Author: Andrea Brockmeier

Doing It Right Doesn’t Mean Doing It All

Written by Andrea Brockmeier on April 18, 2012. Posted in Articles. 7 Comments on Doing It Right Doesn’t Mean Doing It All

At the conclusion of a recent project management class, a student sighed heavily and noted that, “If I did all of this stuff, my stakeholders would shoot me.”

I hear this sentiment often from students who are new to project management or working in organizations that are new to project management.

The good news is that no one suggests that project management best practice means implementing every best practice on every project. Considering that many organizations expect project managers to manage projects and be a team member and, often, the SME, that wouldn’t be feasible. And, frankly, it probably wouldn’t be good project practice.

The intention of learning best practices in project management is to become familiar with what they are in order to know which ones make sense and how to scale them appropriately for your project in your organization.

This may be self-evident to people who have been in the field for awhile, but it can be liberating for those trying to get the reins on unmanaged or poorly managed “projects” and who can become quickly overwhelmed with that should be done to manage projects correctly.

Which of the best practices are applied and the degree of rigor around them should start with an honest assessment of what’s not working and causing the most pain. If, for example, an organization hasn’t acknowledged the role of sponsorship and doesn’t have people willing to take on that role, getting excited about developing a lengthy risk register may not be time well spent.

To get a sense of where to begin, listen to the frustrations of stakeholders, pay attention to problems causing the most noise, and ask key stakeholders what they wish they could change most about how projects are handled. Then work with them to prioritize those frustrations.

If the primary obstacle to project success is that key decisions don’t get made, maybe it is a sponsorship issue. A reasonable place to begin might involve a discussion around sponsorship and defining roles and responsibilities.

Maybe stakeholders complain most that the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing, in which case maybe communications planning is a good place to start.

Perhaps it’s confusion about the purpose of the project which might suggest that introducing a charter and/or scope statement would be a good investment of organizational resources.

Of course, these things are interrelated. But the response to the inquiry “what are we doing wrong?” can’t be to start doing it all. Many a project management journey begins like any other – with one step at a time.

Work with others to figure out the one or two best practices you can start with. Then identify your champions and advocates and work together to show small successes. As you accumulate those successes, add to your best practices toolkit as necessary, draw others in and let the results speak for themselves.

The journey may not take you exactly where you’re expecting, but that’s OK. There will be stumbles and detours along the way. Sometimes project management is messy. The important thing is to be able to get to the end and recognize that you learned something together that you can take with you to the next project.

Best practices in any discipline are important to understand. What’s not important is doing them all.

Good luck on your journey!

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.

Facilitation Top 5

Written by Andrea Brockmeier on February 6, 2012. Posted in Articles. 9 Comments on Facilitation Top 5

As any instructor will tell you, one of the best things about teaching is learning from your students. It happens in some way, big or small, every time you get in front of people who are expecting to hear how to do it “right.”

Of course, there is no “right” a lot of the time. In my classes, for example, I instruct and inform, but I also facilitate discussions about the options, and the students decide what’s going to work for them.
This brings me to the recent Facilitation Skills Workshop class I taught. In this class, we learn about different facilitation techniques and then the students do the work; they actually facilitate each of the 12 sessions throughout the class.

Maybe you are like many of the students in this class who are terrified of speaking in front of groups. Their hands shake, they sweat, and some have a hard time breathing. This fear is not unlike other fears and there is often a visceral response.

It is amazing to watch those folks who are terrified of facilitating get up in front of a group and, with some preparation, tools, and guidance, actually help the group accomplish a goal. It is enormously validating- for them, the participants, and me.

The last session of the 12 sessions is one in which the facilitator brings the class to consensus on the top 5 characteristics of a good facilitator. My last class came up with the following Top 5 Characteristics of a Good Facilitator:

1. Neutrality
The facilitator cares that the group achieves their goal in the session, but they don’t care what the results look like specifically.

2. Preparedness
A facilitator needs to be prepared for their session. Facilitation might look easy, but it is hard work. Taking time to understand the group and issues, as well as practice the skills and techniques to be used make for a far more effective facilitator and one who will be much more likely to help the group achieve its goals.

3. Energetic
A facilitator needs to be neutral, but that doesn’t mean they should be comatose. Bringing some energy to the session helps keep people focused and engaged.

4. Clear idea of Purpose/Agenda
A good facilitator needs to start with a clear understanding of the goal of the session and the tools they might use to achieve that goal. In short, be flexible, but have a plan.

5. Positive
An effective facilitator makes the participants want to achieve the session objective. Even if it’s addressing a problem, a positive tone will encourage participants to own their part of the outcome.

It wasn’t necessarily the list I would have come up with, although those are certainly things we talk about in the class. As I sat in the back of the room watching them come to this conclusion together as a group, facilitated by one of the students, it was an interesting and, in some way, a teachable moment for me.

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.

Is Your Meeting Worth the Time?

Written by Andrea Brockmeier on January 11, 2012. Posted in Articles. 3 Comments on Is Your Meeting Worth the Time?

A couple of days ago I fired up my online calendar and started to schedule a meeting with my manager. Our meetings are typically less than 30 minutes long, but I had a lot to talk about, so I was going to make it an hour long. Yessirree. I had a lot of stuff on my mind, I needed an audience, and he was the logical person to hear me out!

Fortunately, we have a little meeting protocol where I work. In our organization, you can’t schedule a meeting without identifying the objective of the meeting and the desired outcome. At first, I didn’t think it would be difficult to get my thoughts around those things and document them. (Did I mention I had a lot to talk about?)
But when it came to actually spelling out the objective in the invitation, my fingers froze. I hadn’t really gotten much past “To talk about all the stuff I need to talk about.” That, of course, left me with nothing to describe in the way of desired outcome.

So I took my hands off the keyboard, put them on my forehead and started to think: What is the purpose of this meeting? Why should he take his time, that is, the organization’s most valuable resource, to meet with me? What do I have to say that is worth his time to discuss?

The truth is, I did have a lot on my mind. I was feeling overwhelmed and unfocused with more to deal with than I had bandwidth for. I had ideas and thoughts about some things I was excited about and wanted to be able to address all of it, but I couldn’t.

The truth is also that I did not have a lot to discuss. I just needed to know the current priorities of things on my plate. My objective was to clarify my priorities, and the desired outcome that I needed at the end of our meeting was a list.

Once this became clear, the meeting got a lot shorter.

How long ago was it that you attended a meeting with 3, 5, or 10 people without a clear understanding of the purpose and deliverable expected out of the meeting? When was the last meeting you attended that got off track in the absence of a meeting objective? How many meeting agendas have you seen that included extraneous items that wouldn’t have been necessary had a purpose been identified? Most importantly, when was the last time you were sitting in a meeting that you might not have needed to attend if a clear meeting objective had been defined?

The time it takes to be thoughtful about a meeting objective and desired outcome is not free, but it will always be cheaper than the time squandered in meetings without clear objectives defined.

So the next time you are inviting people to a meeting, consider identifying the objective of the meeting. If someone were to ask you why your meeting is worth their time and organizational money, could you answer? Maybe your objective is to get a decision about something. Or identify options. Or prioritize choices. Whatever it is, define it first – before developing an agenda, deciding how long it will be, or whom to invite.

And then write down what it is you need to walk out of your meeting with, your desired outcome. Maybe it’s a decision. Or signatures of approval. Or a list of options. Whatever it is, write it down. You’ll find your meetings are more likely to end on time because you know when they’re over – you’ve named it!

Try it. But don’t expect to like it. It’s a lot easier to just send an invitation to a bunch of people for a meeting about…you know…that thing we need to talk about.

But once you have defined an objective, the rest of the meeting will become a lot more clear. Your desired outcome will probably reveal itself. Who really needs to be there will become evident – and will probably result in a shorter list of invitees than a meeting with no defined objectives. Your agenda will begin to take shape and, again, probably be shorter than with an undefined meeting.

I ended up scheduling our meeting for 40 minutes, which is longer than we usually meet, but shorter than I initially intended to request. I’m pretty confident it’s going to be a good use of organizational time and resources. I think my manager is, too.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.

Grapevines and Rumor Mills

Written by Andrea Brockmeier on December 7, 2011. Posted in Articles. 4 Comments on Grapevines and Rumor Mills

Communications is, of course, the single biggest indicator of project success or failure. As project managers, we have to think about all aspects of communications, including how much, to whom, in what format, etc. We also get pretty savvy at knowing which communication channels to use.

A lot of project work gets done through informal, undocumented communication channels. This is not only OK, it’s actually necessary. Imagine if every conversation or information gathering effort we conducted required a documented plan. The fact is a lot of good data can be mined from the water cooler and coffee klatch gatherings.

There are two types of this informal network: the grapevine and the rumor mill. I would suggest that while both are informal, undocumented communication channels and that they may include many, if not most, of the same people, they are significantly different. The grapevine is an asset worth using; the rumor mill is something to avoid.

How are they different and what makes one an essential part of a project manager’s communication strategy and the other a liability? In my mind, it comes down to content and effect.

First, the nature of the content is qualitatively different between the two channels. On the grapevine, information is rooted in truth. It may not include the whole story, but the information available is fundamentally true. It is often a great source of information about prevailing attitudes, for example. A project manager might tap into the grapevine to find out how people are responding to an organizational change of some kind.

In addition, grapevine content is generally not specifically about individuals. The vine is more about ideas and things, and less about who did or said what.

Content on the rumor mill, on the other hand, is highly specious. Often the information obtained from the mill is patently false or so distorted by innuendo or editorializing as to be of little value. Of course, it’s not presented that way. In fact, you can usually tell if you’re tapping into the rumor mill by a qualifying comment such as “My brother’s roommate’s cousin heard….” The qualification serves the purpose of creating distance between the information and the person spreading it; it’s a way of deflecting ownership for the information.

Furthermore, the rumor mill is generally where you hear a lot more about specific individuals and a lot less about ideas. Name dropping on the rumor mill is rampant – and generally not a place where you want your name mentioned.

Still, it’s not always crystal clear as to which channel you are using based on content alone. Effect is also important to consider in order to distinguish between the vine and the mill.

The effect of the grapevine is positive (or at least not negative). Use of the vine results in shared perceptions, level setting, or improved understanding. The effect is not damaging or demeaning to others. When you are working the grapevine, you don’t feel uncomfortable about getting the information. Grapevine conversations don’t inspire ducking into empty conference rooms to avoid being seen. You come away from a grapevine conversation feeling like you could share what you learned with others without feeling like you violated a confidence or compromised anyone’s integrity. You are comfortable with your name being associated with grapevine information.

On the other hand, the effect of the rumor mill is generally negative. The purpose is really to provide cheap entertainment. It’s the “You’re not gonna believe what I heard” factor. When you are grinding on the rumor mill, you may look behind you or over your shoulder to see if anyone sees you. These are the conversations that make you want to find an empty conference room or somewhere to avoid being seen. Rather than about ideas or things, the rumor mill is almost always about people, and it’s generally not flattering. The effect is usually that someone is shamed or demeaned or at least presented in an unfavorable light.

The savvy project manager will always make good use of informal communications channels in developing relationships with stakeholders, getting buy-in, managing expectations, and keeping the project on track. The ethical project manager will also know which type of informal channel they’re using, when it makes sense to use it, and when it’s best to disengage.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.

PMs and Hockey Players

Written by Andrea Brockmeier on November 16, 2011. Posted in Articles. 6 Comments on PMs and Hockey Players

My son’s hockey team won a tournament recently that included a series of hard-fought, well-earned victories. As the athletes came into the lobby from the locker room, everyone cheered, recognizing each individual contribution. Another mom made a comment out loud that many of us hockey parents think just about every time we see them come out of the locker room: “They’re so little!”

It’s truly amazing to see 9-year-olds play hockey at the level that this team plays. They skate on the ice as though they’re dancing on pavement. They handle a stick with astounding skill. They move the puck up and down the ice with agility that sometimes takes my breath away.

It’s not hard to get caught up in this level of play and start cheering, shouting…OK screaming: “Hustle!” “Pass!” “Move your feet!” They are so good and they make it look so easy. Fans sitting on the bench start to wonder, “What’s your problem? Shoot the puck!”

Then after the game they come out of the locker room and you see them as…little boys. With height not augmented by skates, bodies not donned in pads and equipment, faces not covered by helmets and masks, they’re just the little kids who like Saturday morning cartoons and still sleep with a favorite toy.

If it doesn’t make you feel a bit silly for all the screaming you did, it sure does make you appreciate how good they really are.

Project managers don’t wear pads and helmets while managing projects and we don’t get a locker room from which to exit looking like a humbler version of ourselves to invoke appreciation for what we do.

We do, however, get senior level folks to sponsor our projects and advocate for what we’re trying to accomplish. We get access to resources, support to schedule and run meetings, and we may get training to help us do our jobs better. We get teams of people and the wealth of organizational knowledge about what’s worked and what hasn’t on past projects. So there may be stakeholders on the sidelines wondering, “What’s your problem? Deliver on time!”

Well, it’s tough out there on the project ice. Even when we get the sponsorship, resources, and skills we need to do our job, stakeholders are conflicted, organizations are in flux, and resources change. While it may not look that hard from the bench, some days it’s amazing that we get consensus or momentum on anything.

High expectations for project managers are a good thing. But sometimes after a hard day, it would be nice to have a locker room where we could take off all the emotional and intellectual equipment we wear to get our job done and emerge for others to get a little different perspective for who we are: someone just trying to get the project done for the benefit of the organization and everyone in it.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.