Are You Communicating? Three out of Five Leaders aren't, but They Think They Are!

 

By Michael Adams, PMP®, PMI Otowi Bridge President Elect
Twitter: @MichaelAdamsPMP - LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaeladamspmp

Edited by Sarah Maxwell, PMI Chapter Administrator
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sarah-maxwell-91b23a4b

Would you agree that communication is critical to success?

Do you feel you are an effective and successful communicator?

According to PMI’s December 2013 White Paper, “Communication: The Message Is Clear,” more than sixty percent of business owners and executive sponsors believe they are doing a good job at communicating strategic alignment and business benefits for their projects.¹ What do you think? Are you part of that sixty percent? Considering that only forty three percent of project managers agree with the assessments of leaders who claim to be effective communicators, who do you think is wrong?

No one in a position of leadership appreciates the notion that their communication skills are poor. We leaders prefer to see ourselves as one of “those people” who have communication handled. We collect evidence to support our assumptions and when challenged, we disagree and parade our evidence as proof against the charge. We do this at work, at home, and with our friends. Leaders dislike having our communication shortcomings highlighted, and when this happens, we tend to vigorously defend our status as expert communicators. This is all normal behavior which carries no cause for shame or embarrassment.

It does however, carry the cost of missing opportunities to enhance performance. It means we’ll continue to perform at the same level, a.k.a. on par with other leaders, rather than standing out. A question leaders might consider is, “do I want to accept typical behavior in myself, and with that, typical performance?” If yes, there is no need to read further. If the answer is no, and you wish to elevate your own performance and communication effectiveness, the next question gets personal. “Am I willing to humbly and honestly see where my communication falls short?” That question is key, and answering in the affirmative immediately confronts us with deep personal challenges.

For starters, let’s explore the traits or criteria of effective communication. According to the white paper referenced above, effective communication isn’t merely the transmission of facts. It must produce understanding among team members. It must engage everyone who is touched by the project, including managers, executive leaders, the project sponsor, and other stakeholders. Effective communication results in people understanding their role in the project.

If you consider yourself an effective communicator, take some time to consider your past projects from the context of the criteria listed above. Were any of those communication results missing in any or all of your projects? Did one or more of your projects experience misunderstanding on the part of the project team,  stakeholders, or management? Did everyone understand his or her role in the project? Did you have some level of engagement from any group touched by the project? This is an opportunity to honestly search for evidence in your own performance that exposes you as an average or poor communicator. If you’re like me, you wonder why you would want to see yourself as an average or poor communicator. The answer lies in your goal: this perspective leaves ample room to boost performance. Who has more room for growth, an expert, or a novice? The key to elevating performance lies in our own perceptions of our own performances. How much room are we giving ourselves to improve?

To that point, I’ll confess my own arrogance. Employing humility is often difficult and bitter for me. I prefer to see myself as an adept communicator, a likable leader, and a caring team member. These positive self assessments aren’t useless; in fact they are essential when developing my resume or interviewing for a job. However, when my goal is self improvement, they are a hinderance. Consistently, I experience rapid growth only when I perceive myself as having ample room for improvement. With a humble perspective, I identify new opportunities for communication more easily. I am more open to critical feedback from peers and team members. According to Professor Bruce Winston, “we should not view ourselves as a full cup—something that cannot receive more—but rather as an empty cup, always willing to learn more from others.”²

According to PMI’s 2013 “The Essential Role of Communications,” one in five projects is unsuccessful due to ineffective communication.³  If you know four Project Managers whose projects are running successfully, is yours the one in jeopardy? I understand statistics don’t really work that way, but it might be a valuable perspective, particularly if it encourages a bit of humility and self examination. We have the power, through our own choice in perspective, to view ourselves as having ample room for growth and development, or to take the less valuable approach of seeing ourselves as developed, with maybe some minor polishing of finer details. Which choice will better enable our own breakthrough success and that of our teams?

If we examine some basics of project management communication from the context that we are poor or average communicators, let's see what becomes available. Let’s keep an eye open for how we aren’t employing important communication tools and methods. Let’s consider how we could better apply communication concepts from the PMBOK guide, let’s consider investing a little time into developing a personal communication plan for career growth.

I’ve often heard people say that ninety percent of a project manager’s job is communication. That is a lot of communication! According to a 2011 Harvard Business Review article, managers who communicate the same expectations more than once, and in a variety of media, consistently have the best results.⁴ Contrast that with how often you’ve seen a PM or other leader simply email meeting minutes to everyone or assume that everyone took good notes. Maybe their idea of communication is to post all important information to the intranet site and assume the key team members will see that. I remember a manager at a small company saying, “it is everyone’s responsibility to take notes, I may or may not distribute my meeting minutes.” All of these behaviors are valid, the perspectives aren’t wrong, but none of them accounts for ninety percent of your job being communication. Do any of these scenarios roughly approximate your standard communication plan? Are you feeling a little defensive that I’m even bringing these up? If so, just sit with the discomfort, let it dissipate, and try to examine the results of your projects from a neutral standpoint.

In considering past projects, and assessing my own communication, I’ve found it useful to consider how much stress I experienced, and how much stress my team experienced. I’ll ask myself if there were executive leaders expressing concern or regularly contacting me for updates. After thinking through these points, I consider whether modifying my communication plan to include alternate methods of reaching team members might have had a positive impact. What if I had identified people who really dislike email? Did I consider that some team members might have a reading disability or an auditory disability? Did I expect everyone to take notes, and if so, did I find out how many people knew how to take effective notes? Did I account for which people are better with organizing paper and which are better at organizing digital media? If my communication plan failed to account for these individual differences in how people receive information, could I have changed it to be more accommodating? Would that have made a positive difference for the project?

According to the PMBOK guide, a communications plan has four inputs:

1. project management plan
2. stakeholder register
3. organizational environmental factors
4. enterprise process assets.

Why do you think inputs to the communication plan include both stakeholder register and environmental factors? One obvious reason is that the stakeholder register provides a list of people who need to receive communications, while the environmental factors shed light on the expectations of communication within the organization. Could those inputs also help to ensure that a PM’s delivered message means the same thing when it is received? If I insist on communicating with team members in ways that specifically don’t work for them, are they likely to perform at their highest level? No one would disagree that a PM’s job is to deliver their projects on time, with sufficient quality, and within budget. Stated differently, they facilitate high performance among their project team. Wouldn’t that include communicating with team members in ways that encourage their best work?

An example that comes to mind is a contractor I worked for nearly ten years ago. He assigned me several small projects. He began each by giving me numerous detailed instructions describing what he wanted and how he wanted it done. I always had a notepad in which I wrote down my assignments. Feeling his time too short for my note-taking, the contractor looked at me, and said, “put that down...you don't need it, just listen carefully. You can write it all down after I leave.” What followed was a forty minute monologue with detailed explanations of the results he wanted and how he expected tasks to be completed. I couldn’t remember everything and ultimately, I failed to deliver on what he wanted. I’m tempted to lay this all on my boss. It would be easy; however, poor communication takes two. I was one of those two people, so while it is easy to see where my boss failed to provide good communication, I’ll instead focus on my own failures.

First, I didn’t let my boss know that I couldn’t remember forty minutes of detailed verbal instruction. Rather, I tried to save face by letting him talk and leave. I told myself that I would be able to succeed anyway. I didn’t let him know that while it might take a few extra minutes for me to write down his instructions now, it would pay off when I completed everything he wanted in the fashion he wanted; whereas, my failure to document his instructions would make success unlikely. In short, I let my ego get in the way of facilitating good communication, and in the process, I lost a job and very possibly hurt a local small business.

However, I did learn, and today, I will not proceed with a project while I lack confirmation that I understand expectations.

Beyond expectation, a PM who focuses exclusively on fulfilling the triple constraints of scope, schedule, and budget is a PM who fails to see how their project benefits the organization. This PM has not applied sufficient rigor to communicating with decision makers. They haven’t ensured their understanding of the business benefits that their project provides. How could a PM in this position effectively communicate their project’s benefits to stakeholders on their team, or throughout the organization? How could this PM know if their sponsor effectively communicates the project’s importance in the organization or to external customers? Wouldn’t an effective communications plan require the PM to understand their project’s strategic importance? Wouldn’t it include periodic reviews of project goals and anticipated benefits with the sponsor and other leaders?

Who is more valuable to an organization?

• A PM who understands the strategic context of her project, and is able to assess organizational impact as the project environment shifts.
• A PM who strictly manages to meet the defined scope schedule and budget, regardless of environmental factors, some of which may render the project irrelevant or of minimal value.

In his 2015 PMI Global Congress presentation, “The Promotable Project Manager: New Findings About the Leadership Behaviors of Successful Project and Program Managers NA15RES06,” Richard J. Heaslip presented data from studies about how project managers communicate. Specifically, he studied the level of leadership that PMs provide in various organizations.⁵ According to Heaslips findings, roughly fifty percent of executive leaders express a desire for their organization’s project managers to both conceive of and discuss their projects from the context of how those projects align with enterprise goals and how they will benefit the organization.

Even in organizations whose culture discourages PMs from communicating like this, your understanding of expected benefits will enable your communication with executives to inform their decisions about critical changes in scope. A result is that you and your team will be more valuable to the organization.

What happens if you don't do this? Maybe nothing, but let's explore another construction project I worked on more than twelve years ago. I was assigned a high profile sub-project on a multi-million dollar job. My manager clearly identified what he wanted me to do, who I could communicate with, and what his expectations were. I asked clarifying questions about tasks, my team, and appropriate communication channels. I focused on and delivered exactly what my manager requested, and I felt good about my work. But when I checked in with the manager, he didn’t seem very happy. Apparently, there were unspoken expectations that I didn’t identify, and which weren’t met. I failed to account for the fact that my project was taking place at the ranch manager’s residence, and that his wife would be home all day every day. I didn’t consider risks associated with interpersonal communications between my team and the manager’s wife. I ensured project completion in strict adherence to the triple constraint, however, when my manager reviewed the project with me, he said, “well, you did exactly what I asked, but the property manager isn’t very happy.” I asked what went wrong, but he was hesitant to give me any specific feedback. I shrugged and moved on. I didn't press for details on how I could improve my performance or if I needed to straighten something out with the property manager. I didn't understand the context inside of which my project existed and it hurt both me and my employer.

Today, when I begin a project, I often start with what the Harvard Business Review calls a premortem.⁶ I ask each team member to imagine that we’ve just wrapped up the project, and it went horribly wrong. Everything fell apart, and we’re all on the verge of looking for new jobs. Then I ask the team to tell me, what exactly went wrong, and how could we have addressed it? I ask people to avoid changing their answers based on preference for someone else’s. I really want a diverse list of what could go wrong.

In my experience, this exercise does a few things. First, it causes each team member to see how others think, and what their concerns are. Sometimes it exposes risks that were overlooked. But most importantly, it causes everyone to examine the project for obstacles and problems, and causes them to consider how they can individually affect project failure. This exercise causes team members to develop a sense of ownership for project success, and they begin exploring their internal communication requirements as a team. As the PM, I see a little of how each person thinks, and I gain insights into how I should communicate with each individual.

As the project proceeds, my communication relies on a mixture of personal interactions followed by an email summarizing agreements and deliverables. All meetings of more than three people require an agenda and succinct meeting minutes, which include action items, accountable parties, and due dates. Emails are best when they are short. Every email requires editing before distribution. The best emails are composed of short descriptions followed by bullet points and due dates. Emails should never be seen as an opportunity to fulfill on regrets for a missed career as a novelist.

Contrary to what most people think, it is difficult to over-communicate.⁷ It is easy to overwhelm people with verbose and irrelevant communication, which is not over communication, rather it is over-indulgence or laziness in editing. Communication is engaging, succinct, it tells a story, gives people context for what they are doing, and it is the key to success in business.

As you ponder your communication style, and how you want to develop a communication plan for your next project, maybe you’ll consider the following questions:

1. What are your experiences with communication on projects? (Either as a PM or a team member.)

2. What sorts of things have you overlooked in your communication?

3. What do you tend to overlook repeatedly, and how can you avoid doing it again?

4. What ideas do you have for how communication can be improved in our profession?

In closing, let’s reflect on the words of George Bernard Shaw, followed by Jim Rohn:

“The single biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place.”

--George Bernard Shaw

“Take advantage of every opportunity to practice your communication skills so that when important occasions arise, you will have the gift, the style, the sharpness, the clarity, and the emotions to affect other people.”

--Jim Rohn

[1] https://www.pmi.org/~/media/PDF/Knowledge%20Center/Communications_whitepaper_v2.ashx

[2] http://stephenblandino.com/2012/09/role-humility-personal-growth.html

[3] https://www.pmi.org/~/media/PDF/Business-Solutions/The-High-Cost-Low-Performance-The-Essential-Role-of-Communications.ashx

[4] https://hbr.org/2011/05/defend-your-research-effective-managers-say-the-same-thing-twice-or-more

[5] http://congresses.pmi.org/NorthAmerica2015/program/educational-areas-of-focus/area-of-focus-sessions/session/2015/10/13/default-calendar/the-promotable-project-manager-new-findings-about-the-leadership-behaviors-of-successful-project-and-program-managers

[6] https://hbr.org/2007/09/performing-a-project-premortem

[7] https://hbr.org/2013/01/three-elements-of-great-communication-according/