Guessing is not a strategy: How to build decision velocity with AI and real-time data
June 10, 2026 | Live Webinar
Viewing Posts by Lynda Bourne
Project Management in Action at the Shanghai World Expo
Categories:
Innovation
Categories: Innovation
| There's big -- and then there's mind-blowingly big! Everything about the World Expo 2010 in Shanghai, China defies easy definition. Covering a total area of 5.28 square kilometers (2.04 square miles), the site is divided into five zones spread along both sides of the Huangpu River in downtown Shanghai. The CNY18 billion extravaganza includes gardens, wetlands, paved walkways and hundreds of buildings. The expo is not only a triumph for project managers from the Shanghai region and the Chinese construction industry, but also from all of the nations that built and fitted out their pavilions. The design, construction and management of the Shanghai 2010 World Expo projects went beyond the traditional iron triangle of "time, cost and quality" to include sustainability and safety. The projects represented a true integration of Western and Eastern cultures, demonstrating project management as a truly global profession crossing all sectors. There are more than 200 countries and international organizations represented, ranging from Tuvalu to the United States; the World Bank to the International Council of Museums, as well as numerous corporations and Chinese provinces. In one long day, I only managed to see a small section of the total experience, but could start to appreciate the overarching purpose of this great festival. The remarkable British Pavilion's "dandelion" is made up of 60,686 acrylic rods, each 7.5 meters (25 feet) long, to allow light into the inside of a 20-meter (66-foot) cube. Embedded in the end of each rod are one to 10 seeds representing Chinese plant species growing in the United Kingdom. Project managed by Mace Construction Group, the remarkable "seed cathedral," is already winning awards. In the two months since opening, the Expo has hosted more than 25 million visitors. And organizers expect 70 million will get a glimpse of the urban vision before the Expo closes in October. My visit was a once-in-a-lifetime experience to see project management on such on a grand and global scale. If you can't make the trip personally, you can be a virtual tourist online at http://en.expo.cn/. It's well-worth the visit. |
How Much Proofreading Is Too Much?
| In March I introduced you to Sebastian, a highly competent, upwardly mobile executive who happens to be your boss. A very detailed person, Sebastian works from 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. That post sparked quite a discussion and prompted some ideas for building a relationship with him. Now it's time to put these skills to use! This time around, we're focusing on Sebastian's habit of proofreading. While it's a fact some people can see mistakes in documents that others just miss, his copious corrections are starting to cause issues. Sebastian can and does act strategically. But his habit of correcting everything is causing the project managers and project management office staff in his division to spend an excessive amount of time focusing on the documents' presentation (style, font, grammar, spelling) to the detriment of the more important issues of content and strategy. How do you advise him that his ability to see and correct minor errors might be counterproductive? And what is an acceptable standard for internal project documentation? Post your comments and ideas, and we'll review and consolidate the answers in a few weeks. |
Developing Swift Trust
| My last post posed the question, How do you manage trust with a new team? Some suggested taking a cautious approach to building respect and rapport. Others addressed the long-term nature of trust developed in a traditional framework. These are valid, but there's a different form of trust that can also be highly beneficial to project teams: swift trust. Swift trust occurs when a diverse group of experts are brought together in a temporary organization such as a virtual team created for an urgent project. It's especially prevalent when the team is required to deliver a result that requires interdependent working and there are significant external pressures. The team has to work out their differences on the fly and "blindly" trust one another to do their jobs simply because there is no alternative. In these circumstances, team members tend to exhibit behaviors that presuppose trust. Each person knows they're trustworthy and assumes they can trust the others. Therefore, the team simply acts as if trust is present even though there has been no opportunity to develop the more traditional forms of trust. This is swift trust, and although it can be a powerful force, it is also fragile and easily broken. Activity contributing to the team's common goal, professional behavior and an effective team leader allow swift trust to develop. But it will only last as long as everyone behaves in a trustworthy way. One aspect of developing swift trust is the presence of recognized expertise. We tend to trust modern medicine and therefore tend to trust doctors. Very few people when rushed into hospital in an emergency want to check the credentials and track record of the doctors working to save their life. They trust the hospital to provide competent doctors to help solve their problem. Another aspect is a clearly defined objective and clearly defined roles and responsibilities. The key to developing swift trust is interdependent work focused on a common objective. Each member of the team needs the other's particular expertise for the team as a whole to be successful. Swift trust is not a random occurrence. By understanding the criteria that encourage its development, a manager can create a favorable environment. Then the act of trusting tends to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. By trusting others we encourage both trustworthy behaviors and engender trust in return. However, as with traditional trust, swift trust can easily be destroyed by untrustworthy behavior. It needs nurturing and support. The concept of swift trust is not new. There have been papers and books on the subject for at least a decade. But making pragmatic use of the concept on project teams has not been widespread. If you've been involved in a temporary team under pressure, did you notice swift trust between you and your colleagues, or was it missing altogether? Please share your experiences to help build a better understanding of this interesting phenomenon. |
The Value of Trust
Categories:
Teams
Categories: Teams
| Trust is a fascinating element of business and relationships. Where trust exists, all that's needed to manage most work is a brief conversation to ensure understanding and a handshake -- real or virtual. It's lack of trust that leads to the constant measuring and checking of performance, writing complex and detailed contracts, and meeting with people. Trust speeds everything up and lowers transaction costs. As the level of trust goes down, the speed of doing business goes down, costs go up and relationships and communications are largely ineffective to the point everything has to be proved or validated. Interestingly, it would appear trust is not a fundamental element of a relationship. Relationships can work with remarkably low levels of trust, as long as both people have a common objective, and at the beginning of any new relationship there is little to base trust upon. Within both personal and business relationships, trust tends to build as the overall relationship is established. It is built over time and is based on your observation of the other person's actions within the relationship. The effectiveness of the relationship progressively improving as trust between the two people builds. According to Stephen Covey, PhD, author of The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People, trust is built on three behaviours: - Transparency: Tell the truth in ways people can verify and validate for themselves. - Keeping commitments: Do what you say you will do. - Trusting others: Extend trust to your team and they will trust you in return. Trust that has taken years to build can be destroyed in minutes and rebuilding trust is far harder once it has been lost. The first challenge facing project teams and their stakeholders is to identify a pragmatic level of trust that will allow the work of the project to proceed effectively but to also have sufficient checks and balances in place to insure against untrustworthy behaviours. The second challenge is to create trust quickly enough to allow the teams to function in the early stages of a project. This is particularly true for virtual teams. How do you manage trust with a new team of people you don't know well and may never meet? Post your advice and I will combine them with a few of my suggestions in my next post. |
Hey Boss: The Conclusion
| The more than 40 comments on my last post Hey Boss, What About Work-Life Balance? provide an interesting mix of views. Here are my thoughts on how to work effectively and build a relationship with someone like "Sebastian." This input comes from a position of advantage since I knew the real person. The first key to building any effective relationship is to avoid stereotyping. Sebastian was a very effective, upwardly mobile manager with a focus on being promoted to the main board. Interestingly, most people liked him as well as respected him. It's just that he had a different life focus, which is not uncommon in successful senior executives. The second key is to recognize that in every relationship there is a power dimension. How a manager like Sebastian would use his power is to an extent a generational issue. Many younger managers would see nothing wrong in you setting reasonable boundaries and procedures, as long as they understand their purpose. Managers with more experience are used to operating in a command and control environment are likely to react negatively to a "junior" pushing rules upwards. The third key is mutuality. Team members need to understand what he or she needs from the relationship (support, resources, backing) but also what Sebastian needs from the relationship. Then, work to negotiate mutually beneficial outcomes that meet both sets of requirements. For the team member discussed in the post, the requirement was time-related; Sebastian's requirements were not defined in the original post. However, by defining what's important to Sebastian, then linking your requirements to the achievement of his requirements, you can start to achieve real communication inside an effective relationship. Finally if you wish to be taken seriously, you need to develop a reputation for credibility. Senior management needs to recognize that if you say something, it is backed up by facts, and if you commit to something, it is delivered. Credibility is earned by performance, but there is no harm in quietly making sure your performance is noticed in the right places. In the end, relationships all depend on the situation. But mutuality and credibility are the two keys to advising upwards. If you are seen as a serious contributor to the organization's success and can link your needs to the needs of senior management, there's a high probability of achieving your desired outcome and benefiting the organization at the same time. |