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_Sep14_2022

Manifesting Project Success – Setting Objectives

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

In project work the whole idea is to manifest success – satisfying stakeholder expectations by delivering timely and financially and emotionally rewarding results.

“The word ‘manifestation’ means to create something or turn something from an idea into a reality. In psychology, manifestation generally means using our thoughts, feelings, and beliefs to bring something to our physical reality.”[1]

 

From Idea to Reality

In the general sense, manifesting, like a project, is turning an idea into a reality. In the psychological sense it is the practice of thinking positively to get what you want.

The message is to be clear about what you want, visualize it and cultivate the mindset that you will get it.

Underlying this is a principle that your positive attitude and intention will attract what you are after. It is the Law of Attraction, which believes that if you think positive thoughts positive things will come to you – “what you think is what you get.” If your magic is not strong enough to manifest what you want, positive attitude motivates the work required to get what you think.

 

Does it Work?

Manifesting is a popular wellness idea. In that context it is creating the conditions for a fulfilling life. In some circles, there is the belief that you can get what you want – money, a lover, …, whatever – by thinking it into existence or by chanting or praying to a god, saint, or angel.

Does it work? Well in my experience it does. I often tell the story of how my son manifested a pellet rifle that he craved. It appeared out of thin air at my feet while walking to the subway. Now it could have been a coincidence, but I am convinced that it was the power of his thinking that manifested the gun.

But let’s not get distracted by the magic. Though it is interesting to explore.

A more scientific view is that thinking positively, believing it can be done, and having a clear picture of what is wanted sets the stage for the work required to  achieve it. For example, if I set my mind to getting a promotion and believe that it is possible, I am more likely to persistently do the work required – get a certification, make a good impression on my boss, lobby for it, etc.

 

Manifesting Project Success – Setting Objectives

In project management we manifest project outcomes and success. We conceptualize and visualize the results we want, commit them to writing as objectives and requirements, fine tune the description to make sure everyone is aligned with it, and that it is meaningful and achievable. That sets in motion the manifesting – the work to achieve the objectives.

However, applying positive thinking and mystical or spiritual powers can only help. While we do not rely on our thoughts alone to manifest the results we want, thoughts and feelings influence team performance.

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

 

Objectives

Arguably, the most important thing we can do to manifest project success is to be clear about achievable objectives and make sure that stakeholders agree about what they want to accomplish. Knowing what we want is a must if we want to get it. Having a team that is aligned on objectives avoids unnecessary conflict, wasted efforts, and enhances the probability of success.

Project management principles recognize that objectives drive the project. What we think sets the stage for what we get. That is why it is so important to set unambiguous objectives.

The standard wisdom expressed as SMAART objectives is a foundation. SMAART stands for Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Agreed upon, Relevant, and Time bound. I have added a second A to highlight the need for agreement to ensure stakeholder alignment and the focus it brings.

 

Specific

Specific means that the objective is unambiguous. Vague and ambiguous objectives, for example, “Improve sales” leaves too much to the imagination. Energy will be wasted as performers try to figure out or make assumptions about what ambiguous objectives really mean. An objective like “Improve sales of product X by 15% with a profit margin of 50% by the end of this fiscal year” takes away uncertainty regarding sales of what, by how much and by when.

 

Measurable

Measurable means that whether the objective is achieved or not is not left to the imagination. The measure of success may be quantitative or qualitative, but it must be clear enough to enable stakeholders to know what they are shooting for and whether they have hit it.

 

A quantitative measure is provided in the specific objective – 15%  etc. A qualitative measure can be added by including the objective of satisfying stakeholder expectations. Since being time bound is part of a SMAART objective, the target date provides another measurable objective.

 

Achievable

An objective that is not achievable takes a project on a ride to failure, waste, and unnecessary conflict. Whether something is achievable or not is subjective – one person might think that increasing 50% profitable sales by 15% is impossible, another that it is a stretch, and yet another that it is a “piece of cake.” Feasibility studies are needed to avoid the loss of enthusiasm that occurs when the team thinks it is saddled with an impossible task. Their belief turns into a self-fulfilling prophesy – an example of what you think is what you get.

 

Agreed Upon

This characteristic of objectives is critical and often left out of the “one A” definition of SMART. This second A points to the need for focus and alignment. Having team members who do not agree with the definition of objectives divides the team and does not support the focus needed for success.

 

Relevant

If the objective is not aligned with organizational goals, the attitude of performers and other stakeholders will be effected. That effect will be a loss of resources and motivations. A relevant objective will bring more attention to the project, particularly from senior stakeholders like sponsors and executives. That attention will help to motivate performers and functional managers.

 

Time Bound

Establishing a clear and achievable time frame or target date for a project is part of the specific objective and provides a measure for judging success.

 

Manifesting Success

If you want to manifest success in your projects, make sure you have clearly understood objectives that are agreed upon by all the stakeholders. That way the energy and efforts of the team will be focused on achieving them.

That focus doesn’t mean that all the team has to do is think and visualize the outcome. They must plan and apply intelligence, effort, and resources to execute the plan to achieve success.

[1] Davis, T PhD, Manifestation: Definition, Meaning, and How to Do It https://www.berkeleywellbeing.com/manifestation.html

 

PMTimes_Aug31_2022

Best of PMTimes: Managing Fear and Anger in Projects

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

Published on: Mar 19, 2020

Fear, including anxiety, and anger are realities. They are normal. They appear in all situations, including projects.

There is a challenge – to not suppress or ignore these emotions AND to not to act out in emotionally driven behavior. Finding the place between suppression and acting out takes wisdom and skillful effort.

What are the causes of fear and anger? How can we minimize the causes? What are the side effects of being driven by them? How can the power of these emotions be channeled for productive use?

The answers to those questions require mindful introspection. It requires a process among the people involved to explore and resolve, or at least understand, the dynamics of people working together. Emotional and social intelligences along the willingness to forgive and work on oneself are used to avoid the lashing out, withdrawal, blaming, irrational expectations and the other side effects of reacting to emotions.

 

Causes: Uncertainty and Lack of Control

A predominant cause of fear in projects is lack of control. Uncertainty makes people feel that because they cannot predict the future they are at risk. For example, not knowing if one is safe blossoms into worry about negative outcomes. Thinking that one might not get one’s way creates anxiety that can transform itself into overly aggressive behavior.

Uncertainty and the lack of control it elicits leave many people feeling uneasy and helpless. Uneasiness and helplessness are experienced physically as unpleasant sensations in the belly, chest or throat. Thoughts and worries run rampant. We label the sensations and thoughts as the emotion fear. Similarly, we label the burning in our chest or gut and accompanying thoughts as anger.

 

Relationship Between Fear and Anger

Fear and anger are closely related to one another. They are both unpleasant and, may range from subtle anxiety and annoyance to terror and rage. Fear and anger occur during stressful or otherwise challenging events. People who evoke fear or anger are seen as hostile. Hostility elicits anger and conflict.

Anger can be a symptom of fear. Fear is perceived as weakness, anger as strength. When one is feeling fearful and weak, anger comes up to create a sense of strength. It is the fight part of the fight or flight response to threats. Fear is transformed into anger and directed at the someone (including oneself) or something perceived as the cause. Anger becomes a means for regaining control and a mask for the “weakness” of fear. For example, when in conflict, say, over a design alternative or a plan, the other party becomes the target of anger because there is uncertainty and the fear of a negative outcome.

Anger can be directed at an inanimate object, like a computer. This happens because one cannot control the device’s operation. Frustration arises. There is worry about not being able to get required work done on time.

A project manager might become angry at an administrative department or vendor responsible for a delay. The anger arises out of the lack of control over that department’s response or the vendor’s delivery. There is the fear that the delay will result in schedule slippage and the slippage will be blamed on the project manager.

It doesn’t matter that neither the department head nor the vendor has control. It doesn’t matter that they would like to avoid angering their client or that they have no control themselves. Nor does it matter that they are as fearful as the project manager. Fear and anger are emotions and emotions are not rational. When rationality is brought into play, the emotions can be managed effectively, without suppressing them.

 

What’s Wrong with Fear or Anger?

There is nothing wrong with anger or fear. Fear is a signal that triggers heightened awareness. Anger brings up lots of energy and clears the way for action. However, being driven by either of them is counterproductive.

Freezing in fear or avoiding conflict is unproductive.

In the moment, acting out in anger, might feel better than experiencing fear. However, reactively acting out in anger is unproductive and destructive. It does not lead to a positive outcome. Breaking the computer or yelling at the department head is not likely to put one in control or make things more certain. In fact, it is likely that acting out in anger will make things worse. Uncertainty increases because it is impossible to know how the other party will react to being the target of anger. A punched-out computer screen will not improve productivity. Not only that, it will only feel good for a moment. Then, there will be embarrassment, guilt and remorse followed by an expense to replace the computer.

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

 

Neither Suppression nor Acting Out

Suppressing fear or anger is as unskillful as reactively acting out. The middle ground between acting out and suppression is recognition, acceptance and transformation.

 

Recognize

First, recognize the “afflictive” emotion (fear or anger afflicts one as unpleasant, painful sensations and often lead to behavior that afflicts others) as soon as possible.

This is an aspect of emotional intelligence – awareness of one’s own emotions early in the emotion’s life. Emotions grab hold in tenths of a second and then increase in intensity, taking over the mind with the need to somehow relieve the pain, or, if the emotion is a pleasant one, to keep it going. The earlier one recognizes the symptoms of an emotion the easier it is to moderate behavior.

Part of the recognition is to be aware that the emotion is not you. Saying “I am angry” or “I am afraid” sends the wrong message. It is more effective to say, “I am feeling anger.” That reinforces the reality that the emotion is a feeling and that, like all feelings, it is a temporary complex of thoughts and physical sensations.

Step back from the feeling, observe it and do not be identified with it.

 

Acceptance and Transformation

Once the emotion is recognized, it can be accepted. One accepts that there is anger instead of denying or suppressing it. Acceptance enables transformation.

Let’s be clear, acceptance a situation does not mean perpetuating it. No one can change existing conditions. However, one can, to a degree, influence the future. Acceptance creates the solid platform needed for effective behavior. It enables transformation.

Transformation takes the emotion’s energy and uses it to fuel skillful behavior. The emotion represents energy. Energy is neither good nor bad, it is just energy. How it is used is critical.

For example, let’s look at the situation of the vendor that realizes that there will be a delay in its delivery of a necessary product. The delay will have a ripple effect in the project. The vendor rep experiences anxiety. She fears that the project manager, who has a history of volatile behavior, will freak out. She recognizes her anxiety and can let it cause her to hold back on the truth or use it as a signal that she’d better be careful to craft a communication that while it gives the PM the truth earlier rather than later, also helps to avoid an outburst.

As for the project manager. If he recognizes and is motivated, he can catch his anger before he starts yelling at the vendor rep and instead channels his energy into assessing the impact and changing the plan to minimize disruption. He must recognize his anxiety and be candid with his stakeholders. If he is emotionally intelligent and empathetic, he will realize that the vendor rep is anxious.

The bottom line is that it is skillful to manage fear and anger without suppressing them. Doing so requires the cultivation of mindful awareness to enable recognition, acceptance and transformation.

PMTimes_Aug17_2022

The Most Important Thing: Systems Thinking

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

No One Thing

What is the most important thing in project management? You could say that there is no one most important thing. In the context of our bodies, is the brain more important than the heart, or lungs? One without the others is useless. Weakness in one weakens the others as well as the whole.

The same is true in managing projects. There is no single function – creating a plan, controlling the project, communication, team building, stakeholder, and human relations, etc. – that is most important. Creating a hierarchy of importance fails to acknowledge that bringing all those factors together in dynamic balance, influenced by the needs of the project environment, is critical to success.

The PMI Standard for Project Management[1] lists functions and principles. It supports the idea that none of them is any more or less important than the others.

 

Systems View

The way you view the world influences your behavior, your values, and goals,
and the degree to which you can handle challenges.

But maybe there is a most important thing after all. It is to view the whole, the parts, and the relationships among them in a dynamic ‘dance’ that influences performance. In other words, the most important thing is having a systems perspective with systems thinking.

The PMBOK supports systems thinking. “There are various components, such as portfolios. programs, projects, and operations, which can be used individually and collectively to create value. Working together these components comprise a system for delivering value…”[2] We can take that further to include all the project management functions and principles and the components of the project environment as part of that system.

The systems view recognizes the realities of interdependence, cause and effect, and continuous change. That makes it a practical model for describing the nature of the world of things, relationships, and the processes that dynamically tie them together. It is a model you can use to better understand your world and to be more likely to respond rather than react.

Remembering that any view or model is a concept that can only approximate reality, use the model as a way of simplifying the incredibly complex world we live in and giving guidelines for how best to manage it. The descriptions and boundaries of systems approximate the nature of the environment.

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

 

Intersecting Systems and Processes

The systems view sees our organizations, communities, economies, projects, operations, families, selves, bodies, as intersecting systems within an overriding system of systems. Systems change as they are influenced by changes in conditions and actions anywhere within or around them. Systems are activated and changed by processes – complexes of performers acting to make change. Processes are the way systems and parts of systems interrelate.

Having a sense of the interplay among the systems’ parts (including yourself), you can more effectively influence change and promote effective performance and quality of life. While being part of the system, assessing it analytically and objectively, as if you were outside of it, promotes objectivity and clarity.

 

Practical Application – Cause and Effect Analysis

Systems thinking and the idea of the interdependence of equally important factors is interesting but how does it help to optimize performance?

Since the view promotes objectivity clarity, it frees project managers from the biases and beliefs that get in the way of optimal performance. The project manager with a systems view knows that everything that happens in the project is caused by something – a condition or action in or around the project.

The systems-oriented project manager uses this concept in managing projects by cultivating two perspectives, 1) the big picture – the look and feel of the entire project within its environment and 2) the detailed view of the individual factors that influence the whole.

For example, project reporting and performance assessment is best structured to assess the project from both perspectives. The big picture view tells us if there is something that needs attention. The detailed analysis of the individual factors diagnoses the cause of the problem and enables solutions.

In one project, a high-level view gave the impression that things were not going well. There were an abnormal number of conflicts, late deliverables, and abundant changes. Assessing the situation to uncover the cause, it was found that client personnel were not dedicating quality time to the project. As a result, they did not pay sufficient attention to the definition of requirements. Knowing that there was a cause behind insufficient client dedication, instead of going into excuses and recriminations, the project manager assessed the situation further. Was it that the clients were too busy doing their operational tasks, a lack of understanding of the importance of the project, or poorly executed requirements definition?

The cause was not one single factor. The system was a complex one in which each of the factors – insufficient time, lack of priority, and requirements definition performance – contributed to the problem.

With an understanding of the “system” and a sense of how best to influence change in it, the project manager initiated a communication process that identified the issues, motivated senior management to communicate the importance of the project and the role of the clients. This enabled client availability. In addition, the requirements definition team was required to change its approach to one that made client engagement easier, less time consuming and more effective.

 

Stepping Back

Taking a systems view enables the clarity that not only helps in diagnosing and addressing problems. It helps to avoid them by enabling project managers to step back and accurately view their project and its place in its environment. Then they can identify all the factors that are needed to achieve objectives and the ones that are likely to get in the way. With that knowledge, planning is likely to be more effective.

[1] The Standard for Project Management and a Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK), Seventh Edition

[2] PMBOK, Seventh Ed, P. 8.

PMTimes_Aug2_2022

When is a Decision Final?

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

This article addresses the question, when can a decision no longer be changed?

Everything we do results from a conscious or unconscious decision. When it comes to anything important, it is better to make firm conscious decisions.

In projects, changing decisions about objectives, requirements, designs, staffing, and vendor selection is disruptive and costly. Not changing them may also be disruptive and costly.

 

When is a Decision Final?

A decision is final when it can no longer be changed. It can no longer be changed when the decision has been completely implemented or when authority, rules, and regulations say the decision cannot be changed.

We can’t revoke a decision to build a house once the house is built. It is physically impossible (in the absence of time travel) to go back and not build it. While it is physically possible to change a decision that has been deemed final by authority, there are political ramifications.

 

Models, Beliefs, and Relationships

Models and beliefs about sticking to decisions influence the decision-making process. Relationships among stakeholders are affected. Some expect that once a decision has been made the decision-making ends. They believe that going back to reassess a decision is a sign of poor decision making – being sloppy, wishy-washy or indecisive.

Consider the relationship between executives, clients, requirements analysts, and implementers.

  • Clients and executives love decisiveness and hate ‘analysis paralysis’ – they want to ‘get on with the work’
  • Clients often change their minds
  • Requirements analysts are charged with avoiding the need for changes and communicating changes to the implementers
  • Implementers are often ‘annoyed’ by the changes, thinking that the clients are indecisive and oblivious of the impact of their changes and the analysts are not doing a good enough job when eliciting requirements
  • Analysts feel that they are not given sufficient time and do not have sufficient access to decision makers.

We value both firm decisions and the flexibility to change them.

 

Expect Change

Change is inevitable. Consider a conscious decision-making process:

“1) Define values, goals, objectives and specifications underlying the issue or question

2) Define the decision making and target environments

3) Agree upon decision criteria

4) Identify solution options

5) Analyze and compare solution options vis-à-vis the decision criteria

6) Decide

7) Implement the decision

8) Monitor and adjust

9) Reflect on the process for lessons learned.”[1]

We see that step seven, Implement the decision, is not the finish line. We acknowledge the need for adjusting decisions whenever conditions change.

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

 

Decision Making and Change Management

This question of when a decision is final links decision making and project change management.

The heart of change management is deciding whether to change previously made decisions.

A change management process decides whether to allow change to earlier, frozen, decisions. Changes are costly. Changing a requirements or design decision before it is implemented costs far less than changing it afterwards. Changing a decision that has been baked into a contract can require legal proceedings. Changing a screen design in a website less costly than changing the design of a physical product, like a bridge or building once construction is started.

 

A Middle Way

Enable and minimize change.

We want to be flexible, open to changing our minds, and we want to avoid wasting time and effort caused by having to unnecessarily revisit decisions.

Let’s look at a case. A design team decided on the use of a certain type of handheld device. Based on that decision a procurement process was started. A couple of weeks into the procurement process for the devices, the design team changed its mind. They decided that a handheld device would not work. They changed the design to use work stations instead. This wasted the time and effort of the procurement team and the vendors they reached out to for bids.

Was the change warranted? Yes, it was recognized that use of handheld devices made operational costs excessive.

Could the design change have been avoided? Maybe. If the team avoided unnecessary changes by spending more time and effective effort to better understand the decision factors – objectives, work environment, criteria – using checklists, and making sure people speak up with ideas, comments and criticisms.

 

Causes

In this case, the design team became aware that they had not consider the operational issue of the loss, damage, and ‘shrinkage’ of the devices when a member spoke up to bring the operational issue to light.

Why hadn’t he/she/they spoken up earlier? Maybe the idea just dawned, or out of fear to speak up during the design sessions. Either way, it was a good thing the issue was raised and that the design team and leadership accepted the change, even though it disrupted schedules and wasted effort. The up front loss was miniscule compared to the expenses saved.

Imagine if design team leadership didn’t support the change, saying that it was too late or too politically dangerous to question the earlier decision. Not only would there have been an inferior outcome, but some members of the design team would also be demotivated, thinking that their leadership was unprofessional and cowardly.

If this kind of thing happened frequently it would be a sign that the design team’s process needed some improvement.

 

Action

Adapt an approach that dynamically balances enabling and avoiding changes.

Any project decision can be changed until the decision has been completely implemented. Minds change when information regarding decision factors change. While you may never be perfect, make sure your decision-making process addresses all the factors that influence the decision. Take the time to get it as right as possible the first time.

Consider how often stakeholders change their mind after having decided, and how many decisions end up being poor ones.

Do you need to devote more time and focused effort to the decision process? Do you need more formal facilitation, brainstorming, checklists, and input from experts regarding objectives, decision criteria, environmental considerations, and options?

[1] https://www.projecttimes.com/articles/the-power-of-decision-criteria/
PMTimes_July12_2022

The Power of Decision Criteria

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles.

Every decision is made based on criteria. Are you and your team conscious of your criteria?

Decision making is at the heart of project management. Doing it well requires skill and awareness of the process. This article addresses decision criteria and the need for up front and formal definition of them as part of a decision-making process. A previous article Get the Right Answers to Make the Right Decisions[1] discussed the need for the right questions to ensure high quality decisions. Among those questions is “what criteria will we use to evaluate options and decide?”

Poor decisions are made when people make them without consciously identifying their decision criteria. This happens at all levels, from individuals to decisions amongst project teams, executives, and members of boards of directors.

 

The Decision-Making Process

When decision makers are aware of their process it is less likely that they will overlook setting up mutually agreed upon decision criteria.

Being aware of the process means consciously recognizing that there is a set of steps for deciding. One of the steps is agreeing upon the criteria to be used.

There are many variations on the definition of the decision-making process. They share a common theme – consciously understand what you are doing and how you are doing it. Define your process and make it adaptable and flexible. Make it so that later steps influence earlier ones in an iterative refinement process.

Here are nine steps to sum up the process[2]

1) Define values, goals, objectives, and requirement specifications

2) Define the decision making and target environments

3) Agree upon decision criteria

4) Identify solution options

5) Analyze and compare solution options vis-à-vis the decision criteria

6) Decide

7) Implement the decision

8) Monitor and adjust

9) Reflect on the process for lessons learned.

 

The first step includes the definition of the desired outcome. The second step identifies who will make and influence the decision(s), levels of authority, process, tools, and techniques to use in decision making. It also makes sure that the decision makers have a good understanding of the nature of the environment that the decision will affect – the operational environment. Goals and objectives may be adjusted as step two is performed. Both steps one and two may be refined as criteria are identified. All three are subject to refinement as the process proceeds, as implied in step eight.

 

What are decision criteria?

Decision criteria are the basis for deciding. They “are the principles, values, rules, variables, and conditions that an organization or team uses to select an option or make a decision.”[3]

 

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

 

Why Define Criteria

Consciously defining decision criteria improves the quality and rationality of decisions.

The criteria always exist. Every decision is made based on some criteria, which may be consciously known or not. Many are prone to subconsciously consider factors that skew their decision. For example, a bias towards reinforcing privately held values may get in the way of reaching a practical decision.

When decision criteria are consciously considered, prioritized, and agreed upon by decision makers, biases can be identified and managed, criteria that may not be immediately obvious can be discovered. Without consciously addressing decision criteria, decisions are suboptimal. They will take longer than necessary to make, and they are more likely to turn out to be ineffective.

Decisions take longer because criteria emerge over the course of discussions rather than at the onset. For example, a team charged with the design of the interior of elevator cars became aware after deciding, but before the design was implemented, that there were design options that were more likely to protect against damage. The team had not directly assessed damage resistance when making their decision. Once aware of the newly identified factors, the original decision was put aside while other options were identified and assessed, causing a several weeks delay.

The team had not explicitly stated their criteria. Informally, everyone had an understanding that aesthetics was the main criterion, with maintainability as a key factor. Cost and availability were also considered. They reviewed several options and selected one. If the decision had been acted upon the team could have made a poor choice that looked good but was easily chipped or cracked. The result could have been costly.

 

Time and Effort

Besides thinking it is unnecessary, a reason that decision makers do not spend adequate time and effort considering their decision criteria is the perception that it will take too long and that it is overly formal.

The time it takes to define decision criteria depends on the situation. With a team that often works together on similar projects, the criteria for choosing supplier, design, or plan options may be already available in a checklist. Little time would be needed to review the checklist and verify its fit for the decision at hand. If on the other hand the team was not used to working together, was operating informally, and had no checklist, setting decision criteria can be more complex, requiring convincing team members that some formality is needed.

In most cases all it takes to identify decision criteria is a brief brainstorming session among the decision makers, informed about typical criteria for the type of decision they are to make. Going further to evaluate the criteria, prioritizing them, takes more time and effort.

 

How Formal Do You have to Be?

A formal process improves performance. But how formal is formal?

The minimal degree of formality is to have a written list of criteria. If during the decision-making other criteria come up, add them to the list.

A next level of formality is to weight the criteria to identify priorities among them and then use the weights to score each option, so the score becomes a factor in choosing one.

In all decisions some criteria are more significant than others. Sometimes the degree of significance, the weights, are used informally or unconsciously. With more formality weights are used to calculate scores in a documented process. This brings a greater degree of objectivity to the process, though making decisions purely on the numbers can be unskillful. Do not underestimate the power of intuition, particularly among experienced decision makers.

The degree of formality depends on the complexity and impact of the decision, the team’s confidence in their decision-making process, and their accountability for their decision. In some cases, rules and regulations mandate the documentation of decisions, in other cases it is useful to be able to show others that a rational process was used to make the decision.

 

How to Set the Criteria

Identifying the criteria for a decision is not a particularly creative process. Use readily available lists via a quick web search for decision criteria lists. For example:

  • Performance
  • Appearance – look and feel, aesthetics
  • User experience
  • Stakeholder acceptance
  • Cost – of implementation, operation, and replacement
  • Benefits
  • Risk
  • Security
  • Maintainability
  • Reliability
  • Resilience and flexibility
  • Environmental, social and governance considerations
  • Sourcing and availability
  • Time to implement
  • Reviews.

Use this list or one that is more specific to your decision as a starting point to craft your criteria.

 

Bottom Line

Consciously agreeing upon and documenting decision criteria in the context of a defined decision process promotes high quality decisions and avoids unnecessary delays. To apply this principle most effectively tailor formality to the nature of your situation, with the minimum being a list of agreed upon criteria.

[1] https://www.projecttimes.com/articles/get-the-right-answers-to-make-the-right-decisions/

[2] Adapted from Pitagorsky, Managing Conflict in Projects: Applying Mindfulness and Analysis for Optimal Results

https://www.amazon.com/Managing-Conflict-Projects-Applying-Mindfulness/dp/193558958X

[3] How to Write Decision Criteria (With Tips and Examples) | Indeed.com Canada