead changed. In long-term engagements, this is pretty common—and often derails progress. But because we’d built adaptability into the process, we were able to transition smoothly:
-
We walked the new lead through what had been done so far, with full transparency.
-
We reframed deliverables where needed, without throwing previous work out the window.
-
We adjusted while maintaining a consistent through-line, keeping the project on track.
Key takeaway: Leadership changes don’t have to mean starting over. A structured but flexible approach keeps things moving
Why this worked: adaptability in action
1. Faster stakeholder alignment
Instead of spending months getting people on the same page, we designed a hypothetical version of the page and went from there. Our adaptive approach cut alignment time from an estimated 13 weeks to just four. Less time wrangling, more time making real progress.
Why it matters: Long alignment or discovery phases can kill momentum. A structured-yet-flexible approach keeps things moving without sidelining key voices.
2. More confidence in project success
People were sceptical at first—past projects hadn’t gone well, so why would this one be any different? By showing from the outset that we had a plan for change (not just deliverables), we built valuable trust and engagement.
Why it matters: When stakeholders see that a project can flex without falling apart, they’re more willing to invest their time and expertise.
3. Stronger collaboration and ownership
A rigid, top-down approach makes people feel like they’re just being ‘consulted.’ Our iterative approach meant stakeholders had a real say in shaping the outcome, which led to stronger buy-in and a deliverable that actually stuck.
Why it matters: Projects with real stakeholder input have a much higher chance of long-term success.
4. A model for future projects
Perhaps the biggest win was that this wasn’t just a one-off success. The organisation saw firsthand that projects didn’t have to be rigidly structured to work. By embedding adaptability into their own ways of working, they could take this approach forward into future initiatives.
Why it matters: Adaptability isn’t just for one project—it can reshape how an organisation tackles challenges in the long run.
Final thoughts
Adaptability isn’t about being unstructured—it’s about designing with change in mind. This project proved that by building flexibility into every stage, we could navigate uncertainty without losing direction.
For teams working in high-change environments, structured flexibility isn’t a luxury—it’s a necessity. Plan for change, design engagement methods that work for different people, and keep a strong through-line. That’s how you make complex projects work.
How to thrive in unpredictable projects
It doesn’t matter if you’ve got the perfect plan, timeline, or methodology—when you’re working inside complex organisations, success is all about how well you adapt.
Too often, rigid project plans get locked in upfront, with unwavering dedication to the almighty Gantt chart. Deliverables are set in stone, timelines are nailed down. But in reality? Things change. Stakeholder availability is patchy. Priorities shift. The unexpected happens.
A long time ago, we learned the art of adapting and have been putting it to good use ever since. When a project team can flex, you get better outcomes, more useful outputs, and a smoother experience for everyone involved.
We’re lucky enough to be a nimble design agency, and here’s how we made adaptability work for an emergency services client.
The challenge: designing for a moving target
It doesn’t matter if you’ve got the perfect plan, timeline, or methodology—when you’re working inside complex organisations, success is all about how well you adapt.
Too often, rigid project plans get locked in upfront, with unwavering dedication to the almighty Gantt chart. Deliverables are set in stone, timelines are nailed down. But in reality? Things change. Stakeholder availability is patchy. Priorities shift. The unexpected happens.
A long time ago, we learned the art of adapting and have been putting it to good use ever since. When a project team can flex, you get better outcomes, more useful outputs, and a smoother experience for everyone involved.
We’re lucky enough to be a nimble design agency, and here’s how we made adaptability work for an emergency services client.
Organisations responsible for emergency response live in a world of unpredictability. While they see the value in long-term improvements, their number one focus will always be responding to critical events as they happen. That means external projects like ours often take a backseat when the situation demands.
This particular project came with a few extra layers of complexity:
-
Timelines that couldn’t be pinned down - Emergencies could pause the project at any moment.
-
A wide mix of stakeholders - Full-time staff and community volunteers had different priorities, availability, and comfort levels with digital tools.
-
A history of failed attempts - Previous stakeholder alignment projects hadn’t quite landed, creating a healthy dose of scepticism.
-
A fuzzy goal - The organisation wanted alignment and whatever form of assets would get us there. So the way we worked had as much impact on success as the work we did.
Each of these constraints shaped our approach..
How we built adaptability into the project
1. Planning for disruptions
Rather than just reacting when things went sideways, we started by mapping out potential risks before the project even kicked off. We knew that:
-
Key stakeholders might be unavailable at short notice.
-
Some people wouldn’t be comfortable with digital collaboration tools.
-
The organisation’s priorities could shift, affecting engagement.
So, we set up contingency plans upfront, making sure we weren’t scrambling when disruptions inevitably happened.
Key takeaway: Planning for adaptability isn’t about predicting every problem—it’s about having a framework that lets you respond quickly when things change.
2. Giving the timeline some breathing room
Rather than sticking to a rigid schedule, we built in a four-week overflow period. That meant if the organisation had to hit pause for an emergency, we wouldn’t lose momentum or compromise on quality.
This flexibility was a game-changer. It allowed us to pause when needed without blowing out costs or pushing the project indefinitely. The client felt reassured knowing we could adapt without everything falling apart.
Key takeaway: A project timeline should be a guide, not a constraint. Flexibility prevents unnecessary stress when things inevitably shift.
3. Letting the deliverables evolve
One of the biggest wins was not locking in a rigid deliverable from day one. Instead, we took an iterative approach where the output evolved based on stakeholder feedback.
-
We started with a low-fidelity wireframe so the client could see where we were headed.
-
We created a hypothetical version of the final output and refined it through engagement.
-
We co-designed the deliverable with the organisation, rather than just handing them a polished product at the end.
This meant we weren’t just delivering something—we were shaping it together in real time, ensuring it stayed relevant as things changed.
Key takeaway: Fixed deliverables can create friction. Iterating with stakeholders keeps things useful and aligned.
4. Offering different ways to engage
With a mix of full-time staff and volunteers, we couldn’t rely on one-size-fits-all engagement. Instead, we provided multiple ways for people to get involved:
-
Live workshops and interviews for those who could join in real-time.
-
Asynchronous options (like workshop walkthrough videos and summary reports) for those who couldn’t.
-
Facilitated discussions instead of digital tools for those who weren’t comfortable using platforms like Miro.
By meeting people where they were, we captured insights from a much wider range of voices.
Key takeaway: A one-size-fits-all approach doesn’t work. Giving people flexible ways to engage leads to richer insights.
5. Keeping things on track through leadership changes
Midway through the project, the client’s project lead changed. In long-term engagements, this is pretty common—and often derails progress. But because we’d built adaptability into the process, we were able to transition smoothly:
-
We walked the new lead through what had been done so far, with full transparency.
-
We reframed deliverables where needed, without throwing previous work out the window.
-
We adjusted while maintaining a consistent through-line, keeping the project on track.
Key takeaway: Leadership changes don’t have to mean starting over. A structured but flexible approach keeps things moving
Why this worked: adaptability in action
1. Faster stakeholder alignment
Instead of spending months getting people on the same page, we designed a hypothetical version of the page and went from there. Our adaptive approach cut alignment time from an estimated 13 weeks to just four. Less time wrangling, more time making real progress.
Why it matters: Long alignment or discovery phases can kill momentum. A structured-yet-flexible approach keeps things moving without sidelining key voices.
2. More confidence in project success
People were sceptical at first—past projects hadn’t gone well, so why would this one be any different? By showing from the outset that we had a plan for change (not just deliverables), we built valuable trust and engagement.
Why it matters: When stakeholders see that a project can flex without falling apart, they’re more willing to invest their time and expertise.
3. Stronger collaboration and ownership
A rigid, top-down approach makes people feel like they’re just being ‘consulted.’ Our iterative approach meant stakeholders had a real say in shaping the outcome, which led to stronger buy-in and a deliverable that actually stuck.
Why it matters: Projects with real stakeholder input have a much higher chance of long-term success.
4. A model for future projects
Perhaps the biggest win was that this wasn’t just a one-off success. The organisation saw firsthand that projects didn’t have to be rigidly structured to work. By embedding adaptability into their own ways of working, they could take this approach forward into future initiatives.
Why it matters: Adaptability isn’t just for one project—it can reshape how an organisation tackles challenges in the long run.
Final thoughts
Adaptability isn’t about being unstructured—it’s about designing with change in mind. This project proved that by building flexibility into every stage, we could navigate uncertainty without losing direction.
For teams working in high-change environments, structured flexibility isn’t a luxury—it’s a necessity. Plan for change, design engagement methods that work for different people, and keep a strong through-line. That’s how you make complex projects work.