“You’ve got to
get down to the working surface, and build your estimates on actual facts,
history and judgment. Otherwise, your plan is going to have big holes in it.”
Totally right on
the substance. Excellent project management . . . so far. Project estimates
must arise from actual facts and relevant experience – to the extent possible.
Whose facts? What
experience? This is where the speaker’s narrative took a turn that seriously
undercut the value of his advice. He described the many hours he had spent in
researching and preparing estimates for one project.
He applied his own personal experience? He invested
his own time to produce detailed
estimates?
The context was that
of a complex, good-sized challenge with a number of team members and
stakeholders.
I can think of a few situations in
which there might be an argument for that kind of time investment by the leader
of a project:
1. The project is so small there’s little else for
the project manager to do, and there’s no one else to do the research and the
math, anyway.
2.
The work is so routine that plan management
really is just a matter of drawing up the laundry list without forgetting
anything.
3.
The sponsoring organization is so huge and so
rich it has plenty of experienced project managers who can take the time to do
back-office work.
4.
The project manager is being punished for doing
something really stupid.
None of those applied to the example the
speaker was referring to. He was talking about regular behavior on regular
projects. This was his take on how the lead decision-maker should manage any
complex, demanding, multifunctional activity with a variety of stakeholders in
risky circumstances.
If so, he was providing an excellent
illustration of why so many projects fall short or fail entirely. Detailed
implementation planning is no place for the manager.
Why? Several
reasons.
First: Top-down estimating at the
necessary level of detail requires current information from the field, lots of
it. Managers rarely have full state-of-the-art data at their fingertips, or the
necessary contacts and sources.
Second: The work requires the kind of
single-task focus that managers can’t afford to invest; and a workstyle not at all like the one they have developed since back in their individual-contributor days.
Third: Either the project start is
delayed while the key decision-maker is not available; or team members are
standing around waiting for directions, explanations and decisions.
The true
management role in the planning process is that of overseer, not planner.
The coordination
of the action plans, and the priorities at all levels, must be directed from
the broader perspective of the over-all project and the strategies of the
sponsoring organization.
It is where the project manager must
be, continuously from beginning to end. The work cannot be done within the nuts
and bolts of the action planning process.
It’s not easy to
stick with this, particularly when the project manager is expert in the subject
area. You often could perform any one of the functions better than the person
you have doing it in your project.
The fatal flaw
is, of course, that while you were doing that . . . no one would be performing
the most important function of all – your job.
This “subject
matter expertise” matter is a topic of continued conversation (dispute?) in
project management. Can you do the management job if you are not competent in
the field?
Over the years, I
have become convinced that management – especially project management – is a
specialty of its own.
The role it fills
in the leadership of complex enterprises must be adapted for the particulars of
any particular project, but the fundamentals are generally the same: Building
relationships and establishing reliable agreements within the project team,
with sponsors in the larger organization and with suppliers and contributors
outside the direct project relationship.
That work
requires expertise in organization, communication, negotiation and problem
solving, with a serious investment of time and attention. Skills specialists
within projects typically can’t get their own part done properly and handle
that level of management besides.
Competent project
managers know how to develop the necessary relationships and provide value in
ways that build mutual respect and collaboration with the specialists.
What
do you think? Let’s see your opinion in the Comments section below.
SEE ALSO: Put Me In,
Coach: Role vs. Soul
http://jimmillikenproject.blogspot.com/2011/11/put-me-in-coach-role-vs-soul.html
No comments:
Post a Comment