Jumbo Shrimp, Baggy Tights, Act Natural, and…Project Management?

 

“Management also involves the integrating process whereby human resources work together in harmony to achieve the firm’s objective.”[i]

When I performed an internet search on the question “Is management a process?”, I received over 15 billion hits in less than one second, including a link to an article that contained the quote above. While a precise definition of the word management is somewhat elusive, the overwhelming majority of experts considers it to be a process, as well as a discipline and a science. While I don’t have any real heartburn with such definitions, they do raise the question: Is Project Management a contradiction in terms, an oxymoron, like clearly misunderstood, black light, or country classic? And, if that is the case, then what does that say about the massive management science codex that serves as the foundation for almost every business school in existence?

GTIM Nation knows of my predilection for tearing into the old management saw that the point of all management is to “maximize shareholder wealth,” but that’s just one of many of the ossified business world rules that work against PM. Re-read the first sentence. Note how the source asserts that, definitionally, management seeks to have “human resources work together in harmony to achieve the firm’s objective.”[ii] There are two things I want to point out here: to engage is just a little bit of hyperbole, PMs generally don’t care about the level of “harmony” in the organization, as long as the project’s scope is being accomplished on-time, on-budget. Certainly, if inter-Project Team relations go south, thereby threatening project success, all but the worst PMs will act to correct. But to stress my point, consider whether an excellent Project Manager, given the choice between successful project completion but with the Team at each other’s throats, or having the project crash and burn while everyone got along swimmingly, would such a one really choose the latter? The second part of the quotation that raised alarm bells (for me, anyway) was the bit about achieving the “firm’s objective.” What if the firm’s objective entails displaying behavior that’s neutral to, or even working against, project success? After all, by definition Project Management seeks to deliver the customers’ expectations of scope, cost, and schedule – not the “firm’s.” No Request for Proposal (RFP) ever stated the expectation that the contractor’s objectives be attained, or even pursued.

Also consider two culinary-themed clichés, “Too many cooks spoil the broth” and “The proof of the pudding is in the eating” (and anybody who misstates the latter as “the proof is in the pudding” should never be taken seriously). Obviously, these two axioms were meant to convey insights beyond the confines of a kitchen. A short-and-sweet paraphrasing would be “the outcome of an effort is all that matters,” with a bit lengthier one being “an over-emphasis on the process in an endeavor is likely to ruin its final results.” But if management truly is a process, and the millions upon millions of books, articles, presentations, and, yes, blogs devoted to its non-PM-specific attributes represent an excessive concentration on that process, doesn’t that mean that the final outcome is in danger, if not already ruined?

And, as if all of the preceding wasn’t bad enough, you also have the problems with the endless variability of process, with very little variability when we’re discussing output, the basis of the PM codex. Again, by definition a well-written scope baseline leaves very little (or no) doubt as to the objectives being sought by the contractor on behalf of the customer. Size, weight, function, reliability standards, cost, schedule – the ways of quantifying the expected project deliverable(s) are multitudinous. But process is almost endlessly variable, as reflected in another axiom “there’s more than one way to skin a cat.” It’s the reason James Bond is famous for stipulating that his favorite cocktail, the martini, be “shaken, not stirred.” Everybody involved in his placing the order for this libation knows what a martini is. He’s specifying a part of the process to get what he wants, since there are over 30 ways to mix the cocktail.[iii]

Based on this analysis, “Project Management” is clearly an oxymoron, but if AND ONLY IF it’s being evaluated in terms of the traditional business models that have become so rigid and unassailable over the centuries. As long as we’re focused on the products, services, and outcomes of our work, PM’s precepts are golden. The moment we lose that focal point, it all becomes foolish wisdom.

[i] Retrieved from https://www.managementstudyhq.com/management-process.html on June 4, 2022, 20:49 MDT.

[ii] Ibid.

[iii] At least according to https://www.thespruceeats.com/martini-recipe-collection-4051778, retrieved on June 6, 2022, 18:47 MDT.