Forward Momentum: Delivering Results

by Vicki Wrona, PMP

I recently learned about a tool called the OODA loop. While the tool itself was created based on military fighter pilot observations and is now often used to train law enforcement, it has applications for use in business and personal life as well. Here we will discuss the applications of the OODA loop in business, and more specifically, in managing projects.

First of all, OODA stands for:

1. Observe
2. Orient
3. Decide
4. Act

The concept of the OODA loop was first created by US Air Force Col. John Boyd during the Korean War. We all naturally follow this loop. If you are in a confrontation, you want to interrupt, or get inside, somebody else’s loop so that you instead of following, you now lead and can react faster than they can. At that point, they are chasing you on your OODA loop terms. This technique is often taught to police officers and law enforcement. For example, if someone were to break into your house, they know what they intend to do and so their OODA loop is ahead of yours. What you want to do is somehow disrupt their loop, or get inside it, so now you are the one in the lead. While this loop works well with quick reactions, it also works with longer-term decisions that need to be made. Let’s explore this.

In business, this can be used to manage projects, staff or operations. Let’s take the example of a project that is already in process. Once a plan is in place, the project manager will monitor the progress made on the project to make sure it’s on track. That is the first stage of OODA, Observe. The second stage, Orient, has to do with watching the work as it progresses, listening to what is going on, analyzing the reports that are pulled, talking to stakeholders, etc. In pulling information and data from as many sources and vantage points as practical, you can determine if the project is on track and progressing as planned. There will be variances from plan; you need to decide if they are normal or an indication of trouble. Based on this, you move to step three, which is to Decide what course of action, if any, is needed. Maybe you need to add more resources to a particular piece of work to keep it on time. Maybe you need to look at options to cut cost in order to stay on budget. That’s your decision here. The next step is to Act. You follow through on that decision, and then repeat the cycle to observe the impact of your decision and whether to take additional actions. By nature, this cycle repeats constantly throughout the project.

This technique can be very useful in noticing and rescuing a troubled project earlier rather than later. What we want to do is interrupt what is going on in the project and improve it.

This cyclical process may sound very familiar to experienced project managers. This is similar to the PDCA (plan-do-check-act) cycle made famous by W. Edwards Deming. The cyclical nature of these cycles is built into project management and should be done constantly to effectively and pro-actively manage our projects. The Six Sigma version of PDCA is called DMAIC (define, measure, analyze, improve, control). Kaizen, also called continuous improvement or “for the better”, also follows this concept. With kaizen, small improvements and corrections are constantly being made to keep a project on track or to improve existing processes.

The reason I like the OODA loop concept is because, at least for me, it adds an extra dimension to the PDCA cycle. This dimension is the thought of interrupting and getting inside the loop on the bad things that are happening on your project or within your teams. It enhances the ability to adapt more quickly by remembering that we have to interrupt the current flow of work or status quo in order to put things back on track. With our teams, we may have to shake up our team in some way to get them out of their current rhythm or comfort area in order to do what is best. It is also adaptive in that on projects, the plan you go back to when you have completed a cycle may be different from the plan before the cycle was completed. This is fine, as long as the proper change control processes and sign-offs are followed.

While the PDCA cycle is cyclical in nature, I have observed that it tends to be viewed more methodically, slowly and with a longer-term attitude. That is not always true, of course, but that is how it often comes across to me in practice. The PDCA cycle is not always long-term and the OODA loop is not always short-term and quick, but when thinking of these concepts, it helps for me personally to keep them both in mind in order to properly manage my teams and initiatives both quickly and methodically.

Here is a link to a good description of the OODA loop in business called The OODA Loop: Playing chess with half the pieces. It is a book review with notable quotes on agility, overcoming the numbers, planning and strategy, on not following the rules, and on culture as a long-term competitive advantage from the book Certain to Win.

Think about the OODA loop and how it may apply to your processes, operations, teams or projects. How can you use this new perspective to better manage those?

by Rob Zell

When teaching leadership and management skills I refer to maintaining and/or enhancing self-esteem as a foundational practice for all leaders. When I do, I typically get a few participants who give a very subtle eye-roll or smirk. I can understand why: as leaders in a fast-paced, bottom-line focused organization, who has time to manage the self-esteem of others? Aren’t we all big boys and girls? We all come to work and have a job to do, so let’s just set aside all the personal feelings and get the job done.

While it’s certainly true that we owe it to the organization to be a little thick-skinned about feedback and look at criticism as a means to improve, a little praise and recognition goes a long way. It also has a measureable impact on the organization and profitability. Don’t believe me? Let’s look at a couple of examples.

I recently found this post about a server who comped a dessert for a family because the kids were well-behaved in the restaurant. As a parent, I try to influence my kids to behave in restaurants out of respect for other patrons and the staff. To be recognized for your efforts as a parent by complete strangers makes you feel pretty good. The value of the recognition in this example was four dollars. But what’s the return?

• Net profit* from family that returns to dine there one extra time (on a ticket of $60) = $3.00
• Net profit from 10 extra guests from the family sharing the story (Average check of $20) = $10.00
• Net profit from 10 extra guests who see the story on crowd sourcing review site  = $10.00
• So the ROI is (($23 – $4)/$4) *100 = 475%   

*figures based on average net profit of 5% of guest check

Not too shabby. And I think my estimates are on the low end. A small amount of recognition, for something we hope all parents teach their kids (it’s what they are supposed to be doing – teaching manners, etc.), leads to a HUGE return on investment.

Of course most of the people I teach aren’t facing the guest. But they do manage or work with many people across the organization. How important is maintaining/enhancing self-esteem for those people? Let’s dig into that idea.

In a study by the Corporate Executive Board, discretionary effort is defined as,
“Employee willingness to go ‘above and beyond’ the call of duty, such as helping others with heavy workloads, volunteering for additional duties and looking for ways to perform the job more effectively.”

Discretionary effort and “Intent to Stay” make up employee engagement. Engaged employees are more committed both rationally and emotionally (read that as engaged heart and mind) than non-engaged employees. So how engaged do you think employees are? In the same study, researchers found that engagement rates had dropped by almost 4% in Q4 of 2012. The level of discretionary effort hovers in the 25-26% range for most industries.  The Intent to Stay metric hovers around 36%; the converse is that about 60% of the workforce is thinking about leaving their company in the next year.

So what’s the value of making an impact on these metrics? Let’s say we take an organization of 2,600 people. Using these figures, almost 2,000 are just “putting in their time” and about 60% (about 1,500 employees) are thinking about leaving, even going so far as to send resumes and make calls. Providing just a small amount of recognition, in order to engage 10% of the 2,000, could increase productivity and commitment. If just half of those were part of the 1,500 considering leaving, a mere 100 people, and they stay, we save approximately $1.1 million in turnover costs.

The point is that maintaining/enhancing self-esteem is easy, cheap and provides big return. It doesn’t take much time or effort to write a note, say “thank you” for quality effort or provide specific motivational feedback. Even providing developmental feedback with the attitude of “do no harm” can go a long way to engage and retain employees. We all like to feel that the work we do is valued and appreciated.

How often you provide recognition is up to you. The argument that we shouldn’t recognize people for doing their job doesn’t really hold up in the face of these figures. We hired people to perform a specific job for us. If we want them to continue to do those tasks with us and contribute discretionary effort, we owe it to them to provide recognition to keep them engaged.

What do you do to recognize your employees? Have you noticed a return on that effort?

By Vicki Wrona, PMP

Often in project management classes we teach the concept of situational leadership, which suggests that you should adjust your leadership style based on the readiness level of the person or group you are leading. That is a good theory, but on top of that you should also consider other factors, leading to a management style that adapts not only to the ability and willingness of the person or group involved but also to the intended outcome. Let me explain.

With situational leadership, your approach as a manager will vary depending on the readiness level of the person you are managing at the moment. For example, if the person or group you are managing is new to the type of work you need them to do, you will take a more direct style and explain to them what needs to be done and how to do it. This allows them to fully understand what needs to be done and to deliver that work with success, theoretically moving them up the readiness scale and ensuring they are able and willing to do this work the next time it is needed. If the person you are managing is already an expert at the work to be done and willing to do the work, you can delegate the task to them, being available if and as they need support.

On top of that, you need to take into account other constraints and the intended outcome. For example, if you need something done right away because you are on a tight deadline, a direct style, or push approach, works. This allows the person or team to complete the work quickly without having to spend time determining how to approach the work. This also works when the job to be done is smaller or more trivial, avoiding unnecessary discussion and debate.

If, however, you need the person or team to be more engaged or fully vested in the work, a pull approach is more appropriate, even if (and I would especially if) time is short. This approach allows people to participate in “how” the work will be done, allowing for multiple viewpoints to be considered. Doing this will not only increase engagement, involvement and buy-in, but can also (hopefully) lead to a more efficient approach or better solution. This is appropriate for work that requires more buy-in, is more complex or risky, or that which has a higher profile or visibility.

Managers with more experience know they need to vary their approach and they know how to do this effectively. We all have a preferred style but we know, or need to learn, to develop and use various approaches where applicable to be a good leader.

You can read another view on push vs. pull leadership in an article by Denise Brouillette at w2wlink here.

Are you properly varying your approach based on what’s best for that situation?

By Vicki Wrona, PMP

I was recently talking to a teaming agreement partner and they said to me, “You’re a project manager. To you, everything’s a project.” Interesting. I’m also a business owner. The combination of business owner and project manager means I look for opportunities and processes everywhere.

There are advantages and disadvantages to the meaning behind his comment. The advantages are that because of the structured approach and tools I have been taught and have successfully used, I have a formality and a structure in which to approach initiatives, both new and familiar. I have or create a logical structure and process for almost everything I undertake.

This was echoed to me by a different teaming agreement partner who commented that since he earned his PMP, he has noticed he is able to apply project management to so many aspects of life. These include operational improvements, new initiatives, business trips, long drives, vacations, home and garden projects, etc.

I agree. To me, sound project management principles represent sound business practices, including good communication, solid planning, reporting and controls, milestone checks, expectation management, accountability, etc. I also see how structured approaches apply at the macro level as well as in managing the details.

It is interesting how universally applicable project management can be. Of course, that’s my opinion. When I talk to engineers, it’s funny how they can relate the very same things we are talking about to a concept in engineering. Once they explain it to me, I see it both from their viewpoint and my own. Both work. That’s the benefit of having a frame of reference.

That said, there are some disadvantages behind seeing everything as a project. One is trying to make everything fit into the project management mold even if it doesn’t necessarily belong. Another is that the structure or formality can lack flexibility if applied incorrectly. It can introduce unnecessary constraints or limit spontaneity. We all know managers and project managers who have done that!

So the good news is that I can create processes and/or intelligently select the pieces of best practices to apply to positively influence any particular effort I am undertaking. I simply have to remember to apply the framework and still remain flexible.

What is your frame of reference?