Cohesion White Paper - Navigating the Political Minefield of PM

8/9/2019 Cohesion White Paper - Navigating the Political Minefield of PM

1/14

WHITE PAPER

NAVIGATING THE POLITICAL MINEFIELD OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Author: Andrew McGregorCohesion Project Management Solutions

Tel: +27 11 888 6616

Email: [email protected]

P O Box 72443, Parkview, 2122. South Africa


2/14

ABSTRACTThis paper is intended to be provocative in that it subordinates traditional PM competencies and raises

the importance of people and organisational skills in being the true determinants of project

management capability.

Most PMs feel constrained in that their project teams are frequently staffed by people who (a) do not

report to them, and (b) have other, sometimes competing, priorities. We will also discuss the increasing

complexity of projects which result in geometrically increasing risk, potential benefit, uncertainty of

outcome, strategic dependency, and, most importantly in the context of this discussion, influence andnumber of stakeholders.

In this paper we examine ways in which projects have evolved in terms of intention,

scope, complexity, risk, potential benefits and stakeholders. We review and challenge

current definitions of project management and go on to present a new, albeit informal,

definition of project management. Two frameworks for defining and assessing the

qualities of an effective manager are used to present a number of skills not traditionally

associated explicitly with project management.

The roles of authority, influence and leadership, plus ways in which they can be

developed are discussed in detail. We look at how the PM can develop power in non-

traditional ways, build relationships using currencies that can be used to buy support

later on, the critical elements of leadership in the PM context and how to develop

them.

An iterative stakeholder management process, developed by the author, will be

presented. It covers the development of a formal stakeholder management plan,

social network mapping and stakeholder identification, a multi-faceted stakeholder

assessment framework, stakeholder management planning, execution and review. A

discussion on extending stakeholder management skills is included. While this is a

disciplined process, we stress the importance of informal tools. There is obviously a clear

link to the project communications plan, which we distinguish from the project

managers political plan. We conclude with a discussion on managing project sponsors

and other executive stakeholders.

KEY WORDS:Project management, Politics, Power, Influence, Roles, Leadership, Stakeholders,


3/14

THE RELEVANCE OF POLITICS IN PROJECT MANAGEMENTThe fundamental premise of this paper is that the project management community does not explicitly

recognise what the author believes to be the essence of project management. This is clearly illustratedby a review of the definitions articulated in the literature.

A review of definitions of project managementThe Project Management Institute (PMI), for example defines project management as follows.Project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools and techniques to a broad range of

activities in order to meet the requirements of the particular project. A project is a temporary endeavorundertaken to achieve a particular aim. Project management knowledge and practices are bestdescribed in terms of their component processes. These processes can be placed into five Process

Groups: Initiating, Planning, Executing, Controlling and Closing.

The Association for Project Management (APM) similarly proclaims planning, monitoring and control of

all aspects of a project and the motivation of all those involved in it to achieve the project objectives on

time and to the specified cost, quality and performance.

An internet search of definitions produces more in a similar vein: key words and phrases that consistentlyform the basis of definitions are

controlled process

techniques and systems scope, quality, time and cost schedules and tasks define goals, plan and monitor tasks and resources control costs and budgets manage work.

These definitions are not wrong, but do not do justice to the role, particularly when recent shifts in the

nature of projects are taken into account.

The nature of projectsIn a paper presented to the PMSA 2002 Conference, the author demonstrated that projects have,

specifically in the commercial sector, become significantly more complex. Business projects haveevolved from the automation of existing processes, through the compilation and presentation of

information to typical projects in the current environment which have a strong business transformation

element. The complexity of projects, as measured in four dimensions, has increased exponentially

through this evolution.

The four dimensions of project complexity presented in that paper are:

Dimension

of complexity

Characteristics

Linkage Alignment with business strategy

Contribution to benefitsIntegration with other initiatives

Reach Areas of organisation or value chain impacted

Extent of impact

People People affected by changeCurrent competencies

Attitudes, motivation and know-how

Readiness for change

Time Time and effort to manage all dimensions to realize benefits

Change of dimensions over time

Metabolism of the business environment


4/14

In addition to complexity, there are other pressures on projects undertaken as agents of business change.

Examples are the demand for resources, given that organisations typically take on more project workthan they have capacity for, the demands on project decision-making resulting from the recent

emphasis on corporate governance and increasing executive focus on portfolio and project

management as tools for strategy realisation.

The implications for project management

What are the consequences of the shifting nature of projects on project management? These are manyand varied and have not been exhaustively listed. A representative sample would include items such as

Higher visibility of projects More uncertainty associated with projects, resulting in higher risk More demands on, and competition for, project team members, both from within and from

outside the project

Underlying all of these is that projects and project managers have more stakeholders, representing many

more interests than ever before. The role now demands far more in the way of working with people (notmanaging them), both inside and outside the project. It is clear that the demands on the project

manager go far beyond those implied in the current definitions of project management.

Towards a new definitionThis line of thinking prompted the author to look at a definition of the project management role thatcaptures that essence: Project management is getting (important) work done through other people.

In addition to multiple stakeholders, there is another key characteristic of project management that

distinguishes it from other management disciplines. It has to do with the fact that the people who are

needed to contribute to the success of the project typically report to a line manager who is not the

project manager. This is a function of good project management practice (line managers should not

manage projects) as well as being a function of the temporary nature of the project, by definition. It isalso common for many of the project resources to be allocated on an as needed basis, implying that

they are not assigned full time to the project and will have other, possibly more pressing, demands on

their time and effort. In addition to this, it is possible that project team members, particularly those who

are not dedicated to the project team, will look beyond the project for his or her ongoing careerdevelopment.

Thus we have a good basis for adding to our new definition of project management: Project

management is getting (important) work done through other people, who (a) do not report to the project

manager, and (b) have other, possibly conflicting, personal and corporate priorities.

Thus, we have two key characteristics that characterise project management: (1) multiple and diversestakeholders, and (2) lack of (hierarchical) authority. These two characteristics are the basis on which the

role of the project manager needs to be reviewed.

SHIFTS IN THE ROLE OF PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Looking again at the traditional definitions of project management, the role of the PM seems to becharacterised by activities like

Controlling project performance and budgets Prioritising Planning Reporting Coordination Scheduling tasks and resources


5/14

While these are important, it is submitted that they are nowhere near sufficient for a project manager to

be successful in the contemporary projects environment. Far more important are activities relating to our

new definition of the project management role. Examples of these are

Balancing and mediating conflicting demands Conflict resolution Team development mediation Negotiation

Stakeholder management

Not only should these be identified as important roles of the project manager, they should be recognised

as representing the major portion of the role. The iceberg in the attached diagram represents the role, as

it should be defined, of the project manager. The ship is the project that is jeopardised far more by the

mismanagement of the socio-political elements of the project managers role, than by the technicalelements.

Figure 1 Technical and Socio-cultural components of project management

CAPABILITIES REQUIRED OF PROJECT MANAGERSWhat, then, does the project manager require to play this role effectively?

Simple answer? A PMP does not cut it!

We have seen a number of PMP-qualified project managers who were unable to build a team, manage

their sponsor or mediate a contentious issue. They simply do not have the temperament, training or

mindset.

The project managers role requires two very distinct aspects.

1. Project management, in the traditional sense, is still very much a part of the PMs arsenal. Thecompetent project manager must be able to plan and expedite tasks associated with the formal

and traditional understanding and definition of the role2. To these skills and activities must be added a new range of capabilities. These have a strong

business orientation, more informality, more general management and above all working with,

and garnering support of, people in and outside the project team and sometimes the

organisation as a whole.


6/14

These are compared and contrasted in Table 1 below

Traditional (PMBOK) capabilities New capabilities

Focus on how Focuses on why & what

Develop comprehensive, realistic and

technically correct plans

Sets vision, tone & direction

Delegate tasks Exercise influence

Exercise control Inspires innovation, passion, responsiveness

and commitmentDelegate and monitor the completion of

tasks by others

Develops enthusiasm & commitment

Administers processes (like issues registers) Mediates and resolves conflicting interests

Focus on delivering the required project

outputs

Thinks about business outcome

Does things right Does the right thing

Table 1 Comparison of traditional and emerging capabilities required of project managers

A framework for specifying and assessing project management competenceA useful framework for specifying any role has been proposed by Murray-Webster and Hillson (Murray-Webster, 2002). Competencies are classified in terms of five categories Personal characteristics,

Experience, Attitudes, Knowledge and Skill, leading to the acronym PEAKS. The PEAKS frameworkprovides a

a clear definition and distinction of terms defining the elements that comprisecompetency

a set of key attributes describing project management competence a variety of objective mechanisms for assessing individual levels of the various

elements of project management competence

A full discussion on the application of the framework is outside the scope of this paper, but it is useful to

consider that all elements must be present for true competency. These are developed in the following

different ways.

Personal characteristics - Who am I? Natural preferences and traits

Experience What have I done? Acquired

Attitudes How shall I respond? Chosen responses

Knowledge What do I know? Learned

Skill How ably do I demonstrate? Developed experientially

Table 2 The PEAKS framework

In populating this or any other structure for defining project competency, it is essential that the new

capabilities listed above are carefully considered and that competency development programmes are

designed and implemented to develop all elements.

THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT POLITICAL PLAN - A SAMPLE OF TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES

This section describes a number of tools and techniques that may assist project managers in developingmore influence, political acumen and leadership. It is not exhaustive, but rather represents an orientation

or way of thinking about the socio-cultural components of the project management role.

PlanningUltimately, it comes down to planning. A well-worn, yet nevertheless appropriate saying warns us that

by failing to plan, we plan to fail. We need to develop plans for the socio-cultural components with just

as much thought and rigour as we do the technical. While certain of the activities are informal, they are

nevertheless planned and executed with discipline. We even urge our project managers to plan to bespontaneous!


7/14

Stakeholder analysis and management planningIt is absolutely vital to adopt a formal stakeholder management approach. An example of one adapted

from the PMBOK Guide (PMI 2004) is summarised in Figure 2.

Figure 2 Stakeholder Management Process

Each of the components needs to have specific actions and review points in the project schedule as wellas specific tools to add rigour and consistency. Two examples of these follow.

The first question in the process is who are our stakeholders? Stakeholder identification starts with a

definition of a stakeholder. We define a stakeholder as Any individual, organisation or group that isdirectly or indirectly involved in the project, has a vested interest in, or has the ability to influence, the

project or its outcome. It isclear that, with a broad definition like that combined with a short, proactive

brainstorming session, most projects will ultimately have scores of stakeholders. The process could be

aided by discussing the following

Whose agreement or approval will we need? Whose opposition could keep us from achieving our objectives? Whose cooperation will we need?

We obviously cannot and would not want to devote equal amounts of time and energy to all identified

stakeholders and we need a mechanism for highlighting those who require the most focus, without

completely forgetting about the others. So another pertinent question is Where does the real influencelie?

A useful tool is adapted from the principles of the project risk management matrix and is illustrated in

Figure 3. It recognizes that the potential for a stakeholder to influence the project is not just a factor of

how close to the project that individual is or how interested, but also on the ability of the individual to

exercise influence.

Figure 3 Stakeholder

analysis matrix

Having placed each stakeholder (individual,

organisation or group) onto the matrix, it is important

to note the reasons for the position allocated. It isalso important to recognise that positions may

change over time; hence the process in Figure 2 is

iterative.


8/14

A formal stakeholder analysis will have answers to the following questions for each stakeholder:

Degree of influence Reason for degree of influence Degree of interest Reason for degree of interest What is my current relationship with this stakeholder? Do any differences exist between us? How does s/he view the project (supporters, indifferent, antagonists)?

What issues and problems do they have? What risks are associated with this stakeholder?

Having completed the stakeholder analysis, the rest of the process will be largely, but not entirely, driven

by the communications plan. The essence of stakeholder management is to be proactive. Seek out

opportunities to communicate with, manage expectations, exceed requirements and gain involvement,support and acceptance.

Communications management planningWhile communications management is one of the PMBOK knowledge areas, we believe that there is

room for enhancement in this area, specifically in the area of informal communication.

Before we get there however, the stakeholder analysis leads directly into the communications plan, withthe addition of these items to the list above:

What does the project require of this stakeholder? What sources of influence do I have relative to this stakeholder? What does this stakeholder require of the project? How often? In what forum or medium?

In addition to the traditional communications management as presented in PMBOK, we advocate a far

greater emphasis on informal communication mechanisms and employ a number of tools, including afew simple dos and donts to keep people informed and engaged.

Plan time to meet informally with as many stakeholders as possible as frequently as possible to maintain

familiarity, sustain friendships, discover opportunities to do favours and understand the needs and

motives of others. Through frequent communication, the PM is able to alleviate concerns about the

project, dispel rumours and champion the cause of the project. With solid relationships as a foundation,

PMs are far more effective when it comes to reminding people of commitments, garnering further

support and raising concerns.

The key is to build relationships before they are needed. Without prior, easy interactions around

nondecisive issues, an encounter when the stakes are high is going to be more tense, unforgiving andharder to reach a successful outcome.

Informal communication tips, tricks and trapsThese are ideas that project managers may find useful. They are intended as ideas for discussion and

prompts for further ideas. What is important is that project managers must realise that they can only get

work done by the project team by building relationships first and managing projects second. Thus, what

follows represents a mind set as much as a toolbox.

Do get personal. Many project managers are too desk bound, relying far too much on email,status reports and project risk, issues and decision registers. They may have an open door policy

and encourage people to bring them issues that need attention. To them no news is good news.

We believe that this leads to squeaky wheel syndrome and is inappropriate for savvy projectmanagement in the contemporary environment. Effective project managers are seen spending

significant amounts of time on the ground with the project team but also regularly interact with

suppliers, vendors, top management, and other stakeholders.


9/14

Obey the four rules of email

1. If it is at all possible for your email to be misconstrued, it will be. And even if it isnt possible, itprobably still will be.

2. Never send an email with clenched fists.3. If you forget rule 2, never forget this: DONT COPY ANYONE if you are making a point.4. Use email for three things:

Confirm what has been said in person or by phone To share good news (copy everyone!)

To distribute documents and notifications Develop a caffeine addiction. Resolving issues, asking for favours (or even giving them), or simply

building relationships is best done in an informal setting. Can I buy you a coffee, or something

similar, should be a standard phrase that a project manager uses several times a day to get

people into an informal, neutral setting.

Become a down-and-out PM. Good project managers have dirty shoes, typically well worn, fromall the walking around to see as many stakeholders as possible on their own turf. Management

theory once called it MBWA. One of our top project managers is homeless; he literally does not

have a desk despite having overall responsibility for a multi-year 50,000 work-day project, withover 100 project resources in different countries. Through face-to-face interactions he is able stay

in touch with what is really happening on the project and to build relationships needed for project

success.

Use SMS software. We recommend the use of SMS to keep people informed about projecthappenings. This does not replace any other medium but rather supplements it.

Think out of the box. One of our PMs was really struggling to get any response from an importantstakeholder over several weeks because she was so busy. Eventually, he sent her a hand-writtennote with an energy drink; an excellent way of diffusing a potentially tense situation with

unpredictability and humour.

Dont allow decisions to be taken in project meetings. This is counter-intuitive, but at a seniorlevel, is a very useful tool. Strategic project decisions are seldom made in steering committee

meetings. The savvy project manager will lobby with key decision-makers in advance of the

meeting, ensuring that decision-makers are fully informed about the issues, that the opportunity is

taken to facilitate the decision-making process and that a public forum such as a steering

committee is a smooth, unconfrontational event where decisions that have already been madein peoples minds can be ratified.

Develop relationships in unlikely places. An example of this is a key tool in building relationshipswith sponsors and senior stakeholders. You are not going to be building a relationship with peopleyou cannot get to see because their gatekeeper is too efficient. Secretaries and personal

assistants can be amongst your most influential stakeholders and relationships with them need to

be cultivated with utmost care.


10/14

Sources of power and influenceMany project managers have complained that they have no authority to get the job done. This point of

view is understandable because, as mentioned earlier in this paper, project staff typically do not have areporting line to the project manager. Thus it is true that project managers due not have power over staff

in the sense of a traditional reporting line. We refer to this as positional or hierarchical power.

What these project managers do not realise is that there are other forms of power that they mustdevelop to make up for the lack of hierarchical power. The table below lists the various sources of power

and influence, that a project manager may be able to use (each situation should be assessed). Someideas for use in a project setting are included.

Reward PowerHolder can give something toensure/obtain compliance.

Rewards may financial, but savvy project managers are

good at thinking up ways in which non-financial rewardscan also be employed. These can be light-hearted and

even verbal. A certificate or email expressing

appreciation for good work fits into this category

Legitimate PowerThe target responds to what is right in

terms of our social norms.

Without discrediting team members publicly, project

managers can use this to urge the team to follow-up on

their undertakings (Did you do what you said you would

do?)

Expert PowerBased on credentials, knowledge,reference groups or individuals.

Qualifications, such as PMP. Ability to demonstrate anunderstanding of stakeholder issues and industry

knowledge.

Referent PowerAssociation with other, recognized

power holders

Important reason for networking: build relationships with

key opinion leaders and influencers

Team PowerTeams (not groups) more powerful than

individuals. Team composition is crucial.

Key competency of savvy PMs: ability to develop a

cohesive, motivated team

Information/KnowledgeSingle most powerful source of power.

Can most easily influence anothers

position with facts.

Another key reason for interacting with people on a

personal level: you get to understand what is really

happening on the project

Personal PowerBased on charisma. Synthesises all other

sources of power. Training in negotiation

can augment it.

This is as much a function of confidence as anythingelse. It comes from being in control and knowing where

support will come from when needed.

Corporate PowerPosition of the project w.r.t. many issues,

such as priority, perceived and realvalue of the project and executive

support.

The result of developing the trust and support of key

stakeholders and opinion leaders, particularly at senior

levels of the organisation.


11/14

Managing upwardsIn one sense, managing relationships with senior stakeholders, such as sponsors, steering committee

members and business customers is a special case of stakeholder management, and in another sense it is

a whole topic for discussion on its own. This section will lean towards the latter view; nevertheless thereader is urged to remember that the basics still apply when managing upwards.

The context for this discussion is based on the following premises:1. Projects are agents of business change2. Business change is, in turn, driven by company strategy.

We define three broad categories of management:

Operational management, that is responsible for day-to-day operation of the business.Key drivers here are quality, efficiency, repeatability, status quo.

Strategic management, that is responsible for the future of the enterprise: not where weare but where we need to be in future. Key drivers here are change and innovation.

Project management, that is responsible for introducing change in a controlledenvironment. Key drivers here are risk management, coordination, facilitation.

Project management can therefore be seen as a key enabler of strategy realisation.

The consequence of that is that project managers, more so than operational managers, frequently

operate in the world of senior executives who are more closely involved with the future of the businessthan their operational management team. Projects tend, correctly, to get more visibility than operations:

they consume most of the capex budget, they are the ticket to future prosperity and they carry the

biggest risk (to the company and to individual careers) if they go awry.

Given that picture, it seems reasonable to expect that project managers would be trusted advisers to

top management. It could be argued that project management is a good preparation for occupants of

the executive suite.

The reality, however, is that we are failing. Project managers are not being embraced by top

management as partners in strategy realisation. Project managers are not being promoted into C-level

positions. There are very few Chief Project Officers. It seems that, just as women and minority groups

suffered glass ceiling syndrome in the 1970s and 1980s, there is a project management glass ceiling.

Why is this? We think it comes from the perspectives of both the project manager and the business

executive.

The project managers mindset

Project managers have a different mindset. Project managers focus on delivery of the project output

(the product of the project). To them, excellence is represented by the delivery of good technicalsolutions. Business executives, on the other hand, focus more on the business benefits or outcome of the

project (the promise of the project. The project organisation is, by definition, separate from the

operational world. It is, for example, a temporary organisation. This difference is illustrated in Figure 4,

below.

Figure 4 The project can only deliver a tool


12/14

Our own behaviour, as a project management community, reinforces this division. We are tactical

beings, who do not think or act strategically. We cannot repudiate this assertion in the face of:

The definitions of project management discussed at the beginning of this paper Our inward focus and bias towards tools and techniques (attendance at any industry forum will

attest to this)

Our industry accreditation, the PMP, which actively encourages by-the-(PMBOK)-book projectmanagement

The majority of our time being spent in the trenches putting out technical fires.The business executives perception

Project management has, in the opinion of many executives, failed to deliver.

Numerous studies provide evidence to suggest that there is more chance of failure than

success in large scale projects and programmes. The famous Chaos Report, forexample, published by the Standish Group found that only 26% of projects aresuccessful, with success rates of large projects and programmes as low as 19%. Another

study found that The average loss was $13million per project, with the largest singleproject failure costing $213million. Reports such as this ensure that project managers

do not command the respect that they need to operate effectively at executive level.

The perceptions of project management in the executive suite are also coloured by a

number of prejudices. These have to do with organisational structure and culture,barriers caused by simple differences and a lack of understanding.

The fact is that, with exceptions, we do not have the trust or respect of business executives. Some of thereasons are not our fault, but they are there, nonetheless.

How to break through the project management glass ceiling

The most important thing is also very difficult. We need to develop a profound shift in perspective. The

different worlds described in Figure 4 are fundamental. Making the transition is non-trivial and even with

determination will not be possible for many of us. Pellegrinelli et al (2003) showed that a persons

competence consists of, and is inseparable from, their conception - the way they conceptualise their job. The conception held by an individual governs the awareness, appreciation and actions of that

individual. Conceptions form a hierarchy in which higher-order conceptions (in our case the

strategically-orientated business executive) can recognise and appreciate lower order conceptions (the

tactically-orientated project manager) but, crucially for this discussion, lower-order conceptions do notrecognise or appreciate behaviours, attitudes and actions emanating from the higher-order conception.

Elevating conception levels will require significant effort, non-routine, experiences that provide

dramatically different realities (many different roles, in multiple organisations and/or different countries),

prompt deep reflection and questioning of ones own approach.

Deliberately setting oneself up for dramatically different experiences, in-depth business coaching,

development of global skills and strategic awareness are things that we need to do explicitly in order to

start developing insights into the perspectives of our senior managers and to be able to interact withexecutives on equal terms.

In parallel with that, we need to develop trust in the role we are expected to play. That is to deliver

results, specifically solutions that genuinely meet the needs of our business counterparts, linking our

delivery to strategic business objectives. We need to demonstrate true leadership and develop

outstanding communication and persuasive skills. Very importantly, we need to learn the language oftop management


13/14

CONCLUSIONThis discussion provides a way of thinking and a few supporting techniques to help project managers to

be more effective. It may ultimately go further. In taking aim at the PMI definition of projectmanagement, we are in fact questioning how competence in project management is understood and

what competencies should be identified and developed. The unique position of project managers from

the positions of authority (or lack thereof) and the number and influence of stakeholders makes project

management one of the most demanding of occupations. Typical competency development andassessments programmes only scratch the surface when it comes to defining the true role of the modern

project manager.


14/14

REFERENCES

Murray-Webster, Ruth and David Hillson, paper presented to PMI Europe 2002, The Project Management

Festival, Scaling the PEAKS of Project Management Competency, 2002

Pellegrinelli, Sergio, David Partington and Malcolm Young, paper presented to PMI Global Congress

Europe 2003, Understanding and Assessing Programme Management Competence, 2003

Project Management Institute, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK

Guide), 3e, PMI, 2004

Date post:	30-May-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	andre-du-plessis
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

Cohesion White Paper - Navigating the Political Minefield of PM

Documents