Guessing is not a strategy: How to build decision velocity with AI and real-time data
June 10, 2026 | Live Webinar
Navigating Complexity
Categories:
Complexity
Categories: Complexity
| Complexity is ever-present, and while it means different things to different organizations, some common traits do emerge. Nearly three of five respondents reported multiple stakeholders as complexity's defining characteristic in PMI's Pulse of the Professionâ„¢ In-Depth Report: Navigating Complexity. Ambiguity came in at a close second, with nearly half of organizations reporting it as a key trait of complexity. But as complexity takes on many forms, so do the ways to harness it. The Pulse complexity report revealed that among high-performing organizations -- those that complete 80 percent or more projects on time, on budget and within goals -- effective communications to all stakeholders had the most impact on projects with high complexity. SA Water is a prime example of how rock-solid communications can pay big dividends. When the 2013 PMI Project of the Year Award finalist launched an AU$1.4 billion project to build a desalination plant in the middle of a global economic meltdown, it faced a tough sell. So the Australian government agency identified key stakeholders -- which included everyone from business leaders to aboriginal elders -- and then tailored communications to each audience to gain buy-in. And when the severe drought -- the very reason for the project's existence -- ended, the agency built on the trust it had forged to showcase the continued value of the investment to a skeptical public. The team highlighted project facts on a dedicated website, held public meetings and met with community business groups. Drought or not, stakeholders are well aware of the project's ROI: long-term water security. But effective communications is just one way to wrangle complexity. According to the Pulse complexity report, an engaged project sponsor is a powerful ally for highly complex projects and programs. When Savannah River Nuclear Solutions, another 2013 PMI Project of the Year Award finalist, began its project to clean up aging stockpiles of nuclear waste, the details were still ambiguous. Before the team could get to work, it had to figure out what "clean" actually meant. To hammer out a definition, and thus a project scope, the team collaborated with the project sponsor, the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE), a PMI Global Executive Council member. The agency also relayed project progress to the U.S. government, which funded the project through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. In the end, the DoE's ongoing participation in the project pushed it toward the finish line -- under budget and more than four years ahead of schedule. Complexity is no doubt difficult to define and control. But according to the Pulse complexity report, a project with high complexity has an average budget double that of a project with no complexity -- putting that much more money on the line. And no organization can afford that kind of risk. For more on how to turn complexity into dexterity, read PMI's Pulse of the Professionâ„¢ In-Depth Report: Navigating Complexity. |
Taking Competitive Advantage of External Change
Categories:
Change Management
Categories: Change Management
|
In recent posts, I've discussed how project managers can become agents of change, and how managing change can drive their organization's business goals. In this post, I'll focus on the external events that can affect business -- and how project practitioners can help their organizations derive value from these changes.
Over the years, I have witnessed organizations incorporate external forces, such as fluctuating market conditions or the advent of new technology, into their business planning process to much success.
A few years ago, I was part of a project team that helped harness external change. I was employed at an organization at the top of its industry, but one that was also facing shifting customer demands across its portfolio of products. The organization had to consider how to meet the demand changes, increase revenue and address the variability of the business plans.
The organization defined a new strategy that would allow us to weather economic headwinds, advance our value creation by integrating new products and services, and increase shareholder value. That strategy relied heavily on investing in a multi-year journey to execute mergers and acquisitions. And to succeed in this strategy, we needed to adapt internally to incorporate newly acquired companies into our operations.
That led to the creation of a Mergers and Acquisitions (M&A) integration team, and I was invited to participate in building up this capability. Management selected a core project team that included high performers, particularly those who demonstrated strong IT skills and solid project management experience.
Right from the beginning, our core project team focused on setting clear goals, based on how we would provide benefits to our organization's customers -- and shift the market demands back to our favor. We drove several goals-setting sessions to establish a project timeline and identify opportunities for synergy savings (syncing expenditures to reduce administrative costs).
Then, we selected the rest of the M&A integration team members -- mostly various subject matter experts and business analysts who were well versed in project and change management. This helped us deliver multibillion-dollar integration on time and closely aligned to strategy. We were able to do so because of our team members' clear roles and expertise, but particularly because of these standout team characteristics:
Over the next three years, this same project team was called upon to develop knowledge and competence in the area of internal change. My organization dedicated a small M&A office to develop integration tools and codify our knowledge. We were even asked to continue to work together to build on the initial strategic goal: to help the company maintain its leadership position in the industry. That required us to support post-merger integrations by leading work streams and mentoring junior teams. Our competence increased in managing people across matrix teams, and the use of change management prepared us to lead and sustain other major initiatives of the organization.
How do you identify external change and help turn it to your organization's advantage? For more on change management, download PMI's Managing Change in Organizations: A Practice Guide, currently available for free download for a limited time only. Explore PMI's Change Management Resources.
|
Embedding Portfolio Management Through Effective Communications
| Despite uncertainties in today's economic environment, organizations remain under pressure to successfully execute business strategies. These challenging conditions demand that organizations innovate and gain an advantage through projects. Yet launching a bunch of projects won't save the day. We need solid portfolio management to enable that competitive edge. It's not just about software, methodology and frameworks, after all. To perform well, portfolio management requires a cultural change and solid communications within an organization. And yet, we still suffer due to poor communications. Many companies, for instance, invest significant effort and capital on projects and programs that do not directly align with corporate objectives because those goals are poorly communicated. Meanwhile, others struggle to balance risk and fail to seize opportunities because of ineffective communications that do not support informed decision-making. For example, I worked on a project of high complexity that had huge technical challenges. These challenges could have been better addressed if there had been more communication among different research teams in our organization. The payoff to investing in project communications can be substantial, as many studies -- such as a recent one from PMI -- point out. Companies that excel at portfolio management are able to complete projects on time and under budget, increasing ROI and other benefits. But how do we consistently communicate the portfolio management strategy, policies, governance and benefits throughout the organization?
I'm a firm believer that the role of communications is to ensure that portfolio management is embedded in the corporate culture. What do you think is the role of communications in a portfolio? |
Agile, to Scale
Categories:
Agile
Categories: Agile
| As agile matures, it's being employed at the program level by larger teams, many of which are broken down into groups. How must agile evolve to match these growing needs? In this first of two posts, we will look at some of the key objectives of the agile approaches designed for large-scale projects. Scott Ambler's Disciplined Agile Delivery and Dean Leffingwell's Scaled Agile Framework are two such approaches. These in particular reevaluate some concepts from the IBM Rational Unified Process framework. Among the most useful concepts shared by all three is the opportunity for teams to balance upfront planning needs while preserving agile's ability to refine the plan based on empirical observation of real results. All also speak more to what architectural underpinnings are necessary to give larger teams a firm foundation:
In larger teams, agile approaches -- such as the feedback afforded by iterations in Scrum -- remain popular, as do the technical practices centered around quality. Lean principles used by smaller agile teams remain important to reduce wait time, optimize the entire system and balance flow among teams. But the frameworks mentioned above also add a fourth dimension: synchronized relationships among agile teams. In particular, aligning teams so their sprints end at the same time is useful, because it facilitates the release of the product. So what's different for large teams trying to use agile methods? First, overall investment governance becomes all the more important. Larger projects require more preparation to justify the greater levels of funding. They also may have more complicated dependencies among teams. Organizations will need to find a way to allocate effort between work in their portfolio of projects. This includes not only features, but also infrastructure work and nonfunctional requirements. And organizations should also use investment gate models to ensure funds are invested wisely. Second, technical architecture is also very important. In smaller agile teams, people may experiment first and then evolve guidelines and patterns. But in larger teams, overall design and architecture plays a leading role so as to better coordinate among teams. System teams, or people who work on supporting teams creating features, also become important as the demand for a shared infrastructure increases. Finally, metrics quickly become important. New metrics -- designed specifically for larger teams -- provide a holistic view of the overall health of the large team, and also help gather and assemble data for the smaller groups within. This allows organizational leaders to see, at a glance, where the overall program stands, so they can make broad project decisions with wide impact. These general principles guide many methods to scale agile from teams of seven to 100 members. In my next post, we will look at some specific practices to enable large teams to find the benefits of agile. What do you think are the fundamental principles of scaling agile? |
Cultural Lessons from a Controversial Comedian
| Recently, I re-watched Borat during a long holiday weekend. Though it's a comedy, I think there are important lessons to be learned from its essence, which is an exploration of behavior: how a foreigner's actions — the norm in his or her culture — may seem offensive to another country's native population. In the film, Borat, a fictional journalist from Kazakhstan, travels to the U.S. and makes interviewees uncomfortable with his behavior. You may have had a similar experience when you started working in a multicultural project environment. The film showed several examples of issues project managers may have experienced in such an environment. From those, I have noticed the following two cause the most discomfort among project team members: Proxemics U.S. anthropologist Edward T. Hall invented this term to refer to our personal space. Depending on an individual's culture, the amount of acceptable space around a person varies according to subtle rules. In the film, Borat gives a great demonstration of invasion of personal space. He starts greeting New Yorkers on the street with a handshake and a kiss on each cheek. Most of the people react adversely. Some even threaten him. Team members in a multicultural project environment may experience similar aversion, particularly during the forming stage. I remember during a kickoff meeting in Argentina with team members from Argentina, Uruguay and the U.S., the Argentine host introduced himself with a handshake and a kiss on the cheek. He started with the Uruguayans, who have a similar greeting. When the host got to the first U.S. team member, he stepped back, extended his arm as far as he could and said, "A handshake is OK for me." In situations like this, warn your team members beforehand that there might be cultural differences, and urge them to be upfront with their preferences while respecting others' norms. Stereotyping In my experience, stereotyping is the main source of conflicts in a multicultural project environment. In the film, Borat stops at a rodeo dressed as a cowboy to interview a rodeo owner. Because Borat has a large mustache, the owner assumes he's from the Middle East. The owner recommends Borat shave his mustache so he can look "more Italian," which may help him fit in better. If not managed well, stereotyping may become a barrier and impact the project work. I recently witnessed this during a project that included implementations in Latin America. One of my European colleagues was very vocal about the stereotyped unpunctuality of Latin Americans, recommending strict controls be placed to avoid any schedule slip. I had a private discussion with him to find the source of his concern. It turned out that he had not had previous experience working with a Latin American team, and he was operating on a stereotype. I asked him to give the team members a chance to prove themselves before he set any controls. In the end, his perceptions were unfounded — the team members worked as expected and met schedule requirements without the need for controls. As projects become more global, project managers need to understand cultural complexities that lie below surface behaviors. I would advise using a holistic approach to find out more about people's cultural values and beliefs. Have you learned cultural lessons to apply on your project team from unconventional sources? |