Invite Performers to Decline
July 4th, 2005 by HalIn the last week saying "No" on your projects is getting attention. Thanks to Frank Patrick for pointing us to postings from Jeffrey Phillips, Getting to No, and Ester Derby No Is in the Air. I couldn't help but add my two cents Be Responsible, Say "No". Long time readers know this as one of my soap boxes. In November 2002, I was writing about uncertainty Reduce Uncertainty by Promising Reliably.
Promising is in our control. We can say "yes" or "no". (I know some people think they must say "yes" to keep their job.) When we say "yes" but we mean "no" we add uncertainty to the project. When we say "yes" but fail to allocate sufficient capacity to the task (blocking time in our calendar) we add uncertainty. When we say "yes" but don’t understand what will satisfy our customer we add uncertainty. Do I need to go on?
A few years earlier (1994) Greg Howell and Glenn Ballard, both of the Lean Construction Institute, wrote the paper, Lean Construction Theory: Moving Beyond 'Can-Do'. They claim that we can't improve our project performance without people saying "No".
(C)urrent management approaches are built on and entice dishonesty. We cannot improve performance unless new thinking exposes the contradictions and weaknesses in our underlying mental models and injects certainty and honesty into the management of projects. It is simple in concept and not hard in execution once we take the challenge of no longer accepting "Can Do" when "Won’t Do" is appropriate. Only then will we have the consistent feedback needed for rapid learning.
The idea of saying "No" as being responsible has been around for quite some time. While "simple in concept and not hard in execution", we still get far too many yeses when no is more appropriate. It may be simplistic to suggest fear is in the way of saying no.
Here's one action you can take to get the no you need to get. Make it your routine to invite people to say "No". Only then will Can-Do mean anything. That's right, by inviting people to decline requests you and others make you are creating the situation for honest conversations among your team. It's in that setting of honesty that we can be most successful.
Related Posts
- Safety…It’s the System, Stupid We've made so little progress in the safety of construction work. Over 1,200 people die each year and 100s of thousands...
- Successful Projects Require Effective Communication I just received the latest e-blast from PM Boulevard. They offer short essays on project management practices. The ar...
- Language Action Perspective Fernando Flores made the language action perspective popular in his books Understanding Computers and Cognition, Disclos...
- Bringing New People to Your Project Needn’t Be Hard As project performers come and go you'll need a strategy for them to be successful. Johanna is ready to help. Read h...
- Starting a Project Well Begins with a Kickoff Meeting I've been working with a number of architectural and engineering firms in the last six months. I've been surprised at...
July 4th, 2005 at 6:59 pm
Consider that promising may be too weak a statement. Right now we have committed not to doing stuff we don’t understand, more importantly we have also signe the SOX commitment and that, in fact, makes it easier for us to keep our commitment.
Not that our commitment is limited to projects; we take our commitments very seriously and will keep them at the task, the function, what ever level is needed.
Interesting thing is that C, D, and P&L level Management (who also signed SOX) wholeheartedly stands behind us. It is always interesting to note the change in tone when a conversation that this needs to go to the Legal department for a SOX review.
July 5th, 2005 at 2:46 am
Mike, Am I right in thinking SOX = Sarbanes-Oxley??
July 5th, 2005 at 7:34 am
Mike makes a good point about the word ‘promise’ vs. ‘commit’. When we promise to do something we know that there is always the chance that we won’t be able to fulfill the promise either based on personal or external situations. I equate decline to a promise not to perform. It turns out that people actually break that promise too. There are some cases we need someone’s absolute commitment that they will not do something.
I might ask someone to promise to only proceed when certain conditions are present. Mike uses the word commitment for that kind of promise. While there are times when promise and commit are used interchangably, there is no doubt memorializing that commitment by signing a Sarbanes-Oxley statement underscores the seriousness of the commitment.
July 5th, 2005 at 9:17 am
Hal:
The commitment we make also covers not wasting resources and most of all letting the Product Owner (P&L) make the decisions and then support their decision making by specifying what we can and cannot do. In fact the boundary definition as to what is NOT part of our effort, is more relevant than the scope as it permits the product owner to say what they are NOT interested in and leave what is bounded as “terra incognita” for us to explore and report back. It also makes changing a boundary a strategic decision and not something that slips in as a ‘good idea’ during the exploration.
July 6th, 2005 at 11:33 am
I think we are all missing the point. We need to be honest, but we also need to hold our team accountable. To do that we must first take the ownership of activities out of our control as project managers and place them squarely where they should reside… with the actual team members. We cannot and shouldnot play the “Adult” to the willing child saying yes I will do something when you know darn well they will not. I suggest having them set their goals with your guidance, then hold them accountable for their actions. Saying No is just a start. The real key is making everyone Empowered, thus accountable for their estimates/actions.
July 6th, 2005 at 1:07 pm
One of the big challenges in doing projects is getting project performers to sign up for the promise of the project. It is that promise that is most critical. All the tasks that go into fulfilling the promise to the client can change, and will change, as the project unfolds. Someone needs to play the role of leader to get performers to be team members. At the point people have signed on, then accountability gets easier. The team doesn’t need the leader to hold them accountable. They do it for themself and for each other.
Still, as Frank, Ester, Jeffrey, Greg, Glenn and others have said, we must create the situation where people promise responsibly.
July 11th, 2005 at 10:20 am
Hal: I agree, but in this age of “it’s not my fault”, this is the last place you want people to be self accountable.
July 11th, 2005 at 10:49 pm
Dirk,
I certainly know what you mean. I’ve been on the listening side of that conversation more than I want to. However, people will step up. Sometimes I’m surprised, but frankly I’m never disappointed. The key is to have regular conversations as a team. It might be a ‘peer pressure’ thing, or maybe it’s just the right thing to do. Either way, when we take the time to create the situation for people to sign-up for the promise, they invariably do sign-up.
Hal