One of the primary concepts of engaging in Intelligent Disobedience is to be true to one’s self. Intelligent Disobedience is acting in a way that often counters what is expected, but is in the best interest of the business at large. Equally important, however, is understanding that acting with Intelligent Disobedience is often required to be true to yourself, your ethics and to validate your role in your business, your family or amongst your friends.

So our idea for a New Year’s resolution is not to decide to DO something…it is to decide to strive to BE something in 2012. And, it is not to be anything different…it is to BE yourself. It is to accept, value and support who you truly are. Be true to yourself and enforce this “selfness” by the approaches you take and the decisions you make this year. For example, if you truly believe the status of a project is red, and management is wanting you to state it is amber because they don’t want “undue attention” paid to the project, don’t just accept that direction. Push back – state your case and strive to maintain your integrity towards your profession and more importantly, your SELF.

Taking this approach with a full understanding of your personal strengths and weaknesses can help improve your professional and personal life. (And you don’t need a scale to measure it!)

Can you think of things that you did (or did not do) during 2011 that were not in support of who you really are? What could you do different in 2012 to enhance your “support of self?”

Note: Mindavation provides a number of workshops and keynotes that incorporate the concept of Intelligent Disobedience. For details, email us at info@mindavation.com. You can learn about all of the Mindavation offerings at www.mindavation.com or www.mindavation.com.au.

The Projectmanager.com.au website published an article last month asking the question “Do Sponsors Need to be Qualified in Project Management?” (http://projectmanager.com.au/blogs/sponsors-qualified-project-management/) An interesting question but one that raises another question…if qualifications for sponsors were mandatory, would we have any projects to deliver? Maybe more distressing to project managers; would they really want their sponsor questioning every project management technique they applied?

Project sponsor involvement is certainly pivotal to success, and the project manager has a role to play in educating and defining the role of the sponsor in the project. Any education or qualification for a sponsor would not replace this activity; different project requirements, different approaches from sponsors and project managers make this process mandatory for successful project delivery.

Understanding if the sponsor wants overviews or detail, what priorities apply to the triple constraints, how to manage financials and the management reserve and a number of other items lie with the project manager to advise and negotiate with the sponsor.

So, do sponsors need qualifications? YES, – on the processes they and the project manager will use on each and every project. Have you worked with and gained agreement with your sponsor on the processes you are using on your project?

Note: Mindavation provides a number of workshops and keynote that address sponsor engagement, most notably the Preventing Troubled Projects keynote presentation. For details, emails us at info@mindavation.com You can learn about all of the Mindavation offerings at www.mindavation.com or www.mindavation.com.au.

After seeing an advertisement in the Australian Institute of Project Management’s (AIPM)  magazine this month (http://www.aipm.com.au/html/project_manager_magazine.cfm) for a university that has masters degree programs in both “Project Management” and “Project Leadership”, we got to thinking…what do we think is needed most – the technical aspects of project management or the leadership components?

As we work with companies around the world, we frequently see significant gaps in project management skills; risk, scheduling and scope management techniques are sometimes non-existent. However, the real deep-seeded problems seem to lie in a lack of leadership at the project manager level, and at the level above the project manager who have the mission of driving change. Many leaders (and project managers are leaders!) do not understand the organisational, political and cultural elements of driving a project change initiative. It is leadership of projects where the vacuum exists. It is vital that project managers have a breadth of leadership skills and education to fill this vacuum and provide guidance to their management team to successfully implement their project deliverables. In short, we need more project leadership personnel.

A quick internet search yields a plethora of Masters of Project Management programs but very few programs for Project Leadership. Certainly, many of the project management programs include leadership courses, but where is the emphasis? In a sidebar article on the “Top Traits of Future Project Managers” in the same AIPM magazine, 6 of the 9 traits mentioned are leadership versus management skills.

Are you placing the appropriate emphasis on your educational and advancement as a project leader/manager? Where do you see the greatest gaps in your organisation?

Note: Mindavation provides a number of courses on project leadership, most notably our Critical Judgement workshop. You can find details at www.mindavation.com or www.mindavation.com.au, or e-mail dpalm@mindavation.com and we can arrange a presentation for you and your team on Critical Judgement.

In celebration of International Project Management Day on November 3rd, we are adding another communication resource to inform and entertain our blog readers!

In the essence of Intelligent Disobedience, we are doing something different with the intent of sharing information or presenting something thought provoking, while having a bit of fun at the same time. We are recording short podcasts – about 2 minutes each – that we will be posted on the Mindavation website. You can listen to our first podcast at
http://mindavation.com/?p=1641

Enjoy!

The book we reviewed for the May 2011 Mindavation newsletter was Employees First, Customers Second by Vineet Nayar. (http://mindavation.com.au/?page_id=53 to view the newsletters). In that book Nayar mentions that new knowledge or a shift in perception only comes about through ‘memorable, extreme or experimental’ communications. At an Intelligent Disobedience keynote presentation in the United States, one of our attendees shared a great example of extreme and experimental communications, and it saved a major project they were running.

A team of business analysts were working on the requirements for a new patient care system at a major metropolitan hospital. Despite pressures from senior hospital administrators to progress the new system, the administrator’s team members were not diligently attending requirements collection and analysis reviews. As a result, the project schedule was slipping and risked falling farther behind. The Business Analysis Manager had escalated the issue to the sponsor (one of the aforementioned senior administrators) multiple times. After the escalations, attendance at the requirements sessions would improve, but only temporarily. It was apparent another way of communicating to the senior administrators was necessary so the team tried a very different approach.

As the hospital administrators held their next monthly meeting, the business analysis team went into action. They collected a patient “crash cart” and connected it to a cardboard mock up of their project mascot (a running cartoon character to symbolize speed in getting patient data to physicians). They then brought the cart into the administrator’s meeting, turning the cart on as they entered. The device made the very familiar high pitch squeal, accompanied by the “flat line” appearing on the crash cart monitor. The business analysis team made an announcement to the meeting attendees that the patient care system project was in “critical condition”.

This notable means of communication got the required attention from the administrators to result in substantive change. Business representatives were added to the project team, requirements were collected and verified appropriately and the project ended up being a notable success for the hospital and the community it serves.

Note: This blog entry on communication demonstrates a great example of intelligent disobedience.  If you or your organisation wants to learn more about intelligent disobedience and the value it can bring to your environment, check out our Inteligent Disobedience workshop which addresses many approaches to communication and influencing others. You can find details at www.mindavation.com or www.mindavation.com.au, or e-mail us at info@mindavation.com and we can arrange a presentation for you and your team on intelligent disobedience.

The concept of a change manager is growing in popularity, with the role becoming a standard part of many organisations, the Change Management Institute is gaining membership and Communities of Practice for Change Management are dotting the specialist landscape.  Providing focus to this area is long overdue; there is a terrible history of repeated failure with projects that require cultural or significant procedural change.

Out of one of those change management meetings came a question, posed a bit facetiously, but warranting some thought. What about establishing a “Stability Manager” role? When people are experiencing change, they seek something more familiar. When moving to a new city people look for stability.  Joining clubs that promote similar interests, becoming part of professional associations that are part of one’s profession or attending a church are examples of seeking stability in the midst of change. Why don’t we employ this role in change management initiatives, appealing to what we as humans do in other areas of our lives?

A Stability Manager could arrange specialised communities of practice, emphasise what is NOT changing in the midst of business churn and provide coaching on the process of making change or allowing change to occur in one’s life, versus just how to respond to a specific change posed by the business and its priority project. It could well be a very useful and much-needed role, making significant change easier to bear, with a title that has more appeal.

Maybe it is time we do think of stability factors as well as change factors. In your current projects, what stability factors could you emphasize in your organization alongside the changes you are imposing?

Our thanks go to Michael Davies from the Australian Department of Human Services for asking a GREAT question about the concept of a Stability Manager.

Note: If you or your organisation requires assistance with change and stability management check out our Critical Judgement workshop which addresses change via the “leadership lenses” of rational, organisational, political and cultural. You can find details at www.mindavation.com or www.mindavation.com.au, or e-mail us at info@mindavation.com and we can arrange a presentation for you and your team on how to increase your change (and stability) management capability.

The process is regularly repeated in large as well as small businesses – an idea is generated from a middle or senior manager, a project proposal, project charter or other initiation document is created; it is evaluated, approved and a project is started. Although this may appear to be a reasonable process in the spirit of PMBoK or PRINCE2, in most cases it is a nearly useless foregone conclusion. Yes, in some cases creating project proposal deliverables do provide a useful documented overview of the project and its business objectives. However, the other primary purpose of the initiation documentation is to evaluate whether the project idea is a sound one that should be pursued. But if a senior manager instructs the initiation document to be created, and then the same senior manager provides signoff on the proposal, isn’t the idea of an objective review of a potential project thrown out the window?

Theoretically, a set of project review criteria or portfolio management processes would address the lack of objectivity discussed above. Unfortunately, most organisations do not have that type of rigor in place. So what is a diligent project manager to do?

In the true spirit of acting with intelligent disobedience…propose your own criteria. It is not suggested that the criteria be created in response to a given project proposal; that would probably not be received well by senior management. Propose the project viability criteria when there is not a project in the proposal stage; that way the discussion will be more objective. What to include in such criteria? Focus on the financial items typically discussed in your organisation; cost to benefit ratios, resource requirements (dollars and people), payback period and profit margins are typical items.

Do this well, and you can weed out some projects that distract from the success of the business and your personal productivity as well.

Do you understand what criteria would be used to filter out projects in your organisation? How would you go about proposing a set of validation criteria in your organisation?

Note: If you or your organisation requires assistance with project evaluation and portfolio management check out our project governance and portfolio management offerings at www.mindavation.com or www.mindavation.com.au, or e-mail us at info@mindavation.com and we can arrange a presentation for you and your team on how to increase your efficiency and improve your resource utilization through governance and portfolio management.

Whether you call them key stakeholders, primary stakeholders or some other term, it is likely that every project manager labels at least one person as ‘the person to please’ when delivering a project. During the life-cycle of a project, stakeholders come and go, however the ’person to please’ is ever-present. By default, it is the sponsor. As the sponsor is footing the bill and (theoretically) is the primary beneficiary of project delivery, this is reasonable. But should the project manager always behave as if the sponsor is the primary stakeholder? Depending on the project and the mindset of the sponsor, that might not be the optimal way to  accomplish the project.

A frequent circumstance of today’s business climate is that skills are critically short, and the skilled business experts and technical team members have a tremendous number of demands placed upon them. Your project is just one more on the stack. Treating these vital resources in the best possible manner can be crucial to successful project delivery. Sometimes, these vital resources should be treated as your primary stakeholder(s).

This is not a suggestion that you ignore the sponsor; he should always be front of mind. However, when the sponsor is content and fulfilling their role appropriately, it may be time to consider other primary stakeholders for the project manager’s everyday attention.

Are you treating the right person(s) as the primary stakeholder, or are you treating the sponsor as the primary stakeholder by default? Could you improve your project status by shifting your attention to different ‘primary stakeholders?’

Note: If you or your organisation requires assistance with improving stakeholder management (via traditional or non-traditional methods) check out our consulting and education offerings at www.mindavation.com or www.mindavation.com.au, or e-mail us at  info@mindavation.com and we can arrange a presentation for you and your team to discuss this perception enhancing management technique.

Contingency elements – typically in the form of extra dollars or time – are a fundamental part of the way leaders manage risk in their projects. Reasonable approach, right? Unexpected things happen and items that were considered in risk management plans sometimes do come to fruition and must be handled. Having contingencies in your budget and/or schedule can be applied to minimize the impact of the risks. But does the publicly known presence of contingency items cause improper behavior?

In his book What the Dog Saw and Other Adventures author Malcolm Gladwell discusses the results of an experiment in Germany conducted with taxicab drivers. A set of taxis were equipped with antilock breaking systems and another set of taxis were left unmodified. One would think the ABS breaking system would result in better driving results…in fact the opposite happened! The additional safety and capability the ABS breaks provided caused the taxi drivers to be more aggressive and reckless. The “contingency” of knowing they have the additional safety element available negatively changed their driving habits.

This surfaces the question…does publishing contingency elements in our project schedules and other deliverables cause bad behavior? Do our excessively multi-taking project team members see contingency as a relief valve that gives them a chance to miss deadlines? Should project managers HIDE the contingency available to them?

We have run across project leaders who do just that; they hide the contingency or they publish two schedules…one for team members without contingency and another for management that shows the contingency available. Although potentially useful, we do not believe this is an example of intelligent disobedience. The risk of losing trust from your team members outweighs the risk of having to manage “contingency consuming behaviors”. Better to publish one set of documentation, with contingency elements evident and use open and honest communication to avert potential behaviors that are undesirable.

Note: If you or your organisation want assistance with improving your performance through the use of Intelligent Disobedience, you can check out our Intelligent Disobedience workshop at  http://www.mindavation.com/classes/id_pm.htm or drop us a line at info@Mindavation.com and we can arrange a presentation for you and your team to discuss this performance enhancing approach.

Critical path and schedule analysis are drummed into every project manager who endures formal project management education. But, is only using this approach to scheduling a project the best way to maximize project success? We don’t think so – in fact relying solely on managing the critical path of a project may provide a significant “pathway” – straight to project failure!

The critical path specifically highlights the series of predecessor-successor tasks that start from project initiation and bring the project to a close. It provides the most direct way to get from the project idea to the coveted successful closure of a project, with all deliverables completed and put to use by the project’s customer. That may not be what a customer wants, even though they will profess that is what they want. Given time pressures and an increasing desire to show results “tomorrow versus the next day”, delivering “early wins” on a project may be the only way a project survives to deliver all of the requested deliverables. This is where the “victory path” comes into play.

The victory path is that series of predecessor-successor tasks that lead from the present state to the production and delivery of an interim deliverable that will “give faith” and/or early business value to sponsor(s) and key stakeholders of the project. This may significantly overlap the critical path, however in many instances it diverges. Managing the “victory path(s)” as you would the critical path may be the key to being “victorious” in the delivery of a project to its full potential. Yes, it means you may not be producing the set of overall project deliverables in the most efficient way. However if the stakeholders are kept happy and business value is derived from interim deliverables, that often overshadows the inefficiencies introduced by utilising a victory path approach.

Are you relying entirely on the critical path for your projects, or do you understand the desires and objectives of your stakeholders enough to realise that a “victory path” might be in order for your project?

Note: If you or your organisation want assistance with understanding, establishing and managing victory paths, you can check out our Recovering Troubled Projects workshop at http://mindavation.com.au/?page_id=262 or drop us a line at info@Mindavation.com and we can arrange a presentation for you and your team to discuss this management approach.