Wednesday, 21 September 2011 09:25

Control Projects, Not People

Written by 
Rate this item
(0 votes)

Controlling projects is a good thing. Controlling people is not. What does it mean to control projects, not people, and when have you crossed the threshold from controlling the project to micromanaging the people?

When you start telling people how to do their jobs instead of focusing on the results they create is usually an indication that you have stepped beyond the bounds of project control and into the realm of people control.

Some team members are quite adept at complicating this tidy distinction. What about, for example, the team member who tells you they will get the work done on time but sees no need to share details regarding the steps involved or how they’re going to get it done?

Even if it’s someone you have previously worked with and have every confidence that they’ll meet their deadline, it’s conceivable that you need more information about what’s involved in accomplishing the work. Perhaps for reporting or tracking purposes, for example, you may need to know about the steps involved or milestones in getting to their end result.

How can you ask for details that may not, in fact, be necessary to the person doing the work without being perceived as trying to micromanage? The most important thing is make sure the team member understands why you need the lower-level information. In the absence of an example or clear explanation of reporting or tracking requirements, many people are going to infer a lack of trust in a request for more detail than what they’re initially interested in providing.

The following three ideas can also help a project manager engage a resistant team member in providing more detail about their project work:

  1. Suggest breaking down the work into smaller chunks to make it easier to share the work load or include others in accomplishing the result. If they decompose the work into smaller level activities or tasks, perhaps there are things that could be done by others.
  2. Present it as an opportunity to teach others. If the team member can break down what it is they do to get their work done, it is easier to show and train others how to do it. Even if it’s not entirely repeatable, knowledge transfer requires some level of decomposition, and teaching others is usually an appealing personal development opportunity as well as valuable to the team and organization overall.
  3. Consider the information in the context of risk. Breaking down the work presents opportunities for identifying risks that might otherwise be missed. Engaging the team member in that discussion may yield ideas that even they hadn’t considered in terms of possible threats.

When project managers have a need for more details than team members are initially willing to provide regarding the work they do, these perspectives can help soften resistance by showing team members how they can contribute to something rather than making them feel like they are being needlessly imposed upon or, worse, not trusted.

So go ahead ask: “Tell me more about what's involved in getting that done.”

Don't forget to leave your comments below.


Andrea Brockmeier is the Client Solutions Director for Project Management at Watermark Learning.  Andrea is a PMP® as well as Certified ScrumMaster.  She has 20+ years of experience in project management practice and training. She writes and teaches courses in project management, including PMP® certification, as well as influencing skills. She has long been involved with the PMI® chapter in Minnesota where she was a member of the certification team for over eight years. She has a master’s degree in cultural anthropology and is particularly interested in the impact of social media and new technologies on organizations and projects.

Read 1584 times Last modified on Monday, 16 April 2012 14:49
Andrea Brockmeier

Andrea Brockmeier is the Client Solutions Director for Project Management at Watermark Learning. Andrea is a PMP® as well as Certified ScrumMaster. She has 20+ years of experience in project management practice and training. She writes and teaches courses in project management, including PMP® certification, as well as influencing skills. She has long been involved with the PMI® chapter in Minnesota where she was a member of the certification team for over eight years. She has a master's degree in cultural anthropology and is particularly interested in the impact of social media and new technologies on organizations and projects.

Comments  

 
0 # Louis Nichols 2011-09-21 12:09
I couldn't have broken that logic down any better.... In fact, I'm going to suggest this read to my boss as a short read. THANKS A LOT
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # R Gonzalez 2011-09-21 14:11
In project and construction management for architecture and interiors works, PEOPLE MUST BE CONTROLLED. PE OPLE are the ones building and executing designs. If the schedules, deliverables, and output quality - all produced by people - are not controlled, projects are late, over budgets and quality according to contract documents is not achieved. In many cases they must be shown how to achieve the desired results and the time to achieve. If the PEOPLE cannot get the jobs done, replace them. No yelling, fussing or name-calling, just straight-forwar d dealing with the people and what they can or cannot do. cheers,
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Andrea Brockmeier 2011-09-25 14:09
That's a great point, R Gonzalez. Absolutely -- people sometimes need help in terms of how to get something done and a good PM will see that they get it. In addition, team members should be accountable for the work that's expected of them. In the end, I think we're saying the same thing, however. Straight-forwar d responses to what people can or can't do and objectives-driv en partnerships is the best way to work with others. If the PM needs detail around how team members are accomplishing those objectives, I would hope the need is more significant than simply telilng them how to do what is, after all, their job.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Andrea Brockmeier 2011-09-25 14:10
Thanks, Louis. Hope your boss found it helpful, as well!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Gary Rosenfeld 2011-09-29 23:38
Thanks for the intuitive post, Andrea. It's interesting in that the example you provided is common, but but as I was reading down, the person that came to my mind was the reverse of the one you provided. The challenging team member that I often face is the one that I'm not sure does have the competency to do the work, says they can, but isn't all that vocal in breaking the work down (obviously because they don't quite got it down.) Your suggestions could put this individual on the defensive and shut them down further. At the same time, I do subscribe to controlling the plan and not people. So, with weekly status and having the team member provide work product (not just progress) on their deliverable gives me (and the team) a better sense on how things are moving or not moving along.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Andrea Brockmeier 2011-10-03 14:31
Gary, If people are unable to break things down because they don't know enough about what they're doing, then I'd suggest being open about that and dispense with other motives or incentives. If people aren't able to show the level of detail that you need for reporting or some other project deliverable because they don't have the skills or experience, we owe it to the stakeholders to sit down with them and work through it, and find others to help, if necessary. If you're honest with them about your concern, and you sincerely engage with them in order to help them understand what they need to know in order to do their work, they will probably be less defensive. But you're right in that people are more likely to react defensively if we aren't entirely transparent about our motives.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 

Add comment