The price is not the cost

How many times do you look at the price of external resources and conclude ‘we can’t afford it’?

Did you think about the cost of schedule slippage, the cost of personnel replacement, the cost of not managing your vendors, the cost of missed opportunities when you decided to do-it-yourself?  The ABEO Group can demonstrate that the price is not the cost.

What does ABEO mean?

ABEO is a Latin word meaning ‘to change’ or ‘to exit or leave’. Both translations reflect the philosophy and culture of The ABEO Group. We lead change. We drive change. We exit at the end of every business transformation. We are not there to sell future engagements on your time. When you want to change again – we know you will call us back.

Netflix: Change management is more than just announcing a change

Given the recent actions of Netflix, the DVD and internet streaming media giant, it’s easy to see why change management experts following this story are beating their heads against the wall. An article from Fast Company quotes the CEO of Netflix, Reed Hastings as saying their problems (including a 44% decrease in stock value) stem from “a failure to communicate”. Unfortunately for Netflix, they’ve got bigger challenges – how they manage change going forward – of which communication is only one piece.

The announcement of a 60% price increase two months ago and the ensuing customer backlash eventually led to an email from Hastings to all Netflix customers – but in change management – that’s too little too late.

Here are several key lessons learned:
1. Conduct ongoing risk assessments of what could go wrong with the consumers and always have a mitigation plan.

2. Understand that no one likes surprises and introduce the changes accordingly – Netflix should have known that a surprise rate increase, a new company name, etc. was too much within a short amount of time.

3. Communications should be executed early on to gain buy in – Netflix could have offered an incentive to consumers to ‘make the change’ vs. force feeding them with information.

Although we can’t predict how the outcome would have been different if Netflix had managed these changes differently, it’s a lesson to everyone that managing change is more than just communication.

*Contributor – Karen McIsaac, Managing Director

 

Know when to fold ‘em – cutting your losses

Ever watch someone gambling in Las Vegas? They continue to pour money into a game where they continue to lose and hope for a better outcome.
In the business world, we see this in another form:

Companies continue to pour investment dollars into change initiatives that either should be cancelled or delayed.
No one is weighing in on whether they are financing a “loser” and what the final outcome might be.
Knowing when to use a disciplined approach to cut your losses will:

1. Save you investment dollars

2. Increase the success of other business change initiatives currently in progress

In the words of Kenny Rogers, “you got to know when to hold ‘em, know when to fold ‘em, know when to walk away, know when to run”.

*Contributor – Karen McIsaac, Managing Director

 

The Importance of Dress Rehearsals – Why the Navy SEALS were successful in Pakistan

We’ve seen all the articles on training, physical abilities, mental capabilities, teamwork and skills.
One detail you may have seen mentioned was the replica of Bin Laden’s compound built in Afghanistan that was leveraged for practices and dress rehearsals leading up to the raid.

Why don’t we leverage dress rehearsals when we are deploying change? The Navy SEALS knew the value of this risk mitigation plan. They could test all the scenarios of what could go wrong and their recovery strategies.

There is risk associated with all change initiatives. Let’s reconsider how we approach the mitigation of all these risks and take the time to build in dress rehearsals to ensure flawless implementation!

*Contributor – Karen McIsaac, Managing Director

 

Flying under the Radar

So often consultants enter a new client’s office with our project bag of tools and associated project language.  We usually begin by telling our client “how to do” project management, work plans, status reports, issue tracking, issue escalation, governance, change request process, escalation process, timelines, milestones, project deliverables, the lifecycle , communication plans, process improvement, Six Sigma, toll gates, etc”.  By the time you have finished your clients’ eyes are crossed, their heads are spinning and the room is filled with the sound of silence.  If I was the client I would run out of the room screaming, “STOP”.

How about an alternative approach that is “just do it”?  I know Nike is famous for bringing this simple approach to light.  Let’s say it is time that I get into shape and I want to start a jogging/running program.  The simple approach is to get a pair of running shoes that are comfortable and put one foot in front of the other.  Start slowly, short distances and gradually OVER TIME speed up and run longer distances. Don’t over do it and if you hurt, then rest and recover – a very simple, easy process with easy to follow instructions.

The other approach to start a running program is to research all the running shoes available to ensure you get the “correct” pair.  Then you need to find the answers to all the technical questions. Do I pronate? Do I need orthotics? Am I a heal striker or toe runner?  How should I hold my arms and hands?  What should be my stride length?  By the time you would get through all of that you may want to take up Ping-Pong.

So what approach can we take with our new business client?  Here are some thoughts:

• Define what you initially want to get done, say in the next 30 days (For example: the project goals/scope and interim work plan)
• Keep a list of questions (potential issues) that need to answered
• Identify who, when and how we keep the right folks (Sponsors, stakeholders, project leads) informed about how/what we are doing

I think this is enough to start. Then do it.  Bring in templates and “project speak” only as needed.  Keep the documentation simple and fact-based. I am not suggesting that you not follow the client’s standards if they already exist.

A next step would be to look at what you want to do in the next 30 – 60 days. And repeat the steps above.  As you hit the next 60 – 90 days you should have a viable plan that you can manage to and a process to review the progress, the financials, etc. and you will have introduced “project management” without your client knowing it!

In conclusion, I think if we remember that the tools are not the focus, it is the work, we will have more success and a very satisfied client.

*Contributor – Bob Metzler, Managing Director

Download PDF

Why PMOs Get a Bad Rap

You want to paint a picture: Did you get the “paint by numbers” with a predefined picture and stay within the lines or do you start with a creative stroke of red paint on a white canvas?

All too often we see PMOs that are built without following the same practices we would use to begin a project. Instead, they are built from a prescribed method without consideration for the problem being solved. This is where the trouble begins and the “bad rap” is attached to the PMO. Let’s look at some reasons why PMOs get a bad rap and what you can do to build a successful PMO for your organization.

Depends on What “It” Is

For organizations that have a mired of project investments, governance and controls are a must have. There is an immediate propensity to build “it,” without a consideration for what “it” is, how “it” will perform, the benefits/merits and success tracking of “it”. A PMO should never be built because it is vogue, but rather because it is essential to the success of an organization.

Before you build the PMO, identify the problem and the “appetite for change” (how much change can be introduced and over what period of time).

Gaining clarity on what “it” is will get you to a viable solution, and “it” typically does not come out of a book. An organization’s real needs should always drive the PMO build out.

Using Project Management Processes to Design the PMO

The design and build of a PMO requires the same due diligence that we would use to plan and execute a project. One of the current trends in building a PMO is “build it and they will come”. In reality, the PMO is built and quickly becomes a burden, so why are we not utilizing project management processes to define/design our PMO?

A large Telecom purchased a step-by-step PMO guide at a discounted rate that included templates and online training. After implementation, a PMO Administrator would create a “one-size-fits-all” compilation of reports from data that was collected monthly from the project managers. The Administrator would then email the reports to the leadership team on the requested timeline. The reports rolled up identifying the project portfolio, highlighting “at risk” items in red. 

The PMO team began to realize that a long list of PMO-generated reports were not of any use to the leadership – they were outdated and not being read. The PMO was already getting a “bad rap” by the very people who once advocated its importance.

This particular PMO was created as a new box on the organizational chart, provided some “silver bullet” tool, to find that it has become an administrative ball of yarn that quickly began to unravel. 

Define the Problem

The PMO should start with a defined Charter that identifies the business problem the PMO is supposed to solve, ties to the strategic vision of the organization and communicates a clear vision that will be embraced across the organization. Success measures should be defined as goals and measured/reported.

If you don’t define what you want then you won’t get what you want!

What are the Requirements?

Requirements are essential building blocks to answer the question, “What do we want the PMO to provide?” In the Telecom situation noted above, the organization jumped in headfirst with a solution. While the requirements themselves are not the solution, they enable us to lay the foundation for the PMO roadmap and subsequent success measurements. In this scenario, a gap analysis to determine the “as is” and “to be” was not completed. The gap analysis is a technique to identify the current situation and the future vision, which helps to uncover the people and process aspects and change impacts. The purported “best practice” methods/tools may not be addressing your organization’s needs.

Why Does Our PMO Not Have Any Clout?

Once you have gathered the requirements, put together a roadmap and start the execution, this is when we often see the PMO begin to lose traction. The PMO team may find itself asking, “Why do we not have any influence?”

The PMO is about people and process within your company’s culture. There is no cookie-cutter approach based on a new organizational chart. The PMO needs to have defined resource capabilities, be clearly accountable to its stakeholders and not create fiefdoms. Here are a few considerations that will help put the punch in your PMO; we call this the “accountability factor” of your PMO.

By establishing what the PMO will or will not provide and the roles and responsibilities of everyone involved, you prevent the creation of false expectations. The importance of the PMO should be documented and communicated (and not by the PMO). Interactions with vendors, contractors and consultants who work with the PMO should also be identified, and clear communications procedures established.

It is essential that the right people are in place to make the PMO successful. This includes transitioning and maintaining continuity so the PMO can increase productivity and measure success.

Is the PMO information relevant to support an escalation path where senior stakeholders can act and disposition it? If not, why? Status, risks, issues and financial information should be a factor in ongoing decision making across the PMO portfolio. The governance process should be established for decision making and handling change control for the PMO. For example, if status reports are provided and no one reads them is it because there is no value to them, they lack credibility, format is too complex or are they outdated? Where is the value to the recipients? Creating and reading reports takes time, and time equals money. The PMO has the accountability to address the lackluster interest in the reporting. It goes back to the basic premise that if no one looks at the report then why was it created?

One major PMO benefit is standardization, which includes reporting, processes and practices. Standardization also includes the execution and documentation associated with Risk Assessments for not just project risk, but also deployment risks. Having a standard risk evaluation ensures stakeholders receive the information the same way and can help with risk mitigation.

The PMO may have lost its punch because no one knows where the information is. To overcome this barrier a process for documentation should exist. This would be the guidelines for the centralized repository with required project information.  A project library of key information will become critical for auditing and provide proof of SOX compliance.

To be truly successful, the PMO must continually go back to the definition of what stakeholders need for information and decisioning purposes. A PMO Communication Plan enables the team to understand and address who, what, when and how the stakeholders are engaged.

Understanding stakeholder information needs begins with asking the right questions. For instance, does this group want to distinguish Business as Usual, Regulatory/Compliance, Merger projects?  Do they want to monitor success metrics and are they interested in determining deployment approaches? Too often, we forget who the clients are.

Stake in the Game – Selling the Value

Another key reason why PMOs continue to get a bad rap relates to the PMO not “selling itself”. The solution an organization decides to build must clearly state to the customer/stakeholders, “What is in it for me?”  Here are some key metrics that senior management will be looking at when assessing the PMO value and engaging it across the organization:

• Controls over the financials – baseline ‘before’ and ‘after’
• Reduction in turnover by supporting project teams
• Greater project output (on schedule, time, budget)
• Flexibility to adapt to changing environment (how we handle change)
• Regulatory/Compliance (i.e. SOX) – controls over project investments
• Increased market share via reducing missed opportunities (decreased time to market)
• Stakeholder satisfaction
• Standardized way of doing things which infers increased productivity

Summary

Organizations continue to pour time, money and effort into building a PMO only for it to end up with a bad rap. Now is a good time to rethink how your PMO was built or how you are going to build one – and approach it using project management processes/practices!

*Contributor – Juliann Knott, Executive Change Consultant

Download PDF

Keep Poor Vendor Management from Impacting the Bottom Line

A recent public announcement by a local government disclosed that over $6 million had been spent on a program for the judicial and criminal justice systems, but that nothing had been delivered.  The program was ultimately cancelled.

In the fourth quarter of 2005, a publicly traded company announced to their shareholders and the public that the last quarter dividends would be reduced $.30 – $.40 per share due to “problems” with the poor execution and deployment of a new Enterprise Resource Planning system (ERP).

The bottom line in both of these real-world examples is that the organization, its taxpayers and shareholders were negatively impacted by the misspending of project funds.  These two examples demonstrate significant investments that required managing an outside software vendor.  Many companies will turn these types of initiatives over to the vendor only for the project to falter or fail.

Who is to Blame?

In today’s world, when something goes wrong everyone likes to put the blame on someone or something.  These examples are no different.  People often blame problems on one specific area, such as technology, poor vendor management, an organization’s ability (or inability) to change, the management/leadership and the list goes on.  I believe that the root cause of these problems is poor execution of program/project management – of which vendor management is one component.

The more mature organizations are executing projects using defined success measurements, business-based governance and oversight of these dollar investments, embracing change improvements and doing the “right” projects the right way.

When a change initiative is large, in terms of overall investment and business impact, it does not make sense to turn the organization’s success over to a vendor with conflicting priorities.  The vendor goes away at the end of the engagement, but the organization must live with results, good or bad.  This has led me to believe that organizations should consider the use of an unbiased, certified project management professional (PMP) to oversee the client and vendor performance to ensure success.

Execution Risk

There are many risks associated with major initiatives that involve an outside vendor.  One example is every time you hand off a responsibility, you are incurring inherent risk. This holds true for all instances including when a software integrator or consulting firm is engaged and even when you ask for support from your own team members.  Execution risk becomes significantly more when there are large dollar investments, software integration, changes in enterprise business processes and associated and expected employee and/or customer behaviors.

Leadership Risk

Another risk is when an operational manager with other responsibilities is brought on to oversee a visible and business transformation initiative.  Our profession terms this the “accidental” project manager.  The accidental project manager is generally someone that does not possess the skills or the experience to drive a large change initiative (program or project). They are most adept at running the business as usual environments vs. dynamically changing project world.

Those that come out of the operational (business as usual) environments that have been successful in transitioning to a new and different role can attest to the differences in required skills and aptitude.  The following example shows what can happen to projects led by accidental project managers who are not trained to manage large initiatives involving outside vendors.

A government agency was installing a significant ERP where the vendor was chosen via bid process.  The accidental project manager recognized at a very late date that the vendor was incompetent and not performing.  The vendor was subsequently dismissed and then proceeded to take the government agency to court.  Because the contract and vendor performance had not been managed, tracked and clearly documented, the vendor left with an additional $3 million in their pocket for non-performance of the contract.

It is also important to remember that when vendors and contracts are not managed, the cost is not only to the organization, its shareholders or taxpayers as in the examples above, but the careers of project sponsors can also be negatively impacted.

The True Value

My experience in our industry has left me with invaluable insight from clients that demonstrate what they have gained from having an independent, certified PMP onboard to execute these types of projects.  One of the benefits is the creation of tangible documentation that not only ensures that the project has appropriate controls, transparency, use of disciplined processes to mitigate risk but essentially is completed on time and within budget. These controls and documentation can be leveraged in the event that legal issues surface.  Project sponsors and stakeholders do not want surprises regarding vendor communication of status, deliverables and releases.  Some other specific examples of documentation that outside, certified project managers can provide include:

• Fully integrated workplan that includes vendor and client deliverables and activities
• Clear Statement of Work for vendor activities – level setting expectations in writing
• Clear, reported metrics regarding Service Level Agreements – the are indicative of vendor performance
• Quantifiable metrics that represent current and future state associated costs – this measurement is called Earned Value – if the vendor has invoiced 70% of the contract and completed 10% of the work – there is a gap
• Formal processes for managing changes – those submitted to the vendor (these changes may represent management of cost, timelines, risks, quality and lastly, knowing if the change has impacted someone else)

According to my past clients, the value of an independent PMP is also demonstrated in their ability to ensure that the client’s infrastructure is in place to support the program/project governance, sponsorship/ownership and that the client methodologies are integrated with the vendor’s processes.  My clients also say that a qualified professional project manager can place equal focus on the business and technology transformation and integration.  Other areas in which such a resource can benefit an organization include:

• Ensuring that the vendor has appropriate processes in place to support quality requirements as well as a structured method for review and client acceptance of deliverables, release control, incident tracking and revalidation
• Managing vendor and client contracts and performance as well as collaborating with client procurement/sourcing partners for contract questions/performance indicatorsEnsuring there is performing vendor software in escrow that has been accepted by the client and outlined in contracts
• Transition of vendor knowledge to client resources prior to vendor exit.

The Bottom Line

Executing an initiative that requires an outside vendor does impact your organization’s bottom line.  Allowing the vendor to oversee the project or designating an accidental project manager can have serious consequences to your organization.  You should be aware of your options, consider your risks and identify insurance for success for you and your organization.  Consider the value of an independent, experienced project management professional (PMP) to oversee your next initiative that involves vendor management.

*Contributor – Karen McIsaac, Managing Director

Download PDF

Definition of Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result

Do you do the same thing over and over again because it’s comfortable, no matter the outcome? In our unique economic environment, complacency equals inflation, inflated project costs that is.

Now, more than ever, is the time to consider how to plan, execute and control projects to avoid the excessive cost and schedule overruns experienced and accepted in the past. In order to do so, you have to deviate from your comfort zone.

Today is the day to become creative and make a concerted effort to evaluate project options based on requirements and weighted evaluation criteria and select the approach that is right for your company, customers and shareholders.

What are the options and how do you choose?

Regarding project options, it isn’t like Baskin Robbins where there are 31 flavors to choose from, in fact, just two. DIY or buy. Either can be customized, but ultimately you complete the project internally or outsource all or part to an external vendor.

Chances are you are more confident executing one option or the other; however, if you do the same thing over and over again, you will get the same result. For most companies, their project track record could use some renovation and innovation especially NOW.

Do It Yourself (DIY)

Completing the project in-house is often preferred but seldom selected given the fear of responsibility and accountability for meeting project objectives, especially where failure comes at a high cost. With budgets tight and jobs at stake, fear is no longer an option.

As a guideline, it is better to complete the project internally if the following apply:

• Excess resources are available (materials, personnel)
• Required skills are found in-house, easily acquired externally or training is readily available
• Control/authority is a key driver within the organization or project
• Ownership of quality, cost and schedule management is critical
• Project or process is proprietary or confidential

Keep in mind, you must know what it takes to “keep the doors open” (personnel, materials, spend) before you allocate discretionary resources to projects or programs.

A recommended variation of the “do it yourself” option is to build out and enhance your internal team through an external company that can provide experts to augment your staff, which ultimately leads to the following benefits:

• Cost savings – you pay only for the resources needed
• Streamlined communications – roles and responsibilities are clear and not duplicated
• Increased control and risk mitigation
• Opportunity to transfer or retain knowledge
• Oversight outside of a formal contract  - within a Statement of Work (SOW)
• Time/cost savings of contract bidding (RFP’s, etc.) and negotiations
• Schedule ownership – the organization dictates and manages the schedule versus the vendor

Buy

How many times have you heard, “you have to be in it to win it”, meaning if you are watching from the sidelines, you have no chance at all to be successful. The same applies here. If you hand your project over to a third party, you are placing the fate of your project, and possibly your career, in their hands. With due diligence, clear contractual commitments and an SOW, outsourcing can be a positive experience.

 Buying versus completing the project in-house can provide several benefits as external vendors can often cut through political environments, provide independent oversight, incorporate best practices from previous engagements and with adequate contract terms, share or mitigate project risks. As long as the key risks associated with outsourcing are mitigated, this option can be extremely valuable under the following conditions:

• Expertise is not available in-house and cannot be readily acquired
• Cost to purchase and maintain is less than the cost to develop and maintain internally
• Product has already been developed, tested and implemented successfully elsewhere and can be integrated with little change

Exposure or Windfall?

There is no silver bullet with one option or the other, and each is not without challenges and opportunities as outlined below.

Cost

If you choose to complete the project within, there are usually lower internal hourly rates, limited incremental management overhead and nominal travel expenses as costs tend to be reduced and more predictable for in-house projects. If you outsource, you may also be able to capitalize on fixed bid contracts with an external vendor as long as the project requirements are comprehensive and changes minimized. ROI and project risk should influence the approach selected and if needed, contract type and terms.

Timeline

How frequently are “canned” timelines presented by external vendors and guaranteed to work in every environment? Unfortunately this occurs all too often, resulting in quality concerns, cut corners, more money and missed deadlines without notice or penalties. However, in-house projects are not without timeline risk, especially if the project is unique, resources are focused on both operational and project work or there is no sense of urgency. An integrated workplan, measurement and performance criteria, continual risk assessments, formal tollgates and controls are essential to attain project success for either option.

Control

Internally, the focus is typically on “doing the right thing” for the customer.  You are closer to the actual work with greater flexibility to change if necessary.  For good or bad, with outsourcing, when you sign a contract with an outside vendor you are “locked in”, and the terms agreed to upfront are the rules to live by.  Consider the number of anticipated changes, need for flexibility or agility and level of scope definition when weighing options and negotiating contracts.

Quality

Utilizing a vendor is often seen as an insurance policy for program success.  Historically however, most buyers have performance, quality and/or expectation issues after selection and contract signing, which may not be known until later in the project. Take caution, as your expected level of quality, or acceptable quality protocols for internal projects, may not be built into the vendor timeline or price and must be spelled out in the contract or SOW.

Resources

Dedicated (full or part-time) internal qualified project resources are hard to come by, especially now with increased layoffs and reduced hiring, but once secured, team cohesion, collocation, oversight and motivation are often easier with in-house projects. It is much more difficult to lead and manage external resources (they are generally ‘directing’ you), especially if they are offsite or offshore, traveling each week or transitioning on and off the project. However, many of the resource risks can be mitigated with independent project oversight and comprehensive communication planning and management.

Summary

Whether you make the decision to do it yourself (DIY) or outsource your project needs, each approach is not without risk. With the proper identification, planning and mitigation, the pitfalls that normally derail projects can be mitigated and opportunities exploited. Now is the time to think outside the box and truly examine your options. Remember, if you do what you’ve always done, you’re going to get what you’ve always gotten.

*Contributor – Gail Bennett, Executive Change Consultant

Download PDF

Accounting for Misaligned Political Agendas

Most experienced project managers are versed in how to technically initiate, plan, control, execute and close a program/project.  However, having these skills can result in being very process driven, which in turn means that project managers can miss the “culture” issues associated with mission-critical, cross-functional initiatives.  These issues, organizational nuances and misaligned political agendas represent significant project risk that is not easily identifiable through standard risk assessments.

What is a misaligned political agenda? 

No one likes to use the term ‘political,’ but let’s face it, that’s the term everyone uses when dealing with a cross-functional program/project that involves many stakeholders from all areas of the organization.

Anyone associated with project management understands that there are many tools and methodologies available that can help to ensure that an initiative is delivered on time and within budget. Unfortunately, those tools alone will not ensure that all stakeholder needs, expectations and support are aligned.  This is something that project managers must learn to recognize and mitigate so that their project can be successful.  Perhaps one of the best ways to illustrate a misaligned political agenda is to share an example.

In this situation, the initiative had already experienced two starts, was unsuccessful to date and was about to start a third time.  The project was critical to the client as the current environment was causing significant customer issues which resulted in significant backroom operational issues, including additional costs as well as customer frustration.

A new project manager was assigned.  She had delivered a similar solution in the past, so this project was not to be overly taxing or challenging as an initiative sometimes can.  However, the project manager had no experience with the client organization and culture. The project was cross-functional in nature as it was dependent on the support and engagement of approximately twelve unique areas of operation. The issue was that not all of those stakeholders shared the perspective of the importance of this project.

So what happened during project execution?  First, the executive sponsor driving the project was not adept at garnering up-front support of the cross-functional partners/participants.  Second, the project manager did not consider all of the stakeholder agendas.  The stakeholders were not fully engaged or supportive, which resulted in several additional stops and starts and unnecessary delays.  Though the project plan was being managed and the communications prompt and clear, the project was not progressing at the pace dictated by the plan.

Why?  There were several different political agendas being executed. If the project sponsor does not (or will not) align them, it is the project manager who must align and engage those that are negatively impacting the project progress in a diplomatic (non-political, unbiased and impartial) manner.  In this specific scenario, the project manager had to revisit, realign, engage and coach all of the cross-functional managers.

When the project sponsor and all of the stakeholders became engaged and supportive, the project picked up momentum and the underlying tension was eliminated.  Until that point the unseen political risk was jeopardizing project progress and success.  The project manager in this example learned that to be successful one must serve as the diplomat that pulls everyone with varying agendas to the table for open discussion.

Steps you can take

In all projects, the best way to prevent misaligned agendas is at the inception of the initiative.  At that time, there are several areas where the project manager can take steps to potentially prevent issues down the line.

One of the first steps that you should take is to identify and include every stakeholder as a part of an oversight committee, sometimes referred to as a governance committee, which serves to bring everyone together.  This infers that every cross-functional area has been identified from an impact/ownership perspective and included because exclusion can have detrimental effects on the project.

The next step is to talk with the stakeholders to find out what is critical for success to them as well as their commitment to the effort.  Are they committed to the project or there in name only?  Be sure to integrate all stakeholders’ perspectives for tracking purposes and continual review.  You may need to meet with each key stakeholder independently to ensure candor during the conversation

After speaking with stakeholders, you should create a communications plan that will help establish standard meeting routines and ensure clear and frequent stakeholder communication.  This will manage expectations and minimize surprises as well as garner continued dialog among stakeholders.

All of these steps will lead to a commitment of project resources from each stakeholder that is responsible for representing their interests.  Keep in mind that a lack of human capital commitment will prevent the project from progressing as planned.

As with every project, there are issues of “time constraints” of cross-functional participants due to other commitments.  To prevent any surprises in an oversight committee meeting, be factual about reporting them one-on-one to the stakeholder responsible for the cross-functional area and the associated impacts on the project.  Time constraints are real and you should look for any options that may support resolution of the issue.  No one wants to be reminded that they provided the “wrong” human resource.

During project kickoff you should ensure that all representatives from the cross-functional areas are included in risk identification, areas of impact, the work breakdown structure for project plan development, identification of what’s critical to quality, their respective roles/responsibilities and all expectations (“the rules” of engagement).  Keep in mind, exclusion promotes non-ownership.

Remember, the project sponsor should be the person responsible for aligning political agendas and garnering support.  Whether this is actually the case or not, you must ensure that the project sponsor is apprised of all issues, political situations, support/non-support of participants of dependent/impacted cross-functional areas and overall project progress (budget, milestones, deliverables, change controls) on a regular basis and prior to any stakeholder meetings.  Your job as a project manager is to ensure that the sponsoring executive is successful along with the project.

Most project teams comprise a mired of team members that represent a matrix managed group.  In order for the project to run smoothly and for the group to be successful, each of your team members should have a method of communicating with their management.  By assisting in this process you have the opportunity to influence how the communication is delivered.  It’s also another method of core team and cross-functional team member support as well as ensuring the appropriate communication of facts vs. assumptions.

Your project team’s lack of experience can be detrimental to a project.  You should address situations where the cross-functional and/or core team members may need additional training and support by communicating these needs to the sponsor and appropriate stakeholder.  It’s usually best to offer options rather than removing the person from the project.

Though most project managers may possess the technical skills of initiating, planning, executing, controlling and closing a project the “soft skills” are just as important.  Projects are about people, people working together to achieve a shared goal – note, shared goal is most important.  The project manager is a key element in ensuring there is a shared goal among stakeholders, core and cross-functional team members. Everyone’s perspectives, experiences, skills, priorities and “end game” are important and to be respected.  Your challenge is aligning them to the goals of the project.  As a project manager, possessing the following soft skills will potentially prevent misaligned political agendas:

• Remain an unbiased execution lead. As a project manager, remaining unbiased minimizes any promotion of political agendas on your part.
• Clearly represent facts and communicate them to the stakeholders and solicit feedback.  Attempt to deal only with facts and not assumptions.  Issues don’t belong to one area; they are shared among the stakeholders.
• Recognize that every cross-functional area impacted by the project represents additional project risk, from a political, resource and change perspective.

Summary

Though projects support an organization’s goals, objectives and targets, they are also a forum for political havoc.  Everyone has unique goals, perspectives and opportunities as is evident within every project team as well as at the executive and sponsorship levels.

The misalignment of political agendas can sabotage a project when there is no “apparent” reason for its lack luster success or failure.  Early recognition of the politics surrounding a project initiative and taking action can help garner support from all areas, including the team and project sponsor.

As in any team sport – the team wins, the coach loses.  Don’t be the losing coach!

*Contributor – Karen McIsaac, Managing Director

Download PDF