Tag Archives: project manager

Project Management is the Journey, Outcomes are Your Destination

Posted on by
2

After years of contemplation and introspection, I’ve come to the conclusion that it IS About the Destination!  (See, I’m trying to retire before I hit the ripe old age of 85).

I came late to financial investing in my life.  I never really understood the value of the market and stock options.  I worked for Microsoft early in my career when stock options were plentiful and Microsoft wasn’t that big.  Needless to say by not understanding the value of the market and the stock options provided….I’m still working for a living.  See….I was focused on working for my money rather than having my money work for me.  I forgot about my long term goal (destination) and delayed my retirement by another 40 years.

So I learned, did my research and finally understood that the key part of success in investing is to define your goals and consistently work toward them.

iStock_000056745992_XXXLarge_EIGHT

Mind you, this is not a lesson in investing.  Yet, I always look for similarities in different parts of my life.  For instance, my progression up the investment learning curve and how most companies manage their portfolio of strategic initiatives.

Let’s assume that most companies have goals that are defined in the strategic vision.  These strategic goals plan for their future growth.  Yet how many of these companies monitor their portfolio regularly?  How many companies align their portfolio with their strategic goals in order to measure whether they were able to successful reach their desired outcomes?   If they aren’t doing it, then why spend all this money to create a strategy in the first place?  It is a waste of resources both human and financial.

Unfortunately, I see this way too often.  I previously described this in my previous blog: Project Management is “Broke.”   By the time a project is kicked off, stated project goals are defined as on time on budget and within scope.  But what happened to the project purpose…. the strategic goals? Is the company spending money to check off the box or to solve a problem, grow the business, reduce or contain costs?  I contend that the reason many companies fail in reaching their desired business outcomes is because they aren’t aligning their project with their desired outcomes, monitoring them for changes, and working consistently toward those outcomes.  Implementing a new system or changing a process is great but what were you trying to address by putting in that new system or changing the process.  Don’t train everyone on a new system for 12 hours without understanding what your users need to know and target the message accordingly (actual recent case study with a prospective client)

Companies need to stop focusing on project management and begin to focus on Outcome Management.  Outcome management looks at the big picture.  Take the cartoon that shows two doctors standing over a patient.  The first doctor says, “The surgery was flawless”….the second says “too bad the patient died.”  What are you trying to achieve?  A perfect surgery or a healthy patient?

Outcome management focuses on four things.

  1. Solutioning. This is the alignment between strategy and execution. Are companies using their investment money wisely? Have they prioritized their project portfolio to ensure that they are spending their money on the optimal initiatives that have the best chance of getting them to their goals? Through a better understanding of the organization’s strategic goals, you can ensure that the project is both on point and aligned with strategy.
  2. Execution. This occupies the space where most place project management. But I contend that by today’s standard, not in the proper way. A mix between art and science (see Sept. 2014 blog), focusing on ensuring that the effort is on time, on budget and within scope while keeping a consistent focus on the prize is the only way to be truly successful. As an example, a large public company involved in a merger was looking for synergies in every department to help cut costs. However, early on in the project, they realized that the original goal had been met. By measuring throughout the life of the effort, it gave the organization an opportunity. They could continue cutting through every department or they could use the fact that they had already met their strategic objective to retain their employees to provide an even greater competitive advantage. They choose the latter. They made a course correction mid-way through the execution of their plan and were able to surpass their stated goal. My experience has shown that the typical organization would not have been measuring their progression to their strategic goals. They would have continued through their original plan and cut their employees to the bare minimum. Here is the important distinction. The merging companies could have decided to continue down that path but by measuring outcomes, they were able to create and take advantage of an unforeseen value that resulted from the formation of a new organization. They were able to make a business decision rather than have one forced upon them.
  3. Adoption and Adaption. This is the soft mushy side of making things happen that many organizations think is baloney. If you’ve been in business long enough (say 6 months), you will most likely live through an example of a project that completed and brought no discernable value to the company. This could be for many reasons but I would bet that the majority of reasons are based on a lack of buy-in from the necessary parties. I’ve been involved in a lot of mergers and acquisitions. It’s amazing how many of them (95.8% but who’s counting) have not focused on bridging the cultures. The companies’ focus on the integration of process, technology and people but not the culture. Some companies will attempt this in the form of change management but either that is cut or skimped on in the budget, or it is addressed at the tail end of the initiative. It takes seven times to hear a message for it to sink in. It takes 30 days of constant focus to change a habit. People don’t change easily and they resist it where they can (directly or indirectly). Adoption is about communication. Frequent, transparent and early. Keeping information quiet or sharing on a “need to know basis” never works out well. Even if you don’t have all of the answers, give your users an opportunity to hear about something from the beginning. They will feel like they had a part in their destiny. Getting people to adopt a new process or technology is not as hard as you might believe. Even if they don’t buy-in, understanding who might stand in your way is better to know early than it is after they’ve dropped a piano on your head.
  4. Last of all are the Metrics and Measurements. At the beginning of every effort, reengage your strategic goals. Ask two key questions. What does success look like? And, when is done done? From those questions, you can define the proper metrics to track from project initiation through implementation and into operational mode.   Measurements should start at the beginning of the initiative.   Think about your financial portfolio. Your financial consultant would be reviewing your investments and course correcting all along.  Many organizations don’t want to measure due to a fear of being held accountable. If they are found to be wrong, it brings eyes on what might be viewed as failure. But if you are focusing on all of this from an outcome perspective, this information will give you two opportunities. First, it will allow you to course correct earlier. If you aren’t going to meet your objectives, you will find out sooner (easier to course correct at the beginning than towards the end of an initiative). Second, if you fail and you’ve been measuring your progress to your strategic goal, chances are that the strategy might have some false assumptions. These metrics allow your company to integrate this knowledge to create a revised strategy for the future. How can that be possibly be a bad thing?

make the change concept with related word cloud hand drawing on blackboard

I’m guessing that at no point did corporate America decide that “Our key strategic goal is to get all of our projects completed on time, on budget and within scope.  If that goal is accomplished, we will reach our desired business outcomes”

Managing to desired outcomes brings companies back full circle to their overall strategy.  Outcome management is changing up the way things are done.  It creates accountability (a whole different blog), and a focus on adoption for which the benefits are huge! Better returns, better information yadda yadda.

I bet my Microsoft earnings (if you can find them).

Laura

Project Management is “Broke”

Posted on by
Reply

You might know the old adage: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Well, it’s definitely broke, but no one is fixing it. Just look around. Overall, most organizations have a terrible track record of delivering their strategic initiatives successfully (on time, on budget and within scope). But even when it is delivered successfully, that doesn’t guarantee success. Success includes getting the organization to adapt and adopt the new results. How can you legitimately deem a completed project a success without those two things? The fact of the matter is that the practice of project management as it currently stands fails to meet the objectives of an organization. SO … what are we going to do to fix it? Executives should be clamoring for a change.

05fc122

When I first started in this field, project management was not a common title in the business world (other than engineering and construction) so we made it up as we went along. We had a broader role. The role of delivery focused on the big picture. We asked questions to figure out objectives, map out a roadmap and execute it. But we didn’t stop there. We built the training, communication and change management right into the plan. It was not treated as separate entities but as part of the outcome. We broke down the strategy and saw it through.

Fast forward 25 years … project management has been commoditized. Project manager titles are everywhere and are in big demand. A career path has become “project management for a job well done.” Even when the job “well done” didn’t require any project management skills.

And even though there is a proliferation of discussion around project management, there is still a lousy track record of successful project conclusions. The Standish Group has been reporting on project management since 1992 in its Chaos report. Back then, project management only succeeded 28% of the time. We are now up to a measly 36%. Long timeframe … poor progress.

There is plenty of need for good project managers but the process of using this title as a catch-all has diminished the perceived value and commoditized the discipline. Project management is now perceived as procuring someone to check off boxes on a plan, create issue logs and take meeting minutes. Following direction has become the key focus of this title.

I don’t know … maybe too many people diluted the role by using it as a certification vehicle. But honestly certification does not let me know that a project manager knows how to deal with people, manage stakeholders with their own agendas, “herd cats.” We seem to have lost the purpose of project management … the reason we are managing something in the first place.

All this leads to the fact that project management (in its commonly held understanding) fails more often than it succeeds. So, until corporations pay attention and set higher expectations, nothing will change. Here are the biggest myths to overcome:

  • The correct gauge for Project Management success is delivering on time and on budget. Do you consider yourself successful when you finish the project or when you reach your objectives? When the only focus is finishing the plan without focusing on where you want to be, there is a problem. The medical field understands this well. For example, curing cancer doesn’t stop at surgery. You may need radiation or chemotherapy. Following all of that, you may need physical therapy or additional medication. Getting to a desired outcome in project management should include a similar thought process. Completing a project (meeting timeline, budget, scope) does not mean that everyone has adopted the new process or system or even that they understand what’s expected. We have not completed the project until we have gauged our effect on the organization impacted. The more meaningful measure considers the achievement of the desired outcome.
  • Quarterly results will drive the project budget. At Peritius we are expanding into the public sector. A vendor asked me why I would want to get into government work. He said that government agencies are not held to following a specific strategy as they are in corporate America. He pointed out that priorities change frequently and going over budget is not an issue. I told him that, unfortunately, the private sector acts in a similar fashion. Companies often make their decisions based on quarterly results. Often resource decisions are based on price alone. Procurement departments are measured on procuring the lowest priced resources. As a result, staff augmentation firms have been able to drive resource price down in the market to secure the business, often with less qualified contractors. Shouldn’t company procurement departments be reviewed for the overall success of an effort? If a more senior level resource costs more but delivers the effort in less time than a junior level resource, is anyone evaluating that dynamic? The more expensive senior resource may in fact cost less over the life of the effort, yet by focusing on short term quarterly results, organizations are leaving long term savings on the table.
  • Project Management is a commodity skill. If it were a commodity, two-thirds of projects wouldn’t fail. The difference between the project managers delivering the two-thirds of failing projects and the one-third successful is soft skills. Average to poor project managers manage plans. Good project managers and program managers manage teams to a plan. Strong project managers are leaders. They know how to interact with people … people with all different styles, culture and personalities. In my experience, projects rarely fail due to the tactics required in creating a plan. They fail because of people related issues.
  • The right project management methodology can resolve our corporate issues around delivery. Most PMOs in different organizations are designed around process and reporting. In the 25-plus years that I’ve been in this field, I’ve seen more versions of methodology than I can count. Yet, projects still fail. It’s not the methodology that makes a difference. It’s the discipline around it. Half of it is the squishy, soft skills that people feel funny talking about. PMOs need to stop making their mission to report on the projects in a tactical manner but proactively work with the project managers to help programs go from “red” to “green.”
  • It’s normal for projects to get delayed or go over budget. This one confuses me. I find that when I’m talking to executive management, many build into their thought process that things will go poorly the first time around. Why should that be acceptable? Executive management has become so accustomed to failures that they view it as part of the norm. It is amazing that executive management isn’t in an uproar about two-thirds of their initiatives failing of which most can be prevented. Would you get in an airplane that has two-thirds of a chance of failing?
  • Failure of delivery can often be a self-contained problem. Failure begets failure. If something is delayed, is anyone tracking the lost opportunities that can no longer be funded because the other project ran over budget or the project timeline ran over? Or is the project delayed long enough that the ROI of the project itself is in question? Companies continue to put good money after bad by adding additional budget or time to “fix” a troubled project. The hardest thing for most organizations to do is to stop a project. It can be a career-limiting move in some organizations. Yet it is a practice that should be used as needed. When you get past the issue of dealing with failure, you will often see that it frees up the organization to do what’s right and end the continued cycle of poor project spend.

My biggest angst with this topic is that even with all of the discussion around improving project management practices over the last 20-plus years, there have not been enough consistent improvements. In fact, I think that with the “commoditizing” of project management, it’s actually gotten worse. If you’ve read this far and have been able to get past the poor grammar in my title, I want to leave this final thought: Organizations must start thinking of project and program managers as subject matter experts in knowing how to manage teams toward a plan. There are specific skills in knowing how to successfully manage people towards a specific goal. Until we change expectations and perceptions, we will continue to throw good money after bad.

Laura