Skip to main content

Tag: Facilitation

Performance Improvement Needs Candid Assessment

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles. 3 Comments on Performance Improvement Needs Candid Assessment

To improve future performance, it is necessary to candidly assess past performance.  That means overcoming resistance to criticism and learning to give it in a constructive way.

The Case Of The Lost Review

Once I was called in to facilitate a performance improvement process at a successful high-tech company.  

When looking for artifacts from past projects, I discovered that the group held a post project review for a large recent project but that there were neither notes nor report.  My contact told me that the event had been video recorded but that the recording was “lost.”

Upon further exploration I discovered that the review process was so divisive and inconclusive that management decided to just move on and focus on the future.   

When we planned the kick-off event for the improvement program, we decided to use the controversial project as a case in point. 

Goal

The goal for the improvement program was sustainable optimal performance based on establishing a continuously improving learning culture.  

To achieve the goal, we would address the foundation for successful process improvement:

  • open-minded objectivity
  • responsive vs. reactive behavior
  • effective communication
  • mindful awareness.

From that foundation, we would then explore how to approach performance improvement using techniques and concepts like goal setting, cause and effect analysis, performance measurement and review, conflict management and decision making, managing change, and methodology. 

Overcoming Obstacles

A crucial step in creating a continuously improving culture is the recognition and overcoming of obstacles, particularly the attitudes and habits that get in the way of candid performance assessment.

To achieve continuous improvement, it stakeholders must explore their own mental models, beliefs and biases.  Peter Senge advises us to turn “the mirror inward, learning to unearth our internal pictures of the world, to bring them to the surface and hold them rigorously to scrutiny.  to “… carry on ‘learningful’ conversations that balance inquiry and advocacy, where people expose their own thinking effectively and make that thinking open to the influence of others.”(Senge, P. (1994) The Fifth Discipline, p 9)

Too many improvement programs focus in on concrete techniques like measurement and review without addressing the more systemic interpersonal issues that are at the heart of the collaboration that fuels the program.  

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Performance Assessment

When we look at performance assessment, we recognize that it serves all stakeholders and the organization as a whole.  The stakeholders are performers, managers, executives, clients, and anyone else effected by the performance results.  

While many of the stakeholders will not be present at a specific review session, it is important to consider their input and perspective.  Keep in mind the intention to serve the stakeholders with quality performance by reflecting on past performance, learning from it, and applying the lessons learned.  

Assessment is important and necessary.  The challenge is to find the right balance between objectivity and subjectivity in assessing capability to perform and then to improve future performance.  

Objectivity begins with demonstrated performance, though we must recognize that there are always subjective perspectives at work.  One person’s sense of what is or isn’t effective performance can be quite different from another’s.  

To minimize the subjectivity there is need for clear mutually agreed upon criteria.  What are the attributes of effective performance and what are each attribute’s weights?  For example, when it comes to an individual, is truthfulness and the ability to own up to and learn from mistakes an important attribute?  Is it more or less important than technical skill?  

When assessing a team’s performance on a project, what are the critical measures of effective performance?   Are they limited to timeliness and budget compliance or do they include criteria like the satisfaction of stakeholders about relationships and the usefulness of the results over time?  How do the criteria enable an assessment of the probability of performing a similar or more complex assignment in the future?

Coming up with the criteria is a process that goes well beyond adopting an off the shelf model, though models and the tools that go along with them are useful starting points.  it is important to involve key stakeholders, particularly the people whose work will be assessed, in the decision process.  

The process of developing or fine tuning the assessment criteria is a means for gaining support, exposing biases, and for learning about assessment and its role in improvement.  Without the buy-in of the performers and their understanding of the dynamics at work in assessment, effective reviews are less likely.

Dynamics 

While concrete measurement and criteria are desirable, addressing the dynamics at work is critical.  These dynamics have two dimensions – organizational and personal.

On the organizational side, is there more than lip service to values like objectivity and confronting dysfunction while not punishing those who have performed poorly?  What is the organization’s tolerance for slow learners and marginal performers?  How does management at all levels act?  is it in sync with or at odds with stated values?  

An organization that has the goal of establishing a continuously improving learning culture, must avoid punitive behavior and be willing to confront performance dysfunction in the face of internal politics.  How does one improve performance and fairly and effectively manage the incompetent and those who do not fit in with the organization’s culture?

The personal dynamics center on the degree to which people seek to avoid critical performance evaluation, where performance includes decision making and the quality of relationships.  How does one adequately assess competence/capability when giving and receiving negative feedback is avoided by many for fear of repercussions? 

Address the often deeply embedded resistance to criticism.  This resistance is not easily overcome.  It takes more than policy statements, procedures and guidelines to cut through it.

It takes 

  • Commitment and example form the highest levels of the organization
  • Mindfulness and emotional intelligence to be aware of and not driven by emotions like fear of punishment and anger
  • Valuing and opening to criticism from others – making one’s thinking open to input from others; recognizing that through criticism there can be improvement

Being able to give criticism honestly and respectfully.

Making Effective Decisions: What is the Truth and How Important is it?

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles. 6 Comments on Making Effective Decisions: What is the Truth and How Important is it?

Effective decisions are central to project success.

Making effective decisions relies on the ability to manage conflicts among the decision makers and to weave together objective facts (truth) with opinions, analysis, risk assessment, and feelings.

There is nothing new about lying, manipulating the truth, and/or using rhetoric to influence decisions while ignoring objectivity and analysis. There is also nothing new about people buying into a “truth” because it reflects what they want the truth to be.

Many people seeking profits, safety, certainty and security will get behind anyone who promises to deliver these, even when they know deep down that they are being lied to. For these, truth is confused with wishful thinking rather than an objective assessment of facts and other factors.

Case Example

While there are many newsworthy examples of blatant lies and hiding or misrepresenting facts, we will consider the ones that directly impact projects. Let’s look at an example.

In a process improvement project, the project’s costs and risks were significantly under stated. Senior management was provided with a highly detailed project description with functional specifications and plans, along with a simplified executive overview including high-level estimates. The executives wanted the project to succeed and were quick to sign off – probably without reading the detailed document and relying on the word of the project’s proponents.

The project’s proponents may not have purposely lied. They may have been influenced by their desire to make long needed process changes and by unconscious optimism or other biases. The project team and some functional managers grumbled, but no one paid attention to them. Risk analysis was getting in the way of approval, so risks were downplayed. Then, later during the project, problems, lateness, and overspending management softened the truth to spare key stakeholders from stress.

The result was a late and over budget project that delivered positive results that more than paid for the overrun. The project could have just as easily been a failure.

Why Truth

So, we have misrepresentation and, maybe, even straight-up lying; sometimes purposefully to sway decisions, sometimes out of fear of telling the truth, sometimes because the project control process is broken with inaccurate or inadequate data and reporting.

In our process improvement scenario, even though the project was late and over budget, the benefits outweighed the costs. One could argue that the misrepresentation of estimated costs and risks was justifiable – the ends justified the means. Project proponents thought “the bureaucrats and bean counters would never have authorized this needed project. We had to build an case they couldn’t turn down.”

The absence of truth telling is destructive, even when things turn out well. In the long term the organization and its inhabitants suffer. The absence of truth promotes subjective decision making based on special interests, bias, and power.

Executives are both robbed of their prerogative to make well informed decisions and cannot be held accountable for poor decisions. Performance is unlikely to be accurately measured and therefore less able to be improved. Because of schedule overruns other efforts’ schedules are impacted. Budget overruns can lead to other projects being cancelled for lack of funds. People are unnecessarily stressed and spend much time and energy covering things up. Paranoia, distrust, confusion, conflicts of interest, and increased uncertainty become characteristics of the culture.

Performance Improvement

Truth is the foundation for performance improvement and trust. Relying on truth, as supported by facts, data and objective analysis, leads to a self-improving culture.

Science relies on truth and scientists rely on peer review to keep one another honest. When we take a scientific approach to performance management, we get a self-correcting system. The truth comes out (if people are interested enough to check). When data indicates that performance is not in-sync with the plans and promises that set things in motion, causes of short-falls can be identified and addressed. Then, the process can be improved.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

How To Know What is True

The dictionary says “truth is the property of being in accord with reality.” We will stay away from philosophical and religious Truths like the way the universe was created or whether people have free will. Project managers are interested in truths that effect performance on a practical level and that they can verify as being in accord with reality through objective analysis based on data.

In some cases, checking the facts and realizing that alternative facts are lies, will uncover the truth. For example, the financial cost of a project can be objectively determined through proper accounting, as can number of people attending an event, dying from a disease, making an error, or using a product.

However, it is not always that easy. The numbers may not be available. Estimates are predictions based on assumptions or beliefs. They are subject to uncertainty. Decisions about methodologies are important but easily subject to unfounded assumptions and beliefs. For example

  • Is it true that an agile approach to project management is better than a waterfall approach? It might be. But is it always better? Probably not.
  • Is it true that the decision-making executives in our example above would not have decided to go ahead with the project unless they were duped? Maybe, but we’ll never know.
  • Were the project’s proponents justified in influencing the decision by hiding risks and underestimating?

To know the truth look at the evidence, assess the data, the facts – and make sure they are accurate. Distinguish between facts, opinions, assumptions, and beliefs. And, take multiple perspectives.

Multiple Perspectives

We cannot rely solely on the facts to make decisions. Meaningful decisions rely on a combination of factors. The facts are a foundation but there is a need to take multiple perspectives to build the case for an effective decision. Edward de Bono’s Six Thinking Hats model is a methodology for making well informed decisions and avoiding bias. It recommends taking six perspectives:

  • Facts – data, evidence, probabilities,
  • Positivity – optimism. value, benefit
  • Judgement – criticism, risks
  • Feelings – hunches, intuition, emotions
  • Creativity – ideas, alternatives, possibilities, thinking outside of the box
  • Process – managing the thinking and decision-making process, analysis and syntheisis

Taking these multiple perspectives is more likely to lead to an effective decision, particularly, when multiple competent players are collaborating in an open and well managed process in which there is clarity about fact, opinion, bias, truth and lie. One can “speak one’s truth” while acknowledging that it may be an opinion and/or influenced by biases.

Project success is achieved because hundreds of effective decisions are made. The more those decisions are based on a realistic, fact based analysis, the better.

Project Karma: What You Think, Say and Do Matters

Written by George Pitagorsky on . Posted in Articles. 3 Comments on Project Karma: What You Think, Say and Do Matters

Projects are the vehicles for making things different. It is natural to want things to be different than they are.

Things can be better. Progress and improvement arise out of this desire. So may pain and suffering. Choosing the right projects and performing them well make the difference.

Projects are actions to effect change – to make more money; improve people’s lives. They deliver new and modified products, architectural wonders, events, and processes which impact both the environment the project work takes place in and the environment that receives the results. Within those environments people’s lives, the way they think, their values and how they relate with others are changed.

The Law of Cause and Effect -Karma

Every action, whether to make things better or not, creates a ripple effect. The effect may be short lived or last for years, if not lifetimes. It may be felt near or far. Knowing that there is this ripple effect motivates one to be careful about what one does, what one says, and even what one thinks.

This is the Law of Karma or the Law of Cause and Effect. Every action has an effect. Everything is caused by something. Sometimes the effect is very subtle and minor; sometimes near and sometimes far. This is the foundation for process thinking and quality management.

Consider the project of planning a wedding. The way the planning and preparation are carried out influences the relationships among the stakeholders. The over controlling parent can turn-off the bride and groom and the other parents. An over controlling or over emotional bride can change the feelings of the groom and/or her friends and relatives. Even the decision of who gets to sit at which table can reverberate for years to come. One conversation can make or break a relationship.

A project to implement a new process for an operational group can disrupt the organization positively or negatively. It can cause ongoing conflict between management and labor, and either make for better ongoing performance or degrade performance depending on how well the project is executed and how the new process performed and maintained overtime.

A project to lay a pipeline across virgin territory can contribute to the pollution of the environment because of the immediate disruption of the construction project or a decade later when a leak spews oil into the land and water. The project can also result in profits, lower energy costs, and conflict among promoters, resisters, and supporters. There are any number of unforeseeable possibilities.

Decisions and Actions

A decision to ignore or dismiss testing results or concerns raised by project staff can lead to a disaster, as it did in the Challenger explosion, killing the crew, costing millions of dollars and destroying the reputations of NASA management because of their faulty statistical reasoning.

Intentions, biases, values, and beliefs are the drivers of decisions. Decisions drive behavior. The way decisions are made influences relationships and outcomes. For example, being overly aggressive or using underhanded methods to get one’s way can cause distrust and anger that clouds relationships going forward to other negotiations.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Working with Karma

There are a number of strategies to apply this concept of cause and effect to promote optimal performance.

Some people ignore the Law of Karma entirely. They act as if there were no consequences and then are surprised by the results of their behavior. Some of these do, in fact, know about the Law of Karma, others are ignorant of it. Either way, there are consequences.

Some others fall into analysis paralysis. They spend so much time analyzing and worrying about what might happen that they miss the opportunity to act.

Others take a middle path that considers the question from multiple perspectives. They balance their analysis with intuition. They consider the time factor, uncertainty. They realize that there may not be a “perfect” solution.

Take a Beat

This last strategy is one to aspire to. When faced with a decision take a beat.

Relax, pause, breathe and think about what you are going to do. Just reactively diving-in, risks unforeseen consequences. So take a beat. Respond after the due diligence of assessing from multiple perspectives the pros and cons, risks and rewards, ripple effects, alternatives, etc.

Make the duration of the pause and the nature of the decision process right for the situation. Do you have an hour, a day, a month or does the response have to be in the moment. In project work, immediate response is not usually required.

The way a soldier or police officer reacts in a life-threatening situation requires a well-trained reaction. Yet, even in those situations, it is easy to get lost in emotional reactivity. Reactivity does not allow for a step back to think about one’s actions and their consequences. We have seen many instances of inappropriate reactivity leading to unnecessary deaths and ruined lives.

Most project managers have at least a moment to step back and consider the ripple effect of what they do or say. It is only lack of mindful awareness that keeps some from realizing it.

Responsiveness

With training in the cultivation of mindful self-awareness there is the possibility of a natural process of letting things unfold. Not in a sloppy, lazy way, but by being in flow so as to allow one’s skills, intelligence, analysis and intuition to emerge in perfect alignment with the needs of the situation.

Short of that, objectively observe what is going on internally and externally to create the platform for what to do next.

In any case, living requires decisions and actions. Actions include the actions of not acting, and of expressing oneself by speaking, writing, or with body language.

Responsiveness means making conscious decisions. Discerning whether they are unbiased or are really justifications or rationalizations after the action has been carried out. When reacting there is no conscious decision making, only the outburst or withdrawal.

No matter whether action stems from a well thought out decision or not, there is the ripple effect.

Picture dropping a stone in a still pond – the effect is ripples radiating out in all directions. Now imagine the stone falling into an already rippling pond into which many stones of different sizes are being continuously dropped in different places. That is more like our world. Complexity and volatility leading to uncertainty.

Sometimes in that kind of pond, the ripples from your stone, your action, are barely visible, sometimes they are operating under the surface to take effect later. Sometimes they don’t much matter. In any case, be mindful enough to remember the Law of Cause and Effect and responsive enough to choose what you do, say and think wisely.

From the Sponsor’s Desk – The Innovation Road

Written by Drew Davison on . Posted in Articles. 4 Comments on From the Sponsor’s Desk – The Innovation Road

You see things and you say, ‘Why?’. But I dream things and I say, ‘Why not?’ – George Bernard Shaw

Innovation is often risky, time consuming and frequently more expensive than existing, conventional solutions.  Many of the answers required to make effective long term decisions aren’t known. Indeed, many of the relevant questions haven’t yet been asked. However, failure to innovate, to adapt, to evolve can lead to a slow and painful end. That’s why one organization took on the challenge and followed the innovation road.

Faced with this dilemma in 2014, The Canadian Urban Transit Association (CUTA), sought to launch a standalone, independent organization to spearhead research and development of leading edge low carbon smart mobility technologies focused on advanced transit, transportation, and integrated mobility applications.

The result was CUTRIC, the Canadian Urban Transit Research and Innovation Consortium. CUTRIC is an independent, not-for-profit organization with a mission “To support research, development, demonstration and integration through industry-academic project-based collaborations that bring innovation, design, and manufacturing to Canada’s transportation supply chain.”

The Situation

CUTRIC selected Josipa Petrunic as its first President and CEO. Since joining CUTRIC in 2015, Josipa and her team have grown CUTRIC’s footprint to a 120 member organization representing transit agencies and academic institutions across Canada and including the Who’s Who of Canada’s, and many of the world’s, leading industrial organizations. The total value of approved CUTRIC funded projects exceeds $40 million to date, including twelve R&D projects, three commercialization projects and five consultation, research and other initiatives.

CUTRIC’s objective is to “Make Canada a global leader in low-carbon smart mobility innovation” by supporting “industry-academic collaborations in the development of next generation technologies for Canadian transportation systems. These advancements will help drive forward innovation in transportation across Canada, leading to job growth, economic development and significant Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reductions.” The project and development focus is on its four pillars of innovation:

  • Zero- And Low-Emissions Propulsion Technologies and Systems Integration
  • “Smart” Vehicles and “Smart” Infrastructure
  • Big Data for Mobility Analytics and Mobility as a Service Application
  • Cybersecurity in Advanced Mobility Applications

CUTRIC‘s approach to launching projects, garnering partners and securing funding has contributed considerably to its success to date. Most partners pay an annual membership fee which, together with assorted government and industry grants and loans, provides the operating capital. The project ideas come from CUTRIC, from the industry and academic partners and from government and industry groups.

CUTRIC vets the project opportunities and prepares the project charter for submission to its members. Participation is voluntary and can range from two to three industry and academic partners to over fifty participants. A CUTRIC staff member is always in the sponsor’s chair. Project participants get input to the goals and conduct of the project, contribute to its conduct and share in the resulting deliverables and any intellectual property.

It became evident early on that a one-size-fits-all approach would not attract the diverse membership necessary to achieve CUTRIC’s mission. The needs and capabilities of its current and future partners varied considerably, from large regional transit organizations to small rural operations, from a vast array of industrial partners to colleges and universities across the country and beyond.

One of the key deliverables for serving that diverse community was a modelling tool that participants could use to plan, implement, manage and migrate low-carbon technologies in a cost-effective manner, reaping the rewards and managing risks along the way. The initial first generation prototype release was a tool called TRiPSIM™ , which was soon replaced by a second generation tool, called RoutΣ.i™, designed from scratch based on months of inputs gleaned from transit agencies that requested more powerful modelling and simulation capabilities.

The Goal

To develop a predictive model that enabled transit agencies and other fleet owners to make informed decisions about electric vehicle deployments by predicting operational costs and benefits, total CO2e savings, and charging and hydrogen fuelling requirements using proprietary information from the equipment manufacturers.

The Project

CUTRIC staff developed a proposal for the simulation tool and distributed it to its partners. Nine industry partners and three academic institutions expressed interest and committed to its further development.

Development of the TRiPSIM™ tool started in March 2017 with the University of Victoria. The main inputs included the characteristics of the bus, route topography, ridership, powertrain efficiencies, route scheduling, and driving speeds. The model would calculate e-bus energy consumption as well as battery state-of-charge, time required to charge, and total electricity consumed.

In July 2019, a team of six researchers, mostly with doctorates and master’s degrees in technical fields around energy consumption, modelling and GIS, located in Ontario and Quebec, developed RoutΣ.i™ using the mathematical language of Python. Individual projects were launched to incorporate each transit agency’s unique characteristics to the model. The overall project was governed by a CUTRIC guided steering committee including representatives from each of the committed industry and academic partners.

The tool included manufacturer-vetted and utility-vetted predictive modelling outputs to demonstrate how various e-buses and e-chargers would operate based on variable route topologies, passenger profiles, stop-start needs, and other route requirements. The tool also had to support extensions to model hydrogen fuel cell vehicles and other evolving innovations. Plans also called for the commercialization of the TRiPSIM© app to generate new revenues for the consortium of partners.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Subsequent releases of the TRiPSIM© tool enabled comparative analyses of varied e-bus and fuel cell ebuses and their allied charging and/or fueling systems, integrating:

  • energy consumption estimations,
  • environmental costs and benefits;
  • electricity and fuel costs and benefits and;
  • resiliency costs and benefits for public fleet systems specifically.

RoutΣ.i™ is updated on monthly basis to meet ongoing changes in the costs and capabilities of low carbon technologies.

In addition, a complimentary tool, CloudTransit™, a cloud-based software analytics tool, has been developed to collect and assess data in real-time from overhead charging systems and electric buses accommodating  emerging international standards and compatible with various OEM bus platforms. The shared platform merges real-time data from competitive OEM data loggers to perform meta-level analysis for transit agencies.

The CloudTransit™ team includes a half dozen researchers, most with advanced degrees, who overlap to some degree with the RoutΣ.i™ team.

The Results

The first outputs from the TRiPSIM© modelling tool took nine months to deliver and were released in December 2017. Subsequent releases and modelling outputs based on the new capabilities of RoutΣ.i™ have resulted in more than twenty projects being completed for transit agencies across Canada and in California to date. Each project takes about three to six months depending on the complexity of the transit agency.

Because the application was built with direct powertrain inputs from manufacturing partners, it has become a highly unique and industry-leading tool. Plans call for a significant expansion of the application to cover all transit systems across Canada in support of the Federal Government’s carbon emission reduction targets.

The major challenge on CloudTransit™ is trying to build a tool to help transit agencies understand their fleets better only to discover that, in many cases, transit agencies did not collect data in a standard way, it was often not digitized and even when it was, it was not digitized in a standard format so municipalities could share and compare. In many cases, the agencies did not have robust data sets or precise GPS tracking for every one of their vehicles, or precise topographical maps.

As these challenges are overcome, agencies will be able to see meaningful real time results such as kilowatt hours per kilometer and energy consumption per passenger. Cities get much more insight into how their assets are performing. That allows them to work with manufacturers to ensure the results are consistent with product expectations and to work to close any performance gaps.

The CloudTransit™ tool is now being implemented for three large transit organizations, one in BC, two in Ontario, with twelve more agencies expressing support for the initiative. CloudTransit™, once it’s set up as a data trust, is intended to last forever as a municipal asset to support the evolution of smart cities. Like RoutΣ.i™, plans call for CloudTransit™ to grow, with a proposed cohort of over one hundred data scientists and researchers across Canada to be added to the initiative to cover all Canadian transit agencies with electric and hydrogen electric buses.

How a Great Leader Delivered

CUTRIC has mastered mass collaboration to achieve its goals, bringing together all levels of government, transit agencies big and small and private industry in Canada and beyond. Imagine if governments and industry worldwide could learn to apply mass collaboration with the same expertise and zeal as CUTRIC. Perhaps the pursuit of worldwide challenges, like COVID-19 treatments and vaccines, could be accelerated exponentially.

CUTRIC’s intriguing operating model and style has enabled it to achieve remarkable results in the few short years of its existence. Here are some of the other factors that have contributed to that success: 

  • Leadership with vision, knowledge, passion and engagement – In my experience, organizations with informed, passionate and engaging leaders are invariably more successful. It’s clear why CUTRIC is where it is today. Josipa Petrunic, CUTRIC’s President and CEO, has lived and breathed this low carbon world for years, through her post graduate studies, her work as lead researcher in electric vehicle policy studies at McMaster University and her involvement with the Women’s Transportation Seminar (WTS) Foundation among other pursuits.
  • Top talent ­- Josipa is supported in her goals by a highly credentialed and experienced team of senior specialists, researchers and managers who bring their expertise and insights to every CUTRIC initiated collaboration.
  • An opportunity to innovate – CUTRIC exists to foster low carbon innovation in Canada’s transportation sector. Without that presence, many of the transit, industrial and academic organizations across the country would not have the vision, financial capability or technical talent to go it alone. For those organizations, the ability to participate in and benefit from ground breaking research and innovation is made possible and practical with CUTRIC’s partnership model, sharing the benefits and the risks.
  • The ability to choose – Every transit organization, every company, every academic institution is unique. Each serves different communities, different user needs, different geographical regions, different infrastructures and different political priorities. CUTRIC’s operational model provides an appealing opportunity for its partners to be exposed to the full gamut of initiatives being considered and under development. Yet each organization also has the ability to choose which specific undertakings they wish to commit to and be actively involved in. That is a compelling argument for membership.
  • A tolerance for ambiguity – CUTRIC’s ultimate success depends on a massive cultural shift. Transit agencies across Canada need support in learning how to standardize their data, learning how to collect that data in real time, how to move it to a cloud platform, how to cyber secure it, and then learning how to share it in real time. It’s a massive cultural shift to show that data openly so other cities can learn and act on those experiences. It’s also a significant change for industry members, where product performance can be tracked in detail. CUTRIC’s staff enables that transition, one project at a time, each step of the way.
  • Robust governance – Each initiative has a steering committee made up of the partners involved. The committees are essential for dealing with the challenges of deploying technology when there are multiple competitors at the table. Each has its own charter and voting mechanisms and meets regularly, with subcommittees as needed for things like public affairs and technical matters. The steering groups have been highly effective because participation is high and dedication is high.
  • Lean and mean – CUTRIC has a small, highly knowledgeable and talented staff. It relies on its industry, government and academic partners for financial support and incremental on-the-ground expertise and talent. That gives CUTRIC the ability to move swiftly, at little cost and risk, to take advantage of new opportunities and quickly terminate initiatives that are not yielding expected returns.
  • Focus – CUTRIC’s vision is to make Canada a global leader in zero- and low-emissions transportation technologies. While it welcomes participation from all, including international industrial and academic organizations, that focus on specific markets and technologies is a force multiplier.
  • Phased development and staged delivery – You won’t see any multi-million dollar, all partner implementations in CUTRIC’s portfolio of projects. Each initiative is carefully phased to manage risks and rewards. Each rollout is staged, in trials, by partner, by platform to gain insight, to improve the product, to make the next implementation even better.
  • Amplified communications – With a wide array of possible partners on each project, the inherent risks of innovation and the geographical challenges of a country like Canada, one would expect innumerable communication challenges and the resulting project pitfalls. Apparently not so. Precisely because a potentially large number and wide variety of stakeholders can be involved on each project, communications is job one. Shared interests, knowledgeable and talented participants, highly focused scope, phasing and staging and effective governance all help to improve and amplify communication effectiveness.

An example of that heightened communication focus can be found in the planned 2nd Canadian Low-Carbon Smart Mobility Technology Conference scheduled for June 17 – 19, 2020.  Hosted by CUTRIC and originally planned as a physical, attend in person event, it’s now virtual!

So, if you’re involved in an innovation venture or a challenging change with a diverse set of participants, consider CUTRIC’s approach and the ten factors above that have helped it succeed year after year. Also remember, use Project Pre-Check’s three building blocks covering the key stakeholder group, the decision management process and the Decision Framework right up front so you don’t overlook these key success factors.

Finally, thanks to everyone who has willingly shared their experiences for presentation in this blog. Everyone benefits. First time contributors get a copy of one of my books. Readers get insights they can apply to their own unique circumstances. So, if you have a project experience, a favorite best practice, or an interesting insight that can make a PM or change manager’s life easier, send me the details and we’ll chat. I’ll write it up and, when you’re happy with the results, Project Times will post it so others can learn from your insights.

The Virtual Leader Part 1 Building Trust

Written by Elizabeth Larson on . Posted in Articles. 3 Comments on The Virtual Leader Part 1 Building Trust

“Community is nothing, except what is based on trust.” – Yo-Yo Ma[i]

Since so many of us are practicing social distancing by, among other things, working from home, I thought it would be a good time to review some tips and tried-and true techniques for leading teams virtually. This article focuses on the importance of and tips for establishing trust virtually.

When we work from home, it is harder for us to establish trust. Although not impossible, it’s harder to communicate, which we’ll discuss further in Part 2. It’s harder for us to recognize and address conflict. And it’s harder for us to ensure that real work gets done without being overbearing.

What can the virtual leader do to establish trust? We establish trust virtually the same way we establish trust in any work environment, but it’s harder. So here are a few tips:

Make and meet commitments

  • Make commitments purposefully. It’s well known that we need to follow through with our commitments. But that means we actually need to make them. I tell people that I once had a boss who never had to meet any commitments because he never made any. Telling people what we’re going to do and when is critical for leaders wanting to establish trust. Even if we’re not sure that we can meet the commitments, we need to make them. However, this is not license for making commitments haphazardly. They have to be realistic. We lose credibility quickly when we lack the courage to make realistic commitments—when they are either too easy or too hard to meet. Our commitments should be grounded in reality rather than being overly optimistic or so loose that it will be impossible not to meet them.
  • We need to let everyone know when we can’t meet our commitments. Life and the unexpected happen, and when they do, we need to let people know. Immediately. Many of us have fallen into the trap of waiting too long to communicate bad news. We think that somehow if we try extra hard, we’ll be able to meet pull off a miracle. But if we wait too long to communicate bad news, we will break the trust. It’s better for us to let people know if there’s a high likelihood that the commitment can’t be met. How we communicate, though, is key. For example, telling stakeholders “we’re late–sorry about that” is weak and will automatically bust any trust we want to establish. We need to let them know why we’ve missed the commitment we made, the impacts of doing so, and then make a new commitment based on data, not emotion.

Establish routines

It’s important for the virtual leader to ensure team routines are established and followed. Routines can be established for many things, and routines that work for one team might not work for another. As virtual leaders our role is to facilitate the team and help them decide on such things as how often the team will meet, for how long, and for what reasons. Routines establish a sense of normalcy. They can provide the team with a sense of purpose and security, which in turn builds trust in the virtual leader.

Our role as the virtual leader is to facilitate the conversation about routines. The team’s role is to provide recommendations to us. But we should not accept the team’s recommendation without question. An effective leader, virtual or not, ensures that the team’s recommendations have been well thought-out and will meet the goals of the team, the project, and the organization.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Plan and monitor results

As Lewis Carroll famously said, “If you don’t know where you’re going, any road will get you there.” If we want Wonderland-style chaos, we’ll skip the planning. We might hear team members say things like “let’s just get the work done,” or “it takes longer to plan than to do the work,” but in these uncertain and chaotic times, it’s not a great way to build trust. Planning, regardless of the methodology or set of practices used, is a proven way make the team feel purposeful. It provides them with a sense of accomplishment as planned tasks get completed. And that shared sense of accomplishment is a great way to bring the team together and build trust not only with the leader, but within the entire team.

Monitoring to ensure results are complete is equally important. Monitoring has many names. Some people call it micromanagement. It’s not. It does not involve doing the work for the team. It does not involve looking over anyone’s shoulder. It’s not “Big Brother.”

Monitoring work can take many forms. It can be done in a daily meeting where members talk about what was planned, what was accomplished, and obstacles that have occurred withing the last 24 hours. It can be a status report with much of the same information. It can involve the use of software where all team members can see the progress of work items. Scrum and other agile methods are all over this concept with daily scrums and burn-down and burn-up charts. Sure, they use different terminology, but the concept is the same—let’s figure out where we are, where we should be, and what’s getting in the way of getting there.

One important component of monitoring involves learning of obstacle/impediments right away. Our role is not to chastise team members for incomplete or late work, which is guaranteed to break trust. Rather, it’s to coordinate all necessary resources to solve the problems and remove the obstacles so that team members can move forward. This is particularly important in a virtual environment. Being geographically dispersed can make some team members feel stuck and isolated, preventing them from moving forward quickly. Knowing that the goal of the leader is be “chief roadblock remover” can be comforting to the team. As virtual leaders we need to find the time and courage to:

  • Coordinate resources outside the team to solve the problems
  • With the team figure out how to keep moving forward in a parallel path as a solution is found to the obstacle at hand.
  • Get experts or other team members to help get unstuck. Having other sets of eyes is important, but it’s much harder when the team doesn’t have the benefit of being together.
  • Let the team know what we’re doing to resolve the problem. Keeping the team informed is vital to building trust.
  • Provide encouragement. Take time to let team members think through problems with you. Listen to them and do not provide easy but ineffective answers.
  • Communicate delays and problems to key stakeholders. Tell them what the delay is and what we’re doing to remove the obstacle.

There are, of course, more ways to establish trust virtually, but these tips provide a start. In Part 2 we will delve into the complex subject of communications.

 

[i] PBS Newshour, March 18, 2020, https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/yo-yo-ma-on-encouraging-songs-of-comfort-amid-global-crisis