Skip to main content

Tag: Communication

The Agile Project Manager – Don’t Throw out the PMBOK!

Dec7bob4I must admit that I’m a fairly rabid agilist. Part of the rationale for that is the pain I’ve experienced in leveraging traditional PM techniques in software projects. Another influence is my experience dealing with traditional leadership and the dysfunction relating to driving projects and teams towards unrealistic goals.

What’s interesting though is a conversation I had with our Scrum Master team the other day. I asked them to act more like “traditional project managers”. To begin to—

  • be more prescriptive at times with their teams; demanding high quality, excellent software, and adherence to our agile principles
  • pay close attention to risks – planning, real-time surfacing and guiding team reactions
  • encourage the teams to improve at an accelerated rate; to set the bar high for improvement
  • become visible as leaders and spokespersons for their teams; to do a better job of socializing state & progress
  • take the role of impediment resolution to the next level; mining for impediments…and dependencies, then inspiring action
  • cheerlead for their teams; inspire and demand that the Product Owner does the same

What I was trying to convey to them was the ‘mindset’ of a “good Project Manager”…or at least the ones I’ve seen and collaborated with in my journey. You see, many agilists use the role of Project Manager as a bit of a verbal “punching bag”—implying that there is no need for them in an agile context. By the way, you see these same folks trivializing other roles too—functional managers, testers, and business analysts to name a few.

I can’t disagree more with these folks and that position. I think solid Project Managers can find a place in agile teams…a place that makes a HUGE difference. Yes, they might need to reframe their style and behaviors for an agile context, but please, please, please don’t throw away all of your approaches. Your teams absolutely need and will appreciate your skills, as long as you reframe appropriately without throwing out your essence!

The “Agile Way”?

An anti-pattern that often shows up in agile teams relates to managers and project managers losing their way when it comes to knowing when and where to engage their teams. Knowing how to effectively handle the fuzzy and scary notion of a “Self-Directed Team” it turns out can be quite challenging.

A common reaction is to treat the team as if walking on egg shells. If you see the team heading for a cliff, you can’t really say anything—as they’re “self-directed”. Of if you do say something, you must whisper…quietly…hoping that someone might hear you.

I once coached a team in Toronto. As is my typical practice, I gave them a quick Scrum overview, then planned and kicked off their first sprint. I stayed for a few days to ensure they were going in the right direction, and then I went home. I came back at the sprint transition just to see how things were going. In my first morning Scrum upon returning, one of the developers sort of “yelled at” their functional manager who was attending as a ‘Chicken’.

The team was stuck at a technical impasse and she said: “You better step in and tell us how to handle this, or I’m going to scream”. I was taken aback and after the stand-up I asked her what was up.

She said that ever since the sprint started that none of the functional managers were saying anything—nor providing any guidance whatsoever to their teams. And that she was sick and tired of it. She wanted help! I then asked the functional managers what was going on. They said that they were only doing what I’d told them—that the team was “self-directed” and that they were to keep quiet…being ‘Chickens’ if you will.

Ugh I thought as I smiled a wry smile to myself. Yes, I had told them that respecting self-direction is important. But that doesn’t imply that you don’t have a role and responsibility as the teams’ functional manager. You certainly don’t let them crash into a wall without yelling and warning them. You see, the managers missed the nuance of leading within agile teams, as many roles do. They mistakenly behaved as if they were marginalized and didn’t matter…when nothing could be further from the truth!

Dec7bob3

So—Which way do we go George?

It’s Situational & Skills Matter

Always remember that your agile PM role is situational. You’ll want to keep the values (Lean principles, Agile Manifesto Principles & Practices, Essence of your specific methods, Quality, and focus on Team) core in your thinking, but at the same time very much react to situations as you always have—with simply some ‘adjustments’.

As part of being situational, always remember that the teams’ skills & experience matter quite a bit in how you should react. If you have a brand spanking new team, then you probably want to provide more prescriptive guidance. If you have a master-level team, then your job is to softly guide & support them, but truly get out of their way. The Dreyfus model of skill acquisition is a good model to become familiar with to conceptualize the various team levels that you might encounter and to guide your adjustments.

Risk an Opinion

As in the above story, your teams still need leadership—leadership that provides clarity, vision, missions, and goal-setting. Leadership that is “in the game or trenches” with them. Leadership that endeavors to protect them and to shield them from major obstacles and mistakes. Leadership that is supportive and encouraging. Leadership that is in all cases, well, leading them…

In a word, you should evolve towards a more Servant-Leadership style. But you also need to share your thoughts with you team. Risk saying how you feel and what you’re concerned about, but then allow the team to take risks and chart their own paths. Risk telling the team ‘No’ if you feel they’re on a destructive path and be prepared to also tell them ‘Why’. Finally, risk ultimately becoming a part of the team and sharing their responsibilities.

Leverage your Instincts

As I’m writing this, my company iContact is making a fairly major release of our eMail Marketing software platform. We’ve been adding social capabilities for several months and are now exposing them via this release.

One of the things we struggled with was how we turn on our +70k customers. Do we do it all at once, or in a more measured way to mitigate risk and allow us to see how the new functionality ‘behaves’ under load. There were two schools of thought across the teams—release it ALL and release it incrementally. Most of the teams had an ALL perspective, as did our QA team members. However there were a few in the development organization that wanted a more controlled release and argued for that option. Initially they were considered naysayers, only reacting to FUD, but to our credit—we listened to them.

After much discussion, we opted for a controlled roll-out. While we didn’t encounter huge problems as we ramped-up, it allowed for us to better understand our usage metrics, plan for incremental use, and have time to fix a few lingering issues. In the end, it proved that our overall risk-handling instincts were the right way to go. I’m glad the few had the courage to “speak up” and that we trusted their instincts.

Ceremony & Reporting Matter

Remember that even agile teams still bear a responsibility to integrate back into the organization. They need to be transparent and communicative—and not simply in agile terms. It’s not sufficient to simply say “come review our burndown chart” or “just attend our Daily Scrum” if an executive or stakeholder asks you or the team for status.

Sure that is a mechanism or ceremony setup for this sort of communication. But what if that stakeholder doesn’t show up? Does that alleviate your communication responsibilities? Of course not! So beyond the information radiators, a PM can ensure the team is effectively communicating broadly across the organization.

Another important point is communicating in ‘terms’ that the business can understand. Whether it is reports, data, videos, or whatever it takes to represent the teams’ progress and efforts.

The PMBOK!

I’ll even go so far in this post to say that many of the ‘traditional’ principles and techniques from the PMBOK shouldn’t be “thrown away” from an agile perspective. Let’s take the notion of critical path for instance. In larger agile projects, with multiple teams, there still are plans that evolve. And within that framework keeping the critical path of work in-sight across teams can be a crucial visibility point.

As can asking the team to manage risks, or creating a project charter, or establishing effective milestones for cross-team integration. So please don’t throw away or ignore these skills if you “Go Agile”. Just transform them (and yourself) a bit and then trust your instincts in the situations that emerge.

Wrapping Up

I want to wrap-up this post with caution though—traditional Project Managers DO need to reframe themselves and their approaches in an agile context. Throw away your templates and checklists that prescribe a specific approach to all projects & teams. Instead you must become context-based and situational in your approaches.

You must also engage your teams, not as an execution monitor or policy cop, but as a true partner.

I’ll leave you with the following two charts that nicely illustrate some of the focus and tempo changes that occur between Traditional & Agile PM activities.

Dec7bob2Dec7bob1

So, Project Managers—may you navigate these waters well and engage with your teams. They NEED YOU!

Thanks for listening,

Bob.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.

Why You Should Align Your Project and Company Goals

Each year, as project managers we take courses and read articles and books on how to improve our project management skills: how to track the critical path, influence without authority, tackle bigger scope and bigger budgets, work with remote teams, flush out the ‘right’ requirements, engage the teams we’ll need for success and many other topics. Often, these are great courses and articles with great tips and advice that we use every day to deliver projects assigned to us. One area where PMs aren’t always included—or do not involve themselves in—is the project selection process, that pre-initiation stage where the project is still a concept, someone’s brainstorm or someone’s personal pet project.
Many projects come from the must-do category—legal, compliance, regulatory, contractual (this last one is a big area and for the purposes of this discussion it will be left in the must-do category). But what about the rest of the project requests that are raised? There are infrastructure projects, which some companies define as must-do based on end-of-life criteria, while other companies include them as part of a discretionary project, such as a new product or new functionality. There are software projects—new options, features, products, functionalities—that will improve market share, increase customer experience, provide more features that customers can buy, improve turnaround time for transactions, allow customers to have more self-serve options, cut headcount, improve security, etc. How does a company select which projects will go ahead given the available project hours in a year or term?

Many project managers become involved or are assigned after a project is approved and only focus on the project they’ve been handed; they do not question whether it is the ‘right’ project to be done. However, as a responsible project manager, it is your place—and your responsibility—to at least raise the question of how the project fits in with the company’s goals and strategic direction.

Projects that do not align with the company’s goals—projects done because someone has a personal interest or is focusing only on their own area/department—do not necessarily further company interests. Such projects will not get the proper management support they need to be really successful, they will have over-inflated benefits that look attractive but are not based on realistic data (without these good-looking benefits, they wouldn’t have made it past the selection stage) and they will ultimately fail even if they are successfully installed.

In order to ensure that the project actually benefits the company, PMs should get to know the company short- and long-term goals. Most of these are easily available in the company’s intranet, and some companies want to ensure employees are aware of the goals so they print posters that are posted in company hallways or lunch rooms. If they’re not easily available, ask your manager/director, or the person who assigns you your work. If they don’t know, then the project may not be aligned to the company’s goals.

Go through the goals one by one and work with the sponsor and key stakeholders to identify the ways in which the project does and does not align with each stated goal. If there are aspects that do not align to the goals, spell these out in the Charter. Taking the time to write this out in plan form may save you from issues being raised later in the project. Be as specific as possible; if the company goal is to improve the customer or client experience, state specifically how this project does or does not contribute to this goal. If the company goal is to be a luxury brand or to have a reputation for world-class service, list the ways that this project will help or hurt this perception; again, documenting the negatives as well as the positives may get the sponsor/key stakeholders to reconsider their approach before the project is too far down an odious road. Once you are sure that the project is aligned to the company’s goals, ensure that this is spelled out in the Charter and is signed off by major stakeholders.

Once the information is documented and approved, ensure that the project team understands how this project fits those goals. Use this information throughout the life of the project to help guide decisions, including change requests. It is by no means the only information to be considered, but should be included with other information to make sure that the project doesn’t sway from the intended goal.

Perhaps the company already does this before the project gets the approval to proceed. In this case, the exercise should be very simple to complete and most of the information will already be in the business case. In this situation, once the information is in the Charter, it will be signed off and you can proceed to the next phase of your project.

You may be surprised to find that in projects where this alignment is not considered up front, once you complete the exercise and document the findings, the project may stall as people discuss and possibly reconsider the decision to proceed. Do not view this as a time-waster or think that you are being a troublemaker—a boss or sponsor who interprets this as such probably has other reasons for wanting this project to proceed, reasons that will likely come to light through the exercise. Remember that your goal as a project manager is to deliver the project—not just any project, but the project that will benefit the company. 

When you do the right project, there is engagement at all levels, there is support, and there is also increased attention and monitoring. There is also likely more pressure as this is a strategically important project. Welcome this attention as it will help you to deal with risks more effectively and prevent some risks from becoming issues.

A project that doesn’t align to the company’s goals will not contribute to the company direction—it is a project that will not meet expectations, that will attract only a handful of customers, that will actually pay back in multiple years rather than months, and that doesn’t get the attention of the senior management team when issues arise. It is the type of project we’ve all installed after arduous hours and many challenges that everyone forgets about as soon as the installation is over. This is not the project we enjoy installing—it’s the project we’re all glad is over. And this is not the project we should be doing. 

Ultimately, the decision to proceed comes from the business and leadership team. If they accept that the project does not support or contribute to the company’s goals, then at least it is documented and approved, and can be referred to in later stages if the question “why are we doing this project” is raised. If that happens, you are prepared to hear this question and can prepare for the inevitability that the project will not get the attention to help it proceed smoothly.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.


Effie Sismanis is a Project Management consultant working in Toronto, Canada. Effie has spent the last 17 years delivering IT projects for the Financial Services & Telecom industries in Canada and internationally. PMP-certified since 2004, Effie started out working in a call center, and appreciates that business knowledge is a key to delivering successful projects. 


Five Uses for a “Dead” Issue Log

I couldn’t surpass Simon Bond’s volume of suggestions, but Issue Logs can add value beyond a project’s completion!  Although you may be more likely to consider schedules, financial plans or even risk registers as useful post-project artefacts, here are a few reasons to consider doing more than just archiving those issue logs.

Improving operations: A good practice in project closeout is to transfer all open or on hold issues to the team that will be responsible for supporting the project deliverables in their operational state.  However, even the data related to closed project issues can help with resolving operational challenges – troubleshooting methods, workarounds that might have been used during the project for expediency purposes or key contacts are a few examples of such useful information.
As I wrote in the article, Quantifying Risk Management Benefits, by reviewing issue logs immediately after a project has completed, you can glean candidate threats to future projects.  You can also harvest quantitative impact data and gain insights into how effective specific issue management strategies were.

Helping to develop a Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS): An RBS can be a valuable input into risk identification activities, but to develop one that reflects the relative severity of different threat categories, past project issue logs can provide empirical evidence on issue frequency and impacts. 

Proactive identification of portfolio-wide threats: Analogous to the rationale used by security agencies use for sifting through and analyzing terrorist chatter to avert impending attacks, analyzing issues across projects can help to identify significant systemic threats.

Resource evaluation and development: While the normal artefacts in a project can provide data to help resource managers understand how their staff perform under normal conditions and expectations, issue logs can provide insights and supporting evidence into how the same resources deal with unexpected situations.  This information can help during performance evaluation time but can also be useful to identify which staff may be better suited to troubleshooting tasks.

Harvesting and distilling operational process assets requires effort, and such post-project activities may necessitate the services of a PMO or PM community of practice (as the project team will likely have moved on to their next project), however, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to fulfill it”.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.

Three Tips for Solving the Communications Dilemma

Oct12_FeatureRecently I talked to a colleague with a communications dilemma. She wondered how she should communicate with her various stakeholder groups. Thinking out loud she pondered, “When I’m with business people, I always try to use business language, including their acronyms, which I’ve gone out of my way to learn. But what about when I’m talking to the technical experts? Should I talk techie to them?” She went on to say, “I write a lot of proposals. I have some stakeholders who let me know right away about typos or if my grammar is not exactly right. I have other stakeholders who have told me that my writing style is too formal and that I shouldn’t use such correct grammar. They feel it’s intimidating and unfriendly.”
As BAs and PMs we know we’re supposed to be good communicators, but what exactly does that mean? We are trained to be aware of others’ communication style. We use our intuition, empathy, and awareness of body language to “read” others. But is that enough? And does that apply equally to our written and our verbal communication? What about the language we use? I have always loved the quote from the poet William Butler Yeats, “Think like a wise [person] but communicate in the language of the people.” Does that mean, however, that when we are talking to someone who misuses the language, that we should match our language to theirs? I don’t think so. Matching the communication style does not necessarily mean mimicking their language. However, we do want a communication style that makes our stakeholders comfortable.

How can we solve this communications dilemma? Here are three tips for both written and verbal communications that can help.

  1. Take the time to keep it simple. We are all aware of the wisdom of keeping it simple, but simple doesn’t mean easy. Simple doesn’t mean careless. It is often harder to keep it simple, because keeping it simple requires thought, precision, and a good command of the language. I find that it takes a great deal of thought to write concisely and say everything I want to in language that all stakeholders will understand.

That same principle of simplicity applies when we paraphrase, or restate what was said in different words while keeping the nature of what was said intact. I think paraphrasing is one of the most difficult skills to master. It requires the ability to     take in a lot of information, to synthesize it, to concentrate on what is being said, and at the same time to rework the ideas to make them understandable. It’s tough work!

  1. Be correct without being pretentious. When we use incorrect grammar or when we don’t bother to check our work, we run the risk of being judged poorly, of reducing our credibility, and of not being taken seriously. On the other hand, when we use ornate language and complex sentence structure, we run the risk of losing our audience. I remember taking a multiple choice test in high school where the correct answer was “It is I who am going shopping.” Wow. And of course there’s the famous line from Churchill. Apparently his editors rewrote a sentence to make it grammatically correct, and apparently he responded with the famous line, “This is the sort of bloody nonsense up with which I will not put,” pointing out the ridiculous nature of obscure grammatical rules. In a nutshell, I think we should strive for communications that are both intelligent and clear.
  2. Use language that both technical and business people understand. I have found that when I use technical language with business people, they have a harder time understanding me than if I use business language with technical people. Using business language, then, tends to be more easily understood by all stakeholders. As a project manager working on software development projects, I always encouraged the developers to use business terms, even when the subject was technical in nature. For example, instead of saying DB17, I encouraged the team to talk, even among themselves, about the Price Change database.

Another example I use is that when we need to find out about data business rules, we might walk into a requirements workshop and ask about the cardinality and optionality, but we’d probably get some blank stares. However, we can translate those concepts into questions our SMEs can understand and answer. For example, we might ask if end-users can set up customers who don’t have any accounts. Or what information the end-users need to enter before they can leave the web page. I have always believed that translating technical concepts into business English, while annoying to some team members and technical whizzes, has always been worthwhile. It encourages us to focus on the business need rather than the technical solution.

Finally, let’s look at the intent of the communications. If we all understand each other and what we’re trying to say, then I believe we are communicating effectively, even if our grammar isn’t perfect or we don’t use the right words. And I believe that most stakeholders get that and won’t judge us harshly. However, for those stakeholders who want each “i” dotted, let’s proof our work. It will help build our credibility. The key is to know our stakeholders, but that’s a topic for a different day.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.

Improving Communication: Controlling Your Body Language and Tone

FEATURESept28thMany think that communication is the single most important aspect of project management.  I won’t argue that point. 

We can all agree that communication is essential and a major factor in achieving objectives.  Managing expectations, settling disputes, agreeing upon requirements, coming up with designs, managing to the schedule and budget and maintaining healthy relationships all hinge on communication.
Communication is an enormous and complex subject with many models, concepts, techniques and tools.   Here we will focus on one factor, the ability to manage body language and tone.

Why manage body language and tone? You might ask.  Because, in communication, particularly when there are emotional or behavioral issues or ambiguity, tone of voice and non-verbal (often subtle and unconscious body language including facial expressions and posture) have a significant impact.  Albert Mehrabian’s 7%-38%-55% Rule says that when speaking about one’s feelings and there is an incongruity between one’s word and one’s tone or non-verbal communication the receiver will trust the predominant tone and non-verbal components (93%) over the words (7%). 

Example

After giving a presentation on conflict management to a group of project managers the following question came up: “In approaching a manager with an issue, questioning a process, how do you not come off as condescending?”  It triggered in my mind the need to be very much aware of our true feelings and the way they show up in our verbal and non-verbal communication. 

Condescension often arises from a judgment regarding the way the other party(ies) should be behaving or has behaved. 

What is an example from your life where a negative emotion takes over and spills out in the form of body language tone of voice (affect) and, possibly, the words themselves?

Dealing with Feeling

In project management circles emotionally driven behavioral issues are present but not often dealt with directly.  As a result there is a greater tendency for the words and affect behind the words to be at odds with one another. 

Until such time that one can cut the roots of negative feelings and eliminate those feelings before they arise and influence behavior, one can skillfully adjust behavior even after the feelings arise.  Body language and tone as well as speech are behaviors. 

Taking Control of your Affect

Most of us can moderate our speech – the content of what we say, and we regularly do so in our work.  Rare is the person who is totally candid, revealing his true thoughts as an innocent child might (I am thinking of the child who has no problem saying that the king has no close on when everyone else holds back or lies about it when asked directly about the king’s glorious new suit of clothes that can only be seen by the worthy and wise.)

In the same way we moderate the content of our speech can moderate our body language and tone of voice.  We can sense the feelings and observe how they translate into behavior.  We can give ourselves the option to behave differently while not “stuffing” or suppressing our feelings.  We can become increasingly aware of ourselves and of the effect our behavior has on others and the effect of their behavior on us. 

Then we can communicate.

You might be thinking that it’s not easy to take control of your affect and work with your feelings without letting them drive your behavior.  Yes, it is not easy, but, it is well worth taking on the challenge.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.