Reforming Project Management |
||
|
Wednesday, July 02, 2003
10th Project e-Tip of the Week
I wondered if I'd be able to keep up the tip writing. Thanks to three readers they made writing these first ten Project e-Tips easy for me. My plan is in place for the next ten. I just need three more submissions from readers!
I hope these e-tips are useful for you. Don't hesitate to pass them around, post them in your project workspace, or make them a discussion topic at project team meeting. Please let me know how you are using them. Monday, June 30, 2003
Credible Leaders Take The Time To Listen And Learn
I'm sharing this morning's The Listening Leader newsletter with you to go along with my recent postings on (5R) Protocol for a Listening Workplace and Reflections on 5S and 5R. The two paragraphs come from the book Credibility by Kouzes and Posner. While the lesson is geared at leaders, the project situation demands listening from all performers. There is good advice here for project managers/leaders and those coordinating the work of others. Credible Leaders Listen And LearnImpressive listening skills have been identified as one common characteristic of credible leaders. A willingness to listen carefully to constituents and, if necessary, to hear the bad news keeps leaders from being isolated from critical feedback. When they can get information from a variety of sources, across functions and levels, they are able to know what is going on. To serve others well, leaders must be in touch with them, listen to them, and respect them. Ever try getting good service at a restaurant when your waiter or waitress is never around, is too busy, or seems to think something you have asked for was too much bother? Being able to listen to the news, good and bad, is a basic ingredient for staying in touch. When things are going well, it's not all that difficult to hear the good news. It's how we react to news about mistakes and difficulties that may be the better indicator of whether or not constituents feel like keeping us in touch. From the constituent's perspective, the question is always, "Did they still shoot the messenger with bad news?" How do you react to mistakes and difficulties? Are you inviting those conversations? Are you thanking people for those conversations? Are you clear you appreciate the opportunity to learn from these conversations? If you answered "No" to any of these questions, then you're not likely to be hearing all of what you need to hear for a successful project. If you like what you read here, then subscribe to Dr. Rick Bommelje's Listening Leader newsletter. Sunday, June 29, 2003
Preview of Linguistic Action Foundations of Lean Construction
I've written about linguistic action as a theory that does a better job at explaining why projects succeed and why they don't succeed. In three weeks I get to present my case at the International Group for Lean Construction 11th Annual Conference at Virginia Tech. You can still register for the event. Visit: http://strobos.cee.vt.edu/IGLC11/. I'll offer up the paper in this forum as soon as IGLC publishes it, most likely in the next few days. In the meantime, I want to call attention to an aspect of project management that gets far too little attention and is often not performing for us. You guessed it, project controls. I've never quite understood project controls. Project managers set up a structure for tracking and reporting cost and schedule variances often weeks after the incident and we refer to this as 'control'. I've always thought of control as a mechanism for staying on track. There's no way to stay on track when third parties are accumulating data and reporting on it. The only possibility for control is to have the performers take responsibility for making adjustments in the midst of their action. Some would call that being out of control. Performers are supposed to execute the plan as it is given to them. Doing otherwise would put the project at risk, or so goes the argument. Our common sense is betraying us. The greatest untapped opportunity for staying in control is the distributed capacity for observing and making assessments. Performers are scattered all about the project setting, whether physical or not. By simply engaging performers in the planning conversations they will be prepared for for noticing, assessing, and taking actions that will keep them on plan. Without including them in the planning conversation they don't know what to look for, let alone what assessments to make. So there you have it. The most profound thing Greg and I say in our IGLC paper is to stay in control you have to share it with the performers on the team. You do that first by including them in the planning. Then you hold them accountable for offering up observations and assessments that only they can make. How's that? Only they can make those assessments because they were the only ones present to the events as they work wherever they happen to be and the project management team is not. We stay in control on projects by sharing the responsibility for control. There's more coming! Hope to see some of you in Virginia. Visit the Archives for more postings |
Reference Papers
|
|||||
|
| ||||||