You know what the world needs more of?  Short blog posts.  I know I have done some long ones lately and I am resolved to save my self a chunk of time and do some short ones.  So here it comes. 

 

Let’s start with a fact.  Some people are better project managers than others.  I know there a humanist point of view out there that says everyone can do everything equally well if given half a chance, but that just isn’t true.  Some people are better at seeing what the real problems are, at developing a solution, at organizing the resources required to bring that solution to life, and keeping every one focused and on track until the goal is accomplished.

 

The second fact is that just about everything we deal with on a daily basis in the business world is a problem for which we need to develop a solution.  And that is the definition of a project.  Maybe the solution is just redefining the procedures that are already in place.  Maybe it involves entirely new procedures or software (probably a combo).  Maybe it just requires a new way of looking at the issue at hand.   

 

Over the past twenty years, we have gotten use to thinking of project management as something for big projects only.  It’s not.  It’s a set of techniques, a way of approaching problems, a way of looking for solutions that is applicable to a wide range of much smaller, and much less expensive projects which, in the end, could have just as big an impact on the bottom line as the big monster projects. 

 

Now is a difficult time, but now is also the time to start looking for the projects you can do that will set you up for the recovery after this crash.  What ‘little monster’ projects are you facing? 

Do you ever wonder whether or not using the proper project management approach is worth the time and effort?  I mean wouldn’t it be easier to just dive in to what you have to do and get it over with? 

Not according to a landmark study commissioned by the Project Management Institute (the world’s leading non-profit association for project management individuals).  The results, delivered at the 2008 PMI Research Conference in Warsaw, Poland, strongly show that using project management techniques lead to a greater level of satisfaction with the project results, a higher degree of alignment between project goals and the business objectives of the company, more consistent methods that make it easier for senior management to keep track of what’s happening, realization of more tangible and intangible benefits due to a higher level of creativity and innovation, and a greater probability of a ‘successful’ project (on time, on budget). 

Factors that worked against projects being successful included changes in personnel who drive the project, lack of focus or will to do the project on the part of the project team, over bureaucratization of the project process, and poor alignment of goals between the project team and the managers the project is being done for. 

I guess none of this should be too surprising but in today’s world, where speed is everything and all projects need to be done yesterday, it is refreshing to know that there is some definitive proof that doing things right is more effective than just doing things.  It’s particularly telling that the study was not just based on multi-year, mega projects but included projects of varying size and complexity.  It’s true in tennis and it’s true in managing projects – form is important. 

For more details on the report, go to http://www.pmi.org/Value/default.htm for more info and a video of the full presentation.  The research monogram is available for pre-order from http://www.pmi.org/Marketplace/Pages/ProductDetail.aspx?GMProduct=00101065301.  PMI members will receive a special four page synopsis with the August issues of PM Network and PMI today.    

To be honest, I really don’t need to write up instructions for how people can screw up a project.  A lot of folks just seem to warm up to that naturally.  In fact sometimes it seems that the only projects that really succeed are those that happen pretty much by accident.   But I’m an organized sort of fellow and so to me it just seems comfortable to document everything. 

Couple of things should be mentioned right off the bat.  First, there aren’t necessarily going to be exactly ten ways.  They’re might be six, they’re might be 16, don’t really know at this point.  I’m doing them as I think them up.  Nor am I doing all of them at once.  You’ll have to be patient and stay tuned to get them all.  That’s called ‘a hook’ by the ad boys.   Oh, and they’re not going to be in any order either.  That requires way too much planning and people will end up arguing that number 1 should be number 2 and vice versa.  You just can’t please some folks. 

So where am I going to start?  With one of my pet peeves – people who think you don’t need a project manager at all. 

That’s the prevailing wisdom for a lot of companies – we don’t need no stinkin’ project managers.  Everybody here knows what needs to be done, we just need to get busy and do it.  

Back in the good, ole days, we used to have project managers on everything.  And then people realized that you had to pay project managers.  Plus there was a perception that because they were ‘managing’ that they weren’t doing anything.  So it seemed like a ‘money for nothing’ situation but without the chicks.  And before you knew it, a lot of people just kind of stopped using project managers. 

Of course nobody would admit to something like that out loud, they would spin the truth by having a ‘working’ project manager, like when Lou Boudreau won MVP and managed the Indians to the 1948 World Series.  Somebody who can do it all.  The only problem is that you start with a Lou Boudreau but eventually you are going to have a Pete Rose pop up and it won’t end so nicely. 

You see, there is always one person in every project who is the ‘go to’ person for that project; the one who knows the most about it, the one who kind of outlines what needs to be done on the back of a napkin, and the one who ends up doing the lion’s share of the work.  And so doesn’t it make sense, since they are so totally immersed in it, to just have them manage the project also? 

Unfortunately, this is often one of those things that makes a very nice theory but which doesn’t work out as well in the real world.  The problem is, even though that ‘go to’ person is very important, they are never the only ones associated with a project and whenever you have multiple tasks and multiple people, you need someone to coordinate what is going on,  Unfortunately, often the ‘go to’ person is not someone who enjoys or excels at coordinating.  They tend to think that everyone understands the situation as well as they do.  They tend to think that it’s just as easy to solve or do tasks themselves rather than involving others.  And they often don’t feel a need to document or explain what is going on because they already know so just relax people. 

True project management functions best when you have someone overseeing the project who is not also consumed by the tasks that make up the project.  They have time to work out who is going to do what and to focus on communicating exactly what is being done to the outside world.  Nor is it always a full time job.  A good project manager should be able to simultaneously oversee a number of normal sized projects.

In the last analysis, the project manager is someone who keeps things moving.  Someone who is concerned with how the tasks fit together and how they are parceled out among the team members for maximum efficiency.  Someone who may not know how to do every little task but who sees the big picture and knows how to keep that picture in focus.   Someone who maximizes your chance of bringing the project in on time and on budget.  And the question I would have is – Why wouldn’t you want to utilize someone like that? 

What are the qualities of a good project manager?  I saw this question posted on the LinkedIn question page a month or so ago and I watched avidly for the next few days as answers come in from people literally around the world.  And the results didn’t surprise me because just about every attribute you could think of was thrown out by someone; intelligence, leadership skills, ability to communicate clearly, high energy, persistence, motivation, competence, etcetera, etcetera. 

Not surprising in a way.  We all have different things that we prize most highly as  attributes we want to see in someone who is leading us.  And that certainly is what a project manager is – a leader who is guiding us through a process that may take anywhere from a few weeks to a few years.  And we want someone good for that role, someone who is able to keep us going, keep us together, and keep us on track. 

True, maybe it’s not right that we look for a single trait that this super human hero should posses.  But sometimes we just can’t help ourselves and so here is the entry that I made in LinkedIn.  Flexibility.   

We are a species that loves to plan.  And our society today has taken that to new heights.  Everything possible is laid out and anticipated.  We need to know what is going to happen, the order in which it will occur, and when that is going to unfold.   Every possibility has to be taken into account and prepared for.  To have something unexpected happen is tantamount to failure itself.  Why didn’t somebody plan for that? 

I guess it’s hard to argue against that.  Planning is good.  You should plan for everything you can think of. 

And yet, I think most of us know that life doesn’t function like that.  I did a lot of planning when my children were born.  I would do this and it would result in that for them.  Well, surprise, surprise Sgt Carter, things didn’t unfold exactly or at all like I thought they would.  And yet, for the most part, it’s all worked out fine. 

Of course, most projects are truly less complicated than our lives.  Unfortunately, as our technology becomes more complex the projects do too and it is becoming harder and harder to plan for every contingency. 

And when that happens, flexibility, the ability to evaluate surprise situations, the ability to see new alternatives, the ability to segue the team into those new paths without running in tight little circles yelling ‘the sky is falling’, is a real asset.  It’s flexibility that provides the extra cushion you need when things don’t turn out just the way you want, that gives you the way to rise above the difficulties and bring a successful outcome to a situation that has suddenly gotten up and walked away from the original plan. 

Nothing, of course, is ever ‘just one thing’.  It’s always a blend of characteristics.  That’s what makes people, and projects, so interesting.  But if I had to pick one, not just for success in projects but also for success in life, it has to be flexibility. 

Oh, yeah.  I can remember it.  Seems like a lifetime ago, but I can still picture it clear as day.  A big conference room, several white boards, a half dozen easels with tear off pads on them.  And a big box of donuts sitting right smack dab in the center of the table. 

And the people.  They were all there.  The big power users.  Steely eyed folks from finance, geeks from engineering, the bad boys of manufacturing, and, of course, the marketing and sales group.   

And why shouldn’t they be there?  After all we were embarking on a major project that would impact every part of the company and the CIO had sent out the invitation to all and sundry, and they had responded.  Some were there just for today, just to kick things off, but many of them were there for the duration and each department had assigned one or more resources to the team that would carry out this project.  Other people had already been cross trained and they would take over the primary responsibilities for the chosen ones while they devoted themselves to the project.  It was a very serious thing because everyone knew you couldn’t give a project your best effort if you were still trying to do your normal job. 

It was a long time ago, but I remember it well.  Yes, children, in the old days projects were staffed by people who were sometimes assigned to that project exclusively.  And the result?  I think that the end result was two fold. 

First, people spent more time on the project, did more research, and tended to really test things out.  It wasn’t fool proof, of course.  People made mistakes and cut corners and missed the obvious then just as they do today, but at least you had a fighting chance. 

Second, there was a real feeling of corporate (as in group, not the guys who hold all their meetings in Breckenridge) ownership of a project.  It wasn’t an IT project, it was a company project that might be chaired by IT.  And that meant that if it didn’t go as well as expected, everyone would get a chance to take some of the blame home. 

Unfortunately, today’s projects are generally quite different.  Oh we start out the same way.  We hold a big meeting, get everyone together and chant the magic spells, but shortly after that things take a decidedly sinister turn. 

You know you are in trouble when the guy from manufacturing who is going to be your resource arrives late, gets three phone calls from the floor, and then leaves after 20 minutes because ‘everything down there is all messed up’.   Or the finance rep doesn’t come at all because she is ‘in a conference call with the Comptroller in Malaysia’.

But you know what the worst part of the situation is?  There’s not a darn thing the manufacturing guy or finance rep can do about it.  They may be just as dedicated mentally to the project as their ancestors, but there is no fresh young face waiting in the wings to temporarily take over their duties.  Baring a total repeal of child labor laws, there is no one available for them to shift the load to and free them up.   We become victims of our own cost cutting mania. 

And so the question is – what does a Project Manager do about this?

Well, one thing I do is start getting my list of excuses for why the project is late or why things weren’t tested better ready right off the bat, because sometimes it doesn’t take long for something to go wrong in that kind of flying weather. 

Another thing you have to do is keep a closer eye on the testing process (most projects have some sort of test to see if things work).  You can’t just assume it will be done (or done well) just because you know the person charged with that is a solid performer.  You need to make sure that he has time to do what is needed and does not just convince himself that ‘it seems to work’.  Many times this means designing the tests so that you have both a full set of test requirements but also see the results of each test.  This, in turn, often means that you have to separate the process of setting up test scenarios from actually doing the test scenarios.  Fortunately, that is a good idea anyway. 

I think it also puts more pressure on the project manager to keep in touch with the people on the team.  There should be some sort of daily interaction, something to help you gauge when people are so overwhelmed by their own jobs that they just don’t have anything left to give the project.  This works both ways, of course, as the interaction gives your team member the perfect opportunity to break down to you and confess his lack of progress on the project. 

And finally, it is important for the project manager to be able to work potential lack of time into the time frame estimates for the project.  Everyone in management wants things to be already completed by the time they start but you have to be the voice of reality on the project and clearly articulate what are reasonable goals and what aren’t. 

One thing is clear, however.  The old days are not coming back.  We are probably never going to go back to the staffing levels of old that made it possible to detach someone and let the project own them.  But it doesn’t mean that we still can’t have successful, on time projects.  It just means we have to handle things a little differently.