The A-Z of Project Management Survival

Don't panic. Really, just don't. Sure, big problems do happen and you may have to take action and say that it is urgent/critical/non-negotiable (perhaps even using bold) and escalate to the Gods, but choose the times to do this carefully.

No one likes it when you go bananas about something that really isn't that important. No one will listen to you if you do it too often. Time will come when you do have a real issue and the villagers simply won't be around to help.

On the flip-side, if you see people over-reacting in this way, try shouting 'WOLF!' at them. Everyone else will love it and you'll get the point across. Unless they don't know their fables, in which they'll just be a little freaked out, which is good enough.

Labels: W

Now we're getting to the meat.

Project Challenged Factors	% of Responses
1. Lack of User Input	12.8%
2. Incomplete Requirements & Specifications	12.3%
3. Changing Requirements & Specifications	11.8%
4. Lack of Executive Support	7.5%
5. Technology Incompetence	7.0%
6. Lack of Resources	6.4%
7. Unrealistic Expectations	5.9%
8. Unclear Objectives	5.3%
9. Unrealistic Time Frames	4.3%
10. New Technology	3.7%
Other	23.0%

So, what conclusions can be drawn from these many years of research? One broad message is that, despite all the years of innovation and experience that have passed, as Cobb’s paradox suggests, nothing much has changed. What was problem a decade ago is still a problem now. Despite tools, techniques methodologies aplenty, projects still fail and for the same broad set of reasons.

This research clearly points at the major issues in project failure and with consistent results over so many projects over so many years it would seem entirely incontrovertible. There is a common thread in all the results that is concealed behind the detail. At the heart of all project failure is the people. This may seem obvious, after all, projects are conceived by, designed by, built by and used by people. It is clear that this human factor can never be removed from projects but, by understanding the nature of the influence of people on a project, certain key failure points can be targeted and improvements made. At least in part, this is perhaps at least part of the answer to the paradoxical question ‘so why do they still fail?’.

All the great processes and tools cannot make up for the fact that people are at the core of everything we try to do, and if the people aren't up to it then there isn't an awful lot you can do about it. Except to look for a saviour.

What this all points at is that there is only one thing you need to get right. Get the right people on your project. You do this by either getting your recruitment right or, within the existing resource pool, making sure you grab the good ones.

The quality of the people at the start of the project sets the upper limit of how well everything can go before all the usual stuff starts to go wrong.

Everything, EVERYTHING you try to do is based on and reliant on people. Get good ones, make sure they are happy, give them space and let them do their thing.

Labels: P

As regular readers will observe, there is much discussion on the central concept of arses and good guys. Some may find this a somewhat vague concept. So, to bring this to life a little, we will introduce the concept of the Mean Value Coefficient.

This is being done for a few reasons:

• the concept will be used in forthcoming posts, there's a whole theory to come
• it is an extension of the nickname concept
• you just can't beat a bit of pseudo-science

The concept is very simple:

1. An individual with an Mean Value Coefficient of 1 has a neutral impact on your project, makes it neither better or worse.
2. An individual with a coefficient less than 1 has an overall detrimental impact on your project (an arse). The smaller the coefficient, the worse they are.
3. An individual with a coefficient greater than has improves your project (a good guy). The higher the coefficient, the better they are.

This has a very important use. You can simply refer to people as "MVC 0.5" and only those in the know will know what you are on about. This is sometimes safer than the more traditional "he's an arse" when you don't know who might be listening. Generally, people who don't know what MVC is will be to embarassed to ask. Its also particularly sneaky as MVC means something else too.

Labels: M

Nicknames aren't anything new. Some people get them, some don't. Some last for a while and die away, some stick for life. They can be derogatory, complimentary, used to the person's face or just behind their back, but very, very rarely, are they planned.

Here's the deal, everyone should have a nickname that is known within the inner circle of trusted friends. This isn't just for colleagues, it can be for customers, suppliers, whoever. The point is that it is very useful to be able to talk about people with other people, including the individuals themselves, having no idea who you are on about.

The important thing is that the nicknames can't be obvious. You can't call John Smith 'Smithy' or 'Bitter'. By way of example, you could call him 'Garlic'. See, you have no idea how I came up with that, but there is method to it. Its all about additional degrees of separation.

Above all, nicknames can make every conversation more fun, which is very important.

Labels: N

Remember this. Write it on a piece of paper if you have to. No one you
work with is independently wealthy and comes into work just because
they love it. And, even if they are, they still do it for more glory,
not relaxation. None of us are charities, we work to earn money, simple
as that. And we spend a lot of our lives doing it.

Therefore, enjoying our work as we go is very important. Sure, it
helps with retention, churn, yada, yada. But you should consider it on
a more human level. If people are, by virtue of necessity, stuck with
working for most of their natural lives, surely everyone has a
resposibility to make it as enjoyable as possible. This is suggesting
that we enter the Brent-ian nightmare of "entertainer first, manager
second", it is simply to say that it is incumbent on every manager to
create an environment that people want to work in, to get out of bed
for.

Obviously, your standard arse believes that maximum productivity comes
with the intense silence of the monk in a scriptorium. Their fear
forces them to believe that any time not working is wasted time. This
is very far how it should be. There is never a time when a bit of
laughter can't improve things. A relaxed mind is a clear mind.

A good manager is one that creates the environment in which their
people can work at their best. There is many aspects to this, but
having fun is the central tenet of them all.

OK, so it doesn’t actually start with an ‘X’, but there aren’t many words that do, so this is pretty much the best you’re going to get.

This one can’t be stressed enough. If you are managing a project, delivering software, whatever, it means you have customers, or stakeholders, or perhaps both. These are the people that will build or break your reputation in equal measures and with astonishing speed. So, best have them on your side eh?

Build a rapport with them ensure they are aware that you have their interests at heart, because you do of course!

When things are going well, be sure to make sure they are aware of how good a job you are doing, but in a subtle way of course. Equally when things are going wrong, it’s a good idea to be open an honest with them up-front and early. That way the kicking you are likely to receive as a result of it will be minimised, perhaps to none at all.

Of course, if you are a good guy, you will have thought through all the permutations and options and presented the best solution for the benefit of the project. So, beforehand, work out what’s wrong and how you’re going to put it right then present your plan for saving the world to your customer(s). Do it well and you will maybe even come out smelling of roses.

Labels: eXpectation Setting, X

The basic rules of prioritisation tell you what is important, what you should do next, what is really important to concentrate on. The butterfly doesn't follow these rules. They flit from flower to flower on a whim. Quite like the flip-flop, this change of direction can often be as a result of a conversation but it just as easily be something random or forgetful in the nature. Sometimes butterflies just aren't very organised. The combination of a flip-flip with a butterfly can be a dizzying journey through madness.

Butterflies often follow what they perceive to be important. This can often be what they think will bring them the greatest glory, the topic du jour of senior management, something that will make them sound clever. But usually its just the last thing to pop into their head.

There isn't that much positive to say about the butterfly other than: if they are chasing you for something that you haven't done yet, it usually very easy to distract them with something bright and colourful. Like maybe a new pen.

Labels: B, Butterfly

Those of you of an older vintage may remember the flip-flop. A simple logic circuit that can be in one state or another. You get people like that too. Having no clue about anything, they tend not to have any definitive opinion of their own. Instead, they carry about with them the opinion of the last person they discussed a given subject with.

This is generally quite irritating as you can usually have two very different conversations with the same person about the same thing.

"But I thought we had agreed yesterday that the sky was blue?"
"Yes, but I had a meeting with marketing this morning and no I see that it is more of an indigo..."

Fundamentally, such people aren't much use, but there is much to be exploited here. If these people are in decision making positions and you'd like to them to act in your favour, all you have to do is get to them last. Just make them flip to your way of thinking, make sure no one else talks to them before they enter the crucial meeting and the world is yours.

Labels: F, Flip-Flop