Forward Momentum: Delivering Results

by Rob Zell

After a recent purchase at a chain pharmacy, the associate showed me on my receipt the number I could call to take a quick service survey. She ended by saying, “…and we would appreciate if you gave us fives.” You have probably heard this before at a retailer that you frequent. If you’re like me, you probably get a trifle annoyed by the statement. One day I’m going to have the fortitude to respond by asking, “How would you rate your service?” or maybe, “What exactly was five-worthy about our transaction?” Again, if you’re like me, you nod and smile and go about your business. If an organization wants to earn fives on their service, then every interaction has to start with the end in mind.

As learning professionals we often ask the organization to rate our training programs. We also look for fives on our post-class surveys. We ask participants to rate the materials, the facilitator, the content and the environment. The Kirkpatrick Model is the reference model for measuring training effectiveness. Basic information about the environment and experience is Level 1. When we measure knowledge transfer and retention we are evaluating Level 2 effectiveness. How often the learner actually uses the content on the job is Level 3. Finally, the Return on Investment (ROI) or impact to true business metrics, is Level 4.

Your training organization is likely using this system to measure its performance. To really deliver on high-impact learning is to score well at every level: positive learner experience, knowledge acquisition, skill practice and ROI. In order to achieve this lofty goal, it is critical to start with end in mind.

1. Identify the desired performance. Stay focused on the skills and knowledge that achieve the desired performance and remove the extra that only confuses the issue. We often hear, “But they really should know…” Make sure they need to know it to do the job, not just because it’s a fashionable topic.
2. Be a performance consultant. Ask the hard questions. Is there a performance gap because people don’t know the expectations? Are there obstacles in the way? When they perform the way they are supposed to, are there negative consequences? If they use a non-approved short cut are they rewarded somehow (is the job easier, do they get paid more, are they recognized by their boss)? For a great resource try this book by Robert Mager.
3. Make sure learning solutions fit the situation. Some interventions can be solved with a simple job aid while others require full classroom experiences. Make sure that the solution fits the issue at hand and considers both the desired performance and the learner’s experience consuming the training. You can read more about my thoughts on this in a blog I posted last year.

If you want your people to earn fives for their performance, and who doesn’t, make sure they know what they are supposed to do and have a clear path to get the job done. If the associate at that pharmacy had known exactly what great service looked like and had delivered on it, I might call or go online and give them a five. Instead, I am tempted to respond that the employee did exactly what was expected: she informed me of the survey and asked for a five, rather than making my experience great.

What do you think? How can you make sure your people and your organization earn fives on their metrics? Let us know and please, rate this blog a five.

By Craig Covello, PMP

I think it’s fair to say that most project participants are interested in doing a good job. Money is certainly a motivational factor, but many of us also value the concepts of personal integrity, commitment and reputation. We want to do the right things and we want the project to be successful. Recognition for a job well done is also its own reward.

So sometimes project participants adopt an unrealistic and overly optimistic view of reality when circumstances suggest otherwise. The term “whatever it takes” comes to mind. It’s a cliché that continues to be embraced by some in the corporate culture despite the fact that this attitude has the power to sink projects, damage reputations and waste money. And you don’t have to accept it.

Here’s a case in point: I have the privilege of managing several health care innovation projects for my employer. Most are pilot efforts with budgets under $100,000 and project time lines between six and nine months. As such, they’re not terribly complicated, but admittedly they do have a tremendous amount of visibility across the organization. Some might interpret that visibility as a reason to do “whatever it takes”. NASA’s retired Apollo flight director Gene Kranz reinforced that philosophy with his famous statement “failure is not an option”. While that is certainly true when bringing astronauts back from the moon, it doesn’t necessarily apply to pilot projects. The point of a pilot is to spend a minimal amount of money in order to validate a concept or idea.

Not everyone may agree with this thinking. Recently I was working with a “pilot innovator” who developed an original idea. He was given funding in exchange for defining implementation details, general time lines and success criteria. Unfortunately, his vision did not reflect reality. All the warning signs were there.

• Unrealistic time lines.
• Scope that went above and beyond the definitions used to fund this project.
• No alternate plan to mitigate problems that manifest themselves in virtually every project.

As project manager, I had the responsibility of addressing all these issues during the planning phase. We came up with reasonable compromises before moving forward. But again, more warning signs began to appear during project execution.

• The innovator continued to work on activities which reflected the original and unrealistic scope.
• He avoided reporting problems encountered, preferring instead to work extended hours without asking myself or the other 8 members for assistance.
• He begin missing scheduled team meetings, which further impeded the project’s progress and assessments.

So it was time for some “tough love”. I had a one-on-one meeting with this individual and presented my concerns rather candidly in order to realign expectations. And it worked. Several additional issues were uncovered and I was able to offer solutions which took a tremendous amount of stress off his shoulders. As a result, he was very appreciative of my direct approach. The project sponsors also expressed their gratitude.

Here’s the point. There is a natural tendency for us to avoid conflict, but as a project manager, conflict should be addressed and resolved as early as possible. These are some guidelines I’ve adopted:

• Preface all concerns or criticisms with the understanding that they are related to the project, not the individual. Don’t make it personal.
• Be honest with your assessments. This should not be difficult if expressed in the context of the project, not the person.
• Always offer a solution to mitigate your criticism or concern. There is always a plan B.
• As Ronald Reagan once said, “trust but verify”. Don’t be passive when collecting status information. Ask questions and get details in order to understand the true situation.
• Try to meet with the entire team face-to-face once or twice during the project. Virtual “WebEx” meetings are sometimes more efficient, but meeting face-to-face may help to establish comfort, trust and honesty between project participants. This was one of the lessons learned in Bruce Beer’s article dated May 31 titled Virtual Teams and PMOs – The European Experience.
• Recommend terminating the project as early as possible if it appears that there is little chance of success due to circumstances beyond your control. If plan B, or even plan C cannot be executed, this is no point in wasting additional money and resources hoping things will get better.

The bottom line? Failure is sometimes an option, unless of course, you’re bringing astronauts back from the moon.

By Vicki Wrona, PMP

The end of a calendar or fiscal year often brings feeling of overwhelm, but those feelings are not limited to that time of year. As Project Managers or managers in general, we are often juggling many things and have multiple deadlines looming near, so it is common to feel overwhelmed at any time of the year. A common reaction to this feeling is to put off the activity we dread most to tackle….which is the one thing we probably should be working on first.

We spend a lot of energy dreading the activity we are to do, the difficult conversation we need to have or the deliverable we are to produce. Often we spend more energy in the worrying than in the creating. Finally, when we can put it off no longer, we finally begin to tackle the unpopular task and begin to feel a little better when something is accomplished. One of several things will happen at this point. As we accomplish the things leading up to the final deliverable, we either 1) feel very good about making progress and so keep working and chipping away at the final deliverable or 2) feel so good about making any progress at all that we trick ourselves into relaxing when we shouldn’t or 3) realize that the task was not as large or formidable as feared.

I prefer #1 or #3, but have experienced all of them myself. When I find myself falling into the procrastinator’s syndrome, I try to logically talk myself into beginning some work and making some kind of progress. I may have to promise to myself that I will not spend more than 30 minutes on the task in order to get started. Better to do that than wait until the last minute. Some people thrive on the adrenaline rush of waiting until the last minute, and while we have all relied on that at one time or other, using this as the normal course of business will get you in trouble…and probably eventually affect your health. If you are constantly pushing, there is no leeway for mistakes or surprises, and life will be full of more stress than necessary.

Well, I feel better now that I have said that. It’s now time to get back to that unpopular project I must tackle.

What do you do to motivate yourself when feeling overwhelmed or worried about how to tackle something you are not sure of or don’t want to tackle? Let us know.

By Vicki Wrona, PMP

There are certain terms that we all run into which are so frequently mis-used that we wonder whether it makes sense to keep fighting to define the “real” term or just give in to market forces and call something by an inappropriate name.

Let me give you an example, one which experience tells me that many of you will relate to. If your boss or a peer asks for the “project plan”, are they asking for a schedule (also called a timeline) or are they asking for a collection of documents that describes your project from all aspects, including schedule, budget, risks, quality, roles and responsibilities, procurement, etc.?

PMI takes the stance that proper planning is much more than just developing a schedule. I agree with them and have seen too many projects get into trouble with an over-emphasis on schedule at the risk of ignoring the other elements. In these cases, the other elements were still taken into account, but inconsistently and only informally by the manager or the team members. In other words, the information was in their head, but not necessarily documented, shared, or acted on. However, except in the most sophisticated organizations, the schedule is still what comes to mind when talking about a plan. Is it reasonable to expect the marketplace to come around? I hope so and would like to think so, but how long will that take? Is it worth it?

Another instance is using the term process groups instead of phases. I agree that the term process group is a good term, describing a grouping of similar processes under one group or category or label. However, it isn’t intuitive to the average worker, and therefore often misunderstood or not used. I would ask again, is it worth fighting the terminology that many professionals are used to?

Those who are certified in project management or who have received formal training and work for more sophisticated organizations know the difference. But those do not make up the majority of the base of professionals using project management today. Should the “enlightened few” continue to stand their ground to get others used to using these terms correctly? Or is it time to let the majority rule and in the 5^th edition PMBOK® Guide come up with terms that more can live with? I struggle with whether this is strictly an academic differentiation or a meaningful distinction.

Most of the time, I don’t mind sharing my lessons learned and educating people on better ways to get their jobs done. But sometime, I just get tired of being the salmon, feeling like I am always swimming upstream.

What do you think?