Recently, a colleague made a statement that I love and thought I would explore that with you. She tells her teams, “Don’t make the same mistakes, make new ones.” This resonated with me for several reasons.

First, she gave her team members permission to explore, be creative, and make mistakes at work. If you are never wrong, never fail, or never make a mistake, then you aren’t pushing yourself and growing personally. The same goes with work. If you have never worked on a project or initiative which has had trouble or has not succeeded 100%, then you haven’t stretched yourself. Anyone who has worked on larger initiatives or more complex projects has had problems, even failures. Not everything succeeds. What we want to do is take control where possible and avoid those issues or problems which can be properly managed, minimizing the occurrences of problems or failures that are beyond our control.

Second, this statement emphasizes the rule to avoid repeating past mistakes. How do we avoid making the mistakes that have been made before? By reviewing lessons learned and familiarizing ourselves with the problems and issues that prior similar projects have had. We can also interview our SMEs (subject matter experts), those who have been involved with similar initiatives in the past. They have a wealth of information if we make the effort to talk to them and ask the right questions. I would suggest that when you initiate a discussion with a SME that you are prepared with the right questions to gather the information you need.

Another way to avoid making the same mistakes is to involve SMEs in the project or initiative. We cannot do all of our work alone; unfortunately many managers or project managers believe they are supposed to. That is not true. Involve your team, talk to SMEs inside and outside your team as well as outside your organization where possible, use all the resources you have. If at first blush you don’t think you have many resources or help, think about it some more. With some thought, you’ll probably realize you have access to more sources of information and knowledge than you think. Be proactive. I’ll bet you know of managers or project managers who are able to gather intelligence better than others. Emulate them.

In closing, keep this phrase in mind when managing your own work as well as other people. Be the role model you need to be.

How have you helped yourself or your team stretch beyond the comfortable while avoiding making the same mistakes?

Maybe you’ve heard the advice to “fake it ‘til you make it”. Well I’d like to expand on that saying.

Do you ever find yourself angry with something or someone and need a way to change your mood? If you are upset, sad, or experiencing a negative emotion that needs to go away, just smile. You may feel silly but your brain cannot handle the crossed signals coming into it. Your mind is clearly upset but your face is smiling. Within a few minutes, your mood will lighten, and you will find yourself able to deal with that difficult person in a rational way rather than emotionally and negatively.

I once worked for a telemarketing firm. “Smile and dial” they would tell us while we worked toward our goal of 200 calls an hour. If you smile while talking on the phone, that positive emotion comes through in your voice and the person on the other end will pick up on that. Do this especially if you are upset or dreading the conversation.

As covered in Whole Living Magazine, researchers at Northwestern University found that simply putting your body in certain positions triggers hormonal changes. Positioning your body in a posture of power to act more confidently raises levels of testosterone, a hormone which makes us take action, while also reducing cortisol, a stress hormone. This includes both sitting and standing positions, such as sitting with your hands behind your head and one ankle on the other knee or walking with your eyes focused straight ahead and head held high. Using this knowledge wisely can help you boost your performance at work and in life.

If you are working on a task or problem and just want to give up, give yourself the ability to be more persistent by crossing your arms. Your brain will pay attention to the body language more than your inner negative voices wanting you to quit.

You can also sit up straight or stand tall to boost your confidence. What I have found to work well is to sit or stand tall and talk with assuredness on what I DO know. That helps overcome nervous energy when making a big presentation or negotiating with a tough negotiator, such as your boss or customer. I’m not suggesting that we all become the cocky and annoying person who acts all-knowing and over-confident, sometimes due to lack of awareness and sometimes to cover a lack of knowledge and/or possible insecurity. I don’t want anyone acting like they know everything when they don’t.

Your mom may have used this technique when she put her hands on her hips to stand firm and make a point. At that point, you knew she was not budging.

Another interesting trick is to nod your head to increase positive feelings. Your body language reflects your inner state, so if you are feeling positive when talking, you may start to nod your head. It also turns out that if consciously nod your head while talking, you will feel more positive. It works in both directions.

If you don’t quite know what to say and want to encourage the other person to provide more information and continue to speak, you can either put your chin in your hand in a thoughtful pose or lightly stroke your chin. If you also nod your head at the same time, you encourage the other person to continue speaking and to agree.  This will help you gather more information and collect your thoughts before responding. Again, not only are you encouraging the other person to participate, you are convincing yourself to act reflectively when you need it.

I hope these tips help when you find yourself in a difficult, negative or uncomfortable situation.

How have you applied any of these body language techniques? If you have not used this trick, how can you apply it?

When I learned of an opportunity to sit in on a major NASA project review as a “fly on the wall,” I jumped at it. This seemed like a great way to learn about the new Kepler project. Kepler is a special purpose mission in the NASA Discovery Program, with an objective that the project’s principal investigator William Boruki says is to “explore the skies for terrestrial-like planetary systems around other stars, in order to answer one of the most enduring questions humans have asked throughout history: Are there others like us in the universe?”

Fly-on-the-wall was an experiment in knowledge sharing, offering project practitioners an opportunity to learn from observing good project-related meeting processes as they occurred in real time. This idea surfaced after several senior project managers commented that they had little, if any, training or experience in holding reviews, making presentations, holding team kick-off meetings, or in many other project management activities until they “had to do one.” A common refrain was, “I’d never even seen one!”

To participate as a fly began an interesting and revealing odyssey for me, watching and listening to peer review presentations and discussions from the Kepler-Ground Segment development team to other NASA and contractor managers. These were the key players who would decide how the project would be structured and who would establish a preliminary schedule for this portion of the project.

Now operating in space, Kepler was a joint project between two NASA Centers. Mission control and overall data management were the responsibility of the Ames Research Center, and the telescope and the launch portion were to be managed by the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The primary instrument of Kepler is a specialized one-meter diameter photometer telescope, positioned in Earth’s orbit to “stare” for four years at a small portion of the night sky, containing over 100,000 stars similar to our sun, and to capture images of Earth-like planets rotating around them. This peer review of the project’s ground segment portion emphasized that Kepler was not a large, complicated project.

I was impressed that the meetings started on time, stayed on time, and even finished a little ahead of schedule, despite a lot of active discussion about the control and management techniques to be employed in the project and who had what responsibility. No fewer than eight separate functional organizations with integral roles in the project attended the meeting, from across three continents including North America. And this was said to not be a complex mission! My hat went off to the Kepler project team for their thoroughness, professionalism and ability to stick to the purpose of the meeting. Some useful tips that I picked up as an observing fly for future use in meetings include:

1. INTRODUCTIONS: Not introducing everyone in the room; only the key players at the main table. Other important contributors, who gave parts of the presentation or contributed to the discussions when appropriate, introduced themselves. Some of these people were high-level representatives who did not seem to mind their secondary roles in the meeting.
2. PURPOSE: Clearly stating the purpose of the meeting at the beginning and, even more important, clearly stating what the meeting “was not” about. This set the stage for efficiency and minimized distracting comments. A facilitator kept the meeting moving along but never “squashed” anyone who had a relevant comment or contribution.
3. OMBUDSMAN: Assigning a key member at the table as an ombudsman with a strong enough personality to cut off discussion when it would be part of a later presentation (not relevant now), or to end comments that contributed little (those who love their own voice) or when it would be more appropriate for an off-line conversation (those who can’t let go but just-might have something important to say). This process worked well and was conducted in a polite, professional manner.
4. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: A particularly useful chart on one wall, referred to often during the meeting, showed a roles and responsibilities matrix with the key organizations involved in the project, listed across the top as column headings, and the project functional elements as role headings down the left-most column. The row-column intersections in the matrix clearly identified the organization responsible for each of the functions, removing much confusion that might otherwise have occurred.

I believe fly-on-the-wall is an extremely simple but valuable knowledge-sharing technique, easily duplicated in any organization. Tips from observers in well-run meetings can be shared with project managers and teams, and have high potential for encouraging an outcome of project success.

In what ways do you think the  fly-on-the-wall technique can help your projects?

Subject matter experts (SMEs) are generally a very valuable asset to a project manager (PM). However, as a PM, you must be prudent in how much authority and control is given to or taken by a SME. Additionally, you must be aware that a SME can slowly erode your authority, even without a direct confrontation.  When a PM begins to have the authority slowly taken away by a SME, it is called “SME creep.”

I’ve been there. You have been assigned a project to manage and you don’t have experience in the area that you’re about to manage; a project that could make or break your career.  As Frank, the boss, gives you your assignment, you’re wondering if he is speaking English. He is throwing acronyms and technical jargon at you so fast that your head is swimming. However, as if to wish you lots of luck, he reassures you by saying, “Now I am asking Bob, our SME in this area, to give you support and be there to help, if you should need him. Of course, he has his full time job, and so he may be a little slow in responding to you.”

Just great. You’re responsible for the project – assuming you can untangle the jargon into plain English – and someone else has all the knowledge. Your team is looking to you for guidance and direction. Bob is working a 50 hour work week, just trying to keep his head above water. You want to set up a meeting with Bob.

You send Bob an email and say, “What is a good time for us to meet to talk about this project?” You’re trying to be understanding and cooperative. That is a nice consideration. However, you are sending the wrong message to start the project. What you are subliminally saying is, “I recognize your time is more valuable than mine, so I will let you take the lead.”

Some may disagree with my interpretation of this situation, and that is OK. I realize there are SMEs out there that would not take it that way and would be thankful that you where being considerate. Then there are others that would, perhaps subconsciously, take it just the way I presented it. Bob sends you back an email stating that he will be able to squeeze you in tomorrow at 5:30 PM, knowing that the standard working hours are 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM at his office. You realize that you are a salaried “professional” and sometimes (most of the time) you have to work a “professional day” (which means no overtime), so you agree. Strike two for you. By letting Bob set the location, you once again are giving him the upper hand and implying that you must go to Bob instead of him coming to you.

You show up at his office two minutes early. He is on the phone talking “technical speak.” He motions for you to come in. He raises up one finger, indicating that he will just be a minute. So you sit there looking around the room at all the technical posters and books that have multi-syllable words in the title. You glance at your watch and that one finger minute has turned into ten minutes and Bob’s conversation shows no sign of slowing down.

Strike three. Bob obviously does not respect your time or he would have ended the conversation when you walked into the room. You haven’t spoken a word about the project and you have already lost control.

It just goes downhill from here. After you have waited for 15 minutes, Bob finally gets off the call and apologizes profusely. Don’t let that fool you. You begin the conversation by giving him a little background on yourself. He stops you after about two minutes into your opening and says, “Frank,” (your boss), “tells me you’re a little ‘weak on experience’ on this project.” He clears his throat. “Don’t worry, I know enough about this project for both of us.” This is another bad sign. He does not want to listen to you because he thinks he knows everything, and the boss has confided in him that you are “weak” on the subject.

I could go on with this scenario, but that would be just more to read and you wouldn’t get much out it except more ways of identifying that you were in trouble.

Consider this approach: Interrupt Bob and say that you are glad he is on the team. This is very subtle way of telling him he is a team member, not the team leader. Secondly, say, “This meeting has run over the time I had allotted. Do this for me,” (in a friendly tone), “put together a list of the deliverables. Do you know how to do a WBS? After drafting a WBS, would you put together resource requirements with roles and responsibilities, and then a time estimate, based upon your suggested resource requirements, and show me a time line and the critical path? You’re probably the best choice to do this since you are so familiar with the project requirements.”

Wow, what did you just do?! By him making the statement that he knew enough for the both of you about the project, he just said, “I am the only person that knows what to do.” So you loaded him up with enough work to “choke a horse”!

If he is all “techie,” he won’t know how to do those tasks, so he will have to refer back to you for guidance and it will be clear that you have taken back the leadership role. If he does know how to do all those assignments, that’s great; you can grade his papers. In either case, you are clearly the one in charge. Be fair with your evaluation of his work, but make it obvious that you are supervising him, not just taking everything he does as gospel. This will reinforce your authority. If you can, get together a committee that you obviously run and put his work in front of a committee, reinforcing the point that he is part of a team.

As with most everything in project management, this is a “situational” scenario. You must adapt to the personally of the SME and the operational process assets of your organization. I hope you are never put in this situation. However, if you are, you might consider this approach.

Good Luck.

I don’t know about you, but one of my biggest frustrations in the workplace is meetings that go on long past their scheduled time allotment or those that finish within their scheduled time, took a crazy turn, went completely off topic and seemed to accomplish nothing related to the original meeting subject.  I’m sure most of you can relate, so I’d like to share my experience about a recent meeting I was in and how it influenced me to improve the ways I’ve conducted all my meetings since.

Not so long ago I was invited to attend a meeting via conference call. The meeting was scheduled for 30 minutes and was to cover quite a bit of material and training. I automatically blocked out 60 minutes on my calendar as past experience has told me, many times over, the meeting would last quite a bit longer than the scheduled 30 minutes. I dialed in, connected to the assigned WebEx screen and introduced myself to the other attendees. The meeting sponsor started the meeting immediately and explained there was only 30 minutes and all topics to be discussed had to be completed in those 30 minutes, no exceptions. Guess what? It got done – really. As I sat in amazement during this meeting about how much was discussed and accomplished in a very short period of time, I made sure to listen as closely as I could to learn this meeting magic.

After several meetings with this meeting sponsor, I’ve learned and now use the following to lead all my group meetings:

• Schedule your meeting for the time you truly think you can accomplish what needs to be done and stick to that time frame.
• Throughout the meeting, remind attendees of the topics at hand and how much time is left to discuss the topics.
• Be sure to speak up and let someone know if they are off topic. Make sure to let them know you will follow up with them to discuss what they would like to talk about and also include any other people who may be needed. Most of the time, the off-topic items can be discussed and resolved very briefly after the meeting.
• If the meeting topics truly do not fit in the allotted time, schedule a follow up meeting instead of going over time and creating conflicts in others’ schedules.
• Be diligent in moving along the topics of the meeting, keeping careful watch of the time.

I hope these points are as helpful to you as they have been to me. What are some of the things you’ve done to successfully keep meetings within their scheduled time allotment?

Perhaps the most common environment a typical project manager works in is a matrix organization.  Given this circumstance, a lot of project managers not only have no formal authority when it comes to our clients, but also have limited formal authority within our own company. Often the most successful project managers are the ones who develop a methodology and leadership style that allows them to effectively overcome formal authority limitations.

Typical concerns that arise from limited authority situations are: lack of decision-making power, less responsiveness from within the project team and weaker negotiation positions for potential scope and schedule change requirements, to name a few.

So, is managing without authority an art, a science or a technique?  The good news is that there are effective ways to overcome the situation with all of the above, and you can tailor your approach based on your personal management style and preferences. Of course, the process will require significant effort, continuous fine tuning and a good amount of patience and flexibility.

Established Project Processes
The first and most widely accepted way to control the project is through the project process.  The key feature of this approach is that processes provide the necessary structure for your project delivery. Controlling through the process is more likely to be effective in teams where the processes have been established for some time and have been used repeatedly and consistently through multiple projects.  In other words, when your team members understand exactly what to do and how to do it and have been through the process multiple times, your project runs a lot smoother and situations where a strong formal authority is required are few and far apart.

Another nice thing about controlling through the process is that the project manager’s authority is implicit as that of a person responsible for managing the process.  Clear project documentation will have a significant positive effect if controlling a project through process is your primary management mechanism.

Varying Processes
What if you work in an environment where projects vary significantly, driven by major differences in scope, stakeholders’ priorities and project team structures? If you are a consultant, this situation is probably what you live in. Here, controlling through the process is probably not as effective. If the processes have been developed before you joined the project, you have to learn and adopt them. If those processes are not in place yet, developing and establishing them will take some time.

Controlling your project though metrics may become a good addition to your tool kit.  It is generally accepted wisdom that you get what you measure. Carefully study objectives of a project and stakeholders’ expectations and priorities.  Most people cannot allocate appropriate focus to more than three to four measurable parameters on any particular project.  Pick three or four metrics to monitor that would have the biggest impact on the success of a project and on stakeholder’s satisfaction. Measure, review, document diligently, and publish the results in a way that is visible to the team and is easily accessible.

Leveraging Your Personal Style and Competence
The more experienced project and program managers may also rely on developing and then leveraging their personal leadership style. They sometimes control their projects through influence.  The key to using this approach effectively is competence.  Competence does not necessarily mean knowing more than our team or client. How many times have we all felt that the specialists on the team know more than we do? It is not that they know more, they just know different things.

For a project manager, competence is about being able to successfully and effectively deliver on agreed upon objectives while maintaining a positive attitude within the project team. If you are able to demonstrate competence consistently, you will be on your way to developing a reputation of a great project manager and earning the trust of stakeholders and team members.  If people trust you, they are rather likely to imply you have an informal authority, which is perhaps more powerful than any formal kind.

Every project manager finds a unique way to be successful, whether through different combinations of the above mentioned approaches or by developing their own secret sauce. It is fairly certain that at some point in our careers we find ourselves wishing we had more authority to be able to resolve some situations. So please, do share your experiences with your colleagues. Maybe our gathered experiences and lessons learned will help us collectively better manage with limited authority to deliver project success.

Let’s start here. What successful ways have you discovered to manage with little authority?

I would like to share an invaluable resource for running effective meetings. This concise book goes beyond the obvious high-level discussion of running effective meetings such as what to do before, during and after the meeting, but really gets into the heart of how to practically run an effective meeting, both with large and small groups. The book is called Great Meetings! Great Results by Pam Plumb and Dee Kelsey.

What I like about this book is that they discuss everything with regard to getting people together and getting results. This includes everything from understanding the purpose of the meeting and the audience to the techniques used to generate then classify and then select ideas to handling conflicts to breaking through creative blocks to making sure everyone clearly understands the outcome. Where else can you get so many concrete ideas in one concise place? I have found this to be a good reference book and have recommended it in my classes for years with good feedback from those who have used it.

One strength of this reference book is the section on breaking through creativity blocks to generate, evaluate and select ideas. We have all heard of various analytical techniques, but rarely are they used well. The most basic technique of all, that of brainstorming to generate ideas, is presented in ways to help your group avoid the most common pitfall of evaluating ideas too quickly. There is also a section on getting and keeping everyone involved at the appropriate level. Never again will you have meetings where people are allowed to sit and not participate. Anyone with ideas or knowledge will be engaged.

One of the techniques outlined in the book for large groups is an exercise called “Something in Common” which lets team members get to know each other a little better and to break the ice. Even if people have been working together for a long time, this is a fun and quick exercise.

First, pair participants up and ask each pair to find something unusual they have in common that they are willing to share with the larger group. Encourage them to go beyond the obvious and get creative. It is always amazing what people will come up with. Quickly go around the room and have each pair share their findings. I have had a lot of fun with competitive groups who try to outdo each other and be the pair with the most outrageous and true similarity. Then put two pairs together so that four people are now finding something in common. Again, encourage creativity and something else besides the items previously found. You can go around the room again and let each group share their results. Again, I direct them to do this quickly or else this exercise can take all day. J Lastly, you can let 8 people meet each other and find something in common if you choose. Obviously, the larger the group, the more “common” their similarities will be. The important thing, though, is not what they come up with but the sharing and discussion beyond normal work that they have.

I like that the book offers practical tips. For example, there are 3 case studies of one page each in length outlining how to handle:

• An undercurrent of hostility between group members
• When a participant attacks the facilitator
• The nay-sayer during brainstorming sessions

There is a nice section with tips and examples on staying true to your values as well. I like that reminder, because we get tempted to stray from our gut and don’t hear that message often enough.

I hope this helps you. Please let me know what you think of this reference.

I imagine you could survey employees on any day in any company and they would tell you that meetings are the bane of their existence. Too often, meetings are conducted without an agenda or even an overarching purpose. Attendees jockey for organizational position or display blatant apathy, checking email on mobile devices or laptops.

Meeting derailers are well documented and websites abound for coping with them. One challenge is that we work in an information age in which knowledge workers spend their time gathering, analyzing and synthesizing data, rather than producing or manufacturing. In meetings we have a desire to share what we know, rather than work to completion or decision. We all have a data set that we bring to the table and we need the time to process the data that others have before we can make a decision.

One way to manage this confusion is to have “pre-meetings”: touch base sessions with participants to set the stage and gain buy-in and commitment. Of course this means that a one hour meeting turns into a series of meetings; not the way to increase productivity! I would propose that this is the best reason to integrate the technology of a social collaboration tool into your workplace.

I can already hear the groaning in some corners of your organization. “Just what we need,” the CFO will say, “Facebook for work.” The COO will argue that the organization doesn’t need people “tweeting” on the job. This is what we often think of when the topic of “social” collaboration comes up. What if we took “social” of the term and instead called it “enterprise collaboration?” Few people would argue that engaging more people in the conversation, at least more people with relevant information, improves the quality of the decision.

A collaboration tool for business might be the answer to creating productive sharing prior to the decision meeting. Inviting employees to discuss and share adds value by increasing the knowledge and awareness of the participants and giving them time to process and synthesize. Furthermore, the content and discussion becomes a shared database and with proper use of tagging and cataloging, the information is available to the organization speeding the time to productivity. In a workforce that is generationally shifting, capturing this “tribal knowledge” is critical to the organization’s long term success.

The other great advantage in using a tool like this is that it increases the commitment to the decision. Because the members had a chance to weigh in, discuss, process and be heard, the team can come to a joint decision during the dedicated time allowed without the posturing and politics that might normally occur in the formal meeting space.

And finally, for the naysayers who will argue that these kinds of tools don’t add business value, there is plenty of research out there that says otherwise. In organizations that utilize these tools, there is better alignment, better transparency, better community and better results.

I’d like to hear your thoughts: how might your organization take advantage of “enterprise collaboration” tools to support higher productivity? If you are already using a tool like this (in my organization we use Yammer) how is it paying off?

Note: This is the fourth post in a series on PMOs. Read part 1 What is a PMO and What Does It Do?, part 2 PMO Business Value and Impact, or part 3 PMOs – Why Might I Need One?.

In the previous three blogs in this series we looked at what a PMO is, the business value that they bring to a company, and why your company might need one. In this blog I want to look at the steps to consider when actually planning and establishing a PMO – how many people, what functions, ROI etc.

If we reach the conclusion that yes we think we do need a PMO to make our program / company / project portfolio more successful, we need to create it. So as the overall maestro of this potential vehicle to success or failure, you need to sit down to consider how many and what skill types you want in it, and how you actually bring one to life. In the following sections I use the term “program” but it is also valid for larger projects.

Some of the questions you may ask yourself during this consideration are:

1. If there are multiple projects in the program, should the individual PMs be part of the PMO or not?
2. How well established are your methodology, tools, infrastructure, and previous project history database?
3. How technical is the project?
4. How inter-related are the projects? Are they mainly independent of each other or highly dependent?
5. What is the generic level of risk for the program?
6. What is the projected cost of the program (including the PMO)? If it is for an external customer, what is the projected profitability of the program and what is the potential cost of failure of the program to your customer and to your company?
7. What is the projected length of the program?
8. For an external customer, should customer representatives be included in the PMO?

Before we look into these questions that may affect the size of your PMO, one consideration that I do not think has a major impact on the size of a PMO is whether the program is for an internal or external customer. All programs need to be planned for success whether the customer is internal or external, so the size of the PMO should not be significantly affected.

1. PMs IN OR OUT OF THE PMO

From my own experience I can suggest that as a rule, the cost difference will be negligible because there is little additional time or expense involved if the PMs are established as members of the PMO or not, unless there are traveling expenses involved. On the other hand, having all PMs together to discuss status, progress, issues, risks, etc. will usually have a significant impact on the success of the program because of the level of communication between the PMs which will enable the PMs to be more proactive on their project. So I would suggest that there are substantial benefits to having individual PMs included in the PMO rather than have them hanging around the edges.

2. METHODOLOGY, TOOLS, INFRASTRUCTURE, PROJECT HISTORY DATABASE

If your company does not have a solid methodology, including tools, techniques, and historical project information to review, then it is likely that individual projects will be managed in the way their individual PM does it and are likely to be little islands of work that are unlikely to be well integrated, consistent, solid, or repeatable. They are likely to provide the overall program manager with a great opportunity for failure and a need to polish up their profile. In this situation, a successful outcome will probably involve more people in the PMO just to develop the missing infrastructure, train and support program team members, etc. Having a well established methodology, tools and techniques will not only raise the chance of a successful outcome but will enable your company to add this experience, lessons learned, plans, etc. to a database of completed programs to enable future similar programs to benefit by previous experience. So not having a well established project infrastructure will either lead to  increased size of the PMO or a decreased probability of success.

3. TECHNICAL LEVEL OF THE PROJECT

This will impact the number of technical leads and SMEs you may need in the PMO.

4. PROJECTS: HIGHLY DEPENDENT OR MAINLY STAND-ALONE

It is possible to have a program with multiple projects that although they are related, may not be highly interdependent. In this case, the size of the PMO may be significantly smaller. Where there is a highly dependent set of projects in the program, the issues of risk and scheduling in particular are a serious consideration. In this case you may need a PMO scheduling manager who will take each individual project schedule and combine them at the program level to identify dependencies and risks. There may be a need for a PMO risk manager who could assist PMs to be proactive in assessing and managing the risks on their project caused by other projects.

5. COST AND PROFITABILITY OF THE PROGRAM

For both internal and external projects the cost of having a PMO should be compared to the risks and potential costs of not having one. In my experience, for external customers we assessed the optimum size of the PMO and if the customer will not accept the resultant price of the program our management quite rightly stated that we did not want “bad business”. Consequently we would not reduce our quotation unless requirements were de-scoped. If this were not acceptable to the customer, the decision was usually made to not pursue that opportunity as the likely lack of success would erode any anticipated profit.

6. LENGTH OF PROGRAM

This is a factor in considering the size, consistency and skill set of your PMO. Unfortunately people – even PMO members – tend to want to have vacations, be ill, and leave the company. On a long term engagement, allowance must be made for these inconveniences. One obvious way to reduce the impact is to cross train PMO members to allow for short term absences. In addition, they can perform other background tasks such as assisting and mentoring PMs, working on capturing lessons learned, training project team members in the company methodology, etc.

7. CUSTOMER REPRERESENTATIVES: IN THE PMO OR NOT

Having the customer represented on your PMO can have an associated risk depending on the maturity level of the customer. An immature customer who does not realize that all programs have issues can be a disruptive force when things go wrong; they may panic and want to implement short term fixes. The more mature customer will be an asset on the PMO provided they work with the PMO cooperatively, and resultant communication will be greatly enhanced. Ideally there will be no finger pointing when issues arise, just a cooperative approach to resolving them.

There are other questions that you, as Program Manager, may need to consider in planning the size, consistency, and skill level of your PMO, but I think the ones above are the main ones as you build your PMO.

The next and final blog in this series will consider how to integrate PMOs into the organizational culture and how to make PMOs a permanent and valuable asset to your company.

What steps have you taken in planning and establishing a PMO?

Have we (meaning me, at least) been missing what project management is all about? One of my favorite ways of thinking about the complexity of project management has been to compare it to completing a puzzle where you don’t have all the pieces and need to make some of them up as you go along. Another favorite of mine is to think about it is as if I were a juggler trying to keep several balls in the air (scope, cost, schedule, quality, etc.), experiencing only brief encounters with each important part on some rotating basis. But I am now convinced I’ve been wrong because of the simplistic ways I’ve assumed projects can be understood and managed.

At a recent PMI Chapter meeting I had an epiphany about my distorted approach during the speaker’s presentation. The speaker provided insight into problem solving by not only identifying that there are only six different types of problems and cautioning us that to solve them requires choosing the correct approach for each particular type (http://www.problemsolving2.com), but also that many problems may require using more than one approach.

Project management is one such type of problem where my single puzzle or juggler thinking is insufficient. I now know that it requires a triple problem type approach. These three approaches include the following:

1) Puzzle problem thinking works on most projects to identify the pieces involved (at least I was partially right on this method), the interdependencies of the pieces, the constraints on them (resources, time, quality, etc.), and then working with standard tools (network diagramming, critical path, schedule, etc.) until a reasonable solution evolves or something can be changed to create a more workable solution (crashing, fast-tracking, use of float, etc.).

2) Uncertainties abound on projects as risk. This is where my puzzle and juggler solutions were weak, and need to be applied as part of the solution more than they are in many cases.

3) Dilemmas, however, were the key problem-solving link I was missing from my thinking. Dilemmas result from an imbalance between stakeholder requirements and expectations, and what can be achieved with the time and resources available to accomplish the desired scope at the appropriate level of quality. The dilemma is that you want to do what the customer wants, but can’t do it within the imposed constraints. As the famous “you can’t have all three” has shown countless times, flexibility is required somewhere. NASA’s experience with faster-cheaper-better projects shows the fallacy of demanding all three, treating the problems in projects too simplistically.

In my own work with researchers and scientists on their projects, I made it clear they could demand any two of the three constraints (schedule, cost, quality), but the remaining one belonged to me. And it actually worked with them! I’m now convinced that we can do better in our project management by considering that there are often three types of problems intertwined: a puzzle to be solved; uncertainties to be identified and dealt with; dilemmas to be solved in the best interests of both the customer and the project. Considering all three together will achieve a higher level of project accomplishment and success. I can’t wait to try this, or hear from someone else who has.

How have you managed the complexity of projects?