Advantages in not knowing very much...

When I question whether you have to have some or maybe very much knowledge about a profession to be or become a project manager in that area people usually have lots of arguments for the need of professional knowledge – actually it seems like they cannot imagine themselves being able to manage project without professional knowledge.

In a lot of incidences the background is that these project managers used to be very good if not the best in a specific area and therefore they might have been appointed project managers. So of course they will keep on working from this base of authority and how should they know if it is possible to step down from the knowledge base and step up on another – the good leadership base?

From time to time one should think about these things because they give a perspective to ones development – more technical stuff or more leadership?

Here are some input to your thoughts:

Fewer technically questions.. with fewer disturbances you have got more time to think ahead - the manager's main task!
Project participants know that you professionally are"blank" .. participants use you to other, more personal things such as to ensure good working conditions, high motivation, job, etc.
You do not know much about the profession.. you can concentrate fully on project management and facilitate eminent workshops to ensure that the project and the participants have very good understanding of and control over the project
You can not answer all the questions from the outside world.. you will need, but also an opportunity to promote your skilled participants to the world - they will rejoice and grow with the responsibility
You do not have just the solution to an urgent technical problem.. you will not be sucked into the matter and therefore can stay organized and escalate the matter properly if and when necessary. You can also ensure that the experts are left alone to solve the problem
You can not help a participant who is stuck in a challenge.. you can instead consider to grow the person by coaching through the necessary decisions if confidence is actually the problem, otherwise you can allocate the necessary knowledge for a period.
Your leadership colleagues can ask about anything professionally that you can not answer.. you can ensure that it is a fully correct answer that will be given by finding the right person.
Your boss knows you are not a specialist.. you are being assessed, receive recognition and is remunerated as a project manager.

To Buffer or not to Buffer!

Many are too optimistic that they'll be "getting things back on track" if something goes wrong in a project.

I realized many years ago on their way into Yugoslavia from Austria, that it is good with buffers along the way in a schedule. Do not put a little buffer in the end - at the time, you've already lost.
In Austria they give you security against brake problems like this:

In Yugoslavia (dengang!!) Did like this:

Which model do you like best?

Get more time with your sponsor and steering committee?

I heard recently a manager say:

"If I did not have to spend so much time trying to understand the progress reports (which is very person dependent at us - even with common templates) I could use a lot more energy on coaching, problem solving and support ..."

It's an opinion that is worth thinking about the next few days ...

Good week-end!

Fortryd redigeringer

Alpha

Should we punish Project Managers with fines and imprisonment?

.. to get more quality into the estimates that underlie the business cases that we repeatedly see are not reliable in real life!

The idea pops up when you read Prof. Bent Flyvbjerg article here about all the scandals in public (and probably in total secrecy also business-) capital expenditures. Advisers who calculate business Cases with too low costs and excessive benefits (eg. Number of cars on the Great Belt Bridge, etc.) should not escape as easily as just being fired believes Flyvbjerg. When society in this way is misled we should perhaps punish advisers more harsh considers Flyvbjerg.

Now try this quick thought experiment:

If you now have to pay a fine of 3 times your monthly salary if the estimates on your project are not met, what would you do differently? - And now the killer question: why do you not do it allready today?

Why do we continue?

An analogy to your job as a project manager could be the following:

"Every morning your boss calls to offer you a new job, an unknown place with unknown deadlines and unknown partners. Without hesitation you say ok and thrusts you into the day. Each evening you will come deadly exhausted home to your family who have become accustomed to, you never get home on time. The morning after your boss is calling ... "

Canadian Martin Cobb's paradox of 1995 is about the same: "We know why projekter fail, we know how to prevent their failure – so why do they still fail?” David Hillson tries to answer it in this months Risk briefing here.

It is the year of the Project Sponsor!

Finally got a chance to see some of the annual Chaos Report (Chaos because the report monitors the amount of chaos in projects) from the world's most recognized organization in the field: The Standish Group. The report from June this year called: CHAOS Manifesto 2012: the Year of the Executive Sponsor ($ 1,500 at The Standish Group here). The reason for the words Executive Sponsor is to be found in the reason for the growth in the number of successful projects, the report actually documents:

 

 - and declare that the reason for success is mainly attributable sponsor! The reasons are here:

Notice that Project  Management is 7th! We have long ago passed the point where projects and their success was an inside-and-out process. Today it is an outside-in process. Many more actors, interests and forces in play. In that arena, there are entirely different playing rules.

Are you and your sponsor ready?

The culprit is found!

I think I have finally found the cause of all our problems in projects! Hold on! This is gonna be big! The reason is where nobody has looked. Right at the feet of you. The reason is simply the word Project! That's it!

When I say project - ziiiip zaaaaap, then you have immediately a picture of a project in your brains, but do we have the same? and is in fact one the right image or a real definition?

There are lots of definitions - some are even standards (eg. Here at PMI), but common to them all is that they all come from or fit a certain age - the so-called Modern Social Period - the period governed by reason and knowledge.
I think many today feel that reason and knowledge is no longer the most important thing in projects now a day. We are in the Postmodern Social Period - the period ruled by discourse and rhetoric. An appropriate definition of project nowadays might be:

A discourse of legitimation and an arena for social games and power tests. The project is an instrument of powerful stakeholders.
Yes, it was a little fluffy. Back on earth one could just have fun with defining success in projects? is it:
• process terms: managed within time, quality and resources?
• product-wise: it can be used and they are happy about it?
• business: was it worth it?

- We are allready three completely different views of projects. So do not come here and say that the word project makes sense!

So what I'm trying to say is that the word project is a too poor word - and therefore it is dangerous - and therefore we must find another or a different way of talking about 'projects' further on.

There are great prizes for the winner!

Challenging structure fascism 2

Obliquity is a philosophy and not at least the experience many of us probably have, namely, that you often end up somewhere else than where you was expected to end - or, conversely, a goal best isachieved indirectly. (book on the idea here).

If we believe in this principle in our projects, so would:

• plans more serve as a starting point, rather than as a way to the goal!
• it be more important to relate to developments in the near and distant environments; than trying to stick to the plan!
• planning of how we capture, interpret and react to change and events be more important than the project's schedule!
• process be more important than results! - Perhaps even more important than the purpose of the project?
• many classic project managers be on thin ice in regard to management and control.

It could all be true.