Double spaced 3-5 page journal entry about lessons taught, vocab, module take aways, a-ha moments, project management acco

Before a project team does any work, it should spend time ensuring that it has a shared understanding of where it is going. The terms used to define that destination are “mission,” “vision,” “goals,” and “objectives.” And it is at this very early stage that projects tend to fail because everyone takes for granted that “we all know what the mission is.”

Defining the Problem

Every project solves a problem of some kind, but people are inclined to skip over the definition of the problem. This is a big mistake. The way you define a problem determines how you will solve it, so it is critical that a proper definition be developed. For example, too often a problem is defined in terms of a solution. A person may say, “I have a problem. My car has quit, and I have no way to get to work. How am I going to get my car repaired because I have no money to do it?”

The problem has essentially been defined as, “How do I repair my car?” The actual problem, however, at its most fundamental level, is that the person has no way to get to work—or so he says. But could he ride the bus, go with a coworker, or ride a bike until he has the money to have the car repaired? It is true that having no money to repair the car is a problem, but it is important to distinguish between the basic, or core, problem and those at another level.

I once heard a sales manager berate a salesman, saying, “The company has spent a lot of money developing this new product, and none of you are selling it. If you don’t get out there and sell this product, I’m going to find myself some salespeople who can sell!”

It is clear how he has defined the problem: he has a group of salespeople who can’t sell. However, given that none of them can sell the product, I am sure he is wrong. There is something wrong with the product or market, or the competition is killing them. You are very unlikely to have all bad salespeople!

Nevertheless, this manager has defined the problem in terms of people, and that is the way it must be solved. Imagine that he replaces all of the salespeople. He will still have the same problem because he has not addressed the actual cause.

People sometimes define a problem as a goal. A goal in itself is not a problem. It is when there are obstacles that make it difficult to reach the goal that one has a problem. Given this definition of a problem, we can say that problem solving involves finding ways to deal with obstacles: they must be overcome, bypassed, or removed.

A goal in itself is not a problem. It is when there are obstacles that make it difficult to reach the goal that one has a problem.

Confusion of Terms

Suppose a person tells you that she is taking a new job in a distant city, and she plans to move there. She immediately realizes that she must find a place to live. So she says, “I have a problem. I have to find a place to live.”

You ask her what her mission is. “To find a place to live,” she says.

And how about her vision? “To have a place to live,” she answers, a little confused.

No wonder she is confused. All three statements sound alike! She needs to understand the difference between them if she is to solve this problem.

Remember, a problem is a gap. Suppose we were to ask her to tell us where she wants to be when her problem is solved. She would say, “I would have a place to live in the new city.”

“And where are you now?” you ask.

“I have no place to live,” she says.

Then the gap is between having a place and not having one. This can be stated simply as, “I have no place to live.” And, indeed, this is the problem she is trying to solve.

But—would just anyplace be okay? Of course not. She doesn’t want to live under a bridge, although homeless people sometimes do. So she can tell you if you ask her, “What kind of place are you looking for?”

“It needs to have three bedrooms, the house must be of a certain size, and I prefer a certain style,” she says. This is her vision for the kind of place she wants to live in. That vision literally paints a picture in her mind, and, when she finds a place that comes close to that picture, she will have “arrived” at her destination. This is the function of vision: it defines “done.”

Her mission, then, is to find a place that conforms to her vision. Another way to say this is that the mission of a project is always to achieve the vision. In doing so, it solves the stated problem. So you may want to diagram it, as shown in  Figure 5-1 . Note that the vision has been spelled out as a list of things she must have, along with some that she wants to have and a few that would be nice to have if she could get them.

[FIGURE 5-1] CHEVRON SHOWING MISSION, VISION, AND PROBLEM STATEMENT

The Real World

Okay, now we know the differences among the mission, vision, and problem, but in the real world you never get them in this order. Your boss or project sponsor will say, “Here is your mission,” without any mention of a problem statement. It is possible that some discussion of the sponsor’s vision of the end result will take place, but even that may be fairly sketchy. So the first order of business for a project team is to develop these into a form that everyone will accept.

The major “political” problem you may encounter is that the sponsor will undoubtedly have given you a mission that is based on his definition of the problem to be solved. Sometimes his definition will be incorrect, and you will have to confront this. Otherwise, you will spend a lot of the organization’s money, only to find that you have developed the right solution to the wrong problem.

The Real Mission of Every Project

I said earlier that the mission is always to achieve the vision. However, I should add that the vision you are trying to achieve is the one the customer holds. Another way to say this is that you are trying to satisfy the customer’s needs. That is the primary objective. Your motive may be to make a profit in the process, but the mission is always to meet the needs of the customer. That means, of course, that you must know what those needs are, and sometimes this isn’t easy because even the customer isn’t clear about them. So you have to translate or interpret as best you can. Your best safeguard is to keep the customer involved in the project from concept to completion so that there is a constant check on whether what you are doing will achieve the desired result.

The mission of the project can be written by answering two questions:

1.What are we going to do?

2.For whom are we going to do it?

In the previous edition of this book, it was suggested that you also state how you will go about meeting those customer needs, but this should not be part of the mission statement itself. The mission statement defines what you are doing; how you are going to do it is project strategy and should be dealt with separately.

Developing Project Objectives

Once a mission statement has been developed, you can write your project objectives. Note that objectives are much more specific than the mission statement itself and define results that must be achieved in order for the overall mission to be accomplished. Also, an objective defines the desired end result.

Goal setting has traditionally been based on past performance. This practice has tended to perpetuate the sins of the past.

I may want to finish this chapter by 10 o’clock this morning. That is my desired outcome or result—my objective. The way in which I achieve that objective is to perform a number of tasks. These might include typing text into my computer, reviewing some other literature on the topic about which I am writing, calling a colleague to ask a question for clarification, and printing out the chapter, proofing it, and entering some revisions into my computer.

An objective specifies a desired end result to be achieved. A task is an activity performed to achieve that result. An objective is usually a noun, whereas a task is a verb.

The following acronym may help you remember the essential qualities that a statement of objectives must have. We say that an objective must be SMART, with each letter standing for a condition as follows:

Specific

Measurable

Attainable

Realistic

Time limited

Dr. W. Edwards Deming has raised some serious questions about the advisability of trying to quantify goals and objectives. He argued that there is no point in setting quotas for a manufacturing process to reach. If the system is stable, he argued, then there is no need to specify a goal, since you will get whatever the system can produce. A goal beyond the capability of the system can’t be achieved.

On the other hand, according to Deming, if the system is not stable (in the statistical sense of the word), then again there is no need to specify a quota, since there is no way to know what the capability of the system is.

In project work, we may know the capability of a person by looking at his or her past performance, but, unless you have a large number of samples, you have no way of knowing exactly what the person can do, since there is always variability in people’s performance. Furthermore, it does no good to base a quota on what someone else has done. The quota must be valid for the person who is going to do the job this time.

We all know that some people are capable of more output than others. So defining the measurement and attainability aspects of a goal or objective setting is very difficult. I go into this more in  Chapter 6  when I discuss time estimating.

I have found the following two questions to be useful both in setting objectives and in monitoring progress toward those objectives:

1.What is our desired outcome? This is called the outcome frame. It helps keep you focused on the result you are trying to achieve, rather than on the effort being expended to get there.

2.How will we know when we achieve it? I call this the evidence question. This question is very useful for establishing exit criteria for objectives that cannot be quantified.

What follows are a couple of examples of objectives:

Our objective is to develop a one-minute commercial to solicit contributions to WXYZ to air on local TV stations by June 5, 2016.

Our objective is to raise $600,000 in funds from local viewers by September 18, 2016.

The Nature of Objectives

Note that these examples of objectives do not say how they will be achieved. I consider an objective to be a statement that tells me what result is to be achieved. The “how” is problem solving, and I prefer to keep that open so that solutions can be brainstormed later. If the approach is written into the objective statement, it may lock a team into a method that is not really best for the project.

Assessing Project Risks

Once you have established your objectives, you can develop plans for how to achieve them. Unfortunately, the best plans sometimes don’t work. One safeguard in managing projects is to think about the risks ahead that could sink the job. This can be done for critical objectives and for other parts of the plan.

The simplest way to conduct a risk analysis is to ask, “What could go wrong?” or “What could keep us from achieving our objective?” It is usually best to list the risks first, then think about contingencies for dealing with them. One way to look at risk is to divide a flip chart page in half, have the group brainstorm the risks, which you write down on the left side of the page, and then go back and list the contingencies—things you can do to manage the risks if they do materialize. An example of a risk analysis for a photography project is shown in  Figure 5-2 .

It is helpful to assess risks of failure of the following:

•The schedule

•The budget

•Project quality

•Customer satisfaction

[FIGURE 5-2] RISK ANALYSIS EXAMPLE

What could go wrong?	Contingency
1. Exposure wrong	Bracket the exposure
2. Shots unacceptable	Take extra photos
3. Film lost or damaged	Hand carry to client
4. Weather delays	Allow extra time

One benefit of doing a risk analysis in this manner is that it may help you avert some risks. When you cannot avert a risk, you will at least have a backup plan. Unexpected risks can throw a project into a tailspin.

I mentioned this point previously, but it bears repeating: you are not trying to identify every possible risk, just some of the more likely ones. This point should be made to team members who are highly analytical or who perhaps have a tendency to be negative in general. Also, risk analysis always has a positive thrust—that is, you are asking, “If it happens, what will we do about it?” You don’t want people to say, “Ain’t it awful!”

Risk analysis should not lead to analysis paralysis!

In  Chapter 6 , I present detailed tools and techniques to address risk management in the project environment.

KEY POINTS TO REMEMBER

The way a problem is defined determines how you will solve it.

A problem is a gap between where you are and where you want to be, with obstacles making it hard to reach the goal. A goal by itself is not a problem. Obstacles must exist for there to be a problem.

Vision is what the final result will “look like.” It defines “done.”

The mission is to achieve the vision. It answers the two questions “What are we going to do?” and “For whom are we going to do it?”

Objectives should be SMART.

You can identify risks by asking, “What could go wrong?”

Early in my career at Grumman Aerospace, I was part of a team of procurement specialists who were directed to create and implement a supplier performance rating system. It was a good team and we worked hard, but nobody was trained in project management. As a result, some planning activities were accomplished formally, as a process (scheduling, budget), and others were not—specifically, managing stakeholders. But we forgot to include an important group, Grumman’s Texas office, in the creation of the new system. They were not happy. While business etiquette and decorum prevent one from printing their exact response, needless to say it was direct, and it would have been painful to do what was suggested. This delayed the project and caused a great deal of needless conflict. Had we done our job and identified our stakeholders from the beginning of the planning process, the project would have been completed on time and within budget. It was an unforced error that did not have to happen.

Prioritizing Stakeholders

Managing stakeholders does not have to be difficult, but it does take some effort. It begins with identifying the individual stakeholders, which you can do by asking three basic questions:

1.Who benefits from the project? Focus on the project deliverable and who will benefit from it. The deliverable could be any number of things, including a new internal process, software application, or new product to be marketed.

2.Who contributes to the project? Determine which individuals or groups you will be relying on to accomplish the project work. This could include project team members, the project sponsor, and subject matter experts outside the project team.

3.Who is impacted by the project? The project deliverable can impact others who do not necessarily benefit from it, such as the IT department updating software for buyers or engineering supplying priority data for a new marketing campaign. These individuals and groups must be considered stakeholders because their work will be affected by the deliverable.

Managing stakeholders begins with identifying the individual stakeholders by asking three basic questions:

1.Who benefits from the project?

2.Who contributes to the project?

3.Who is impacted by the project?

You then must analyze how each of the stakeholders relates to your project. Some will be supportive, others will not. It is particularly important that “negative” stakeholders be prioritized and their concerns addressed (if possible). A negative stakeholder might be your best friend at work, but she needs the same resources required for your project for her own project. A negative stakeholder might also be a department manager who resists change—the change that your project deliverable will bring. There could be any number of reasons why a stakeholder does not have a positive attitude toward your project. Your job is to find out who they are and what is behind this attitude.

The stakeholder grid, shown in Figure 4-1, is an excellent tool to help you manage stakeholders. Once they are identified, stakeholders can be analyzed as to their attitude (or support) toward your project and influence (or power) within the organization. Once these dynamics are determined, you can place them in the appropriate grid quadrant. Some of these stakeholders will literally be in your corner; others will not. Your response to and interaction with these stakeholders will depend upon which quadrant they occupy.

[FIGURE 4-1]

THE STAKEHOLDER GRID

Those stakeholders with low influence or power do not demand much of your time or effort because their impact will be minimal. Those with high influence or power can be devastating if their attitude is negative, but their power can be leveraged if their attitude is positive. For example:

Person 2. His attitude is negative toward the project, but his influence is low. Limited effort is required here, but I would keep him on my radar; he may get promoted.

Person 5. Her attitude toward the project is positive, but her influence is low. This is good but not particularly helpful.

Persons 3 and 4. These stakeholders have a positive attitude toward the project, and their influence is high. Here is an opportunity to leverage their influence to help persuade others.

Person 1. Person 1 is dangerous because she has a negative attitude about your project and her influence is high. She can kill the project if she is not managed correctly. This may require a formal meeting, coffee in the morning, a nice lunch, or a couple of happy hour beverages. Your goal is to find out what her objection to the project is and work to bring her into your corner.

With proper planning, there’s no reason for a project manager to be blindsided. Frontload your effort, then invest time and work accordingly to make your project a success. In Chapter 14, I cover the project manager as leader. Here is where you put your leader hat on and work to persuade.

Engaging Key Stakeholders

Stakeholder engagement represents the project manager’s effort, as you manage and execute the project, to involve stakeholders and understand stakeholder concerns. Some stakeholders are key to your project’s success. You must have them engaged or involved for it to succeed. Some you may want to involve because of their expertise or institutional knowledge. Others you may want to involve because of the strength of their influence within the organization or among the participating parties.

Stakeholders are key to your project’s success; they must be involved in order for it to succeed.

In the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), PMI has published a model for the Stakeholder Engagement Assessment Matrix (see Figure 4-2). This matrix helps with the overall management of stakeholders by plotting current and desired levels of engagement. The engagement matrix acts as an effective complement to the stakeholder register, as it enables you to plot the desired engagement level for each stakeholder. You can then formulate and execute a plan to drive each of them toward the desired level of their with the project.

[FIGURE 4-2]

THE STAKEHOLDERS ENGAGEMENT ASSESSMENT MATRIX

KEY:

Unaware. Unaware of project and potential impact.

Resistant. Aware of project and potential impacts and resistant to change.

Neutral. Aware of project yet neither supportive nor resistant.

Supportive. Aware of project and potential impacts and supportive to change.

Leading. Aware of project and potential impacts and actively engaged in ensuring the project is a success.

C = Current engagement

D = Desired engagement

In the figure, Stakeholder 1 is unaware, and you want him to be supportive. You have some work to do. Stakeholder 2 is neutral, and you want her to be supportive. Perhaps you have a short meeting or a cup of coffee and try to move her to support your project. Stakeholder 3 is already supportive. This is obviously good news, and he will require little or no effort moving forward. You can check periodically to make sure he remains happy.

Be proactive and maximize stakeholder involvement. Invest the time and effort necessary to create a stakeholders engagement assessment matrix. In the fog of the typical project environment, it is always useful to have a simple matrix to rely on. Oh yes, keep it current!

Stakeholder Alignment and Communication

Do all of your stakeholders agree with every element of your project as stated in the project charter? Probably not. Stakeholders are many and varied, and they are often affected differently by the project deliverable. They also have varying levels of technical expertise and product/project knowledge.

To get everyone moving in the same direction and thereby maximize interaction, gauge their overall experience and project knowledge levels. In order to influence your stakeholders effectively, you must align your knowledge level with theirs, so you are speaking a common project language. Workplace learning expert Karen Feely cautions against the so-called Curse of Knowledge that affects many project managers. She suggests that you “remember that not everybody knows as much as you do about a topic. You need to speak to their levels of understanding.”

To overcome this curse, Ms. Feely suggests that you focus on four distinct groups when aligning and communicating with your stakeholders (see Figure 4-3).

[FIGURE 4-3]

AUDIENCE GUIDE TO KNOWLEDGE AND COMMUNICATION

Most people communicate in their comfort zones. Project managers must plan and execute stakeholder communication in a focused and flexible process. The Curse of Knowledge may be lifted when you encounter a stakeholder with deep technical understanding of your project work, but she will still need to make herself understood by the others. Work with this stakeholder to make her an asset, not an impediment to project progress.

Most people communicate in their comfort zone, so the project manager must plan and execute stakeholder communication in a focused and flexible process.

Managing Multicultural Stakeholders

Project managers will naturally develop an intuition for the dynamics of their working environments. This comes with the experience of managing within established organizational structures and interaction with individuals within defined workplace cultures. The organizational infrastructure will be self-evident and populated with familiar processes, rules, and regulations. The cultural environment of an organization can be more nuanced, however, and require some work by the project manager to measure the dynamics and drive effective stakeholder interaction.

Management Adjustments Based on the Stakeholder’s Culture

Where am I now? This is a simple question that can be used to determine whether adjustments must be made in your approach to managing project stakeholders in different corporate environments. Are you leading individuals from other departments, facilities, locations, or countries? Do you understand their working cultures and how they differ from yours? Flex your style to get the most out of your team members and other stakeholders.

Back in 2008, I was teaching an MBA project management course for the City University of New York Graduate School. One of my students brought in a guest speaker (the CFO of a major global finance company) who spoke about organizational culture shock. She was a fascinating woman who recounted her experience at a previous company. There, if you were attending a 10:00 a.m. meeting, it meant you should arrive at least five minutes early, or you were late. In her current organization, 10:00 can mean five or ten minutes after 10:00, and then everybody will want to hear about her brother’s new baby. She did not adjust quickly and eventually was approached by a colleague to help her amend her style.

The Five Cultural Dimensions

When interacting with stakeholders, their cultures should always be a consideration. In 1974, Dutch social psychologist Geert Hofstede conducted a study with a large pool of IBM employees worldwide. His study found that a society’s value system is a combination of five key dimensions (see Figure 4-4). These dimensions identify behavioral indicators within the working culture. The tendency of individuals to use a similar combination of these dimensions is what results in the formation of a unique culture. This can be a very useful tool for project managers when managing stakeholder culture.

[FIGURE 4-4]

THE FIVE CULTURAL DIMENSIONS

Understanding these dimensions will help you build trust. A relationship with a stakeholder absent trust is not a relationship. It is a time bomb. It is a risk waiting to become a reality.

When managing multicultural stakeholders, the trust factor becomes especially important. Growing up in the Grumman project environment, the cultural challenges were few. Everybody looked and acted alike; Grumman drew from a common resource pool. When I accepted the Global Practice Leader, Project Management position at AMA, the headquarters in New York City was staffed with employees from all over the world. One of my team members wanted to read my palm and tell my future, but I didn’t want to know. I told her I had a risk management plan for that. The AMA culture presented me with an opportunity for tremendous personal growth but significant stakeholder management challenges. I eventually earned the trust of my stakeholders, but a proactive five-dimension approach would have been much more efficient.

Working with Remote, External Stakeholders

“Out of sight, out of mind.” Most enduring sayings endure because they contain an element of truth. The distributed nature of our project teams and stakeholders requires a full-time effort. Remote, external project stakeholders always present unique challenges. We are usually forced to meet and communicate with these stakeholders via teleconference, Internet, videoconferencing, Skype, and other technology. Talk about relationship barriers!

Invest time and effort in one-on-one interaction. Get to know each other, and use the five dimensions as a tool. This can help mitigate or prevent initial distrust. More important, this will help you map your approach to work with remote, external stakeholders individually and collectively. The project manager as leader utilizes trust as an invaluable commodity. Using this strategy will help you build and hold trust and communicate more effectively.

Invest time and effort in one-on-one interaction when working with remote, external stakeholders.

Uniting Stakeholders

Yes, we have all heard about the problem of trying to herd cats. Well, try uniting stakeholders from different cultures and backgrounds and managing them as a group throughout the life of a project. Think about your own project experiences. You have just completed phase III, and the operations manager has a great idea. You know that it is too late and that the impact of this idea on the project will be counterproductive, at the very least. The Stakeholder Grid in Figure 4-1 shows that this stakeholder is highly influential. Here you must manage the disagreement. Don’t be a complainer; be a persuader. Let logic and data help you with this and all disagreements with stakeholders. I often use the following four-step process when managing stakeholder disagreements:

Step 1. Clarify your stakeholder’s position before you take action. Make sure you understand his concerns first.

Step 2. Describe the impact to the project that implementation of this new idea will have. This is often an aha moment for the stakeholder and can immediately diffuse the situation.

Step 3. Alternative ideas can be persuasive if your stakeholder is firmly entrenched. Offer pros and cons of each idea.

Step 4. Transition to negotiation. We all do it every day as we work our projects. Negotiating with stakeholders is a fact of project life. The best-case scenario will front-load all negotiations early in the planning stage. Reality dictates their happening throughout the project life-cycle. Before you negotiate:

•Do your due diligence—plan.

•Know what changes your project plan can and cannot absorb.

•Manage scope creep by negotiating needed resources/time during the negotiation.

•Win-win; find the common ground that makes sense for the stakeholder and the project.

Remember, stakeholders are there for a reason. You need them, and they need you for your project to be a success. Leverage their strengths and minimize their negative effects. Use common sense, and rely on some or all of the stakeholder management tools presented in this chapter. Identify those that make sense for you and your project, and you will find the road to on-time and under-budget completion much easier.

KEY POINTS TO REMEMBER

A stakeholder is anyone who has a vested interest in the outcome of a project.

Managing stakeholders begins with identifying the individua

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.