Project Management: Organizational and Team Issues OPER 576 A pril 22, 2004

1. Project Management:Organizational and Team IssuesOPER 576April 22, 2004 Greg Magnan, PhD.

2. Agenda • Organizational Issues • Structure: Functional, Dedicated teams, Matrix • Culture: Affects project success • Team Issues • Phases: Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing • Punctuated Equilibrium • Meetings: Role of PM • Rewards: Individual or team? • Conflict: What to do? • Pitfalls: Too much love • Homework Assignment • Organizational and Team factors

3. Organizational Issues • Projects: Interface w/ Organization • Org’ns: repeatable and ongoing activities • Projects: unique and temporary; multi-disciplinary • “Because projects span across functional areas, identifying and legitimizing PM authority is often problematic.” • Gray and Larson, Chapter 3.

4. Organizational Issues • Method of Organizing Projects • Within the Functional Organization • Delegating tasks to functional units • PRO: Leverage expertise; career paths maintained • CON: lack of focus; weak integration; longer • Dedicated Project Teams • PRO: Motivation; cohesiveness; focus; x-functional • CON: Expensive; “projectitis”; top talent; post? • Matrix • PRO: expertise, career, motivated, focused • CON: tension b/t P and F; scarce resources; 2 bosses

5. Organizational Issues • Method of Organizing Projects • Virtual Projects • Managing projects that span across organizational boundaries • Increasingly common • PRO: Costs; expertise; more proejcts • CON: coordination (timing, culture, sensitive information, etc.); loss of control; conflicts

6. Organizational Issues • Factors to inform PM STRUCTURE • Size of project • Strategic importance • Organization’s need for innovation • Organization’s need for integration • Environmental complexity • Budget and Time constraints • Stability of system resources • “Higher” means more autonomy to Project team

7. Organizational Issues - Culture • System of shared norms, beliefs, values and assumptions which bind people together, thereby creating shared meanings • Reflects the personality of the organization • Can impact a firm’s ability to motivate people and span cross-functional boundaries • Provides a sense of identity • Helps legitimize the management system • Clarifies and reinforces standards of behavior • Helps create social order • “Culture is the river and the project is the boat.” • Gray and Larson

8. “Discipline of Teams” • Teams call for BOTH individual and “mutual accountability,” which can lead to results beyond the reach of individuals. Members must: • Listen; Respond constructively; Provide support…and have: • “Essential Discipline” • Meaningful, common purpose the team has shaped • Specific performance goals that stem from purpose (e.g., getting new product developed in half the time) • Mix of complementary skills (technical-functional expertise, problem solving / decision-making, interpersonal) • Strong commitment to how work gets done and that all do their share • Mutual accountability: process of creating shared goals creates bond among team members Source: Katzenbach & Smith, 1993

9. Teams vs. Working Groups • Working groups: performance is a function of what the individuals do • Come together to share information, perspectives and insights; make decisions that help one another; reinforce individual performance standards, BUT • Members only take responsibility for their own work • Teams: involve collective work products, items in which 2 or more members collaborate (e.g., survey) • “A team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, set of performance goals, and approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable.” Source: Katzenbach & Smith, 1993

10. Building Team Performance • Establish urgency, demanding performance standards, and direction • Teams work best in a compelling context • Select members for skill and skill potential, not personality • Pay particular attention to first meetings and actions, especially actions of leaders • Set come clear rules of behavior • Attendance, confidentiality, analytic approach, end-product orientation, constructive confrontation and contributions to project/work. Source: Katzenbach & Smith, 1993

11. Team Dev’t: Nine Situational Factors for High-Performing Teams • 10 or fewer members on team • Members volunteered • Serve on project from beginning to end • Assigned to project full time • Part of org. culture that is collaborative/trusting • Members report solely to PM • All relevant functional areas are on team • Project involves a compelling objective • Members are located in conversational proximity Source: Gray & Larson, 2003

12. Traits of High-Performing teams • No sacred cows; members should feel free to raise any relevant issues • Confidentially is maintained unless team agrees • It is acceptable to be in trouble, but not acceptable to surprise others • Zero tolerance for bulling through a problem or issue • Agree to disagree, but when a decision has been made, regardless of personal feelings, move forward • Respect outsiders, and do not flaunt one’s position on the team • Hard work does not get in the way of having fun Sources: Katzenbach & Smith, 1993; Bolman and Deal, 1992; Katz, 1997.

13. Project Team Pitfalls • Working toward other goals at the expense of team goals • Groupthink: members in a group may lose their evaluative capabilities • Bureaucratic Bypass Syndrome • May get sabotaged from outside! • Entrepreneur’s Disease • Project goals at expense of overall company • Going Native

14. Teams: Stages of Development • Forming • Getting acquainted/polite but untrusting; formalities are preserved and members are treated as strangers; Begin to establish ground rules • Stage is completed when members begin to think of themselves as part of a group • Storming • High degree of internal conflict / testing others; Members resist the constraints placed on their individuality; Conflict over who will lead, how decisions made, etc. • Stage ends as the conflicts are resolved • Norming • Group begins to develop cohesiveness; Feeling of camaraderie / shared responsibility • Stage ends when group established a common set of expectations about how members should work together • Performing (“High Performance Work Teams”) • Whole is truly greater that sum of the parts • High levels of productivity

15. Punctuated Equilibrium • Rather than the 4-stage model of Tuckman, Gersick says: • Teams do not “get going” until half of project calendar is gone (start to deadline) • Teams drop old norms and adopt new behaviors and working relationships • Up to PM to work through • Can create multiple/phased milestones to introduce deadlines to drive behavior

16. Facilitating Group Decision Making • Problem Identification • Not solutions…they could limit others’ creativity • Generating Alternatives • Brainstorming...mindmaps again! • Reaching a Decision • Recommendation criteria? • CSSQ • Consensus testing…what issues remain within team? • Follow-up

17. Encouraging “Functional Conflict” • Disagreements are natural to teams/projects • Priorities, resources, work quality, solutions, etc. • Line between functional and dysfunctional conflict is not clear • Distinguished by how affects project performance • Healthy dissent is desired…may even assign someone role of devil’s advocate in meetings • PM can model by asking tough questions and challenging rationale behind recommendations • PM should model appropriate response when their views are challenged/disagreed with • Avoid defensive posture; encourage debate; listen and summarize before talking; check to see extent of viewpoint • Facts and data

18. Managing Dysfunctional Conflict • More challenging that encouraging functional conflict • Hard to identify • Solutions can be hard to come by • Human interactions • Range of options from mediation to arbitration to controlling/defusing to accepting to eliminating • Choice depends on nature/severity of the problem and individuals involved • Best is to create environment that motivates collaboration through developing shared vision, using group rewards, and watching for signs that conflict is turning towards dysfunctional

19. Questions Recall a recent team project in which you were involved • Which best describes the team’s development: the 4-stage model or Punctuated Equilibrium? • Analyze the team using the 9 situational factors...which were positive contributors? Negative? How did team try to overcome the negative? Done differently? • How did the team manage meetings? What worked and didn’t work? Changes?