Trust in the Gulf -- Boot on the Neck

Department of the Interior Secretary, Ken Salazar, made the following statement on CNN: "Our job basically is to keep the boot on the neck of British Petroleum to carry out the responsibilities they have..."

Salazar's remark has now been widely circulated. How do you think the Secretary's statement affects the level of trust between the administration and BP?

How would you react if your client or a user group spoke to you like that? What if your manager told you that he was going to put his boot on your neck until you fulfill your responsibilities? I wonder whether the administration considered what effect its violent tone would have on the trust of those involved in the solution. Perhaps the administration doesn't believe trust has a part to play in the success of this unfortunate project.

Project: Stop the Oil Leak

Leadership, Ownership, and Trust are extremely important in successful large IT projects. I concluded this after conducting some research a few years ago (see Sacred PM Practices). In the years since, I have looked around to see how these attributes play out on my own projects, and in the world.

America's eyes are focused on the Gulf of Mexico and the oil spill. The stopping of the leak and cleanup could be considered a project -- it is a temporary effort, there is a beginning, some objectives, and an end. Just for fun, let's call this project, Stop the Oil Leak. During the next few posts, I'd like to share some of my observations of this project, and hope that you will share your own.

On May 27th, President Obama declared, "I am responsible." This would seem to address the attibute, ownership. Once he admitted that, it was clear who is responsible for the success or failure of this project. As an aside, I think BP is the owner of this project, but that probably speaks more of my personal views of accountability, and less of project ownership.

Was this declaration a good move by the White House? Do you believe it relieved the executives and employees of BP? Who do you think owns this project?

Towers Perrin's Top-10 List for Employee Engagement

Another firm that chimes in about employee engagement is Towers Perrin. Like Accenture, Towers Perrin also has a top-10 list for employee engagement.

1. Senior management sincerely interested in employee well-being
2. Ability to improve skills and capabilities
3. Organization’s reputation for social responsibility
4. Employees' input into decision making
5. Quick resolution of customer concerns
6. Setting of high personal standards
7. Excellent career advancement opportunities
8. Challenging work assignments that broaden skills
9. Good relationships with supervisors
10. Organization encourages innovative thinking

Most of these ten drivers directly impact the employee (e.g., 1, 2, 7). A couple of the top-10 drivers speak to the environment of the employer (e.g., 10). The odd one here, the one I didn’t expect to see, is driver #5. Resolution of customer concerns has not appeared on any of the other employee engagement lists that I have reviewed. I suppose it is difficult to be engaged to an employer that has difficulty resolving the problems of its customers.

What is on your top-10 list for employee engagement? Has Towers Perrin captured everything on your own list?

Accenture's Top-10 List for Employee Engagement

I found that Accenture’s Human Performance service line has considered how employee engagement affects profit, productivity, and innovation. They have found a direct relationship between employee engagement and profit, productivity, and innovation. Accenture’s analyses have shown that the higher an organization scores on the ten areas below, the higher the employee engagement rating.

• Recognition and rewards must be linked to job and business performance
• Hr systems must provide managers with the information they need
• Learning opportunities for current and future positions must be available
• Provide tools for staff to find the information they need to perform their jobs
• Frequent and effective performance appraisals must be provided
• High-performance physical workplace must be created
• Significant changes in the organization must be communicated to reduce their impact on morale and performance
• Pay attention to each employee’s career planning and development
• HR policies must be fair for all staff members
• Recruit individuals with the same goals as the organization

Does this look like a complete list to you? What about trusting one’s manager? What about having a good working relationship with one’s boss? I once read that an employee always joins a company, but always leaves a boss. I think a person’s relationship with his manager carries a lot of weight. Where is that topic in the Accenture’s list?

What do you think?

Sacred PM Practices – Bottom Line

Most project managers, project management instructors, and publishers of project management material are spending much effort on management topics that are of little importance to the success of large IT projects, and little energy on those topics which are present in many of these successful large IT projects – leadership, ownership, trust.

I am not suggesting that knowing how to create a project plan, or managing project risks are not important. I have come to believe that topics like leadership, ownership, and trust are little understood. How much time do you, or your project manager, spend on creating a sense of ownership among team members? Do you spend any energy cultivating trust?

We started the discussion of the research project, Sacred Management Practices, in a posting on January 25, 2009. This summary posting represents that last planned post about the the project. We have enjoyed some great discussion around the topics presented. You can find the full presentation at SlideShare.net under Sacred PM Practices.

Sacred PM Practices – Topics for Consideration

Traditional project management resources seem to address topics that do not necessarily support the successful execution of large IT projects.

• Project Management Institute claims to be the world’s leading publisher of project management information. Its books, newsletters, training courses, and seminars focus on traditional concerns such as resource estimation, risk management, and scope management.
• American Management Association’s books, seminars, and self-study materials focus on traditional project management activities – setting measurable project objectives, estimating project costs, and the use of a Work Breakdown Structure.
• Software Engineering Institute strongly promotes the establishment of repeatable (i.e., standard, documented) processes for such areas as project planning, project tracking, and change management.

Project management resources do not adequately address the qualitative findings of this study.

• There are many resources written about leadership. The resources however, tend to address military leadership and the leading of whole corporations.
• There are few resources that address ownership. Some of the leadership books do include a sentence or a paragraph about why ownership is important to an organization.
• There are extremely few project management resources that address trust among project stakeholders.

Do you also find this to be the situation? If so, why? Is it simply easier to describe how to create a work breakdown structure than it is to describe how to create an environment of engaged team members?

Sacred PM Practices – Possible Explanation

It may seem reasonable that with strong leadership, ownership, and trust in place, there is less of a need for the standardization of project management procedures/activities (e.g., resource estimation, risk assessment, change management).

In contrast, there is a need for standard project management procedures in the absence of leadership, ownership, and trust.

This possible explanation implies that standard project management procedures serve as a substitute for project leadership, ownership, and trust.

Am I reaching here? Have I oversimplified the observations?

Sacred PM Practices – Unexpected Findings

Project Managers of successful large IT projects spend relatively little effort on activities declared important in project management literature, methodologies, and training seminars. Only two of the nine initial assumptions, dedicated project team and frequent interaction with stakeholders, passed the 80% bar (see posting on June 15, 2009).

These same project managers do focus on project leadership, build a sense of ownership, and cultivate trust among project stakeholders.

Why do you think that leadership, ownership, and trust are not prominent in literature, methodologies, and training seminars? I have been looking for these topics to be addressed for four years now. Only recently have I seen a couple of books and a seminar on Trust.

Sacred PM Practices – Ownership

Ownership is a psychological bond between a project team member and the outcome of a project.

The majority of respondents in the study volunteered their belief that a sense of ownership was critical to the success of their projects. Many discussed several perspectives on ownership. Respondents shared examples of project managers, project team members, the clients (both internal and external), and users exhibiting ownership of project outcomes. There was the consultant who volunteered to cancel his contract if a software release was not successfully executed at a critical time. I also remember the CEO who found a project team in the office hours after a blizzard ended. No one from the rest of his company could make it into the office because of the snow-drifted streets.

The respondents did not know how to measure the level of ownership, but believed that they could state whether project team members exhibited ownership.

When have you seen a project team show ownership of its success? Have you witnessed an especially engaged project team? If so, what made the team engaged?

Sacred PM Practices – Qualitative Factors Uncovered

My prepared questions were asked. Hundreds of pieces of information were organized. Trends were identified.

When I asked the successful project managers what I was missing, most project managers shared a few ideas that had helped their projects to succeed. The following characteristics were discovered to be present, to a large extent, on most of the sample projects:

• Project leadership, as opposed to project management
• Ownership of the project outcome
• Trust among project members, stakeholders, and senior management

I was dumbstruck. In all of my project management courses and seminars, studying of PM textbooks, and discussions with senior management, I had never come across the importance of leadership, instilling a sense of ownership, and cultivating an environment of trust. After all, most of our status reports address schedule, budget, and risks.

When was the last time your boss asked you about your project team members’ sense of ownership? When has your status report commented on your client/customer’s trust in the project team?