Strategic Project Management

The headline in Austin Carr's recent article for Fast Company reads: Half of Young Professionals Value Facebook Access, Smartphone Options over Salary: Report. I have to admit, although I appreciate that money isn't everything, this blew my mind.

"For a whole new generation of tech-savvy young professionals, having access to social media or the right smartphone in the workplace is at times more important than earning a higher salary. For business, that means adapting to this change in priorities rather than resisting it—if the Man Men-era job force expected noon whiskeys and female secretaries, then our modern-day equivalent demands Facebook and iPhones," writes Carr.

At first glance, it might be easy to say, "Geesh, these guys just want to goof off on Facebook all day." I don't think that's the case. In fact, their desire to stay connected to their network could be a very good thing for project teams—provided we can expand their network to include their colleagues at work, can make the work they do something interesting enough to collaborate about and create tools that leverage what we've learned from watching this generation communicate and collaborate via social media.

These findings come from Cisco's second annual Connected to World Technology Report, released yesterday. "Cisco's findings are telling of a generation that's been glued to LCD screens and wired to social networks from an early age. According to the report, 40% of college students and 45% of young professionals would accept lower-paying jobs if they had more access to social media, more choice in the devices they could use at work, and more flexibility in working remotely," says Carr. "More than half of the college students surveyed indicated that if an employer banned access to networks like Facebook at work, 'they would either not accept a job offer from them or would join and find a way to circumvent.'"

Although many business leaders are going to read this report with some consternation because of the potential for abuse, Cisco is trying to figure out ways to take advantage of the findings.

I don't think it's a secret that our personal lives and professional lives are becoming less clearly defined. My company provides me with an iPhone that I am allowed to use for personal purposes. In fact, every full-time employee in the company has one. Of course, having the phone gives them access to us 24/7—but there are very few employees who are ever required to take an after hours phone call or answer an email. For most of the company its simply a nice perk. However there are times when it's easier for me to answer an email in the evening or take a phone call on Saturday afternoon than it is to put things off until Monday. My professional life and my private life are less compartmentalized than they were 30 years ago—it's just my life.

We've talked before about how the Millennial Generation has been collaborating and working on teams since elementary school. The same is true for their use of technology that facilitates collaboration via social media. I don't think this trend is going to change any time soon. And although it might be pandering to the younger members of the workforce, they aren't the only folks "plugged in" to Facebook. Many of my contemporaries are updating their pages just as often—in not more frequently.

Just how do we leverage this information into something relevant that we can incorporate within the project environment?

1. Make the project environment a little more flexible: Give the team some input into how they do their job, when they do their job and who they do it with. I have younger colleagues who are online sending emails, writing code or otherwise getting stuff done in the wee hours of the morning—long after I've gone to bed. Yeah, they might not show up as early as I do the next day, but if they are able to get their work done, does it really matter?
2. Provide tools that leverage the social media metaphor to make collaboration easier and more intuitive for them: I know this is going to be considered coddling to the younger generation by some, but if a more social media-like approach works, why is that a bad thing? It's easy to understand and the medium has become so ubiquitous that even the gray-hairs I pal around with are totally connected. Why not save ourselves some brain damage and create the environment that seems to work?
3. Recognize accomplishments and provide feedback—regularly and frequently: This generation has become accustomed to an almost consent stream of feedback regarding what they're doing. It's been a part of their experience in school and social media has made it a part of their life. Is it any wonder they want to stay "connected" at work? I think the effort it might take to do that in the workplace will be well worth it.

Would I choose Facebook over a bump in salary? Nope. But I communicate, collaborate and otherwise productively get work done every day by using social media and social media-inspired work management tools.

What do you think?

I was recently reading in the Wall Street Journal about companies that are not only allowing, but encouraging game play at work. It's not what you might think.

"They're deploying reward and competitive tactics commonly found in the gaming world to make tasks such as management training, data entry and brainstorming seem less like work," writes Rachel Emma Silverman when describing what companies like IBM and Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Ltd. are doing. "Employees receive points or badges for completing jobs or meeting time limits for assignments, for example. Companies also may use leaderboards, which let players view one another's scores, to encourage friendly competition and motivate performance, experts say."

I'm convinced that the biggest challenge project leaders face involves engaging individual members of the project team to participate in the process. I also believe that recognizing team member accomplishment is important to meet that end. Does gamification do that?

"This 'gamification' of the workplace, or 'enterprise gamification' in tech-industry parlance, is a fast-growing business. Companies have used digital games for a number of years to help market products to consumers and build brand loyalty," writes Silverman. "What's emerging is using games to motivate their own employees."

The big question has to be, "Does this work?" I have to admit I haven't had much experience with this in the workplace and don't know if making my job a game would make me any more productive or any better at it. With that said, I don't want to be a focus group of one and the results seem to suggest that it is working. Citing Traci Sitzmann, an assistant professor of management at the University of Colorado Denver Business School, Silverman says, "So far, the tactic has proved effective. ...[E]mployees trained on video games learned more factual information, attained a higher skill level and retained information longer than workers who learned in less interactive environments."

Gartner has even weighed in on this approach. "Tech-industry research firm Gartner estimates that by 2014, some 70% of large companies will use the techniques for at least one business process," says Silverman.

The market research firm M2 has even predicted that revenue from gamification software and consulting will rise from its' less than $100 million to $938 million by 2014.

I do know that according to some research Forrester did for AtTask a couple of years ago, 40 percent of knowledge workers don't believe their mangers understand how their individual contributions impact corporate objectives. If this is really the case and formalizing the recognition of team member accomplishment can be achieved by gamification—I'm all for it.

It's easy for the gray-hairs like me to argue, "This whole gamification thing just panders to the younger generation's short attention span." I think that would be a mistake. I don't think there's any question that traditional approaches to how we manage projects and lead people haven't been very successful at engaging the team to take ownership and step up performance to a higher level. I think if something like gamification of the process improves that, it is something we should embrace.

I would really be interested to hear of any successes (or failures) you may have experienced with this. Does it engage the team? Does the team participate more willingly in the process? I'm interested in what you may have done or are doing and how it seems to be working. Thanks in advance for your comments.

Project leaders are often faced with a conundrum. Most of us have always accepted the old adage that "The customer is always right." Unfortunately, that isn't always the case—particularly within the project environment.

Often the role between the project sponsor and the project manager is not well defined. The sponsor feels like he or she has omnipotent control of scope, team resources and the project manager (which is often the cause of project failure).

A good example is a software project from a few years back initiated to create a customized application for managing the calls that took place within our call center. Often projects at that company, like many projects doomed from the start, only had a cursory outline of scope, which seemed to change after every meeting with the project sponsor. Despite objections (because the sponsor was the owner of the company), every effort was made to make any scope adjustments as they came up—regardless of the impact that would cascade down to other, more important, parts of the project. It felt like we were on a train headed for a ravine with a broken bridge with the sponsor alongside us in the engine smiling and tooting the whistle as we headed for certain disaster. Unfortunately, when disaster was evident to even the project sponsor, he was unwilling to take any responsibility for it. Sponsors have "selective memory" when it comes to conversations about scope changes and the ultimate cost. With that in mind, let me suggest the following tactics for preparing for and dealing with a project sponsor who might not be right:

1. Define roles upfront: Many project sponsors don't understand their role. If this isn't something that has been formalized within the organization, it will be up to the project manager to help the sponsor understand his or her project responsibilities. I have seen the most success when the sponsor takes on the role of executive advocate. Often, whether or not a project is successful depends upon whether or not the organization is committed to the project from start to finish. There are many projects that have a lot of support to start, but executives with short attention spans loose interest quickly as the next "shiny thing" distracts their attention (and their budget approval). A well-connected sponsor is often critical in helping shepherd a project through to completion. It's often easier for sponsors to micro-manage the project manager.
2. Identify the end from the beginning: My grandmother used to say, "Well begun is half done." As important as a good beginning may be to a project, it's even more critical that "complete" is defined. Without a clear definition of what "done" looks like, it's possible to get caught in the "never-ending project". When the sponsor suggests scope adjustments, I've found, "Yes, that's a great idea. In fact, once we're done with phase 1 (what we're currently working on) let's add that to the backlog of features we want to include in a phase 2 project," works well as a response.
3. Always say "yes," but identify what "yes" costs: It's sometimes difficult for a project manager to say no to a project sponsor without putting his or her position at risk. When this is the case, "yes" is an appropriate response as long as a cost is attached. Sometimes, when a project sponsor realizes the cost of scope adjustments will be in terms of time, money and resources, they are happy to wait for phase 2.
4. Suggest an alternative timeline: I have never personally pulled this card yet, but I know of a project manager who will often say, "Sure, we can accommodate that next May. Otherwise it's going to cost XXX." (See #3)
5. Make sure you have "drop-by" access: Regardless of the sponsor or the project, a successful project manager and sponsor relationship will require a clear channel of communication—which often necessitates some informal conversations outside of traditional project status meetings.

Is the customer always right? What do you do when faced with unreasonable requests from project sponsors?

Over the weekend I spent several hundred miles on my motorcycle tooling around Utah. It's easy to take for granted that the motorcycle is going to function properly, but sometimes when I'm out in the middle of nowhere I have to ask myself, "Is there anything you forgot to check before you left?" Not that I expect anything to go wrong, but even being as few as 30 miles away from the next town could be a problem on some of the lightly-traveled roads I like to ride.

Regardless of the type of work we do, keeping the team working well together is sometimes challenging when project teams are composed of team members with various experience and skill levels. Here are a couple of suggestions that might keep your team working like a well-oiled machine:

1. Technology can help keep the team together: I always carry a cell phone when I'm out on a ride so I can call for help if there ever is an emergency. Project teams can leverage technology in the same way to work together regardless of where they work in the world. The Internet has made it possible for project leaders in Europe to manage teams in China or South America, and executives in Cincinnati to have access to real project information to make informed decisions.
2. Because you don't always get to pick your team, you need to make the most out of the team you've got: Most of the time project leaders don't get to pick their team—nor does the team get to pick their project leader. Building a good working relationship with everyone on the team is important. Earlier this month, I went on a big group ride with 400 or 500 people I didn't know. Despite the fact that most of us had never met before, we had to trust that nobody would do anything really dumb on the road. What's more, there were a number of people I got to know and really had a good time.
3. It's not fair to expect any team member to do all the heavy lifting: When I ride with someone, it's usually my brother-in-law Paul. Although he's been riding a lot longer than I have, it wouldn't be fair if I left all the ride planning up to him for every ride. The same is true for project teams, the same team members shouldn't be expected to do all the heavy lifting for the team. When everyone works together and carries their share of the burdens associated with a project, the project is more likely to be successful and the team is more likely to pull together as they all work to overcome challenges and help with the heavy lifting.
4. Stronger and more capable team members should mentor and help less experienced team members improve their skills: I'm a firm believer in always learning and improving skills, at work and in everything else I do. When Paul and I ride together, once we've returned home, we usually talk about the ride. We talk about how we could have made it a better, safer ride. Our goal is to make sure we're safe and have a good time. Similarly, how we treat less experienced members of the team and potential learning experiences can positively or negatively impact how they perceive their role on the team. I will always be grateful to the more senior people who took an interest in me during the early years of my career and taught me the things that didn't appear in the HR manual or company training.

Successful teams don't just happen. Neither do productive working relationships. As project leaders, it's important for us to remember that we need to build an environment where healthy collaboration and communication can thrive. We need to us the technology and interpersonal skills at our disposal to foster a good team environment—which is no less important than the project management software we use, the work management methodology we employ or the details of our project plan.

What do you do to keep your team working like a well-oiled machine?

Last week I read an interesting article by my friend Pam Stanton the Project Whisperer, The Impossible Dream: When Vision Kills Execution. I think we can all agree that it's important to make sure that everyone on the project team understands the vision behind the particular project their working on, but Pam wonders if that can sometimes get in the way.

"Of course, it's important to understand the context for a project, and to have a view of the ultimate goal," she writes. "On the other hand, a team in execution mode needs to focus on the tasks at hand."

She describes a situation where an enthusiastic and charismatic Program Director who, because he could see the larger vision of what they were trying to do, was encouraging scope creep to run amok.

"This team was constantly bombarded and distracted by the desire of the Program Director to "eat the elephant  'in one big swallow,' she continued. "They would just start to get traction in one area, and then would be pulled into discussions and debates about building ancillary pieces before the foundation was even in place."

I agree with Pam's assessment that this was a big problem. "Pretty soon, team members started to passively resist any direction from this leader, and either go off on their on 'skunkworks' efforts, or simply stop all activity," she says. "They desperately wanted to perform and deliver, but were being confronted with what seemed like an 'Impossible Dream.'"

This scenario sounds like a Program Director who didn't understand how distracting the team from the "vision" of the current project with work that should have been planned for "future" projects. "Don't distract the team with tangents, don't disrupt momentum..." argues Pam. I have to agree.

I'm a big advocate of keeping vision and project goals transparent to the team. People want to contribute to something bigger than themselves and are motivated to "perform and deliver" as Pam suggested. We just need to make sure that once a project is underway, we allow the team to execute—otherwise a successful project will be "The Impossible Dream."