CIO.com has an interview with Linus Torvalds that I’d just had to share…very interesting commentary from Linus on managing software projects.
In the article, Linus provides five ‘tips’ for managing projects…they are:
Find people you can trust.
Be trustworthy yourself.
Be honest—sometimes painfully honest.
You also have to let the others get their say in.
A combination of bluntness and honesty leads to the best code ending up in Linux.
Interesting thoughts…what I found refreshing is that Linus never talks about ‘process’…he talks about getting results…something I believe a great deal in myself.
If you click over and read the interview, you’ll see Linus talking about being painfully honest…even to the point of calling people ‘incompetent idiots’. I’m not a fan of this approach…you can be honest and still be civil. I expect that one reason Linus is able to get away with calling people incompetent idiots is because of his fame in the Linux world…but I’d suggest that his approach would fall under the ‘asshole boss’ syndrome
That being said, I’d like to create my own ‘tips’ for managing software projects that are closely aligned with Linus’. They are:
Hire the right people. Look for people that are trustworthy, knowledgeable and driven.
Create an environment of trust
Value open, honest two-way communication
Be willing to admit when wrong
Deliver Results
Focus on the above five things with your team (whether its a project team or not) and you’ll find yourself closer to success.
I still stand behind the overall message of the post that good leadership and organizational culture shouldn’t need to ‘create a sense of urgency’ for change to occur….but I think I needed to expand on my thoughts. The word ‘create’ is what makes me a bit squeamish about this because it makes me feel as though you should ‘conjure up’ some reason for urgency. A good leader should have already instilled a sense of urgency in their group….perhaps the authors of the book could have used ‘instill a sense of urgency’. If they had used that terminology, I probably wouldn’t be writhing this post (or the previous one!).
In addition, I made a few comments about leaders not needing to have political acumen and the ability to be persuasive…which are false. As a leader you must have these skills. But again, in the context of the book I was reading at the time, it felt a little ‘off’ to me when the authors talked about using politics to ‘win battles’ and ‘convince others’ that you are rights.
Bruce - Thanks for calling me on the carpet and making me think!
BTW - Every reader of this blog should go check out Bruce’s blog…he’s got some great stuff there. While you are at it, check out Bruce’s company LiquidPlanner…maker of one of the most interesting and exciting project management tools I’ve seen in a long time. I had the pleasure of having Bruce give me a demo of the tool a few months ago and was extremely excited about what I saw.
Recently, while reading a book on Organizational Change and Project Management, I noticed a disturbing pattern.
The book I was reading discusses the creation of a central project office to manage all projects within organizations (note…it is not the book I reviewed here) and looked interesting when I saw it at the local half-price book store.
The first chapter, which provided an overview of the the topics covered in the book, started off on a bad note. The first few paragraphs eluded to topics like “create a sense of urgency”, “develop political acumen”, “find a champion” and “master the art of persuasion”.
These topics disturb me for a few reasons…but mostly because they make me believe that the authors are trying to ‘teach’ a reader how to ‘play the game’ rather than ‘change the game’. Organizational change should be about changing the game rather than playing it.
The book continues on about processes and ‘tips’ for getting people to ‘buy in’ to the change that needs to occur. The authors write about ‘projectizing the organization’ to add value and ‘creating a sense of urgency’ for employees so they understand how important the change is.
As I mentioned, I have a problem with this approach.
As a leader, If i have to ‘create’ urgency for change have I been doing my job? A good leader should already have people aligned with the necessary changes and have them ready to implement change. Steve Roesler over at All Things Workplace described leaders in a recent post titled “Leadership: Facilitating The Show You Are In” as:
People who are engaged with what needs to happen while orchestrating how to make it happen.
Steve is exactly correct.
As a leader, if you are engaged with your team (and they with you), you and your team should already have a grasp on what changes are needed and your everyone should fully understand why those changes are necessary.
If a leader is doing their job, there should be no need to ‘create a sense of urgency’…it should already exist.
Seeing as how I have an interest in Project Management, Program Management and PMO’s…and I’d never seen this book before so I thought I’d pick it up and read it.
Not a bad book at all. There is good advice for people at all levels of PMO experience.
The book seems to be targeted at people/organizations who are trying to build a PMO. There are some chapters targeted at managing the PMO once it’s been created, but you’ll have to wait till the end of the book to find them.
As mentioned, the majority of the book covers the creation of a PMO and what topics need to be considered while setting up your program/project office. When considering the creation of a PMO, the author states that you should first consider your initial PMO “Model”. In other words, how will your PMO be organized and managed? Will the PMO be the central office for all project management functions…or will it be a project management knowledge center for the organization? The author provides three PMO “models”: Consulting, Strong and Blended. These models are basic PMO models, but are effective when trying to determine how the PMO will fit into the organization. The book provides pros/cons of each model, how the models would fit into organizations and what processes and tools are needed to make these models work.
In addition to the three PMO models, the author provides a basic overview of the PMO as Project Standard Bearer and Knowledge Management Center. The Knowledge Management Center was most interesting to me since this is the area that I believe organizations and PMO’s fail. Many people have studied project management processes and standardized these processes…project governance is a field that many people have a good grasp on. Knowledge management in the world of projects, on the other hand, is still fairly immature with lots of interesting topics to explore.
The book is a good one…if you have any interest in PMO’s, I’d recommend picking it up.
I’ve been holding off on this announcement until I finished the paper (mainly to make sure I actually finished it!).
I’ll be speaking at University of Texas at Dallas’ 2nd Annual Project Management Symposium on August 18-19 in Richardson, TX. I’ll be presenting in the Project Management Methods - A (Track 3) on August 18 at 4:40 to 5:40 PM. There are some other very interesting topics being presented…hope mine doesn’t get lost in the shuffle!
The presentation and paper is on an interesting topic (more on that in a few minutes). My co-author, Chad Jordan, and I were able to get some interesting ideas down on paper and get it accepted for presentation at the symposium. At some point I hope to be able to share the paper on this blog (or at least link to it).
The paper is titled “Project Management and the Stockholm Syndrome“.
The abstract is:
Project success in the world of client/vendor relationships hinges on two things: The ability of a project team to plan, manage and deliver results; and the ability to build and maintain relationships. Most project teams understand the pitfalls of delivery but many do not realize that another pitfall is associated with building relationships. For example, what happens when project managers or other team members begin to associate more closely with the client or vendor then with their own organization? This pitfall, which has the same characteristics as the Stockholm Syndrome, can be a significant risk for any project.
This paper addresses the topic of behaviors similar to the Stockholm Syndrome as applied to project managers and project teams. This is not an in-depth research study into the psychological effects of managing stressful projects and how these stresses might cause a ˜Stockholm Syndrome” effect. The purpose of the paper is to provide an overview on the syndrome and its associated behaviors and give some insights gathered from a real-world project where symptoms similar to the Stockholm Syndrome appeared and how these symptoms were recognized and overcome.
The idea for this paper came about one day when chatting with a former colleague, Gene De Libero. Gene postulated that the affects of stress on project managers might be similar as stresses found in a hostage/captor environment. We discussed the topic some more and decided to work on a research project. That project never really got underway, but Chad and I were able to grind out a paper on the topic.
This particular topic lends itself to future research, which is a good thing considering I’m working on a Doctorate degree
One thing that I’ve heard often is that a project manager role is a good thing for your career and will help your ascent up the ladder to more responsibility.
I’m wondering how often this actually occurs. I’ve met a lot of Project Managers who have been PM’s for years and have had very little chance to be promoted. Now, some of these people are perfectly happy being PM’s and don’t want to do anything else…but others are struggling with moving into higher responsibility positions.
I’ve got a good friend who’s looking to make the transition into a leadership role (she’s hoping for a Director or VP spot) and she asked for my thoughts on what she needs to do to make herself more appealing for a more senior role.
I couldn’t really answer the question…surprising I know! :) She’s a great PM but an even better leader. She understands business and technology and is a perfect candidate for a a senior leadership role but she’s found that companies are passing her over for advancement. I took a look at her resume…everything looked great. She’s personable and interviews well. She has peer reviews and recommendations from current and previous managers…everything is the way it should…except she can’t land a job in a more senior role.
I’ve mentioned to her that she might want to start looking elsewhere because it seems as if her managers don’t want to promote her because she is skilled at what she does and they don’t want to lose a good PM. I’ve seen this happen other places…people aren’t given a chance to move into a management role because they are ‘too good at what they do’. Of course, that’s absolutely the wrong thing to say and do…if you have good people and they have the right skill sets to be a manager, you should move them into that role.
Does anyone have any ideas for those PM’s who can’t seem to get promoted?
In project management, leadership is desperately needed; leadership that is adaptable, perceptive, timely, meaningful, authentic, and unselfish.
This one sentence sums up the core of The Strategic Project Leader’s message: Project leaders, not project processes, are the future for project management. As the first section carefully lays out, the codification and standardization of project management knowledge has created a commoditized service that can be bought and sold like any other product. However, project managers can resist the force of commoditization by adding personal value to their organizations through leadership.
Ferraro defines a new role for the project manager seeking to be the spearhead of change – the service-based project leader. As the book points out, this role of ‘Project Leader’ is an area of untapped potential in project management. This kind of leadership requires a project manager to provide service not only to a sponsor but to all the project’s stakeholders. By truly serving the needs of organizations and individuals, project leaders find themselves doing meaningful work, a factor that is linked to personal growth and great job satisfaction. Due to the highly personal and individual nature of leadership, it cannot be codified and standardized into a ‘methodology.’
The first section of the book is devoted to this idea of leadership in project management and provides guidance as to how to step up into a leadership role. However, Ferraro also introduces several critical topics not usually found in project management books. He discusses the importance of establishing trust-based relationships with clients, and putting the needs of the client first, ideas that are central to high-level project leadership.
The second section of the book provides more concrete information in the form of a ˜leadership competency framework” that is comprised of five ˜core competencies”. This competency framework is presented in the form of a pyramid:
Project & Program Management Knowledge, Skill & Experience
Subject Matter Expertise
Trust-based Relationships
Consultative Leadership
Courage
While knowledge of project management processes is necessary as the base of this pyramid, project leaders must move beyond this to become true consultative leaders.
The third section helps the reader create practical self-development plans – a step-by-step guide to improving leadership skills. The final section, written by Roberta Hill, provides a detailed overview of a variety of assessment methods.
Smoothly written and easy to read, The Strategic Project Leader is an indispensable guide to anyone looking to be a leader among project managers.
NOTE: This book was provided by the publisher as a review copy.
Over the last few years I’ve started noticing a trend toward specialization within the field of project management. These specializations seem to break down into the following areas:
Administrators - people specializing in the reporting, tracking, budgeting and other administrative aspects of Project Management.
Specialists - people who have specialized in industries or specific aspects of project management. Examples can be people who are experts in Risk Analysis, Earned Value Management experts, Portfolio Management, etc.
Leaders - those folks who have found that project leadership is their calling. These are the folks who gladly step in and take responsibility for a project and make sure things get done.
Technologists - focused almost solely on helping organizations implement and use technology in project management.
Most project managers can immediately place themselves into one of the three categories above (and many would actually fit into more than one…if not all three). Am I missing any specialization?
I’ve found that my particular area of interest and specialization is within the “Leadership” role of projects. A good project manager who has the administration of projects down pat can run circles around me in that regard….but I’ve found that many really good PM’s who are good at project administration tasks aren’t great at project leadership…and vice versa.
I’ve been talking with a few Project Managers that I know and they agree that they are seeing more specialization within the PM world. For more thoughts on this topic, take a look at the book titled “The Strategic Project Leader” by Jack Ferraro….I’m about four chapters into it and he seems to be saying similar things.
This was a great article and I’m thankful to Raven for pointing it out. The 3 P’s is a wonderful way of looking at that strive to perfection. A brief summary of the 3P’s follows:
PERFECTIONISM
Perfectionism can be defined as striving towards IMPOSSIBLY high goals. Perfectionists are caught in a TRAP -– they can never be good enough. They engage in rigid, black or white thinking about their own performance -– if it isn’t perfect, it’s horrible.
PROCRASTINATION
When you believe that your next project should set the world on fire, you are setting yourself up for failure. At some level you know that this LEVEL of achievement is UNLIKELY. You lose your energy and excitement for your project.
PARALYSIS
You do absolutely NOTHING on the very project that is most important to you. This is devastating for your self-esteem, and very DISCOURAGING. It’s hard to plan your next project when you failed to complete your last one.
The article provides some ideas on avoiding the 3P’s…but I’ll leave you to read them to get the majority of the tips…but the one that jumped out at me was the following:
Look for role models who are SATISFIED with “good enough.” Note how they get things done and are not looked down on by others.
This goes back to the first line in my “Is Perfect Worth It” post:
“Don’t let perfect ruin good”
- Harry Beckwith
[tags] Getting Things Done, Perfection, Raven’s Brain [/tags]
Timothy Johnson, author of the Carpe Factum blog (great blog…check it out), had an interesting St. Patrick’s Day post titled “The Luck of the Irate” where he talks about the wonderful “hit and run” managers. You know, this managers that step into a situation that they know very little about, offer their opinions and/or bark orders and then leave with the thought that they’ve “solved the problem”.
We all know managers and project managers like this…they don’t wait to find out the details…they barge in and ‘get things done’ but most times they end up confusing the issue and causing more work than needed. I’m a big believer in being hands-off as much as possible and expect my folks to bring up any issues that they need my help with…and it appears that Timothy believes this as well…he writes:
There’s a lot to be said for the finer art of facilitation as opposed to going into a conflict like a bulldozer on a steroid overdose
The “Tao of Project Management Blog” is quoted by Timothy to help make his point about using less of a bulldozer and more of a facilitator:
The wise project manager does not interfere with the work of the team unless all else has failed. Delicate facilitation is the way not sudden intervention. By using a sudden intervention the work of one or more members of the team is cast aside and they will feel violated. The team will be weakened and what may, at the time feel like a victory, is actually a failure.
Managing a team of people requires a lot of skills…being a bulldozer isn’t one of them.
