People, Planet, Profits & Projects

Once in a while on this blog, we focus simply on projects which are what we call “Green By Definition”.  This means the project’s charter of the project and its main outcome is focused social or ecological bottom lines – even though, as in this case, it could be very much a profit-driven effort as well.

We recently encountered an example in PMI’s PM Network magazine (March 2016, Page 10, “Underwater Energy”) which we’d also like to share with you, drawing also from other resources which give more background this project.

To get started, I want you to make a strange visual image in your head: a balloon and a battery… balloon on the left, battery on the right.  Now, put them in motion – slowly.  Move them closer and closer to each other… that’s right… and let them merge to become one.  Excellent job!

Imagine an un-inflated balloon.  Now bring that balloon under water, perhaps deep under water, and inflate it.  Would you agree that the balloon is storing air?  And you’d agree that the water pressure would help deflate the balloon, right?  Sure.  Now imagine that the balloon can be deflated under control, rotating the blades of a turbine, which in turn produces electricity.  Would you agree that now the balloon is storing energy?  Sure.  So balloon = battery.  It can be charged (inflated), and it can be discharged (deflated) to convert one type of energy to another.  In the case of the battery it is a chemical to electrical conversion – here it is air-flow to electrical.

Is this loony?  Not at all, as it turns out.

In the PM Network article, we learn that the project is sponsored by a company called Hydrostor.  A visit to their website is informative, as you can learn about their ‘golden thread’ from mission and vision to the operation of their project’s product. The business case for such a system (what would make us put giant balloons under Lake Ontario?) is the fact that the promise of wind and solar energy is somewhat deflated (excuse the pun) by possible dips in availability of those sources, since they are dependent on nature.  This “rounds out the curve” and becomes an enabler for wind and solar by providing storage when those sources are not producing the needed power.

So, with a business case, a charter, and a dedicated sponsor, the project was launched in November 2015 and is aimed at reducing Toronto’s reliance on fossil fuels.

In this article from the Financial Post, we learn that the project is well into execution.  Near the shore of Lake Ontario, 30-centimetre steel pipes already extend deep underground before jutting out into the Lake, traversing over 4 kM.   We share a key figure from this article below, and highly recommend that you have a look at the full article.  In it, we learn that already, new contracts are being signed by Hydrostor, including one in which Hydrostor will build a plant in Aruba: it will construct a 10-MWt facility on the small Caribbean island of Aruba to help round out the potential power dips of a 30-megawatt wind farm there.  Here's a really cool video on the whole concept (click here or on the image to watch this 6-minute video).

The full story is here.
 

Here is the promised diagrammatic explanation:

If you want to go to the original article in PM Network that triggered our interest, you can go to PMI directly on these two links:

http://www.pmi.org/Learning/pm-network.aspx

http://www.pmi.org/learning/Publications-Online-Library/PM-Network-Past-Issues.aspx

The Ballooning Bottom Line

Here we see the relationship between project management and sustainability in a very direct way.  We know it’s not always that direct and that’s why we’ll continue to write about the more subtle connections, such as planning for the long-term success and ecological and social aspects of any project.  But in the meantime, let’s not burst your bubble – enjoy the story of how a balloon becomes a battery and the projects that this has yielded.

Continuing our look at the top ten PM trends from our last post, we look at Trend 7, The Significance of Programme and Portfolio Management.

Here’s what the Trends (see part 1 - this is from TwentyEighty's recent Top Ten Trends of Project Management 2016) have to say:

“With the increased focus on bridging the gap between strategy and execution, portfolio and programme management are emerging as key components in making that happen. What does this mean for project managers?”

Understanding how various projects affect others while maintaining a strategic perspective requires PMs to be able to focus on the details as well as step back to a more strategic, multi-project viewpoint.

And our take:

This is an important trend, but in our opinion, could use a little more focus.  We’ve written about this in both of our books, and even feature it I the title of the second, “Driving Success in Project, Program, ad Portfolio Management”.   Rather than repeating sections of that book here, we want to highlight some key points:

• Most companies have embraced the triple bottom line (social, ecological, and economic) for measuring success, and these have found their way into the mission, vision, and value statements of these companies
• Projects, programs, and portfolios are the key connection point between the high-level ‘ideation’ of the organization, and the day-to-day operations.In other words, projects are the ways in which ideas become reality
• As we know, PMI’s ‘hierarchy’ is from Portfolios (closest to the ‘Mission’ level) to Programs, to Projects
• Combining the first three bullets, since we project managers are the connection point to mission statements which increasingly call for sustainable thinking, it should follow that we need to consider sustainability concepts in the planning of our projects and in the products they deliver.

So what is the bending of the trend that we recommend?

Take seriously what was said in the trend but also consider the sustainability angle.  Remember – think strategically, and assure that you can easily link your projects’ objectives to the mission, vision, and values of the company and in particular, consider how your projects’ objectives – often outcomes that are around for years, and/or are producing byproducts that may be around for years – are linked to strategic (and often very public) statements about social and environmental bottom lines that are made by your organizations’ leaders.

Today, four project practitioners who feel strongly about PM and Sustainability -  practitioners from Italy, Portugal and the USA -  are proudly launching The Manifesto for Sustainability in Projects. We urge you to read it, download it, support it, and share it with your teams and connections. They're our projects, it's our future. Let’s make it a sustainable one!

Click here to view the Manifesto...
http://pos.li/tWF

Two influential companies in PM have come together – IPS Learning and ESI International, to form TwentyEighty.  They have issued their Top Ten Project Management Trends for 2016.  When these trends are released, we are always eager to see if the concepts of sustainability thinking make it into the list of trends, either directly and literally, or through a second-order connection.

This year, the trends were, unfortunately completely absent of the word sustainability.
However, the theme is there.  You just have to know where to look.  And we do.

Let’s have a look at a couple of the trends and how we connect the dots properly to align them with sustainability in project management.

Trend 2: Broadening Strategic Role of the Project Manager.  In this trend, the authors correctly assert that “PMs are being asked to think more strategically”.     They also say “they are evolving from project managers to profit managers”.   So far, it’s not about sustainability. They come so, so close to getting it right when they say, “Project management is no longer just about managing the triple constraints, but rather about reaching solutions faster and demonstrating strong, direct business impact.   We agree – PM is no longer (only) about the triple constraint, but the ‘other’, added constraints involve a triple bottom line (social, economic and ecological) not just a ‘business impact’.  Unless, of course, the ‘business impact’ to which they refer, itself already includes the holistic impact of the triple bottom line.  We assert that when it comes to thinking strategically, that means linking vision and mission to operations – and that in turn mandates a holistic style of thinking (and constraint identification as well as opportunity discovery) which considers the social and the environmental as well as the financial.  And this isn’t necessarily about whales, trees, and bees – when we say environment, we also include the local project environment – see my video about how the Big Dig project neglected the Boston environment of salt and snow, which could have cost lives but did cost $54M in repairs to light fixtures in the tunnels under the city.

In Trend 2, TwentyEighty goes on to say, “PMs are moving away from their historical position within the organization as a technical cost center and toward a more pivotal role charged with ensuring that project-based work aligns to, and helps achieve, the organization’s strategic intent.  Smart organizations are hiring, retaining, and training their PMs for the skills necessary to manage this evolving role”.  Well, yes, it is definitely about evolution of the PM, and we fully agree that the project manager is at the key pivot point between strategy and operations.  The piece they left out, however, is the “pivot”, the change agent role played by the PM can and should involve the significant move that companies have made in including social and ecological elements in their mission statements – the so-called Purpose element, as mentioned so eloquently in the book by that name (Purpose – The Starting Point of Great Companies) by Nikos Mourkogiannis).

We will continue to “bend the trends” – focusing them on long-term thinking, expanding them to cover triple-bottom-line considerations, enabling them to make all of us truly better project, program, and portfolio managers.

And, speaking of program and portfolios, in Part 2 of Bend the Trends, we will cover Trend 7 – The Significance of Portfolio and Program Management.
 

Long Haul Part 2

This is Part 2 of a two-part series which references PMI’s two major publications – PM Network magazine and The Project Management Journal.  In particular we focus on the two most recent editions of these magazines – the February 2016 PM Network and the February/March 2016 Project Management Journal.

The Long Haul, Part 2: Constructing Success

The PM Journal is not an easy read for most people.  Often, titles of the articles contain words like Orthogonal, Iterative, and Multiphase.  And (shudder) there is lots of math.  Lots and lots of it – including formulas, graphs and sweeping, intricate flowcharts, oh my.

In the most current edition is an article by Terry Williams, of Hull University Business School (UK) and this article not only is actually is quite readable, it’s quite valuable.  The abstract says in part:
Defining “project success” has been of interest for many years, and recent developments combine measurable and psychosocial factors that add to this definition.  There has also been research into success factors, but little research into the causal chains through which success emerges.  Following the multidimensionality of “success”, this article shows how success factors contributing to project performance by a company working on two major construction programs and shows how to map and analyze paths from root causes to success criteria…
As I read through the article, I hoped to find a reference to sustainability.  And sure enough – there it was.   Referring to the United States Agency for International Development and then the UN and OECD, they list project success in five dimensions: 

•    Efficiency
•    Effectiveness
•    Relevance
•    Impact
•    Sustainability

If the first two bullets remind you of Part 1 of this series – it should.  In fact you could combine the first two and the last one and arrive quite neatly at our 3E model (see Part 1).  In fact, the article even goes as far as to use the Scottish Parliament Building (pictured in this post) and the Sydney Opera House (which you should remember from Part 1) as examples!

Below we provide an actual extract from the referenced OECD manual on evaluation of projects and programs in which you can see a little more detail.

Williams goes on to reference work by Shenhar and Dvir from 2007 , using these words to describe some of the aspects of project success:

“A longer-term view is thus required: How the success of a project is viewed will often depend on the phase it is in, or how long it has been since the project was completed.  Some projects seen as successful or unsuccessful are seen quite differently in the longer term.”

So, what do you think?  After looking at these two short posts on “project success”, does this affect how you look at your own projects?  Does sustainability have a place in evaluating the project? What problems do you see in incorporating this type of thinking in your projects (and more importantly your programs and portfolios)?

We’d really like to hear from you – about the long term – in the short term.

References:

• Identifying Success Factors in Construction Projects, A Case Study , Terry Williams (PM Journal February/March 2016)
• Samset 2010 – Early Project Appraisal.  Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan
• Shenhar and Dvir (2007) – Shenhar, A. J., & Dvir, D. (2007).  Reinventing project management: The diamond approach to successful growth and innovation, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press