Skip to main content

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.
PMTimes_July4_2023

Make Accountability a Cultural Norm: Stop Blaming

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

Just about everyone says they believe in accountability; many try to avoid it.

 

In previous articles[1] I highlighted the nature of accountability and its benefits. I’m returning to the theme because it remains a controversial topic that is linked to performance improvement and the cultural and psychological biases that get in the way.

 

Accountability is “The obligation for an individual or organization to account for its activities, accept responsibility for them, and to disclose the results in a transparent manner.”[2] It is the obligation to report and explain about what one does and does not do and to take responsibility for the consequences – “being called to account for one’s actions.”2[3]

 

Accountability is simply about acknowledging both your own behavior, and the behavior of others.

 

Though it is not so simple. It is linked to perfectionism and the avoidance of criticism. It is complicated by the reality that there are often several decision makers responsible for an outcome and that results are caused by changing and uncertain conditions, outside of anyone’s control. Accountability is too often linked to blame.

A goal is to make accountability a norm embedded in a culture committed to optimal performance. When we do that, we must avoid finger pointing and replace it with cause analysis and action to remediate current issues and avoid future instances of unskillful behavior.

 

A Scenario

Let’s look at a scenario from a construction project that as an example of accountability in action:

A contractor responsible for laying down a concrete sidewalk pours concrete on one segment that is widely off from the color expected by the sponsor. The contractor had provided a selection of samples and a light gray one was chosen. The concrete poured was yellow! When the project manager saw it he was not happy. He was even less happy when the sponsor saw it and irately demanded an explanation. The PM was accountable to the sponsor but was not responsible for the error. The contractor, accountable to the PM, took responsibility even though the underlying cause of the problem was with the vendor who supplied the cement. That vendor was accountable to the contractor.

 

The contractor didn’t try to wriggle out of the need to replace the concrete (an expensive undertaking). He took responsibility.

There was no anger, no finger pointing. Just recognition of the problem, who was responsible for remediating it, a course of remedial action, and agreement about the outcome.

 

Had the contractor behaved differently, the issues would probably end up in a legal battle and over time a poor image for the contractor. By looking at the causes of the error, the contractor and the sponsoring organization could find ways of avoiding similar problems in the future.

 

Blame is Why We Are Not Candid and Honest

Accountability is simple, but there is a big if. Candid and honest reporting is not always evident. And the reason for that is rooted in the need to blame someone and the tendency of people to avoid blame.

To blame is to “assign responsibility for a fault or wrong.” Synonyms for blame are to criticize, condemn, find fault with fault, denounce, attack, guilt, etc.

 

A recent Harvard Business Review article stated that blame is the most destructive behavior in relationships. It encompasses criticism, contempt, defensiveness, and stonewalling.

The author goes on to explain that “humans are all naturally wired to blame other people or circumstances when things go wrong.” … “Our brains interpret blame the same way they interpret a physical attack.” And “Blame also kills healthy, accountable behaviors. Nobody wants to be accountable for problems if they think they’ll be punished for doing so. Furthermore, learning and problem solving go out the window in workplaces that tolerate blame. Instead of learning from mistakes, blamed employees tend to hide their mistakes.” [3]

 

To make accountability part of the culture it is necessary to change the mindset from blaming to learning from mistakes.

To do that it is necessary to combine training, planning, and practical lessons learned sessions following projects and when errors occur during projects.

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

 

Training

There is a need for training that directly addresses accountability and awareness of the tendency to blame and avoid being blamed and how that tendency gets in the way of sustainable optimal performance.

That kind of training is uncommon, particularly in the places that need it most. It is often left out of project management and other business courses. There is a tendency to avoid psychological and mindset issues.

 

Effective psychological and mindset training requires skillful facilitation and is often best done by embedding it into “practical” management education and reinforcing it regularly in lessons learned activities. Many very good technical management skills trainers are not qualified to teach the emotional and social awareness skills that are needed to address the issue of blaming and accountability. These skills require experiential learning that goes beyond intellectual/conceptual thinking, and sensitivity to those who may be averse to looking at their own thinking and emotional awareness.

 

Planning

On a more concrete level, accountability and responsibility begin with planning. Communications planning sets the stage for accountability by establishing a reporting process.

Human resource planning establishes responsibility for reporting and performance. Task planning, scope definition, scheduling, risk management and cost estimating set expectations and define roles and responsibilities.

With a comprehensive plan a baseline and with the expectation of candid and honest reporting, accountability becomes a reality, unless it is blocked by cultural and emotional resistance.

 

Lessons Learned: What, Not Who, is the Cause

Lessons from past performance are learned during debriefs held whenever a project ends and at key points during project life. Looking back at performance is a means for individuals and organizations to learn from experience. The focus is to find causes, not point fingers.

Quality management gurus agree that the causes of errors and quality shortfalls are caused by flaws in the system rather than by individual performance alone. Even though an individuals’ behavior is the direct cause of a problem, systemic issues like poor training, inadequate support, unreasonable expectations, and flawed processes are often the underlying cause

 

[3] https://hbr.org/2022/02/blame-culture-is-toxic-heres-how-to-stop-it#:~:text=Humans%20are%20wired%20to%20blame.&text=These%20propensities%20are%20partially%20psychological,or%20environmental)%20influencing%20their%20behavior.

 

Assess Your Process

The way forward to a culture that values and uses accountability to promote improvement begins with assessment, so that individuals, teams, and the organization as a whole can acknowledge the degree to which they avoid or promote accountability and eliminate blaming.

 

[1] https://www.projecttimes.com/articles/accountability-and-performance/ and https://www.projecttimes.com/articles/accountability-a-contributor-to-optimal-performance/
[2] www.businessdictionary.com/definition/accountability.htm
[3] Sinclair, Amanda (1995). “The Chameleon of Accountability: Forms and Discourses”. Accounting, Organizations and Society20 (2/3): 219–237. doi:10.1016/0361-3682(93)E0003-Y

 

PMTimes_Jun27_2023

Evidence Based Decision Making: A Pillar of Optimal Performance

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

Decision making is at the heart of leadership, management, and performance. I write about mindful conflict and expectations management, and the decision making that underlies both. Last month the article on the use of the Evaporating Cloud technique addressed the power of collaborating to face conflict to identify goals, wants, and needs.

 

This article focuses on making decisions based on evidence and rational thinking as opposed to unfounded opinions and emotions. While feelings are important, they are often without a sound basis in reality. Acting upon them without investigating evidence and alternatives is foolish. Not considering the feelings is equally unwise.

 

“When somebody on staff asks what we should do to

address a problem, the first questions I now ask are

‘What does the research say? What is the evidence base?

What information can we gather to determine if it will

fit in different contexts?’ It’s become a way of life.”

– Jim Hmurovich, BA, MS Ed, President & CEO, Prevent Child Abuse America

 

Decisions

Here is a simple example to bring out the practical nature evidence based decision making:

In an apartment building an occupant, Ms. H, objected to the practice of leaving a building provided package cart in the elevator for the next elevator rider to return to the lobby. 

She felt that the “rude behavior of some made it impossible for others to use our very limited elevators.”

Taking a rational look at the issue, it seems that if the person who borrowed the cart took it down in the elevator there would be one less spot on the elevator for other riders.  Further investigation may uncover that Ms. H. doesn’t like to or isn’t able to get on an elevator with a cart. If that is the case, adding the cart’s borrower to the trip will do her no good.

 

Ms. H failed to consider the facts. Her emotions and biases drove her demand. She was reactive. Imagine if she was good at convincing others without providing any foundation in fact and logic, and the decision makers just threw up their hands and created a rule that “borrowers or designated alternatives must return the carts themselves.”

This is a simple example. But how often are projects hampered by reactive behavior? Instead step back to consider evidence and apply analytical thinking along with emotional and social intelligence.

 

The decision gets more serious if it was about whether to purchase a product or create one. Ms. H, now in her capacity as senior executive and project sponsor, insists that buying a product is the way to go. She was convinced that development was too risky and expensive. She had been burned when in an earlier project a decision to build vs. buy led to a project with costly overruns. She was sold by product vendors and external consultants on the idea that the products were easily customized to the unique needs of Ms. H’s organization. And that the organization would be better off changing procedures to accommodate the products.

 

An analytical review of research, the experiences of others, and a clear sense of the nature of the customization required would uncover the risks and expense of adapting to or customizing a product rather than creating one’s own to fit special needs.

The decision could go either way. The point is to combine analysis and intuition to best decisions. “Good” decisions are informed decisions that combine information (facts, feelings, interpretations and opinions, etc.) from multiple perspectives. Good decisions are more likely to successfully solve the problem at hand than decisions made based on limited information.

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

 

Evidence Based Decision Making

Evidence Based Decision-Making (EBDM) leads to informed decisions. “Evidence Based Decision-Making is a process for making decisions about a program, practice, or policy that is grounded in the best available research evidence and informed by experiential evidence from the field and relevant contextual evidence.”[1] Not only does it result in optimal decisions, but EBDM also cultivates collaborative action and cuts through unnecessary conflict.

 

Evidence Based Decision Making (EBDM) is described as a 4-part process with 10 steps and 47 sub-steps. The model is shown in Figure 1:[2]

Figure 1: The EDBM

 

Don’t worry, we won’t go into the 10 steps and 47 sub-steps. Though, having a detailed model is useful for training and to promote collective understanding of required tasks, roles, and skills. See the referenced source for the full model.

But let’s be realistic, getting decision makers and stakeholders like Ms. H to buy into a super-analytical process with 47 steps is virtually impossible. Well maybe not impossible, but requiring a mindset transformation, and that takes time.

 

The successful decision maker understands the process and adapts it to the current situation. She avoids analysis paralysis and understands that collaboration among the decision makers is as important as the weighting and scoring of facts and feelings. Based on inquiry the rest of the process is customized to fit the personalities, cultural influences, need for speed, availability of evidence and the capacity of the decision makers.

 

Evidence

EBDM means making decisions using four sources[3]

  • the best available scientific evidence – research studies, experiments, journal articles, etc.
  • organizational evidence – business data, including financial reports and performance, studies, project journals and history, organizational culture, etc.
  • experiential evidence – the collective experience of the decision-makers and outside experts
  • stakeholder evidence – stakeholder expectations, feelings, beliefs, biases, wants, needs, and values.

On the surface all four types of evidence seem objective, where “Objective evidence is evidence that is not subject to bias and is quantifiable and able to be independently confirmed and verified by using analytical or other tools. Simply put, objective evidence is based on facts and is the kind of evidence that can be independently examined, evaluated, and verified.”[4]

 

But go a little deeper and you find that there can be subjectivity in each. For example, there are often many ways to interpret scientific data. The same data can be used to justify any number of opinions, which when written up in a journal article can give the impression of being objective.

Subjective evidence is based on individual interpretations and opinions. It cannot be independently verified. When subjective evidence is valued and evaluated in concert with objective evidence and the multiple subjective experiences, it is often what leads to the most effective solutions. Evidence based decision making makes subjective evidence a valued part of the process.

 

Applying EBDM

EBDM is a process to uncover convincing evidence using objective analysis. Like all approaches to decision making, it is a quest for greater certainty about the outcome of a decision. Use it to go beyond both decision-by-the-numbers and decision-by-feelings. Objectivity and subjectivity are facts of life in any complex decision making, do not ignore either. To be objective a decision maker must acknowledge the presence of subjectivity and incorporate it into the decision making.

If you are fortunate enough to be making decisions optimally, resolving conflicts, setting expectations, experiencing great outcomes, just keep doing what you are doing. If there is room for improvement, bring EBDM into your work, whether it is you alone or the team. Raise it as a topic as you work to continuously improve performance guided by informed decisions.

 

[1] https://vetoviolence.cdc.gov/apps/evidence/docs/ebdm_82412.pdf
[2] https://archpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13690-022-00843-0
[3]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6308777/#:~:text=The%20four%20sources%20of%20evidence,expectations%20(1%E2%80%933)
[4] https://www.ocdisabilityattorneys.com/disability-benefits-for-objective-versus-subjective-evidence#:~:text=%E2%80%9CSubjective%E2%80%9D%20evidence%2C%20on%20the,accepted%20on%20faith%2C%20or%20rejected
PMTimes_Jun13_2023

Managing Uncertainty with Risk Management and Communication

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

“Sticking with … uncertainty, getting the knack of relaxing in the midst of chaos,
learning not to panic—this is the spiritual path.”  ~ Pema Chodron

 

Spiritual or not, this is the path of the project manager. Accepting uncertainty is a mindset that we want to promote for all stakeholders. It is about accepting and managing change and the uncertainty it brings.

 

This article is a follow up to my February 2023 article Goals Are NOT Expectations[1]

 

I’ve experienced more than one organization that refrains from publishing long term plans, cost and revenue expectations, and budgets out of fear that they will be penalized when predictions are not realized. In other settings, project managers are held accountable for missing deadlines and budgets that seemed realistic when they were created and used to justify project approval. Even when changes out of the control of the project manager were the cause of the project’s schedule slippage, budget overrun, or failure to meet benefits expectations.

 

Paradox

There is a paradox. Everyone likes certainty, and that like, left unchecked, leads to problems.

It is fine to like certainty but expecting it causes dissatisfied stakeholders and project failure. While we try to approach certainty, we recognize that, with few exceptions, it is unattainable.

 

The Best Made Plans

“The best-laid plans of mice and men often go awry.” – Robert Burns

Burns got it right. Schedule and budget as best we can, and the next day there can be change, a sickness, storm, strike, or any random event that disrupts the schedule and causes cost overruns. Even if you are clever enough to build in buffers, they can be blown through.

We know we can be certain of some things that, for example, we can be certain that there will be change, we can’t control everything that affects our projects and that things will not always be how we’d like them to be. However, we can never be certain of staff and resource availability, requirements, deliverables, cash flow, the completion of tasks, inspections, tests, and more.

 

Since the certainty of a plan is a pipedream, we are left with two choices, don’t plan or manage uncertainty. Given Benjamin Franklin’s statement, “If You Fail to Plan, You Are Planning to Fail” the first option is not recommended. That leaves us with the need to manage uncertainty.

Doing it means accepting and letting go to manage expectations using risk and communication.

 

Accepting Reality

The first step is to accept that uncertainty is an unavoidable reality in projects. This acceptance is a mindset change from thinking that everything must come out the way we want it to everything will occur as it does, and we can work with it. Acceptance is the key to the “knack of relaxing in the midst of chaos.”

Acceptance does not mean passivity. With acceptance and confidence in your ability to handle anything that happens, acceptance puts you on a solid platform for success. You relax in the midst of chaos. Until you and your stakeholders accept uncertainty you cannot optimize your performance. Acceptance is what enables you to let go and let your own and your team’s skill and experience take care of business.

 

Then manage expectations using risk management, and communication, to get the reality of uncertainty across to all stakeholders and have them accept and let go.

Lets look at expectations to see their role in managing uncertainty and the way risk management and communication are keys to managing them.

 

Managing Expectations

Expectations are beliefs about the way something will come about in the future. When stakeholders have rational expectations, accepting uncertainty, they are more likely to keep calm and carry on, even when faced with chaos. With calm acceptance, the probability of success is high.

It is both the organization’s and project manager’s responsibility to make sure expectations are rational and reasonable. Risk management and communication are the tools for managing expectations.

The bottom-line expectation is to work for the best outcome possible while being ready for anything. It is expected that you as a project manager will plan and work to satisfy stakeholders. When expectations are well managed, stakeholders are more likely to be satisfied. Satisfied stakeholders mean project success.

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

 

Communication

Communication is the means to achieve rational and realistic expectations.

Communication uses the results of risk management to inform and lead. Communication includes plan presentation and revisions, and continuous candid dialogue in the form of regular progress reporting and informal conversations.

For example, when presenting a plan stress the planned outcome in terms of a range of possibilities with different likelihoods of occurrence. Include statements like “While we are confident that we will meet our sche3dule and budget expectations, we acknowledge that there may be variance. Our risk assessment and plan goes into the details regarding that possible variance. We will regularly assess risks and performance to manage expectations.”

 

Mindset Training

Mindset training is a form of communication. Its purpose is to enable setting the stage for effective performance. Without mindset training that confronts biases and beliefs about the need for and ability to achieve certainty the project manager’s ability to manage expectations is limited.

 

Training time is limited. That is why mindset training is best done by embedding it in skills training as well as in regular meetings and presentations. For example, when giving a presentation to senior stakeholders take a few minutes to highlight that plans are predictions, and that they do not guarantee the predicted outcome. That is a great introduction to the part of the presentation that addresses risk. Posters and informal dialogues can help. In project management training include a segment on expectations management and the need to accept and manage uncertainty.

 

Risk Management

Risk management is the key part of planning that acknowledges and accepts uncertainty and manages expectations. Risk management seeks to identify and avoid the things that get in the way of success, and to promote the things that enable it

We assess risks and plan to remediate them with effective responses. We acknowledge that there are both known and unknown risks. We monitor and adjust throughout the project.

The degree to which risk management is a formal and regularly performed part of planning is a measure of whether uncertainty is accepted in an organization. Producing a plan that has a single, unqualified completion date, expense cap and benefits expectation is a sign that more mindset training and communication is needed.

 

Action

What do you and your organization need to do to create the mindset that uncertainty is unavoidable?

 

[1] https://www.projecttimes.com/articles/goals-are-not-expectations-change-mindsets-to-avoid-the-suffering-of-disappointed-stakeholders/
PMTimes_May23_2023

Arguing to Learn and to Win

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

The recent INC. article, Stuck in a Heated Argument? Follow the ‘ATL Rule’ to Ensure Everyone Wins[1] set me to thinking about how best to approach the way we manage major conflicts and minor disagreements, how we argue.

In my book, Managing Conflict in Projects: Applying Mindfulness and Analysis for Optimal Results[2] the message is to approach managing differences with clarity, while accepting the reality that there may be emotions involved, not being driven by them. This is emotional intelligence, the ability to be aware of and manage emotions. It is a foundation for healthy relationships, and healthy relationships include the ability to manage disagreements, whether they are small arguments or major conflicts.

The word conflict needs definition. The general definition from Merriam-Webster is “an extended struggle : fight, battle. : a clashing or sharp disagreement (as between ideas, interests, or purposes) : mental struggle resulting from needs, drives, wishes, or demands that are in opposition or are not compatible. conflict.” From Cambridge dictionary, an active disagreement between people with opposing opinions or principles: There was a lot of conflict between him and his father. It was an unpopular policy and caused a number of conflicts within the party. His outspoken views would frequently bring him into conflict with the president.”

Here, the term conflict covers any kind of disagreement or struggle that starts off with opposing views. Managing conflict seeks to resolve the conflict.

The conflicts that make the news are beyond the scope of this article, though the same basic principles apply. Here the focus is on the kinds of conflicts that come up in organizations, projects and processes. The principles are:

  1. Step back to see the big picture and how your emotions, beliefs, biases, and mental models affect your perspective.
  2. Seek to understand your mindset, goals, needs, and wants and what influences them
  3. Seek to understand the other parties’ goals, needs, and wants and what influences them
  4. Be mindful of your words, behavior, and feelings, and their impact
  5. Assess the degree to which you can trust and collaborate with the others
  6. Promote a win-win attitude in which the parties jointly resolve the conflict
  7. Recognize that there are some disagreements that cannot be settled with a win for both parties
  8. Compile facts and opinions and examine and use them in decision making to resolve the conflict.

Arguing to Learn and to Win

The INC. article points out that scientific study shows we should “enter debates looking to learn rather than win.” Since it is very difficult for many people to give up winning, I think the right mindset for working on a disagreement is looking to learn and looking to win.

That opens the question of what it means to win. Does it mean getting your way? Or does it mean coming to the optimal solution to the problem at hand? For example, two designers in conflict about which design should be used in a project can collaborate to identify the objectively best design or they can battle one another to get their design accepted.

Researchers identify two primary mindsets that set a stage for the way arguments are addressed: arguing-to-learn (ATL) and arguing-to-win (ATW). In the ATL approach the parties cooperate to get a better understanding of the situation. It implies open mindedness to discover the resolution through research, dialog, and analysis.

In the ATW approach the tendency to believe in a single truth and to cut off or ignore debate in which conflicting opinions and facts are raised. Instead of discovering a resolution the ATW mindset often begins with the resolution, takes it as truth and argues for it with a closed mind.

Understanding the different mindsets and the benefit of using an ATL, the challenge is to work towards making an ATL mindset part of your conflict management process.

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

A Hybrid Approach

As with all complex social issues, there is no one right answer. Let’s not over-simplify and think that it’s either ATL or ATW. We can also argue to learn and win (ATLAW).

In projects meaningful arguments are about whether, why, how, who, and when things will be done. If the argument is not settled the project may be delayed or motivation and morale will be impacted. If the argument is not settled well, the outcome will be subpar.

Of course, there are other arguments about politics, religion, freedom vs. authoritarianism, the causes of global warming, etc. For these important issues, there may never be a resolution. But when it comes to deciding on a design to use, or a budget or schedule, there must be a winner.

We can take the position that the winner is not the person with the idea, it is the idea that wins. And if the best idea wins, then the people involved win, where winning means that their needs have been met. If the parties take an ATL approach they creatively discover a resolution that may blend elements of alternative solutions or pick one over another. The discovery results from the learning process. Then there is the perception of winning or losing

 

Buy-in

If everyone agrees as to what it means to win, and recognizes that learning improves the probability of winning, then the players will naturally take a collaborative approach facing the issue rather than facing one another.

But ego and closed mindedness get in the way. The emotional need to win, psychological tendencies to dominate and win, and not knowing of an alternative to win-lose confrontation make collaboration difficult, if not impossible. Getting past that barrier requires process awareness, self-reflection, coaching and training.

Look at your process.

  • Are the principles stated above realistic?
  • Do they naturally occur as part of a healthy flow that allows for differences and promotes win-win resolutions? If they do, be grateful and carry on.
  • If not, how can you subtly or overtly discuss the conflict management process to promote open-mindedness and rational thinking?
[1] Hobson, Nick, INC. https://www.inc.com/nick-hobson/stuck-in-a-heated-argument-follow-atl-rule-to-ensure-everyone-wins.html?utm_source=newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=INC%20-%20This%20Morning%20Newsletter.Newsletter%20-%20Inc%20-%20This%20Morning%201-13-23&leadId=139009&mkt_tok=NjEwLUxFRS04NzIAAAGJShVVfSySV8qVyMiwe8jQgTYv2wo6BL8ZCEskpEFN5woe4jMmz75uMewcTu8h7xWU1aXXH9Cet_es7oYwP7-5VS8xiaHyKS9Wg0DB_YM
[2] Pitagorsky, George, PMI https://www.amazon.com/Managing-Conflict-Projects-Applying-Mindfulness/dp/193558958X
PMTimes_May02_2023

Disagreements, Decision Making and the Evaporating Cloud

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

Is it too much to ask that decision makers make use of a collaborative goal and values-based conflict resolution approach to come to effective resolutions that satisfy needs?

Whether decisions are made in socio-political, organizational, and personal realms we all know that they are important. They direct action, resolve and cause disagreements. Decisions, if carried out, have physical, financial, emotional and relationship impacts.

 

Decisions are most likely to be “good” ones when disagreements or conflicts are well managed. The best decisions are made with clear objectivity and lead to achieving goals.

In my article Arguing to Learn and to Win I described a hybrid approach between arguing to learn (ATL) and arguing to win (ATW). This article focuses on ATL and how winning can emerge from learning through a collaborative approach like the Evaporating Cloud[1] (EC), one of the six thinking processes in Eliyahu Goldratt’s Theory of Constraints.

 

Fulfilling goals

The process is a technique designed to cut through disagreements by turning attention to fulfilling all parties’ goals rather than seeking only what each person wants.

In short, EC works on the premise that conflicts can be resolved when the parties get what they need. They satisfy their goals and values.

If the overarching goal is prosperity, peace, health, freedom, and happiness, decision makers must have an accurate sense of what each term means in concrete practical terms.

 

In the world of projects, goals like prosperity are expressed in terms of cost savings, revenue, and profit. Happiness is satisfying stakeholder expectations. Health is about the goal of sustaining the wellbeing of project performers to enable effective performance over time.

With an understanding of goals, we can identify relative weights. For example, are financial goals more important than employee health and wellbeing? Are the weights negotiable?

 

In projects it is much easier to attain consensus about goals than it is in social and political disagreements. Projects are objective focused and, assuming the project is a healthy one, the objectives align with organizational goals.

When there is no consensus on goals and values, we have a zero-sum game with winners and losers. Handling those is a subject for a future article on arguing to win.

 

The Evaporating Cloud (EC)

Now, back to the Evaporating Cloud (EC) technique and finding win-win resolution.

“If you really want to remove a cloud from your life, you do not make a big production out of it, you just relax and remove it from your thinking. That’s all there is to it.[6]“

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

 

“The Evaporating Cloud tool is intended to similarly “vaporize” difficult problems by collaboratively resolving an underlying conflict. “[Goldratt teaches] that every problem is a conflict, and that conflicts arise because we create them by believing at least one erroneous assumption. Thus, simply by thinking about the assumptions that enforce the existence of a conflict, we should be able to resolve any conflict by evaporating it with the power of our thinking.[2] “

Though the power of thinking has its limitations. To use a collaborative approach, at least one of the parties must step back to objectively perceive the cloud, and their place in it:

  • Emotions
  • Needs vs. Wants
  • Willingness to negotiate and collaborate to face the issues not the opponent.

 

Sharing Goals

In addition, the parties’ goals, values, and priorities must be compatible. For example, is getting elected or promoted more important than deciding on an optimal decision to serve the organization? Is your goal to have your design selected or to achieve project and organizational goals. Is one design demonstratively better than another? Is objectivity and telling the truth a shared value?

To answer these questions you must identify, understand, describe, and prioritize goals and values. What would happen if your goals weren’t met? Can you live with a negotiated compromise solution? Will the other parties agree to a solution that doesn’t give them everything they want?

 

Mutually exposing goals makes negotiation easier. Though, without open sharing it is still possible to use EC by subtly facilitating a discovery process. It is important to consider that sometimes openly sharing one’s goals may not be possible or desirable. There may be hidden agendas and motivations. Cultural norms may not support such openness. There are trust and personality issues.

 

Addressing the Wants

Knowing the goals, attention goes from Needs to Wants. Wants are about the way to achieve the goals and get what you need. For example, in projects a key goal is to satisfy stakeholders’ expectations. There are several ways to do that and there are often conflicting views on which is best.

If one way is as good as another, what does it matter which you choose? Flip a coin. Decision made. Can you and the others give up getting what you want if you get what you need? If one way is best, what makes it so? What are the criteria for deciding? Who will decide and how and when will they do it? Will they rely on emotional rhetoric, hierarchy, or analysis?

 

Benefits

A collaborative approach makes resolving conflicts a game that you can both learn from and enjoy while you find an optimal resolution and promote healthy ongoing relationships.

Relationship health is an often-overlooked benefit of collaborative decision making. “Don’t burn bridges” is good advice. Winning is great but if you are not playing the long game, you are likely to have a Pyrrhic victory. You win but at a price that is so costly that victory is tantamount to defeat.

 

For example, you or your team win an argument by undermining and alienating another team that you must work with to implement the decision or collaborate on future projects. How will that affect the organization’s goals? You may think you will never see your opponents again, but you never know if you will encounter one of them in an interview for a job you have applied for.

Less likely to be overlooked is the benefit of finding an optimal solution, whether it is a blend of elements from alternatives or choosing a demonstrably more effective outcome. Of course, there is no guarantee. But if people commit to an analytical process, collective intelligence and multiple perspectives should result in higher quality decisions.

 

Taking It Home

Assess your personal approach to conflict resolution, disagreements, and decision making? Assess your team’s and organization’s approach? Is there room for improvement?

Share this article to start a conversation as the first step in adopting a collaborative approach and adapting it to your situation.

 

[1]There are many references for EC, Wikipedia is a good place to start for further information. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evaporating_Cloud
[2] Scheinkopf, Lisa J. Thinking for a change: Putting the TOC thinking processes to use. CRC Press, 2002.