If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!
In my first guest-blogger entry, I mentioned the importance of managing perceptions. I wrote that not doing so was the main cause of why only one project out of three was considered successful by major stakeholders, according to the Standish Group's Chaos Report1. I concluded that "not managing perceptions" could be considered the 10th waste of ill-managed projects.
It is easy to say that we have to manage perceptions. But where and how should we start doing that? The Chaos Report gives us pretty good leads on that. The report identifies the involvement of end-users as the No.1 in its Top Ten List of project key success factors. I talked about that also when Hal gave me the opportunity to contribute a project e-tip back in 2003 (e-tip 016: Keep the Customer/End-User Involved). After all these years, this e-tip is still relevant and I propose to rename it The Proximity Principle and to revisit it as it pertains to fighting the 10th waste.
Ensure with your sponsor that you get proper end-user representatives on board and keep them involved on your project
Many project managers and their sponsors still shy away from involving, on a continuous basis, the project customers, most particularly the end-users, those who will materialize the project anticipated benefits though using its deliverables. On too many projects still, project managers meet, at the start of the project, some so-called representatives of these ultimate project customers to discuss rapidly THEIR operational requirements. They will not 'converse' with end-users again until much later in the project, only to find a very uninformed, unpleased, and distressed party in full resistance-to-change gear. There is then a lot of damage control to do to regain end-users trust and ensure that they will commit to materializing project benefits from the deliverables imposed on them.
End-users involvement must be more than that. Successful project managers have long ago realized that, as their project evolves to adjust to its changing environment, customers/end-users also change their mind along the way and must also understand that conditions in the project environment change for all sort of uncontrollable reasons. Both project managers and their ultimate customers must be 'in sync', preferably in a continuous manner, in order for the former to satisfy the latter.
Ensure with your sponsor that you get proper end-user representatives on board and keep them involved on your project, as it evolves, as much as humanly possible. I call that the Proximity Principle and its functioning is quite well explained by Scott Ambler in his landmark article: Agility for Executives2. Do that and you will automatically get, time after time, high quality deliverables (and highly satisfied end-users perceiving the same deliverables as you), while keeping as low as possible the risks of not meeting requirements. Do that also with all other major stakeholders and you will manage effectively perceptions and deliver successful projects over and over again.
- www.projectsmart.co.uk/docs/chaos-report.pdf [ ⇑ back ]
- http://www.ddj.com/architect/184415034?cid=Ambysoft [ ⇑ back ]
Tags: agile, leadership, teams, theory
? Guy Kawasaki wrote, "Less is the new more." Easy to learn: symmetry, seduction, subtraction, and sustainability. Very valuable to do. Step 1: Read Matt's book!! just 140 keystrokes.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=03314884-90d1-47e5-acf3-2821313e9fdc)
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=4ce3f392-8989-448a-a97a-c1432dd3fce6)
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
Great post!
Most of my projects are small infrastructure implementations for customers, so the primary stakeholder is often also the check-signer and the owner of the company. As such, the projects I implement are often tools that the owners use to force change upon their employees. I know that end-user involvement is a key factor to success, but sometimes the PrimaryStakeholder/Check-Signer/Owner doesn’t WANT me to work with the end-users, because he/she wants to push organizational change moreso than create a business solution that the end-users are enthusiastic about. Usually this results in a successful implementation, but sometimes users don’t bite and the project is a technical success but an organizational failure.
Do any readers have any brilliant thoughts about how to deal with this?
Possible tools for helping project managers manage perceptions are project websites, blogs, or wikis. Not only are these places where multiple types of information can be brought together to make project communications more efficient (e.g., by cutting down on meetings and email), but such tools can also support the governance functions discussed here. For more information on this topic, check out this link to a post on my blog titled “What Should Project Managers Know about Social Media and Social Networking?”: http://www.ddmcd.com/know.html
@Joel
One thing I’ve done in the past is approach stakeholder/owner/check-signer to have a meeting with some trusted end-users to discuss pain-points about their current process — with the main objective to make sure I understand what currently is NOT working, but the added benefit is to glean some end-user requirements that can be incorporated in the implementation.
Joel,
the issue you raise of the «PrimaryStakeholder/Check-Signer/Owner who doesn’t WANT you to work with the end-users» is a very important one and, unfortunately, one that many project managers face.
I also face it, even in project-oriented processes implementation projects, where it is not only a technical solution you are trying to deploy but, mainly, a major cultural shift. I am always appalled at this type of behavior from the Project Owner/Sponsor, but, once persuasion has failed to change this position at the beginning of a project, I just have to accept that this person is at this point in his/her personal development and that further experiences of personal failure to impose changes (and personal recognition that it was this end-user-excluding behavior that caused the failure…and the humility to accept accountability) are the only way this person will evolve. And ultimately, he/she will have a better understanding of how end-users (intelligent, resourceful «collaborators» for the Prime Stakeholder organization) can make a real difference if you try to communicate with them instead of to control them.
This is a sad situation and, unfortunately, I have not much more to propose than to insist that end users be included in the project early when you can…and then, through frequent return-on-experience/lessons-learned sessions with the project Owner/Sponsor AND the project team during the execution of the project, to always come back with the need to include end-users to accelerate benefits realization afterwards. I am not sure that asking this person to read the Chaos Report would make a big difference, since behavioral changes are not accomplished though only thinking, but also through feeling. Attending a workshop on Emotional Intelligence would have a better chance to give results. hehe
A thing that sometimes works for me is «direct empathy». This is based on research on the «perception of risk» and the subsequent trust in others during difficult situations (like changing a work environment, hehe). Always talking to the Owner/Sponsor in terms of benefits to gain or benefits to lose for him/her (using real empathy towards the Owner/Sponsor main concerns) is a must and should be the preferred approach over talking about detriments to users (showing empathy to the end-users when you deal with the Owner/Sponsor is not a winning strategy).
If this does not work, nothing will since it indicates that the organizational climate is so bad that the Owner/Sponsor is ready to forfeit his/her own project benefits to prove a point and prefers to exert control over others for the sake of it instead of relying on others as partners in his/her personal success. The paradigm shift required from this person is too strong; this shift can only be accomplished because of a very significant disastrous event or simply because this person is replaced by someone who believes in collaboration and in the value and capability of the project end-users.
So, keep going Joel. I believe you do a very good job at what you do. You have the right mindset. But you cannot change others if they are not willing to change themselves. And I am sure that ultimately, because of your sensitivity to end-users, you do you best for them.
Dennis,
I read your blog entry and all you say there about social networking is, for me (my perception, hehe) very relevant to perception management too. I’ll try to cover some of the issues you raise in one of my next blog entries. And I’ll get to read your blog in the future. Thanks a lot !