November 5, 2020, 8:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. EDT | November 6, 2020 – February 7, 2021, On-Demand | Online Conference
Please login or join to subscribe to this thread
All of you, nice conversations. I like it!
I understand that the Program Manager might be worry about his position "today" but lies don't pay
As a PM, sharing the bad news as early as possible so that damage can be minimized.
To me, transparency requires candor.
Candor In The Project Management Workplace: Good News, Bad News
Are you being silenced and silencing others? A project manager's dilemma?speaking truth to power in your organisation.
Transparency and candor in the project management workplace are absolutely good and important. The tangible and intangible costs of lack of engagement and collaboration within an organization are substantial. Unfortunately, candor and honest feedback can be destructive when perceived as, weapons.
Transparency and Ethics... How To Achieve the Balance?
I believe that group-think can cloud transparency in an organization.
Adapting to group-think is a sound survival skill, but allowing yourself to slavishly follow the prevailing norm is most often a form of intellectual and moral suicide.
"Every culture (workplace included), wittingly or not, pressures each of us to forswear independent, critical thinking, and in so doing, join the herd. Our job is to think our way through this pressure."— Mitchell Frangadakis
The balance is easier in some cases. Has an independant consultant my standard need be high. When a client ask for an evaluation of project progress and possible delivery date I ask to tell an unbiased view.
When within a company many shade of gray may exist. But at some point it is your ethic. I have been confronted with VPs requesting I change my evaluation. My answer, on what new basis?
For me, when someone asks me to reconsider or change my evaluation, as you put it, I will relook at my conclusions... after all, no one is perfect and perhaps I made a mistake. But, I will use a disciplined methodical approach to arrive at an answer. If I was wrong... I will state it as such. But if my original conclusions stand, I will state that too.
I'm really happy that you raised this point, it resonated with me.. I realized that I mistakenly referred to group-think in my original reply. Sorry.
I keep forgetting that group-think is not the same as "Abilene Paradox". Abilene Paradox is, in my opinion, more befitting to what I was alluding to.
A term, "Abilene Paradox" was introduced by management expert Jerry B. Harvey in his 1974 article "The Abilene Paradox: The Management of Agreement"
In the Abilene paradox, a group of people collectively decide on a course of action that is counter to the preferences of many or all of the individuals in the group. It involves a common breakdown of group communication in which each member mistakenly believes that their own preferences are counter to the group's and, therefore, does not raise objections. A common phrase relating to the Abilene paradox is a desire not to "rock the boat". This differs from group-think in that the Abilene paradox is characterized by an inability to manage agreement.
Please login or join to reply