Basecamp's original Hill Charts use a biphasic dimension to show mission status:
- Uphill stage (left side): Indicates problem exploration and scenario design, where the closer to the top of the mountain the higher the uncertainty. A "blue marker" is recommended for this stage, reflecting current risk points and pending decisions.
- Downhill phase (right side): Indicates program implementation and delivery, with higher levels of completion closer to the bottom. Instead of "green markers", specific percentages of completion or remaining work hours could be indicated.
There are three major differences compared to traditional burnout charts:
- Philosophical differences: The Burnout Diagram focuses only on workload consumption, while the Hill Diagram emphasizes the cognitive process - the difficulty with many tasks (e.g., requirements analysis) is in 'figuring it out' rather than 'getting it done'.
- risk warning: When the mission stagnates in the uphill phase (left side of the hill) for an extended period of time, the system triggers a yellow warning that resources may be needed to intervene, which is 2-3 business days earlier than the overdue warning for the burnout map.
- Collaborative Leadership: Team members can comment on hill locations (e.g., "stuck on technology selection"), and this context is displayed below the chart in a decision memo.
In practice, it is recommended to link the hill map with the to-do list - when modifying the task status, the system will ask "Where is the current position on the hill?" This dual recording mechanism is particularly suitable for creative and R&D projects.
This answer comes from the articleBasecamp: an online project management and team collaboration toolThe
May not be reproduced without permission:AI productivity tools " How does Basecamp's Hill Chart feature help track project progress? How does it differ from other tools' burndown charts?
