|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Project Approval Fantasies
The project approval process varies from organization to organization. In some, it is a rational process of strategic and tactical planning. In others, it is a highly charged political game where PMs keep their backs to the walls to avoid the random dagger from behind. Whatever the environment, there are two classic fantasies that executives play whenever the phrase "project approval" is mentioned. And then there is the game PMs play to cope with executives' demands.
Executive Fantasy Land
Project sponsors and high-level stakeholders think that if they had really good project managers the approval process would go like this:
The project manager stands confidently at the front of the Board Room. The long table before the PM is filled with corporate honchos and honchas. There is no whining about contingencies or risk. The PM listens politely to a question about budget and the completion date and then says, "We WILL complete the project for $3,123,876.56 and the last of our 1,347 tasks will end on March 9th, 2005 at 3:42 PM."
As the executives applaud, the project manager holds up a hand to silence them and says, "That's Eastern Standard Time," and flashes a shy smile as the executives go wild.
Relying on this fantasy of a really good project manager, executives believe that projects have no risk. The budget and the completion date are set in stone and any failure to hit them means that someone goofed off and did not do their duty to the organization. Here in fantasy land, a project is a machine. The executives push buttons and twirl some dials and the project machine spits out the result two years later. Project managers in this environment never negotiate trade-offs between budgets and durations; one does not negotiate with a toaster before putting in the bread.
Sponsors give project managers the budgets and completion dates with the assumption that it will all come true with a little hard work. The PM may never talk with project stakeholders directly and the entire approval process may happen in the executive chambers while the PM sits in a cubicle waiting. But that does not mean the PM cannot affect the presentation and its content.
The Used Car Lot
In other organizations, the roles and schema surrounding the project approval process resemble a transaction on a used car lot. The executive is the innocent customer and the PM is a slick shyster in fancy clothes. Here, the approval process goes like this:
The executives stroll onto the used car lot, looking for simple but effective transportation. No high-powered hot rods, no fancy wheel covers or custom interiors, just a basic car to carry the executives where they want to go. The PM slithers out from under a rock and wraps an arm around all the executives. "I've got just the thing for sports like you," the PM says in an oily voice.
"We are not 'sports'," the executives say. "We just want a basic car; something simple and cheap."
"That's what I was saying," the PM says with a snicker. "Let me show you this beauty; I've been saving it for just the right customer." The PM leads the executives toward a far corner of the lot.
On the way, one of the executives spots a simple economy model and says, "Wait, that's what we want!"
The PM sneers, "Everyone will laugh at you if you drive that wreck. It's outdated, antiquated and uses '60s technology. You'll be laughing-stocks and die a lonely, miserable death."
Scared at making a mistake, the executives follow the PM to a dark corner of the car lot. The PM pulls an enormous drop cloth off a vehicle, saying, "Here's what you want!"
The executives peer into the gloom and see an enormous vehicle that will carry far too many people. The interior is plush leather, there are three stereo systems, 12 speakers, a TV and a wet bar.
The executives chorus, "This is too much, too big, too expensive. We want the little car back there!"
The PM starts to talk, waving complex charts and graphs and saying, "This is the latest technology, the best economy and the. . ."
The PM's pitch mesmerizes and hypnotizes the executives. A few minutes later they drive off in the big expensive monster.
With this executive mindset, PMs and their projects are greeted with suspicion, even hostility. Sponsors review project plans with a fine-toothed comb, searching for unwanted and unneeded features, options and fixtures. They know the PM has hidden them somewhere; it is just a matter of uncovering the slick shyster's latest tricks.
The Eager Puppy Dog
To cope with either of these extremes and the many options that lie between them, some PMs play what we will call the eager puppy dog,
The sponsor says, "I think this budget looks just a tad fat. You can get it done for 20% less, can't you?"
The PM nods like an eager puppy and hurries off to slash the budget by 20%. The easiest way is to reduce the work in each task 20%. The PM is able to return with the lower budget and, as a bonus, a shorter duration, proving that the PM is not a slick shyster and that the project will be a machine.
When the session ends, both the sponsor and the PM have learned a lesson. The sponsor has learned that the PM's plans have a lot of fat built in and next time, the cut will be 30%, not just 20%. The PM has learned a lesson too. Next time the plan will be 25% padded so that arbitrary changes do not cripple the effort before it even starts.
Excerpt from: Project & Program Management: People, Budgets & Software by Dick Billows