My 5 min talk on why Agile can be used for anything is now posted http://youtu.be/Gp73bhssPUs -- not bad for first time in front of 300+ people if I do say so myself. :-)
See all the slides on-line at http://www.slideshare.net/Leyts/ignite-waterloo-agile-vacation?utm_source=slideshow03&utm_medium=ssemail&utm_campaign=iupload_share_slideshow
la·ten·cy (noun) ~ or is that 'Ley-ton-C' (my name) ~ yes, a bit of wordplay, and the period of time required to locate the first spark of an optimal inspiration or idea that actually works! Filling that gap is what this site is all about. Reducing the time required to get from project management impasse to answer.
Tuesday, 27 May 2014
Sunday, 25 May 2014
When you Hire Smarter do you Really?
An article -- http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/231911 -- I was reading on the 'Entrepreneur' web site read a great
quote, "The best investment you can make is to hire people you can trust
to take things off your plate." That is so true, and especially with
experience as a people manger, it amazes me the attitude of some people.
The reason companies hire is because there is
already have too much work for the person doing the hiring with existing
resources. That shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone but surprisingly all too
often it is. The following examples are some of the surprises I’ve heard or
overheard in the last 30+ years. And yes, in the examples I overheard, I did
appropriately challenge the speaker. I can’t guarantee that it helped; just
that it happened.
Employees (prospective or otherwise):
“You're here to help me be successful.” No,
it's actually the other way around. You’re here to help everyone be successful
do doing to the best of your ability the role you were hired to perform. As a
direct report to someone, your manager will in turn help you help them be
successful by using the skills you espoused as within your possession during
the interview process. You must sow before you can reap anything. BTW, everyone
in a company of two or more people is a direct report to someone else; even if
you’re the President and CEO.
“I lied to you because I didn't think I could
trust you, and when I was fired that proved I was right.” No, you were fired
because you lied to my face and proved I couldn't trust you.
“I'll work with you but I won't work for you.”
No, if you're a new hire with relatively few years of post college work
experience and someone is going to take a chance at giving you a job, damn
right you're going to work for them.
A smart business is not an autocracy but it ain't no f@#king democracy either.
Managers:
“I gave you the job; now you're on your own.”
No, if you're going to be a people manager, manage your people. You don't want
to do that? Okay, maybe it's you that's in the wrong position.
“I was here first, I know better.” No, because
if you're the smartest person in the room about everything that needs to be
done then you're hiring idiots .... or maybe it's somebody else that's the
idiot.
“I expect people to leave their outside lives
at the door, and behave in a professional manner while in the office.”
Professional (aka 'ethical')? Certainly. Leave their lives at the door?!
Really?! You do know you're actually hiring people not robots; right? Sure, to
the best of a person's ability they should manage their emotions rather than
the other way around. Empathy is a critical factor in leading and managing ...
bear with me here ... P E O P L E.
All these people and many others haven’t a
clue when the term “servant leadership” is used. It does not mean the leader
becomes the servant. It means the leader provides a service in their role as a
leader to create something bigger than themselves. And from yet another
article “Learning from and acknowledging mistakes requires the
humility that Level 5 Leaders display. Level 5 Leadership, according to Jim
Collins (no relation), is what separates exceptional leaders from all others.”
Knowing all of this perhaps I was then
somewhat overly surprised when I read another article -- http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/232914. This
article labels flexibility and drive as personality (78%), cultural alignment
(53%), and then skills (39%) as the areas for job opportunities in the future. This
actually scares, yes 'scares', me.
Yet from reading this article I further
appreciate what I've been hearing some senior economists say over the last year
- "there will never again be a company that lasts for over 100
years". I hope the article is a misinterpretation of the study. If
charisma and group think are valued more that skill and respecting each others'
individual differences then the probability is a whole lot smaller towards ever
creating in the future innovations like the iPhone, object oriented
programming, or a flexible process that will leave Agile in the dust the way
Agile has waterfall.
I listened to a Sr. VP at Google tell a crowd
of wannabe employees about a year ago that he didn't care if somebody was the
best programmer in the world if they didn't have the skills to get along with
those they needed to work with. There is a lot more damage that one developer
can create that would more than offset them writing code day in and out. And
everyone deserves to feel good about going into work every day they go.
Okay, not everyone, not those who have the
perspective that it's all about them and anyone else left can have whatever
scraps are left-over.
Not those to manage to what I call the
"dumbest common denominator". The perversion of the 'no kid left
behind' strategy in the 70s and 80s created class agendas where mediocrity
flourished. This was 'easier' than empowering the best and the brightest to go
as far as they could, to leverage their own innate talents to go beyond on
their own, and use that extra bandwidth available to the teacher to help the
stragglers get over the hump. This is the premise of apprenticeships that have
worked the world over for hundreds of years. This also opposes the
short-sighted mediocrity of unpaid internships. Now of course anyone who can
afford to do this may actually be the most qualified for the role, however,
those who cannot are never even given the opportunity for those people or
companies to ever find out. And as my statistics professor said, “you can’t
prove a negative.”
I still have some hope that some of today’s
leaders and those into the future are seeking principles over popularity
(personality) but if this second article is correct that is not the case. And
if that is truly indeed the case, all I have to say is "may god help us
all". History has given us examples with companies like Nortel, Enron, MCI
Worldcom, NCR, and many too numerous to mention that when popularity and
charisma become paramount the company doesn’t last long. Certainly each of
those companies thought they were making the best decisions when they started
hiring charismatic individuals over those with more valuable ‘skills’. No one
intentionally makes business decisions to proverbially slit their own economic
throats, but when they do make decisions that do just that then everyone suffers
from stockholders to the least skilled laborer to some degree.
So this is
where we come back full circle to where I started this post. Hopefully you are
hiring smart rather than mediocrity. Hopefully they can do things you can’t or
better than you. And if not that, hopefully you are hiring apprentices who are
willing and able to learn.
What does
this all have to do with project and program management? Well, the same as any
other management role; to get things done through other people. Hopefully, most
of those people are smarter than you in what they were hired to do. And
hopefully they equally recognize that you are smarter than them in what you do
as well.
Sunday, 11 May 2014
Status reports versus Progress updates
The difference between a status report and a progress update.
As much as the uninformed would have some people believe, no it's not semantics.
For example, a team member has a series of tasks to complete a user story; a requirement. Let's say those tasks are to load and stage the latest development build, and then execute a series of tests to determine if what is new in that build 1) does the functionality that was added, 2) has not broken anything that used to work, and 3) does all of that with the same or better system throughput performance. Let's also say that the original estimate for that work is three-and-a-half days. Further, let's say that equates to 7 story points.
A status report is "I've got the build and I'm continuing to stage the software." A status report or update is focused on the past up to that point in time. And until somebody invents a time machine where people can go back in time to to change things, this is a waste of people's time; including the person giving the update.
A progress update is "I've got the build, I started to stage the build this morning, and I ran into one small problem, so I spoke with Julio and he was able to help me out right away. He discovered there was an error in a default setting for our test environment. So all things considered, I believe the work will still be finished as planned on Friday." A progress update or report is future focused. It focuses on where things are headed and gives people a proactive opportunity to avoid risks while that work is ongoing or for the next time such a set of similar tasks is being performed.
In the status report, there is no way to know whether the work is on, ahead, or behind schedule, or worse, completely roadblocked. It does not support clear visibility into the progress of the work being done. No one knows to offer help if the tester is roadblocked, and for all anyone knows what is occuring with these series of tasks could be the first indication that the project could be completely riding off the rails.
I've heard some people say "well, that's the project manager's job to ask questions to clarify that." And for me, that is completely and utterly obtuse for two reasons.
One, if the project manager has enough time to remember to stay that on top of every task then either the project isn't very complex or the project manager is being under-utilized. Either way the company is wasting money.
The second reason is that I suspect in a lot of situations those same team members would probably next be screaming about being micromanaged if that was happening. And if they aren't, hopefully the project manager is thinking something like "my god, what am I doing here?! Isn't there something better I could be doing with my life?!" In short, the project and the organization in actuality are circling the drain.
In summary, a progress update creates value-added visibility with opportunities to create even more value beyond that specific point in time. A status update takes people away from the value-add they are doing in their individual jobs so they can hear each other ramble on for probably longer than necessary, add just another layer of distraction that further reduces their value and productivity in each of their roles, and creates unnecessary overhead.
Think I'm wrong? Listen to the updates from yourself and other team members in your next scrum session, stand-up meeting, or whatever you want to call it.
As much as the uninformed would have some people believe, no it's not semantics.
For example, a team member has a series of tasks to complete a user story; a requirement. Let's say those tasks are to load and stage the latest development build, and then execute a series of tests to determine if what is new in that build 1) does the functionality that was added, 2) has not broken anything that used to work, and 3) does all of that with the same or better system throughput performance. Let's also say that the original estimate for that work is three-and-a-half days. Further, let's say that equates to 7 story points.
A status report is "I've got the build and I'm continuing to stage the software." A status report or update is focused on the past up to that point in time. And until somebody invents a time machine where people can go back in time to to change things, this is a waste of people's time; including the person giving the update.
A progress update is "I've got the build, I started to stage the build this morning, and I ran into one small problem, so I spoke with Julio and he was able to help me out right away. He discovered there was an error in a default setting for our test environment. So all things considered, I believe the work will still be finished as planned on Friday." A progress update or report is future focused. It focuses on where things are headed and gives people a proactive opportunity to avoid risks while that work is ongoing or for the next time such a set of similar tasks is being performed.
In the status report, there is no way to know whether the work is on, ahead, or behind schedule, or worse, completely roadblocked. It does not support clear visibility into the progress of the work being done. No one knows to offer help if the tester is roadblocked, and for all anyone knows what is occuring with these series of tasks could be the first indication that the project could be completely riding off the rails.
I've heard some people say "well, that's the project manager's job to ask questions to clarify that." And for me, that is completely and utterly obtuse for two reasons.
One, if the project manager has enough time to remember to stay that on top of every task then either the project isn't very complex or the project manager is being under-utilized. Either way the company is wasting money.
The second reason is that I suspect in a lot of situations those same team members would probably next be screaming about being micromanaged if that was happening. And if they aren't, hopefully the project manager is thinking something like "my god, what am I doing here?! Isn't there something better I could be doing with my life?!" In short, the project and the organization in actuality are circling the drain.
In summary, a progress update creates value-added visibility with opportunities to create even more value beyond that specific point in time. A status update takes people away from the value-add they are doing in their individual jobs so they can hear each other ramble on for probably longer than necessary, add just another layer of distraction that further reduces their value and productivity in each of their roles, and creates unnecessary overhead.
Think I'm wrong? Listen to the updates from yourself and other team members in your next scrum session, stand-up meeting, or whatever you want to call it.
Saturday, 10 May 2014
Paying back ... or at least forward
"Tell me and I forget. Teach me and I may remember. Involve me and I learn (or I will understand)."
For me, this is a great quote, that I believe has been around in various forms since the days of ancient China.
The challenge though is how rarely it seems to be applied. Perhaps being the least in the last decade compared to ever in history.
What I mean is ...
To 'tell' someone something they must be listening closely enough to ask questions if you are being vague; or at least for you to clarify for them so they understand you.
To 'teach', one must be willing to be taught. This applies to the student and the teacher, and I remain astounded by the number of people who consider themselves no longer a student as soon as they graduated out of school. As stated by an old proverb, "Only a fool knows all."
To 'involve' is no more of an isolated category than the previous two. And like the other two categories it is a relationship of sorts between the provider and the receiver. It is also a more involved or deeper relationship because it requires more effort to complete. It also creates more value for the short and the long term. As in the movie "Mr Holland's Opus" this teacher learned at the end of his career when he was feeling at his lowest the true impact of his efforts. Most teachers have their students for a few months and then are never seen again. The truly great teachers have students who stay in touch, make the effort to say hello on the street, or attend show their appreciation in other ways with a positive impact that lasts a very long time.
The question that remains is whether you want to be average or mediocre in the things that only the unique you can do. I'm also neither saying do this for free. Part of the value measurement of any effort is based on what people are willing to pay for it.
That said, over the last couple of years especially it seems there are more and more greedy and unethical businesses who have been discreetly re-implementing indentured servitude or slavery, and some I'm sure believing themselves wonderful human beings for doing so. They tell themselves they are offering an education that those students would otherwise be excluded from. Their slaves are given labels like intern or football scholarship recipient and that's supposed to make it okay. Back when I was young and for hundreds of years before that when people did a job where they were also learning something it was called being an apprentice or in a co-op program through the institute of higher learning; and we all got paid.
For me, this is a great quote, that I believe has been around in various forms since the days of ancient China.
The challenge though is how rarely it seems to be applied. Perhaps being the least in the last decade compared to ever in history.
What I mean is ...
To 'tell' someone something they must be listening closely enough to ask questions if you are being vague; or at least for you to clarify for them so they understand you.
To 'teach', one must be willing to be taught. This applies to the student and the teacher, and I remain astounded by the number of people who consider themselves no longer a student as soon as they graduated out of school. As stated by an old proverb, "Only a fool knows all."
To 'involve' is no more of an isolated category than the previous two. And like the other two categories it is a relationship of sorts between the provider and the receiver. It is also a more involved or deeper relationship because it requires more effort to complete. It also creates more value for the short and the long term. As in the movie "Mr Holland's Opus" this teacher learned at the end of his career when he was feeling at his lowest the true impact of his efforts. Most teachers have their students for a few months and then are never seen again. The truly great teachers have students who stay in touch, make the effort to say hello on the street, or attend show their appreciation in other ways with a positive impact that lasts a very long time.
The question that remains is whether you want to be average or mediocre in the things that only the unique you can do. I'm also neither saying do this for free. Part of the value measurement of any effort is based on what people are willing to pay for it.
That said, over the last couple of years especially it seems there are more and more greedy and unethical businesses who have been discreetly re-implementing indentured servitude or slavery, and some I'm sure believing themselves wonderful human beings for doing so. They tell themselves they are offering an education that those students would otherwise be excluded from. Their slaves are given labels like intern or football scholarship recipient and that's supposed to make it okay. Back when I was young and for hundreds of years before that when people did a job where they were also learning something it was called being an apprentice or in a co-op program through the institute of higher learning; and we all got paid.
Friday, 4 April 2014
So you think you're a leader . . .
I get a lot of my inspirations from
others' articles and blogs. Bruce Kasanoff and his article 'How Do YOU Bring Out Talent in Others' on LinkedIn is no
exception. After all, one of the greatest pieces of advice I ever received is
'to read'. So when I read this article and Bruce asked his readers how we lead
I had to contribute.
For me,
leadership is about establishing clear accountabilities, boundaries, and
letting them know I am there to care about (protect) them. And doing that as
concisely as possible. For me, these are the ABC's of leadership.
The
accountability part; I think that's the obvious part - I hope so anyway. Just
in case I need to clarify; my expectation is always for people to make commitments and then adhere to
them. Yes, this must be done in a way that is commensurate to the level of
maturity and skills of each individual. And yes, people either know or learn
that if they don't hold themselves accountable, I will. To clarify perhaps a
bit further, two of the US Marines mottos are also two of my favorites. 'Semper
fi', short for semper fidelis, latin for 'always faithful. And 'Adapt -
Improvise - Overcome'. Life whether in business or elsewhere will introduce
hurdles we'd rather not have to deal with. Omission to make a decision (or
commitment) is still a decision.
Boundaries -
for me it's never ever okay for anyone to deflect responsibility
for their own decisions onto others people, or hold onto critical information
that impacts other people and their commitments. You know something is up and
coming that other people will care about? Figure out who those people are and
get that information to them ASAP in a clear and concise way. Part two of that,
only make decisions within your realm of authority and responsibility. An
in-the-weeds individual contributor should never
presume to know more about
the business than a Director or VP on the leadership team.
Protection - I
expect everyone to 'man/woman up' when they screw up; admit you messed
up, honestly apologize to those you impacted, make a commitment to not repeat
the behavior, and then move on. If someone wants to lord over you that error;
that's when the very pointed, gorilla-in-the-closet, in-your-face me comes out
towards that person. In short, don't
mess with my team; period. I will eat you alive.
That's the
launch pad.
The execution is for me to be consistent with
myself and everyone else in applying that.
Accountability
-- something I've noticed a lot of over the years is that a lot of very smart
people are very dumb when it comes to the cost of doing certain things. I'll
offer a couple of examples because this is so important.
1) Everyone at the
company where you work is there because someone higher up in the chain of
command (relative to you) believes the role is needed and that person has the
skills needed for that role. I've witnessed people who regularly step on the
proverbial toes of others and then loudly complain (sometimes back stab) when
others do the same to them. I always set expectations right out of the Ontario
Labour Code and a lot of very good books to minimize the occurrences of this
happening -- i.e.:
a.
speak to the other person(s) about the concern; and do it
respectfully because sometimes some people just didn't realize
what they were doing,
b.
if you are not comfortable doing that on your own for some reason;
come see me and I will assist you, and finally
c.
if you've already tried a) and b) more than once and it is still
happening, we will all sit down together -- NOTE: this does not mean I will
carry your burden (see more below).
2)
I've seen groups of 8 people
spend 2 weeks developing huge, detailed, documented plans that other than them,
no one will ever look at. And think themselves oh so wonderful for doing it.
The cost: $40,000. Now, if you were writing the cheque for that document, would
you think it's worth $40k? We all need to be good stewards of not only our own
wallets but of our company's wallets too. That is, If we really want the
company to be successful.
Boundaries --
in the high tech realms, thinking outside the box in a lot of cases is a really
good idea. There is rarely if ever the case when only one right way exists to
do a task. That said, if it's not part of your role, collaborate with someone
you trust whose responsibility it is to do that. If there is no one who does
that (and you've actually checked to confirm) and you're not putting your own
job on the proverbial back burner to do that task it may just be a good idea to
proceed.
Protection -- I
will protect you in public but I will also punish you in private. Sadly in my
travels I have encountered some people who define integrity as "it's okay
if we can get away with it" and "lying is a valid negotiation
tactic". To me, outright lying is just plain disrespectful, and will
hasten the severity of that punishment. If Harry or Sally keeps repeating the
behavior they've been told to stop, it'll become public when they are no longer
present. NOTE: we will go straight to DEFCON 1 in instances where the law has
been broken -- e.g.: workplace harassment or bullying.
The results:
the teams I mange are filled with a lot of highly motivated people that do a
lot of very good and productive work. And yes, over the years, I've also had to
fire some people and ignore others. I've also had many different people I
haven't worked with in years stop me in the street and in stores to say hello.
Everything else
is filling in the cracks; the details that pop up here and there that are just
parts of reality because you're dealing with people - not machines. Remember
two things -- 1) "because I said so" is always the weakest form of leadership (even if
it is sometimes necessary -- usually only in a crisis), and 2) you can't be a
leader if no one is willing to follow you. They may follow you because they
have to, but that's a boss; a manager, and always temporary.
Sunday, 26 January 2014
Perspective is everything
The other day I was speaking with a group of people who thought it was so horrible that their executives look at the contents of the project tracking system. And worse, that they challenge the project managers when their status updates and the contents of the tracking system don't appear to match.
My first response to them was to ask "How so?"
They elaborated about their belief that they should just be trusted to deliver to what is described in the project plan at the start of the project.
I countered saying my perspective is actually the complete opposite of that. A couple of people just walked away. The smarter people looked at me like I was nuts, and the even smarter people ask "How so?". I elaborated with the following justifications.
1) Want to know whether or your project is really important to the bottom line? Listen to see whether or not they are talking and asking about it. Seriously, if they're not, it's not.
2) Executives have people they have to report to too. Executives seriously do not have time to ask about the minutea of your project. However, if they can't get the information they need AND the project is important don't expect them not to. And if they don't, it doesn't really matter -- re: see point 1 above. That's one of the great things about burndown charts that are embedded apps within the tracking system being used. It gives a snapshot view of what the status is at any point in time, if it's embedded well, the extra effort to create those charts is somewhere between negligable and nil.
3) It's NOT micromanaging if all they're asking for is progress updates and quantifiable information to substantiate what you are saying. It's called 'trust but verify' and any manager that doesn't do that is either incompetent, a fool, or both. From a financial perspective it's also a SOX compliance issue. To you, it's an 'oops'. To them, it's a potential legal matter and in the most serious cases possible jail time. Blind trust is a fool's overture.
4) EVERYONE wants to go home at night and into the office in the morning with the warm and fuzzies. Executives are no different.
So reminder to smile, say thank you, and offer a concise and direct answer the next time you get asked what is going on.
Oh, BTW, those people that stayed engaged in the conversation? We all learned something those who left figuring they already knew everything that mattered. We're all further ahead in the game than them. Now also recognize that these are all start people; some of them wise. Yes, there is a difference, but that's for another post.
And when it comes to career management it tends to be those who know the most and work the best with others who tend to start in the game the longest. ... of course there are exceptions. And the companies where those expectations tend to apply also tend to be the companies on the way out.
My first response to them was to ask "How so?"
They elaborated about their belief that they should just be trusted to deliver to what is described in the project plan at the start of the project.
I countered saying my perspective is actually the complete opposite of that. A couple of people just walked away. The smarter people looked at me like I was nuts, and the even smarter people ask "How so?". I elaborated with the following justifications.
1) Want to know whether or your project is really important to the bottom line? Listen to see whether or not they are talking and asking about it. Seriously, if they're not, it's not.
2) Executives have people they have to report to too. Executives seriously do not have time to ask about the minutea of your project. However, if they can't get the information they need AND the project is important don't expect them not to. And if they don't, it doesn't really matter -- re: see point 1 above. That's one of the great things about burndown charts that are embedded apps within the tracking system being used. It gives a snapshot view of what the status is at any point in time, if it's embedded well, the extra effort to create those charts is somewhere between negligable and nil.
3) It's NOT micromanaging if all they're asking for is progress updates and quantifiable information to substantiate what you are saying. It's called 'trust but verify' and any manager that doesn't do that is either incompetent, a fool, or both. From a financial perspective it's also a SOX compliance issue. To you, it's an 'oops'. To them, it's a potential legal matter and in the most serious cases possible jail time. Blind trust is a fool's overture.
4) EVERYONE wants to go home at night and into the office in the morning with the warm and fuzzies. Executives are no different.
So reminder to smile, say thank you, and offer a concise and direct answer the next time you get asked what is going on.
Oh, BTW, those people that stayed engaged in the conversation? We all learned something those who left figuring they already knew everything that mattered. We're all further ahead in the game than them. Now also recognize that these are all start people; some of them wise. Yes, there is a difference, but that's for another post.
And when it comes to career management it tends to be those who know the most and work the best with others who tend to start in the game the longest. ... of course there are exceptions. And the companies where those expectations tend to apply also tend to be the companies on the way out.
Sunday, 15 September 2013
Like riding a bike
Eric Barker's blog is on my weekly must read list for what I do during my Sunday morning coffee and before the household gets too active. This blog holds incredible wisdom and insight, and has the ability to get that communicated without the purple prose of similar blogs.
This week's post I thought was a great reminder about how great leaders remain great leaders and riding a bicycle are quite analogous. Remember when you were first learning to ride a bike? Pushing the pedals forward to move forward; esay. Push back to brake; cinch. Balance? Well that something else entirely.
It's easy for us to believe at some point that we've mastered riding a bicycle and we don't have to think about it any more. The reality though is that the task has just become rote. We're still thinking about it; just not consciously. And when we stop doing that? That's when gravity kicks in and shows us who the real boss is.
Managing or leading people is in many ways the same thing. It means keeping everything in balance, making well found decisions without waiting too long to make them, and making sure you don't allow yourself to get carried away on the shoulders of the sycophants.
A few quotes from this week's article:
"Egos expand faster than waistlines."
"The irony of leadership is you need to speak with certainty to be taken seriously. But if you take yourself too seriously, you end up in the hubris trap."
This week's must read article sums up with a statement that "denial, ego and hubris are all parts of human nature. They are like gravity. We don’t defeat them. To move forward we must actively resist them every day."
Want to see the whole article or subscribe yourself? . . .
http://www.bakadesuyo.com/2013/09/strategic-leadership/?utm_source=%22Barking+Up+The+Wrong+Tree%22+Weekly+Newsletter&utm_campaign=a23f4e90aa-9_15_139_15_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_78d4c08a64-a23f4e90aa-46174749
This week's post I thought was a great reminder about how great leaders remain great leaders and riding a bicycle are quite analogous. Remember when you were first learning to ride a bike? Pushing the pedals forward to move forward; esay. Push back to brake; cinch. Balance? Well that something else entirely.
It's easy for us to believe at some point that we've mastered riding a bicycle and we don't have to think about it any more. The reality though is that the task has just become rote. We're still thinking about it; just not consciously. And when we stop doing that? That's when gravity kicks in and shows us who the real boss is.
Managing or leading people is in many ways the same thing. It means keeping everything in balance, making well found decisions without waiting too long to make them, and making sure you don't allow yourself to get carried away on the shoulders of the sycophants.
A few quotes from this week's article:
"Egos expand faster than waistlines."
"The irony of leadership is you need to speak with certainty to be taken seriously. But if you take yourself too seriously, you end up in the hubris trap."
This week's must read article sums up with a statement that "denial, ego and hubris are all parts of human nature. They are like gravity. We don’t defeat them. To move forward we must actively resist them every day."
Want to see the whole article or subscribe yourself? . . .
http://www.bakadesuyo.com/2013/09/strategic-leadership/?utm_source=%22Barking+Up+The+Wrong+Tree%22+Weekly+Newsletter&utm_campaign=a23f4e90aa-9_15_139_15_2013&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_78d4c08a64-a23f4e90aa-46174749
Friday, 29 March 2013
Soft skills -- Vision – having one … to a detailed level
Having
and being able to share a clear vision; being strategic in your purpose. I
believe this is what people are talking about when they refer to needing
someone who is “details oriented”. It’s also widely recognized that having one
is important. I did a Google search just a minute ago and it responded with
about 57,300,000 results in 0.17 seconds. And yet having a vision is rarely
listed when people are asked what the most important characteristics are for
being effective. For example, it was listed only once in a recent LinkedIn PM
Community group post.
Now,
before I go any further, I’d like to repeat and clarify that the following is
focused on those in the project management profession. I and many others have
been inspired by leaders over the years. JFK’s vision of landing a man on the
moon and safely returning him the Earth by the end of the 1960s. Martin Luther
King Jr’s ‘I have a dream’ speech. Those and many other leaders had a very
clear vision of what they wanted to see happen. They did not, however, have the
skills to technically know how to achieve it. Still, both these and other
visions were achieved and the world is a better place for them being achieved.
Would they have made great project managers? Probably. JFK was the captain of a
PT boat during WWII. Do all great project managers possess the skills to become
leaders of industry, government, and causes that will change the course of
history? Probably not.
Now, with
that out of the way, the clarity of a PM’s / PgM’s vision and level of detail
that can be discussed are very much inter-related in my opinion. It is the ability
of this person to:
- get into the weeds with the
team if and when needed and
- commensurate to their role and
- for the teams they are
managing and
- for whom they are reporting
into.
Where
this seems to go off balance in many cases is where people (both individual
contributors and those already in leadership roles) sometimes have a perception
that you must be able to do to lead. This, depending on how extreme this
position is taken, can be a promotion of individualism over teamwork. It is
also the downfall of many people new to management roles. That lesson being to
learn to delegate rather than do. Toyota
and many other companies almost always promote from within. And this makes a
lot of sense in most cases. A project or program manager really should understand
what a group of computer science professionals need to do and why to develop
and deploy a complex software application. Do they need to hold a B.Sc from a
prestigious university to be effective as a PM/PgM? I doubt it. I don’t have
that degree and I’ve really done quite well over my career. By the same token
though, I equally believe my hands on understanding and experience of software
development and the IT infrastructures that software needs to be deployed on
has contributed to that success.
It’s also
those “and”s that really make a
difference. As systems theories seek to promote, it’s not so much the
individual components as the interrelationships among them that really make the
difference. They are very important because the vision needs to be shared at
the level of your audience, and as a PM/PgM I believe we all know that your
audience consists of management teams, vendors, customers, and other
stakeholders in addition to your core team. Making anyone feel stupid at any
time at any place is just plain wrong. It may be immediately satisfying to put
a bully in their place in a public way; and I admit that in the past I have
been guilty of doing that myself. However, the loss experienced doing that also
meant losing the skills that other person had to offer. Yes, sometimes it’s
worth it but that should never be the first option. U.S. President Theodore
Roosevelt’s famous foreign policy statement to ‘speak
softly and carry a big stick’ can equally be applied today. And as he also said
during his presidency, the objective should always be to never have to use that
big stick. On a lighter note, even in the Bugs Bunny – Yosemite Sam cartoons of
my youth Bugs never sought out to humiliate Sam. I think that was a good life
lesson.
Finally,
if people perceive you as making it up as you go you’ll very likely be
perceived as flaky, insincere, not credible, whatever; and that’s regardless of
how clearly, concisely, … you communicate. And they won’t follow you. As the
old adage goes, you can’t be a leader if no one wants to follow. Someone once
said to me a few years ago in a moment of frustration, “It’s not about you! And
what makes you think you’ve got all the answers anyway?!” My response was
simply, One, I don’t think I have all the answers. That’s why I’ve built a
strong team around me. And two, I was put in that position because of the
vision I had and communicated to the executives; on what we needed to do to both resolve
existing limitations/gaps, achieve stated strategic objectives, and how and
what we should do to go about doing that. If you think I’m completely wrong and
the wrong person for the job, take that up with our executives.
I never
did find out if I was the source or just the target of that person’s
frustration. I do know thought that person was able to convince our executives
that the gloss and polish they offered actually made them the right person for
the job (not me). I wouldn’t take too much stock in their decision making
skills though. I got a call from a recruiter about 18 months later telling me
who had been ‘let go’ and asking me if I would consider coming back because the
project still needed to be completed. This was a project that should have and
could have been completed in less than a year. Yes, karma does exist. A
favorite analogy of mine for this event is a beloved children’s game, King of the Castle.
The specific analogy being that others may and will knock you off that heap
(out of your position) but without possessing the depth of your vision they
won’t stay there too long themselves either.
In
closing, I’ll offer to you the request and hope I have for you, and why I am
writing this post. If you’re going to have a vision, share it. If you want to
take over someone else’s vision, I hope you actually have the depth of
understanding to actually carry out that vision through to fruition.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)