The Project Shrink

In projects many things can “just happen”. Things start out with the best intentions and spirits. Everyone is excited. There is enough time and budget. We all decide on the path to be taken.

But during the ride, people get lost. They start questioning the road. Are wondering if there is a road. Heck, nobody told them what the road looks like.

I remember some research that suggested that problems in projects occur not because of the lack of process components, like procedures and techniques. At project start up all the things that we are supposed to put into place, are put into place. But somewhere during the trip, when pressure gets build up, we seem to forget about them. I can't find the reference anymore. Sorry.

Forgetting about why we do stuff in the first place.

Many people just drift away on a certain feeling. They need to reconnect. It is a bit like remembering why you fell in love with someone, after many years.

I think that problems occur when we get stuck in patterns that we are unaware off and don’t think we can get out.

Why do you use a certain method? Perhaps because your organization has it defined as a standard. Why is it defined as a standard? Because it's a dominant method in our profession. Why is it a dominant method? Because it's the best? Who knows. But perhaps you think it is the only one you can use.

A method is a pattern. Might be a good pattern. But still. It is something we can get sucked into. After a while we can't remember why we choose this one.

Why is an team member so negative? For some reason he has this horror picture of the organization in his mind. The story that is told inside his head is not one of joy. Sometimes it's hard to remember how he got to this behavioral pattern. He loved the organization when he joined.

Things just grow out of synch. People enter a pattern and get stuck in the pattern. They end up on a road some how and just keep on following the same road.

I think this is the source of project problems.

If we think there is only one way to organize a project. If we think everything around us just sucks.

Because we are unaware of other roads. Because we are afraid to explore other roads. Because we are convinced other roads suck. Or every body else is using this road so it must be a good road. Or we forget why they are on this road in the first place.

The trick is to recognize you are sucked into a pattern. It's repeating behavior. Many times others have to point this out to us. It can pop up everywhere. In relationships with the team, the project, individual stakeholders, your role and your working environment. Problems around expectations, trouble caused by friction between the project and the host organization.

The trick is to recognize the source of the pattern. Did you copy it from someone else? Does your organization dictate or enforces this pattern? Did something trigger a part of your personality? (Oh yes, doing a Meyer-Briggs personality test can be revealing for some :))

There is more to it. For sure.

But, as always, recognizing the problem is already half the solution.
 

Bas = Writer who draws. Author of  A Travel Guide for Transitions: Because Freaking Out About This by Myself Totally Sucks.

Someone explained to me how he categorized the behavior of people. He used that to deal with people he considered difficult to deal with. It seemed he had a lot of "problematic" stakeholders. He talked about "the tank", "the sniper", "whiners", "grenades" and many more flattering labels.

I felt very unpleasant when he discussed how he disabled the big fat tank. Supposedly his team leader. It's not that I have issues with the use of labels. Heck. It seemed to be working for him. He was so happy with the results, he was telling me about it. So. There.

I know it's how our brains are hard wired. It's just that I can't deal very well with the negativity of the labels.

Here is the thing.

People are effected by the mental image they hold of a situation. People can talk about projects as if they are conducting a war. They are using words like “marching orders” and “the troops”. If a Project Manager has a mindset like this, war as a metaphor, his mind is thinking in friends and foes, allies and enemies. You are either with him or against him. This view of the world will make it very difficult to collaborate with this person if you disagree.

Using negative labels enforces the mindset. Not helping here in this respect. At least not in my brain.

We need labels. I am aware of that. Analogies and associations help us crunch information so it doesn't take up so much space in our brains. It helps us to compress information for storage.

The problem we face is that we use the labels directly offered to us, to put things and people into prefabricated boxes that that might create the wrong association.  With "wrong" I mean, "not helpful". It brings us in a polarized view of the world.

A couple of weeks ago I pondered the question if introverts might be more suited for virtual leadership. Actually, some great comments and this insightful blog post by Josh Nankivel triggered this post :) This mental exercise is not intended to let people take a Myers-Briggs test and determine based on their score if they are a better leader than someone else. This use of labeling is absolutely not productive or useful.
 
Going over the axis and see what's in each box, and consider how this might affect a situation can be interesting. It shapes connections and associations, and awareness. It helps you to prevent seeing a single story. The trick is to recognize that it's not a box, but a balance. In reality we all are part introvert, part extrovert. Or any other dimension you want to pick.


Consider agile and plan-driven approaches. It's not one or the other. Different circumstances require a different approach. If you need creativity to solve a problem or to create a design, you need an easy going, stimulating approach; if you are running towards a deadline to get towards production, a rigid, centralized controlled environment is more the way to go. Depending on the environment and general circumstances a project manager should construct a process and organization that serves him or her best.

Depending on the situation you can provide a proper balance. By seeing this as a balance, there is no need for polarized discussion about right or wrong. But before you can do this, you need to study the labels itself. What's in it, how this might affect a situation?  

I really do think that awareness about dimensions and balances is important. If nobody tells you about it, you might not be aware of a bias you might have. As they say, fish discover water last. Somebody has to show you the water.

If you want to read more how to bridge polarities, getting into a "both-and" mind set instead of a "either-or", I encourage you to read this article: "Rhythms, Boundaries, and Containers: Creative Dynamics of Asynchronous Group Life". In it the authors are exploring a middle path bridging two prevailing approaches to groupware: (1) mechanism — making groups work through the use of explicit forms and procedures, and (2) context or open space — allowing groups to self-organize. Although they talk about groupware, software for virtual collaboration, I find the article relevant to any group collaboration. And it's a great illustration on how to bridge polarities.
 

As you can tell, I am still not sure how this works exactly. :) But it's is about how we explain things to others effects how they might behave. So it's important. Really.

Bas de Baar is a writer who draws about people in transition. He loves to make visual maps and travel guides for the collaborators of our brave new world.

We drive a 1994 pink Toyota Starlet. It's Frau Shrinks car. But once in a while I drive in this INTENSELY pink Japanese car.

When you drive that car  everybody is turning their head, pulling windows down in the traffic jam to say something about it, point at it, taking pictures of it. Because it's pink. I mean. Really.

It used to be red. Boring red. Nobody bothered to say something about it.

The car truly creates engagement with others.

Although I do feel weird stepping out of the car wearing a suit and tie.

For a while I  had  a bowling bag to carry my papers and other work related stuff. I bought it, because everybody else was carrying the same black Samsonite briefcase. The bag was blue with white letters and oddly shaped. Colleagues and clients would say something about it. Complementing me on my fine exquisite taste. Making fun of my stupid bag.

The bowling bag created engagement. A conversation starter. Something to trigger a spontaneous moment of interaction. And never in a negative mood. The plastic bag from the supermarket I carried around for months after that triggered some different comments though.

I have a small pendulum kit used to "provide cosmic answers". It's a chain with a pointy stone that you hold above a chart with words (like yes/no, a calendar, etc). You ask a question and where the pendulum will point to, that's your answer. We use it sometimes for planning purposes. At least that is what I tell people if they see it on the desk. The conversation always ends up talking about uncertainty and risks.

Objects are conversation starters. Like the palm tree.

"So you bring a huge palm tree to put on your desk. Nothing brightens up a place like a little bit of tropical green.

People will gather under the palm tree. Give you compliments. Provide you with tips on how the harvest those coconuts. Someone will bring a hammock. It will become a hangout and topic of conversation."

An object can also become a flag for your group. A flag for me represents a visible element of a culture that identifies that culture and the people part of the culture.

If you have to move to a different room with your team, and you take the palm tree with you, they get a sense that the new room is still "their room". Something like "making yourself at home".

It provides continuity in a changing environment. It's a MacGuffin. As explained on the excellent Sparknow blog:

"A maguffin (McGuffin, MacGuffin) is a term popularised by Alfred Hitchcock for an element in the story that both helps and distracts the viewer, orients them but serves no direct purpose. … For any nomadic product development community, it’s useful to have a maguffin that’s an object to provide place, memory and a thread of continuity. "

Objects are a powerful tool to facilitate interaction and group culture.

Even if it's a pink car. Especially if it's a pink car.

Bas de Baar is a writer who draws about people in transition. He loves to make visual maps and travel guides for the collaborators of our brave new world.

Seriously.  Think about it.

Extroverts are strong in verbal communication, expressive in body language, great in invading your private space, really loud and stuff like that. Stuff that is cool for face-to-face communication. Introverts tend to be more reflective, silent, chilled out and living with cats in remote places. The things that make you awesome online. (yeah, yeah, I am overly strereotyping here.)

In "Why Introverts Can Make The Best Leaders" Jennifer Kahnweiler provides us with a couple of clues why this could be.

"They let the fingers do the talk." It seems that introverted people prefer writing over talking. I think it's the asynchronous communication that enables them to reflect, make up their mind on what they really think and spent time expressing this correctly. Uhm. Hello? "Online communication" anyone?

"They embrace solitude." Introverts are not some kind of hermits that try to avoid any human contact. But. They need some time alone. Getting away from outside interruptions. It provides the energy and silence that fuels the creativity and absorption of information.

This post also mentions that "it has been reported that a full 40% of executives describe themselves as introverts."

So. There should be a lot of introverts among the Project Management community.

Do you know any?

I think you recognize them because they are getting good at reading "digital" cues. They are masters of asynchronous communication.

I think you recognize them because they see projects as shelters from external disturbances. An oasis of focus. And stuff like that.

Not all managers would pay attention to providing their team and themselves with supportive structures that shield them from stress from the organizational environment. You know. Exercises like "The Tent". An exercise in creating and maintaining your comfort zone.

But at least introverted leaders would.

Although. They might be hard to spot. Some "extroverts" are perhaps "introverts in disguise".

The first female U.S. Army general to lead troops in combat is an introvert:

"Here’s General Brown: “I’m an introvert by nature. People would say, ‘Oh, you’re not…You don’t come across as being an introvert at all.’ and I said, ‘Well, that’s because every day I put on my Wonder Woman outfit, and you have to be able to do everything and anything. And so that’s the person you portray when you’re in uniform.”"

You wouldn't know. Although. The creative mental image of assuming the role of a superhero is a dead give away. I think you can recognize introverts in how they describe their own mental processes in situations. Like being on a Big Adventure. Setting up a tent. And of course the extensive use of maps. Maps!
 
But, of course, to lead a team, you have to challenge your comfort zone. "Introverts must be willing to tap into their extraversion when it’s time to “rally the troops” and inspire their teams," writes Lisa Petrilli in her very informative article "The Introvert's Guide To Leadership."

Sure enough, virtual leadership will not be exclusively for introverted people. Extrovert-Introvert is one of just many, many, many dimensions of a person.

For virtual leadership, we need transformational leaders. I quoted this post by Surinder Kahai before:

 “Since virtual teams are supported by technology and technology tends to filter out vital nonverbal cues, can a leader be effective in virtual contexts? (...)  (Researchers) “found that the effect of transformational leadership on team performance was stronger in virtual than in face-to-face teams. (...) Transformational leaders motivate others by engaging their intrinsic interests (e.g., being associated with a particular cause) as opposed to engaging their extrinsic interests (e.g., salary or pay).”

But still.
 

Bas de Baar is a writer who draws about people in transition. He loves to make visual maps and travel guides for the collaborators of our brave new world.

In the winter, when snow and ice would block roads in some remote places of the country, the postmen would not bring the mail there. They couldn't get there by bike, car or truck. The truck drivers from the newspaper would take the mail with them. They would go to the most remote place, whatever the weather conditions. The newspaper would be delivered always and everywhere. No matter what.

I love this story. So much better than: "We have a culture dedicated to 100% guaranteed deliveries being resilient towards disturbances caused by external conditions."

But. When it comes to messing around with culture, some turn into a mix between Michael Jackson and Freddy Mercury.

"We are the best. We are the world. We are the children. We are the champions."

Ah. The verbal diarrhea fest called "Name That Shared Value".

Stories beat statements 100% of the times.

In an organization during the late seventies the unions blocked two exists between buildings disrupting production. The company created a tunnel (for real!) so it could never be blocked again.

Bam. Folklore!

Folklore is important. If people want to be part of a culture, if they are comfortable in it, if they want to be associated with it, if they are proud to be a member, it's because there is a connect between the culture and their identity.

I am not talking about changing a culture. I am referring to having a connect between you and your organization. Culture wise. Connecting to the cues, the visible elements of the culture, and reflecting on how your relationship is with them.

The story about the trucks in the winter delivering also mail, reflects balls, guts, men with beards driving through the blizzard the make sure you get the letter from your grandma. Do you connect to that?

You can actually ask people this. What do you make of this story?

You can also ask how people feel about "100% guaranteed deliveries being resilient towards disturbances caused by external conditions"?

Does that rock your boat? Do you get all warm and fuzzy thinking about "100% guaranteed"?

Luckily some people get the fact that you can't dictate a culture. Even yelling doesn't work. Dammit.

Culture is something that people connect with or disconnect with. Opt-in or opt-out.

They make their decisions based upon the cues that the culture provides. Habits. Rituals. Stories. And if the stories are boring, hard to remember and actually not stories, it will not stick and it will not spread.

Some even resolve to having words starting with the same letter. The 3 O's. Oblivious. Obstipation. Osmotic.

If you tell a story of three words and you have to make it easy for your employees to remember those three words … Incredible. Insane. Insulting.

So. Before you are going to define your culture, change it, mess with it and dance with it, let people connect with the stuff you have now.
 

Bas de Baar is a writer who draws about people in transition. He loves to make visual maps and travel guides for the collaborators of our brave new world.