Eric SimmsSenior Program ManagerBaltimore, Maryland, United States
Imagine that five companies are executing a joint venture to develop a new software system. It’s a complex project, and the Management of each company assigns its own PM to be part of the project management team leading the project. However, the various Managements don’t assign one of the PMs to be in charge of the others, with the authority to direct their work – they just put the PMs together and expect them to make things happen. Not surprisingly, the PMs have competing priorities and goals. With no one officially in charge, the PMs can only manage the project by consensus. Can this project succeed? Or will it likely fail? Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Eric SimmsSenior Program ManagerBaltimore, Maryland, United States
I think this project is pretty much guaranteed to fail without a single, defined leader. It’s complex, which makes it difficult to begin with. Also, the project will suffer from infighting because the PMs each have their own priorities and agendas. I believe project management by consensus is theoretically possible (the first Triumvirate of ancient Rome featuring Julius Caesar, Pompey and Crassus comes to mind), but I can’t imagine a situation where it will likely be performed successfully. If anyone believes this project will have a more favorable outcome, please share your reasons why. Saving Changes...
Hardik BhavsarCorporate Technical Services Manager| IFFCO GroupDubai, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
Project Management is relying on communication and collaboration.
PM should not look for consensus but to lead, collaborate and get best decision in favour of sponsor / organization. Saving Changes...
Stéphane ParentSelf Employed / Semi-retired| Leader MakerPrince Edward Island, Canada
Most team approaches, like Scrum, favour consensus as a decision approach. Please note, however, that there are other team decision making approaches. One alternative that comes to mind is compromise. Saving Changes...
Just as there can be many key senior stakeholders but you should have only one project sponsor, I'd say there can be many contributing PMs but only one overall PM, otherwise you risk the downside of consensus and compromise (delay with the first and a mediocre outcome with the latter).
The bank I used to work for frequently had multiple delivery partners providing PMs, but there was always a single PM orchestrating the work across all the individual sub-projects/workstreams who took the input of all the PMs but had the authority to make the final decision.
