How to get our project teams to perform similarly?

Adrian,

Although there are always variant implementations of project structures, the “chartered project” philosophy is purposed to create an environment wherein the PM has been granted “executive control” of a project, with the PM being accountable to a committee (e.g. a steering committee). It is analogous to an executive of a corporation who is accountable to the board of directors. I understand that is not your experience; however that doesn’t negate the fact that what I’m describing is the principled construct of the profession. All the variants of accountability structures are legitimate, and we, as project managers, either accept them or not (for an engagement).

Specific to your statement: In my experience, under a chartered project, the internal resources are “loaned to the project,” and functional ties are broken with their direct manager for the duration of the project. Anything short of this, create political issues that are intolerable for successful outcomes. Hence, a project manager will state this as a risk and will mandate compliance – of course, with the backing of executive management.

It goes as far as this: If a resource doesn’t perform to the statute of the charter then it will follow them from a human resources perspective. The resources go into the project recognizing this fact, and thus the accountability structure that I mentioned is intact.

Again, my experience does not negate yours, and they are both understood and valid. However, one approach more closely follows the principles of the profession, which is what we are normally trying to communicate in forums like this – while not ignoring the reality of variant implementations. So, let’s state them both, but not state them from a terminology perspective as absolutes.

Dear Anton
Thank you for sharing your reflection.

I'm one of those people that I think all of us humans can (if we wish) be excellent.

I know that not all people strive for excellence and try to surpass themselves until ... someone believes in them and can communicate their value and potential so that they will eventually see them in themselves.

Hi Luis, thank you for initiating this engaging topic.
During Team Development to build a streamlined team, especially with new and diverse members, I learned the transition of "Forming" to "Storming" and to "Norming" stage is critical.

i) Work cohesively as a team to brainstorm and plan team-building activities will help to nurture mutual trust in "Forming".

ii) Subsequently of the mutual trust, "Storming" establishes the structure of a project, which includes framework, rules, procedures, roles, and responsibilities.

ii) With the mutual agreement of the project structure in place, the team can transit smoothly to the "Norming" stage, where members feel closer to the team. Consequently, the team builds a cohesive unit of norms and culture with the acknowledgment of individual members' traits and contributions.
Therefore, able to gel the team's wheel to perform similarly in the subsequent "Performing" Stage.

I also experienced the suggestion described by Thomas - Scheduled Standup meeting with short discussions to address members' concerns and align the team well to improve performance for daily and weekly activities.

Luis, yes, and with nobody I include executives management.

Once the crisis was solved by this PM using the power he had been given, they wanted the power back.

The team members were tired of being pushed and preferred the way of working that led to the crisis in the 1st place.

Maybe other means would have been successful too, like getting together the team, setting priorities and instilling trust. It was easier and quicker to get a firefighter and give him all the power he asked for.

In situations when people feel fearful and helpless, we often ask for strongmen who claim to relieve us, willing to suffer and sacrifice.

Dear Thomas
Thank you for sharing with us this situation.

I am thinking here with my buttons:
- What happened to this Project Manager?

Luis,

my experience on creating high performance teams is not to focus on performance but on trust. If they trust each other, they may love you for this and die for you (not that you would allow that to happen). Simon Sinek has a nice video on this, referring to the Navy seals.

In order to make them trust each other, you have to bring them together, listening, talking, eating, drinking, succeeding.

In one outsourcing deal I was part of, we had a team of 80 in India and team of 10 in Germany. We went to India 4-5 times a year for 1-2 weeks and we had permanently 4-8 Indians in Germany for a year or so, incl family.

This was designed to create cultural alignment and transfer tacit knowledge.

India cost was 10% of that if Germany, still ok after adding the overhead cost.

The answer to this question is simple. Assign to the teams people in such a way that the "average" knowledge and experience in all the teams is as much as possible similar.

For instance don't put all of your best experts in a team and let the other teams with less skilled and less experienced team members.

For the performance of a team many things are important but the most important by far is the performance of each individual being part of the team.

Of course the way people work together is also important but if you don't have a team composed of high performance individuals you can't have a high performance team no matter what you do.

If it is “your” team, then it doesn’t matter if it is outsourced or not as the “accountability link” is all that is required for one to have an “influence quotient” over the members of the team.

On a separate note, Luis: I appreciate the challenge-based discussion you are having here and in other threads. However, when the thread gets large it is not easy for someone to extrapolate all the tidbits of knowledge. Could you consider creating a summarized post with “what you have learned” as a whole on your stated question – it would add value.

Dear George
Thanks for your comment

I agree that when the topic becomes too long we risk relevant information if it gets lost

Gave me an idea for an article to post on a possible blog that will create
Thanks for the sugestion

Regarding the theme, properly said:
"If it is your team, then it doesn't matter if it is outsourced or not as the accountability link is all that is required for one to have a quotient influence over the members of the team"

Will I, as leader of this outsourced team, get them to perform?

Here is the doubt and at the same time the challenge.

Whether or not the team members are outsourced or not does play an important role.

If the team members are not outsourced/not hired just for the project then they are accountable to their line manager and not to the PM. For these team members working on the project is just a temporary work assignment and the PM is just a colleague or peer. PMs can just track and report the work and nothing more.

If the team members are outsourced and are temporary hired just to work on that specific project then the PM has more control as he can either terminate the contract or request the termination of the contract for the outsourced team member.