Why do PMs lose track of the basics?

Following my recent post on PM basics that are missed (Forgetting the PM basics can be a cardinal sin) many have asked me the obvious follow up question … why? If I had that answer I could have written a handy book that would have sold millions and there would be less troubled projects.

PMs don’t go into a project and decide that this is the time to experiment with not doing X or Y … that isn’t their makeup. So, what causes the basics to be missed?

Needless to say, the variety of causes probably outnumber problem projects. However, there are some repeated scenarios I find in my role reviewing projects. I’m happy to share the ones that I see most commonly for your views. I would also be interested in your thoughts on other significant triggers as there are many.

The Undermining of the Basics

Having emphasised the importance of starting well let’s first consider things that impact in this phase of a project:

The project doesn’t fit …

It should be obvious but if you start with an impossible target, whatever shortcuts you take you are unlikely to do the impossible. And, more often than not, those shortcuts ultimately make things worse.

This is often the result of an imposed deadline, one set even before a single line of planning has been completed. If you start well you will do the leg work to see that the deadline can’t be hit and be able to prove clearly why that is the case. When is the best time to bring this up? NOW!! Ignoring the fact won’t make it go away and not escalating this now means you will end up escalating later – when budget and time has been expended and you have probably missed the most optimum alternative approach.

Role of the PM is to provide the facts and work through the options. Can we descope, does more resource help, can we phase delivery etc. etc. But experience has shown me that “we can make it fit by taking some shortcuts” (i.e. miss some basics) is rarely a successful strategy.

Delays to mobilisation

Everyone is keen to mobilise the project but … something holds it back. Often getting the final green light on funding can drag on for weeks … hands are tied. Then the OK arrives but, funnily, although the start date has shifted how many times does the end date move in alignment?

“You’ve only been delayed 3, 4 … “x” weeks so that’s recoverable isn’t it? We can’t afford to be late with the delivery …”

A controlled start had been planned giving time to get the basics right. Where is the first place to look to get some of that lost time back … let’s rush through the mobilisation … it can’t be that important … we know what we are doing … !!!

Excitement of the task – “let’s go” …

Everyone is so keen to “get on with it” – they can’t hold themselves back and drive on with the “doing” regardless. This may also be associated with a desire to get to low hanging fruit and demonstrate real progress early (a good principle in its own right). However, beware that if you have dodged the core of your start-up for this then the first of those fruits reached often turn into the totality of a project’s demonstrable success …

Focus on mechanics and process … not the reasons why

In a previous post I postulated around issues I perceive in too much of a focus on the mechanics and process of project management versus understanding and internalisation of why these things are important (Why doesn't project management training create great managers).

I see this as another reason why basics fail, i.e. processes are followed for process sake, not to create the outcomes that the process is truly meant to. For example, when is your risk management actually mobilised? It’s a problem when the offered answer to that question is “when the risk log is created, and the first risks have been entered”. That is a process answer not a “why” answer.

A more comforting response is the above statement AND a statement that active ownership has been established with proactive management decisions agreed and initiated. Basically, the difference between administration has started versus management has started.

The key is in the title, we are called project managers not project administrators.

Another great example of this problem is a governing body that has been established and is meeting but isn’t actually governing. It goes through the motions but, for example, it doesn’t really ask the right questions of the project or the PM.

Rabbit in headlights syndrome

Another common scenario I see is the PM I am talking to is not the PM that started the project, and actually may be the 3rd or 4th in the seat …

Here I often find that the person charged with mobilising was simply not experienced enough for the scale of the project, so most likely froze in the face of the challenge and didn’t know where to focus their efforts. The foundation gets broken at that point. Unless an incoming PM has the strength to call out the issue and take the time and effort to put the pieces together then that PM quickly falls into the fire-fighting that inevitably comes with the problem (see below). Herald the revolving door of replacement PMs … !!!

Distracted to … “distraction” …

The last “start well” scenario I want to point out is the case of the challenging client. Uncomfortably common but one that a PM can allow to get in the way of the things they know that they should be prioritising.

Without the personal confidence and management support to face this challenge what can happen is that client demands push the PM into activity that can be premature and was not the priority for the mobilisation. The truth is that once you are into the “doing” then, inevitably, the good practices that were planned rarely get revisited.

However, it isn’t all about the starting phase, basics can be dropped at any point in the life cycle so even if we start well what can derail us in flight:

 Spiral of the firefight … “we don’t have time” …

This is the most common scenario I come across. Whatever the root cause the PM has reached the point where they are fighting one problem after another; good practice becomes the last thing on their minds.

Sometimes the PM doesn’t even see the spiral they are in; they are just too busy. Even when pointing out that a step back is needed that suggestion is often met with a manic declaration of “… if only we had time …”. There is a Murphy’s law that stems from a famous John Wooden quote - although there is never enough time to do it right the first time there is always time to do it over.

In discussing this topic with a colleague, they wondered if the true value of getting basics right up front and continuing to do those basics is actually seen by those outside a project? Whereas the visible “hard work” of everyone fixing problems shows a clear value. This is, in my opinion, poor project management economics.

Unless you can get yourself ahead of the curve you will continue to be buried in the problems of today until the project either fails or the PM and their team are completely burned up. You get ahead of the curve by getting back to some of the basics that are the foundations of strong project management; even if that takes a little time.

The major left field problem …

However good a PM is or the basics they have set up there is always the risk of an unidentified problem appearing, one that hasn’t been anticipated or planned for. This is where a PM earns their money. Unfortunately, it is also too often the scenario that differentiates strong PMs.

A panic reaction and throwing everything up in the air is the wrong response. You have a plan and have been tracking so you know where you are on your journey. Use your PM basics to assess what impact the issue has on your project, identify options to address and get back on plan or, if it is ultimately derailing your current plan/timeline/costs, define your recommended action and associated change and take that to your governance for consideration and a decision. 

Your job is to assess and understand, react and address what is in your control to do and to highlight when things are outside your span of control. If you need help or need to redefine your journey provide your governance with the information on what is needed, alternatives that have been discounted and why your recommended approach is the recommended approach. Your key role is to define the facts that allow the right decisions to be made.

Forgetting the basics, jumping into firefighting and thinking you are the only person who can solve the issue is going to lead you to, at best, the wrong answer or, at worse, no answer. Manage the situation; don’t let the situation manage you.

ooooOOOoooo

So that’s a quick pass through some of the common triggers that I have seen. I really would be interested in others builds on these – such sharing will clearly help those less experienced to avoid some of these pitfalls.

Would also be happy for anyone to contact me if they wanted to discuss this topic in greater detail.

=================================================================

Carl is a Senior Programme Director within Capgemini UK and leads a large team of experienced consultants whose focus is on technology enabled business transformation.

As experts in programme leadership and transformation Capgemini has a wealth of experience and we have helped many major organisations successfully transform. Find our latest thinking on key topics and trends on business and technology, including Programme and Project Management, here: https://www.uk.capgemini.com/expert-connect.