Author: George Pitagorsky

George Pitagorsky, integrates core disciplines and applies people centric systems and process thinking to achieve sustainable optimal performance. He is a coach, teacher and consultant. George authored The Zen Approach to Project Management, Managing Conflict and Managing Expectations and IIL’s PM Fundamentals™. He taught meditation at NY Insight Meditation Center for twenty-plus years and created the Conscious Living/Conscious Working and Wisdom in Relationships courses. Until recently, he worked as a CIO at the NYC Department of Education.

Healthy Goals, Psychology, and Performance Assessment

Written by George Pitagorsky on February 7, 2024. Posted in Articles.

A reader reported that the “Motivation: Intentions, Goals and Plans” chapter of my book, The Peaceful Warrior’s Path, triggered memories and painful feelings about performance reviews.

That set me to thinking that the cause of much of the trouble with performance assessment as a part of performance management was psychology and mindset about criticism, coupled with organizational and personal resistance to addressing those issues.

A recent Harvard Business Review article pointed out that

“Performance reviews are awkward. They’re biased. They stick us in boxes and leave us waiting far too long for feedback. It’s no surprise that by the end of 2015, at least 30 of the Fortune 500 companies had ditched performance evaluations altogether. But let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater.”[1]

My reader, a financial professional with a decades long career, reexperienced anxiety about being found deficient, reinforcing her need for perfection and acceptance by others, highlighting weakness and imperfection. Embarrassment, financial, and career consequences, circled in her mind.

As a result, she was triggered by the thought of setting goals and objectives. In her experience they were often unrealistic and rigid.

Others report a sense that they are being evaluated without adequate objective criteria and by people who are biased and, in some cases, unqualified, unprepared, or uninterested. Often the goals and objectives, even those set by the individual performer, are rigid and not adjusted when conditions change.

The Benefits of Performance Reviews

But let’s not just jettison performance goals, objectives, and assessments. Let’s make the best of them, to use them for personal growth and organizational success.

The HBR authors reported that at Facebook “a survey of more than 300 people found that “87% of people wanted to keep performance ratings.”[2]

They realized the need for candid feedback to give employees a sense of where they stand in the eyes of their organization and what they need to improve, and to give the organization knowledge of employee performance to support training, compensation, and hiring decisions.

Add to that the benefits, clarity of purpose and direction, which come from establishing rational expectations in the form of goals and objectives.

What Gets in The Way?

But something gets in the way. Not every organization is as wise as Facebook about optimizing their performance assessment process, including setting, and adjusting goals.

When I look at the issue from a project management perspective, I see three predominant causes of unskillful performance assessment: lack of clear goals and objectives, psychological/mindset issues, and poor process.

In this article we home in on the psychological issues and how they impact and are impacted by the other causes.

Psychology, Mindset, and Performance

There has been resistance to addressing psychological issues in the workplace. But we do well to be aware of these issues because individual psychology influences behavior and behavior influences performance and relationships.

The interplay among individual psychological tendencies and mindsets, cultural and organizational norms, and self-awareness influences performance and makes for a complex system. In a complex system change anywhere can have an impact everywhere.

For example, a project team member may make decisions influenced by fear of upsetting the functional manager who will give her the next review. Another performer may avoid committing to goals and objectives to avoid imagined failure. A project team may be reluctant to commit to objectives they feel are unrealistic and that they will be evaluated against regardless of changes to any number of conditions

In our projects, we see that factors like

Individual anxiety and perfectionism,
cultural norms,
performance processes
attitudes regarding success and failure,
communication and relationship capabilities,
levels of emotional and social intelligence, and
organizational support levels evidenced by allocating sufficient time and attention and adjusting objectives as conditions change,

all contribute to the success or failure of performance assessments and performance management.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Skillful Performance management

Awareness of and sensitivity to psychological and cultural tendencies enables skillful performance management.

In projects, performance reviews are not limited to individual performers. We assess performance on individual projects and the performance across multiple projects of individuals, project teams, departments, and organizations.

Performance management should be treated like a program with each assessment of a project. Intentions, goals, and values drive performance. When we evaluate the effectiveness of performance management these elements must be considered. If we never evaluate the effectiveness of the program, it is likely to be ineffective. And that leads to less-than-optimal performance overall.

The intention of performance management is to improve and optimize performance while creating a work environment in which performers at all levels of the organization’s hierarchy feel safe and have a sense that the process is fair and objective. Values: effectiveness, kindness, candor, self-reflection, emotional intelligence.

The goal is to enable clarity regarding performance effectiveness through a process of performance reviews which include the assessment of the factors beyond individual behaviors that contribute to achieving optimal performance.

Objectives are to regularly assess the performance of individuals, projects, teams, and organizations to identify opportunities for improvement based upon pre-established criteria and to make decisions regarding the need for training, deciding who will be compensated at what levels, who will and will not be retained, and what organizational, management, cultural, and environmental changes are needed to achieve optimal performance.

Optimal Performance

If the intention and goal is to achieve optimal performance, then we must know what optimal performance means. It means performing as best as possible given current conditions where performance is measured by the ability to achieve desired results – satisfied clients, profits, clean air, healthy and happy executives, managers, and staff.

Next Steps

To move from the general to the specific you need an action plan for your situation. Consider each of these:

Identify a responsible party for performance management – and it can’t be ‘everybody’ even though everyone and every team is responsible for their performance
Educate the staff at all levels regarding the intent of performance assessment and the reality of psychological, emotional, and cultural influences
Set a baseline for optimal performance – objective and realistic criteria that are agreed upon by those whose performance will be measured
Assess your current performance management process – get feedback from the staff, assess against industry benchmarks
Refine the process as needed
Be open to continuous improvement based on ongoing assessment of both performance management and individual and project performance.

[1] Lori Goler, Janelle Gale, Adam Grant, Let’s Not Kill Performance Evaluations Yet, Harvard Business Review https://hbr.org/2016/11/lets-not-kill-performance-evaluations-yet#:~:text=People%20want%20to%20know%20where,recognize%20and%20reward%20top%20performance.

[2] Ibid

Looking Back and Looking Forward to Improve

Written by George Pitagorsky on February 1, 2024. Posted in Articles.

There are many New Year celebrations – Tet, Rosh Ha Shona, and more. Why not make every day the beginning of a new year?

But now we are here celebrating the Western solar new year. We are reminded to enjoy the moment, reflect on the past and visualize a healthier, happier, more productive, and peaceful future.

Time to Reflect and Plan

Now is a traditional time for looking back, remembering the past, and looking forward, resolving to make a “better” future. In project management this is quality improvement through assessment, control, improvement planning, and follow through.

As individuals, we make resolutions to improve by giving up bad habits and cultivating positive behavior. We resolve to stop overeating or drinking and to exercise more, or to take that course that will lead to a new career, or to be kinder and more understanding and patient.

But many resolutions last a short time because we don’t follow through.

On a team or organizational level, do you make resolutions and follow through with them? Do you reflect and plan as a normal ongoing process, or is it a once-a-year event?

Quality Management

Among project management’s principles is assuring quality by critically assessing performance and planning to improve. Dr Deming’s PDCA cycle: Plan, Do, Check, and Act is one way of looking at the improvement process.

Reflect and resolve once a year and you are certain to miss a lot of opportunities to improve performance and wellness. Build PDCA into your normal way of doing whatever you do and you will reap the benefits of an ever-improvising process.

Learn

This article reinforces the message of my October article, “Learn from the Past to Perfect Performance, “Learn from experience. Set aside time for reflection, learning, and making the intention to perfect the way you live and work.”

Improvement is cyclical. It is ongoing. It continues as long as the target process or product lasts. The target process may be your own project management process or a new process resulting from a project. Here the focus is on the project management process.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

PDCA

The PDCA cycle is an improvement model that uses a scientific method:

Plan – propose a change,
Do – implement it,
Check – measure to see if the intended goals are achieved,
Act – decide whether to adjust by taking appropriate action in another cycle, or to standardize and stabilize the new process.

You decide to standardize and stabilize changes to your process when you have achieved planned benefits. Then you start a new cycle based on your new standard.

The Standard

You may or may not have a standard to start with.

When a new process is being designed and implemented the standard is a set of expectations. For example, you expect to complete 90% percent of projects within 10% of the original planned time and budget.

If you have done performance measurement you may know that your current standard is 40% of your projects meeting that expectation. If you do not have an objective sense of your past performance, you are at a disadvantage, but all is not lost. Chances are there is a subjective sense that you are not satisfying stakeholder expectations. Too many projects are delivered late and overbudget.

Part of planning is to set an expectation, a standard or benchmark to use as a target. You determine your goals and set the standard for measuring or checking the effects of your efforts. Research to determine if your goals are realistic. Make sure you are setting a realistic expectation about how long it will take to achieve your goals. Assess risks.

Plan to Achieve Goals

With realistic goals in mind, you plan the way you will meet them. To do that well, you have a decision to make. Will you refine your existing process or start from a blank slate?

How unstable and undefined is the current process? Is documenting it worth the effort or is it more effective to find a good model and adapt it to your current conditions.

In the realm of project management, don’t try to invent a brand-new process. You would be reinventing the wheel. Instead, take the time and effort to find a suitable model or models for the kind of projects you perform. If you have multiple project types you may need multiple defined processes, some agile, some more structured.

Cause Analysis

Look back to see why you are not meeting stakeholder expectations. Sep back and candidly assess causes. Are schedules and budgets dictated from above or are they the result of actual planning based on expected resources and conditions? Are projects initiated without regard of their impact on ongoing operations and other projects? Are estimators and/or performers in need of training or better tools or both?

Looking back at causes and on the state of the current process often causes conflict and resistance. Performers and project managers may be attached to the way they have been operating.

For example, they may be happy not to have to follow a defined process. They may not have knowledge of or may be in denial regarding the perceptions of stakeholders. They may be threatened by criticism and resistant to change.

Tread carefully to manage change in a way that engages and motivates the people who will have to go through the transition and live with the new process.

This is where follow through comes in. Educate, train, and implement change. Treat it as you would with any project, with care to support the people involved.

Check and Act

Realize that the new or changed process is not complete until you have checked to see if goals have been met. This is quality control and testing.

If you have done it well, the planning has left a standard, a benchmark, to measure against to determine if your efforts have achieved what you intended. Check often during the life of the improvement process.

Based on your findings decide and act. You may decide to continue, with or without changes to your goals, methods, or both. Or you may decide to stop, standardize, and stabilize the process.

Standardizing and stabilizing the process does not mean that your improvement work is done. You have just set a new standard against which to measure performance and go into a new PDCA cycle.

If you have done the improvement job well, future changes will be tweaks rather than major changes, though as new technologies like AI are introduced, more radical changes may be needed.

It is always a new year. Look back at what you have done, how successful it has been, and what you can do to make it better. Look forward to plan check and act.

Related articles:

Learn from the Past to Perfect Performance.

https://www.projecttimes.com/articles/learn-from-the-past-to-perfect-performance/#:~:text=To%20optimize%20performance%2C%20learn%20from,intentions%2C%20performance%2C%20and%20goals

The Key to Performance Improvement: Candid Performance Assessment

https://www.projecttimes.com/articles/the-key-to-performance-improvement-candid-perfromance-assessment/

Achieving Quality Performance and Results

https://www.projecttimes.com/articles/achieving-quality-performance-and-results/

Late and Over Budget Projects: No Simple Answers to Complex Questions

Written by George Pitagorsky on January 24, 2024. Posted in Articles.

Albert Einstein said, “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” Some simple answers may be true, but most are not. Human systems and relationships are complex. When problems, issues, or questions arise, don’t be satisfied with simplistic answers that assume that there is a single cause that if eliminated will resolve the problem or answer the question.

That is not to say that there are no simple solutions. There are but applying them is not easy. They require adapting the solution to the situation at hand and overcoming obstacles to its application.

Examples

For Example, on a personal level, the answer to “How can we live a life of wellness?” is simple, accept things as they are, do what you can do, and let go of the things that get in the way. The same simple answer applies to the problem of chronically late and overbudget projects.

But, accepting and letting go into a solution is not so easy. Accept and let go is often the last thing we want to hear when we are trying to resolve the issue of late and overbudget projects.

We need to answer the question, “How do we break the misunderstandings, cultural conditions, and habits that keep us from accepting and letting go?” The answer depends on the nature of the people involved and the environment. You must get down to the specific causes of the problem, assess them, decide what to do, and do it.

When you do take action be realistic. Do not expect miracles (they might happen but let them be a surprise rather than an expectation). The more complex the situation the greater the probability of having to refine the action over time until an optimal solution is found.

Predictability – Complex vs complicated

Before moving on let’s be clear about what a complex situation is. The situation is the system, state of affairs, or circumstances within which the issue occurs. When the system consists of many interrelated parts and the parts act independently from one another the system becomes emergent – we don’t know how things will turn out until they turn out. In other words, complex systems are not predictable. Systems in which humans interact with one another in a changing environment are complex.

Complicated systems, on the other hand, also have many parts but their relationships to one another are clearly defined and coordinated. For example, a jet liner is a complicated system. Removing unnecessary elements, you can know what will happen when the pilot flies the plane. Complicated systems are predictable.

Systems can be understood by breaking the system down into their parts. This “decomposition” makes the number and type of intersecting elements – people, expectations, departments, technology, processes, rules, interactions, objectives, predictability, cultural norms, etc. As this is done the degree of predictability of the system becomes obvious.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Late and overbudget projects occur in a system made up of several departments within client and provider organizations. Multiple projects are occurring simultaneously. Departments may have conflicting objectives. There may be insufficient coordination – for example an ineffective portfolio management process. Expectations may be unrealistic. Communication skills and emotional intelligence may be primitive. Hierarchical relationships may get in the way of effective communication, decision making, and planning.

In a complex system, aside from the probability of unpredictability, it is not possible to accurately predict the outcome of a simple solution like the implementation of a new and wonderful project and portfolio management tool set and simplistic training in scheduling and budgeting. Without going further into the causes, we can predict that the solution will not solve the problem – projects will continue to be late and overbudget.

Why do we seek simple?

If we can predict that simple solutions to complex problems will fail, why then apply simple solutions?

One reason we do it is because we want certainty. Simple solutions often come with the promise of a quick and definitive fix at low cost. Often, we do not want to or can’t spend the time and effort to understand complexities and determine root causes. Even when we do spend the time and effort, we might find that the causes are too embarrassing to bring to the surface, or we might think they are not actionable. For example, the cause of the problem of late and over budget projects might be a combination of sales efforts that set expectations that cannot be met, poor estimating and scheduling, senior management or clients who won’t listen to reason.

It reminds me of a story:

A man, Nasruddin, is crawling around under the streetlamp in front of his house. His neighbor comes over to help. The man is searching for his dropped key. After combing the area under the light, the neighbor asks, “Are you sure you dropped it here?” Nasruddin says, “Oh, I dropped it over there by the door. But it’s dark over there, we’d never find it there.”

So, someone comes up with the idea that a new project management tool and some scheduling and estimating training for the project managers will solve the problem. That makes everyone, except, maybe, the Project Managers, happy. The salespeople are off the hook. Senior management can keep on doing what they are doing, and they are happy that they won’t have to deal with the complexities of making meaningful change.

The Bottomline

The simple solution is to accept the situation as it is – look at it objectively, accepting all its flaws, and with a realistic understanding of it, and then figure out what to do to eliminate the obstacles to resolving the problem. With obstacles, like fear of making meaningful change by confronting powerful stakeholders, out of the way, a workable, yet probably imperfect, solution can be found. When the solution includes ongoing assessment and refinement, it is as perfect as it can be.

The challenge is to courageously speak truth to authority, to accept the way things are, and let go into an ongoing performance improvement process to get them to where you want them to be.

Psychological Safety and Accountability for Performance Management

Written by George Pitagorsky on December 6, 2023. Posted in Articles.

Reading an article, “The Downside of Psychological Safety in the Workplace“[1], I am reminded of the need for clear thinking when it comes to applying any philosophy, particularly in the area of psychology and performance at work.

Albert Einstein advised us to make everything “as simple as possible, but not simpler.”

It is easy to take a clever idea and ruin it by mindlessly applying it as if it was the miracle cure for every situation. Avoid seeking simple solutions to complex problems. We see it operating in the application of agile management, positivity, candid communications, as well as psychological safety. When we apply a belief or theory without considering and adapting to the situation at hand, we risk making things worse instead of better.

Psychological Safety

Psychological safety is a good idea. It focuses on freedom from shame and fear of punishment. Proponents of psychological safety believe that this safety correlates with high performance.

How bad could being psychologically safe and high performance be?

But, over simplifying can lead to a belief that any kind of discipline or negative criticism is psychologically harmful and degrades performance.

The article mentioned earlier was co-authored by Wharton’s Peter Cappelli. It says that “Too much psychological safety at work can jeopardize performance in typical jobs, according to new research.”

The research implies that people in typical jobs, as opposed to creative or innovative jobs, need less psychological safety. Too much safety, and workers will slack off and their performance will suffer.

Are people in “typical” jobs more likely to perform well if they are in fear of being punished or shamed? Are they lazier, less motivated, more deserving of psychological abuse than creative problem solvers, designers, and other creativity workers? Are creative workers immune to the downside of too much safety?

I do not think so.

What are Typical Jobs?

First, it is necessary to define “typical” when it comes to jobs. Among the most common jobs are nurse, service representative, cashier, and server. And of course, there are project manager, software developer, and all the other jobs found in projects.

Creativity and innovation are not limited to jobs in R&D or design, where there is a need to risk being wrong to get it right.

Jobs in other fields may be best done with repetitive application of accepted tools and techniques, but there is always some need for creativity. Even AI based robots must be taught to assess the situation before applying a solution. It is a think out of the box, when necessary, attitude.

In Toyota’s quality management system, assembly line workers were expected to stop the line if they saw a problem. Fear of making a mistake would inhibit workers from taking the initiative to stop the line. Fear would stop workers from creatively adapting instead of following the rules.

Goals Drive Performance

High quality performance is critical to success. Performance is optimized by focusing on both short-term goals like getting the task done right, and long-term goals like continuously improving process and wellness.

Optimal performance can be achieved without shame or fear of making errors by working to “perfect” process and outcome using a quality management mindset.

Some errors or defects are expected. That is why Six Sigma is not Infinite Sigma. When they appear, errors are seen as learning opportunities to discover the cause and avoid it next time. Systemic causes are explored before blaming performers.

But that does not mean there is no accountability for poor performance. If a performer continually makes errors and fails to take responsibility for their performance, discipline is required. Without it, morale and team performance suffer.

Too Much of a Good Thing

So, it makes sense to include psychological safety and accountability in performance management. Psychological safety is meant to relieve any kind of worker of the unnecessary and damaging effects of negative motivation. Accountability is making sure that causes of performance deficiency are discovered and acknowledged.

Psychological safety, like any psychological-behavioral-management-leadership approach, should not be taken as standalone truth. It must be applied based on each situation, integrated into a broader program that values personal, organizational, environmental wellness and optimal performance.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Accountability is Needed

Accountability is often misunderstood. It would be ideal if everyone understood the need for it, had a great work ethic, wasn’t afraid of criticism, and everyone’s performance, the organization was accepted and accepting.

Accountability is not Blaming

But the ideal is not the norm and even if it was there is still a need for accountability.

Accountability is not blame. It is bringing performance to the surface to identify the causes of performance quality – whether it is good or bad. It is great to be held accountable for stellar behavior and not so great to be held accountable for errors and failures.

Whenever there is accountability, some individuals will be afraid and view consequences as punishment. They may perceive management as a bunch of mean overseers ready to criticize and punish.

There is an internal psychological dynamic at work. Some fear being fired. Some have an internal judge criticizing any imperfection with an unrealistic sense of perfection. Some in leadership positions lack empathy and misread resistance to accountability as laziness. Some blame when they find someone accountable.

Fear is generated from the inside, even when there is no external threat. Recognizing the psychological dynamic enables individuals to be self- reflective and put their inner critique in its right place. Their recognition gives management and leadership the ability to be empathetic and more effective in managing performance.

How to Go Forward

When it comes to managing performance, consider both psychological safety and sustained effective performance and continuous improvement.

Safety and accountability are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they go together to promote wellness, process quality, and sustainable high performance.

Psychological safety is promoted by a program of training and sustained reinforcement for managers and staff on what makes for the best way to handle accountability.

That kind of program confronts the causes of blaming and resistance to accountability, psychological dynamics around fear of criticism, methods for objective accountability, and the need for a quality management process that seeks sustained optimal performance.

[1] https://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/the-downside-of-psychological-safety-in-the-workplace/?utm_campaign=KatW2023&utm_medium=email&utm_source=kw_campaign_monitor&utm_term=11-22-2023&utm_content=The_Downside_of_Psychological_Safety_in_the_Workplace

Objectivity in Conflicts – Moving from Win-Lose to Win-Win

Written by George Pitagorsky on November 7, 2023. Posted in Articles.

Conflict, whether you call it difference of opinion, or disagreement, is an inevitable part of project life. Managing it well is critical to short-range project success and long-term healthy relationships. Organizational success relies on both project success and healthy ongoing relationships.

While not all conflicts or disagreements can be settled to satisfy all parties (win-win), there can be many more of them if the disagreeing parties put their efforts towards addressing the conflict and the decision that will end it rather than competing with one another.

Even when there is a win-lose conflict, cultivating long term relationships better enables follow through and future collaboration. Take for example two people vying for the same job. Imagine what might happen a year or two later when the one who lost is interviewing his opponent for a position in the ‘losers’ new company.

The way the conflict was managed will make a big difference. If they perceived a fair process and there was a cordial closure, it is more likely that they will consider their experience with one another without letting emotions overwhelm objectivity.

Passionate Objectivity

Decisions resolve conflicts and set up the action that will influence the future. Objectivity is a key to effective conflict resolution because it leads to rational and practical decisions and effective action to carry them out.

We are living in a time when beliefs are confused with reality, when ideologies and emotions drive decision making, often without considering longer term outcomes. To come to an effective decision to resolve a conflict it is necessary to suspend beliefs and attachments long enough to assess their usefulness.

Are you willing to question and validate your beliefs? Are you willing to collaborate with your opponents to confront the conflict rather than one another?

“When you see.., how belief, prejudice, conclusions, and ideals divide people and therefore breed conflict, you see that such activity is obviously not intelligence. Will you drop all your prejudices, all your opinions … so that you have a free, uncluttered mind?

“If you say it is impossible, you will never find out for yourself what it is to be intelligent.” – J. Krishnamurti

Krishnamurti pulls no punches. He says that to be well, happy, and able to take care of business, you need to stop being driven by beliefs and biases, you need to see things as they are, objectively.

Objectivity is the quality of being unbiased, relying on facts rather than opinions and personal feelings when making decisions. Objectivity does not mean ignoring the role of opinions, emotions, and gutfeel. It means taking them into consideration and making sure that the decision being made is the right decision.

If we overemphasize rational analysis, we end up with solutions that are brittle and hard to implement because they ignore the human element. If we under emphasize analysis, caught up in emotions, we get poor outcomes and ongoing strife.

Confronting the Issue

Objectivity leads to the idea of confronting the issue rather than the opponent. This is far easier to act upon in projects and organizations as opposed to the socio-political realm of ethnic groups, nations, and governments.

Here, in projects we have the advantage of relatively clear mutual objectives among stakeholders. For the most part, everyone is after a quality outcome, at a reasonable price, within time constraints. There may be differences of opinions about just about everything – objectives, designs, estimates, plans, resources, etc. But if the parties take a step back and remember what they are all after, there is a good chance that they will make good decisions to achieve it.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Taking a long view

Often, when there is conflict the tendency is to think about the short-term consequences of the decision. Objectivity requires a long-term view.

Will the design option enable easy maintenance? Will the people who are on the “losing” side take an active role in implementing the decision, even though it was not their first choice? Will ongoing relationships be healthy?

What Does it Take to be Objective

It seems so simple, objectively address the issue to come up with resolution, a decision to act, that satisfies as many participants as possible and leads to successful project completion and healthy long-term relationships. Simple, yes. But not easy.

Emotions, beliefs, and biases get in the way. If the parties are unwilling or unable to step back and objectively assess the situation and make a decision based on identified decision criteria, they will struggle to justify their position, often relying on hierarchical authority, rhetoric, and distortion rather than good sense.

Two things are required: emotional and social intelligence and an effective decision-making process.

The process is a starting point for optimizing conflict resolution. A process that includes identifying decision criteria and that uses analytical methods, opens the door to improved self-awareness and self-management. An effective process makes it less likely that strong willed, assertive people will be able to have their way regardless of the facts and what is best for the organization and project. It forces people to step back and assess things objectively.

Emotional and social intelligence promote the ability to disengage from feelings long enough to be rational and to respect the needs of others. But even when there are parties who lack the ability to exercise self-management and recognize the power of objectivity, an effective process will influence the outcome.

As you make the decisions that resolve conflicts, make the effort to step back and drop your prejudices and opinions so that you have a free, uncluttered mind? Will you take the time and effort to validate your feelings with facts and consideration of alternative views?

It takes effort and awareness to bring objectivity to bear when you feel strongly about your position. It takes skill, courage, and patience to question your beliefs, validate them, and accept that your way is not the only right way and may even be the wrong way.