A new paradigm for program management

How high is too high?

The buy-in that can be won with the implementation of progressive mini-projects as responses to bottom-up initiatives can be lost if the bigger project is then done ‘from on high’ with minimal end-user or customer engagement. This customer engagement is crucial, but it is tragic how often this is done poorly.

It is not exceptionally difficult to engage end users, though it does take a commitment to listening, comprehensive dialogue, empathy and a range of other emotional intelligence skills: the soft skills increasingly recognised as being at least as important as the technical project management skills. And it means being vigilant in watching for, and countering as best we are able, the assumption ‘we know what the customer wants/needs’, or the notion ‘we are just implementing a bit of technology’.

Responding to Max’s clarion call for regular small benefits being delivered, a Program Management Group was established, combining this area of the business with selected members of the relevant delivery section of the organisation. While the notion of program management existed within the overall company and within this delivery branch, this particular customer area felt it had minimal connection with the program—also a common experience in many organisations. They are now delighted to have this vehicle that keeps them informed of wider activities and streamlines the process of requesting new initiatives. Essentially, this Program Management Group became a subgroup of the wider ‘official’ program.

It does raise the intriguing challenge: Are we, in our focus on project/program/portfolio, possibly neglecting some areas of the business in our attempts to ensure broad corporate and strategic alignment? This question was reinforced in question time after a recent seminar presented by Lynn Crawford, ‘Speaking the right language: getting buy-in for PPPM’, where she discussed the importance of engaging with the senior executives, having recognised a significant gulf in understanding and terminology between the executive and project stream.

The challenge for us in the project stream is to learn to speak the language of the executive, especially regarding outcomes and governance. In a slightly contrary position, one attendee spoke of her experience in facilitating change, largely informally, throughout many parts of her organisation: this ground-up approach felt remarkably similar to what Max was after!

Finding the balance

There is a need to combine both bottom-up with top-down focus on programs, paying adequate attention to the small, bottom-up initiatives that can be fairly quickly implemented and can be integrated and interspersed within the wider program of more major works, as long as there is a streamlined system for generating, approving and funding these small business cases. These initiatives will give gratification to the initiators, morale improvement to the group, and, crucially, facilitate an interest to be involved and engaged in the larger, strategic top-down projects.

Change is inevitable, and the rate of change is accelerating. It is also generally acknowledged that almost all of us are resistant to change, with the main exception being the person who is trying to effect the change! Intriguingly, while we only have the power to change ourselves, we have a predilection for wanting to change others. The key, of course, is to get the group to come as close as possible to being the instigators, and owners, of the change in their environment.

Based on my experience, the best way to encourage ownership is to actively engage those people, as comprehensively and early as possible, in the change process within a project. Yes, this applies more to business projects than construction and public/infrastructure projects but, where there are many impacted stakeholders, the same principles apply. Getting stakeholders on board and integral to the decision-making process will help make the difference between a satisfied stakeholder community that is ready to engage in the next proposal and a disaffected and resentful one.

Some specific examples of approaches that have been effective:

• Formal forums for engagement: Ensuring all affected stakeholder groups have been identified.
• Actively following up on suggestions and recommendations: This includes bringing them to a close. Even if there is no action to be taken, the project manager needs to clearly communicate that it was considered, and why it is not suitable to act on at this time.
• Keeping the core team informed: Formal communications supplemented by corridor discussions.
• Real acknowledgement of issues, problems and risks.
• Investing significant time in dialogue with end users/customers, not just management-level stakeholders.

Caring about the people involved in and impacted by a project is a core dimension of what helps foster the engagement of end-user stakeholders. Be prepared to be amazed by the way these potentially adversarial characters will join you on the change journey, even if the outcome is less than perfect.

In summary, find out who the actual customers and relevant stakeholders are and spend time with them in mutual dialogue. Agitate for formal stakeholder forums. Be part of the bridge that connects the customers with the project team. Rarely can we expect to see a utopian outcome from our projects but, as it turns out, the smaller, simpler, bottom-up ones that can easily be overlooked can often come closest to those ideals of perfection.