Prioritizing Stakeholder Communications

Communication is critical to any project's success.  But to whom do you communicate?  How ofter? Using which medium?  These are not questions to be lightly considered.  Your success depends on the answers to each.

 

To Whom Do You Communicate?

Your project's stakeholders include the customer, upper management, members of your core team, extended team members and anyone who has any interest in your project. You need to communicate with each of them. However without some parameters, this can (and usually does) consume your every waking hour. You must prioritize your communication efforts. We suggest the Audience Focus Tool below to assist in this effort.

Audience Focus Tool

Communication with stakeholders in the bottom two quadrants (especially Influence) is important to initiate or nourish support for your project. Use stakeholders in the top quadrants (where support is high) to assist and build support. Your time available for communication should be budgeted to ensure you are building support for the project as well as maintaining existing support. The squeaky wheel analogy is really true here. Listen for unmet needs and focus time and effort on stakeholders in the Influence quadrant. This tool helps to properly allocate precious communication efforts / time.

 

How Do You Communicate?

Recognizing stakeholder needs / interests is important here. Today, no one needs / wants communication that isn’t focused on an immediate need or interest. Just recall the last telemarketing call you received during an evening meal. Ask yourself “What are this stakeholder’s interests in this project?” then be certain that your communications focus on those needs. Remember, management needs communication about all three elements of the triple constraint (time, cost and quality). Individual style preferences are reviewed below in the Styles Matrix.

Styles Matrix

Use of tools like Meyers-Briggs or DiSC (as shown above) to identify personal preferences can help you tailor the message to meet their individual information preferences. The first bullet in each box identifies the format preferences for each of the DiSC styles. Subsequent bullets identify the types of information commonly of interest to the person possessing that style. To use this tool it is important to be able to accurately identify individual style preferences. You should do this for each of your stakeholders, including core team members. Then, using members of your team with a particular profile to assist in communicating with stakeholders of the same preferences is a wonderful time saving idea that can serve to motivate core team members as well.

 

How Often To Communicate?

Stakeholders in the bottom two quadrants of the Audience Focus Tool will need the most frequent communication (especially those in Influence). We suggest two levels of communication; broadcast and targeted. Broadcast (possibly minutes from the core team meetings) should be enough for stakeholders in the top two quadrants of the Audience Focus Tool and for those in the D or C quadrants of the Styles Matrix. Targeted communications should be as often as the stakeholder wants them. Those in the I or S quadrants of the Styles Matrix or the top two quadrants of the Audience Focus Tool will need less frequent communications.

 

 

Core Team Motivation

The most commonly cited reason for project failure is lack of team motivation.  Without a committed and motivated team, even great ideas never make it to fruition.  What does it take to develop and maintain team motivation?  We’ve not got time to delve into the depths of motivation, but below are some crisp tips.

Developing Motivation

1.       Ownership – The fountain of commitment.  If they (the team) build it (participates in defining “how” the project will be completed), it (ownership / commitment) will come.  It is this commitment that drives results!

2.       Focus – Having a clear vision (mission statement) with a detailed knowledge of what each team member will contribute (work breakdown structure) and the result are primary factors in motivation.  Lack of focus is the most commonly voiced frustration of core team members and results in diffuse outcomes.

3.       Power Through Alignment – Teams desire power to accomplish tasks and meet deadlines.  When the Project Leader ensures that projects are visibly aligned with key business strategies, teams acquire that power by driving business results. Alignment of key stakeholder expectations also produces power for the team.

4.       Belonging – Individual team members will either spend their energy working with one another, or protecting themselves from one another.  Encouraging team members to invite co-worker involvement is difficult but produces great results.  The ability of each team member to express ideas / concerns is key to motivation.

        Maintaining Motivation

5.       Recognition of Needs – Project Leaders who quickly identify individual needs / strengths / weakness and assign work in a way to leverage each not only sustain motivation but also enhance results.  Doing tasks that challenge, offer growth possibilities and produce visible results motivate.

6.       Sense of Achievement / Momentum – Nothing is more frustrating than an absence of forward momentum.  Being blocked from accomplishment is frustrating and discouraging.  Project Leaders that monitor, actively communicate and encourage celebration of movement toward goals / milestones drive motivation.

7.       Meaningful Rewards / Recognition – Money is not the only reward, nor is it the best.  Recognition, challenge, change, involvement, empowerment, and growth are all more powerful motivators.  Working in an exciting / fun environment is more motivational than the money derived from working in a hostile one.

Managing Sponsor and Customer Alignment

As a project leader, there were many times that I became frustrated because the project sponsor and customer seemed to both have different views of the project than I did.  The sponsor's goal is to resource the project and keep costs and time to schedule.  The customer's goal is to derive as much value as possible from the project.  And the project leader's goal is to ensure that these often opposing parties are all happy when the project is complete.  Opposing perspectives can lead to all sorts of problems, and I eventually learned that before a project gets too far out of the starting blocks, a wise project leader ensures alignment between these three key stakeholders.

Reconciling your vision of the project (project requirements documentation or project charter) with the Customer and Sponsor will establish an initial “mind-meld” and ensure the project gets underway with aligned or homogenized expectations.  Once this is managed, then a project leader just needs to maintain that alignment - much easier than creating it mid-project!

The process of achieving this alignment is critical to the success of your project.  Following is the outline of a process you may find useful to ensure that you, your project sponsor and customer (or customer advocate) share common expectations: 

1. Get Customer and Sponsor Together: Never assume that the Sponsor and Customer have a common view / understanding of the project or have even spoken with one another directly about it.  Try to get both parties together in the same room with you when ever possible.  The more important the project, the more important this step is. 
2. Review the Project Charter:  Overview the draft charter you have created with both the sponsor and the customer.  Respond to their questions and take note of their suggestions, input and reactions. 
3. Begin by Listing Specific Expectations: Ask both parties to identify and list, in priority order, their expectations of desired project results (deliverables, time frames, acceptable risks, etc.).  Ask them to be specific.  Have them share their expectations and facilitate a discussion to initiate alignment.  Refer to Managing Expectations posts (Part One - Apr 13th 2011, and Part Two - April 25th, 2011) for information on how to gain alignment of expectations.
4. Identify Assumptions:  Work with both parties to identify assumptions that may underlie their expectations.  Work to identify those that may pose risk and incorporate them into your risk log.
5. Discuss Trade-Offs: Where differences exist, use Resolving Conflict to work through issues that may arise / exist and consider trade-offs.  Then document agreement by updating your draft Charter.  I usually come prepared to do this on the spot.  Getting all of these parties together again may be difficult.
6. Agree to The Revised Project Charter:  The final step is to get both to agree to the revised charter.  Your revised charter now needs to be managed throughout the project to ensure that expectations don't diverge as the project progresses and changes are implemented.

 Projects where I started this way usually went more smoothly than those where I skipped this important step.  If you will do these steps prior to or during your reconciliation meeting, you will successfully align expectations and start your project with support from your key stakeholders.  Try it, you'll like it!

Making Your Project Green

It’s increasingly difficult to go a day without hearing news of global warming or its impact on our planet and lifestyles.  Each day a larger percent of newsprint is dedicated to reporting on the ecological impact we are having on our communities, nations and planet.  We have known for years that our decisions impact our environment, but until now, the pain associated with those decisions was a future, not an immediate source of concern.  With the impacts of pollution, global warming, and increasing energy / food costs, perhaps it is time for us to add “ecological impact” to the list of important considerations as we make key project leadership decisions.

Typically the three mantras of all project leaders are “Quality”, “On-Time” and “Within Budget”.  However, a growing number of organizations are leveraging their success by innovating more eco-friendly ways of conducting their business.  As project work is typically at the cutting edge of innovation, it should be the front line for eco-friendly ideas and solutions.

Following is a list of some areas where we should consider the size of our “footprint”:

1. Communication – What is the most environmentally efficient way to communicate?
2. Vendor Selection Criteria – who can provide the best solution with the smallest negative impacts to the environment?
3. Resource Utilization – is there a better / less harmful way to accomplish each task?
4. Project Prioritization – how can we more actively integrate “environmental impact” into our decision criteria?
5. Quadruple Constraint – in addition to “better”, “cheaper” and “faster”, can we add “cleaner”?
6. Travel – Could it be accomplished as effectively in a more environmentally friendly way?

Here is a link to a short Environ Sim that may help you with this new thought process.  See how you do.  Let me know what other issues you'd like to see added.  Enjoy!

 

Negotiating for Resources

Project resources are always critical to your success.  Acquiring and keeping the appropriate resources requires negotiation skills. Negotiation skills and tactics is a large topic, but boiling it down to the basics for project leaders leads to the following few tips to help you better negotiate with stakeholders (particularly upper management):

1.     Remember that negotiation is a PROCESS, not an EVENT.  Don't be afraid to revisit previous "No's".

   2.     Always begin with a detailed Project Charter.  This will become the foundation for all of your negotiations.

3.     Know how your project aligns with key business strategies.  Only by aligning with key strategies will you have the power to win negotiations.

4.     Agree with Sponsor on the overall priority of your project.  You won't want to ask for resources needed on higher priority projects.  Knowing the priority of your project will allow you to avoid potentially unsuccessful negotiations.

5.     Always reconcile the Charter with the Project Sponsor and the Customer (or Customer advocate).  Get both to sign the charter to document agreement.  This initial agreement will form the foundation for all future negotiations.

6.     Begin every negotiation with common ground.  You and the party with which you negotiate both want project success.  Start there.  Then demonstrate how what you are requesting supports and is necessary for project success.

7.     Never make a concession without the other party making one as well.  Remember to demonstrate the consequences of each concession and do so using the "Language of Management" ($$$$).  Ask for the moon, then give minor concessions.

8.     Always be sure you are negotiating with the right person.  Sometimes this requires that you go directly to the top, not work up through the various levels.  This is dangerous if the previous seven tips have not been followed.

Managing Meetings

Sorry for the break - I've been traveling.  And during those travels, I've had several questions regarding meetings.  So, I think I'll address that topic in this update.

Meetings are a common source of irritation.   The reasons vary from "too many", "no clear purpose", to "poorly managed".  They are frequently seen as a waste of time because many produce no tangible outcomes.  So, within these complaints lay the principles that can make meetings powerful.  They need to be short, focused, with clearly stated outcomes (measurable wherever possible) that are then provided to participants.

Most meetings suffer because we try to accomplish too much in a single sitting.  I've discovered that in the project world, rather than having a one-size-fits-all "Core Team" meeting, where progress is reported and problems are resolved, it is better to break these into separate meetings.  Progress should be reported regularly, so my Status Update Meetings (SUM) are held regularly, calendared at the beginning of the project for the entire project.  Problems should be resolved as quickly as possible, so my Project Adjustment Meetings (PAM) are scheduled as problems are uncovered.

Status Update Meetings:  The format for my SUMs is constant.  Each of these regularly scheduled meetings is 35 minutes in duration.  I apply the following agenda:

1. Items currently on Critical Path (those tasks on the critical path that are currently in progress - 15 Minutes 
   1. Did each task begin on or before the Earliest Possible Start Date (EPSD)? Associated risks / issues and learning - Reported by the task "Responsible For" 
   2. Is each task expected to end on or before the Earliest Possible Completion Date (EPCD)? (Is projected duration still accurate?) Associated risks / issues and learning - Reported by the task "Responsible For"
2. Items coming up on Critical Path (those not yet in progress but expected to begin before next meeting) - 15 Minutes
   1. Is there communication between predecessor task Responsible For and subsequent task Responsible For? Is subsequent task ready to launch at EPSD? Associated risks / issues and learning.
   2. Is each task expected to end on or before the Earliest Possible Completion Date (EPCD)? (Is projected duration still accurate?) Associated risks / issues and learning.
3. Recent mistakes and associated learning. Award of “Dogs” - 5 Minutes

Project Adjustment Meetings:  Project Adjustment Meetings (PAM) are held in response to problems and result in adjustments to project plans.  They are thus held as necessary, as problems are identified in the SUMs.  These are meetings in which creativity and innovation are expected, so I limit them to 2 hours duration.  They are tightly focused on brainstorming solutions to problems with which all core team members can align.  An Alignment Discussion process is used throughout the meeting to ensure both forward momentum and commitment are maintained among all core team members as solutions are generated.

Meetings are more effective when they are focused and short.  Try it . . . . I think you'll like the results!

Managing Difficult Stakeholders

You’ve all had them . .  stakeholders that for one reason or another are difficult to satisfy / manage.  They can make project work difficult, unsatisfying and even dangerous.  I’ve seen them complicate, slow and even derail perfectly healthy projects.  They are the bane of project leaders and seem to be ever present.  Avoiding them is NOT an option; so let’s consider how to improve our ability to manage the difficult stakeholder.

Why So Difficult?  What makes a stakeholder “difficult”?  We’ll address the three most common reasons; 1) They don’t Understand, 2) They don’t Agree With, or 3) They don’t Value / Support  the project.  All three of these reasons lead to pain, and most avoid the pain associated with change by avoiding or confronting the change.  As a change agent, the project leader usually is at the “point” of or driving change initiatives and thus must effectively deal with the resulting resistance.  So having a handful of tactics may be helpful.  Ready?

Understand:  Paramount among reasons for “difficult” stakeholders is fear resulting from lack of or misunderstanding about projects.  It is not uncommon to have stakeholders become resistant when their “comfort zones” are invaded by the ripple effect resulting from your project.  Frequently this happens late in the project as a result of poor stakeholder identification at the beginning of the project or ineffective communication throughout the project.  This will result in delay and potential scope creep, creating huge problems for the unsuspecting project leader.  Communication is the solution to this problem, and preemptive is always better than reactive.   You need to first understand the stakeholder’s perspective and then provide information to alleviate the underlying fear or pain.  This frequently requires creativity, so allow your core team to assist.

Agree With:  We all have beliefs about the way things should be (paradigms) and it is not uncommon to have those beliefs clash.  This accounts for much of the tension with which project leaders must deal.  We are normally threatened when someone disagrees with our view of things, and our first reaction is usually to “dig in” and defend our view or belief.  When we undertake this tactic it only serves to solidify the opposing view and intensify the difference.  Negotiation and Idea Generation are the solutions to this problem.  When project leaders learn to view disagreements as opportunities for creativity and use the energy that normally accompanies such differences to generate alternative ideas / paths / solutions or negotiate trade offs they cease to exacerbate differences and begin to construct bridges to resolution.

Value / Support:  Each of us has values / priorities (personal or work imposed) that address the question “what’s in it for me?”.  Things that we value highly get our attention and effort, and things that don’t, don’t.  Imposing my values or priorities on others does not win their support nor garner much of their energy.  With everything that is going on in busy organizations today, many things don’t earn my interest or attention until they impact me personally (until I am within the ripple or begin to feel the pain).  The solution to this type of difficult stakeholder is education.  They must be convinced of the benefit to themselves to recognize value and behave in supportive ways.  The wise project leader ascertains stakeholder values / priorities as part of their situation analysis at the beginning of the project and uses that information to anticipate potential problems and “educate them away” early in the project.  But even when they spring up during the project, education about benefits is the solution.