PM Blog: Kimberly Wiefling

Too Tired to Care? Regain Your Perspective with 5 Proven Practices

2012-01-17T10:14:09-08:00

by Kimberly M. Wiefling, M.S.

"Turning the Tables" by Roger Shepard

Somewhere around the spring of last year I started to forget to take care of myself. Maybe it was brought on by the shock of repeatedly watching the video of the March 11 tsunami sweeping away tens of thousands of lives on the east coast of Japan, a country I travel to on business nearly every month for the past five years. Or maybe it's just an old habit resurfacing, like a recurring rash. Either way, I started ignoring my need for balance in my life, and focused single-mindedly on the enormous pile of tasks and projects I had accumulated.

By December, I was a mess! As I said my end-of-the-year goodbyes to my colleagues in Tokyo, I bellowed (only partially jokingly), "I know you've all been working just as hard as I am, but frankly I'm too tired to care!" And I truly was. In exhausting myself, I had lost my ability to care about my teammates. What a pity!

This is a place that a project leader cannot afford to end up. And yet, in the demanding, deadline-driven project environment, it's all too easy to exhaust ourselves to the point that we're ineffective (and not much fun to be around).

Welcome to Your Own Personal Reality Distortion Field!

One of the interesting effects of being so burned out was a loss of perspective. Minor irritations at home, like the toilet seat being left up, seemed like calculated attempts to annoy me. Debris left on the kitchen cutting board was a premeditated attempt to send me a message that I was not valued. My work situation was no different. No matter how much my mind tried to reason with me, such incidents took on gargantuan proportions.

Being in a state of exhaustion feels a bit like being in a reality distortion field, analogous to how I felt when I first experienced the famous "table illusion," pictured above. Although the tops of these tables are identical in shape and size, I still can't perceive them as such. Even after printing out this picture, cutting the tables apart, and overlaying them against a light source, they still appear to have vastly different proportions. Similarly, as a sleep-deprived, overworked professional, my perception was a very poor guide to what was really going on around me. With that distorted perception comes bad judgment, further compounding the problem.

Take a Break? Are You Kidding?!

Of course it can be difficult to take even a much-needed hiatus, especially when there are many worthy causes demanding our time and attention. But eventually our bodies get their way, and we simply have to get some rest -- or end up facedown in our bowl of cereal one morning, making strange gurgling sounds in the milk.

Lately, I always feel like I'm behind. One good friend often jokingly asks me, "Are you caught up yet?" The fact is there will always more work than time, so being "behind" is kind of normal.

Out of necessity, I've adopted the following five common sense practices. They have helped me regain my perspective, reduce my stress, and optimize the results I get from the time I invest in my work. I hope they'll serve as a handy reminder of what you already know, but may sometimes fail to do. Whatever you do, make some changes for the better before you're carried out on a stretcher, or the price for ignoring your own needs for too long may one day be much higher than you can imagine.

Write Down Your Goals. Just because you're busy doesn't mean you're effective. Running in a circle uses energy, but doesn't get you anywhere. Make sure your destination is clear. A tiny percentage of people bother to write down their goals. Be one of them! Post yours conspicuously, let them drive how you spend your precious energy, and don't waste time on tasks that don't support achieving them.

Do you have more than three goals? Ignore the rest. People with 2-3 goals achieve them with excellence, however according to Stephen R. Covey in The 4 Disciplines of Execution, those with 4 or more achieve only 1-2. (Unless you have 20 or more, in which case you achieve a big fat zero!)

Prioritize Ruthlessly. Many busy people are just doing way too much to be effective, and making matters worse through excessive multi-tasking. Force yourself to arrange your list of projects and tasks in priority order according to which are most important to your goals, not which are most urgent to someone else. (Unless the "someone else" is me, in which case you should stop everything you're doing and work on that particular task immediately.) To make best use of your time, start at the top of your list and work your way down.

Although it sounds deceptively simple, even trivial, you can actually double your productivity by following this advice. For bonus points, review your priorities with your colleagues to establish agreement that you're working on what matters most to your team. Your good example might even inspire them to get their own priorities in order.

Prototype, Don't Perfect. Although I'm a great admirer of perfection when it matters, sometimes it can be a giant timewaster. Sometimes only perfection will do, such as when you're performing open-heart surgery or maintaining an aircraft engine -- especially the engines on the planes I'm using, thank you very much! But sometimes "good enough" is good enough. Don't try to do everything perfectly! Prototype first, then make improvements later if and when required. You'll find that often you'll be spared the revision, and usually no one will miss the minor improvements that would have taken another two hours.

One common motivation for perfectionism is the fear of making a mistake. But ignoring other, more important, tasks is an even bigger mistake. You don't have to shed your perfectionist tendencies all at once. Experiment on just one task a day by stopping when you've done enough, and see what happens. Even an Olympic gold medalist doesn't run another lap after crossing the finish line!

Set Limits. While it's often impossible to finish your work, you can abandon it, at least temporarily. Weary, sleep-deprived people aren't efficient or effective. Working day after day is a marathon, not a sprint. Sometimes the best way to make progress is to go home and get some sleep. You think your team can't survive without you? Think again. That's a very egocentric notion. Everyone's replaceable. When John F. Kennedy, the president of the United States of America, was shot to death on November 22, 1963, he was replaced in just over two hours.

Ask for Help. Business is a team sport. There's only so much one human being can do. A baseball team with only one person would lose every game. Don't try to do a whole team's work all by yourself. Asking for help is a sign of maturity, not weakness.

Human beings need to take a rest every day, every week, every month, every year, to re-energize our spirit and keep the fire of our passion alive. If we care so much about what we're working on that we burn out, we won't be able to help anyone, including ourselves.

Too tired to care? Please promise me that you'll take a break and get some rest. Experiment with these principles for just one week. If you do, I'm quite sure that you'll find you've achieved almost twice as much as when in a zombie state, and you'll feel much better, too. Oh, and it's just a guess, mind you, but your teammates and family may thank you for not ragging on them incessantly about minor nonsense.

Related Links
Not sure what's most important? Figure it out with this worksheet designed by Kimberly. Not sure what's using up your time? Try this easy-to-use worksheet by Cinda Voegtli. (Also consider these strategies for retaking control over your time.) Then remember to take a vacation and give yourself time to think.

Kimberly Wiefling is the author of Scrappy Project Management, published in Japanese, and the executive editor of the whole series of 5 "Scrappy Guides". Her favorite is Scrappy Women in Business, a collection of the stories of a dozen scrappy businesswomen. She works primarily with globalizing Japanese businesses, traveling extensively in the US, Europe and Asia.

©Copyright 2001-2012 Wiefling Consulting. All Rights Reserved.

Creativity in Business - It's Going to Get Weird!

2011-11-08T09:47:00-08:00

by Kimberly M. Wiefling, M.S.

Lately I've been fascinated by a book, Creativity in Business, based on the famous course in the Stanford University MBA program by that name. In fact, I've been carrying it with me non-stop for the past couple of months and practicing the numerous creativity exercises recommended at every opportunity.

While I find most business books repetitive, every chapter of this book is full of fascinating stories, examples, useful insights and exercises to help the reader master each important concept. But the reason I'm particularly fascinated by this book is because it makes me feel less weird about the crazy stuff I do in workshops with my clients.

The topics and exercises in Creativity in Business aren't the sort of thing that most people expect to find in a corporate environment. Included are discussions of quantum mechanics, Rupert Sheldrake's morphogenic fields, Nobel prize winner Ilya Prigogine's dissipative structures theory, as well as topics like visualization, drawing mandalas, and even the use of tarot cards. I'm a physicist by education, so I was delighted to run across references to some of my favorite modern physics theories. I've used many of these approaches in my own work—I am a big fan of self-organizing systems (see my previous article on ProjectConnections.com), I make a collage as part of my annual business planning process, and I once found a missing piece of equipment using tarot cards. But I'd feel a bit sheepish about admitting this in a crowd of engineers or senior executives. And I certainly never expected to find a collection of such edgy new age thinking in a business book from a Stanford University professor! In fact, if it hadn't been written by professors of a prestigious university like Stanford I think most people would regard this book with a great deal of skepticism. Many probably still will. But I strongly believe that Creativity in Business, written over 20 years ago by Michael Ray and Rochelle Myers, contains many valuable tools for project leaders.

The core message in this book is that there is a "creative force" or "essence" available to each and every individual that can dramatically improve business results. But that force can only be unleashed when we dare to trust our intuition and risk the derision of the obsessively left-brained, analytical thinkers among us, including our own inner critic.

Every company I consult with considers innovation an essential ingredient in success. Creativity is the root of innovation, and this book is a very practical guide to increasing creativity in ourselves and others. But it requires a suspension of disbelief, and a willingness to venture beyond what can be explained by deductive reasoning alone—a belief in the possibility that you can know something without knowing how you know it.

The book is structured around nine "heuristics"—experiential strategies intended to awaken the reader to their "creative source." Here are a few of my favorites. I hope you'll read the whole book to explore all nine.

#1 – Surrender

This is the first—and my favorite—of the strategies. It is summarized as, "If at first you don't succeed . . . surrender." Now, I'm a control freak, and the last person people who know me well would expect to advocate surrendering. It sounds like giving up, and I hate even the thought of that. Me, I'll wrestle a crocodile to the ground if it's gonna increase the chances of project success, but surrender?

In this case "surrender" means to trust in the creative process and continue on the journey without knowing how every detail will unfold or how it will turn out. It's the opposite of precise planning and strong-willed determination. After years of project management discipline, including consciously forcing events down a particular path and to a particular outcome, surrender doesn't come easily to me. But as a result of this book, I've been experimenting with this approach in my business leadership workshops. Naturally, I create elaborate plans for each workshop, and clients frequently demand a detailed timeline. But I am totally prepared to depart from those plans to respond to serendipity, opportunities, and even mistakes. If actual events depart from my plan, I ask, "What does this make possible?" Rather than trying to push the river, I notice where it wants to flow and then go there instead.

I can imagine the howling of those responsible for delivering a specific set of requirements by a fixed date. Don't worry, this tool isn't necessarily for those situations (although I'm open to the possibility it could help). It's for when you need creative breakthroughs, new ideas, and the wisdom to tackle seemingly impossible challenges.

Fear kills creativity. Learning to trust your creative essence, and the creative process itself, will give you the confidence to begin a task that initially seems very difficult, or even impossible. Of course, as I stand in the midst of 45 people from 16 different countries ready to surrender to what's possible beyond my detailed plans I most definitely feel fear. My inner critic goes on loudspeaker, jabbering away about the likelihood of making a complete fool of myself, and how the entire workshop could very well end up a complete disaster. Rather than yielding to that, I imagine that I'm leaping off a cliff and learning to fly on the way down. There's no turning back, and I just have to trust that I'll grow wings. Once I commit 100% to the creative process—once I surrender—I am free to do my best work, and invite others to contribute their very best as well. Somehow, magic happens. It just works.

It's difficult to put this into a Gantt chart! It's the old "and then a miracle occurs" task in project scheduling jokes. It's scary, but it works. Every time. Weird, huh?

Replace the "Voice of Judgment" (VOJ) with Curiosity

Plenty of research has proven that negative people seem smarter. And don't we all feel pressure to appear smarter to assure our position in the cosmic pecking order? Well, bad news—negativity is the enemy of creativity! I was consulting with an engineering group at a Fortune 500 company a while back when one director told this story: "My first month here I had lots of creative ideas and I shared them openly. People discouraged me. My second month here I had a few new ideas and shared them with a couple of colleagues. They told me why they weren't feasible. My third month here I had no ideas."

If you are in a typical work environment you'll be able to relate very well to this story. How many ideas would you suggest if you knew that the first response would be discouragement from your peers? And it's not just discouraging comments that diminish creativity. In her article "How to Kill Creativity," (registration or subscription required) Harvard Business School professor Teresa Amabile has said that working towards perfectly legitimate business imperatives such as productivity and control is also systematically crushing creativity. In short, she recommends that the first step toward increased creativity is to stop killing ideas.

Sadly we don't even need discouraging colleagues to kill our creativity—our own VOJ will happily oblige. Creativity in Business recommends an all-out attack on the barriers to our own creativity, including our own inner critic, judgment from others, and the collective judgment of social norms of our organizations. I've found that simply becoming aware of the stream of negative judgment emanating from others, my environment, and myself has given me more courage to persist in my creativity. Creativity is messy. The creative process is risky, and we're all naturally hesitant to risk failure, or appearing silly. But being uncomfortable is simply part of the process of being creative. Focus instead on being intensely curious about what will unfold once the volume of the VOJ is turned way down.

Pay Attention

In my experience the one word that characterizes much of human behavior in the workplace is "unconscious." Human beings easily fall into routines that our powerful brains efficiently relegate to our unconscious mind. Unfortunately being efficient isn't the only—or most important—goal of work. Being effective is far more desirable. "Pay Attention" is about noticing what is happening on a conscious level so that we can become aware of the ocean of opportunities in which we're swimming. It's also about listening deeply to others for other perspectives that we lack.

"Listening generously" has been an important part of every workshop I teach since I first learned of the importance of listening from Barbara Fittipaldi, president of the Center for New Futures, in 1995. Barbara helped me realize that, smart as I was, I knew only a fraction of what could be known about the universe. If I want access to the 99.9999999% that I don't know, I have to listen with an intensity most people use only when speaking. That kind of listening has been transformative for my projects. I personally feel it has been the secret to success in my most challenging projects.

Creativity in Business suggests a number of intriguing exercises to develop our ability to "pay attention," including gazing into the eyes of a colleague for two minutes without blinking, making up imaginary translations to Egyptian hieroglyphics, and visualizing your head as the world. Yes, really.

Yes, There's More!

If you haven't given up on all of this creativity mumbo jumbo after reading about the first three heuristics, there are six more you can explore, which I paraphrase as:

Ask "Stupid" Questions
Do Only What's Easy, Effortless, and Enjoyable
Don't Think About It
Yes or No – Make a Decision
Be Who You Are
Practice Detachment

I do hope that you'll be curious enough to not only read this book, but also do as I have and practice each of the exercises it contains. Personally, I've found it useful to have the paperback with me when I run into someone who shrinks from some creative experience. For example, in the middle of one of the many crazy workshop exercises I wave it about and shout, "I know you might feel a little silly doing this, but the exercises in THIS book from Stanford University are even weirder!"

Although difficult to explain, the impact of this book on my work has been profound. I would even say "magical" . . . but that would be so weird! Let me know what you experience.

Kimberly Wiefling is the author of Scrappy Project Management, one of the top-ranked project management books on Amazon in the US, published in Japanese, and growing in popularity around the world. She's the editor and co-author of Scrappy Women in Business, a collection of the stories of a dozen scrappy businesswomen. She splits her work time between the US and Japan.

©Copyright 2001-2011 Wiefling Consulting. All Rights Reserved.

Et Tu, Brute? The Obsolescence of Power

2011-08-30T09:20:08-07:00

by Kimberly M. Wiefling, M.S.

Traditional sources of power are obsolete in the 21st century business world -- or at least I hope they are. I came to this realization on a recent vacation, and it's been nagging at me ever since. Every year I travel to Ashland, Oregon, for the annual Shakespeare Festival (which is a bit of a misnomer since it runs February through November). This year I saw Julius Caesar, with a twist that I really appreciated: Caesar was played by a woman, and the script was changed to use "she" and "her" to match. This play left me feeling emotionally unsettled for the next 24 hours, but it had nothing to do with Caesar's gender bender. The intensity began before I even entered the theater. As I approached the entrance, a dozen huge banners featuring slain leaders from around the world hung from the lampposts and beat noisily in the wind. More banners adorned the theater lobby, and as I devoured the dates and details of each one, an icy feeling crept into my heart.

All of these leaders -- the good, the bad, and the ugly -- had been murdered. Leaders I'd considered "good guys," like former US president Abraham Lincoln, were mixed in with some of the most notorious bastards in history. But each banner had two sides -- like the two sides of power portrayed in the play. One painted the subject in a positive light, and the other side portrayed them as monsters, knaves, and worse. Good old Abe Lincoln was titled "Emancipator," but also "Tyrant." I'd never thought of him as a tyrant, but perhaps those he opposed felt differently. It got me thinking about power in project teams.

How are powerful project leaders viewed? Maybe it depends on who you ask. These days I'm pretty careful about how I throw my power around, but I was a bit more brash in my youth. When I was putting my heart, soul, and a whole lot of hours into leading a team worthy of success on a project that seemed destined for defeat, I was sometimes mistaken for a tyrant. Meanwhile, those whose cause I represented thought I was a godsend. Like the two sides of those banners, maybe I was both.

Power Bugs Me

Truth be told, I have a lifelong problem with people in power that started with my dad. (Don't worry, we're friends now.) As a child, it seemed to me that my father abused his position of power in our family. What's more, most of the people in positions of authority I've encountered since leaving home have not weakened my disillusionment. I was truly irritated when I read in Jeffrey Pfeffer's book, Power: Why Some People Have It and Others Don't, that research has proven you can increase your power in the corporate world via behaviors such as interrupting people and other despicable tactics. He also describes as "opponents" folks that I think would be better characterized as stakeholders, colleagues, and potential collaborators. In his view, there's only so much room at the top of the corporate hierarchy, so if you want to get there you've got to scramble over the other crabs trying to crawl up the sides of the bucket. Upon further reading, it turns out that he isn't advising people to be power-grabbing sociopaths so much as warning us of the realities of the world in which we live. Still, how depressing!

Although it's sometimes frustrating to be a project leader with little or no positional power over the people on our teams, I've begun to think that this works in our favor. In his fascinating book Good Boss, Bad Boss, Dr. Robert Sutton reports on how power corrupts human beings. According to statistically valid research, people with power are "F.I.N.E.R." That is, they:

Receive more positive FEEDBACK than people without power
Have less control over their IMPULSES
Think more about their own NEEDS than the needs of others
Are less EMPATHETIC than people without power
Think the RULES don't apply to them

Wonder if promotions favor such megalomaniacs? Nope! It's that having power poisons you. Yuck! I've disliked the whole notion of "power" for my whole life, and after reading Bob's book, I know why.

Think you aren't vulnerable? Think again. Human beings are awful judges of our own capabilities. According to a David Brooks in a 2009 New York Times op-ed, "Ninety-four percent of college professors believe they are above average teachers, and 90% of drivers believe they are above average behind the wheel. Researchers Paul J.H. Schoemaker and J. Edward Russo gave computer executives quizzes on their industry. Afterward, the executives estimated that they had gotten 5 percent of the answers wrong. In fact, they had gotten 80 percent of the answers wrong."

Pfeffer's book recounts experiments showing that even randomly assigned and temporary power causes people to change in rather unappealing ways. They become overconfident and insensitive to others, engage in stereotyping, and tend to see other people as a means to their own gratification. And the bad behavior only gets worse during times of stress and scarce resources, which pretty much describes every project I've ever seen.

Partnership Trumps Patriarchy

This is the century of collaboration. Not only do results improve when people work together to make good use of the group genius (see, for example, The Leadership Challenge), it's more enjoyable as well. We've already seen that power is accompanied by the risk of power poisoning. And while I hope there's no chance of being bumped off for being a power-poisoned project leader, people might decide they don't want to work on your team. Considering the tendency of people to look for another job when they're miserable, as well as the coming shortage of working age people in developed nations, relying on traditional sources of power doesn't seem to be a long-term leadership success strategy.

Mind you, I'm a realist, and very aware that wielding power works. That's why it's so tempting to misuse it! But I think I've finally learned my lesson through leading a volunteer organization for the past six years. The team consists of mid-level and senior level engineering professionals, and since they are all volunteers I have no formal hold on them. Although I'm naturally drawn to having my own way (who isn't?), I've found myself being much more thoughtful about how I interact with people on this team. They can quit at any moment, and if they don't complete their action items there isn't much I can do about it. Our relationship, and their commitment to being part of this worthy cause, is all that motivates them to keep their promises to me and to the team. When someone does a great job I lavish them with sincere praise. When people don't deliver and I want to rant, I don't. Instead I work myself into an empathetic state and pitch in to help out. When people want to drop out of the team for a while, I let them know they'll always be welcome back when their schedule allows it. And when tempers flare, I appeal to reason, touting the value of the relationships over the results.

In the end, I believe this has produced better outcomes than my previous single-minded obsession with results. After six years, I have finally come to realize that I'm a better leader when I don't use my power. (What a pity I didn't learn this lesson before alienating untold scores of people. Well, at least they didn't murder me in the Theater of Pompey on the Ides of March!)

21st Century Power Tools

Much of our modern understanding of power in the business world is fueled by outdated concepts of organizational hierarchies. The fact is that teams and organizations increasingly consist of people who do not share a clear reporting structure. Suppliers, customers, alliance partners, and university researchers collaborate with cross-functional business teams, with no one "boss" that they must all pay tribute to. Influence, collaboration, and facilitation -- not position or title -- are the 21st century power tools. Our project teams are frequently playing a game that only a team can win. As we seek to lead more effectively in this world of complex relationships, poisoned power is something we can do without.

Old-fashioned notions of power are obsolete, and downright tacky if you ask me. But be vigilant! Positional power is very seductive, as I was reminded during the brilliant ending of Measure for Measure at the festival. A devout nun who managed to retain her integrity through many temptations is invited to marry a powerful official many years her senior, who makes the tantalizing promise, "What's mine is yours." Although she's obviously not attracted to him personally, when she walks past the podium, the symbol of his power, she pauses to touch the sides of the pulpit. The look on her face is nothing short of ecstasy as she feels the power available to her through this unromantic union. The deal is done.

Next time I'm tested, I sincerely hope that I have the strength to walk past that pulpit!

Project Leadership Lessons from a Heart-wrenching Tragedy

2011-04-14T08:46:07-07:00

by Kimberly M. Wiefling, M.S.

Pardon me if I'm not my normally humorous self. I'm obsessing on disaster these days after the recent quake, tsunami, and nuclear power plant tragedies in Japan. While there have been plenty of tragedies in the past that could have consumed my emotional bandwidth (see the complete list on Wikipedia if you don't already feel like self-medicating with tequila), this is much more personal. Just about every month for the last five years I've flown to Japan to work for a couple of weeks. From my home in the Silicon Valley, Japan seemed a long way off. Until now, that is.

On March 11 at 4:00 AM the iPhone on my bed table rang. It was my dad calling from my parents' home in Florida. "Get up! Your friends are in trouble," he said. I don't know what he thought I could do about a natural disaster occurring over 5,000 miles away, but that's my dad—no matter how dire the circumstances, he always thinks there's something a person can do to make a positive difference.

Through my work with global Japanese companies I've met thousands of people who live in Japan. Many I consider friends, and some are as precious to me as my dear ol' dad. I had just returned from Asia two days ago, and I was in Tokyo only five days before the quake struck. So up I got, and immediately scoured the internet for news from Nippon, or 日本 as it is known there. Needless to say, what I saw was tragic beyond comprehension.

As the disaster unfolded before my eyes, I watched a tsunami wash away an entire village. At that moment, any illusion of separateness I may have felt was washed away with that village and those lives. This was not an event that I perceived as happening to "strangers," people distant from me. No, at that moment, with so many ties to people living in Japan, I strongly felt that this was happening to "us."

Shared Pain Focuses the Mind

Immediately, I felt an overwhelming urge to help. Figuring out how to help took a while, but there was no question that I needed to be a part of the solution. I could fill this article with the personal stories of people I know, and how they are carrying on in the face of a continuing series of threats and disasters, but there are plenty of places you can read about that. Instead, let's honor the memory of those who have suffered and died by exploring what this experience can teach us about being better project leaders. I've boiled it down to the following three insights for starters, though there are surely more lessons to be learned:

"We-centric thinking" clarifies the goal and focuses people on finding solutions.
The human mind has a limited ability to imagine risks. There is no bottom to "worse."
"Possibility thinking" is effective even in tragic and seemingly impossible situations.

Crisis Creates Clarity

The moment I grasped the situation in Japan (thanks to horrifyingly vivid videos on the web and graphic descriptions of events from my friends living there), I was immediately willing to do whatever necessary. The overarching goal was so clear, and the need so immediate and compelling, that I was willing to do whatever I could to help. I started contacting people on both sides of the Pacific to see what could be done, and so did many others. Perhaps most inspiringly, the people of Japan reached out to help each other with a depth of compassion and selflessness that left the world in awe. One American woman living near the affected region wrote us that, in this time of food shortages, she returns home each night to find that someone has left food on her doorstep. Heck, after forgetting to pack my lunch for a recent university alumni picnic, I sat—foodless—with a couple who never even offered me so much as an olive.

Imagine if everyone involved in a challenging project first and foremost had an attitude of "What can I do to help?" What if each of the people involved on your project—teammates, sponsors, executives, suppliers, and customers—brought that attitude to every meeting and discussion? Don't get me wrong, I believe that most people intend to help, even if that intention is buried deep within their psyche. But it gets obscured by time pressures, differing perceptions of the goals, and competition for resources, not to mention pride, turf wars, and ego.

Over the years I've noticed a sort of fragmentation that occurs in some project ecosystems that can be summed up as "us vs. them." In stressful project environments (which is basically all of them, but who's counting?) I've witnessed a variety of different schisms:

Our company vs. the customer
Our project team vs. the execs
Me vs. "the others"

When I facilitate team effectiveness workshops, I sometimes divide the participants into two groups and locate them in opposite corners of the room, giving both groups the same instructions: get the other group to come to their corner of the room. Then I sit back and watch. Even when the entire group is comprised of people from the same company, even the same division—people who know each other, for crying out loud—successfully completing the task by simply having the groups switch positions is a solution that eludes them for as long as 23 minutes. (Yes, that's the world record, but I'm sworn to secrecy which company it was.) Separating people by as little as 4 meters is enough to cause the "us vs. them" syndrome.

As long as the illusion of separateness persists we can find ourselves working at cross-purposes with the very people needed to achieve our goals. When instead we view ourselves as "we," we're unencumbered by the obstacles of ego, hierarchy, and competition. Adrift on the same iceberg, we're instantly united in helping each other find solutions that enable us to step safely onto the shore of success. When we create this sense of unity among the various stakeholders (ideally without the presence of an external hazard, natural or man-made) we get everyone involved and focused on making a positive difference.

There Is No Bottom to Worse

In view of the fact that multiple layers of backup systems failed in the Fukushima nuclear power plants, I'm of the opinion that human beings have no imagination for disaster.

In Scrappy Business Contingency Planning the author (and my friend), Michael Seese, admonishes those doing disaster planning not to focus on what kind of disaster might interrupt power&mdashponly on what to do when that power is interrupted, as it will surely be. Michael has a talent for gloom and doom thinking, but I doubt that even he could have imagined all of the ways things could go badly wrong at the power plants. When I asked him to comment by email on the unfolding nuclear nightmare, he replied, "In some sense, I see the Japanese response to the events at Fukushima as being like our Y2K preparation efforts. I worked on several Y2K remediation projects. I couldn't help but smile when—after the clock struck midnight and our world didn't grind to a halt—people said, 'Nothing happened! Look at all that money that was wasted.' Of course, nothing happened—because we spent that time, effort, and money. It's the same thing in Japan. Who could say what would have happened had they not pumped in seawater, and dumped more water in by helicopter?

"One takeaway from this disaster," Seese continues, "is that business contingency plans need to tested, and re-tested. Of course, it's not practical to test a nuclear meltdown. But hopefully the lessons learned at Fukushima Daiichi will enable Japan—and other countries—to make their nuclear power plants safer."

Yes, let's all hope so. I know some people think "dilution is the solution to pollution," but our vast oceans can only absorb so much radioactivity.

Even in Japan, where risk aversion, attention detail, and avoidance of failure are legendary (almost a national pastime), engineers failed to imagine the recent catastrophic string of events and design around them. In my experience, no amount of risk assessment and planning captures all possibilities. No matter how thorough we believe our risk assessment has been, no matter how many "lessons learned" from past projects we apply to the present, things can always be worse than we imagined. Something more than risk management and post mortems are required. I personally believe that is a plan to deal with the worst-case scenario if it should happen in spite of our best efforts. We need to apply "Project Contingency Planning"—not merely risk analysis—to our projects. Especially in situations with extreme consequences for unanticipated failure, we need to be asking ourselves the question, "If things still go wrong, what are we going to do about it?"

The Best Is Always Yet to Come

"We are continually faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly disguised as insoluble problems." – John W. Gardner, US administrator (1912 - 2002)

Faced with the choice to either give up hope or trudge on in a hopeless cause, I'm prone to choose trudging. Why? Because if I've learned anything in 20 years of leading, and working on, all kinds of projects with varying degrees of impossibility, it's that human beings—myself included—are notoriously poor judges of when something is hopeless.

Even in the most dire circumstances, asking "What does this make possible that wasn't possible before?" helps open the mind to creative ideas and breakthrough thinking. I've been pondering this in relationship to the quake/tsunami/meltdown triple tragedy, and so far I've come up with a few possibilities:

This will bring the world closer to Japan. People all over the world have voiced their admiration of the dignity, compassion, and selflessness of the people of Japan. My friends in Japan are a bit amused by how much attention the press is giving to the headline, "There's no looting!" They can't imagine why anyone would loot. While some cynics say it's just that negative events aren't being reported, I disagree. I can personally testify to getting my wallet back with over 30,000 yen in it after leaving it in a Tokyo taxi. The driver delivered it to my hotel for free, left it at the front desk, and it was returned to me the next morning.

This will bring Japan closer to their neighbors. After years of icy relationships, Korea and China sent help to Japan . . . and Japan accepted.

This will bring the people of Japan closer to each other. Disasters have a way of recalibrating us about what's important. In a country where avoiding risk is almost a national pastime, living with the daily threat of aftershocks and longer-term consequences of nuclear contamination are likely to shift thinking about risk. Now that daily life is risky, perhaps other kinds of risk-taking, like innovation and breakthrough thinking, won't seem quite as dangerous by comparison. As Helen Keller said, "Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. The fearful are caught as often as the bold."

I think it's pretty safe to say that any project you or I may be working on can't be nearly as dreadful as the situation unfolding in Japan. Consequently, I'm quite certain that we can find some "great opportunities brilliantly disguised as insoluble problems" in whatever project currently stymies us. Even if it's true that the situation is hopeless, the illusion that we can make a difference can inspire us to build capabilities that make the next situation less so. There are advantages to leading your team as if the best is yet to come while dealing with the current reality. Jim Collins labeled this "The Stockdale Paradox":

"You must never confuse faith that you will prevail in the end—which you can never afford to lose—with the discipline to confront the most brutal facts of your current reality, whatever they might be." – Rear Admiral James B. Stockdale

The New Normal

Some of my colleagues at ALC Education in Tokyo slept on the 19^th floor of their office building the night of the quake as they waited for trains to resume operation. Others—parents with stranded children—walked for six hours or more to get home to them. In the weeks that followed they weathered power shortages, devastating news of the missing and the dead, and ongoing scares from aftershocks and radiation. Through it all the people of Japan are inspiring the entire world through their stunning examples of selflessness and compassion—two ingredients that I feel quite sure I can use to improve my next project. I hope we'll all emerge committed to applying these and the other lessons learned to our projects and our lives as life on Earth returns to the "new normal."

Related Links
If you'd like to donate to the Japan Relief Fund, one option is through the American Red Cross: https://american.redcross.org/site/SPageServer?pagename=ntld_main.

Kimberly Wiefling is the author of Scrappy Project Management, one of the top-ranked project management books on Amazon in the US, published in Japanese, and growing in popularity around the world. She splits her work time between the US and Japan.

©Copyright 2001-2011 Wiefling Consulting. All Rights Reserved. About us Site Map View current sponsorship opportunities (PDF) Contact us for more information or e-mail info@projectconnections.com Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Avoiding Stone Age Practices in the Age of the Internet

2011-02-01T15:09:17-08:00

by Kimberly M. Wiefling, M.S.

Albert Einstein has been widely quoted as saying "There are two things that are infinite, the universe, and human stupidity -- and I'm not sure about the universe." Like most people, I usually write this off as an amusing, sarcastic quip he made on a bad day. I mean, it can't possibly be taken literally, right? Then I wander across a news item or business situation that make me wonder if maybe he was on to something. In spite of common sense, again and again I encounter companies repeating tragically avoidable mistakes, hamstringing themselves with the same ludicrous errors their competitors (fortunately) are also making.

Abandon Hope, All Ye Who Enter Here

Although Steven McConnell clearly mapped out a step-by-step recipe for successful software product development projects over a decade ago in his Software Project Survival Guide, a surprising level of ignorance seems to prevail in some software development organizations. Here are a few real-world examples that I have encountered in the past year:

In spite of the availability of free bug tracking software like Bugzilla, one software organization that has been in business for over a decade still didn't have a bug tracking system. No, I'm not kidding.
Another, similar decade-old organization pushed changes in the source code directly to the live production server, upon which their customers depended. Really, they did this.
One software product development team in a Fortune 100 company reported that their schedule had slipped due to the fact that, during the quality testing phase, they'd unexpectedly found bugs that needed to be fixed before shipment. Yes, unexpectedly.

Using one of my favorite thinking tools, called API (Assumption of Positive Intent), I searched my mind for an explanation of why smart, well-educated, experienced people would behave in such seemingly less-than-brilliant ways. I'm sorry to be negative, but I came up empty at that particular moment. Stick with me; by the end of the article all shall be revealed. But until then, more mayhem!

We Can Send a Man to the Moon, and Yet . . .

The widespread availability of inexpensive, even free, internet-based collaboration tools has made working with people scattered around the planet relatively easy compared to even a few years ago. (In the not-so-distant past I was sending memory sticks of big files to Japan through the physical mail!) Today, wikis, Skype, and shared document services such as Sharefile, Dropbox or Box.net have given even small companies like mine the ability to do business around the globe almost effortlessly -- at least from an IT standpoint. And yet I'm personally aware of large, so-called global businesses that are still hampered by issues like these:

No ability to videoconference from work (although Skyping from a nearby Starbucks is no problem!)

No storage location where a file can be stored, where every employee in the world can access it (but placing it unofficially on Dropbox is easy as pie!)

No cross-divisional team collaboration website that can serve as a project dashboard, collaboration space, and team memory for projects (but for $100 you can set up one heck of a collaboration system on sites.google.com)

Naturally, my suggestions to explore using commonly available tools like Google Sites (Google's version of a wiki), Skype (free videoconferencing), and cloud file storage tools are met with the standard retort: "Our IT group won't let us use that due to security issues." Point well taken. Security is certainly a valid consideration. But so is getting our work done, eh? And if email were invented today, I am quite sure it would be forbidden by IT departments worldwide due to similar concerns, as would credit cards (they track everything we do!) and cell phones (and they know where we are!).

Any one of these 21^st century super-cool tools won't necessarily work for a particular environment, but it's up to the project manager and the IT people to work together to figure out what will work. The question we should be asking is "What WILL make it possible to efficiently, effectively, and securely share files, documents, and other critical project information in today's global business environment?" I'm truly stymied by encountering the brick wall of "It's not possible." year after year with various clients. No worries: I'm not tired, and I'm not giving up. I'm just puzzled. Perhaps I'll be deluged by responses full of cautionary notes, but I personally would prefer an onslaught of email answering the question, "What would make it possible?"

Tortured by the Demons of Excessive Workload and Aversion to Planning

As I write, it's starting to dawn on me that stupidity can't possibly be the explanation for the bewildering examples of worst practices above. But what is at the root of all of this, or at least the largest of the many tendrils?

Last time I checked everyone I know who had a job was more overworked than ever, with at least a half-dozen important tasks or projects on their plate at once, all of which were prioritized either HOT, VERY HOT, RED HOT, or DO IT NOW! The necessity of taking the time to plan -- not just what we do, but how we do it -- has been understandably put on the backburner. If you haven't read Chapter 5 of my Scrappy Project Management book recently, you might want to check out this chapter, available free on ProjectConnections.com, for more insights into this "tyranny of the urgent."

Working faster, "doing more with less," and the all-too-common firefighting, heroics, and diving catches can feel like an enlivening experience, even as you're digging your own project grave. An aversion to planning is characteristic of many human beings (especially engineers), and it never feels like there's enough time to plan. In a way it's actually quite a relief not to have the time to do any long-term strategic thinking, especially when the world sometimes seems to be changing so rapidly that any such plans will be obsolete long before they're implemented. We can just come in to work every day, sort through what's piled up in our email inbox, and respond to the crisis de jour, adrenaline coursing through our veins the whole time. Wahoo!

Corporate Culture Trumps All, and Yet is Neglected

Peter Drucker is credited with saying, "Culture eats strategy for breakfast," meaning that if you can't get the company culture right it won't much matter what kind of bug-tracking software you implement, or whether you have a wiki or a place to share files. In spite of a wide array of research, books, and articles on exactly what works with millions of people worldwide, I still find that most work environments fail to implement even the most basic elements required of healthy, vibrant, work environments: corporate cultures capable of fostering and enhancing business results. (See my previous article on this topic if you want more on this rant.) The project leader is the source of culture in the immediate project environment, so we're responsible for what Mr. Drucker claims is even more high leverage than business strategy. What an awesome opportunity and responsibility! Most of the changes required to create a best-in-class culture cost absolutely nothing, except the time to plan and implement practices such as:

Making sure that everyone who's working together gets to know each other face-to-face
Making sure each individual knows what's expected of them, and has the tools and skills to do it
Providing a clear line-of-sight from individual goals to organizational goals, mission, and purpose

But we're all still burdened with the fact that we're human beings, and our nature is to succumb to the overwhelm of extremely demanding work environments. Even I need a reminder now and then that I'm venturing far outside the zone of common sense. Let's help each other stay out of that well-traveled area, shall we? Make a pact with your teammates early in the project that you'll raise a red flag when reason recedes.

A Beacon of Light in the Darkness

My friend and former colleague Jateen Parekh is the founder and CTO of Jelli, a company that's re-inventing radio. I heard him give a talk recently where he shared what he'd learned on the journey from being an engineer to a company founder, people leader, and business manager. He's a dyed-in-the-wool technologist by background, passion, and profession, and yet in his role as the leader of a very techno-centric company he's embraced pretty much every one of the business management, process excellence, and people-focused practices referred to above.

Listening to Jateen reminded me that working on the business -- on the way we conduct ourselves while doing business -- is just as important as working in the business, especially when it is OUR business. Ignoring best practices proven to work better than chaos, lacking the discipline to follow processes that we know make sense, pretending common sense doesn't apply to our work environment because "our business is different" ... these choices are inexcusable for today's project managers. Surely this is one of the most important roles of a project leader. We have a responsibility to step back and question the processes and practices in use, and ask if there is a better way to achieve our business results, find answers to this question, and thoughtfully implement solutions that enjoy the buy-in, commitment, and support of all key stakeholders.

If you haven't got time for that, then at least pause and reflect on this bit of advice from Dr. Eli Goldratt, author of -- among many books -- the bestseller The Goal: "Just stop doing the stupid stuff! The rest is genius!"

Kimberly Wiefling is the author of Scrappy Project Management, currently ranked #1 on Amazon Kindle US in Total Quality Management. She splits her work time between the US and Japan.

Related Links
For more thoughts on productive collaboration, read Tools for Teams: Beyond the Email Bottleneck, by Tony Christopher. If you're ready to plan how your team will work together, our Communication Plan can help. To get those critical culture issues worked out, get everyone together before the project with a great Kickoff Meeting (complete with agenda), map out those Team Roles and Responsibilities together, and ensure everyone understands the Project Vision and how their work relates to it.

Give Thanks If You're Not Miserable at Work... Most People Are!

2010-11-22T08:17:49-08:00

Another noggin' floggin' by Kimberly M. Wiefling, M.S.

This time of year in the US we celebrate something called "Thanksgiving." According to Wikipedia, it's one of the busiest travel times annually, and the night before Thanksgiving is one of the most crowded times for bars and pubs due to college students returning home for the holiday. Traditionally, it's a time to be thankful for our good fortune . . . a time when sometimes-whiney, often-ungrateful cynics (like me) pause to reflect on what we're grateful for in our lives. This year I sincerely hope it's a break from moaning about the economy, condemning the evils of outsourcing, and endlessly ragging on one political party or another's ineptness. After all, in the United States of America we continue consume 30% of the world's resources and produce 30% of the world's waste in spite of making up only 5% of the world's population. And most of us shower in water clean enough to drink while around a billion people around the world don't have access to clean drinking water. So when people ask me how I'm doing, I say something like, "Well, no one's shooting at me, or blocking my access to YouTube, and the gas main under my home hasn't blown up!" My life is truly blessed!

Grateful Not to Be Receiving a Steady Paycheck

In addition to the above-mentioned problems I don't have, there's a long list of items that I'm extremely thankful for, including not having a regular job in a typical corporation. Yup, that's right—while many of my friends and colleagues are grumbling about the loss of their jobs and the threat of being plunged into financial ruin if they can't find another one tout de suite, I'm grateful to be an independent consultant without a steady paycheck. Why? Aside from years of experience in Corporate America that were, shall we say, less than life-affirming, there is growing evidence documenting what I've always sensed about working in the corporate world: It's is a soul-sucking experience most of the time. (If you're a business owner or executive reading this, don't worry. I'm sure your company is fine, and it's just "the others" that are messed up.)

Although you might think people would be grateful for any job during tough economic times, the Conference Board survey this past January found that worker satisfaction in America is at an all time low, with less than 45% of people happy in their jobs. Other studies claim "87% of Americans don't like their jobs." Well, no matter. What's a few dozen percentage points among friends?! Although I can't confirm this based on my own delightful work experience, Americans "hate" or "don't like" their jobs more now than during any time in the past 20 years. And the misery isn't limited to low-paying jobs for displaced autoworkers in Detroit. It spans all income levels, ages and geographic areas. What gives?

In April, Maritz Research found that only seven percent of employees "strongly agree" that they trust their senior leaders or their co-workers to look out for their best interests. Wow, now that is sobering data! I can understand lack of trust in senior leaders, as they're typically blamed for everything by people with a helpless victim mentality. But co-workers? This is a new twist on workplace dysfunctionality. Just stop reading for a minute and look around the office at your co-workers. According to this study, nine out of ten don't trust you! As a project manager, I hope you haven't done anything to deserve that, but we'll talk about that later.

That Sucking Sound Is Your Company's Profits Draining Away

Deloitte found in their annual "Ethics and Workplace Survey" (PDF) that lack of trust and lack of transparent communication are the reasons most commonly cited by employees planning to leave their jobs. Losing talented people is expensive, as anyone who's lost a critical resource in the middle of a high-priority project can attest. But even people who stay contribute less when they are not "engaged"—the popular buzzword these days for employees who give a . . . er, give a hoot (in other words, enthusiastically care) about their work.

It seems obvious to me that disengaged employees would be less productive than highly motivated, engaged employees, but some people have felt the need to spend enormous amounts of money proving it. To anyone who has had an unpleasant work experience, this should seem a bit like researching the impact of lack of food on human health. But, hey, bring on the results. Gallup found that the ratio of engaged to disengaged employees was far greater in world-class organizations (10:1) vs. average organizations (3:1), and they estimate it's worth $300 billion USD in lost productivity annually in the US alone. Hewitt Associates' 2009 research found that organizations where 65% or more of employees are "engaged" outperformed those where less than 40% of employees were engaged, even in a bad economy. Based on stockholder returns (some financial analyst's assessment of business success—certainly not the only measure of success), companies with high engagement had about 20% higher than average shareholder returns. Those with low engagement had returns 44% below the average. That's a spread of over 60% in returns—nothing to sneeze at, especially if you purchase your own company's stock.

Mass Exodus

Leaders who don't turnaround their relationships with their employees better hope the economy doesn't pick up, because when it does they're going to have to deal with significantly increased turnover. According to Deloitte, over a third of employed Americans plan to look for a new job as the economy picks up. As I've alluded to before, this is mostly because they have lost trust in their company, feel they've been treated unfairly or unethically, or they're unhappy with the lack of transparency in communication from their leadership. Naturally, the employees most likely to find another job are the top performers. And Right Management's Employee Satisfaction Survey this past May found that more than half of employers had lost top performers over the past six months.

Don't Worry! Happiness Is In Fashion!

You may have heard about the country of Bhutan's Gross National Happiness, or GNH as they call it, introduced in 1972 by King Jigme Singye Wangchuck. A sophisticated survey is used to measure the wellbeing of the Bhutanese people.

But the pursuit of happiness isn't limited to this tiny Asian country nestled in the Himalayas near Bangladesh and Myanmar. Gallup recently published a book about the 5 essential elements of wellbeing. One of my colleagues, Dr. Gerald Wagner, is a fellow at the Gallup Institute, current Director of Bellevue University's Wellbeing Institute, and the founder of WholeLifeWellbeing.com. In a recent email, Jerry shared with me some of the exciting work happening in the wellbeing movement:

The city of Victoria in Canada has undertaken a major effort to establish itself as a city known for its "happiness." In 2008, Victoria happiness advocates, led by Michael Pennock, a creator of the Bhutan happiness survey, brought together a partnership to launch a Happiness City campaign. The Victoria partnership included the City Council, the University of Victoria, the United Way, the Victoria Foundation, the Vancouver Island Health Authority, and the provincial Ministry of Healthy Living and Sport. Victoria used the Bhutan happiness survey to gather subjective data from its residents. In October 2010, the city of Victoria conducted a second survey, and will do so on a bi-annual basis to attempt to ascertain the effectiveness of actions taken to improve wellbeing. Now the city of Seattle is organizing to implement a program similar to that in Victoria. They have a goal to include other cities as collaborators.

To me, this rising interest in wellbeing is something to be enormously thankful for. My dad didn't expect to like his job—and he didn't—but he had to go in and do it every day for over 40 years, like it or not. Today, even the harshest of managers should be compelled to change by the growing body of research linking productivity and profitability to increased employee engagement. Happy countries, happy cities—how about spreading happiness to the corporate world, where personal misery results in far more than just a drop in productivity and profits? At the very least let's spread this happiness stuff to our projects. After all, if your project is done on time and on budget, meeting all product requirements, but your team loathes you, each other and your company—is that success? And will they do a fantastic job on the next project?

Just to be clear: I'm not suggesting making teammates happy at the expense of achieving project success. I'm suggesting teammate happiness as a critical ingredient to that success.

Who Will Make Employees Thankful for Their Jobs?

You. Yes, you. I have searched for over 20 years for someone who feels responsible for causing workplace dysfunctionality, and I have never found the culprit. I therefore conclude that many years ago aliens landed on Earth, set up sick, twisted, dysfunctional workplaces, then left. Or—and this is an even scarier possibility—WE are causing it!

That's both the good news and the bad news. It's a common human habit to blame others, but we're often like the prisoner sitting in our jail cell jangling the keys in our hands. I'm sure there will be some protests and "yes, buts" from more than a few valued readers, but my years of experience convince me that the happiness of a project team is most directly impacted by their project leader. Deny it if you like. It's a cold, hard fact that most people's "happiness coefficient" (which I define as their salary divided by their blood pressure) is most strongly impacted by their direct manager. OK, some of the people on your project team don't directly report to you, but if they interact with you a lot then you're a primary influencer of their happiness level. And as such, you can significantly improve their experience of the workplace.

Project team members also dramatically influence each other, so please don't wait to become a project manager to start spreading happiness in your path. It's not an either/or choice. After many years of using only brute force (mostly out of habit), I have discovered that results can be achieved in a healthy and satisfying work environment, without riding your co-workers like rented mules. No one can give you what you deny yourself! Grasp this golden opportunity to own your power and use it for good, not evil.

Start with Building Trust

If you're determined to increase the Employee Happiness Coefficient on your team you may be asking, "Where do I start?" My recommendation is to start with building trust because it has a huge impact of employee happiness. Let's take a look at a few more results from the Maritz Research poll I referred to earlier. For example, over half of respondents (58 percent) with strong trust in their management were completely satisfied with their job, while only four percent with weak trust in management were completely satisfied with their job. Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) with strong trust in management would be happy to spend the rest of their career with their present company. This compares to only seven percent for those who have weak trust in management. Only three percent with weak management trust look forward to coming to work every day. For those with strong management trust, 50 percent responded they look forward to coming to work every day. Now that is something to be thankful for!

If you don't have a clue how to build trust, start by making a list of all of the ways you can imagine to undermine or destroy trust—then reverse each item in the list. Here's an example to get you started:

How to Undermine, Shred or Completely Destroy Trust in the Project Team	Reversal » How to Create or Increase Trust in the Project Team
Take credit for the work of others.	Come on, do I really need to fill this side in for you?! Give it a shot yourself.
Blame others for problems that occur, even if you contributed to them.
Set false deadlines to make sure there's enough pressure on the team to keep them motivated.
Don't waste time getting to know people as human beings. It's business, not personal.
Throw your teammates under the bus at critical review meetings in front of senior executives.
Never breathe a word of appreciation for the good work of your people. They get a paycheck, for pity's sake!
Don't reveal anything of yourself personally, especially any vulnerabilities.
Blame and shame people publicly for mistakes, and berate them harshly so they'll never do it again.
Never ask for ideas from your team. After all, you're supposed to know everything. That's why they put you in charge!
Agree to nonsensical schedules and unreasonable demands of executives and other stakeholders, no matter how ridiculous they are, then take your team on a death march to make it happen.
Don't express any interest in people's personal lives, or their cultures.
Never apologize when you hurt someone's feelings or anger a co-worker, even if it is entirely your fault.
Keep information secret. This project is on a "need to know" basis, and they don't need to know.
Don't spend precious project time talking about the big picture or the overall purpose of the project. Just tell people what tasks to do.
Micro-manage your team to be sure they do everything just right.
Don't worry about what happens to your team members after the project is over. It's every man for himself.

Also, Patrick Lencioni's The Five Dysfunctions of a Team has some terrific trust-building exercises in the appendix.

Call to Action

Are your teammates thankful for your presence on the project team? Are your most talented people inspired, enthusiastic and engaged in their work? Do you know how to find out? Don't be satisfied merely to be a worker collecting a paycheck. Make a positive difference. Start today by building trust. I don't think it's an exaggeration to say that, as a project leader, every interaction either builds or undermines trust. Trust takes a long time to build and only a nanosecond to destroy, so start building trust in your most important relationships now. If you do, I'm guessing that a year from now you'll be on the list of what your teammates are thankful for.

Related Links
Geof Lory has written several columns on specific strategies for building trust at work, starting with Vunerability-Based Trust. Cinda Voegtli explains in depth how to Get Relevant to Get Results from your technical teams -- and dramatically improve your relationship with them. If you really want to prove to your team that you value them, reward their efforts without getting hokey.

Changing the Cultural Cement in Which Your Project Swims

2010-09-14T09:01:35-07:00

I was recently told by another smarty-pants consultant that, "As long as the team makes a logical proposal to the executives, they will support their recommendation." My retort: "Then why do people smoke?" I mean, it's not logical to smoke. There's plenty of data to suggest it's bad for your health. If logic alone were sufficient to change behavior we wouldn't find ourselves staring at the hauntingly familiar "lessons not learned" at the end of every project. What keeps us locked into behaviors that don't make sense, at least to other people?

I believe it's our "culture." Try as we might to change our own and other people's behavior, "cultural cement" keeps us trapped in old, familiar, and accepted behaviors.

Country Culture and Company Culture

Many projects these days involve geographically dispersed teams, with members from a wide variety of country cultures. While there's plenty of kibitzing about language barriers, decision-making style, and time zones challenges, the positive benefits of global teams continue to drive this trend.

I've witnessed this growing trend in my own work over the past five years with global Japanese companies. Yes, even Japan—known for a preference for all things Japanese—has reached beyond its border to embrace global diversity on a scale I've only seen elsewhere in my hometown, the San Francisco Bay Area, where over half of the population doesn't speak English at home.

In May, for example, I worked with 42 people from 16 different countries who all work for a large Japanese bank, and last month I worked with 37 people from 12 different countries who work for a global manufacturer of high tech products that are used in over half of the computers on the planet. These were short projects—only a week long—but the latter included 7 teams presenting business breakthrough ideas to their CEO.

While the country culture and native languages of the people involved certainly impacted these experiences, it was the company culture that stood out in my mind as the key factor in how these groups performed. To my eyes, people from the same company who were born in places as diverse as the Czech Republic, Brazil, Indonesia, Thailand, Philippines, Germany, and the US had more in common with each other than Japanese people working for different companies. The bank banned me from doing exercises that required balloons and peacock feathers, although they did make an exception for my rubber chicken. (I guess banks are "bank-like" all over the world.) Meanwhile, the high tech company experience included tours of smelting facilities and showcases of high-temperature superconducting cables, and embraced all of the wackiness I could throw at them. Irrespective of the country cultural diversity, these company cultures couldn't have been more different.

What is Culture?

If you study country culture you'll inevitably stumble across something called "the iceberg model," which is giving way to "the island model" represented in the picture below. As you can see, above the surface are the obvious characteristics considered "typical" of people from a particular country. While I gag at even the thought of such stereotype-reinforcing generalizations, I have to admit that there does seem to be some truth in them. Many of my Japanese colleagues do seem to be a bit more reserved in their business interactions than my American colleagues, and there certainly does seem to be a noticeable difference in the decision-making process between American and Japanese companies.

Figure 1. The Island Model of Culture.

The obvious traits we associate with "the norm" of a particular culture are those that an outsider can easily observe. Walk down a busy Tokyo street during lunchtime and you can't help but notice that they're a sea of dark suits, white shirts and dark ties. In the evening, you might wonder how such "shy and conservative" businessmen can keep so many karaoke joints in business. Only a peek below the surface could resolve this seeming contradiction. Below the water level you'll find the unobservable influencers of behavior—factors an outsider would likely miss in a casual encounter. These are the values, beliefs, and norms driving the observable behaviors. As far as I can tell, these influential factors and their observable characteristics are what cross-cultural experts refer to as a country's "culture." Beneath all of the obvious and obscure differences lies the bedrock of shared human being-ness (except perhaps for sociopaths).

Taking one particular characteristic as an example, shown below, it's interesting that a shared intent like "intending to get something done" can show up so differently both above and below the waterline. The big picture focus and task orientation typical of the US stands in contrast to the detail focus and group cohesion orientation of Japan. As I learned while gritting my teeth while observing a few cross-cultural workshops recently, standing on one island observing the other, each person usually judges the other's actions in a negative light while ignoring underlying motivations and the shared intent. As you can imagine, this leads to all sorts of negativity and misunderstandings in multi-cultural teams.

Figure 2. Detailed Example of One Cultural Trait

What is Company Culture?

If we apply the island model to the business world, then company culture consists of the observable behaviors and underlying values, motivations, and norms typical of a particular company. It's "the way we do things here" that newcomers are indoctrinated in—for better or worse—during their first weeks. It's the collection of expectations and taboos that shape the behavior and communication of people operating in that culture. It's the water we swim in, and the air we breathe: largely unnoticed, but ever-present. And, although there are plenty of business consultants claiming the expertise of cultural change—transformation even—flout those norms and you'll find that culture can be strong as cement, and tougher to alter than your spouse's irritating lifelong habits.

I believe that culture is the main reason successive projects suffer similar problems, and post the same list of "lessons learned" at the end. Time after time we underestimate the schedule, rely on miracles to attain the finish date, and fall short of our hopes and dreams in spite of the heroics, because we were too busy to include the voice of the customer in our product development lifecycle. Next time will be different . . . we hope. But there is no hope, because it seems that the seeds of failure are sewn into the fabric of our culture.

Why Culture Matters More Than Strategy and Tactics

After the last paragraph, you might assume that I think company culture is just something we're stuck with, and perhaps start polishing up your resume so you can find a place with a more attractive culture. Actually, that's not a bad idea if you're one of the 77% of people that a recent Gallup poll says "hate their jobs" and you perceive yourself as a helpless victim of external forces beyond your influence. But if you're not yet ready to jump ship, and if you're willing to take on the challenge of cultural change, there is hope (and a long list of business reasons) for doing so.

Culture impacts execution, so it should be high on the list of important issues for every project leader. Business outcomes such as revenue, profit, high quality, brand equity and customer delight are the result of what your people say and do, not the contents of some project plan or strategy document on a shared drive . . . somewhere . . . that the execs shared once or twice at an "all employees" meeting or attached to an email (that was probably not read anyhow). The culture of a corporate environment is far more ubiquitous and powerful than any ornate strategy, roadmap, or product development lifecycle that is only seen during occasional quarterly reviews (or maybe never), and that culture influences everything that is said and done. In the words of Peter Drucker, "Culture eats strategy for breakfast."

Transplanting Cultures

If you want to change culture there are highly INeffective ways to go about it. Here's one. Imagine lopping off the top of an island (above the water level) from one company and plopping it down onto the base of another company. The observable behaviors and characteristics would have no meaningful connection to their underlying source. This would truly be a Frankenstein culture, and lead to all kinds of confusion for both the people in the system and those outside who must interact with this "island's" people.

That's essentially what some companies do when they try to copy best practices—behaviors above the waterline—from other companies. Or, put another way, grafting a unicorn's head onto a scorpion is unlikely to produce a unicorn. Installing a Silicon Valley style cappuccino machine and foosball table in the cafeteria of a stodgy old firm won't make people more innovative, and instituting "The Toyota Way" in a political shark tank won't empower individuals to kaizen their jobs away. This is a mistake many companies make when they adopt "the next big thing." Don't go there!

Cultural Cement – Not Set in Stone!

Although resistance to cultural change is legendary, my own personal experience is that you can change culture. If you're a project manager who wants to increase your chances of success, you SHOULD change it. But, whether you're an individual contributor, a project manager, or a CEO, you do have influence on the culture via your behavior in the business. Just as one exasperating jerk can ruin the workday for dozens of people, you can use your own behavior and communication to create a pocket of excellence that will inevitably impact everyone who crosses your path. The first and most important step is answering the question, "Change to what?"

Making Culture Work for You

You could spend 20 years, as I have, reading a pile of books, digging through data, experimenting, and exploring what makes for an effective company culture that produces predictable and repeatable results without sucking people's will to live. Or you could just implement the methods proven to work by years of statistically valid research. A good place to start is your own personal commitment to absolute integrity in everything you say and do, and a passion for enabling others to achieve their greatest potential through your work together.

Here's what I've distilled out of lifetime of study, being obsessed with the idea that maybe earning a living didn't have to make me wish I were dead! I've applied these concepts with vigor in my own work for the past 15 years, and I can personally recommend each and every one of these approaches as solid, viable, and relevant to most businesses. If you want to change company culture, change four key drivers of culture: the behaviors of Leaders, Managers, Individuals, and Teams. Here's a guide to behavior in each area that I promise will transform your culture—if not the whole company, at least the part between your two ears.

Leaders

Companies with strong "transformational leadership" practices outperform those with weak ones by a long shot, as shown below for a five-year period:

	Strong Transformational Leadership Practices	Weak Transformational Leadership Practices
Revenue Growth	841%	-49%
Stock Price Growth	204%	76%

Ref: Download the full report at Leadership Practices, Adaptive Corporate Culture, and Company Financial Performance, Sonoma Leadership Systems.

These practices, sifted out of an enormous body of research by Posner and Kouzes and documented in their book The Leadership Challenge, boil down to five behaviors that any mildly conscious being can learn to adopt:

Model the Way – Be a good example of the behaviors you'd like to see in others.
Inspire a Shared Vision – Get everyone working toward shared goals.
Challenge the Process – Break out of "same old way" thinking and innovate.
Enable Others to Act – Support other people's success.
Encourage the Heart – Practice an attitude of gratitude. Keep hope alive.

For practical tips on what exactly you should do to become this kind of leader you can read the book, but a one-page summary is available on the Leadership Challenge website.

Managers

Daniel Pink's book Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us neatly refutes the effectiveness of motivation techniques that have been practiced for years in business. In his "Cocktail Party Summary," Pink says:

When it comes to motivation, there's a gap between what science knows and what business does. Our current business operating system–which is built around external, carrot-and-stick motivators–doesn't work and often does harm. We need an upgrade. And the science shows the way. This new approach has three essential elements:

Autonomy – the desire to direct our own lives.

Mastery – the urge to get better and better at something that matters.

Purpose – the yearning to do what we do in the service of something larger than ourselves.

And Gallup research, captured in the book 12: The Elements of Great Managing, and expounded upon in Marcus Buckingham's book First Break All the Rules: What the World's Greatest Managers Do Differently, found that the most significant factor in employee productivity and retention is their relationship with their direct manager. This research identifies the 12 characteristics of workplaces that are proven in general to produce substantially higher revenue, profit, employee retention, and customer delight. Employees of managers who support these practices will undoubtedly find their personal experience of their company culture surpasses that of their less fortunate colleagues.

The most effective managers are those whose people would answer "yes" to the following 12 questions (thus the clever name for the Gallup book). You'll notice that most of these practices don't cost a penny, so there's no hiding behind tough economic times and budget cuts.

Do I know what is expected of me at work?
Do I have the materials and equipment to do my work right?
At work, do I have the opportunity to do what I do best every day?
In the last seven days, have I received recognition or praise for doing good work?
Does my supervisor, or someone at work, seem to care about me as a person?
Is there someone at work who encourages my development?
At work, do my opinions seem to count?
Does the mission/purpose of my company make me feel my job is important?
Are my co-workers committed to doing quality work?
Do I have a best friend at work?
In the last six months, has someone at work talked to me about my progress?
This last year, have I had opportunities at work to learn and grow?

Individuals

It's my observation that the biggest obstacles to success are self-induced. In his book Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap . . . and Others Don't, Jim Collins supported this with his description of successful organizations: "Disciplined people, thinking and acting with discipline." Wow, can it be that simple? It just comes down to people doing what needs to be done, when it needs to be done? Yup, successful people do what is required when it is required, whether they feel like doing it or not. And before doing it, they think about why they're doing it, what they hope to achieve, and how they could most effectively go about doing it. Granted, it's easier said than done. I've found these three habits, practiced with discipline, separate people who intend to create results from those who actually do:

Obsessing over Clear Goals
Striving tirelessly for Clear Communication
Ruthlessly setting Clear Priorities

As obvious as these sound, I shamelessly admit that instantiating these basic practices into individual behavior and company cultures comprises the bulk of my consulting work. Sure, there are another 9 elements key to successfully achieving results, but you can read all about that in my book Scrappy Project Management – The 12 Predictable and Avoidable Pitfalls Every Project Faces if you are still among the 6,699,925,324 people on Earth who have not purchased (or pirated) a copy.

Teams

Patrick Lencioni's The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable (personally, I was surprised to find there were only five dysfunctions) asserts that teams fail due to an absence of trust, which leads to fear of conflict, lack of commitment, avoidance of accountability, and inattention to results. Team results, he claims, are built on a foundation of trust, healthy conflict, commitment, and accountability, as shown below in the "Five Functions of a Team" version of this model:

Figure 3. The Five FUNCTIONS of a Team, as Opposed to the Five DYSfunctions.

Start by building trust. It only takes a second to destroy trust, and building trust takes a long time, so you'd best start today. If you can't think of how to build trust, imagine how you would destroy it, and then do the opposite. And, in spite of the best of intentions of the people involved, every relationship is vulnerable to misunderstandings that can erode trust, so you'll also need to build in ways to repair damaged trust if you want your relationship to survive such mishaps.

Once trust is established you can move up to engaging in healthy conflict—sharing different perspectives, raising concerns and arguing over different approaches to take in the business. By learning to "fight as if you're right and listen as if you're wrong," you'll be able to tap into the group genius and surface ideas that would normally just be part of the grumbling in the cafeteria. Inviting people to openly share a healthy diversity of opinions also lays the foundation for real commitment to the agreements that result, and subsequent accountability to fulfill the promises each person has made in support of the results. This stands in opposition to the focus on internal politics, status, and ego that passes for "work" in many organizations.

Oh, That Will Never Work Here

Of course, as a consultant I'm used to hearing, "Our company is different, Kimberly. That will never work here," followed by a string of all the reasons why these practices, proven in thousands of companies with hundreds of thousands of people, will fail at THIS particular company. Yeah, right. Well, if your company really IS quite different from the norm, you might be plopping someone else's island top onto your base. Of course that won't work. But, if you are working with a bunch of human beings (and I suspect you are) there are probably at least a few ideas here worth trying.

I sincerely hope that neither country culture nor company culture is an unchangeable force field that keeps us locked into ineffective ways of behaving. If the explanation for our difficulties is "That's just the way our culture is," the implication being that we can't change . . . we're doomed. Change happens one courageous act at a time. Get busy.

Transformatively yours, - Kimberly

©Copyright 2001-2010 Wiefling Consulting. All Rights Reserved. About us Site Map View current sponsorship opportunities (PDF) Contact us for more information or e-mail info@projectconnections.com Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Suppressing Your Feminine Side May Be Bad for Business

2010-07-07T09:33:30-07:00

Another noggin' floggin' by Kimberly M. Wiefling, M.S.

About 15 years ago a woman I barely knew, the wife of a coworker, was listening to me describe the challenges I faced as a project manager at Hewlett Packard. "You're not using your feminine power!" she suddenly pronounced, as if she'd just discovered the cause of some mysterious chronic illness I'd been suffering from for a lifetime. My first reaction was, "Use my feminine power? I sure hope not!" Since I was obviously perplexed, she further explained that this included nurturing behaviors like bringing food and drinks to meetings, and expressing other characteristics that I've heard described as "soft skills" by HR pros. I figured I'd missed that in the job description.

You see, I was working in high-tech, and for over a decade I'd painstakingly stamped out any semblance of femininity in my work. After earning a Master's degree in physics, a field in which women are almost as scarce as on-time schedules, I'd entered the high-tech engineering world, a profession with an equally abysmal track record of attracting women. Why on earth would I want to associate myself—in any way—with anything female in my work? I was sure I would appear weak and ineffective to my colleagues, and quite possibly my salary would decrease.

Maybe I was being a little paranoid, but until recently, I have done my best to ignore the gender issue in my career. I've steered clear of "radical feminism," and I most certainly didn't want to be perceived as "nurturing." However, this past year I've been working on a book project, Scrappy Women in Business, which prompted me to reflect on the role of women in the workplace, and my own experience as a female in a predominantly male work environment. As a result of this, and the changing nature of the work environment, I've come to value what my colleague's wife called my "feminine power." But my initial hesitation wasn't completely unfounded, given the research on women in the workplace.

Even If I'm Not Nurturing, Chances Are People Will Think I Am

It turns out that it might not matter whether I am nurturing or not—being a woman, it's likely that I will be perceived as nurturing by CEOs and other top executives. Catalyst, the leading global nonprofit dedicated to expanding opportunities for women in business, published a study in 2005 under the intriguing title Women "Take Care," Men "Take Charge:" Stereotyping of U.S. Business Leaders Exposed. Their research demonstrated that, although women and men often lead in similar ways, they are perceived very differently by both male and female senior executives. Regardless of the reality, women are perceived to be better at supporting and rewarding while men are perceived to be better at delegating and influencing upward.

Unfortunately, these unconscious biases impact the perception of competence and fitness for promotion, though with the growing emphasis on teamwork and collaboration these days, I'm not sure in which direction. We can, however, measure the results by observing the difference in participation of women and men at various levels in the professional world, and in the relative compensation of women and men.

Just Because You're Paranoid Doesn't Mean People Aren't Out to Get You

Back in the 1970's women represented only 10% of the musicians in an orchestra. That number has risen over the years to over 35%, and a Princeton University study in 2000 found that a big chunk of that gain was due to the switch to blind auditions. When the decision-makers can't see whether the musician is a women or a man, more women are hired. A study by The Anita Borg Institute on the recruitment, retention, and advancement of technical women found that women are sometimes preferentially eliminated during the resume review process, even if the interview process is unbiased. Another study specifically comparing evaluations of resumes by randomly assigning a woman's name found that resumes bearing a woman's name were rated lower by both women and men. (Perhaps women should use initials instead of first names on resumes, or hiring managers should have the names masked before reviewing them.)

Of course we're all biased in many ways. All human beings are. Our assumptions and beliefs unconsciously influence our decisions, and our brains are clever enough to keep this process hidden from us so that we think we are making rational decisions based on the facts. Don't think you're biased? You can find out in about 15 minutes. Harvard University's "Project Implicit®" provides a test in exchange for using your data in their studies. You will be randomly assigned one of a variety of bias studies, but you can repeat the process to experience them all. Based on experimenting with this several years ago, I found that I have a slight tendency to associate technical topics with women. Go figure!

According to US Department of Labor statistics, only 10% of employed engineers were women at the turn of the century (2001). And while the salary differential in engineering has largely disappeared, the employment differential remains large in all but the life sciences. Even project management remains a profession with some degree of gender disparity, in both employment and pay. The 2010 PMI Salary Survey suggests that only 40% of US project managers are women (based on survey respondents), and that the salaries of women project managers are "considerably lower" than that typical for men (about 10%). Karen Klein's 2005 article "It's a Women's World, Too" does make the point that women are entering the project management profession at rates around double that of men, but still acknowledges that female project managers face barriers to success that are peculiar to women, such as excessive humility and a tendency towards self-criticism.

The Road to the Top Winds Uphill All the Way

In spite of the possible risk, and because I'm past typical childbearing age (something executives admit is a real barrier for women in hiring and promotion in off-the-record true confessions), I'm less inclined to eschew my feminine qualities in my work these days. I've found that these qualities have become increasingly valued for their importance in delivering extraordinary business results. The incredible diversity of teams, increased focus on alliances and partnerships, the growth of open innovation, crowd-sourcing, and collaboration on a massive scale (facilitated by the internet), have all made people keenly aware of the power of group genius and the importance of a more collaborative style of leadership. I've noticed that the work I do as a project manager increasingly involves facilitating interaction rather than giving direction; perhaps it was always about that and I just didn't notice because I was suppressing my nurturing side.

It turns out that female versions of leadership improve bottom line business results. In a 2004 Catalyst study, companies with a higher proportion of women on their top management teams enjoyed a 35% greater ROE (Return on Equity) than those with the lowest. Although I'm wary of the trap of stereotypes, in the past couple of years I began to wonder if maybe women and men really do lead in some fundamentally different way. And, with more profit at stake, I hope it's something that can be learned by anyone, even nurturing-averse me.

There are plenty of pop psychology discussions about gender differences, including the somewhat unimaginatively titled "Are Women Better Project Managers Than Men" on the Toolbox for IT Project and Program Management Blog. Puh-LEESE! This kind of conversation is similar to my Japanese friends asking me to describe Americans. "Which one?" I ask. Like all simplistic questions, the answer to whether men or women are better project managers is, "It depends." It depends on which woman, or which man, and which project, and in which situation. While statistics can help us understand trends in the aggregate, it's foolish to apply that data to any specific individual or situation. Those who carelessly apply averages to individuals do both parties an injustice. Let's not deepen the gender divide by participating in these kinds of debates. Instead, let's look at facts.

Is there gender bias at work in project management, and the business world in general? In my project leadership role I make it a practice to focus on the results produced, not the intentions of my team. Customers care about results, not intentions. I think the same approach may work well in this situation. I have no real way of knowing whether there is bias in the process, but I do know that there is a difference in the outcome—the participation and compensation of women relative to men. The measurable data from Catalyst certainly demonstrate a disparity:

Percentage of women in the U.S. labor force: 46.3%
Percentage of women in management, professional and related occupations: 50.6%
Percentage of female Fortune 500 corporate officers: 15.4%
Percentage of female Fortune 500 board seats: 14.8%
Percentage of female Fortune 500 top earners: 6.7%
Percentage of female Fortune 500 CEOs: 2.4%

Of course, root cause analysis is important, but the root cause of being overweight has been well known for years and still I can't lose 5 kilograms. I personally don't care whether the remaining disparities between women and men in project management—and the business world in general—are a result of accident, unconscious bias, or a devious plot. The causes no longer interest me. Making and measuring progress does. What's measured tends to get attention, and frequently improves.

The Coming Shortfall in Working Age Population in the Developed World

Based on a report by the Stanford Center on Longevity, (PDF) it looks to me like it's in all of our best interests to make workplaces more attractive to human beings in general, and—in fields where they are under-represented—to women in particular. In a decade or two, the shortage of working-age people will be an economic crisis in some parts of the world. Japan and Germany in particular will face at least a 20 percent shortage in the coming decades. (That's why I don't worry about women's equality in the workplace in Japan—it's coming!) We'll need everyone's participation if businesses are going to successfully meet the challenges facing humanity.

The Anita Borg Institute found that technical women leave their companies in mid-career at twice the rate of men. (Read more about this and the reasons why in this PDF if you like.) Companies are losing women, especially at the mid-career stage. Catalyst reported that women cite four major reasons why companies lose female talent: "lack of flexibility (51%); glass ceiling issues (29%); unhappiness with work environment (28%); and feeling unchallenged in their jobs (22%). Only 5% report being downsized and only 3% say they were victims of sexual harassment."

Of course, the workplace isn't all that hospitable to men either. A 2007 Gallup Institute study on wellbeing concluded that 77% of all workers hate their jobs. HATE! Wow. That's much worse than being unhappy with the work environment or feeling unchallenged in a job. I'm no expert at organizational development or the link between worker satisfaction and profit, but I'm guessing this is NOT good for project success or bottom line profits. A little more nurturing probably wouldn't hurt any of us, or our chances for project success either.

If Being More Nurturing Will Increase Project Success, Bring on the Nurturing!

I was educated as a scientist, and if I were just looking at past data I'd conclude that expressing my so-called feminine side in the high-tech business world would put me at a bit of a disadvantage. But that's kind of like driving while only gazing into the rearview mirror. With almost everyone hating their jobs, increased emphasis on collaboration, and the coming shortfall in skilled workers, I'm thinking that a more nurturing work environment is going to be a competitive advantage.

In fact, I've been experimenting with a more nurturing approach in my work in Japan, and it's yielding excellent results: noticeably improved performance in various individuals, faster response to my requests, and more enjoyable working relationships. It's working so well that I'm tempted to try it out on this continent. My only concern is whether it's possible to be both scrappy and nurturing at the same time. Considering the potential 35% higher ROE, I'll have to give it a go purely for financial reasons.

Nurturingly yours,

– Kimberly

P.S. Scrappy Women in Business – Living Proof that Bending the Rules Isn't Breaking the Law, will be available in July 2010. This book, and the associated website invite women to draw inspiration from each other's stories. It's just a small drop in the bucket, but it is one drop.

Overcoming "Last Century" Thinking: Powerful Metaphors for What Happens in the Real World

2010-04-27T13:12:34-07:00

Another noggin' floggin' by Kimberly M. Wiefling, M.S.

As a kid, when I first studied how the world worked I learned that light was a wave, atoms were made of particles called protons, neutrons and electrons, and you could take apart a clock to figure out how it worked. But as my education progressed, I learned that the world was a bit more complicated than the simple models I'd been taught. Light wasn't really a wave, at least not all the time. Protons, neutrons and electrons weren't exactly billiard ball-like particles. And while you can figure out how a clock works by examining its guts, the same isn't true of a flock of birds. Over the past decade I've read three books that have further broadened—or warped, depending on your perspective—my mental models about how the world (including a project) operates:

Chaos: Making a New Science, by James Gleick
Complexity: The Emerging Science at the Edge of Order and Chaos, by M.Mitchell Waldrop
A New Kind of Science, Stephen Wolfram's enormous tome (1200 pages, which I scanned more than read)

Chaos helped me understand how slight variations in the starting point (what geeks call "initial conditions") could result in huge differences in the outcome, the famous Butterfly Effect.

Complexity opened my mind to self-organizing systems of interdependent entities (called "agents"), and the highly complex results that could emerge quite naturally from the collective behavior of simple agents (for example, complex structures built by simple termites). A representation of complex adaptive systems, from Wikipedia Commons

A New Kind of Science helped me realize that even vastly complicated phenomenon in nature could be recreated by a very simple set of rules applied recursively, and got me thinking that seemingly complex happenings around me (like the unfolding of a project) might be produced by some relatively uncomplicated underlying principles.

As a result of these mind-bending experiences—a natural extension of my education as a physicist—I stopped thinking about the world as a machine which could be dissected into its component parts, and started appreciating "wholeness" and the nonlinear, highly interdependent nature of the world in which we live. This change in my thinking hasn't made me a better bowler or saved me money on my taxes, but it does help me attack problems that seem impossible and make progress on them, as I no longer expect to see a direct connection between my actions and the end result.

Because I encounter a lot of people who operate as if the world behaves in a linear way, my perspective sometimes gets me into trouble. I was recently asked how a particular exercise in a project leadership workshop contributed to achieving the workshop goals. People are understandably curious, but I was a bit annoyed. What perturbed me was the underlying linear, reductionist thinking that their question revealed, all too common in the business world. Would I really be expected to show a direct cause-and-effect link between everything I did in a workshop and the potential impact it would have on a particular participant's leadership development? It reminded me of the times I'd been asked to justify one or another project risk mitigation expense and how exactly it would shorten the project duration. Thoroughly explaining it would take more time than just doing it.

The sort of thinking embedded in these kinds of questions is at odds with concepts of wholeness, interdependence, complexity, nonlinear behavior, and emergence. This may sound rather like New Age jargon, but it's far better suited to explaining human beings and other natural phenomenon than simplistic views of the world. These ideas provide powerful alternatives to traditional mechanistic models, and I think that they can enable us to be better project leaders. Let's take a look at three interesting concepts that I've found to be powerful metaphors in project leadership and management:

Wholeness vs. reducing things to their component parts
Nonlinear behavior vs. linear relationships between cause and effect
Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) and emergence vs. command-and-control

Wholeness

In 1773 the famous composer Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart was employed as a court musician by the ruler of Salzburg, Prince-Archbishop Hieronymus Colloredo. Now, can you imagine the prince asking Mozart, "How does this particular note support the beauty of this musical piece?" I rather doubt that the prince, or anyone else for that matter, would actually ask such an inane question! The beauty of a musical composition springs from the overall pattern and interrelationship of the notes. The beauty can't be explained by chopping the music apart like some kind of product breakdown structure exercise. It is a property of the whole. Wholeness, or holism, is the first concept that eludes obsessively last century thinkers.

David Bohm, a famous physicist, challenged traditional thinking in physics with his book Wholeness and the Implicate Order. Bohm had had quite enough of the tendency among physicists to assume that any phenomenon could be understood by reducing it to its component parts, somewhat akin to trying to figure out how birds flock by cutting apart a bird. A hologram is a great example of wholeness. Unlike a photograph, where each part of the photo represents the associated part of the scene, each piece of a hologram contains the entire picture, albeit from a different angle. Asking which piece of a hologram of you and your boyfriend contains your boyfriend makes no sense whatsoever. He is represented throughout the entire hologram from different perspectives. If you break up, you can't cut your boyfriend out of a hologram like you could cut him out of a picture.

Likewise, a project isn't a bunch of beads strung together to make a necklace. Your project plan may like a neat, tidy, linear sequence of tasks in PERT chart or a Gantt chart, but that is just a simple linear model of a highly dynamic, nonlinear, iterative system, and it can only be truly understood as a whole. That's why waterfall techniques don't work very well, and why Agile methodology is all the rage.

A project team isn't the sum of its parts, either. You can have a group of eight individual contributors who work at cross-purposes to produce nothing but conflict, or eight people who work together as an interdependent whole, every part supporting every other part. You can't map every accomplishment to the percent contributions of each team member any more than you can map which part of "beauty" in a musical piece comes from each note. The team as a whole achieves what no single member could achieve alone.

Nonlinearity

If I put twice as much gas in my car I expect to be able to travel roughly twice as far as with the original quantity. Three times the gas should carry me triple the distance. That's an example of a linear relationship. It's easy to predict what will happen to the outcome if I change the input.

As I'm sure you know, projects are nothing like this. Cutting the number of bugs in half doesn't necessarily make the quality twice as good, especially if one of the remaining bugs is a showstopper. And spending an additional hour on planning can save a day of wasted time and effort (up to the point of diminishing returns). Most physical systems are inherently nonlinear, and projects are no exception.

Nonlinear systems can't be described by adding up the parts because their parts interact. A small change in one part of the system can produce huge changes in other parts of the system. The reverse is also true—a large change in some part of the system may have little or no impact on the outcome, like shortening the duration of a task that's not on the critical path. Increasing the number of hours people work doesn't increase their productivity proportionately. In fact, in some cases the opposite occurs: they make more mistakes, resulting in misdirected effort, rework, or both. Adding people to a project can cause it to slow down rather than speed up, and reducing software engineering resources on a team of eight by one person could cause engineering productivity to drop by half if that programmer happens to be the one who can produce seven lines of defect-free uncommented code for every one line of an unskilled novice.

An example that far too many people can relate to, unfortunately, is the process of finding a new job. A great deal of activity may occur with no perceptible progress, and then finally a job offer is received. This is a great example of a non-linear system. All of the effort and time invested produces pretty much nothing, and then suddenly the result—a job—is produced. Projects aren't quite as bad since we can see progress along the way in the form of lines of code written, hardware designed, or tests run, but most project managers have learned long ago that a reported "50% percent complete" doesn't mean halfway to the goal.

Complex Adaptive Systems and Emergence

One of my many networking lunches recently was with someone who's famous in the world of business management theory. He was skeptical when I suggested that groups of people could, and would, self-organize around compelling future visions without hierarchy and a power structure to support attaining the desired result. It sounded to me like he was advocating a command-and-control approach—something that even the military has come to realize is ineffective in complex, rapidly changing environments.

Perhaps he hasn't heard that groups of termites following relatively simple rules are routinely able to build complex termite mounds that look like a castle out of a Disney movie, all without a grand plan or a controlling hierarchy. There is no termite project leader. There is no termite scrum master. There is no termite mound requirements document. It just happens as a result of each termite following a few simple rules and interacting with one another.

Imagine if the members of a project team followed a set of guiding principles out of which would emerge a project result that was aligned with customer expectation and business needs. Could human beings be capable of greater collaborative works than a bunch of termites without some higher-ranking manager bossing them around? I certainly hope so.

What guiding principles would enable project team members to co-create an outcome that would delight customers and turn a tidy profit? How about a customer delight meter strapped to each person's wrist with a needle that jiggled one way or the other with each act, depending on how it would ultimately influence customer delight? Maybe this is a bit too futuristic, so what if each person on the team was intimately familiar with client needs, could judge what would delight a client, and was highly motivated to meet those needs? Or imagine if the impact of each action and decision on the revenue, cost and profit of a company were instantly visible to individuals incentivized to optimize profit and customer delight? The results might be even more fascinating than a termite mound, and the process of achieving these results would be much more inspiring than a work breakdown structure and a task list.

The Lens of Wholeness, Nonlinearity and Emergence

I certainly don't recommend that you hole up in your office reading about chaos, complexity, nonlinear systems and the like, but I do think we all can benefit from looking at the world through a different lens now and then. Life isn't linear. Pushing harder doesn't necessarily make something go faster, and simple guiding principles enacted by each person at every level of an organization are far more effective in achieving results than an unenforceable mandate from on high. Peer through this alternative lens now and then to see what might look different on your project.