Addressing Tensions in Prioritising Work
by Amos Law
Last updated 20 July 2026
Digital Issue 11, Oct 2023
The Overthinking Trap
In preparing for my year-end Appraisal and Development Plan discussion with my supervisor, I felt apprehensive as I reflected on how I had refocused my efforts away from certain workstreams that I had planned at the start of the year. My supervisor knows about these changes from our frequent check-ins and understood the need for me to reprioritise to stay productive. Yet, having to broach this topic during the discussion was unnerving. Negative thoughts ran through my head:
“Deprioritising my projects will cast doubt on my capabilities to follow through on projects.”
"Having projects that get deprioritised means that I was working on unimportant projects.”
“Shifting the focus of my efforts halfway through demonstrates a lack of perseverance and commitment.”
“If I had planned well, deprioritising any of my projects would not be necessary. Does this imply that I did not plan well at the start?”
“Stopping the project after so much effort had been invested is a waste of resources! Am I managing resources as best as I can?”
On reflection, I see that such anxieties were based on mistaken beliefs about my work. For instance, important projects might be halted for many reasons, that have nothing to do with my capabilities, due to factors well outside my control. Had these negative thoughts taken hold, they might have affected attempts to prioritise my workstreams, leading me to sustain efforts that may already be irrelevant at the cost of new, more promising initiatives, or to my overall performance and wellbeing.
Similarly, if supervisors or leaders believe that having to choose between workstreams shows poor planning or incompetence, they may push to deliver on new initiatives while striving to complete past projects. Collectively, this could cascade to hinder whole-of-government (WOG) moves to shift national priorities, as agencies continue to invest resources in outdated projects due to legacy or sunk costs.
Contending with Tension
The truth is that, given our increasingly dynamic context, it has become nearly impossible to anticipate when the best laid plans may have to be set aside. For example, a project’s scope could have grown larger than anticipated as stakeholders’ interests grew. New and more urgent tasks may have arisen, or unforeseen disruptions (such as a global pandemic) may upend our lives and work.
We must contend with the tension between knowing when we ought to remain committed and persevere on projects and realising it is time to reprioritise.
This may be easier said than done. We may have to manage the expectations of stakeholders—including ourselves and our teams—when letting go of projects that have been invested with much time and effort, and to which we have become attached.1
We must contend with the tension between knowing when we ought to remain committed and persevere on projects and realising it is time to reprioritise.
To overcome such personal barriers to reprioritising our work, we might adopt these three approaches: Reflect, Review, and Reframe.
Reflect: Take a step back and consider the overall purpose of the team, and where your work fits in
We can be more intentional and systematic in thinking about how best to achieve our organisational priorities while making the most of available resources.
To support this thinking, colleagues in the Institute of Leadership and Organisation Development in the Civil Service College have developed a S.C.A.L.E. framework, based on data and insights gleaned through their work on organisational transformation with various public agencies (read article).
“S” in the S.C.A.L.E. framework stands for “Strategy”. Being clear about the strategic purpose of our work unit is key to resolving the tension of prioritisation. We each need to go back to what our core purpose and mandate are, and appreciate the unique value that our unit brings. We need to ask ourselves: what is it that our unit can (and should) do, that others cannot? A team might also ask itself how its work contributes to the whole: where does it fit in? Answering these questions can help a team achieve better clarity of purpose, making it easier to determine whether a given piece of work is essential to achieving its mandate.
Review each project’s relevance regularly
Most projects are reviewed at regular intervals. At each of these reviews, make it a point to consider whether the project is meeting stakeholders’ needs, and whether it is still relevant to the current context, which may be starkly different from when the project was conceived. The scope of the project could then be modified to adapt to new circumstances, or even deprioritised altogether, in a timelier manner.
Reframe negative thoughts.
One of the ways we can deal with work anxieties is to reframe them as more helpful thoughts. There are three steps to this:
Notice the thought
Take note of the thoughts that cause you to feel discouraged.
Question/challenge the thought
What are the assumptions underlying the thought? Are they reasonable? Think of evidence that disproves some of the negative assumptions— these could come from past experiences, or from observing your colleagues.
Reframe the thought
What are some ways to think about the situation that is also true, but more helpful?
Here are some examples of how negative thoughts might be reframed:
Examples of how negative thoughts might be reframed
Original negative thought | Questioning | Reframing |
|---|---|---|
“Deprioritising my projects will cast doubt on my capabilities to follow through on projects.” | “Sarah had projects that were deprioritised, but her supervisor still thinks highly of her capabilities!” | “There are other projects that I have worked on that equally demonstrate my capabilities.” |
“Having projects that get deprioritised means that I was working on unimportant projects.” | “Do only unimportant projects get deprioritised?” | “Having a deprioritised project does not mean it is unimportant, it could just mean that the other project is more time-sensitive.” |
“Shifting the focus of my efforts halfway through demonstrates a lack of perseverance and commitment.” | “Is it possible to persevere on the wrong projects? What will be the ensuing negative outcome in that case?” | “Shifting the focus of my efforts halfway through shows that I am flexible and willing to change my goals and objectives to adapt to the circumstances.” |
“If I had planned well, deprioritising any of my projects would not be necessary. Does this imply that I did not plan well at the start?” | “Does prioritising need to happen only because of poor planning? What are some other factors that create the need for prioritising?" | “It is not possible to predict all the contextual shifts that can occur once the project starts. In fact, a good plan would have factored in the possibility of exiting the project at the different review points.” |
“Stopping the project after so much effort had been invested is a waste of resources! Am I managing resources as best as I can?” | “If I continue to pour resources into the project and complete it, will it benefit my team or my organisation?” | “Stopping the project may be the best way to ensure that resources are used optimally. If the project carries on when it is no longer relevant to stakeholders or my unit’s mandate, it is an even greater waste of resources.” |
We need to ask ourselves: what is it that our unit can (and should) do, that others cannot?
The Singapore Public Service has to stay agile and adaptable, in order to help our nation thrive in an increasingly complex and unpredictable world.
By learning how to prioritise our work nimbly and well, we can ensure our teams, departments, and organisations stay relevant to our national mission, while being good stewards of our scarce resources.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Amos Law is Senior Researcher in the Institute of Leadership and Organisation Development, Civil Service College. His applied research helps to build organisations that can thrive in the future of work, and his current work delves into the areas of leadership and employee engagement, team wellbeing, and understanding a new generation of public officers.
NOTE
My colleague Aurora Watters, has written an article about the emotional dimension letting go of work, which can be found here.