Participant’s Notes - International Institute for ... · PDF fileParticipant’s...

Participant’s Notes:

©2016 International Institute for Learning, Inc.IIL-SRS

Stakeholder Relationship Skills for Project Managers Appendix B

1

March 1, 2006

You Are Always Selling!

Many Information Technology professionals hate salespeople with a passion. They are treated akin to used-car salespeople – always out for a quick buck, ignoring the customer. But did you know that to be successful – you need to sell every day?

My current role is as a pre-sales systems engineer (to put a simplified title on it ;-)). I was in “customer land” and moved over to “the dark side” – but not quite as dark as being a sales rep!

That said, I have learned some very valuable lessons that I would like to share.

We are all salespeople all the time!

You will say “Not I!!!”. But think about it, do you have to convince your boss for a pay rise? Have you had a design idea that you wanted others to agree with? How do you decide where you will dine with friends? How about when you have a movie that you would like to see, but the others with you do not?

We all have goals, objectives, and things we believe in – and often would like others to agree with. The method by which we can get this outcome is by “selling” them on the idea.

So does this mean we sell our souls? No! The key to effective selling are two simple things:1. Always maintain your integrity.2. Always understand what the other person’s motivation or desired outcome is.

Pretty simple huh?!

Let’s explore this a bit more. The integrity part is easy (at least it had better be!). Whatever it is you want to sell, you need to really BELIEVE in it! You need to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the idea, be honest about them – and advocate the fact that the strengths outweigh the weaknesses. You also need to realize that what appears as a weakness to one person is a strength to another. Which leads us to…

Understand what the other person wants! It is said that there is no bigger motivator in the world than self-interest! And that is true to a large extent. We all want to get the things we want, to do things our way, to get the outcome we seek. So you need to ASK and to OBSERVE the other person and truly understand what THEY are seeking. Once you know that, you can translate what you want into what they want – and agreement is usually pretty easy from that point!

Let’s use a techno example. Say I am a systems architect, and I would like my new system to be developed using J2EE – but the organization I work for does not have a clear platform strategy. I would not sell my boss on the technical merit (or otherwise!) of the J2EE platform, rather, I would be more likely to focus on the ability to standardize all new development on a single platform, to ensure that we deal with less suppliers, that we have greater in-house skills, that we have better future proofing.

I will know which of these points (or others) are key for my boss because I would have observed what he/she looks for in outcomes. Is he/she interested in saving $$$s only? Or is he/she more of a “process efficiency” person?

Either way, if you put the case in the right context, you can get what you want – and everyone wins!

http://www.techpersonality.com/sales_skills

(This information was originally found on this site, but actual material has been archived as of 9/14/07).

TechPersonality is all about people who have careers in technology being able to do a better job. This may mean being more productive, more efficient, a more compelling presenter – or simply being nicer to “non-technical” people!



2

Dr. Harold Kerzner on Governing Bodies in general and Sponsors, in particular:

“Organizational behavior in project management is a delicate balancing act something like sitting on a a bar stool. Bar stools usually come with three legs to keep them standing. So does project management: one is the project manager, one is the line manager [or groups of them as in steering committees], and one is the project sponsor. If one of the legs is lost or unusable, the stool will be very difficult to balance.”

“In Search of Excellence in Project Management,” p. 80

“In organizations that have created effective project management systems, the role of the executive manager has changed along with project management. Early in the implementation of project management, executives were actively involved in the everyday project management process. But as project management has come into its own and general economic conditions have changed, their involvement has become more passive, and they concentrate on long-term and strategic planning. They have learned to trust project managers’ decisions and view project management as a central factor in their company’s success….

Project sponsors provide visible, ongoing support. Their role is to act as a bodyguard for the project and the project manager. Unlike other executives on the senior management team, individual project sponsors may play a more active role in projects, depending on how far along the project is. Early in the project’s functioning, for example, the project sponsor might help the project manager define the project’s requirements. Once that is done, the sponsor resumes a less active role and receives project information only as needed….

The existence of a project sponsor implies visible, ongoing executive support for project management. And executive support motivates project personnel to excel. Executive sponsorship also supports the development of an organizational culture that fosters confidence in the organization’s project management systems.”

“In Search of Excellence in Project Management,” p. 81-82



3

Dr. Kerzner on the relationship between project managers and the steering committee level or what he calls “line managers.”

“Although line managers are the key to successful project management, they will have a lot of trouble performing their functions without effective interplay with the project’s manager and corporate sponsor. In unsuccessful projects, the project manager has often been vested with power (authority) over the line managers involved [or vice versa, depending upon the type of organizational structure and project management culture]. In more successful projects, project and line managers share authority. The project manager negotiates the line managers’ commitment to the project and works through the line mangers rather than around them. Project managers provide recommendations regarding employee performance. And leadership is centered around the whole project team, not just the project manager. In successful project management systems, the following equation always holds true:

Accountability = Responsibility + Authority

When project and line managers view each other as equals, they share equally in the management of the project and thus they share equally the authority, responsibility, and accountability for the project’s success. Obviously, the sharing of authority makes the sharing of decision making easier. A few suggestions for executive project sponsors [with respect to “line managers” or Steering Committee members, as we refer to them in this course] follow.

• Do not increase the authority of the project manager at the expense of the line manages [or vice versa].

• Allow line managers to provide technical direction to their people, if at all possible.

• Encourage line managers to provide realistic time and resource estimates and then work with the line managers to make sure that they keep their promises.

• Above all, keep the line managers fully informed.

“In Search of Excellence in Project Management,” p. 80-81



4

Dr. J. Davidson Frame speaks about Project Teams:

“Teams are the basic work unit of sports competition. Similarly, they are the basic work unit of projects. Because of the central role that teams play in projects, it is worthwhile spending some time examining them, to gain better understanding of what they are and to determine how they contribute to project success and failure. With this knowledge, we can then structure project teams to maximize the likelihood that our projects will be carried out effectively.

Characteristics of Project Teams

A team is a collection of individual who work together to attain a goal. For them to work together, their individual efforts must be coordinated. In sports, coordination is directed by an all-powerful coach and coaching staff. It is achieved through hours of drills and practice sessions. In projects, we have a fundamentally different perspective on teams, since… project managers are rarely all-powerful and the unique and transitory nature of projects does not make them amenable to repetitive drills.

Project teams, like projects themselves, come in a great variety of shapes and sizes. Some are large, some small. Some must grapple with highly complex problems, others with routine affairs. Some are highly dynamic, with team members constantly changing, while others are stable.

These last points have interesting implications. In sport teams, a large amount of effort is directed at developing team spirit, which requires team members to have a clear image of what the team is and to identify strongly with it….With project teams, however, team members are often borrowed and may have only the briefest exposure to the project effort. They work on a piece of the project, and when they are done they move on to other projects. Because of this, they may not recognize that they are part of a team. Without such recognition, they are incapable of developing team spirit, or…project commitment.

Of course, from the perspective of the project manager, there is a team, whether or not the team members recognize this. The project manager is aware of project goals and knows how the pieces fit together. To the extent that project workers do not realize they are part of a team, however, the project manager’s work is more difficult. Clearly, one important task of project managers is the development of some sense of team identification among the staff.”

“Managing Projects in Organizations,” pp. 83-84

Let’s consider one other perspective on the characteristics of project teams.



5

Launching Project Teams

During the past 20 years Idea Champions has worked with a wide range of organizations who have called us in to help improve teamwork and collaboration. Usually, the catalyst for the intervention was a team in breakdown or experiencing some kind of dysfunction. Facing an ambitious challenge, the team was clearly not at the top of their game and the manager (or team leader) found themselves over their head, unable to provide the kind of process or leadership to help their team get back on track. Sometimes, the call for outside help was simply to provide a slight “chiropractic adjustment” to help the team function at a higher level or to help a group actually become a team. Again and again we have been impressed with the dedication, focus, and competence of team members, no matter what their collaborative challenge was. Nevertheless, team members’ specific skills and competencies did not always translate to smooth teamwork and consequently, their team struggled.

No matter what a team’s mission or the profile of the individual players, all teams have a tendency to go through the same kinds of predictable growing pains. Again and again they manifest the same kinds of breakdowns: combating sub-cultures, cross-functional territoriality, inelegant communication, triangulation, infighting, blaming, unmediated conflicts, problems with “managing up,” confusion over roles and responsibilities, and disconnects regarding vision, mission, and values.

On one hand, these kinds of symptoms are par for the course in most organizations, part of the flora and fauna of teams forming, norming, and storming. Indeed, much of what shows up to outside observers as dysfunction is not dysfunction at all, but simply the natural occurrence of a disparate group of people trying to find their collective sea legs in an effort to work together towards a common goal. Still, it is our experience that it is a good use of time for organizations to consider ways of helping their teams become high performing as soon as possible in the process – especially when you consider the ambitious stretch goals given to most teams operating under severe time and resource constraints.

Towards this end, Idea Champions strongly believes that it would be fruitful for all organizations to reconsider the way they launch and support project teams. With just a little more effort and intentionality on the front end, it is highly likely that a higher percentage of teams will become high performing much sooner in the process. This, we believe, is especially important in an organization where many people are simultaneously members of multiple teams.

What is a “High-Performing Team”?There have been a number of studies done over the years in an attempt to understand what it takes to put together a highly functioning (often called “high performing”) team. The study we find most compelling stems from the work done by Larson and LaFasto noted in their seminal book, Teamwork. According to these two gifted researchers, there are eight characteristics of a high-performing team, each of which needs to be operational if a team is expected to achieve significant results: 1) A clear compelling goal or vision; 2) Standards of excellence (norms); 3) Competent members; 4) Unified commitment; 5) Climate of collaboration (i.e., trust, clear communication, listening etc.); 6) Results driven structure; 7) Principled leadership and; 8) External support and recognition. When these characteristics are in place there is an excellent chance that a team will succeed. When one or more of these characteristics are not in place, there is a good chance the team will disappoint.

Curiously, many competent team members actually do not want to be on a team at all. Strong individuals, with a multiplicity of talents and responsibilities, they would actually prefer to be operating as a group or an association or a loosely defined federation of people working towards a common goal. (And in some cases, they don’t even want to be part of a group, but would rather work alone.) One of the reasons for this resistance to teamwork, though rarely articulated, is the fact that it often takes an extraordinary effort to be a member of a high-performing team. It takes time. It demands letting go of old habits. It requires a sublimation of ego in favor of the “greater good.” It demands a kind of “process-oriented learning” that most analytical, task-driven, bottom-line oriented people dismiss as either warm and fuzzy or as something that will naturally happen over time. And last, but certainly not least, it requires someone willing to guide/coach/lead the team through the process – not something that most managers or team leaders have been trained to do. And while many business leaders have certainly learned from experience over the years, managing the nuances of team process is not necessarily their strong suit.

From Idea Champions, Idea Champions is a consulting and training company specializing in creativity,



6




‹#›

innovation, innovation, team building, leadership, and out of the box products.

See their Web site at http://www.ideachampions.com/launching_project_teams.shtml

An excerpt from a collection of government “Project Management Success Stories: Lessons of Project Leaders” by Alex Laufer & Edward J. Hoffman, with the following lessons learned:

• You should be obsessed with customers [clients], but you should not adopt a one-size fits all approach for satisfying their needs. You must recognize that situations and customers [clients] are different, and therefore demand a different response. Context is the key.

• Customers do not fit into a normal curve, and standards are made to be bent. When necessary, the project leader must fight for flexibility of standards to benefit the appropriate need of the customer [client].

The Customer is Always Right! Always? (pp. 149-151)

Robert Goehle, Department of Energy’s (DOE) project management representative for the Management & Operations (M&O) contractor running the DOE’s Savannah River Site.

“As the DOE representative for project management, one of my primary functions is to ensure that customers enjoy the best possible service from our department. To this end, I involve customers from the early stages throughout the full life cycle of the project. Involvement means listening to the customers and being responsive to their needs. However, listening and responsiveness do not mean always accepting the customer’s original point of view. Following are two examples in which the customers were deeply involved in the project, but the extent to which their initial demands were met differed considerably.”

In the first example, the M&O contractor’s telecommunications group had a standard for all sites under their operations – standards which by far outstripped the meager needs of Robert’s project. Meeting those requirements, which the contractor initially represented as ironclad, would have caused the customer to make design changes elsewhere that would have “seriously affected its functioning.”Robert’s solution was to push back on the requirements and secure a waiver.

In the second example, the project was to design and build a new facility to test products for five different customers. The testing involved environmental chambers that could quickly raise and lower temperatures and apply a thermal shock to the products involved. But each customer had such varying specifications on the temperature ranges that there was “no way we could cater to the specific requirements of each customer and also complete the project within budget.” Robert’s solution was to push back on the customers for “the next closest set of requirements.” After initial resistance and the realization that without collaboration, no one would get anything, they “worked together to streamline their requirements so the project could succeed.”



7

Some industries have more urgent needs to pay attention to Auxiliary Bodies, especially regulatory agencies. There are specialized consultants in these fields to assist on projects.

For example, in the medical research industry:

“New England Research Institutes offers exceptional research capabilities, including full Contract Research Services with clients worldwide.

One of the nation’s premier public-health and social-science research organizations, NERI is known internationally for its scientific credibility as well as its efficiency and dedication to cutting-edge technology in conducting clinical trials, epidemiologic studies, and other public-health and education research programs.”

“Through years of working closely with regulatory agencies, NERI has developed key agency contacts, a reputation for thoroughness, and an understanding that sound regulatory strategy must be built into projects from the beginning.

We help clients to tailor their strategies to their product, service or research goals and to meet or exceed the requirements of global regulatory agencies (as established by the International Conference on Harmonization), as well as of federal regulatory agencies, such as the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

We can interpret regulations, assist with agency negotiations, write and review submissions, perform compliance auditing and training and validate the processes, facilities and systems used in any project. Most importantly, real-time reports from NERI’s proprietary ADEPT data-management system are available, under secure, password access, to allow clients and regulatory agencies to track key study parameters.”See http://www.neriscience.com

Here is another example that spans the specialized safety risks of several hazardous industries, including chemical and hazardous wastes:

“A summary of the more important attributes and capabilities provided by SARACon consultants is provided below.

• SARACon has a cadre of internationally recognized associate consultants with more than 100 years of collective experience performing and applying Probabilistic Risk Assessment techniques and methods, both in the United States and around the world.

• SARACon associate consultants have completed a number of important reliability and availability studies to assist clients in optimizing their designs, operational practices, and assuring adequate levels of process safety. These projects have ranged from simple scoping studies to full-scale detailed reliability/ availability evaluations of complete facilities.

• SARACon consultants are familiar with all software packages typically used to perform these analyses.

SARACon’s experience in the areas of PRA and reliability/availability analysis is augmented and reinforced by the depth of experience that its staff has in a number of related technical disciplines, namely:

• Chemical hazards analysis (HAZOP),

• Integrated Safety Management (ISM), and,

• Licensing and Regulatory Affairs.

The products from these activities are represented by the Integrated Safety Management and Safety Analysis Reports (SAR), which they have supported in the past.”

See http://www.saracon.net/quals.php



8




9

We have defaulted to stakeholder names that are most aligned with IT projects, since our participants most often come from that environment or are involved with projects that include IT requirements. Feel free to make appropriate substitutions for analogous stakeholders in your specific project environment.

GB = Governing Bodies

PT = Project Team

CL = Client

AB = Auxiliary Bodies




10

GB = Governing Bodies

PT = Project Team

CL = Client

AB = Auxiliary Bodies

Original Tuckman Model, circa 1965

Step 1: Forming – guarded politeness, so little is achieved

• Orientation period

• Becoming familiar with one another

• Identifying the group’s tasks

• Determining acceptable interpersonal behaviors

• Relying on leaders for structure

Step 2: Storming – confrontation on differing perspectives

• Period of high intra-group conflict

• Challenging others and expressing individual viewpoints

• Lacking unity

• Reacting emotionally to tasks

• Testing out roles within the team

Step 3: Norming – resolve for valuing differences

• Mutually accepting one another

• Developing group cohesion

• Establishing group norms and ground rules

• Establishing roles within the team

Step 4: Performing – flexibility from trust

• Solutions emerge

• Becoming a problem-solving instrument

• Contributing to the team’s purpose

• Becoming interdependent

Adapted from the International Association of Fire Fighters Web site Copyright © 2004

Adjourning was added much later to reflect the need for a team closing process, since leaders must address the sense of loss and anxiety that high-performing teams feel at having to break up after such a rewarding experience.



11

Stakeholder Relationships Across the

Project Life Cycle

Design

Phase

STAKE-

HOLDER

ATTITUDE

DEGREE OF

INFLUENCE

& POWER

RELATIVE

GEO-LOCATION

OPEN

CONFLICT

Weighting

Verification

Weighting 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 Good

Stakeholder

Dimensions

Pro

mo

ter

Bysta

nd

er

Ad

vers

ary

Stro

ng

Mo

dera

te

Weak

Co

-loc

ate

d

Lo

cal

Intra

-co

un

try

Sam

e g

lob

al

reg

ion

Ou

tsid

e g

lob

al

reg

ion

Sig

nific

an

t

Dev

elo

pin

g

No

ne

Cal-

culated

Rating

Attentio

n Level

Weighting

0

.

4

0

0

.

2

0

0

.

4

0

0

.

6

0

0

.

3

0

0.

1

0

0

.

0

5

0

.

1

0

0

.

1

5

0

.

2

5

0

.

4

5

0

.

6

0

0

.

3

0

0

.

1

0 0.00Cool

Spot

Weighting

Verification Good Good Good Good 0.25

Sim-

mer

Point

Governing

Bodies 0.41Hot

Spot

1 Kon Troller 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0.51Hot

Spot

2 Amy Able 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.11Cool

Spot

3 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0.36Simmer

Point

4 0.00Cool

Spot

5 0.00Cool

Spot



12

Company: Other Peoples Money, Inc. (OPMI) is a 13-year-old dot com financial services organization that was founded by Rip Uhoff who, prior to starting OPMI, was the youngest marketing vice president ever hired by a large prestigious U.S. regional bank. Rip is the Owner/CEO/President of OPMI. OPMI survived the dot com meltdown because of four key strategic decisions; remain a privately held company, conduct planned cannibalization (obsolescence) of products and services, stay on the leading edge of Internet technology, and relentlessly pursue and preemptively exploit market weaknesses and the blind spots of OPMI competitors. In the past 3 years, OPMI has leveraged its multi-billion dollar market capitalization (the aggregate value of OPMI’s outstanding common shares) in the United States to establish a formidable global presence in the United Kingdom, Southeast Asia, South America, and Northern Europe.

Current Situation: Rip and his inaugural management team are now ready to “cash in” and they are remaking the organization through a series of key projects to tender an initial public offering one year from now. The party line is “growth, growth, growth”. However, privately, Rip and his inaugural leadership team are ready to reap the rewards of their hard work and prosperity.

OPMI has forged an eclectic mix of talent by identifying and acquiring people considered “the best and brightest” with reputations as fierce competitors in the market. OPMI has bought, raided, and coerced the right mix of talent to fuel impressive growth. These people are then euphemistically fitted with golden handcuffs through an unrivaled compensation package and a performance-based reward system whereby people can quickly realize significant financial gain.

However, the pressure and stress of rapid growth, the organizational restructuring and the impending IPO is straining relationships across the organization. You have been hired as a project management & organizational change consultant to help this team weather the storm, by facilitating the definition of their first critical project, code named for the mythical Phoenix. (See next three pages for information.)

Other Peoples Money, Inc. (OPMI) – Project Phoenix

Case Study



13

Project Definition: Project Phoenix is an organizational consolidation initiative. This involves the outsourcing of customer service to a company in India and consolidation of the U.S. and International Sales business units to form a global Marketing and Sales unit. This is part of a Program to condense 15 business areas into 4 segments:

• Marketing and Sales

• Operations

• Administration

• Product Development

Rip is a fierce competitor who neither asks nor gives quarter in the market. Although highly successful, he has never quite found the right person to share his adventurous but chaotic lifestyle. Although he hides it well, he considers his family to be those within OPMI. He clearly has plans to reap the spoils of his effort, however, his OPMI family will also enjoy great reward as well. Underneath his tough persona and impeccable professionalism lays a caring compassionate man who has discretely taken special care of many in OPMI. Rip is a diehard advocate of project management. Although Rip clearly means well, he has a problem staying out of projects he believes are key to OPMI. This trait is further compounded by his love of the camaraderie that project teams share and the excitement of the organizational change they enable. Over the years several outstanding project managers have left OPMI for this reason. He is very anxious about this upcoming organizational consolidation initiative, especially the project (Phoenix) that involves the outsourcing of customer service to a company in India and consolidation of the U.S. and International Sales business units to form a global Marketing and Sales unit. This is part of a major strategic initiative to condense 15 business areas into 4 departments; Marketing and Sales, Operations, Administration, and Product Development. OPMI Headquarters are in Chicago, US Sales in New York City and European Sales are in Paris, France.

Project Phoenix Definition & Sponsor

Case Study

Rip UhoffPresident/CEO



14

Gitter is a member of the “gang of 5” – Rip and the other four people who left bright and promising careers to start OPMI. Rip and Gitter are the only two remaining active founders since the other three have retired to quieter lives. Gitter is experiencing chronic fatigue after the many years of 70 and 80 hour weeks and desperately wants and needs more time with his family. The IPO can’t come soon enough. However, he is a staunch supporter of the project to form a single global marketing and sales division. He has experienced tremendous value of project management in enabling OPMI to sustain the rapid pace of business change over the years. He has believed since OPMI went global that the greatest competitive leverage is delivered through a single focused division with the right leader. He believes that leader should be the current Vice President of US Sales, Mary Outlook.

Though not one of the original “gang of 5,” Mary has worked for OPMI for over 10 years. She is bright, competent, creative, and a natural leader. If she has any fault, it would be that she tends to discount her own abilities in favor of other more aggressive personalities. She knows that she is being considered to head the new global marketing and sales division but isn’t sure that she would do the position justice. She knows that her counterpart in European Sales has her eye on the position and is inclined to step aside to avoid any conflict. She is a staunch supporter and a persuasive spokesperson for Project Phoenix.

Executive Stakeholder Descriptions

Case Study

Gitter DunnVice President, U.S.

Operations Manager

Mary OutlookVice President,

U.S. Sales



15

Paul is young and very bright project manager. He has real passion for project management. He is a PMP and a sought after speaker for project management forums, conferences, and PMI chapters. He is innovative and understands the critical need to balance discipline with flexibility in project management. He has reasonably good interpersonal skills but since joining OPMI 2 years ago has fumbled the ball several times with key stakeholders. Although caring and personable, Paul has not yet mastered the techniques and subtleties of managing complex stakeholder relationships.

Maya has been considered a fast tracker in OPMI. She is resilient, very bright, and a consummate professional. But, she has been a barrier in filling the VP position of the Global Marketing and Sales segment since it was announced. Unfortunately, her greatest strength is her greatest weakness; her intensity causes her to miss the subtle signals from others, so that they feel discounted and run over by her. Everyone knows that Maya has “stars in her eyes”. That is, except for Maya. She is totally against this project and has even begun back-channel actions to undermine its success. She is blinded by her ambition and her sincere belief that her US counterpart, Mary Outlook, despite strong support from the leadership team, is the wrong person for the role. Maya has major issues.

Irwin relocated a year ago from the UK to rejoin his family after being separated from his wife for a number of years. Now with OPMI, Irwin and his wife have reconciled and are enjoying a fresh new beginning. Rip met Irwin at an Ofcom executive briefing in London. Ofcom is the independent regulator and competition authority for the UK communications industries, with responsibilities that greatly impact this current initiative. Rip was so impressed with Irwin’s political savvy and balanced approach between government and business that he made him an “offer he couldn’t refuse.”Irwin’s rich seasoned global network of government and business relationships at both the personal and professional level are invaluable to OPMI.

Executive Stakeholder Descriptions (continued)

Case Study

P.M. BokU.S. Project Manager

I.M. NueDirector eCommerce

Policy and

Compliance

Maya WayeVice President

European Sales

IIL-SRS


16©2016 International Institute for Learning, Inc.

Date post:	20-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dothu
View:	216 times
Download:	2 times

Participant’s Notes - International Institute for ... · PDF fileParticipant’s...

Documents