In the high-stakes world of project management, a web of players vie for influence. This is accentuated when the projects are complex, goals are uncertain, and the project team is in flux. The executive sponsor holds the purse strings while the project manager orchestrates the chaos. The customer is the ultimate beneficiary while the project teams translate plans into action. Who truly wears the crown? Is it a one-man (or woman) show or a collaborative dance requiring every stakeholder's input?
We have all seen projects derailed by a single stakeholder's actions (or inactions) or, as they say, "too many cooks spoil the broth." So, who (singular or plural) deserves the top billing?
Please share your thoughts in the comments! Is it about power or a delicate balancing act or nothing of this?
I'm not sure that I like the notion of a PM orchestrating chaos :-) I'd like to think our role is to remove entropy and not encourage it!
The PM needs to use whatever forms of power they have (formal or informal) to align key stakeholders to a common goal and then the approach taken to achieving that goal. Is they are unsuccessful with that, issues will emerge but depending on the relative power of the stakeholder who is misaligned, the issues may or may not have a material impact on the project's outcomes.
Depending on the project's context, defining "who owns what" from a decision-making perspective might be formalized using a RACI or similar tool or might be the outcome of an informal discussion with key stakeholders. Regardless of how it is discussed and captured, should that not happen, chaos is likely to emerge.
Kiron
...
1 reply by Dr. Deepa Bhide
Jul 06, 2024 4:23 AM
Dr. Deepa Bhide
...
Kiron, I agree with you, but much as I would like to avoid chaos, I find PMs are mostly fire-fighting and managing the chaos. I could be wrong!
RACI is a great tool to assign the responsibilities and keep reinforcing that. I do see your point in an issue with a stakeholder that may not impact the project. I recently encountered it and while the issue was quite a big one, its impact on the project was not as much.
It is definitely a balancing act, and very much contextually dependent.
Sometimes I am assigned to solve a problem where the participants are ambivalent about making improvements and I have to use every power skill I can muster. A classic case of this is when the performing team gets paid to fix problems rather than prevent them. Preventing them cuts into their overtime so I'm trying to use wisdom from Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, or even Master Shifu from Kung Fu Panda if I think it will help to exert what little influence I have and get people moving the right direction.
Other times, I am more the conductor of an orchestra playing a symphony I didn't compose. A great idea and a lot of motivated talented people might just need someone with the organizational skills and focus to empower them, keep them in synch, and remove their rooadblocks.
Figuring out my role is often one of the bigger challenges to being successful, and it can change over time. I might push for a change where really I'm acting as the voice of the customer, but I have to act as the product owner also so that we can define a solution. Then I must try and get the performing team to own the solution themselves and be proactive rather than reluctant contributors.
One of my tricks to shift ownership is using a "straw horse" plan. If nobody is contributing, I'll create a plan that nobody likes and everyone will tear it apart. (This requires some emotional resilience as the PM). As they criticize my plan, I will ask what we should do instead to fix the issues they are lobbing at me, and adjust the plan. Clearly my plan was terrible, and for good reasons, but now we have arrived at their plan, even if through a somewhat painful indirect route.
...
1 reply by Dr. Deepa Bhide
Jul 06, 2024 4:20 AM
Dr. Deepa Bhide
...
Keith, amazing response! I so loved reading it and agree with it, too. I loved the "straw horse" idea and will now practice it in my projects.
Shifting roles is quite clear from your comment, and that is the reality, too. Yet, some roles are more influential than others, and I wonder if we have the choice to choose them. I also think is less of what we want but more of what the project or a situation wants. And then I think am I a "jack of all and master of none"?
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
I don't know how much more I can add to Keith's and Kiron's detailed feedback which I agree with. It's always a balancing act and not sure I'd lean on the orchestrating chaos side because our job so to avid and eliminate any chaos on our projects.
...
1 reply by Dr. Deepa Bhide
Jul 06, 2024 4:17 AM
Dr. Deepa Bhide
...
Thanks Rami. I also lean, much as I would like to avoid, on the avoiding chaos side!
I don't know how much more I can add to Keith's and Kiron's detailed feedback which I agree with. It's always a balancing act and not sure I'd lean on the orchestrating chaos side because our job so to avid and eliminate any chaos on our projects.
Thanks Rami. I also lean, much as I would like to avoid, on the avoiding chaos side! Saving Changes...
It is definitely a balancing act, and very much contextually dependent.
Sometimes I am assigned to solve a problem where the participants are ambivalent about making improvements and I have to use every power skill I can muster. A classic case of this is when the performing team gets paid to fix problems rather than prevent them. Preventing them cuts into their overtime so I'm trying to use wisdom from Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, or even Master Shifu from Kung Fu Panda if I think it will help to exert what little influence I have and get people moving the right direction.
Other times, I am more the conductor of an orchestra playing a symphony I didn't compose. A great idea and a lot of motivated talented people might just need someone with the organizational skills and focus to empower them, keep them in synch, and remove their rooadblocks.
Figuring out my role is often one of the bigger challenges to being successful, and it can change over time. I might push for a change where really I'm acting as the voice of the customer, but I have to act as the product owner also so that we can define a solution. Then I must try and get the performing team to own the solution themselves and be proactive rather than reluctant contributors.
One of my tricks to shift ownership is using a "straw horse" plan. If nobody is contributing, I'll create a plan that nobody likes and everyone will tear it apart. (This requires some emotional resilience as the PM). As they criticize my plan, I will ask what we should do instead to fix the issues they are lobbing at me, and adjust the plan. Clearly my plan was terrible, and for good reasons, but now we have arrived at their plan, even if through a somewhat painful indirect route.
Keith, amazing response! I so loved reading it and agree with it, too. I loved the "straw horse" idea and will now practice it in my projects.
Shifting roles is quite clear from your comment, and that is the reality, too. Yet, some roles are more influential than others, and I wonder if we have the choice to choose them. I also think is less of what we want but more of what the project or a situation wants. And then I think am I a "jack of all and master of none"?
I'm not sure that I like the notion of a PM orchestrating chaos :-) I'd like to think our role is to remove entropy and not encourage it!
The PM needs to use whatever forms of power they have (formal or informal) to align key stakeholders to a common goal and then the approach taken to achieving that goal. Is they are unsuccessful with that, issues will emerge but depending on the relative power of the stakeholder who is misaligned, the issues may or may not have a material impact on the project's outcomes.
Depending on the project's context, defining "who owns what" from a decision-making perspective might be formalized using a RACI or similar tool or might be the outcome of an informal discussion with key stakeholders. Regardless of how it is discussed and captured, should that not happen, chaos is likely to emerge.
Kiron
Kiron, I agree with you, but much as I would like to avoid chaos, I find PMs are mostly fire-fighting and managing the chaos. I could be wrong!
RACI is a great tool to assign the responsibilities and keep reinforcing that. I do see your point in an issue with a stakeholder that may not impact the project. I recently encountered it and while the issue was quite a big one, its impact on the project was not as much. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
