Skip to main content

Author: Mike Morton

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Praesent accumsan aliquam ligula in luctus. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Morbi ut fringilla mauris. Vestibulum et cursus libero. Maecenas aliquam viverra rutrum. Morbi dolor magna, rhoncus sit amet sollicitudin lacinia, commodo nec ipsum. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia curae; Sed velit orci, scelerisque vitae eros ut, laoreet lobortis eros. Vestibulum egestas mattis faucibus. Pellentesque at lectus dolor. Maecenas et ante velit. Curabitur eu nulla justo. Pellentesque ut pellentesque arcu. Quisque rutrum maximus bibendum. Aliquam tempor, neque et sollicitudin aliquet, ante elit vehicula justo, quis venenatis metus nisl a tellus. Curabitur dignissim, risus a interdum lacinia, orci sapien iaculis ante, et convallis eros orci quis ligula. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Cras fringilla fermentum purus, vitae condimentum quam pulvinar commodo. Vivamus quis urna ac leo rutrum maximus. Integer efficitur pellentesque lacus sit amet pulvinar. Duis eleifend massa id eros fermentum euismod. Mauris nec turpis eu tellus viverra porttitor. In accumsan fringilla tellus ac tincidunt. Donec tempus rutrum feugiat.

Communicating with “Non-Experts”: A Guide for Project Managers

When you run a project you have two responsibilities: you must manage both your project and the organization’s relationship to your project. This second job is often more difficult. You are a technical expert, accustomed to working with other technical experts. Now you must influence non-experts – executives, end-users and others — who are in a position to help you or to hurt you. Welcome to the world of organizational politics.

 

Political problems trouble, delay, and sink projects more often than do technical problems.  Resources are diverted, requests go unanswered, specifications mysteriously change, and business units either ignore you or try to run things.  People expect the impossible and blame you for not delivering it.  People don’t listen and blame you for not telling them what was happening.  You must accept that communicating, selling, and persuading are basic organizational survival skills. Your success depends on engaging the interest and support of very bright people who know little about your area of expertise.  You must always remember that these “non-experts” will define your success or failure.

 

The label non-expert does not suggest stupidity or even lack of interest.  Expertise is different than intelligence: it requires massive amounts of information and years of training in working with that information. You are probably appallingly ignorant of marketing or finance or accounting or manufacturing or customer service. We are all non-experts most of the time.

Experts and non-experts think differently. Despite this, we typically try to use the same communication strategies with both. We provide expert information – details and methods – to non-experts and think we have communicated. We have not. We have spoken but no one is hearing.  Look at good popular science writers – like Matt Ridley or Timothy Ferris or Malcolm Gladwell. They focus on people, they give examples, and they tell stories. They understand non-experts.

 

Recent work in cognitive science has drawn a vivid picture of the non-expert. Outside our areas of expertise:

  • we don’t think abstractly – we think concretely, in pictures, in examples, in metaphors, and in stories;
  • we don’t think logically – we need help seeing how things connect and how one event is related to another; and
  • the personal dimension of communication becomes more important – because we can’t directly evaluate the evidence, trust in the messenger becomes crucial; we attend less to what experts say and more to how it is being said and who is saying it.

 

The less we know about any topic, the more powerfully simple images and stories shape our responses. You need to know the images people have of your project and the stories they are telling.  Are they saying it’s another self-indulgent engineering toy; another waste of the money the rest of us work so hard to make, another bleeding-edge effort?  You only have one tool here – get out in the business and listen.  Talk to people and ask direct questions. You need to know what people are already saying and hearing.  If you are telling a manager how helpful your new scheduling process will be and her best friend from college is telling her how something like this screwed up routing for three months in her company, you are in trouble.

 

Outside our expertise, we have difficulty seeing connections and implications. I was recently at a managers’ meeting in a major financial organization.  During a discussion of the largest systems project in the organization – a new accounts-receivable system – the marketing people volunteered that they were supporting the project even though it had nothing to do with them.  The systems people were aghast. The database capabilities of the new system, they asserted, meant that it would have more impact on marketing than on any other area of the business.  Now the marketing people were aghast; no one had mentioned this to them before.  The project’s natural – and powerful – allies had been ignored.

 

This brings us to the most important point: communication with non-experts is always personal. It is not about “the project.” It is about them and it is about you. These people know that they can’t evaluate the technical side of your project. What they think they can evaluate is you. They can decide whether or not they trust you. We all make these kinds of evaluations regularly with physicians, auto mechanics, and stockbrokers. We can look at the certificates on their walls, but in the end, we make a personal judgment.

 

Help people trust you. Your reputation in the organization is not built simply on the results you have obtained. Your reputation is based on people’s perceptions that you are helping them get what they want. What they want first is to know that you understand their problems. If they believe that you do, they are inclined to trust you. You become “one of us” rather than “one of them.” 

 

Two questions that are at the heart of any strategic communication: what do they want from you and what do you want from them?  Or, to put it more effectively, how can you best help them and how can they best help you?  For this, you need to know your different audiences because their hopes and fears are your real topic. Since one of the universal realities of organizational life is that these concerns differ at different levels, let’s distinguish your three key audiences: the leaders; the managers; and the users.

 

The leaders are your first audience.  Depending on the scope of your project, this may be a department head and her direct reports or it could include the CEO, the top executive team, and even the board.  So what do you want from the leaders? You want their sponsorship. The leaders have already signed off on your project or you wouldn’t be in business, but you need their visible and sustained support, not just their nods or shrugs. 

 

Leaders live in a world of massive demands on their time and resources. They are endlessly distracted and immersed in crises. So what do they want? They want to know that they made a smart decision in authorizing this project.  They want results, they want to know that you are going to succeed, and they want to look effective. You only have their attention briefly, so you want to focus on what you are doing to succeed. You can help them by

  • keeping your reports and presentations short and focused on results;
  • being realistic and straightforward about difficulties; most leaders know that things go wrong, but they are offended at feeling deceived, misled, or uninformed
  • providing materials for their own presentations and discussions with their bosses, board members, customers, financial analysts, and internal groups; leaders spend much of their time in these kinds of discussions and like having exciting, clear, and simple materials to use; it makes them look good; it also publicly commits them to you,

 

Never assume that because the leaders have approved your project that you are done.  Remind them what they have bought and why they have bought it.  Show them that they are getting what they decided to pay for. 

 

Your next key audience–and one that is almost universally ignored–is the managers who will be affected.  Never assume that because the leaders have said “yes” that you have the commitment or even the compliance of the managers.  In fact, never assume that anybody has told them anything.  The leaders always think they’ve communicated with their managers, but they probably haven’t. This group is simply taken for granted, but this is a huge mistake. Managers have strong, implicit veto power. They can decide, for example, that their people are much too busy to be released for training. What you want is for them to become active agents for your project. These are the real implementers. You want them to be willing to make efforts for your success.

 

And what do these managers want?  Managers often have the most to lose in organizational changes: they are under enormous performance pressures; they have succeeded with the old systems; and they live in a competitive world that gives them little margin for error or even experimentation.  They almost certainly see you as a cost, not as an opportunity. You need to help them discover how your project is good for them personally.  You build this support by:

  • keeping in daily touch with the business;
  • listening more than you talk, paying special attention to the managers’ expectations and concerns;
  • being realistic about costs, especially hidden costs around installation such as temporary reductions in efficiency, temporary opportunity costs, training costs, etc.;
  • most importantly, helping them see how your project will help them specifically.

 

There is no substitute here for face-to-face direct communication. You must go to them. This is going to take time, but it is time well spent. Your effort gives you credibility. You want the managers to want your project; you don’t want them either to misunderstand it or merely to tolerate it.  The marketing group I mentioned should have hungered for the new accounts-receivables project.  If managers want your project, it becomes an organizational priority, not another item to be moved down the list every time there is a crisis or another demand for resources.  Your goal is for these key players to want you to succeed.

 

Your third audience is your user community, the people who will actually touch and use the results of your project. You don’t have to sell these people, because they really don’t have a choice. Besides, users are less cynical than their superiors.  They may actually believe that you are going to help them do their jobs better. What you want is for them to become successful users, so don’t sell to them – educate them.  Your goal is to prepare them for installation. That is also what they want. They don’t want to feel stupid and inept. So start educating them and start early.

 

You likely became a project manager because of your technical skills. One of the hard lessons is that you will fail without political skills.  The technical skills with which you and your team create a first-class product are obviously essential, but they are not enough. Communication requires time and effort, but it is your job. You will win when you realize that effective communication is more about your audiences than about your project – about their hopes and fears. As you engage these hopes and fears, you may well discover that you are also becoming an expert in organizational communication.

 

Bill Roberts is the vice-president of TDF International and co-creator of TDF, a perceptual-styles theory. Trained in psychology at Purdue and Duke, Bill has worked as a psychotherapist, a professor, and a change consultant. He is the co-author of Finding Your Place: The TDF Map and numerous training programs. He can be reached at [email protected].

 

IT Program Management for Toronto Pearson

“Information Technology must not delay the opening of the new terminal.” This was the challenge issued in 2003 by James Burke, the recently appointed CIO at the Greater Toronto Airports Authority, the organization responsible for operating Toronto Pearson airport. The background to the challenge was that a $4.4 billion project to construct a new passenger terminal was already well under way and the IT department at the GTAA was still in a formative stage.

 

While the CIO and his management team focused on building an Information Technology & Telecommunications department capable of supporting the significantly expanded airport, the author was enlisted to lead the program to deliver IT&T systems and infrastructure for the new terminal.

 

There was significant catching up to do. It was important to establish IT&T as an integral part of the overall construction program and to quickly understand the needs of the many stakeholders. Even more critical was to establish a relationship with the construction program and make them aware that the IT&T program was dependant upon certain construction deliverables. As a result of this interaction, the construction schedule was revamped to accelerate an earlier than originally scheduled completion of the backbone cable and telecommunication rooms.

 

The scope of the IT&T program included over 700 passenger processing systems (combinations of computers, boarding pass printers, baggage tag printers, etc.), 100 self-service kiosks, over 700 electronic display screens, VoIP phones, a WLAN network, radio systems, and resource management systems.

 

All of these systems were to operate on a brand new infrastructure that included 53 telecommunication rooms and over 2500 kilometers of cabling.

 

Supplier Management

 

As all of the systems for the new terminal were procured rather than developed internally, supplier management became a critical function for the project team. In this context, supplier management included a transparent and challenge-proof process to select the best supplier/partner, the development of precise and comprehensive contracts, and the ongoing oversight of the supplier installation project.

 

A GTAA project manager was appointed to lead every significant project within the program. It was important to have the projects led by someone from the GTAA, not only to oversee the supplier’s performance, but also to manage the GTAA stakeholders, ensuring that the suppliers received clear and concise specifications as well as the ongoing and timely flow of information to the supplier’s project team.

 

The appointment of a GTAA project manager to oversee a project already staffed with a supplier project manager may appear to be a duplicate capital expense but it proved to be a sound investment with the cost of the project manager being offset by the avoidance of project delays and the management/reduction of change orders, etc.

 

 

Program Scheduling

 

There were absolute and critical dependencies between the stakeholder schedules.

 

The GTAA adopted a landlord model whereby it owns the entire IT&T infrastructure outside of the tenant spaces. The consequence of this model is that the deployment of IT&T infrastructure became a dependency for all of the operators and retailers moving into the terminal who required the IT&T infrastructure so they could install their own systems, phones, etc.

 

Schedule coordination between IT&T and the stakeholders became a full-time activity for several people to ensure that all parties could effectively schedule the activities for their workforces and meet their own target dates.

 

 

Milestones

 

The new terminal was opened in two phases. The first opening in April 2005 was to accommodate those airlines relocating from the old Terminal 1. During the three months prior to the opening, a series of operational trials were run, the most significant of which involved approximately two thousand members of the public acting as arriving and departing passengers. This event designed to test the operational passenger flows through the building also provided the first major test of the IT&T systems.

 

In January 2007, the second phase of the new Terminal 1 opened to allow the relocation of airlines from Terminal 2. Once again, all IT&T systems were in place and operational to enable this event.

 

The CIO challenge issued in 2003 had been achieved. The IT&T program was delivered on time and through effective management of the suppliers, the project was completed significantly under budget.

 

All told, it was an outstanding effort completed by a first-class team of project managers, technicians, and support personnel.

 

 

 

Derek Hyman is founder and president of Premium Technology Inc., a provider of project management consulting and training services since 1986. He can be reached at [email protected] or www.premiumtechnologyinc.com.

Linking Earned Value to Schedule Analysis

Earned Value (EV) has grown in popularity over the last several years. With over 75% of projects failing, project management and control systems must be utilized to ensure project success.  The purpose of this article is to outline a simplified approach to understanding earned value.  Earned value shows a “three dimensional” view of project progress. Earned value is an early indicator and forecaster of project progress. We’ll examine how earned value links to the work breakdown structure, the schedule, and the budget.  You will see the potential for implementing earned value on your projects –  starting now!



 

To fully understand earned value we must understand how the values are developed.  Let’s start with the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS).  By definition the WBS is “a deliverable-oriented grouping of project elements that organize and define the total scope of the project”.  This in its most basic use is a list of all the tasks or activities that must be accomplished to deliver the project.  A properly developed WBS is dissected into parts that represent a unit of work.   Through the years the infamous “80-hour” rule has been handed down from generation to generation of project managers.  I have even heard project managers that keep the unit of work down to 40 hours.  Why is this?  When you try to assess how you’re doing – looking at 40 or 80 hours is much easier to assess than two months of work.  If you can make better assessments of activity progress you will increase the accuracy of your reporting.

 

How far do you break down a task?  I always say, “to the level that makes sense”. For customer reporting you would go to a different level of detail than you would for management, and yet again a different level of detail for the employee who will do the work.  The objective should be to break the work into parts that can be measured and identified that they are completed, and have not exceed 80 hours.  Using common sense is best when determining this.  Remember the WBS is a tool to help manage your project, it is not a tool to micro manage.

 

The lowest level that you dissect the WBS to is the “work package”. By definition the work package is “a deliverable at the lowest level of the WBS”. These are the activities that duration and costs will be assigned to. Once again, remember not to exceed the

80-hour rule. 

 

Now that a WBS has been developed we can estimate the time and cost for each activity.  Let’s assess what we have so far.  We have a WBS that consists of the project, its deliverables, tasks, and activities.  

 

What else do you have? You can look to contracts, statements of work, requirements, and other organizational representatives that may have been involved in the development of the project plans (or whatever you may call them at this point).  You also have subject matter experts and those that will do the work.  Please tell me they are included! They have valuable inputs and need to be factored into the estimating process.  You also may have access to project records of similar projects.  If you do not, start archiving project records.  This will help you to develop best practices as you develop in your organizations project management maturity.

Time estimating is your next step in this process.  We have a very rough estimate that the work package can be done in less than 80 hours.  Possibly there is a need for a more detailed WBS for the technical teams that will work on specific parts of the project.  As you analyze each work package or activity, consider the time it would take under normal conditions, optimal conditions, and worst-case conditions.  Estimates should be realistic, and there are many tools that can be used to minimize that risk that a project might run late.

 

When looking at tasks in a project, a strategic planning session should occur to determine task sequence.  Think of this as a game of chess.  Analyze the best sequence for the project tasks.  This is a powerful use for the post-it note.  They can be placed and moved at will.  Once all the tasks have been laid out they can be placed into a scheduling software tool of choice.  Remember, the software is a tool to help you with reporting; it is not project management.  This is no more than saying that using a word processor makes someone an author.  Understanding the skills and tools to manage projects is what makes you a project manager.

 

While estimating task duration all resources should be considered.  Then all direct and (don’t forget) indirect cost can be computed.  Remember the factoring of project duration when considering costs.  This will assist you in determining a reasonable and acceptable budget that you can manage your projects to.

 

Now that you have a schedule and a budget, you can determine the rate of spending.  This is a time-distributed budget that is “the cumulative cost curve”.  This spending curve is developed based on the planned schedule. The schedule indicates when the tasks occur and the tasks have a cost associated with them.  Now is when the 80-hour rule will become important.  With the tasks being dissected to less than 80 hours, the validity of measuring the task to determine project progress is enhanced. 

 

Key Earned Value measures are:

            Budget at Completion (BAC)

            Earned Value (EV)

            Planned Value (PV)

            Actual Costs (AC)

 

The cumulative cost curve can be used to develop the EV values.  The entire project value is the budget at completion (BAC).  Specific points along the curve are called planned value (PV).  When you decide the appropriate point to measure your project progress (this could be weekly, monthly, quarterly, or any divisible factor) you can look at your cumulative cost curve and determine  what should be done to that point in time and how much it should cost. 

 

When monitoring project progress the schedule can be utilized to determine what work has been done.  If 80 percent of the scheduled work is completed (again aren’t you glad tasks are broken down to less than 80 hours?) then the value for that work is 80 percent of the cost (PV) given for that portion of the work.  Here is an example; through one month we had tasks totaling $100,000, this would be the PV.  When we measured the work completed we determine that only 80 percent is done.  This results in an EV of $80,000.  

 

Next we can determine the money spent to complete the work accomplished.  This is referred to as actual costs (AC).  Based on the previous example we might assume that the work accomplished is $80,000, but after all check is cleared we might have spent $85,000.  Thus our actual cost for the $80,000 worth of work was $85,000. 

 

What does this all mean? You have a tool that provides a three dimensional view of the project.  Typical project variance has been determined by looking at the difference between the planned and the actuals.  Earned value lets you look at the planned values (PV), actual expenditures (AC), and the actual work completed (EV). 

 

The previous example showed us that we have a schedule variance of negative $20,000.  This is calculated by subtracting the PV of $100,000 from the EV of $80,000.  This identifies that we did not do all of the work we said that we would ($100,000).  We are behind the planned schedule.  We can also determine a rate of efficiency by dividing EV by the PV.  This results in a schedule performance index of .80.

 

Also, the previous example showed us that we have a cost variance of negative $5,000.  This is calculated by subtracting the AC of $85,000 from the EV of $80,000.  This identifies that the work accomplished did not cost what we estimated the work to cost.  We have gone $5,000 over budget.  We can also determine a rate of efficiency of spending by dividing EV by the AC.  This results in a cost performance index of .94.

 

For effective project management, identifying the acceptable variance is a must. What if the acceptable variance is 10%?  We can determine that our budget estimating is acceptable.  But we also can see that our schedule variance is unacceptable.  We had better data for the cost of work than we did for the time to do the work.  This is what we need to manage to.  We can now better control our projects.

 

We can also predict where our project cost will end up.  There are several estimates at completion (EAC) formulas.  These formulas can be used to determine the upper estimates and the lower estimates.  By dividing the BAC by the CPI we can get a center estimate.  If our BAC for this project is $1.5M, we can assume that with a cost performance index at .94 we will have an EAC of $1,595,744. If we subtract this value from the BAC we can determine the Variance at Completion (VAC) as -$95,744.  Remember what I said about acceptable variance?  If we have an acceptable variance of 10%, we would be within tolerance ranges. 

 

What does this all mean? We have a tool, EV, which allows us to identify how much we should spend based on how much work we said we would do.  But as all plans go, these are subject to change. We must determine acceptable ranges of variation when we first plan our project.  How does an organization determine an acceptable variance range?  First determine the level of difficulty for the project. Second determine the level of experience of those working on the project. Last determine how the organization assesses variance.  I have seen organizations set variance level as; +/- 10%, +/- 25%, +/- 50%, +10/-5%, +25%, -10%,  and +75/-25.  The different ranges should be articulated in the beginning and should be based upon the level of confidence that you can assign to your estimating efforts.

 

What have we learned? Earned Value is a control and monitoring system used to assess project performance.  You can measure schedule progress, task progress, and cost progress.  EV can be used to predict project performance and determine where the project will end up.  Corrective actions can be taken to possibly put the project back on track or to stay within acceptable tolerance.  We have identified that the values we use in EV are based on the WBS, schedule, estimates, and cumulative costs.  Connecting these aspects will make EV an easy and valuable tool.  Go ahead give it a try!

 

 

Wayne Brantley , MS Ed, PMP, CRP, CPLP is the Senior Director of Professional Education for the Villanova University (www.VillanovaU.com). Wayne has taught and consulted project management, quality management, leadership, curriculum development, Internet course development, and return on investment around the world to Fortune 500 companies. He has over 26 years experience from the Air Force as a project manager for AF technology training and curriculum development programs. Wayne has developed numerous AF and corporate training programs, classroom, multimedia, and Internet based programs. A dynamic presenter and trainer, he has spoken at numerous conferences such as; the Project Management Institute (PMI®), the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI), and the American Society of Training and Development (ASTD) annual conferences. He is a doctoral candidate with Nova Southeastern University specializing in Computer Information Technology. University.

Seven Reasons to Take a Look at Microsoft Project 2007

So you’re perfectly happy with Microsoft Project 2003 and you can’t think of any good reason to splurge on an upgrade to Microsoft Project 2007. You may want to give it a little more thought because, according to Special Edition: Using Microsoft Project 2007 (ISBN 0-7897-3652-7) by QuantumPM, LLC (Que Publishing), there are seven new features that might make Microsoft Project 2007 worth your money:

 

Multiple Undo – The Multiple Undo feature is one of the most exciting additions to Microsoft Project 2007. It allows you to backtrack through recent changes or undo the most recent series of changes at once.

 

Change Highlighting – When you make a change to a project, the Change Highlighting      feature calls your attention to all fields affected by the change. Project managers can now see the impact of the change as it ripples through the tasks in the project.

 

Visual Reports – Reports have always been an excellent way to examine and share data in Project. New to 2007 are visual reports, which display project information in visual charts, tables or diagrams.

 

Task Drivers – The Task Drivers feature opens a pane on the left side of the screen that displays information that impacts, or drives, the selected task.

 

Cost Resource Type – The cost resource type enables users to identify specific fixed costs on a task, such as travel expenses or delivery charges for materials.

 

Budget Resource – The budget resource feature allows the project manager to define budget at the summary-level task to represent capital budget or overall approved budget for the project

 

3-D Gantt Chart Display – Three-dimensional display of the taskbars in the Gantt Chart view makes the Gantt Chart view more visually appealing and eye-catching, especially when printed to show as a report.

David Barrett’s Blog: The Show is Over!

ProjectWorld * BusinessAnalystWorld Toronto 2007 is over.
This is the largest event if the year that I am involved in… by far. 2700 delegates five days – 3300 bodies all in when you count the speakers, trainers, exhibitors, my wife and my daughter…

_
It’s a huge effort by everyone involved – and well worth every ounce of effort. I often complain about the stress leading into it, the exhaustion during the event and the endless catch up afterwards but I wouldn’t change it for the world.

Highlights? The workshops – 39 of them – all filled almost to capacity. The track sessions seemed to go well- we’ll wait to see the evaluations. The keynote got pretty good reviews. The food was alright – considering we had to feed as many as 1500 on any one day.

The opening conference reception on Tuesday night was fabulous. We all had fun. The delegates loved it – especially the ones who were just there for the workshop on Monday and Tuesday.

The disappointments? The biggest let down was the formal roundtable discussions on Thursday morning. I blew it! This was a new event for the Toronto conference. We’ve been doing this session instead of a second keynote at all of our smaller regional events: Boston, Chicago, Washington DC, Montreal and Vancouver.

If I had spent a few minutes in front of the 1400 delegates on Wednesday morning explaining what it was all about – how it worked and how great it would be – it would have been fine. But I didn’t. I never even mentioned it in my opening comments to delegates. What a mistake!

So Thursday morning rolls around and only 400 of the 1200 potential delegates show up. They loved it! But I was so disappointed the other others took a pass.

My biggest challenge will be the choice to run them again next year or not.

New ideas? I had a few great ideas come my way via delegates during the conference. One of them – Saturday/Sunday workshops for the billable consultants out there who cannot afford the loss of billable days. Interesting.

So – now we do the post mortem, record our ideas for next year, tabulate the evaluations and move onto the next show. Washington in April, Montreal in May, Minneapolis, Houston and Atlanta in June and Sydney/Melbourne in August … I am stressed already.