Tag: Career

It may seem like a stretch to associate project management with baseball, especially when just giving it a passing thought.  However, a good baseball coach would likely share that if you are going to ‘play’ the game in a position that provides a nice correlation to what a project manager must carry out during the course of a project, it would be as a catcher.  This position requires a comprehensive understanding of the game’s strategic elements and is crucial to the real-time action occurring during the course of a game.

Let’s take a look at a number of the key factors involved during the monitor and control period of a project and how those factors stack up against the catcher’s job. 

Monitor

A catcher has to handle a variety of pitchers, set defenses, and generally run the game during their team’s field possession.  Positioned behind home plate, the catcher can see the whole field and is in the best position to direct and lead the players on the field utilizing the necessary communication strategy that will work best for the given situation. The catcher must be aware of the pitchers’ skills and strengths and well as the batters’ strengths and weaknesses.  The catcher must wear protective gear to protect their face and throat from wild pitches, their knees from kneeling, and their chest and hands from 90 mile an hour throws.

As a project manager, it is necessary to continually watch the project components as the project unfolds; such as a catcher does during a game.  This is the renowned monitoring of a project, one of the primary responsibilities of a project manger.  You must have a good awareness of the skills, availability, and contributions of your ‘field’, your project team members, so that you are certain to best utilize these resources.  You must have constant attentiveness to the schedule and anything that may interfere with flow of the project.  It is vital to assure the project stays on track and to identify any problems without delay so they may be quickly mitigated.

Communicate

The communication strategies that you and your team utilize will differ based on the audience.  It is important to adjust the message and delivery so you can maximize the message and assure that it is the best format for reaching the intended recipients.  We would not expect to see Carlos Ruiz, catcher for the Philadelphia Phillies, jumping up between each pitch to shout out his recommendation for the next pitch.  At the same time, his teammates would not want him to use hand-signals during the pre-game strategy meeting… and likely none of them would want him to send an e-mail message during the game with the hope his fellow team mates will get it before the next play progresses!

As a project manager, you must consider all methods of communication available, and which will be best suited for the situation.   A good communication plan that is well received can be one of the key contributors to success during a project.  Even during difficult projects, team members and stakeholders often report a more positive experience when they are kept properly informed.  And remember, properly informed does not mean over informed.

Risks

The project manager must be on top the forces that work against the project, the “opposing team”.  During the course of a game, the catcher may be required to block the path of an opponent running from third base to home or to nip a stolen base runner.  There is not time during the action to stop and think about the options; rather the catcher and his team have an understanding of how these risks will be dealt with if they arise. 

These forces can present themselves to a project manager in the way of technical issues, deadlines, resource commitments, or a variety of other factors that come up against every project.  Project managers must stay aware of potential risks so that if they do occur a plan is in place to deal with the situation and minimize any extra burden on the project. 

Issues

The responsibility to focus on the pitching, communication with the players, follow the quarks of the umpire, adjust for the batter, prevent stolen bases and runs scored seems overwhelming.  During an errant pitch, the catcher must react quickly to control the ball and prevent the ball from getting behind him.  This requires a keen alert level and any failure by the catcher could present dire consequences for his team.  

A project manager must also stay alert so to identify any arising issues.  They must assess the issue and assure that it is handled in a timely fashion while posing minimal impact to the project schedule and objectives.  They must maintain the same focus to assure that the project stays on track and tasks do not fall behind, particularly those that may impact the critical path.  As with the catcher, failure to ‘catch’ an issue could have dire consequences for the project.

Tools

If you have heard the expression ‘Tools of Ignorance’, it refers to the catcher’s vast equipment which is necessary considering the physical abuse endured by catchers. However, there is irony in this term as the catcher typically has the most thorough understanding of baseball tactics and strategies of any player on his team.  There is often a question of the level of wisdom attributed to a person who would take up this position; being that it is so demanding and places them such a vulnerable situation that they require much protective equipment. 

Many would agree the same holds true for a project manager; in fact project managers may overwhelmingly agree.  The skilled project manager must have the most comprehensive knowledge of project practices, methodologies, and processes.  They must make solid use of the tools available to minimize vulnerability. 

Not every baseball player could be a catcher, and not anyone can be a project manager.  It’s a unique blend of solid planning skills, the ability to monitor activities and adjust to changes to keep the ‘game’ on track while understanding all the players and possessing strong management skills. 

So go forth ye project manager, use your tools and skills for you know they serve to protect you and your project from harm.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below

---

Brenda Hallman has over 15 years of project management experience in the IT and healthcare arenas.  Presently she works for the PMO at Main Line Health.  Ms. Hallman holds Bachelors of Science Degree in Computer Science and Mathematics, an MBA, a Masters Certification in Project Management, and she is PMP certified.

In most countries around the world, bribery, the payment of secret funds to someone to get them to bypass standard processes or to alter their standard behaviour, is considered immoral and often illegal.  The codes of conduct or codes of ethics from many of our professional organizations explicitly forbid bribery.  So, for the vast majority of project managers, bribery is out of the question.

Let me share a story with you, however, that may sway your opinion a bit.   One day about three to four months ago, I was discussing a foreign project management training assignment with a colleague.  He was being asked to teach a three-day project management course in a far-off country.  (For the sake of not offending anyone, let’s leave the country name out of this as it is not necessary to make my point.)

While discussing the contents to be covered by this project management course, the foreign contact asked about training around “individual performance incentives.”  My colleague initially took this to mean standard rewards and recognition discussions that fall under the general category of leadership and motivation.  Upon further discussion, however, it emerged that what was really needed was a course module on the effective use of bribery.

Understandably, my colleague was shocked at this request and did not know how to address it, thus, his conversation with me, seeking my thoughts on the matter.  After we had discussed the issue at length, what started as a black and white issue (bribery is always wrong, therefore he should not teach the course module) became one nuanced with shades of grey (maybe it was allowable in certain, restricted, circumstances).  Let me share with you the key points that led to the revelation.

In Western Europe, North America, and many other places around the world, bribery is illegal and should not be condoned under any circumstances.  In many other parts of the world, however, bribery is a fact of life.  In fact, in some countries, to get a project done on time and on schedule requires the effective use of bribery, including knowing how much to give (and under what circumstances) to elicit the most effective performance.  This could range from paying “tips” to customs agents to get your critical, imported parts released quickly for delivery to your job site to paying a “bonus” to subcontractors to have them move their work on your project to the top of their to-do list.

I am NOT talking about outright corruption such as paying government officials to award you contracts that you would not have otherwise won fairly or paying inspectors to “look the other way” when doing a job site safety assessment.  I think most would agree that these situations cross a very clear moral line – one creating unfairness in a process and the other leading to safety issues that may even endanger people’s lives. 

Rather, I am highlighting situations where work will still get done (eventually) but where an added motivation (via a valued item or service) could affect the prioritization of the work and improve its schedule; for example, incenting a contractor to add additional workers to your project (perhaps by pulling them off of other projects) to speed up your timeline to help you make a critical date.  You would not be “paying” someone to perform work they would not otherwise be doing, or to bypass governance regulations, but rather providing them performance incentives that may motivate them to improve their delivery on your project.

In our normal business interactions, we often provide such incentives to others: U.S.A. government contracts sometimes include incentive payments for early project completion, and auto manufacturers sometimes provide added bonuses to their suppliers if the quality of supplied parts exceeds a minimum threshold.  I’ve even supplied coffee and pastries to those who come to my meeting on time – by not providing enough for everyone It encourages people to come early to guarantee that they will get the “free” treat.  By doing this consistently, it corrected a problem with poor meeting attendance.  Would we consider any of these last three examples bribery?  Of course not!  They are commonly-accepted uses of what I call “individual performance incentives.”

Extending this out to the larger project environment, the incentives that we commonly provide to companies (such as auto parts suppliers) could also be provided to individuals.  This should be fine as long as health/safety, legal, or governance regulations are not being violated, as discussed earlier.  This is a nuanced area to be navigating, for sure, but one that most people should be able to work through without turning to corruption.  Many are concerned about letting people navigate these moral grey areas, as some people will succumb to the temptation to slip over to “the dark side” and participate in corruption.  Yet, there is much value that can be gained by using these individual performance incentives correctly.

In many parts of the world, these incentives are a part of daily life.  Almost nothing gets done quickly without “greasing the wheels” with cash or other incentives.  In these countries, I would support the idea that project management training should include information on how to do this efficiently and effectively without crossing the line into corrupting officials or endangering lives.  I believe that our outright opposition to bribery needs to be adjusted to accept a clearer definition of bribery – one that specifically exempts individual performance incentives – with a focus on maintaining safety, health, fairness, and proper governance.

Over the last twelve years I have seen the role of project manager evolve. The most significant transformational change I have witnessed involves the subtle integration of a diagnostic framework into the baseline project management approach.

Previously, a project manager was strictly known as an entity that coordinated the execution of easy to understand tasks usually made available in the form of a checklist that was provided at the commencement of an engagement. I refer to this project manager as the “checklist” project manager. A project manager would inherit an agenda consisting of tasks that needed to be delivered within defined timelines. In most cases the project manager did not conduct any project due diligence, provide input towards the project approval process or confirm the strategic value of the items found on this checklist – all needed to justify the existence of a project. The purpose of the role was simply to deliver the tangible results found on the bulletin within the prescribed period

The role of the project manager has recently morphed to include a diagnostic phase of work. In most cases today the project manager must holistically diagnose the current internal and external environments and conclude through facts the necessity of a project before it can be initiated. On average more project managers find themselves engaged in unearthing the business justification for the existence of the project, the recommended solutions that will satisfy the business needs and both determining and delivering the required executable actions needed to bring the solution to life. I refer to this revised role as a “consultative project manager.” Previously, after organizational due diligence had been performed (usually by someone acting in a consultative role) and a project need justified, a series of tasks would be simplified and organized on a checklist and then this checklist would be assigned to a project manager for delivery. The “consultative project manager” has eliminated the need for organizations to have a consultant diagnose the current situation and recommend a solution and a project manager to deliver the results needed to realize the solution.

This metamorphosis has served the project management profession, clients and project managers well. The project management profession has benefited from a correction of perceptions – from being perceived as simply task coordinators and executors to critical and strategic thinkers who can perform the business due diligence needed to quantitatively and qualitatively justify the need for a project. The clients have benefited because they now can receive both diagnostic and action frameworks from a single resource and thus have eliminated the need to have two separate resources (consultant + project manager), ultimately lowering the total cost of each project.  Finally, the project managers have been thrust upon a world that mandates an increase in cognitive competencies and mindfulness that leads to a more advanced skill set, increase in knowledge and ultimately long-term career prospects.

Background

During the dot com hysteria many organizations employed a first to market strategy and subsequently many products with minimal ROI justification were rushed through development. The emphasis on schedule, easy access to capital and the employment of first to market strategies all led to many checklist project manager job opportunities coming to fruition during the dot com era.

Once the dot com bubble burst, organizations emphasized costs over schedule, did not have easy access to capital and reluctantly employed a risk-averse growth strategy all due to the deteriorating economic landscape. Naturally, most organizations employed cost cutting strategies in order to meet street earnings expectations. When looking for expense reduction opportunities one of the first things most organizations realized was that in the past the delineation of project work was inadvertently and expensively separated into two areas – diagnose the need for a project (diagnostic framework) and deliver the actions needed to satisfy the project purpose (execution oriented framework). The diagnostic framework was usually assigned to a consultant and the execution oriented framework was assigned to a project manager. Embraced with a corrective economic cycle most organizations amalgamated the two roles into one thus reducing expenses. Many checklist project manager job opportunities were lost.

Additionally, the new, consultative project manager role was assigned internally to further reduce costs and in most cases without any organizational readiness assessments being performed. Existing internal project managers were “told” to handle the new role expectations. Unfortunately, most internal project managers at that time remained locked within their checklist dogma and were not prepared to handle the new expectations. The failure to accept these new role requirements led to the demise of many checklist project managers.

The role amalgamation resulted in many checklist project managers being unemployed simply because they did not possess the training, experience, skill or will needed to diagnose the internal and external economic, industry and business landscapes needed to produce somewhat complicated analyses required to justify the strategic value and necessity of a project. Almost immediately, the large management consulting firms, mostly known for only performing diagnostic based work began altering their value propositions and delivery models to include an execution oriented framework. These firms would now offer a new service that included problem diagnosis, solution recommendations and solution implementation.

Importance

The purpose of a consultative project manager is to supply the results needed to realize corporate strategy. The consultative project manager is perceived as both a creator of business value and the driver of a results oriented framework. Consultative project managers must have the cognitive abilities to internally and externally diagnose a business situation and provide reconciliatory recommendations supported by complex domain specific data. Additionally, this person must holistically understand strategic intent and opportunities, translate organizational strategy into tangible executable actions and deliver the results needed to satisfy the vision supporting the strategy.  

The transformational change of the project manager role is an important milestone for the profession. Being seen as a both a creator and supplier of strategic equity a project manager has now increased their organizational value. This increase in status has mostly reduced the amelioration of common misperceptions. The consultative project manager is perceived to be a holistic thinker and collaborator who can assess and improve a situation through justifiable projects that deliver value. Whereas, the checklist project manager was mostly perceived as an IT based task coordinator and executor who preaches the merits of a delivery framework.

Additionally, the status earned by the consultative project manager brand has assisted these individuals with acquiring a seat at the executive round table when corporate vision, goals and strategy are being set. A checklist project manager would rarely be invited to an executive forum and asked to provide input towards the organizational strategy formulation process.

The project manager’s role, post dot com era, evolved to include a diagnostic facet whereas in the pre dot com era, the position was mostly relegated to an execution role. This amalgamated role is in high demand today. Organizations want a single resource that can supply both diagnostic and action frameworks. Project managers who adopt the skills needed to satisfy the qualifications associated with the consultative project manager role will realize an increase in employment prospects and lay the foundations for long-term upward career growth. The checklist project manager position is obsolete – the consultative project manager role has arrived are you prepared?

Many project managers have likely been subjected to “resource selection” well before they knew what selection criteria, roles and responsibilities, or project management for that matter was. Many may recall their elementary or primary school days, and perhaps the selection of sports team members in the school yard or playground. Typically, two captains were likely chosen by someone in authority (such as the sports teacher), and then each captain selected their teams based on a perceived ability to perform, the positions or roles they needed, and maybe how well the captain thought the people would fit into their team. That was then. Fast forward to today.  School yard “captains” are now the equivalent of project managers and/or resource line managers, and their “sports team” has become the project team. How different is your project resource selection from that of the school yard and do certain risks exist in your current approach?

It is commonplace to create a project “roles and responsibility matrix” to define required team members (also referred to as “resources”), and the skills and competencies required to effectively staff a project. The organizational environment in which you work will dictate how much flexibility you have as the project manager in the team members selected for your project. You may rely on functional managers to provide all resources, based on the needs you have indicated, or you may pull from an available resource pool and have all or some control in selecting your specific project team (this latter approach is typically the case in a matrix or projectized organizational system). What is important to recognize is the criteria for which project team members are evaluated and selected. Do the criteria you use solely rely on the hard and soft skills each team member must possess, or does it lack detail on the technical and professional competencies for your project? If so, we contend that an element of risk exists in your project roles and responsibility matrix that may ultimately impact the success of your project.

Let us elaborate. Consider the example where your project is an agreed “top priority” for the enterprise. The CEO or other authorized person assigns his or her best people to oversee the project and to give you, the project manager, the control to finalize all required team members. On the surface, this is a good situation for the project manager to be in. After all, how can the project fail, if staffed with the best possible talent available that you can choose? The key is to make sure the most appropriate people are selected. Choosing the best functional expert does not necessarily translate to performing well within the confines of a specific project. We have all probably been on a project with strong functional team members. Having a strong functional representative can be powerful when it is leveraged in the right way, but it can cause tension if too much reliance is given to functional department needs and not enough on the project needs, with no consideration to how the whole team will “gel” together. Project resourcing decisions need to go beyond a functional skills assessment. 

This idea is not new; followers of traditional leadership and management disciples will recognize similar suggestions put forth by the likes of Ram Charan, and the Blanchard Group. Ram Charan, in his book, “Execution – The Disciple of Getting Things Done”¹, speaks of effective leaders for organizations  must possess “Heart” and that lack of heart will add risk or could lead to a failure to execute. The Blanchard Group has published works on the “Work Passion” of employees and how a lack of work passion poses a risk to the organization.

The Blanchard Group defines work passion: “Work Passion is an individual’s persistent, emotionally positive, meaning-based state of well-being stemming from continuous, reoccurring cognitive and affective appraisals of various job and organizational situations, which results in consistent, constructive work intentions and behaviors.²” 

The crux of this position is that, when team members lack the passion or heart for the work they are assigned, there is significantly more risk to the success of the activity they are assigned to perform. Passion and “heart” correlate directly to motivation. Less motivated people increase risk to a task’s successful execution. Within the confines of project management, this situation is very real. A project team member who lacks passion or heart is at risk of missing deadlines, or may cause roadblocks and tensions, and perhaps significant team disruption. Passion is not the only behavior or competency one must evaluate, but it is certainly a key one and it is an area of focus for us in this article.  

What measures can a project manager take to ensure their team selection gives due consideration to work passion and heart?

1. Do not base your team selection solely on functional skills. Selection criteria should include personal behaviors and traits to provide a more comprehensive perspective of the person. This may include official performance review outputs, key behavior indicators, and past peer, manager and direct reports reviews. For example, has the person recently been given a positive review, or have they been passed over for a promotion? Have they shown real team spirit on past projects, or is there evidence of derailing behavior on past projects? These are all vital questions a project manager should ask before adding a person to the project team.
2. Conduct interviews and ask questions beyond the skills assessment. If your situation does not allow for this (for example, if you are taking over an existing team), there should always be one on one on-boarding sessions with each project member so that you can get to know them, their motivations and behaviors (these would be starting on-boarding meetings if they are new, or if you are the new project manager, get to know them with one-on-one interviews). Such an action should not be a one-off meeting. Have recurring meetings with each resource, as their behaviors, motives and desires are likely to change throughout the project. The frequency of each recurring routine should be based on the criticality of the resource to the project.  The more critical the resource is, the more frequently your routine should be.
3. Ensure you hold team meetings and gatherings, particularly when milestones are reached – take the time to celebrate your successes.
4. Add all risks about team structure and strategy to the project’s risk register, and make sure the right actions are taken to prevent them turning into issues. Base the severity of each risk on the outcomes of the routines. If you start to see behaviors of any team member changing in a negative way, update the risk and know when to set a prescribed mitigation plan into action. As a project manager, you must be prepared to take the lead on this, regardless of the person in question. A team member may have been a “superstar” on one project, but if they show signs of behavior that is detrimental to the current project you will need to quash it..

In conclusion, when you are setting up your project team, basing your resource and team structure decisions entirely on functional skills adds risk to your project. Focus also on personal behaviors and traits of potential candidates to join your team – a core element of which is passion and heart for the work at hand. Once people are already in place, be sure you can continue to ensure the team performs effectively