Change Through Action

The Pied Piper of Leadership

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Mon, 22 Apr 2013 09:34:00 +0000

On a recent trip to NZ I finally had time to visit the Hard to Find (but worth the effort) Book Shop in Auckland. It’s actually quite easy to find if you know where to look and once you’re in there very easy to get lost amongst the huge and eclectic collection of books. I was on the hunt for a birthday gift and once I found what I wanted hidden in English History amongst a host of fascinating titles, I was distracted by the business section. As I looked up and down the shelves Amanda Sinclair’s Leadership for the Disillusioned caught my eye. It was the word disillusioned that got me and my interest increased as I scanned the Introduction where the first 2 sentences read:

“This leadership book is not about how to run a company. It is for those who are disillusioned by their encounters with leaders and leadership: with idealised heroic performances, impoverished theories and oversimplified templates.”

I bought the book and this post expands one particular gem that when read made me exclaim ‘Yes, that’s exactly what it is!’

Leadership is generally understood as the art of motivating a group of people to act towards achieving a common goal. People are willing to follow good leaders and good leaders are those who, through a combination of personality and leadership skills can communicate with, establish parameters for and inspire others to achieve what’s good for all. Unfortunately I’ve noticed less leadership of this calibre and more of something that leaves me both disillusioned and annoyed. There’s no doubt the boundary between leadership and management is blurry, made even more so by the terms being used interchangeably. But Execs and Senior Management shouldn’t kid themselves that everything’s honky-dory with leadership in their organisation when the behaviours being exhibited are those either of management or like that of the Pied Piper with a team blindly following its leader.

When the DNA of an organisation approves a leadership that focuses less on motivating a group than it does on loyalty and obedience, something’s gone haywire; unless of course that’s what management wants. But if that’s so please, be honest about it. Label it what it is and dispense with the internal comms and ra-ra sessions that seek to engage employees in something that doesn’t exist. Oh and by the way, that employees know doesn’t exist.

Loyalty and obedience mean people will not act of their own volition; they’re depending on someone else to act first and/or issue instructions for them to follow. Amanda Sinclair writes “Dependency is one of the biggest problems for leaders and leadership. When followers exhibit dependency, they look to the leader to solve things; they abdicate responsibility for the problem facing a group.” She goes on to say “Though pervasive in organisations and teams, dependency is rarely admitted. Because of managerial emphasis on values such as ‘initiative’ and ‘self-starter’, dependency is a taboo.” No employee will display the characteristics associated with being a self-starter or show initiative while they’re waiting for someone else to act.

Sometimes obedience is required as management will make decisions or set directions that are there to be followed. That’s what they’re hired to do. However an entirely different set of skills and capabilities are required for good leadership. Leadership takes time and effort to remain focused on the overriding purpose while inspiring others to act. The alternative – being sucked into the dependency trap – is a risk organisations and their management need to be consciously recognising and actively addressing if they want leadership to deliver tangible benefits.

What type of leadership do you give your followers? Are they following the status quo and waiting for you to provide them everything or are they showing initiative, challenging the accepted and willing to fail forward and fail fast for the good of the business?

It's All In The DNA

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Tue, 19 Mar 2013 11:52:00 +0000

It’s not often I register for a webcast but something about the Deloitte’s IWD (International Women’s Day) 2013 one piqued my interest. The subject was ‘Inclusive Leadership as the missing link for advancing women’ and it got me thinking… Is ‘Inclusive Leadership’ just another buzzword and why, if it really is something new, would it make a difference to the advancement of women?

While there was a lot of interesting discussion and some good points made by the panel, the questions and responses didn’t really identify or highlight anything I hadn’t already seen or experienced. As the webcast progressed it seemed Inclusive Leadership was another way of giving a label to the behaviours leaders ought, in my mind, to be exhibiting anyway. Then finally the last question came – What is the definition of Inclusive Leadership?

The responses struck a chord and I noted some key points that were offered up:

Recognising differences and realising full potential
Being open to and valuing different perspectives
Valuing what each person brings to the team and using that well
Recognising biases and being conscious of thought and deed
Equality and fairness

But it was Esther Silver-Parker, President and CEO, The Silver-Parker Group, USA who’s response was a piece of pure gold. To paraphrase:

It must be part of a Company’s DNA, it’s not a program or one-off initiative.

As soon as I heard it I thought ‘Yes!’ The way Esther phrased it was perfect. Not just for Inclusive Leadership as the missing link for advancing women but for organisational change initiatives in general and how Companies should think when triggering them. If human DNA is the genetic makeup we’ve inherited from our parents an organisations DNA is the genetic makeup inherited from its leaders. Whatever behaviours the leaders exhibit be they dictatorial or collaborative, bureaucratic or delegated, disengaged or inclusive etc, those behaviours and the way they influence and guide human interaction will permeate throughout the organisation shaping its culture and informing how it does what it does; it’s DNA.

Therefore if those in charge want the organisation to change they need to take a close look at its DNA before kicking something off and moving swiftly on to the next initiative.

However people are people and no two are alike. There are many at all levels perfectly happy, thanks very much, with the status quo. There will however be those who naturally swim against the tide or are tactically brought in to do so. Some may achieve great success in their area and go on to influence others. Some may move on quickly as their efforts are thwarted or they’re sucked into the modus operandi. Without those at the top of the organisational hierarchy actually changing their own behaviours and proving that change visibly to the rest of the business, the fundamental DNA of an organisation won’t shift. Inclusive Leadership for the advancement of women will remain a buzzword or one-off initiative that fizzes out over time or is replaced by the next craze.

An organisations' DNA will not change just by talking about it or through the heroic efforts of individuals. Senior leaders have a responsibility. They cannot continue merrily ahead and expect those further down the hierarchy to shoulder all the responsibility and do all the work. They must take action. Action that’s real, tangible where they are conscious of thought, deed and full of integrity because, as we know, change happens through action.

And The Winners Are

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 11:48:00 +0000

The Academy Awards ceremony, otherwise known as The Oscars, was held on Sunday 24 February 2013. A night of glitz and glamour where gongs are given, speeches made and the occasional mishap occurs.

On this same night another glittering star-studded Oscar ceremony took place – the virtual Project Management Oscars. To quote directly…

“For The Third Year In a Row #pduOTD – PDU Of The Day (pduOTD.com) tweeted their choices for 150 of the “Best of the Best PM BA Leadership & Agile/IT Twitter Users” & issued them PM Oscars throughout the day. Every 5 minutes @pduOTD gave out another #PM_Oscar to an amazing person or organization.”

With sequins in place, lip gloss applied and acceptance speeches at the ready the Twitter community traversed the red carpet then waited with baited breath to see who would be honoured as Best of the Best.

As Martin Chernenkoff and @pduOTD announced, one after another, an amazing list of talented knowledgeable #PM_Oscar winners I was heard to tweet “OMG, seriously?! WOW! Honoured, gosh”. To be awarded a prestigious PM Oscar by your peers and colleagues ‘For Excellence in International Project Fixing of Business IT Projects’ in the category Highlighting Project Management Field Experts, is a wonderful compliment.

Congratulations to Martin and @pduOTD on a superb ceremony and for their excellent work supporting PM’s around the globe.

Now without further ado or falling over on my way to the podium, I’d like to thank…

A recap of all the Winners can be found here.

'Manager' - Not Just a Job Title

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Tue, 05 Feb 2013 10:23:00 +0000

The posts you read on this blog are mostly about projects, the way an organisations DNA must change if it wants what it says it does, and the challenge of balancing the business drivers for that change with the dynamics of those on the receiving end of it.

Balancing all this takes a combination of leadership and management. Without leadership people won’t have direction or guidance, and without management the company has no clue whether they’ve achieved the desired result or not. A company can be as inclusive as it likes, empower its employees, and push the boundaries of innovation but… if it has people filling roles entitled ‘manager’ without knowing how to manage, it’s got a problem.

From executive level to daily ops, from programmes of multi-million dollar/pound/euro proportions to projects with miniscule budgets, the ability to manage is critical. Yet ‘management’ seems to have been pushed into the background. Execs that give a damn may now been seen as abdicating responsibility as, unwilling to deal with conflict or with bigger fish to fry, they look to their direct reports to pick up the slack. Middle management may be more concerned with keeping the peace rather than making those tough decisions and taking the necessary action to effect change.

How did this happen? Why has it happened? There is a multitude of reasons and of course gazillions of books written on the subject. Because there’s no single reason and rather than discussing the why’s and wherefore’s, let’s take a look at options for re-establishing an equilibrium for ‘manager’.

If you’re the one recruiting or promoting someone into a management role you need to consider a few fundamentals. If you want to be in a management role you must be prepared to learn the basics, take responsibility for them and do them well. There are no short-cuts in either of these.

A few things to think about when filling a management function…

Make an informed decision:

Not everyone is management material and square pegs in round holes are as useless as chocolate teapots. Hmmm…. Think about what the company, the role and the individual need for the future. Learn to recognise capability and resist the temptation to over-promote.

Stretch and grow:

Learning and development plans are important so people learn new skills, grow in their careers and further extend their contribution. Regardless of individual wants or expectations these plans must align and support what the company needs.

Provide support and direction:

Giving someone an opportunity to stretch is one thing, chucking them off the management cliff without a parachute is quite another. Give them clarity, direction, and be clear about expectations and consequence. New managers eventually find their way and their own style so why not make the journey a little easier for them and you.

Take responsibility:

If for some reason there’s a square peg in a round hole, change it. The longer you leave it the worse things will get. The staff you can least afford to leave will leave. The programmes you can least afford to fail will fail. The buck stops with whoever made the decision. Accept it, fix it, and move on.

Things to think about as a new-ish manager …

You’re it:

For the new manager - it’s important to you know that no one’s going to do it for you. You have responsibilities and the buck for those responsibilities stops with you. If you don’t know something, ask. If you don’t like something change it. If you’re not willing to change it don’t complain about it or point the finger elsewhere.

Ask for help:

If something doesn’t work or you’re not sure what to do, ask someone else. People who are willing to give help and advice are everywhere. If you don’t ask you don’t get and crawling under a rock hoping that whatever’s happening will just go away if you ignore it, is bad form regardless of where you sit in the organisations hierarchy.

Note: management training courses haven’t been mentioned on purpose. They have their place however managers cannot completely abdicate responsibility for developing management skills in others. If training courses were that good there would be no mentors and no management issues. Right?

Season's Greetings and a Helping Hand

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Mon, 17 Dec 2012 05:02:00 +0000

Season's Greetings and a helping hand from Unlike Before
	Our way of saying thanks to our loyal readers this season is by making a financial contribution through Kiva; an organisation whose mission is *'to connect people through lending to alleviate poverty'.* Our contribution will help provide *microfinance* to those striving to create opportunity and better lives for themselves and their families. We found Kiva when we were given a Kiva card and realised the good work they do towards anti-poverty; helping others helps all of us.	Kiva is a gift that has the potential to change lives. *Click here* to view the Unlike Before donation page

PMTV and Why Some PM's Suck

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 14:07:00 +0000

Being involved with initiatives such as PMTV (Project Management TV) and WIPM (Women in Project Management) are great for two reasons:

1. I get to meet and interact with many genuinely nice people I otherwise wouldn't come across; and
2. Together we get to share our combined experiences and expertise in a variety of ways for the benefit of others.

This is exactly what happened when I joined forces with Jon Hyde, Bernardo Tirado and Naomi Caietti for PMTV on October 16th.

PMTV is the brainchild of Jon and Bernardo. They have 'created PMTV to bring you the inside story on project management from the trenches of austerity.'

Broadcasting every 3rd Tuesday at 12noon GMT / 7am ET, past episodes can be replayed on demand. Our episode went out live Tuesday 16th October with the topic of discussion being 'Why Some Project Managers Suck!'.

It may not be a very p.c title but we all know it's a very real problem. Why should anyone or any company put up with PM's or leaders who suck?

If you haven't listened to the replay set aside some quiet time and enjoy. The topic's an excellent one, not just because it makes you smile but because of what we cover:

What's the big differentiator between a good and bad PM?
How does self awareness play into leading projects?
What are ways for PMs to seek feedback?
How do you help PMs become better leaders?

Past episodes of PMTV can be played on demand. If you like what you hear you can subscribe via email, follow @PMTVpro on Twitter or get involved in the Twitter conversation using the #PMTV hashtag.

Knocking the Stuffing out of Change

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:02:00 +0000

‘Change’ is bandied about so much and comes with such baggage is it any wonder people get shivers down their spine at the first hint of it. Yet change is everywhere. So why does it have such negative connotations and why is it so difficult?

From my perspective change conversations can be categorised into two groups – the practical experience and the theory. The discussions I prefer to have are around the former rather than the latter. As a delivery specialist theory doesn’t quite cut it when you actually have to deliver outcomes on the ground and adapt as situations come up. I’ve nothing against theory so long as it supports getting stuff done. Getting stuff done isn’t always that easy because things do change along the way – that’s reality. In order to keep up and still get stuff done we must adapt.

Adapting is an important part of responding to situations as they arise, shift and morph. To adapt we need to be prepared, ready and able to change what, how or when we do something. We might have a plan but sticking rigidly to it ‘because that’s what’s been agreed’ is nonsensical when the change means the plan no longer reflects what’s needed. Being able to adapt allows us to stay focused on the outcome while figuring out the most appropriate way to get there. An ability to adapt well relies on a sound base and that only exists when we know:

Why we’re here,
Where we’re heading,
What the priority and / or sequence is, and
What we need to achieve as a result.

Our capacity to cope with and adapt to change is huge yet I think we underestimate ourselves. In business we’re often too busy wondering what it means, where it will take us, what affect it will have, and what might happen; all unknown factors that form invisible barriers and can quite literally paralyse us into doing nothing. Whether Execs, senior or middle management, peers or team members, we all need to adapt. Having a sound base and comprehending that base gives everyone:

A clear point of reference making it easier to check if the track we’re on remains valid as we move along it.
A point from which to think ahead that helps identify or head off problems early.
The ability to recognise and reduce the inevitable noise pollution and static.
An increased level of knowledge so deviations are less surprising and therefore more manageable when they do occur.

In the situation where activities, track or outcomes no longer line up with the point of reference, the affect on priorities or direction can be identified and understood quickly and action plans put in place. In other words, we can constantly adapt what we’re doing as the situation requires. We recognise much earlier that our approach or the process we’re following needs modifying, that the current way is no longer suitable. Sometimes it’s a more conscious act and at other times it’s totally sub-conscious.

As we adapt to changing situations the change itself has less focus. We’re no longer concerned with the change that’s happening. We’re more interested in the possibilities it brings. For without that there would be no change…

How do you adapt and knock the stuffing out of change?

A Little Bit of History Repeating

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Tue, 21 Aug 2012 13:41:00 +0000

There’s a song titled ‘History Repeating’. It’s performed by Dame Shirley Bassey and the Propellerheads. As noted in the Wikipedia entry on the Propellerheads, “the term ‘propellerhead’ is slang for a nerd”. This will make sense to anyone who’s ever worked on any initiative involving technology. But it’s not the band name or even Dame Shirley Bassey that’s triggered this post; it’s the title of the song and in particular the chorus.

and I've seen it before

and I'll see it again

yes I've seen it before

just little bits of history repeating

In our daily work as managers, leaders and change agents we must stop being surprised when we see and experience time and again the same underlying problems, issues, challenges (call them what you will) with projects and change initiatives. We’ve seen it all before and we’ll see it again, it’s just bits of history repeating.

As recent as this week I’ve heard of yet another ERP project that will be deployed globally mid-next year yet is already seriously impacted by too many chiefs, multiple sponsors, and people’s expectations of what’s likely to be delivered being light years apart. These are pretty common across projects. Here are some others that in themselves are bad enough but when combined cause immense amounts of frustration and finger pointing:

Abdication of responsibility and ownership.
Lack of willingness to deal with the elephant, make decisions and get on with it.
Too many project managers or worse still none with sufficient skill or practical real-world experience.
Focused on process compliance and managing the timeline instead of managing and delivering the project.
Common sense is seriously lacking and poorly applied.
Politicking, agendas, positioning, and plain old manoeuvring tactics.

They make up a familiar story and frankly the story is now pretty boring. Yet history continues to repeat. Not only must we stop being surprised, we must start taking action to change the history that repeats. Move the focus from the negative (eg: overruns, disenfranchisement, problems, difficulty, challenges, barriers) to the positive (eg: proactive, assets, values, capability, improvement, doing what’s right, giving a damn).

Last month I wrote about the Executive Factor and in particular Executives who give a damn. Not only do these Execs allow and trust others to get on with the job at hand they are consistent, take risks and are willing to exercise their position of authority on behalf of the initiative. We need more Execs to actively lead and manage initiatives, especially for the hearts and minds of those involved and who are following their lead.

It’s not only top-down where change can be triggered. Project people and change agents, in fact anyone involved in delivering or impacted by the initiative can trigger and drive change bottom-up. These are the people on the ground that sees every day what's missing and what’s required of their leaders. It’s their responsibility to step up to the plate, show willingness and own doing what’s right. Ask for, perhaps even demand, a different form of leadership of their managerial and executive sponsors. Sitting back and waiting for someone else never achieved anything. By enabling their own success they enable the success of others, the initiative and the organisation.

There is another critical area that must not be overlooked or underestimated. Educating people on their role and responsibilities for the particular initiative they’re involved with is fundamental to success. Does your Sponsor really get what being a Sponsor is all about? Do they understand the importance of the role and what they’ll be required to do while in it? What about the Project Manager? The ‘Change Agent’? The ‘insert function title here’ team member? When roles, their purpose, scope and associated responsibilities are properly defined using language that’s clear, concise and avoid of buzzwords, those in the roles fully comprehend what’s required of them, how their role interacts with others, and where the buck stops. There’s a clear line of ownership and accountability.

Through this, Execs who give a damn will know where they need to focus their energy and when: top-down. And those involved elsewhere will have clarity on the escalation path, decision making mechanisms and authority and know where they’re best able to inform and influence: bottom-up. These combined with a shift in attitude and behaviour will help shape a new way forward.

Remove the negative and create yourselves a more positive history that’s worth repeating.

The Executive Factor

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Thu, 26 Jul 2012 10:40:00 +0000

Ever wondered how it’s possible to add value through the work you do to an organisation, another person or indeed yourself? Whether we’re permanent staff or have a bit more flexibility in our employment options it can be frustrating to watch as our ability to create and deliver valuable work is inhibited or stopped by the barriers erected or entrenched positions taken by others. It’s one thing for an organisation to have an appetite for getting things done, it’s quite another for them to actually enable it.

Which is how a recent conversation with a colleague of mine in the USofA kicked off. Rob Schachter, of RBS Consulting, and I first connected on LinkedIn, as you do, and have been volleying our theories and experiences across the Atlantic for some months. The one significant thing we agree on is that Executives who give a damn make the difference to the work of change agents and whether that work will be a success or failure. Yes that’s right, they give a damn. They give a damn about getting stuff done. They get out of the way so others can do what they do best, and they care about how that stuff fits in to the bigger picture.

This post is a snapshot of our conversation. It shows how working with and for an Executive (sponsor or otherwise) who gives a damn makes for a positive work experience where value is palpable. Following are some of the lessons, principles and good (what’s best today may not be valid tomorrow) practices we derived from our experiences for the benefit of others seeking to succeed with their initiatives.

Q: What is it about the Executive who gives a damn that makes such a difference?

They have a future for themselves. A clear sense of what they’re doing, where they want to go and how they’re going to get there. Yet they don’t forget where they are and what they’re responsible for doing now.
An attention to the long view is as important as the short view.
They have an ability to see things on many levels. This is systemic in them as individuals and emanates out to those in their inner and outer circles.
They’re willing to take a risk; go out on a limb for the greater good and the longer term rewards.
They know where they stand and are not afraid to communicate it.
They are willing to do and continue doing the ground work necessary with other executives and staff in a practical tangible way where everyone comprehends the method behind the, supposed, madness.
This Executive is willing to use/exercise their position of authority on behalf of the initiative. Bring it forward, defer or stop it if necessary.
Leads versus controls.
This Executive is consistent with messages and people, always.
They trust people to do the right thing. Connects with them, wants to know what they need when and gives it to them when it makes sense to do so. They don’t interfere or get caught up in the detail though equally want to know how things are tracking and where support or intervention will be needed.
They often have a fairly short attention span purely because they’re ready and want to get on with stuff.

Q: What difference does this make to the organization?

Lowers costs through increased efficiencies.
Drives for greater ownership and holds business accountable.
Helps shift silo mentality thereby exposing opportunities to streamline cross-functionally and generate cost savings for possible re-investment in new initiatives.
Business has a mandate without being given an explicit mandate. Refer to the points above regarding clear direction and trusting people to do the right thing.
Meetings are focused and open (they talk to the elephant in the room) versus posturing or over interpreting in order to satisfy individual agendas.

Q: What difference does this make to the employee, contractor or change agent and their role?

Free things up from the beginning. Liberates people to do what needs to be done rather than seeking permission or having to filter for clarity. This isn’t easy for those used to hierarchy and bureaucracy or where expectations may be different depending on the culture.
It sets a tone and changes the way work and projects are governed. Output increases.
Creates fertile ground for systemic change.

Share your experiences of working with Executives that give a damn versus those that don’t. What difference did it make to you and your work?

Buzz-off Buzzwords

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Fri, 22 Jun 2012 05:50:00 +0000

It’s been an interesting few months. I’ve travelled from one end of the planet to the other 3 times (soon to be 4), visited with family and friends, met loads of new people, worked with some amazingly talented individuals and had what can only be described as an overabundance of stimulating conversation.

Some of those conversations have included more than their fair share of buzzwords. It’s reminded me just how widely buzzwords, phrases and consulting speak are used. The fact they’re used isn't really an issue. It’s how, when and why they’re used that causes problems.

Why can't people just use plain language? Why do they have go populating everything with vacuous words that actually add no value to the sentence let alone the conversation?

No doubt you’ve heard about Buzzword Bingo. It’s usually played by people who are bored. Bored of hearing the same rubbish. Bored of listening to others pepper their presentations and conversations with meaningless phrases and terms because information and ideas are limited or there's an attempt to cover for a lack of knowledge. While Buzzword Bingo helps alleviate the boredom and it makes us laugh, there’s a far more serious message coming out of its use.

As leaders and managers we want people to comprehend our intention and expectations from the words we speak. For this to happen we’ve got to use words and phrases that are clear and make sense. We can start rectifying this in ourselves by listening closely to others and observing the body language of the audience. As the audience shifts in their seats and roll their eyes it’s pretty clear they’re not listening let alone interested in what it is they might be asked to do.

For example... Management can achieve more by talking less about “empowerment” and letting people get on with what it is they’ve been hired to do. If you rely heavily on buzzwords in conversation and documentation, take an objective look at why you use them. Are they communicating your intent? Do they make any sense in the overall context of your message? Did your audience go away any more informed than when they arrived?

Here are some examples I’ve come across recently. I even own up to using some of them; perhaps more to make a point than any other reason. No doubt you’ll recognise a few…

Socialise

One team

Herding Cats

Best Practice

Heads up

At the end of the day

Moving forward

Blue sky thinking

Touchbase

Pain points

Green fields

Agile

Lean

Synergy

Touch point

Buy-in

Sustainable

Voice of the customer

The Cloud

Bespoke

Low hanging fruit

Traffic lights

Governance

Out of the box

Let’s take this offline

Vanilla

Business Case is underway but go ahead

On the same page

Gap analysis

Strawman

You are SO right!

The A Team

Choose your attitude

Yes I am listening

It won’t happen overnight but it will happen

Some are funny, many are used as slang or to parody other people, most of them are used with double meaning. Let’s say buzz-off to buzzwords. Let's make a conscious effort towards buzzword free discussions, presentations and documents. In the meantime, join in, have a rant about the buzzwords you hear and while you’re at it, add your favourites to the list.

Bureaucracy of Process

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 08:04:00 +0000

There’s no advantage to introducing a framework or process if adherence to the process is more important than the process enabling the delivery of business benefits. Yet many companies get caught up in the hype of the process and forget why they introduced it.

Take Governance as an example. When it comes to projects some form of governance is critical to, at the very minimum, check the right things are being done. But breathe the word ‘Governance’ and a world of images flash by, people roll their eyes and groan, and various mutterings, most of them negative, can be heard in the corridors. Whatever it’s labelled in the end governance will resolve some problems and create others but so too will the introduction of any new process.

Companies can do a lot to help overcome the ever present lack of interest and negativity surrounding change by getting their house in order before blindly setting off down the implementation track. While not an exhaustive list the following are some simple pointers to keep in mind when introducing any program, project or operational framework or process.

1. Reason
Define the problem the process is there to fix. What are the current problem areas? Why are they problems? What is or is not happening because of them? Without this level of clarity at the decision making level no one else is going to understand what triggered the decision and the problem the process is there to resolve.

2. Purpose

Define what the process is there to deliver. There may be a multitude of things that are wrong and ideally the process will fix all of them. This list needs prioritising. If the process is expected to deliver improvements in a number of areas each area needs to be drilled into until there is one or maximum two areas of initial focus. Attempting to improve all areas at once is a failure waiting to happen. Bite off small chunks at a time and as one begins to deliver move on to the next.

3. Roles and Responsibilities

The R&R’s - Easy to say, difficult to define, even harder to implement. Focus on defining the roles first and be specific. Who’s involved at what point? Where are the authority and threshold levels? Get clear about how the roles connect with other key roles and activities in the business. Responsibilities need to be specific. Waffle-words and consulting speak don’t tell anyone anything and add no value.

4. Reporting

This is the third R in the list - Who needs to know what, when, from whom and based on what criteria. Again, be specific. Minimise the pretty charts, checklists and over-convoluted reports. A good piece of advice recently heard was to ask the question: How would you like to hear the bad news? Get that defined, pay attention to exceptions and check compliance against the previously defined purpose.

5. Lifecycle

As each focus area is addressed it’s inevitable that some activities or ideas will work better than others. It’s important to remain flexible and willing to adapt as things change. Without this the process is pure bureaucracy and the anticipated improvements will be outweighed by the process.

Regardless of the process being introduced it needs to be clean, simple, clear and flexible. Without these as guiding principles the process will turn into a bureaucratic nightmare with people quickly figuring out ways to get around it.

What approaches have you taken to minimse bureaucracy when introducing new processes, frameworks or operating models? What worked and what didn't?

Book Review: No Wishing Required

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 08:32:00 +0000

Written by Rob Prinzo No Wishing Required: The Business Case for Project Assurance is a semi-fictional work underpinned by a problem that affects many IT related projects - a lack of solid yet pragmatic project assurance.

Prinzo’s background is complex software implementation projects for large Corporates and Government Agencies. The lessons he’s learned and experiences he’s had throughout his career are well observed and addressed by the books central characters, Jenny and her manager and mentor Bill Parker.

The book flows well as Prinzo mixes both fiction and non-fiction to great effect. He takes the reader through the reality of managing and implementing enterprise applications technology supporting that throughout by using Bill and Jenny’s on-the-job reality. In order to introduce and explain his collaborative intervention^SM approach, Prinzo uses Bill, who’s been there done that and got the t-shirt, to help Jenny understand the Intervention Process Pyramid and the Attributes and Behaviours of the Interventionist ultimately leading her to comprehend the differences between project managers and leaders.

Key Messages:

‘Managing projects to success by addressing failure before it occurs’ writes Prinzo, is the fundamental purpose of project assurance and the underlying principle of collaborative intervention^SM. Companies, Managers, Leaders, Project Managers, and anyone in an operational or project role who’s ever been involved in type of IT related project will recognise these key messages covered by the book.

Enterprise project implementations are complex.
While enterprise technology changes human behaviour does not.
The odds of success can be increased dramatically by addressing failure before it occurs.
A collaborative environment of key project stakeholders is crucial.
Common denominator of project failure is not technology but people.
Projects need assuring from the beginning.

Start Early:

Prinzo is clear in his message that project assurance must start early while also reminding us that the process of assurance should remain flexible and adaptable thereby providing structure and guidance rather than another layer of bureaucracy. I liked the way Prinzo’s characters enacted this while they audited, understood and reset the path of their derailed project.

This book is a quick enjoyable read and delivers a sound message. It is not however solely targeted at Project Managers. Project Sponsors and those at senior levels responsible for decision making will also gain from reading it. They and their organisations will benefit through a willingness to learn its lessons and openness to hearing both good and the bad news. Only through this will they be in a position to address failure before it occurs.

Find out more about Rob Prinzo at his website and follow him on Twitter.

Purchase from Amazon.com in paperback or Kindle.

4 Tips from a Sling Shot

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:37:00 +0000

We know change projects can be difficult beasts. Yet we often ignore how we, the people involved in delivering or receiving the change, multiply those difficulties through our own learned behaviours. We’ve let what we’ve been told or read in the multitude of business books, blogs and training programmes automate us and what we do. Don’t get me wrong, process has its place. Checks and balances are necessary and process provides them but when the spotlight focuses on following the process rather than on the results it’s there to enable, the reasons behind implementing a process have been lost.

So if we simplify the process we’ll get better results, right? That will definitely help. However too often the process remains centre stage and other difficulties are left unresolved. In order to effect change fully we must apply different thinking and it’s in this area we can find parallels between change projects and Michaelangelo’s David.

Yes I’m a bit of a Michelangelo fan and am particularly awed by his sculpture of David, which stands majestically in the Accademia di Belle Arte in Florence, Italy. Every time I see it, in real or on the postcard image stuck to my office notice board, I’m struck by its magnificence. I’m also reminded of how David saw things differently, simplified the approach and through that successfully delivered the change everyone was striving for. Here are 4 tips he can teach us:

Tip 1: Use what makes sense when it makes sense to do so – Those before him had each wielded swords and various other armaments without success. David chose a slingshot and stones. He may have been careful in his stone selection taking enough to do the job with some in reserve for risk mitigation. He didn’t ignore the sword and used it to great effect when it mattered most.

Lesson: Process for process sake adds little value and blindly following a method will not improve either the method or its results.

Tip 2: Use understanding and insight – David saw and understood what others had done. He took a different view and applied some intelligent thinking. He figured out the exact spot to hit in order to maximise results.

Lesson: Sometimes the ideas, thoughts or perceptions that initially seem crazy, counter-intuitive or sit outside the bounds of the process can deliver the greatest benefits.

Tip 3: Show willingness to do what’s right – The situation David walked into had been created based on fear and intimidation. It wasn’t going to change any time soon using the current process. While there was an incentive at stake he saw something wasn’t right and took action to change it.

Lesson: Only by changing our own behaviour will we change the behaviour of others.

Tip 4: Put things into perspective – David could clearly see his adversary had a big reputation and a lot of power with his army and over others. Putting what he saw into perspective against what needed to be done meant David could figure out a way to deal with the situation and did it.

Lesson: Bigger isn’t always better.

By breaking out of the ‘process is King’ belief organisations will be able to deliver increased cost reductions for greater shareholder value. Or in other words, stay in business. Instead many punt for more processes, recycling operating models from the past or expounding empty declarations of co-creation and innovation.

They’re missing a huge opportunity because what comes next inevitably compounds difficulty.

Stop making the process important. Refocus and simplify. Use process to work for you.

The Human Face of Transition

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 15:17:00 +0000

One of the people I’ve connected with through Twitter is Bas de Baar. He’s The Project Shrink and in his own words he makes ‘complex people stuff less complex’. I like the way Bas writes and I particularly like the way he uses hand drawn images to simplify difficult problems without trivialising their importance. In a recent post The Project Story Circle. Talking About Transitions he’s used a simple yet very effective drawing. A circle as the cycle of a project and through the centre of it a horizontal line representing the project itself. The two halves can then be viewed as project and non-project time. Read his post for all the details because here I’m picking up on one particular bullet point he makes:

This will focus attention on the transitions organization-project and project-organization.

What Bas suggests is that the shape can be used when discussing projects and where in the circle people join, become active, and where they expect problems to occur. As a delivery specialist I see companies and their people struggle repeatedly with transition from project to organisation and believe the struggle can be simplified by using this drawing. Let’s take a look at an approach to change management and transition that most will be familiar with then see how this simple drawing could help.

First, what resembles a fairly typical approach?

A company embarks on a change programme and include in their project organisation a workstream responsible for change management. Primarily that group is tasked with delivering Culture (shared attitudes, values, goals, and practices that form the work environment) and People (organisation structure and charts, roles and responsibilities, governance, FTE [full time employee] changes etc) change. Bottom line they tend to have an HR and organisation structure focus. The workstream responsible for developing and deploying the solution works with business representatives or subject matter experts (SME’s) to ensure the receiving organisation has the right people in the right place at the right time with the right training and skill competencies in order to receive and operate the deployed solution.

It sounds good and should work, right? On paper yes but in practice it's a bit hit and miss. Why? Because the change management team is concerned with form, structure, and control mechanisms and the solution team is concerned with well, the solution. Yet the big challenge in transition is operational acceptance and uptake, ie: the human bit that uses the solution. It’s this gap in the organisation-project / project-organisation flow where I see Bas’ drawing creating opportunities for increased value-add and cost savings.

If the project manager, business owner and change manager actually worked together ego, methodology and agenda free for the good of the business, they could use this drawing to jointly and objectively uncover, plot and properly address all the human related capabilities, needs, issues, and challenges likely to occur in the project lifecycle. Result? An instant visual of the gaps usually left unattended until they hit the proverbial fan during training or, worse still, on deployment weekend.

Beware, this isn’t a one off exercise. Successful transitions need more than hard skills alone. By the various workstreams approaching this with a different mind set then really working together they will create sound transition plans that combine both the hard and soft skills necessary to deliver successful change programmes. Remember an intelligent transition begins early and continues to evolve throughout the project lifecycle, shifting and morphing as the business and its operations respond to market conditions.

My advice and approach is to use the tools and techniques that make sense rather than those dictated by a method. Simple is often best.

Season's Greetings Everyone

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Thu, 22 Dec 2011 10:29:00 +0000

Christmas is that time of year when there is lots to do and no time in which to do it. Even so it's important to say thank you so I would like to take this opportunity to extend my personal thanks for your support over the course of 2011. It is genuinely appreciated.

I wish you and your organisation a very Merry Christmas and look forward to helping you achieve continued success throughout 2012.

Talking Expectations on #PMChat's Pre-Game Show

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Tue, 06 Dec 2011 13:30:00 +0000

I've mentioned #PMChat before in an earlier blog post but for those of you yet to participate Project Management Chat (#PMChat) is a weekly Twitter chat hosted by Robert Kelly and Rob Prinzo where topics focus on Project Management, Leadership techniques, and best practices etc. The two Rob's have been named in the Top 10 Up and Coming Project Managers on Twitter and their partnership offers nearly 30 years of diverse experience to the #PMChat participants.

How does #PMChat work?

Each Friday at 11.30am (EST), that's 4.30pm GMT or 5.30pm CET, #PMChat kicks off with the #PMChat Pre-Game show. Using BlogTalkRadio the Pre-Game show is appropriately described as a 15-minute power session that adds tremendous value to your day. The Rob's invite thought leaders from a range of project management and leadership arenas to discuss the topic of the week. All Pre-Game shows are recorded live and can be replayed on demand.

Then from 12noon-1pm (EST), that's 5-6pm GMT or 6-7pm CET, participants use the hashtag #PMChat to continue the discussion on Twitter. Knowledge, experience, learnings and opinions are shared as the Rob's prompt interaction through a series of questions. As well as the obvious benefits that come with learning from a knowledgable and geographically-spread peer group, PMP’s are eligible to earn PDU's. A welcome bonus from an hour that's both useful and fun.

Last week I had the honour of being the guest on #PMChat. The topic of discussion - Expectations. First up was a guest blog post entitled "A Mantra - Never Confuse Sales With Implementation", quickly followed by a live appearance on the Pre-Game Show. After a few early technical difficulties the content of the show has subsequently been described as 'awesome', 'great', 'everything resonated' and 'excellent'.

Before you listen to the replay I'd like to say a special thank you to the hosts Robert and Rob for without their initiative there would be no #PMChat.

Listen to internet radio with KellyProjectSolutions on Blog Talk Radio

Book Review: Rescue the Problem Project

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Thu, 24 Nov 2011 10:37:00 +0000

After reading Todd Williams’ book Rescue the Problem Project: A Complete Guide to Identifying, Preventing, and Recovering from Project Failure it couldn’t be clearer - to recover a failing project strong teams are required.

People are projects and Williams shows this time and again as he provides real-life examples of project problems and how-to resolve them. Having spent his career dealing primarily with red projects, his experience is palpable and his knowledge extensive. Reading his book is like being paired with the best mentor around and I read it like I do good fiction; totally absorbed. Drawn in by his experiences, and seeing the parallels to my own, I consolidated what I already know and practise while learning more from those 260 pages of text than I thought possible.

Why? Well because this book contains little about the theory of project management. Instead Rescue the Problem Project is jam-packed full of how the fundamental principals of good management supported by the practical and pragmatic use of solid project management techniques and tools helps everyone on the team, regardless of their position in the hierarchy, led by an experienced project leader can identify the root cause of project failure while maintaining objectivity.

5 Steps to Recovery

Williams achieves this by clearly setting out and describing each step of the recovery process. He takes the reader through each individual step, refers constantly to real-life case studies, and provides key questions to ask along with options for dealing with difficult or challenging situations. Williams makes sure to reiterate Step 0 in the process as without management genuinely answering this there is little or no chance of recovery. His 5 Steps to Recovery are:

Step 0 – Realisation: Management must realise and acknowledge there is a problem to solve before doing anything.
Step 1 – Audit: Objectively audit the entire project to determine all the problems.

Step 2 – Analysis: Look at the data gathered to determine root causes and develop a solution.
Step 3 – Negotiation: Mediate an acceptable solution between the supplier and customer.
Step 4 – Execution: Do it. Implement the corrective actions and agreed plan.

Once you’ve read the book through it is very easy to dip in and out of the various sections. This definitely helps where expertise is stronger in one area than another. Identifying and managing Risk is a perfect example.

The Role of Risk

“Most project managers have a poor understanding of how to quantify risk or how risk analysis can benefit the project. For that reason, they create a risk register at the beginning of a project to fulfil a PMO requirement, but then never update or review it. In fact, frustration is so high that they fail to fully identify risk items or generate reasonable mitigations. To exacerbate the problem, their managers have an equally poor understanding.”

Williams is straight to the point: a cornerstone of risk management is a basic understanding of statistics. He then proceeds to deliver just that by providing a real scenario to improve understanding supported by an example of a risk register, how to determine the odds of each risk happening then quantifying that risk, differentiating between quantifiable and unquantifiable risk and between risks and issues. He also describes how to budget for and determine probability and impact of the risks. It’s simple, straightforward and a thorough introduction to the huge underestimated area that is risk.

If all that wasn’t enough Williams provides the reader with:

A chapter relationship chart that lets the reader see quickly where related subject matter can be found.
Takeaways at the end of each chapter. Key messages and reminders in bullet point form as quick memory-joggers.
Process flows and tables.
Access to an on-line appendix full of templates, process descriptions and tools. Free registration required.
A list of recommended reading.

Anyone interested in recovering a failing project or putting in place strategies to avoid failure in the first place, will benefit from this book. Whether CEO, Project Sponsor, Project Manager or Line Management, buy it, read it and keep it by your side. It’s a book to be used and will dog-ear quickly as you refer to it time and again.

Find out more about Todd Williams at his website and follow him on Twitter

Purchase direct from the Author

Purchase from Amazon.com, Amazon.co.uk or Amazon.it

Lessons Learned - Best when Transitioned to Organisational Knowledge

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 12:10:00 +0000

Project people everywhere are constantly on the lookout for ways to improve or add additional value to their projects. Twitter is one resource being used and recently a new Twitter hash-tag (hash-tags allow the user to directly participate in a specific topic of conversation) was created for Project Management Chat (#PMChat). A weekly discussion hosted by Robert Kelly and Rob Prinzo each Friday from 6-7pm (CET), its topics focus on Project Management and Leadership techniques, best practices, and so on.
But this isn’t a blog post about #PMChat. No, this post picks up on a response to one of the questions posed during Friday 30 Sept’s #PMChat topic: Project Closure and Lessons Learned. The question was…

Q2 – How can you assure that lessons learned are actually ‘learned’?

Good question. Why? Because the lessons learned exercise forms a key part of the project management process. But just doing the process alone won’t stop problems repeating. There must be action.

Take for example the kid who falls when attempting a complicated move on the jungle-bars at school. If successful they’d do it again and get better with practise. But when the result is what they’d expect (ie: falling off) or a downright failure (ie: breaking something) they’d naturally do something different next time. The same logic applies to projects, eg: our review has shown that the project organisation we put in place failed us in these 3 critical areas. We must make these specific changes immediately to avoid the same problems next time.

Great the lessons and action necessary have been identified, now who’s responsible?

PM’s are responsible for doing the lessons learned process. They also have a responsibility for learning from those lessons. When a permanent part of an organisation PM’s may have the luxury of continuity. Moving from one project to another they get a clear opportunity to apply changes to how they work, lead and interact with others. But in today’s projects where external PM’s augment in-house teams for short periods of time that learning is likely to disappear with the PM leaving the organisation to learn those same lessons all over again. Lesson 1: identifying and learning lessons is not sole responsibility of the PM.

Often the lessons captured by the process point back to areas outside the PM’s sphere of influence, eg: project hierarchy or organisation, executive/management support and decision making, investment levels and resource allocation. Where that’s the case learning must go beyond the PM. Organisation and project cultures with top-down management influences means those holding senior roles including the PMO (project management office) are ultimately responsible for ensuring changes are made and that they stick. Only those people who make the decisions that trigger projects and set the scene from which all project related support structures, budgets, knowledge and communication emanates have the ability to directly impact the way things are done next time. Lesson 2: senior management / the executive are responsible for a culture that encourages change and takes action.

Lessons however are best learned when they’re transitioned to organisational knowledge. This means not only learning from what has happened before but incorporating them at project start making learning part of ‘the way we do things around here’. We hear about continuous improvement in manufacturing in order to increase production and quality and reduce lead times and costs so why not apply the same logic to projects. After all a project is not an island or a mystery. Its sole purpose is to deliver benefits to the business. Therefore lessons learned are an opportunity for continuous improvement and the nucleus that is a project gives the wider organisation a platform from which to positively leverage them. Lesson 3: Close the gap between projects and the organisation by not isolating one from the other.

For more on how to incorporate lessons learned as you transition from initial implementation to the next phase or operations download a copy of the Whitepaper Principles for Intelligent Transition.

For more on the process to support project closure and lessons learned check out this guest post on the #PMChat Blog by Michael Greer.

Project Past Due - Could be Time to Stop It, Now!

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Mon, 18 Jul 2011 09:16:00 +0000

When a project is past its use-by date or looks unlikely to deliver the desired benefits in the agreed timeframe, tough decisions need to be made. Often a company will push on determined to see this thing through, following the kind of philosophy as described in Dead Horse Management. But throwing more money at it or changing the people involved doesn’t always work.

To end or not to end, that is the question but what on earth is the answer? The answer is, quite simply, to do what is best for your organisation and that could be to Stop It, Now!

Let’s take a look at a common example many of you will recognise…

An organisation intends to rollout a new standardised application across its many sites. It establishes a large global programme. It then sets about spending months and large sums of money pulling subject matter experts (SME’s) together to define a global template the business units can all agree on and sign-up to. Global deployment begins. Some sites move forward successfully implementing with little or no change to the template. Other sites make good progress initially but soon struggle to correlate template processes to their business model. Not until well into the project is it obvious many of their business critical processes will not work under the template. Process discussions ensue within the project and quickly escalate to the programme office. The said business critical processes are dissected and what is uncovered falls into two broad categories:

Valid, ie: country specific, often requirements that are legislated; and
Invalid, ie: an historical process that needs reengineering to the template.

Now what? The valid ones move forward and the invalid ones move to parked. Someone with more authority must make a decision. Change the template? Change the business? Invest more money and change the software? Time passes, deadlines slip, other work streams feel the effects and pressure build on the programme office as other sites agitate to get underway.

What’s happening during this time?

The project carries on where it can
Budgets are haemorrhaging
Timelines are slipping
There are conflicts and uncertainty of responsibility and decision making between project and programme
Continued discussion about differing or undiscovered requirements locally vs the global template
Any opportunity for early benefits realisation is lost
Distinct lack of willingness to enforce or accept change
Perpetual delays in decision making
etc

What can we forecast will happen next?

Costs will continue to increase
Project completion date will continue to be pushed out
Power plays, politics and leveraging personal agendas will shift focus away from the original issue
Changes to the previously agreed global template will be inevitable
More individual projects will spring up devaluing the benefits of a global programme
The ongoing opportunity for global benefits realisation will further reduce
etc

Projects are only as good as the people on them and solid quality decision making when it counts. If a project is flagged as amber, pay attention and be in action. Give direction clearly and early. You might have money to burn but at least burn it where it makes sense. Once it’s red communicate decisions to key people directly removing the trickle down effect and the possibility for ambiguity. Leave no room for misunderstanding about why you’re allowing the project to continue, the conditions that must be met and the timeframe for meeting them. Otherwise don’t delay the inevitable and Stop It, Now!

Has Leadership lost all Accountability?

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Wed, 13 Jul 2011 13:15:00 +0000

I’ve just finished reading Chapter 14 of William Tate’s book “The Search for Leadership – An Organisational Perspective”. As the phone hacking scandal at News of the World was exposed and continues to explode across all forms of media, my timing couldn’t have been better. You see Chapter 14 focuses on Leadership and Accountability and as more and more details come out about News of the World and News International the more William Tate’s writings make sense.

He starts Chapter 14 by attempting to define ‘accountability’ and is quick to point out that:

“While accountability ought to be a key factor in the management of any organisation, in practice it is unimaginatively conceived, poorly understood, relatively neglected and badly executed.”

He goes on to say that the familiar things we all associate with accountability, ie: lists of principle accountabilities and reporting lines, actually don’t contribute much to improving leadership effectiveness within an organisation. Why? Because those things are not an adequate means of holding senior people to account before a disaster strikes.

What’s struck me most about all this are the parallels between what I’ve read against the management and leadership of what continues to unfold at News of the World, News International and quite possibly within the wider global-reaching News Corp organisation. Other than shutting down an old and widely read English newspaper in one foul swoop, what is the actual process through which News Corp will hold News International and its executive(s) to account? Will it continue to hold its business units to account through this same process going forward? Does it even have a process? Regardless of whether a process exists or not, where have those most basic human behaviours of morality, ethical work practices, decency and sense of doing the right thing gone?

But these questions are not isolated to News Corp. They’re questions that can be asked of all organisations whether small, medium, or large multi-national corporations. Regardless of our role we’ve all, at one time or other, experienced the manager or senior executive who, to those observing or on the receiving end of their leadership, fails to be held accountable for their actions (or lack of). What on earth has to happen before someone is held accountable? Through these experiences we can have empathy for what those who have lost their jobs at News of the World have been thinking.

Company owners, executives and HR people will do well to look beyond this latest leadership scandal and consider whether they have a process in place for holding senior managers to account. As William Tate says and I paraphrase, “one that runs continuously as part of their company’s ongoing performance management framework”. Even portfolio, programme and project managers need to look closely at how they view and challenge accountability in their areas of responsibility.

Someone on Twitter recently shared a quote by Alfred A. Montapert, American motivational author famous for The Supreme Philosophy of Man, that said “All lasting business is built on friendship”. I don’t really agree and would stick my neck out to say others in business today may not either. You can be friendly but friendship suggests something more. For business to be lasting it must have the confidence and belief of the people it serves and the employees it hires, with integrity and trust at its core. Without that leadership roles are open to abuse and friendship can muddy the processes necessary to ensure proper and full accountability exists. Is this what we're seeing manifest itself within News Corp?

While there’ll always be scoundrels and scandalous behaviour in business there are changes that can be made to improve not only individual leadership but also that necessary to make an organisation better led. Look at the system itself not just the people within it and if you don’t have William Tate’s book, buy it.

Principles for Intelligent Transition

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Fri, 08 Jul 2011 12:10:00 +0000

If you want your IT project to be embraced as business as usual operations you must go through a transition process. But you can't be random about it and still expect great results. You need to consistently apply some logical and proven principles.

Read on to discover the principles that give project owners the knowledge to transition their projects with less difficulty and disruption. Or register now for instructions on how to download the full "Principles for Intelligent Transition" guide.

1. Transitioning a project is straightforward

Few Companies find IT projects easy to transition across to operations. They see the transition process as difficult and disruptive. But it’s only difficult because they’re not aware of all the gaps and how to bridge those gaps. With the skills in place to identify, bridge and fill those gaps transition from project to operations is less disruptive and more straightforward.

2. Gathering External Intelligence

IT projects are not islands but they can be very isolated and isolating. The bubble of an IT project often creates more and bigger gaps. Simply talking to the people in operations can benefit a project in two ways:

the project has access to an external source of information
operations are more informed and, more importantly, engaged.

3. Understanding Human Behaviours

People are projects and wherever there are people there will always be variations in behaviour. If you understand the factors that influence human behaviour you'll have more success transitioning your project across to business as usual operations.

4. Determining Transition Success

When a company initiates a project they expect to gain some sort of operational or organisational benefit, preferably financial. But project owners and business stakeholders stand on different sides of a gap and have different views of what transition success is. In order to work together with the same understanding both management and leadership are necessary to bridge that gap.

5. Identifying Opportunities for Transformation

Transition does not automatically result in Transformation but with the principles for intelligent transition in place you are more aware of what's to come and can identify opportunities for transformation.

6. Creating an Intelligent Transition Plan

You might think this is obvious and part of a standard project handover process. Fundamentally it is, yet so many projects seem to finish with end user training and cutover. An intelligent transition plan evolves as you think outside the project bubble, always working to bridge and fill the gaps for transition to be more straightforward.

Putting these 6 Intelligent Transition Principles into practise

These principles have been practised successfuly on many different IT projects across the globe in a variety of industry sectors. They are a proven way by which projects can be intelligently transitioned.

Further information on these principles can be found in our "Principles for Intelligent Transition" guide. They give project owners the key to transitioning their projects with less difficulty and disruption. The key to achieving success lies with you and your application of the principles.

Accessing a complete copy of "Principles for Intelligent Transition" is easy – just register here first to receive download instructions.

Announcement - 2011 IPMA Awards

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Mon, 16 May 2011 15:03:00 +0000

IPMA Young Crew has opened nominations for the 2011 IPMA Young Project Manager Award.

Unlike Before is thrilled to be participating, for the 2nd year running as a member of the esteemed award jury assisting to select the finalists for this award.

“This is an excellent opportunity for Project Leaders to gain acknowledgement and recognition for their successes to-date”, says Deanne Earle, Director of Unlike Before Ltd. “We’re certain the candidates will be stronger than ever and are thrilled to be involved once again.”

Introduced in 2006 at the IPMA Young Crew conference in Shanghai, China, the IPMA Young Project Manager Award recognises rising talent in the project and program management industries by honouring young project managers for their accomplishments early in their careers. These honourees have demonstrated invaluable impact to both their profession and their companies, and are on the fast track to becoming influential project leaders on an international scale.

Initial applications for the 2011 IPMA Young Project Manager Award will be accepted until midnight, June 17, 2011 EST. If you know someone whose expertise and contribution are worthy of recognition why not encourage them to submit an application. The application process for this year's award can be found here. Better still, if you meet the criteria why not apply yourself?

The full press announcement has been published on the PM Forum blog and can be accessed here.

About IPMA Young Crew: IPMA Young Crew is a key component of IPMA’s growth and development of the leaders of tomorrow. We are an active network of young project management professionals and students aged 25 to 35 who believe in community and the building of a worldwide young professional project management family. With over 20 member countries, IPMA Young Crew strives to provide experiential learning through interaction and information exchange with young project managers.

Email Emancipation

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Mon, 18 Apr 2011 15:09:00 +0000

Remember the days of typewriters and memo’s, internal mail deliveries and the excitement that came with the introduction of word processors? Your desk had a work space, an in- and an out-tray, and your secretary would make sure the out-tray was emptied regularly in line with internal mail and the in-tray was organised with post-it instructions like ‘sign here’, ‘urgent’, or ‘for your attention’. You had time to ‘do’ work.

And then email arrived...

Thanks to Mr Ray Tomlinson, the man who originally invented sending and receiving messages in this manner way back in 1971, email was agreat leap forward in communication. In an interview with Datamation in 2002 he was asked what he thought email would look like in 10 years. His response and I quote was “You may see it more closely integrated with other forms of communication, though, like instant messaging”.

But back to email proper. How much time do you spend every day, not just business hours, in front of your computer reading, responding and attempting to manage your email? Where on your desk do you do your ‘real’ work? In the centre or is that where your computer sits? Is email still email in its own right or has it done what Ray Tomlinson thought and become closely integrated with other forms of communication?

As more global organisations do more global projects there’s a tendency to conduct every facet of their business via email, completely replacing the need for any human contact or interaction. Take Instant Messaging, a great tool that’s fast, efficient, and effective. Quick questions get quick responses. But what’s happening to work? Once we’ve got through our “insert the number of emails you get in a day here” and those that haven’t been addressed from yesterday, the day before or last week, the time to do work has gone.

A reader of the Unlike Before blog Bob, made a comment on an earlier blog post about urgency. While the topic was different his comment is absolutely valid here too: “A great example of the fast-food, instant gratification and the "if I want it today, I'll ask for it tomorrow" mindset that is so pervasive today. I think people are equating/confusing the speed of communication with actual reaction time, which clearly can't keep up. This then gets tied to the conduit vs filter mentality, ie just pass the info along, don't look at it to see if it makes sense or is well-defined, and voila, urgency without accountability = paralysis.”

Somehow email has created behaviour where we anticipate and almost expect some form of instant gratification via fast turnaround. As Bob said it looks like speed of communication is being confused with actual reaction time. Sending, forwarding and exchanging emails can actually result in more delays than helping get any work done. People still have meetings to attend, documents to review, feedback to give, make decisions, talk to other people and the million other things that makes a business successful.

We need to be smarter about how we manage our email. We need to liberate ourselves from this dependency. Think about setting aside certain blocks of time in the calendar to focus on email leaving the rest of the time for meetings and doing work. Read our 5 Rules for Email Emancipation and add any others that work for you.

Above all, let’s get some real work done.

5 Rules for Email Emancipation

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:52:00 +0000

Is email managing you or are you managing your email? Meetings used to take up every spare minute of the day and now there's email to contend with before, during and after all those meetings. The amount of time we spend in front of our computers has taken the personal out of almost all our interactions and we're probably still not getting any real work done.

Here are 5 Rules or suggestions on how to take control back and liberate yourself from the burden of email, bring some personal back into play and become the IT Managers new best friend.

Addressing – if you’re going to ask someone to do something in the body of the email make sure they are addressed correctly in the email by putting them in the ‘To’ box. Cc’ing people says this is for their info / to keep them in the loop/up to date. Just as meeting etiquette says don’t assign actions to someone who wasn’t in the meeting, email etiquette says you use the To and CC boxes correctly.
Rules – reduce the volume in your Inbox through rules. Creating a cc rule for example is a great way to sort the wheat from the chaff. When emails arrive with your address in the cc box the cc rule will shift them straight into your cc box on arrival. You can then focus on those emails addressed to you that need your action or attention (refer Rule 1 above) and get up to speed on those cc ones at a time you’ve allocated for clearing your cc box.
Attachments – remember the last 10mb file attachment you received that ground your system to a complete halt? It’s easy to click that attachment button sending huge files to multiple people without thinking of the consequences but don’t be surprised the next time your IT Manager tells you how much the extra disk space is going to cost for the overloaded email server. 1 x 10mb file x 10 people on your distribution list is a reasonable chunk of storage in one foul swoop. Think before you click! Try using something like box.net – share files securely on-line for free!
Folders – Anyone can create a folder and drag and drop emails into it. Keep your sent and deleted files by using an Archive. Move decisions and agreements or emails about budgets or pricing off into separate folders. There’s no rule regarding naming conventions or structures just as there are no rules for your paper filing cabinets. Figure out what works for you and add / adjust over time based on purpose and project. Then create rules (refer 2 above) and voila, your email filing system is working for you.
Salutations and Content – both need to be appropriate for the audience, your relationship with them and the subject matter. It’s non-sensicle to use ‘Dear’ when ‘Hi’ is more appropriate. We can all type content we read to be non-contentious, clear and concise. Problem is we’re not the receiver and the receiver reads it with their own interpretation and meaning. There’s no magic wand for this problem because where there are people there is personal interpretation. So perhaps keeping to the point and laying out the facts is a good starting place, then pick up the phone or go and see the receiver in person for anything else.

Footnote: If the person is sitting next to you, down the hall, or somewhere within coo-ee of your timezone pick up the phone and call them. It may turn out that email you were going to write was going to be sent barking up the wrong tree.

Empowerment - Yeah Right!

noreply@blogger.com (Deanne Earle) — Mon, 17 Jan 2011 12:18:00 +0000

“We empower our employees.” The sentiment and intent of this statement reverberates through the air and bounces off walls. Commendable as it may sound, how often it really happens and to what extent is questionable.

This post sets about challenging the hype and supposed rocket science that seems to embody the process of empowering others. When will all leaders be prepared to achieve more by simply getting out of the way?

Empowerment like many other leadership activities is often hindered by the hype and buzz that builds up around such an intangible statement. They somehow become a thing that has to be done rather than something that just is. Maybe employers are scared. Scared because they perceive they’ll lose control, be overtaken by their employees, become redundant.

In my opinion when employers talk about empowerment what they’re really saying is they seek to encourage their staff to think for themselves, to come up with ideas, participate, and generally show initiative within a set of controls and after specific direction. But isn’t that why employees are hired in the first place? Permitting them to do what they’re hired to isn’t empowerment no matter what fancy ribbon or consultant-speak it’s tied up with. Writing about empowerment in his book “The Search for Leadership”, William Tate refers to Henry Mintzberg. He writes and I quote “Henry Mintzberg (1999) offers the view that real empowerment is the most natural state of affairs: people know what they have to do and simply get on with it. If an organisation exhibits real empowerment, it doesn’t need to talk about it.”

Trouble is people usually just hear and experience ‘talk’ and let’s face it talk is easy. Walking that talk is harder and can be complicated by a need for control. If you want a job done properly, do it yourself – right? Well no actually. If that was the case why hire anyone? Think micro-management. It still exists in various forms and when it does empowerment cannot. It’s not possible to empower people when looking over their shoulder all the time. Giving someone specific instructions means they don’t have to turn on any brain cells in order to do what they’re told.

In an organisation where control is king, telling people they’re empowered is contradictory and nonsensical. People aren’t stupid so insulting their intelligence in this way is dis-empowering. They know this type of culture doesn’t permit let alone support empowerment. Any such edict, because that’s what it is, will be met with ‘Yeah right! Like that's going to be possible.’ People need to believe they are empowered otherwise they cannot operate in an empowered way. It doesn’t matter what the talk is, if the perception is one of disbelief they will not feel empowered.

It’s time to stop the talk and make the change; out with control freaks and in with awe-inspiring, respected, intelligent leaders who bring about cultural changes and know that empowerment happens naturally when given half a chance. Leaders can go from good to great on the empowerment scale; they just need to get out of the way.

Great leaders trust their people and their people trust them. They can set the scene, describe the challenge, and share any information that gives context or builds understanding. People need to be aware of any other agendas, expectations or objectives too. Real empowerment will not happen if there’s a perception of prescribed or predetermined outcomes.

All leaders regardless of their position of power are responsible for and have a responsibility to empower others. Like many characteristics of a great leader, empowerment isn’t rocket science. It just is so let it be.