Art Petty on Management

Art Petty on Management Has Changed and Moved

I don't like to do things small or simple, so in what I sincerely hope is the absolute last time I put myself and you through this, I have moved and changed the name of my blog. 

You will now find me at www.artpetty.com and the new name of the blog is Management Excellence.

As I'm writing this and realizing that most people that have moved blogs have basically had to start over from zero to build traffic, this seems like taking two steps in the wrong direction.  However, sometimes you have to step back to grow, and I've got some compelling reasons for making the move, including:

• Integrating my former corporate web site and my blog under one content management system.

• Creating a simpler url (artpetty.com...12 characters versus the almost 40 for this site).

• Gaining the tools and the control through a hosted blog so that I can easily add planned podcasts, webcasts, forums and other tools that I will roll out this year.

• Aligning my blog's name: Management Excellence with my personal mission to promote high performance, great leadership and the pursuit of excellence in business.  

All of the posts and hopefully, all of the comments have been moved to the new site, so 14 months,  160 plus essays and a tremendous number of thoughtful comments on best practices in leadership and strategy, project management, product management and marketing and sales, all remain part of the library. 

For those of you that subscribe via your favorite Reader or happen across this post via Search, please take the opportunity to visit the new Management Excellence site and click on the site's feed.  And don't forget to check out some of the new tools, including the live polls, free down-loadable tools and links and references to many other great resources.

Thanks so much for reading and referencing Art Petty on Management, and I hope to earn your confidence many times over in my new home at the Management Excellence blog!

Improve Strategy and Execution Planning with Project Management Practices

I’ve danced with this topic before (Struggling with Strategy? Think Project Management), and the more experience that I gain helping clients improve the effectiveness and efficiency of their strategic planning and execution program development activities through project management practices, the more sold I am on the approach.

In my experience, many of the biggest gaffes in strategy and execution planning processes occur because the common-sense steps of the Project Manager are ignored, often because a functional leader or worse yet, an executive is charged with running the project. 

Just a few areas where I’ve observed complete strategy project derailment because good project management practices were ignored:

• The meetings grind down in a never-ending sea of fact-finding, debate and then more debate.

• Instead of focusing on strategic issues, the discussions quickly shift to short-term operational issues.

• Tools are misapplied.

• The deliverables are a powerpoint deck and a bunch of disgruntled participants that realize that they will never get the time that they just wasted back again.

• Insular groups that practice strategic planning like it is a combination of Voodoo and a secret language, complete with a secret handshake for entry into meetings. 

• Ideas are generated, but there is no mechanism to turn them into actions.

• Actions take place but there are no mechanisms to evaluate relative success and gain lessons learned

• A strategy is created but the organization’s employees are not tuned in to the strategy well-enough to understand how to connect their priorities to the strategic objectives of the firm.

• The Voice of the Customer is never heard.

And so on…

Enter the Project Manager armed with skills required to improve the odds of success.  I encourage management teams to treat a strategic planning cycle as a series of projects, and to engage a senior-level project manager to run the process.

Suggestions to Improve Strategy and Execution Program Effectiveness include:

• Creation of a Charter and the assignment of an executive sponsor that is responsible for the success of the initiative.

• Identification of core Strategy Team members, and their responsibilities/accountabilities in the process.

• Development of a clear scope document that defines priorities and deliverables.

• Communication of the Charter and Scope materials by the Executive Sponsor and Project Manager to the broader organization to promote understanding and to gain support for involvement in data gathering and brainstorming as well as future sessions on execution.

• Project Manager working with the core strategy team to define up-front data needs, to help identify the project’s work breakdown structure and to coordinate scheduling and resources for upfront data gathering.

• On-going monitoring of work teams that are handling early phase data gathering, market assessments, customer interviews and competitor analysis.

• Monitoring and control of the project to ensure that it moves relatively smoothly through the phases from definition to data gathering, assessment, options identification, options analysis, options selection and execution program definition.

• Once options are identified and selected, these define logical projects, and the Project Manager and PM team are already in-place to hit the ground running in helping to move ideas into actions.

The Bottom-line for Now

The application of professional project management practices to the strategic planning and execution program development cycles of an organization can eliminate many of the common pitfalls that derail these programs. 

While the Project Manager cannot guarantee that the insights and actions developed during strategy are the right ones, he/she can take away the organizational-risk that so often rears its head to doom the best intended initiatives.  Instead of shooting yourself in both feet while running a footrace, let the Project Manager shoulder the weapon and leave you free to run fast and hard towards creating value for your customers and stakeholders. 

Common Sense and the Role of Leadership in Project Management Success

Dr. James T. Brown, PMP, offers a number of interesting observations about achieving the right balance between methodology and pragmatism in his PM World Today Viewpoints article, entitled: Why Your Project Management Methodology Doesn’t Matter Much.  His central thesis is: “It is not the methodology that is the primary factor of success.  It is the leadership!”

Dr. Brown encourages clients to focus on to beware that, “too much methodology can contribute to project failure.”  He suggests: “Strong leadership is striking a balance between people dependency and process dependency with respect to the given methodology.”

Art’s Comments:

Dr. Brown is right to caution about the over-reliance on methodology as a guarantee of success.  In particular, I’ve worked around early-career Project Managers that with the best of intentions have ridden the methodology horse all the way to project failure.  By the same token, I’ve worked in client organizations where the leadership was either too cavalier about supporting the methodology or falsely assumed that they once the chosen methodology was in place, their job was complete. 

An organization’s leaders must be actively involved in supporting project success, and part of their role is serving as the gatekeeper on when methodology can be sacrificed on the altar of project progress.  Project Managers must be astute enough to recognize the early warning signs of methodology overload and engage their project teams, sponsors and senior leadership on the issues so that changes to the process can be properly vetted and concluded.

“One Size Does Not Fit All”

I love Dr. Brown’s phrase: “Project Management is simply Structured, Organized, Common Sense.”  He suggests that if requirements are relatively fluid and the project contains high uncertainty, then is common sense to choose an iterative method.  Alternatively, mission-critical projects demand a strict development methodology to minimize risk and optimize chances for success. 

Art’s Comments:

Leadership plays a critical role in assessing the importance of a project to a firm’s goals or strategies.  Those projects deemed mission critical merit strict (but not unyielding) adherence to a defined methodology.  An established software firm with many products may be able to relax time constraints on smaller or lower priority projects without suffering significant repercussions.  Alternatively, an early-stage firm dependent upon a new release to satisfy early adopter clients can ill afford to deviate from a methodology that will ensure an on-time release in line with customer requirements.  Methodology and reasons for violating or adapting the methodology should be considered in the initial project planning and prioritization phases and communicated to all stakeholders.

The Bottom-Line for Now:

As organizations grow increasingly dependent upon project execution and professional project management practices to drive strategy execution, a firm’s leaders have to be smart enough and engaged enough to recognize an imbalance between process and people.  Methodologies are guidelines to be strictly or liberally adhered to depending upon circumstances.  Good leadership in this sense means tuning in to project activities at a level sufficient to ensure that the right approaches are being applied for the right reasons.  While your methodology might have its champions, don’t lose track of the fact that the methodology must enable success, not fight it.

From Imperial Court to Learning Organization

Today’s post was stimulated by a great article in the July/August 2008 Harvard Business Review, The Competitive Imperative of Learning, where Professor Amy Edmonson of Harvard Business School outlines the differences between organizations that focus on execution as efficiency—doing things better and faster than your competition versus execution as learning—focusing on learning and adapting faster.

In brief, Professor Edmonson compares and contrasts the approaches used in the traditional industrial age model of motivation and performance evaluation processes versus those required for today’s knowledge-worker dominated organizations.  The approaches required for success in the two models are dramatically different.

In the Execution as Efficiency model, Professor Edmonson indicates that leaders provide answers, employees follow directions and optimal work processes are designed and set up in advance.  In the Execution as Learning model, leaders set direction and articulate the mission, employees discover the answers and work processes are highly fluid, adapting at the speed of organizational learning.

Practical Applications: A lot of Executive Talk, but...

When it comes to driving change, words and actions must match. Few organizations are immune to the massive forces constantly reshaping the world around us, and few organizations can afford to live solely by the Execution as Efficiency model.  We live and work in a world increasingly dominated by knowledge workers, and while one part of an organization may be dominated by an efficiency orientation, other areas, marketing, sales, research and development, must move towards a learning approach or face dire consequences in the marketplace. 

In my own experience working with organizations that have grown up with an emphasis on efficiency but are talking about the need to become more flexible and adaptable, it is often the people doing the talking that are serving as the barriers to change by failing to revamp outmoded systems and processes.

Five Barriers that Get In the Way of Developing a Learning Organization:

1. The Imperial CEO and Royal Executives: A class system that puts undue weight on the import of executives.  Instead of the executives serving the organization, it seems like the organization exists to serve the executives.
2. Strategy by Edict and Set According to the Calendar: Every year at about the same time, the organization stops and waits while the royal court sits behind closed doors working out the new organizational structure and lofty statements that provide the masses inspiration to work hard until they receive fresh inspiration next year.
3. Strategy by Default: “We have a strategy, and it’s to sell more,” is a commonly heard phrase in this tuned-out environment.   Another is, “Strategy is for the big boys, and we’re too small to worry about anything other than doing our jobs.”
4. People as Expenses: the words coming from the mouths of executives might be saying “People are our most important asset,” but the systems supporting the identification, development and retention of talent are saying, “People are our biggest cost.”
5. The Functional Structure: specialization works in some areas, but in general, the silo structure of many/most orientations is the greatest impediment to shared learning.  While the phrase, “we’re all in sales” is commonly shouted by salespeople frustrated with the lack of organizational support, the fact is that, “marketing is truly too important to be left to just the marketing department.” 

What to Do If Your Organization Needs to Learn:

• Take the royalty out of the royal court.  This culture shift has to start at the top—the non-CEO Chairman of the Board and the other independent board members have to step up and overthrow the caste system and monarchy that pervades so many executive environments.

• Recognize and act on strategy as a process that involves everyone.  (I’ve posted on this one seemingly a thousand times, so I’ll spare you the details and direct you to the Strategy category on this blog.)

• A robust execution process with plenty of accountability and constant evaluation of performance and consideration of lessons learned is the fastest way to pump up organizational learning.

• Make the identification, development and retention of talent the job of every manager or supervisor in the organization.  Challenge HR to create systems to support these activities and start living up to the notion that people are your greatest assets.

• Break down the walls by at least moving towards a strong matrix or a project environment for major initiatives.  Cease and desist with throwing initiatives over silo walls, and build a project culture with the charter to execute and to educate the organization on lessons learned.

The Bottom-Line for Now:

It’s time to quit talking about becoming a learning organization and start knocking down the time worn conventions, institutions and processes that stand in your organization's way.  In an ideal world, this change starts at the top with an insightful leader or leadership team that understand what it takes to move from an efficiency orientation to a learning focus.  In reality, a lot of this change will need to be driven by leaders in the middle that clearly see what is happening in the external environment as well as what it takes to win in that environment.  If necessary, let the royals executives posture and play while you go about the business of changing the business one initiative at a time.

Ironically, Mid-Level Managers May Save Your Business

Ever since terms like reengineering, right sizing and downsizing became part of the corporate lexicon; midlevel managers have been taking it on the chin.  This once populous class has been synergized and right-sized almost to extinction.  Those that remain often struggle with spans of control as wide as the Golden Gate Bridge and limited authority that is constantly challenged from above and below.  I find it just a bit ironic (and appropriate) that this much-abused class of leader may just hold the key to surviving and prospering in tough times.

In a great article in the July 7. 2008 Wall Street Journal, entitled: In Search of Growth Leaders, authors Carr, Liedtka, Rosen and Wiltbank offer the results of their multi-year study of the role that midlevel managers play in fueling organic growth.  Their conclusion: "most companies have managers who can turbo charge results.  The trick is finding—and nurturing—them.  Read the article for some great insights on finding and developing these critical midlevel leaders. (And read my post: Management By Jane: Leading Effectively from the Middle for some additional thoughts.)

The Power of Great Managers in the Middle:

• Appropriately trained and armed, midlevel managers are directly focusing on strategy execution—they lead the teams that do the work that drives performance. If your organization is failing to execute on strategic objectives, look to the middle, not to place blame, but to identify what you can do better to help your managers succeed.

• As the article authors highlight, a tremendous amount of innovation comes from the middle.  In my own experience, the managers that fuel innovation are the ones that are relentless about creating the right conditions for their associates to succeed.   Breaking down barriers and taking the heat for bending the rules are common and comfortable tasks of the innovative midlevel manager.

• The most important talent scouts and developers are often found in the middle of organizations.  The savvy manager recognizes the import of identifying and developing emerging leaders, competent role players and potentially brilliant individual contributors. While top management might want the organization to become good at this talent scouting and development, like strategy execution, the majority of the heavy lifting takes place in the middle.

Five Ideas to Strengthen Your Support and Success In the Middle:

1. Change your perspective on the midlevel management layer.  Instead of looking
at the organization chart and seeing cost to be minimized or taken out, look at this group as resources to enable strategy execution, fuel innovation and scout and develop talent.  Quit broadening spans of control to the point of ridiculousness, and begin setting goals around strategy, innovation and development, and suddenly the cost perspective starts melting away.

2. Involve midlevel managers in strategy formulation...not just in rubber-stamping the strategy formulated by executives.  Remember, the people in the middle likely understand your customers and your organization's capabilities at a much more detailed level than those of you with V's or C's in your title.

3. Create systems to help midlevel managers experiment with and implement new ideas.  Provide key managers and manager groups with executive sponsors charged with cutting through corporate clutter to help get things done.

4. Reward successes, provide visibility and learn from misfires.  Easy words to write and speak, but realizing this environment takes discipline. 

5. Recognize the fact that new classes of virtual leaders...Project Managers and Product Managers have emerged over the past two decades to replace the former middle level.  These critical positions often carry tremendous responsibility burdens with little real authority across functional boundaries.  If these positions exist in your organizations, strive to create the sponsors, systems and infrastructure to allow them to perform.

6. As an executive, get over yourself.  No one said that you are required to have all of the answers.  It's a sign of strength, not weakness if you are emotionally secure and intelligent enough to recognize that your strength comes from your ability to get the best from willing contributors. Take the time to invest in reinventing your leadership style.

The Bottom-Line for Now:

The article referenced above is must reading for every executive looking to solve the challenges of how to fuel organic growth.  Innovation doesn't occur on command, and while good accidents happen (e.g. think 3M and Post-Its), hope as we all know is a lousy strategy. 

I teach, train and support midlevel managers in all forms of organizations and by and large, I find them generally miserable about their tasks and their ability to positively impact their organization.  The majority of their frustration stems from working for leaders that succeed in stifling the conditions required for innovation and execution to flourish.  The opportunity is in the middle...not the problem.  For the source of the problem, take a long, hard look in the mirror. 

The Project Management Discipline of Strategy Execution

A number of months ago, I wrote about the benefit of applying professional project management practices to help improve strategy execution (Struggling with Strategy? Think Project Management).  While many view strategy as something that is transformational (and it often is), the fact is that an organization moves from where it is today to where it has decided to go one project at a time...like a football team marching down the field on a long-drive.

In the June, 2008 Harvard Business Review, in an article entitled The Secrets to Successful Strategy Execution, Gary Neilson, Karla Martin and Elizabeth Powers add considerably to the body of knowledge on strategy execution, with this excellent article, backed by a considerable amount of research gained in surveys of over 1,000 organizations.  Their findings seem to support their thesis that: "enterprises fail at execution because they go straight to structural reorganization and neglect the most powerful drivers of effectiveness—decision rights and information flows."

A few key findings covered in the article:

• Employees at three out of five companies rated their organization weak at execution.  (Asked: Are Important strategic and operational decisions quickly translated into action?)

• The number one rated trait (by a landslide) that makes organizations effective at implementing strategy: Everyone has a good idea of the decisions and actions for which one is responsible.

• Of the top eight traits (17 were identified), five were tied to having effective and timely information flows and three were related to decision rights.

• Structure as an effective trait for driving strategy execution did not hit the  list until number 13, with a relatively low strength index rating. 

Fascinating. It's important to see a large body of research dedicated to the execution issue and it is a great learning experience to see how valuable information flows and decision rights are to successful strategy execution.

Additional Thoughts on Strategy Execution:

Structural changes, properly implemented at the right time and for the right reasons can go a long way towards addressing and improving the information flow, decision rights and collaboration issues that are so critical to strategy execution.  Don't write off structure as a powerful tool in strategy execution,  however as the authors highlight, don't jump to structure as the solution.  It's one part of many pieces to the solution.

Back to my strategy execution as project management thesis, the best performing project teams are characterized by clear structure, unambiguous roles, detailed communication plans and clear accountability for decisions and results.  Top notch Project Managers ride herd on these issues, seeking out points of confusion or gaps in information flows and fixing them in process.  

The fact that the authors are able to cite as a research finding that 3 out of 5 surveyed managers believe that their organizations do not quickly translate strategic priorities into action tells me that most of those organizations have not adopted a robust project management discipline for strategy execution. And while strategy is arguably more complicated than creating a new product or constructing a building, it is very possible to structure and manage your execution program using the same approaches. 

The bottom-line (for now):

Strategy execution is where value is created.  The best plans are worthless unless they are backed by a group of people that understand their roles and accountabilities and that have the information they need when they need for rapid decision-making.  Execution never takes place in a straight line and without setbacks.  In fact, the setbacks are powerful learning experiences that a good team will leverage as it adapts and responds to internal and external factors.

A large part of the solution in my opinion is treating execution like a high-order program comprised of a series of projects to be managed.  Ask a good Project Manager how to successfully pull of an execution program and I suspect they won't need to interview 1,000 companies. 

Preventing Product Launch Failure: Watch Out for the Pitfalls!

G. Michael Maddock and Raphael Viton writing in the Innovation Engine column at  BusinessWeek online, offer a sobering look at the Ten Reasons Your Next Launch Will Fail.   From the propensity of companies to create solutions for unknown problems (Science Run Amok) to the recurring theme of teams convincing themselves that they can't miss (Death by Consensus), this insightful and witty column offers some priceless guidance for marketers, product and project managers and executives everywhere. 

Having been on the winning side of some great launches and the losing side of a few spectacular failures in the B2B tech world, I can relate to the problems that Michael and Raphael describe all too well.  Some thoughts based on my own experience:

• The Swiss Army Knife or Requirements Run Amok Product: This one finds erstwhile Product Managers (usually unseasoned) working hard to pack every possible feature into an offering in the naive believe that this Swiss Army Knife approach will create a stronger offering.  They did not understand their buyer's problems/challenges sufficiently, and they over-specified to compensate.

• The Offering Just Slightly Ahead of Its Time:  Yep, I made this mistake.  As Maxwell Smart would say, "Missed it by that much."  Followed by, "Sorry about that Chief."  By now, drinks were supposed to be poured by a Drink Tower robot in Quick Service Restaurants everywhere, saving a veritable fortune in labor and improving time efficiency.  My Drink Tower interface from the Point-Of-Sale system burned a lot of time and money.  It was really cool in the one site that actually tested a drink tower in 1996.  I hear that there are a few more sites now.

• The "We'll Release No Product Before It's Time, Except This One" Launch: This launch failure usually involves a management team that built their budget around a new product launch, only to see schedule delays cut into their nicely developed sales dream.  Pressured by the urgency of the situation and the upcoming Board meeting, a watered-down version of the product is launched and you can guess what ensues. 

• The Product that Won't Be Born: OK, maybe this is a cheap shot, but it's my column, and I get to offer at least one gripe to a development team or two that couldn't get its act together.  It's not always the Product Manager's fault!

The bottom-line for now:

Like the forward pass in football, there are a lot of things that can go wrong and only one thing that can go right: the pass is caught and the product launch is successful.   Successfully launching products requires the organization to be Tuned In to their buyers.  Solving a vexing problem in a unique way for a distinct group is a great starting point.  Creating the culture, systems and approaches requisite for a successful launch requires committed, focused leadership at all levels of the organization.  Establishing a high level of competence in product launch is table stakes for success in a world where opportunities are fleeting and  and product life cycles shrinking daily. 

Hmmm, now, if 5,000 locations save .2 people due to the automatic drink tower, the savings will be worth millions.  I wonder if it's time to re-launch that puppy?  I suspect that Michael and Raphael would advise against it.

In Search of the High Performance Project Team

I recently conducted a leadership workshop for a group of technical professionals at an industry conference, and as always, I walked away from the session with a couple of insights gained from the input of the participants.  One that surprised me was that after talking about characteristics of high performance project teams, I asked for a show of hands from anyone that had been a member of this type of team.  Only 5 out of 58 raised their hands.  Even discounting for the people that don't tend to respond to "showing of hands" requests, anything even close to the 10% range here seems abysmal.

Planning to Recognize Failure-The Project Manager's Guide to Preventing Project Calamity

Every Project Manager with a few years of experience under his or her belt can likely recall at least one example of a major project that lived on long after the plug should have been pulled and the project canceled.  The best (or worst) examples are the ego-driven initiatives of top executives that can't let go for fear of losing face by admitting defeat. 

More than a few organizations have been taken to or pushed over the edge by these self-anointed visionaries bent on changing their corporate world with some grand project.  Once invested, they cannot let go, and if left unchecked, the results can be nothing short of disastrous for the organization.   

Too Many Projects Chasing Too Few Resources in the Strategy-Starved Organization

Whether you are operating at the strategic level or working in product development, I would bet my life-starting morning cup of coffee (a great Mexican roast from Conscious Cup in Crystal Lake, IL) that your organization faces more opportunities than it can possibly deliver.  The extreme of this situation is Project Gridlock, a phenomena that I've observed in mature technology firms where the demand to support and enhance legacy offerings collide with the need to modernize or create new products to grow the business and stay-ahead of competitors.