Your IT Has No Customers

Have you ever heard the head of sales, marketing, or manufacturing describe any other part of the business as his or her customers?

Have you ever heard the head of sales, marketing, or manufacturing talk about “aligning” those functions with the business?

The only people in any organisation who ever describe anyone except the people who buy the organisation’s products and services as “customers” are IT people.

The only people in the organisation who ever talk about “aligning with the business” are IT people.

Maybe the head of sales has talked about aligning her function with a new strategy or a new value proposition, or the head of manufacturing has talked about aligning with new key performance indicators—but aligning with the business?

That view can’t be good for IT.

It is a legacy of the era in which the “data processing” organization was almost entirely populated with people who had very little day-to-day connection with the rest of the business.

Those days are gone, but the mind-set subtly persists, and it separates IT from the rest of the business in an unhealthy way.

What executives ultimately want from IT is not alignment, nor being treated like a customer.

Executives want business outcomes. 

Increased sales, increased margins, and increased market share are examples of the outcomes that executives want.

If the IT team is talking about and helping to deliver those outcomes, then “alignment with the business” is a nonissue.

But if alignment is the goal and the topic under discussion, then the IT team is in effect showing that it is not focused on the outcomes that matter.

In a nutshell: IT is an important part of the business and must focus on business outcomes.

Read more…

Change Management and Your CAST of Characters

There is a simple truth about projects. All projects result in change.

Some projects bring about small modifications to the status quo, and others introduce a large-scale transformation.

Many people in many roles will be affected by and instrumental in the change you’re promoting.

It’s important to tend to their needs throughout the change journey.

Here’s the CAST of characters you will meet:

Champions: These are people who want the change and work to gain commitment and resources for it.

Agents: They implement the change. Agents have implementation responsibility through planning and executing. At least part, if not all of change agent performance is evaluated and reinforced on the success of implementing the change.

Sponsors: They authorize, legitimize and demonstrate ownership for the change. Sponsors come in at least two varieties. They possess sufficient organizational power and/or influence to either initiate commitment of resources (Authorizing Sponsor) or they promote the change at the “local” level (Reinforcing Sponsor).

Targets: They are called on to alter their behavior, emotions, and practices. (During the change process, everyone is a Target at one time or another.)

People in different roles have different needs. Staying aware of those roles will help you with your messaging, coalition building, and every other aspect of your change work.

Here are some character rules to help your change to be effective and fast.

> Agents must have trust and credibility with the Sponsors and trust and credibility with the Targets

> In major change, there will always be overlap in the roles. When roles overlap, treat the individual as a Target first. This includes Sponsors.

> Building a cascade of Sponsors at each level of the organisation who each demonstrate commitment by what they Express, Model, and Reinforce is the single most important factor in getting swift implementation and value realization for your change.

> Your change is accelerated when the other three roles (Agents, Sponsors, and Targets) are also Champions.

> Project teams should recognize early on the importance of building the network of Agents and ensure these individuals have the skills and knowledge to be successful in this important role. After all, it's not the Champions that will have implementation responsibilities-- it's the Agents.

In a nutshell: Many people in many roles will be affected by and instrumental in the change you’re promoting. It’s important to tend to their needs throughout the change journey.

Read more…

How to Talk About Technology With Senior Executives

One of the biggest hurdles that keeps senior executives from getting closer to technology is the complexity of today’s IT environments, further obscured by the endless stream of buzzwords, jargon, and product names.

Working with executives over the last 15 years I realized that we can make it much easier for executives to “speak technology” if we split it’s “language” into two parts: grammar and vocabulary.

Grammar: A language’s grammar defines the structure and rules for composition of words into meaningful sentences. Similarly, the grammar of technology is the set of architecture rules and constraints that define how systems and components can be combined.

Vocabulary: This is the long list of (buzz)words and technologies that we use, often wrapped in jargon and fuzzy marketing terms.

Executives are largely put off by technology’s seemingly endless, unnecessarily cryptic, and ever changing vocabulary.

In contrast, it’s grammar, the rules that define how technology operates and makes decisions, is relatively static, and much more approachable to executives.

So to establish decision transparency you should leave buzzwords and products aside and instead focus on the available option space, the inherent trade-offs between the available choices, and the principles that guide these decisions.

Senior executives can much more easily grasp technology concepts and be involved in decision making once you remove the fog of jargon.

They are used to making decisions affecting their organizations, so the “grammar” of our world is actually quite familiar to them. This often comes as a surprise to both sides that always assumed that executives “aren’t technical”.

Presenting technology decisions in a way that emphasizes constraints and trade-offs without falling into buzzwords and jargon is incredibly difficult, but actually very helpful for IT teams and CIOs.

Things may be complex, but nothing is ever confusing in and of itself.

If something is confusing, that’s because you made it so.

In a nutshell: To established decision transparency you should leave buzzwords and products aside and instead focus on the available option space.

Read more…

If You Want to Bring Change in Your Organization …

People don’t change. Unless they want to.

Humans are unique in their ability to willingly change. We can change our attitude, our appearance, and our skillset.

But only when we want to.

The hard part, then, isn't the changing.

It’s the wanting.

So if you want to bring change in your organization you should make your people want it as well.

It's tempting to try to do this just one person at a time. After all, if you fail, no one will notice.

It's also tempting to try to change everyone at once. But of course, there really is no everyone. Too many different situations and narratives. When you try to change everyone, you're mostly giving up.

The third alternative is where real impact happens: Finding groups of people who want to change together.

Organizing them, and then teaching and leading them.

It's not only peer pressure. But that helps.

When a group is in sync, the change is reinforcing. When people can see how parts of your message resonate with their peers, they're more likely to reconsider them in a positive light. And mostly, as in all groups, "people like us do things like this" is the primary driver.

And some people just hate change.

They don't hate you.

If you get confused about that, it's going to be difficult to make (needed, positive, important) change.

In a nutshell: To bring change in your organization find groups of people that want to change together. 

Read more…

Designed by Clowns, Supervised by Monkeys (Or How to Work With Your Regulators)

Boeing expressed regret at the embarrassing communications it sent to investigators early January, which included a comment that “this airplane is designed by clowns, who are in turn supervised by monkeys.”

Employees of Boeing mocked federal rules, talked about deceiving regulators and joked about potential flaws in the 737 Max as it was being developed, according to over a hundred pages of internal messages delivered to congressional investigators.

“I still haven’t been forgiven by God for the covering up I did last year,” one of the employees said in messages from 2018, apparently in reference to interactions with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

The most damaging messages included conversations among Boeing pilots and other employees about software issues and other problems with flight simulators for the 737 Max, a plane later involved in two accidents, in late 2018 and early 2019, that killed 346 people and threw the company into chaos.

The employees appear to discuss instances in which the company concealed such problems from the FAA. during the regulator’s certification of the simulators, which were used in the development of the Max, as well as in training for pilots who had not previously flown a 737.

“I just Jedi mind tricked this fools. I should be given $1,000 every time I take one of these calls. I save this company a sick amount of $$$$.”

“Would you put your family on a MAX simulator trained aircraft? I wouldn’t.”

“I’ll be shocked if the FAA passes this turd.”

“This is a joke. This airplane is ridiculous.”

“Best part is we are re-starting this whole thing with the 777X with the same supplier and have signed up to an even more aggressive schedule!”

“Jesus, it’s doomed.”

In an exchange from 2015, a Boeing employee said that a presentation the company gave to the FAA. was so complicated that, for the agency officials and even himself, “it was like dogs watching TV.”

Several employees seemed consumed with limiting training for airline crews to fly the plane, a significant victory for Boeing that would benefit the company financially. In the development of the Max, Boeing had promised to offer Southwest a discount of $1 million per plane if regulators required simulator training.

In an email from August 2016, a marketing employee at the company cheered the news that regulators had approved a short computer-based training for pilots who have flown the 737 NG, the predecessor to the Max, instead of requiring simulator training.

“You can be away from an NG for 30 years and still be able to jump into a MAX? LOVE IT!!” the employee says, following up later with an email noting: “This is a big part of the operating cost structure in our marketing decks.”

Last year, Boeing disclosed internal messages from 2016, in which a top pilot working on the plane told a colleague that he was experiencing trouble controlling the Max in a flight simulator and believed that he had misled the FAA.

“I basically lied to the regulators (unknowingly),” the pilot, Mark Forkner, said to his colleague, Patrik Gustavsson.

Boeing did not inform the FAA about the messages when the company first discovered them, waiting until about two weeks before Mr. Muilenburg was set to testify in front of Congress to send them to lawmakers. The conversation, which took place before the Max was approved to fly, angered key FAA officials, who felt misled by the company, according to three people familiar with the matter.

Representative Peter DeFazio, a Democrat from Oregon who is leading the House investigation into the development of the 737 Max, called the newly released messages “incredibly damning.”

“They paint a deeply disturbing picture of the lengths Boeing was apparently willing to go to in order to evade scrutiny from regulators, flight crews and the flying public,” he added, “even as its own employees were sounding alarms internally.”

Besides an appalling disrespect for human lives, Boeing shoes how not to build relationships with regulators.

Depending on how regulated your industry is, your company will have more or less contact with its regulators. You should think about your relationships with regulators in four categories:

1) Relationships in ordinary periods where no proposed regulation is being considered and no examination is underway,

2) Relationships when a rule is proposed or likely to be proposed by your regulator;

3) Relationships when you are being examined by your regulator, and

4) Relationships when your regulator is investigating your company or individuals associated with your company.

It is critical for the long term success of your company and the success of your regulator that you interact with your regulator in a constructive way in each of these circumstances.

During Ordinary Periods

The most important time to build a relationship with your regulator is when you have no current matters with your regulator.

For everyone in this technology-fueled age, we all feel like they are in fact no quiet times because it feels like there’s always too much work to do and not enough people to do it. But during the times when you are not engaged with the regulator about a rulemaking, examination or an investigation is the best time to develop your relationship with your regulator.

Your regulator may have access to a tremendous amount of data about your industry and that may lead you to think that your regulator is on top of developments in your industry and even with your company. The reality is that your regulator is a branch of the government. As such, your regulator is almost undoubtedly dealing with technology that is way behind the technology that you take for granted every day.

So when things are quiet I urge you to approach your regulator and offer your assistance. One very simple way to provide that assistance is to meet with the regulator and let them know what you are seeing in your industry. What business developments are driving innovation and change in your industry? What holdover practices from earlier times do you feel have not caught up with current operations? What risks do you see in your industry in the future?

These are topics that you are thinking about anyway in the course of managing your business and implementing sufficient compliance efforts for your business to comply with applicable rules and regulations. If you can convey your knowledge of these issues to your regulator, you’ll make your regulator better informed and better able to craft policies to address issues in your industry.

During a Rulemaking

When your regulator turns to action, like a proposed rulemaking that will impact your industry, you have another opportunity to build an effective relationship with your regulator. If you are already engaged with your regulator and communicating regularly you will have a distinct advantage in engaging on a rulemaking. If you are not already engaged with your regulator at that point, you should get engaged.

Rule proposals from the SEC for example often asked for data about particular issues and they often would not get any data from the industry. I know that there is an argument that says that industry is better off not sharing information with an SEC or another regulator. The idea behind this argument is that sharing information and data may lead the regulator to do something it wasn’t otherwise considering.

Just like in industry, the vast majority of regulators are trying to do the right thing with the information they have. If you give them more information, you have a better chance of them coming out with a rule that will be well thought out and supported by the data.

During an Examination

If your company is subject to an examination by the FINMA, SEC, RAB, BaFin or another regulator, you have another opportunity to build your relationship with your regulator.

I realize there are a number of my readers who might not have quite that reaction to an exam! I understand that an exam can be a tremendous expenditure of resources by your company and can be a source of concern that examiners may find something that you may have overlooked. Nonetheless, an examination involves a sustained interaction with your regulator.

It gives you an opportunity for the regulator to understand who you are and what your company is trying to do. Don’t waste this chance. If the examination does show an issue or a problem, you are far better off if you have been cooperative during the examination and explained your compliance efforts. If you have been uncooperative and hostile and the examiners find something, I promise you they will take a less charitable view of any explanation that you give.

During an Investigation

If all of your best efforts do not work out and you come under investigation from a regulator, are you past the point of maintaining a relationship with your regulator? While I hope that you don’t end up under investigation, I also would argue that all is not lost.

If you find yourself under investigation, I recommend that you maintain a spirit of cooperation and continue to explain the facts that landed you in the investigation. I have seen investigations being dropped because the company involved was able to adequately explain its conduct.

Enforcement departments of regulators like to win their cases as well. If you have an explanation for facts that may seem to be a problem, enforcement teams will listen. They would rather find out sooner rather than later. Don’t let your relationship with the regulator lapse just because you are under investigation. Keep up your effort to engage and to provide information that your regulator needs. You will have a better chance of the investigation being closed out without being charged.

In a nutshell: Develop and maintain relationships with your regulators for the long term success of your company.

Read more…

Tell the Story of Your Project

Persuasion is essential for a business and the projects that originate from this business.

Customers must be convinced to buy your company’s products or services, employees and colleagues to go along with a new strategic plan or reorganization, investors to buy (or not to sell) your stock, and partners to sign the next deal.

But despite the critical importance of persuasion, most executives struggle to communicate, let alone inspire. Too often, they get lost in the cesspool of company speak: PowerPoint slides, dry memos, and hyperbolic messages from the corporate communications department.

Even the most carefully researched and considered efforts are routinely greeted with cynicism, lassitude, or outright dismissal.

I firmly believe that you can engage listeners on a whole new level if you toss your PowerPoint slides and learn to tell good stories instead.

Stories have been implanted in you thousands of times since your mother took you on her knee. You’ve read good books, seen movies, attended plays. What’s more, human beings naturally want to work through stories. Cognitive psychologists describe how the human mind, in its attempt to understand and remember, assembles the bits and pieces of experience into a story, beginning with a personal desire, a life objective, and then portraying the struggle against the forces that block that desire.

Stories are how we remember; we tend to forget lists and bullet points.

If a story is “good” or “bad” is relative to the opinion of the listener. But there are a few non-negotiable components that make for a great story, for both the listener and teller.

Good stories are …

… entertaining. Good stories keep the listener engaged and interested in what’s coming next.

… educational. Good stories spark curiosity and add to the listener’s knowledge bank.

… universal. Good stories are relatable to all listeners and tap into emotions and
experiences that most people undergo.

… organized. Good stories follow a succinct organization that helps convey the core message and helps listeners absorb it.

… memorable. Whether through inspiration, scandal, or humor, good stories stick in the listener’s mind.

There's no such thing as a true story. As soon as you start telling a story, making it relevant and interesting to me, hooking it into my worldviews and generating emotions and memories, it ceases to be true, at least if we define true as the whole truth, every possible fact, non-localized and regardless of culture.

Since you're going to tell a story, you might as well get good at it, focus on it and tell it in a way that you're proud of.

Storytelling is a skill. It’s not something you’re born with, it’s not based on charisma or authority. It’s more simple than you think, but it takes practice.

So tell the story of your project.

If you aren’t then someone else will be. And their version is likely to be worse than yours.

In a nutshell: You can engage listeners on a whole new level if you toss your PowerPoint slides and learn to tell good stories instead.

Read more…

How to Deal With Stakeholders Resistance to Change

There is a simple truth about projects.

All projects result in change.

Some projects bring about small modifications to the status quo, and others introduce a large-scale transformation.

No matter the size or scale of the project, people resist change. Overcoming this resistance to change is a top challenge faced by organizations and project sponsors today.

The better we are at seeing what causes resistance, the easier it will be to build support for our ideas. In other words, if we understand resistance, we also understand the other side of that coin – support for change.

Rick Maurer identified in his book “Beyond The Wall Of Resistance” the three reasons for resistance.

1) I Don’t Get It
2) I Don’t Like It
3) I Don’t Like You

I Don’t Get It

This is about information: facts, figures, ideas. It is the world of thinking and rational action. It is the world of presentations, diagrams, and logical arguments.

Resistance may come from ...

> Lack of information
> Disagreement with data
> Lack of exposure to critical information
> Confusion over what it means

Many make the mistake of treating all resistance as if it is because of not understanding the change. Well-meaning leaders give people more information – hold more meetings, and make more PowerPoint presentations – when, in fact, something completely different is called for. For example...

I Don’t Like It

This is an emotional reaction to the change. Blood pressure rises, adrenaline flows, pulse increases. It is based on fear: People are afraid that this change will cause them to lose face, status, control – maybe even their jobs.

It is not soft stuff. You can’t say, “Just get over it,” and expect people to say, “Wow, thanks, I needed that.” It runs deep. When it kicks in, we can feel like our very survival is at stake.

When this kind of resistance is active, it makes communicating change very difficult. When adrenaline shoots through our system, we move into fight-or-flight mode (or we freeze like a deer in the headlights). And we stop listening. So no matter how terrific your presentation is, once people hear “downsizing” their minds (and bodies) go elsewhere. And this is uncontrollable. They are not choosing to ignore you, it’s just that they’ve got more important things on their minds – like their own survival.

Organizations usually don’t encourage people to respond emotionally, so employees limit their questions and comments to “I Don’t Get It” issues. They ask polite questions about budgets and timelines. So it may appear that they are with you, but they’re not. They are asking for more information while hoping that you’ll read between the lines and speak to their fears. And here is a really tricky part – they may not even be aware that they are operating on such a basic emotional level.

I Don’t Like You

So maybe they like you, but they don’t trust you – or don’t have confidence in your leadership. That’s a hard pill to swallow, I know. But lack of attention to this is a major reason why resistance flourishes and changes fail. And it is seldom talked about. Books on change talk about strategies and plans (all good stuff, to be sure) but most of this advice fail to recognize a major reason why change fails.

In this case, people are not resisting the idea – in fact, they may love the change you are presenting – they are resisting you. Maybe their history with you makes them wary. Perhaps they are afraid that this will be “a flavor of the month” like so many other changes, or that you won’t have the courage to make the hard decisions to see this through.

But maybe it's not you. People may resist those you represent. The statement, “Hi, I’m from headquarters, I’m here to help,” often leaves people skeptical. If you happen to be that person from headquarters, you’re going to have a hard time getting people to listen to you.

Whatever the reasons for this deeply entrenched resistance, you can’t afford to ignore it.

People may understand the idea you are suggesting (Reason 1), and they may even have a good feeling about the possibilities of this change (Reason 2) – but they won’t go along if they don’t trust you.

So How You Can Turn Resistance Into Support?

Here are a few ideas to get you started addressing the various levels of resistance. And remember, all three reasons could be in play simultaneously.

Make your case

> Make sure people know why a change is needed. Before you talk about how you want to do things, explain why something must be done.

> Present the change using language they understand. If your audience isn’t made up of financial specialists, then detailed charts showing a lot of sophistical analysis of the numbers will be lost on them.

> Find multiple ways to make your case. People take in information in different ways. Some like to hear things. Others like to see things. Some like pictures. Others text. Some learn best in conversation. The more variety in the communication channels, the greater the chance that people will get what you have to say.

Remove as much of the fear as you can – and increase the excitement about what’s positive about the change.

> Emphasize what’s in it for them. People need to believe that the change will serve them in some way. For example, work will be easier, relationships will improve, career opportunities will open up, or job security will increase.

> Get them engaged in the process. People tend to support things they have a hand in building.

> Be honest. If a change will hurt them – downsizing, for instance – then tell the truth. It’s the right thing to do, and it stops the rumor mill from inventing stories about what might happen. Also, honesty bolsters their trust in you.

Rebuild damaged relationships – and tend to neglected relationships

> Mea Culpa. Take responsibility for things that may have led to the current tense relations.

> Keep commitments. Demonstrate that you are trustworthy.

> Find ways to spend time together so they get to know you (and your team). This is especially helpful if the resistance comes from “who you represent” and not just from your personal history together.

> Allow yourself to be influenced by the people who resist you. This doesn’t mean that you give in to every demand, but that you can admit that you may have been wrong and that they have ideas worth considering.

In a nutshell: There are three reasons for resistance to change. I Don’t Get It, I Don’t Like It, and I Don’t Like You. Understand them and you can change resistance into support.

Read more…

Successful Projects Need Executive Champions

Here is a simple truth about projects: All projects result in change. Some projects bring about small modifications to the status quo, and others introduce a large-scale transformation.

No matter the size or scale of the project, people resist change. Overcoming this resistance to change is a top challenge faced by project sponsors today.

Good news: You have what it takes to overcome this obstacle. Engage yourself!

Hiatt & Creasey researched over 300 companies when they wrote the book "Change Management: The People Side of Change." They found the number-one success factor cited for implementing change is visible and active executive sponsorship. When the project team sees that an executive is excited about this project, the team buys in, too.

“Employee resistance increases as authority and sponsorship decreases.” — Hiatt & Creasey

Speak at the kickoff and at periodic meetings over the life of the project. Your team and other stakeholders will embrace the change knowing that it comes from the top.

At first glance people tend to see:

> All of the problems associated with a project/idea.

> All of the other demands on their time.

> All of the other things they’d rather give priority to.

As the project’s champion you need to see that the internal sales process is as important as the project goal/idea itself. The status quo does not need to be defended; rather, the project does.

As a champion, to minimize resistance to change you need to convince stakeholders on an ongoing basis that your project is:

> Worth doing – this can be achieved through the defined desired business outcomes and benefits.

> Doable and will deliver the promised outcomes and benefits.

> And doable by you, your governance and project teams (team credibility).

Some recommended tactics for convincing stakeholders to get behind your project:

> Scale the project to what is worthwhile and can be delivered successfully (i.e., is within your and the organization’s ability to deliver).

> Paint a common picture of the future (through the vision and desired business outcomes) that people at all layers of the organization can relate to and sign on to.

> Encourage key stakeholders to critique the desired outcome statements and review the implementation/change delivery plans.

> Sell to individuals, not the organization (i.e., make the benefits personal to stakeholders).

> Ensure they understand both the problems with the status quo and the ramifications of these problems on the business and their future success.

> As early as possible show the new state working or how the end states will be achieved.

> Enroll them and make them part of the business outcomes and benefits realization process,

> Use a new vocabulary to describe what you are trying to achieve – start creating the new world from the outset.

> Visibly take responsibility for making it happen – make the difficult decisions, chair the difficult meetings, get the difficult commitments up-front and personally manage the difficult stakeholders.

In a nutshell: Engage yourself! Fight for what the project needs. It is relying on you for its success.

Read more…

A Powerful Story to Help You With Stakeholder Management

When dealing with one or multiple project stakeholders I often use the story below as the start of a planning workshop. Sometimes it’s at the initiation phase of a project, but more often during re-scoping of projects because of time and/or budget reasons.

A philosophy professor stood before his class and had some items in front of him. When the class began, wordlessly he picked up a large empty jar and proceeded to fill it with rocks about two inches in diameter. He then asked the students if the jar was full. They agreed that it was.

So the professor then picked up a box of pebbles and poured them into the jar. He shook the jar lightly. The pebbles, of course, rolled into the open areas between the rocks. He then asked the students again if the jar was full. They agreed it was.

The students laughed. The professor picked up a box of sand and poured it into the jar. Of course, the sand filled up everything else.

The professor then produced two cans of beer from under the table and proceeded to pour the entire contents into the jar, effectively filling the empty space between the grains of sand. The students laughed again.

“Now,” said the professor, “I want you to recognize that this is your life. The rocks are the important things – your family, your partner, your health, your children – things that if everything else was lost and only they remained, your life would still be full. The pebbles are the other things that matter, like your job, your house, your car. The sand is everything else. The small stuff. 

“If you put the sand into the jar first, there is no room for the pebbles or the rocks. The same goes for your life. If you spend all your time and energy on the small stuff, you will never have room for the things that are important to you. Pay attention to the things that are critical to your happiness. Play with your children. Take time to get medical checkups. Take your partner out dancing. There will always be time to go to work, clean the house, give a dinner party and change a light bulb.  

“Take care of the rocks first – the things that really matter. Set your priorities. The rest is just sand.”

One of the students raised her hand and inquired what the beer represented. The professor smiled. "I'm glad you asked. It just goes to show you that no matter how full your life may seem, there's always room for a couple of beers."

After telling the story I draw a big jar on a white board and ask my stakeholder what the big rocks are for their project. What key elements drive the most benefits? If we could realize only ONE thing, what would this be? Why?

When you have multiple stakeholders (sometimes with conflicting interests) this exercise will help you make it clear to them that you cannot do everything for everybody. And you will have all the right people in the room to come to an agreement.

After we have defined and agreed on the big rocks, we check to see if they all fit in the jar. When they don’t, we start talking about a bigger jar (more time and/or budget), or fewer rocks (scope reduction). When selecting scope reduction, please be very aware of value creep.

Only when the big rocks are all in the jar do we start discussing the pebbles.

In a nutshell: Yes, having a beer with your stakeholders after discussing needs and priorities really helps with your stakeholder relationships.

When you need some guidance on how to define and measure project success, just download the Project Success Model by clicking on the image.

Read more…

Power, Politics, and Getting SH!T Done as a Project Manager

Leadership and management are ultimately about being able to get things done. Your skills and qualities as a project manager help you to achieve the project goals and objectives. One of the most effective ways to do this is through the use of power. Along with influence, negotiation, and autonomy, power is one of the key elements of politics.

Power and politics are probably the most important topics in project management, but at the same time, they’re one of the least discussed subjects. They are neither “good” nor “bad,” “positive” nor “negative” alone. Each organization works differently, and the better you understand how the organization works, the more likely it is that you will be successful.

Politics has a bit of a dirty name. It’s associated with false promises, backstabbing, alliances and manipulating others. But the worst weakness of politics is its failure to deliver on its promises. Time and time again we see public politicians or business leaders failing to deliver the change they promise. And we as project managers do as well.

Power, in the engineering sense, is defined as the ability to do work. In the social sense, power is the ability to get others to do the work (or actions) you want regardless of their desires.

When we think of all the project managers who have responsibility without authority, who must elicit support by influence and not by command authority, then we can see why power is one of the most important topics in project management.

Power can originate from the individual or from the organization. Power is often supported by other people’s perception of the leader. It is essential for you to be aware of your relationships with other people, as relationships enable you to get things done on the project.

There are numerous forms of power at the disposal of project managers, but using them can be complex given their nature and the various factors at play in a project. Some forms of power are:

> Positional (sometimes called formal, authoritative, legitimate; e.g., formal position granted in the organization or team);

> Informational (e.g., control of gathering or distribution);

> Referent (e.g., respect or admiration others hold for the individual, credibility gained);

> Situational (e.g., gained due to unique situation such as a specific crisis)

> Personal or charismatic (e.g., charm, attraction);

> Relational (e.g., participates in networking, connections and alliances);

> Expert (e.g., skill, information possessed, experience, training, education, certification);

> Reward-oriented (e.g., ability to give praise, money, or other desired items);

> Punitive or coercive (e.g., ability to invoke discipline or negative consequences);

> Ingratiating (e.g., application of flattery or other common ground to win favor or cooperation);

> Pressure-based (e.g., limiting freedom of choice or movement for the purpose of gaining compliance to desired action);

> Guilt-based (e.g., imposition of obligation or sense of duty);

> Persuasive (e.g., ability to provide arguments that move people to a desired course of action); and

> Avoiding (e.g., refusing to participate)

Effective project managers work to understand the politics inside their organization, and are proactive and intentional when it comes to power. These project managers will work to acquire the power and authority they need within the boundaries of the organization’s policies, protocols, and procedures rather than wait for it to be granted, or not given at all.

Read more…

A Step by Step Stakeholder Mapping Guide

Stakeholder Engagement and Stakeholder Management is essential for defining and realizing project success. One important tool to help you with this is stakeholder mapping. This article provides a step by step guide on how to do this effectively.

You will learn how to analyze stakeholders by interest and influence to identify key players, potential saboteurs, advocates and avoid time wasters. Following the steps in this article, you can develop a sound plan to engage the most important people in your project - your stakeholders.

What Are Stakeholders?

You can think of stakeholders as "Anyone who has a stake in the project" although this can be a bit broad. A more workable definition might be: "Anyone who can make, or break, your project".

This group of more specific stakeholders can be segmented into four major groups:

1) Sponsors are often those who initiate the project by mobilizing the resources needed and charging people with the responsibility for getting it done. Sponsors own the requirement for the project - and if the requirement changes they must direct the project accordingly.

2) Project Team are those charged with the responsibility for executing the project and ensuring it happens. The project team is responsible for coming up with the solution to the project requirements.

3) Reference Group include those people that project teams must refer to in order to arrive at the right solution. They ensure that the solution will work.

4) Users are a broad group of people who benefit from the project solution. 

Tip: The Reference Group and some of the Project Team may also be classed as Users. This is often a very good idea.

What Exactly is Stakeholder Mapping?

Stakeholder mapping is a collaborative process of research, debate, and discussion that draws from multiple perspectives to determine a key list of stakeholders across the entire stakeholder spectrum.

Mapping can be broken down into four steps:

1) Identifying: listing relevant groups, organizations, and people

2) Analyzing: understanding stakeholder perspectives and interests

3) Mapping: visualizing relationships to objectives and other stakeholders

4) Prioritizing: ranking stakeholder relevance and identifying issues

The process of stakeholder mapping is as important as the result, and the quality of the process depends heavily on the knowledge of the people participating.

Tip: Gather a cross-functional group of internal participants to engage in this process. Identify sources external to the company who may have important knowledge about or perspective on the issues, and reach out to these sources for input and participation. Finally, identify a resource who can facilitate your work through the following activities. Capture all your work in writing to help with future steps.

Why Should You Do This?

The Stakeholder Mapping process will help you with the identification of the following:

> Sponsor's real goals
> Stakeholder's interests
> Project success
> Effective communication plan
> Mechanisms to influence other stakeholders
> Potential risks
> Key people to be informed about the project during the execution phase
> Negative stakeholders as well as their adverse effects on the project

Step 1: Identifying

The first step in the mapping process is to understand that there is no magic list of stakeholders. The final list will depend on your business, its impacts, and your current project objectives—as a result, it should not remain static. This list will change as the environment around you evolves and as stakeholders themselves make decisions or change their opinions.

Tip: Brainstorm a list of stakeholders without screening, including everyone who has an interest in your objectives today and who may have one tomorrow. Where possible, identify individuals.

Step 2: Analyzing

Once you have identified a list of stakeholders, it is useful to do further analysis to better understand their relevance and the perspective they offer, to understand their relationship to the project and each other, and to prioritize based on their relative importance for this project. You can use the following list of criteria to help you analyze each identified stakeholder:

a) Stakeholder Type: Sponsor, Project Team, Reference Group or User.

b) Contribution (value): Does the stakeholder have information, counsel, or expertise that could be helpful to the project?

c) Legitimacy: How legitimate is the stakeholder’s claim for engagement?

d) Willingness to engage: How willing is the stakeholder to engage?

e) Influence: How much influence does the stakeholder have? (You will need to clarify “who” they influence, e.g., other stakeholders, teams, departments, investors, clients, etc.)

f) Involvement: Is this someone who could derail or delegitimize the process if they were not included in the project?

Tip: Use these six criteria to create and populate a spreadsheet table with short descriptions of how stakeholders fulfill them. Assign values (low, medium, or high) to these stakeholders. This first data set will help you decide which stakeholders to engage.

Step 3: Mapping

Mapping stakeholders is a visual exercise and analysis tool that you can use to further determine which stakeholders are most essential to engage with. Mapping allows you to see where stakeholders stand when evaluated by the same key criteria and compared to each other and help you visualize the often complex interplay of issues and relationships created in the criteria chart above.

a) Draw the stakeholder map with two axes. The x-axis represents the spectrum of dispositions toward your change project; from "Against" at one extreme - to "For" at the other. The y-axis represents the spectrum of involvement from high at the top to none at the bottom.

b) The group discusses each stakeholder, in turn, determining their location on the map by rating their relative sentiment towards your project and the degree to which they are actively involved in it (use the example sentiment slide below to help you decide where each should sit).

<click image to enlarge>

c) The example below illustrates some typical stakeholder sentiments towards a school change initiative. Ideally, you would want everyone to be at the top right-hand corner - actively involved and championing your project! But in reality that is not going to happen. This example shows a broad landscape of diverging sentiment and involvement that is more typical.

Related articles:
> How to Deal With Stakeholders Resistance to Change
> Successful Projects Need Executive Champions

<click image to enlarge>

d) The last step in the mapping exercise is to add a final dimension: this is the relationships that exist between stakeholders.

<click image to enlarge>

e) Draw lines that connect two stakeholders in your map where a relationship currently exists. The thickness of the line can indicate your rating of the relative strength of that relationship - the closer the relationship, the thicker the line. This represents another aspect of the underlying political situation and is helpful to know.

f) In the effort to shift dispositions to a more favorable situation you might want to exploit the relationship that exists, say, between a strong supporter of your project and someone else who remains skeptical or even cynical.

Tips:

> It is wise to know the sentiment of each of the broad groups of stakeholders towards your project. Are they actively supportive, or unsure, skeptical or even against the project? Stakeholder mapping illustrates these sentiments - so that you can determine what action you need to take in order to shift unfavorable sentiments more positively.

> The size of the circle is an important dimension to the success of your project. You want the most influential stakeholders on the right of your map and migrating to the top so if they're not you need to work out a way to get them there.

> Note that relationships can be negative as well as positive. The assumption can be that all relationships are positive ones. If you think it is relevant, you might want to illustrate a negative relationship with a broken line.

> Be careful, because stakeholder maps can contain the identities of individuals. Never print or leave your map lying around. The data in your stakeholder map represents your perceptions about other people - and they may not necessarily agree with you! So it is wise to keep this sensitive information very confidential.

Note: This is just an illustrative mapping example, and your approach may vary depending on your needs: You may need to use more or fewer criteria in "Analysis" depending on the mix of your stakeholder list; more ambitious objectives may require a more strategic, detailed Mapping; and your process may be influenced by outside variables such as tools and frameworks already in place at your company. Look closely at your needs and decide whether this example will work for you as is.

Step 4: Prioritizing stakeholders and identifying issues

It is not practical and usually not necessary to engage with all stakeholder groups with the same level of intensity all of the time. Being strategic and clear about whom you are engaging with and why, before jumping in, can help save both time and money.

An often used base strategy for stakeholder management based on the information you collected in the previous steps (influence and interest) is the following:

<click on image to enlarge>

Tip: Look closely at stakeholder issues and decide whether they are material to your project objectives, asking yourself the following questions:

> What financial or emotional interest do they have in the outcome of your work? Is it positive or negative?

> What motivates them most of all?

> What information do they want from you?

> How do they want to receive information from you? What is the best way of communicating your message to them?

> What is their current opinion of your work? Is it based on good information?

> Who influences their opinions generally, and who influences their opinion of you? Do some of these influencers, therefore, become important stakeholders in their own right?

> If they are not likely to be positive, what will win them around to support your project?

> If you don't think you will be able to win them around, how will you manage their opposition?

> Who else might be influenced by their opinions? Do these people become stakeholders in their own right?

A very good way of answering these questions is to talk to your stakeholders directly - people are often quite open about their views, and asking people's opinions is often the first step in building a successful relationship with them.

Combined with your criteria table and different mappings, use issue materiality to rank your stakeholders into a prioritized engagement list. You should now have captured the most relevant issues and the most relevant stakeholders.

In a nutshell: A stakeholder is anyone who can make, or break, your project. You need to identify, understand, and prioritize them.

Read more…

10 Principles of Stakeholder Engagement

Stakeholder engagement and stakeholder management are arguably the most important ingredients for successful project delivery and yet are often ignored or undervalued.

On the opposite side, I have also worked with project managers that were so busy with stakeholder management that they forgot they also have to deliver a project. Whole project teams were working for days on StC Powerpoint decks instead of the actual project!

Project managers depend on people to respond to the outputs and benefits that they deliver. People will only respond if they are engaged. The phrase “stakeholder management" implies that these people can be made to respond positively to a project, but the truth is that a project manager in most cases has no formal power of authority and therefore has to rely on engagement to achieve his/her objectives. And this is a good thing!

What Exactly is Stakeholder Engagement?

Stakeholder engagement is the practice of interacting with, and influencing project stakeholders to the overall benefit of the project and its advocates.

Stakeholder Engagement is the practice of influencing a variety of outcomes through consultation, communication, negotiation, compromise, and relationship building.

The successful completion of a project usually depends on how the stakeholders view it. Their requirements, expectations, perceptions, personal agendas and concerns will influence the project, shape what success looks like, and impact the outcomes that can be achieved. Successful stakeholder engagement is an essential part of professional project management.

Stakeholder Engagement vs. Stakeholder Management

Stakeholder Engagement differs from Stakeholder Management.

Stakeholder Management is a process that can be defined as: “the systematic identification, analysis, planning, and implementation of actions designed to engage with stakeholders”. 

By contrast, Stakeholder Engagement is the practice of influencing a variety of outcomes through consultation, communication, negotiation, compromise, and relationship building.

Key principles of stakeholder engagement

#1 Understand

Before aiming to engage and influence stakeholders, it’s crucial to seek to understand the people you will be working with and relying on throughout the phases of the project lifecycle. Sharing information with stakeholders is important, but it is equally important to first gather information about your stakeholders. One technique that can help with this is Stakeholder Mapping. See my Stakeholder Mapping Guide on how to do this.

#2 Communicate

There have been numerous studies into why projects fail, with ‘bad communication’ often pointed to as the most common reason. Across all sectors and sizes of project, ineffective or insufficient communication is at the root of project problems such as unclear objectives, misunderstanding the problem, poorly coordinated teamwork and ineffective risk management. The fundamental challenge of effective communication is based on the clear evidence that ‘what you say is not the same as what they hear’, even with people you know very well. It is therefore easy for communications to be misinterpreted. Good communication requires relentless and time-consuming effort to ensure the intended message is understood and the desired response achieved, which, especially on large projects, sometimes justifies the assistance of communication professionals.

#3 Consult, early and often

The rewards of early and efficient stakeholder consultation should be clear to anyone that has worked on a project where this has not been done well. If you have ever felt ‘I wish I’d known that at the start of the project,’ then consider that even just a few, well-timed questions can be very valuable. Questions about who the relevant stakeholders are (e.g. ‘Who else’s views should we be considering?’), and, once these have been identified, questions about the stakeholders’ objectives, success criteria, constraints, key concerns, their stakeholders (e.g. customers), etc., usually provide information that easily justifies the time spent investigating.

#4 They are human too

Accept that humans do not always behave in a rational, reasonable, consistent or predictable way and operate with an awareness of human feelings and potential personal agendas. By understanding the root cause of stakeholder behavior, you can assess if there is a better way to work together to maintain a productive relationship.

#5 Plan it!

A more conscientious and measured approach to stakeholder engagement is essential and therefore encouraged. Investment in careful planning before engaging stakeholders can bring significant benefits. What kind of regular meetings have value? How are they structured? Formal meetings with meeting minutes, or informal ones? This is what Stakeholder Management is.

#6 Relationships are key

Developing relationships result in increased trust. And where there is trust, people work together more easily and effectively. Investing effort in identifying and building stakeholder relationships can increase confidence across the project environment, minimize uncertainty, and increase the speed of problem-solving and decision-making.

#7 Just part of managing risk

Stakeholders are important influential resources and should be treated as potential sources of risk and opportunity within the project. Over and above conventional planning, using foresight to anticipate hazards, and taking simple and timely actions with stakeholders can significantly improve project delivery. See "Risk Management Is Project Management for Adults" for more insights.

#8 Compromise

The initial step is to establish the most acceptable baseline across a set of stakeholders' diverging expectations and priorities. Assess the relative importance of all stakeholders to establish a weighted hierarchy of the project requirements and outcomes. Having ranked the stakeholders in order of importance, their differing interests can then be weighed accordingly with the best compromise solution being at the ‘centre of gravity’. As the leader of the project, it is your judgment as to what this solution is with the rationale and decision being communicated to all parties where appropriate.

#9 Understand what success is

Project success means different things to different people and you need to establish what your stakeholders perceive as a success for them in the context of project delivery. See "The Project Success Model" for more insights.

#10 Take responsibility

Stakeholder engagement is not the job of one member of the project team. It’s the responsibility of everyone to understand their role and to follow the right approach to communication and engagement. Good project teams have clarity about stakeholder engagement roles and responsibilities and what is expected of people involved in the project. See "Taking and Giving Responsibility as a Project Sponsor" for more insights.

When you need some guidance on how to define and measure project success, just download the Project Success Model by clicking on the image.

Read more…