Tag: Process Design

10 Project Manager Traits – 3 – Completers

3 - Completers

Description

Completers are concerned with wrapping projects up. Usually, completers are not very good at getting things started but they are great at coming in and sorting out a mess, getting it back on track and getting it completed. 

The intention

Get this done.

The Good

Having a completer on the team is essential to getting to he end of a project. As a project proceeds they tend to get more diffuse and with software new ideas, implementation, training and user engagement are all essential. There is a need for an attention to detail and the tracking of minutiae. This type love all that. They love making lists and ticking things off.

They often are great diplomats as any project that goes on for some time brings out the character traits of all involved and can lead to conflict. People who appeared to work well together cease to do so. This type is good at settling disputes and smoothing operations whilst keeping their eye on project completion.

The Bad

Depending on when the project is taken over by a completer they can put up considerable obstruction to any changes that become obvious and beneficial as these will lead to the delay in completion. Since the focus is on completion and not necessarily on relevance and functionality some of these desired and required changes may not be “allowed” to be implemented. This may lead to issues later when the boss asks where the desired feature is, or by the end users who indicate that they cannot do their job without the feature or function.

With an obsession to complete these types may not be “available” to consider the next project until this one has been done. This can lead to long lag times between one project and the next. 

The Story

I was in a meeting where the final version of a software project was being presented to the company and the boss asked where a belatedly added key feature was.  I replied that it had not been implemented on the instructions of the project manger, as it would have delayed the project. He was not best pleased and  there was upset by the end-users who then demonstrated just why the absence of the feature meant that continuing the presentation was pointless. 

We met again 2 weeks later when the function had been added. The delay meant that some staff who had been employed to run the system needed to be found other duties whilst the function was inserted. The costs were considerable.

Remedial action

With a strict completer, and one who is not the intended end user, it is important to have an enduser test the system and ensure that it not only meets the brief but also does what they need it to do. The brief should always be carefully constructed and reviewed but, despite that, there will be some issues that only become apparent as the project is worked on. Having an enduser try it out just makes sense. If suggestions for changes are made (and they will be as all endusers love to contribute ideas) any decision to implement or delay the suggestion should be run past the users so that the impact of the include/postpone/exclude decision can be determined. 

 

10 Project Manager Traits – 2 – Starters

2 - Starters

Description

Starter project managers have great ideas and a sense of urgency to get on with the project. They cannot wait to get started but as the project moves forward (or drags on, as they would describe it) they tend to get bored. Since they are overflowing with ideas, a new more exciting project can result in them tputting the current project on hold and for the next project to become the priority.

The intention

“Let’s get on with it.”

 Progress, movement and excitement. 

Thrill of the new, with a touch of: “I want it all now!”

The Good

Project managers of this type generate great ideas and make sure that they get started in very short time spans. They are very unlikely to spend weeks or months discussing possible projects – they already know which one they want to do next out of long list of pending ideas.

The Bad

Boredom takes hold if the project takes too long. If the project is a big one and one that will take years to create and implement then they will most likely leave after a short while leaving the boss with a problem. However, this usually is the boss and the problem is that they may well have many incomplete projects that cause them heavy financial losses and frustration with their junior staff and/or consultants. There is likely to be a history of sackings and firings of people who failed to deliver completed projects. Projects that have made it through, may well be fragmented with many half implemented concepts.

The Story

I love working with starters, I love the abundance of ideas and the sheer energy of their style but where I have failed to encourage the introduction or inclusion of junior managers I have seen the boss lose interest and get annoyed with the apparent lack of progress. It is often much harder to resist the temptation of following them down the path of the next exciting idea and much more self-discipline is required to keep everything on track.

Failing to get junior manager support or helping to keep this type on track has led to being sacked. After all, working with such a project manger, will lead to a series of incomplete, or rather, “failed” projects. All of them could have worked, they just never got done. When the totality is reviewed the Starter will be able to demonstrate that “nothing works” and they will be right.

If you succeed with getting help to ensure that both the new idea and the original idea get completed there will never be a shortage of work. 

Remedial action

The value of starters cannot be underestimated, These are the entrepreneurs overflowing with ideas. They will start things and get things moving fast. However they need a great team around them to take over when the energy wanes. The ideas are still good so the project is worth completing but they need a new project manger to step in and run it through to completion. When a project is completed there is likely to be quite a lot of fanfare as the Starter loves the success of seeing one of thier ideas come to fruition.

If there is no possibility to have another manager take over, then the project needs to be broken up into smaller steps that allow for quick results of parts of the project. This ensures that the momentum is maintained and that there are visible signs of progress.

The manager also needs to create a great evaluative method to ensure that the focus is on essential aspects of the project first. Define what is essential! Keep a log of the other ideas and when there is more time determine which of these should be worked on next.

10 Project Manager Traits – 1 – Starter Finishers

1_Starter Finishers

Description

The focus of Starter Finishers  is continuous, a project is started and carried through to completion. Little or no attention is paid to distractions. 

The intention

Get the job done on time and on budget. Demonstrate how efficient I am.

The Good

A project run by this person will be started and run through to completion. They will ensure that it is created according to the brief and usually have it done on time.

The Bad

Being this focussed means that it is hard for the project to adapt to changing circumstances and to new data. Resistance to change can mean that the project, whilst meeting the original brief, is not fit for purpose as that purpose gets refined. The manager may pass over brilliant additions or modifications which could dramatically affect the outcome. The project may need updating almost immediately (where this is an option) and maybe even before the project can be put to use, causing an inadvertent delay.

A second issue is that project manager of this type tends to be so focussed on the current project they are unwilling, or unable, to look at (or look for) the next project to move onto once this one is over. This can lead to long lag times between the end of one project and the next. It requires either that the boss ensures that the next project is lined up and ready or ideally the project manger books in time to find and prepare the next project as part of the current project timetable so that the lag time is avoided.

The Story

I have seen this happen where the project manager is not the boss and where they are not going to be the ultimate user of the system being created. By blocking out feedback from the users the system matched the brief but failed when put to use. Further work needed to be carried out to adapt to the actual user’s needs. This resulted in brilliant staff members leaving and costing thousands in fresh recruitment and training costs.

I have also seen the consequences of this trait where the project manager was also the end user but was so determined not to stray from the brief that all suggestions where logged with the idea that they would be introduced later. This effectively sabotaged the system. The boss, knowing that their staff member was good at completing projects was not prepared for this second further period of development and this caused their plans to be delayed when the system failed to function as needed on the completion date. In this case the boss needed to delay other projects and divert funds to get this one done.

It can be very costly to finish a project that matched the brief but fails to meet the requirements. It may well be that the budget is spent and there are no additional funds for changes at this late stage. This can result in all of the investment being lost or the system being put on ice. When it is revived the business model will have evolved and more work is required to bring it up to date.

Remedial action

Discovering or knowing that the project manager has the trait of being a starter finisher, and where this is not the boss, it is important to bring the issue to the boss’ attention and spell out what might occur if the controls are not eased slightly. It may be necessary to build into the brief a number of project reviews that not only track progress but review suggestions for changes to establish their worth. If the project manager is not the boss then the boss needs to be the person who chairs this meeting. 

If the boss is the project manager then they need to bring on board one of the end users to provide feedback and insight on what might need to be changed or adapted.

Nearly the same… … not even close.

 

screen-shot-2016-10-24-at-17-59-19

I had written a system for a client and they are now creating a new business that is nearly the same as the current one. Each businesses needs to fill a large hole with waste material, delivered to site by truck.

Same task: Fill the hole.

We met and discussed the idea at some length and there were clearly similarities. It seemed so very close.

However my task is to create a system that is optimal for the particular business the system is going to be used for.

In the first case there were hundreds of clients per year in the second 10. In the first case the business needed to manage 2-3 truck journeys per client within a few days. In the second there would be hundreds per client over several months.

In the first, the nature of the material was varied but getting it right was critical to meeting compliance. In the second the size of the clients and the size of each job were so large that compliance was as good as guaranteed.

The question was – could we re-use the current system for the second business and tweak it a bit?

We could have – but in doing so we would miss out on all the wonderful benefits of custom databases.

Here are some of the differences:

System A – Many clients/few trucks

  1. Where there are many clients there is a benefit to creating an online section to the system to allow the client to enter key data themselves – this saves a lot of time collecting data and ensures that the person who knows the data best (the client), enters it. The system can also ensure that the client is not able to return a half completed form and can guide them through the process of filling it out cutting down on errors dramatically. First time right.
  2. Since we are uncertain of what is being delivered we can stop the truck at the entry to the site and take photos of the registration plate and the contents of the truck and link this back to the delivery note. We now have a visual record of what was actually delivered when and by whom.
  3. The trucks are all run by the client – what was unknown was the nature of the material being delivered. This meant that we could train the drivers, as we knew who they were, and we could reduce the amount of on-screen hand-holding required.
  4. From a management viewpoint we were less interested in the client and more interested in the efficiency of the drivers. How many loads were they delivering per day, what was their workload like over the coming weeks, when were trucks due to be maintained- what more work could we pursue?
  5. In this case we would have many clients – each with a lower value. We would not have time to credit check each client. But some might order more that one job. We needed to be able to learn from their prior payment record.

 

System B – Few Clients/Many trucks

  1. Where there are many truck journeys being carried out there is a likelihood that the same drivers arrive on site over and over again. This means that we can put a simple system on site that allows the drivers to sign in when they arrive and complete the notification of delivery. The weighbridge could automatically fill in the weight delivered and produce a printout for the driver. The driver can then be instructed on where to deliver the waste material with an on screen map and the same map can appear on the printed delivery confirmation. This removed the need for any paperwork and resulted in instant feedback to head office and fewer drivers out on site.
  2. In this case we had little interest in the driver’s performance – they were not our drivers. What we were interested in was the remaining work to be carried out for each client, how many trucks had arrived on site during the last week and therefore how many were likely to arrive during the coming week, we could then predict when the work for the client would be completed. We could also asses how busy the site was going to be over the coming months and when we needed to start scheduling in the 11th and 12th client.
  3. In this case we had the potential of a single client running 10 trucks to site each day and even with weekly invoicing, the 30 day payment terms meant that if a client was late paying the impact and credit risk could be significant. We needed more controls over payments and a way of stopping new deliveries if the credit limit was being exceeded or likely to be exceeded.
  4. The client would want a complete record of what deliveries were made to site and we could attach this to the emailed invoice – including the drivers signature.
  5. The accounts department had little to check as all the data had effectively been pre-verified – they would just need to trigger the invoice process and within seconds emails, with the invoices attached, would be sent out to each client.

These were just some of the considerations, and as they kept accumulating,  the decision was taken to create a new bespoke system for the second business. The cost saving to the client would be in the tens of thousands per year.