Voices on Project Management

by Cyndee Miller

Sweet home Chicago — the birthplace of deep-dish pizza, Ferris wheels (and Ferris Bueller), brownies, Chance the Rapper and yours truly.

This is a city driven by innovation.

Not to brag, but we’ve pretty much cornered the market on mind-blowingly awesome construction projects, with the skyscraper as our specialty. We may no longer be able to claim the world’s tallest, but we’ll always be home to the world’s first. Construction isn’t the only game in town, of course. In September, mega consultancy KPMG named Chicago one of the top 10 tech innovation hubs in the world. Take that, Silicon Valley.

And now, PMI^® Global Conference is here for a visit, with Sir Tim Berners-Lee as the opening keynoter, no less.

As the father of the world wide web, Sir Berners-Lee has serious cred talking about innovation. Over the years, I’ve heard my fair share of hooey about fostering creativity. I appreciated his stance, which basically comes down to letting people do their thing: “When you see a twinkle in somebody’s eyes, that’s when it’s time to give them some space.”

When he first started talking about his nebulous project called the world wide web, for example, his boss called it “vague, but exciting.” Then he had the good sense to get out of the way.

Still, Sir Berners-Lee said he was constantly working to keep the spark alive. He needed to nurture that flame to get to the next phase: the critical collaboration necessary for the nascent project to take off.

“How do you take the creative energy between these different companies trying to produce the best browser and get them to produce the best HTML so there is just one web, just one HTTP,” he said.

For project managers, it’s about getting people to put aside their way of doing things, collaborate on the common goal and build consensus. “By the time you’ve mixed your ideas with other people’s ideas, you’ll end up with a better product,” said Sir Berners-Lee.

With any major innovation, the people driving the effort usually go in with a really strong idea about the world they want to make, the problem they want to solve. But there are inevitably unexpected consequences once an idea makes its way into the real world, said Sir Berners-Lee.

Take Twitter. Given that Sir Berners-Lee built the internet, he also built Twitter — and the angry tweet. “We used to think just good things would happen,” he said. “Give the world a liberal dose of communication and give them a medium that knows no nation and surely there will be world peace.”

Alas, we all know that’s not quite how it worked out.

“Project managers must think about: If everyone ended up using [a given project], what would be the affect on humanity?” he said.

As innovation continues to ramp up — and project managers begin to step up as agents of change — it’s a powerful and necessary question.

by Lynda Bourne

A person’s attitude is derived from their perceptions of a person or situation. In the project context, it is often the stakeholder’s perception of your project and how its outcomes will affect the stakeholder’s interests.

Fortunately, perceptions — and therefore attitudes — are negotiable and can be changed by effective communication.

In my research, I’ve found two key dimensions to attitudes: 

1. How supportive or opposed the stakeholder is toward the project. 
2. How receptive the stakeholder is to communication from the project team. While receptiveness may seem less important, you can’t change a stakeholder’s level of support if they refuse to communicate with you.

Levels of Support

Support can range from active opposition to active support. The project team needs to understand the stakeholder’s current level of support and then determine what is a realistic optimum level to facilitate the project’s success.

However, what represents a realistic optimum level varies. For example, environmental activists can never be realistically expected to support a new road through a wilderness area. In this circumstance the realistic optimum may be passive opposition as opposed to active opposition. On the other hand, your project sponsor should be an active supporter.

Creating Open Communication

The key to achieving either of these objectives — and support in general — is open communication. If the stakeholder is unwilling to communicate (either because they don’t like you or they are just too busy), you need to devise ways to open channels.

This may involve using other stakeholders in the network, using someone else on your team as the messenger, changing the way you communicate or just plain persistence.

If you can’t gain credibility — one of the key factors within your control that will influence the effectiveness of your communication — with a particular person because of their perceptions of you or your project, make sure you find a credible messenger to carry your communication.

Communication is a two-way process. Only after communication channels are open can you start to listen to the other person and understand their needs, concerns or ambitions. Once these are known, you are then in a position to either explain how the current project meets those needs or consider risk mitigation strategies to modify the project to reduce issues and enhance opportunities.

Communicating for Effect

The whole point of stakeholder management is to optimize the overall attitude of the stakeholder community to allow the project to succeed.

This requires:

• A focus on the important people at the current point in time.
• Understanding and managing their issues.
• Communicating to achieve the desired changes in attitude — communicating for effect!

Communicating for effect means focusing your communication efforts where the need is greatest:

• If people are at or above the optimum target attitudes, the purpose of your communication is to maintain the status quo.
• If less important stakeholders are below your desired optimum, you devote as much effort as can be spared from your limited resources.
• Important stakeholders who are below optimum need heroic communication efforts to change the situation and maximize the project’s chance of succeeding.

Remember, a very significant proportion of the risks around most projects are people-based. The only way to identify, manage and/or mitigate these risks is by effective two-way communication designed to effect changes in attitude.

How do you focus your communication effort for maximum effect?

by Ramiro Rodrigues

Project managers: Are you sometimes looking to make plans faster but without being superficial and therefore riskier to the project?

Developed in the 1980s, design thinking is a structured mental model that seeks the identification of innovative solutions to complex problems. Although the concept has existed for decades, it’s only made its presence known in the corporate environment over the last 10 years.

Swiss business theorist and author Alexander Osterwalder similarly sought to accelerate collaborative reasoning when he introduced the Business Model Canvas. Canvas helps organizations map, discuss, rework and innovate their business model in one image.

But a series of proposals for the use of the Business Model Canvas for various purposes outside of business models has also appeared — including innovation, corporate education, product development, marketing and more.

For project professionals looking at alternatives to developing quicker and more collaborative planning, Canvas may sound like a great option. Of all the proposals that come up for the use of Canvas in a project environment, integrating stakeholders may be the best. Canvas brings stakeholders into the process and will help to minimize resistance and increase collaboration, resulting in a better proposal for planning problems and making the project more aligned to the interests of organizations.

But while the arguments put forward for Canvas all seem positive, there is still a dilemma: Can Canvas fully replace the overall project plan and the planning process? Is it possible to do without a schedule of activities, a detailed cash flow, a matrix of analyzed risks — just to limit ourselves to a few examples?

That is probably too extreme.

The general sense is that the integration of Canvas with specific planning — such as the cost plan and the risk plan — is the most productive and generates the best results.

It may be worth asking your project management office for their thoughts.

Have you ever used a Canvas for your project planning efforts? If so, what tips can you share?

By Wanda Curlee 

There are two triangles commonly referenced in the project management discipline: The Iron Triangle (sometimes called the Golden Triangle) and PMI’s Talent Triangle^®. Each provides insight into the complexity of even the simplest project.  

However, I think there is a big component missing: the human psyche. Let’s look at both triangles. 

The Iron Triangle

The Iron Triangle has many versions that have been enhanced by subject matter experts to help define how to manage a project. On the triangle’s sides, you’ll find time, cost and resources. Quality and/or scope, which was added later, can be found in the middle of the triangle. 

My preference is to put time at the bottom part of the triangle as it is constant. When time has passed, it’s gone for good (until time travel is invented). All other sides and the interior of the triangle change and often do.  

Some would say the scope is constant because there is a statement of work that defines the scope. A good theoretical basis, but reality normally prevails. For instance, out of ignorance, incompetence or “doing a favor”, the scope can change. It may also change because of a customer or vendor request. All these changes affect the other axis and interior of the triangle. However, your time is gone no matter how the scope changes. Quality may go up or down depending on scope, resources and time.  

The Talent Triangle

PMI’s Talent Triangle acknowledges that the project professional must have soft and hard skills. These skills include leadership, a technical knowledge and an understanding of the strategic and business alignment of the project, program and portfolio—while also ensuring that projects stay within the Golden Triangle. 

Understanding the industry helps project professionals realize the importance of the endeavor for the company. Finally, understanding the politics and strategic fit of the project or program is a must. If the project or program manager cannot articulate how the effort drives the company’s strategic objective, it might be time to move to a different project or maybe find a new profession. 

The Human Psyche

While these two triangles are good, they don’t incorporate the missing link—the human psyche.  

We need to understand how to drive the project team to make sure no sides of the triangle fail. What does this mean? If one side of the Iron Triangle falls short or goes long then the triangle fails. The same could be said for the Talent Triangle. 

Three inherent manners can help: integrated reasoning, strategic focus and creative thinking. I want to look at integrated reasoning.

According to neuroscience, there are three ways a person thinks. He or she can be a rock star, coach/playmaker or rainmaker.  

The rock star is the junior to the experienced project manager and is normally focused on one or two tasks. Think budget timelines, schedules and risk management, among other things.

The coach/playmaker is the senior project manager and junior to the experienced program manager. These individuals see the forest. The coach knows how to lead to the final goal.  

Finally, there’s the rainmaker. These are the senior program managers, portfolio managers and C-suiters. They can see years into the future. The rainmakers know how to decide which projects and programs make sense for the strategic objectives. They see success.  

Why is this important? It leads to integrated reasoning. Project and program managers should recognize where members of their team fall on the spectrum. He or she then needs to encourage and provide the opportunity to jump into a new reality so they can be more effective on all sides of the triangle.  

For example, I am very comfortable in the rainmaker role. However, I force myself into the coach and rock star role. This allows me to see the organization, strategy and people from many angles, which increases my political rationality.

So, what is the political reality of your project or program? Does your reality agree with that of the sponsor? How about the project management office or portfolio manager? If you do not understand your political rationality from all angles you will fail yourself, your team and the triangle. 

Stay tuned for the next post in which I will put integrated reasoning into reality to help drive the strategic focus of your project or program. 

By Marian Haus, PMP

Throughout any given initiative, project managers must deal with issues that are sure to arise. Some are solvable within the project organization, with or without the project manager’s influence. Others however — especially those that could affect the outcome of a project — go beyond a project manager’s range of influence and authority.

Such major issues and risks can lead to escalations, which require special handling and management.

Various project management guidelines and specialized literature insufficiently cover the escalation management domain.

Escalation means trouble — so it’s a word very few people want to hear about. It also means that a higher authority will need to be called up to take action before it is too late.

When necessary, and if done in a timely and appropriate manner, escalation management can help a project manager solve issues outside of their authority or influence.

Here are some tips and tricks for project managers to better deal with escalations.

1. Be Prepared

From the project outset, define a clear escalation path and mechanism. For instance, establish an escalation committee (e.g., your sponsors or upper management board) and agree on escalating major issues when necessary and bypassing certain hierarchy levels in order to escalate faster.

Don’t overdo it! You should not escalate every encountered issue—only escalate major issues that have considerable impacts.

2. Assess and Qualify the Risk

Is it serious enough to escalate? Is there anything else you can do to avoid an escalation? Is it the right time to escalate?

Certainly, in order to be effective, the escalation should be raised in a timely manner. Therefore, neither should you exaggerate with going through an elaborated risk assessment, nor should you wait too long until raising the escalation (e.g., do not wait until the next reporting period is due).

3. Communicate the Escalation

After you’ve done everything you could have to prevent the escalation (you raised awareness, you communicated, you have pushed and pulled), it is time to escalate!

To escalate effectively and efficiently, first keep a calm and clear head. Then, follow these tips:

• Escalate via the channel that is most appropriate for your project context. Ideally, the escalation should be communicated in a face-to-face meeting or call. Emails can be the most ineffective escalation tools, because they can delay the resolution if the emails are not handled in a timely manner. Emails also can lead to misunderstandings if the context is not well understood. Additionally, they can lead to a deadlock if sent to multiple and unnecessary individuals or when it is unclear who the targeted person is for taking action. In short: Avoid escalations via email.
• Avoid getting personal and refrain from finger pointing. Focus on the issue at hand. This should be communicated and addressed objectively.
• Explain the major issue and its implications. Keep it short and simple, so that everyone requested to help you can understand.
• Explain what you did to avoid the issue and escalation. Again, keep it short. Otherwise, you will end up in endless apologies.
• If possible, make a proposal with two or three resolution options. Explain their potential effect on the issue at hand and ideally make a recommendation on which options to go for.

4. Follow Up

Generally, every escalation requires some resolution time for when the project manager and the project team will implement the decisions agreed upon by the escalation board.

You will need to regularly inform your escalation committee with status and progress updates until the risk and problem are completely resolved. And, after getting back on track, you should conduct a lessons-learned exercise with your project team to learn and grow from the encountered crisis situation.

Would you agree? How are you managing escalations in your projects?