Men and engines - minds and hearts

How many times we are stuck in a unique situation? It happens when, probably due to lack of energy, we cannot see the whole scenario. For example, we are trying to push a door, just because, the sign “push” has not entered in our visual field.

In other situations, our eyes are wandering in the big forest, just to stumble into an insidious root.

The “common denominator” in these situations, is the incapacity to draw from our experience and knowledge.

Connecting points

Piero Della Francesca invented the perspective. Hausmann used it to re-invent Paris.

In both cases, some details were skillfully used for creating magic views. Lines were created for bringing our sights over their natural limits with no efforts. Our minds (with the help of some math) make all the work of giving all wanted depths to a flat image.From lines, emotions are built, bringing new energy in.

Strong visions need clear lines

Like the case of perspective, rules are extremely useful for understanding and mastering reality through the correct dosage of details.

My idea of using fractals for creating a graphic reference to all documents contains risks.

These are the weaknesses that my students, and I found (any comments will be welcome):

1. The information structure shall be built for the specific target. The concept “one size fits for all” brings the risk of lack of adherence to the targeted audience. These unwanted rooms can be filled with “personalized” solutions that shall be harmonized.
2. Too many details are blurring the sign (logo?) and invalidate its power.

Visions and strategies

Organizations need concepts for building their system dedicated to convey “energized” information from the bridge to the engine room. In this voyage, information shall be transformed without losing the energy that gives significance the order.

People in the engine rooms need messages that have (at least) these properties:

• Clear
• Actionable
• Measurable
• (and a lot more)

However, the orders shall be involving. While it is direct to the head, it must arrive at the heart and guts.

This can be achieved shipping strategies with visions. Visions are an ensemble of information that clearly describes what the target is, then how the organization has decided to pursue it. Therefore, information has to be shaped and sharpened to hit the specific target.

During the trip from the bridge to the engine room (and galley as well), details will be substituted, viewpoints narrowed. All processes will save the truth, make it real for the audience.

Chain of command and its limits

Army honed the system for transmitting orders.  In essence, the information is made actionable by the direct report. In this case, the energy is delivered by the strong bind formed by the long acquaintance between the Non-Commissioned-Officer and the private. In the same time, the social “height difference” between who decides and who acts, increases the energy level of the information.

This model based on a clear established hierarchy has been received all sort of critics. In my opinion, the weakest point is about the lack of feed-backs. Countless tragedies were caused by decisions taken without a proper and updated knowledge of the situation.

In the same time, poor decision-making (often clogged by confused information) created disasters.

Reality is made by details. However, it is understood in its scenario.

The perspective law shall be used for understanding the order, they are placed to form the depth that gives life to a flat image.

From a management viewpoint, it is fundamental to observe how the information flows among any level of stakeholders.  Not all orders (e.g. green flags for releasing details) are made actionable; sometimes politics suggests issuing orders that are destined only to the notice board.

Conclusion

Either you are on the bridge, in the galley or in the engine room. It is the same ship. Outside there is the sea.

More readings

Richard Thaler

Thanks to Craig that, again introduced an excellent topic:

http://www.betterprojects.net/2009/08/power-and-influence.html

Image courtesy of : Naval history and heritage command

Chorus singing the same lines

The project manager should act like the choirmaster. Conducting all different “voices” with a single music (according to the “sponsor” outline)

Here below you will find my stakeholders’ taxonomy. (Any crossbreeding situation can produce extraordinary results).

Freelance developers:

• It shall be a source for improving professional skills, especially with easier to sell technologies.
  An offer to grow up through quality could pave the way for interesting bargains.
• Do not kill themselves because of other engagements (due to a low wage).
  Do you remember the Iron Triangle? In this situation lower effort (available money) increases the time and/or reduces the scope.

Payroll-developers:

• Knowledge (of the environment) is power. The volatility of this matter could threaten the holder. The defense of status quo ante (legacy?) could be a strong temptation.
  The tendency to read each task at the company’s culture “light” is a good source for seeking better ways to deal with conflicts.

Systems engineers:

• The longing to survive among the pressing demands for pushing (old) machines to impossible performances.
  A good “feasibility study” shall include the analysis of existing network.

Business analysts:

• Sometimes the frailty of this position (a bridge between customer and producers) could push for leaning toward a bigger scope.
  Any reference to the business case is essential.

Project manager:

• Sitting [sic] between a rock (producers) and hard places (various kinds of) customers; he/she tends to share his/her loyalty between the source of power (sr management and/or customer) and the newly born creature.
  Cura te ipsum.

Customer representative(s):

• Whatever is proposed is pricey (excluding the “small” changes).
  Is the Business Case good enough? If yes, the PM should spend some energy for selling it better.
• Technical people have no grasp about this specific business.
  Diplomacy requires good manners, like using the same lingo.
• The price does not include the interview-time with our final users (often the real domain experts).
  Has the WBS been understood and accepted by all stakeholders?

Final users (from manager department to the operators)

• The eavesdropping activity (including meetings) delivers strange rumors about the available features. Often the training times shall be squeezed into the ordinary activities. This will increase the “disaffection” toward the novelties.
  Has the project manager spent some energies to understand how the new workflow will fit in the current organization?

Senior managers

• They simply need things done.
  At the beginning, all the PM’s power comes from their endorsement. Later, the goodness of the project’s results would improve the balance. However, their need for good results asks for their involvement.

Conclusion

The next project, instead of blaming whimsical (external) stakeholders, the project manager should spend some energy to understand, then mapping every person who participates to the project. The identification process can be started with a simple spreadsheet. However, a database could keep tracing the evolution of the relationships. From this, the project manager should be able to conceive a survival strategy and all derived tactics.
The necessity to buy-in sponsors from any internal player and then to sell the results also to the external ones needs a thorough knowledge of many trades.