I was trapped in the snow blizzard this past weekend and was not able to prepare the blog post I intended to write. So let me share this one that I wrote for Harvard Business Review and was posted on their site last week.
https://hbr.org/2016/01/why-i-challenged-my-kids-to-start-companies-before-college
Tuesday, January 26, 2016
Monday, January 18, 2016
Happy Birthday to a Value Creator
I don’t know about you, but I often use
Wikipedia for a quick background on a subject and to identify the in-depth
references that I need for further research.
The site is easy to use and often very helpful. Is it a peer-reviewed authoritative source
with thoroughly vetted information? No.
But when I want a quick insight to a topic or issue, it is a great place
to start.
Wikipedia has only been around for 15
years, but it is the 7th most visited site on the web. It beats out social media giants Twitter and
LinkedIn. And it beats out the online
sales giant, ebay. What makes it so
popular? I believe it is because it is
because Wikipedia understands its customers and has created a platform that
brings value to them.
The concept of an encyclopedia
has been around as long as there have been books and reference
libraries. The purpose of the encyclopedia was to
combine the information from multiple references into one place. Before computers, this was done through
books. I can remember using our family’s
copy of the World Book Encyclopaedia while doing homework as a teenager. But these multi-volume sets of books were
cumbersome and expensive. When Then computers
came along the encyclopedias were
turned into programs, the most notable being Microsoft’s Encarta. Today most, if not all, encyclopedia companies
no longer offer a print version.
The internet changed the way many people
assimilate information. They wanted
immediate access to short summaries of current information on every topic under
the sun. And then if they are interested,
they would dig deeper into a topic. This
sounds like an opportunity for
encyclopedias, yet Microsoft shut Encarta, down several
years ago. Just taking the old encyclopedia model and
putting it online did not create a lot of value for potential customers.
The Customer Value of Information
When considering the value of information,
I want to segment the consumers of information into three groups. The first group is the academic, researcher
or professional who needs authoritative information about specific topics to do
their work effectively. The second group
is the student who needs authoritative information on many topics to complete
their assignments. The third group is the consumer or hobbyist who wants to
quickly get the background on a topic in order to answer a question.
The first group were the people who wrote
the print versions of
encyclopedias, but seldom used them. They were already experts with far more
knowledge and information in their fields of interest than could be summarized
in an encyclopedia article. Their interest in encyclopedias was the
prestige or pay of writing content.
The second group used the encyclopedia when they had to get their information
for their assignments. Rather than
hours in a library, they could get what they needed in a few minutes from the encyclopedia. They had
no intrinsic love for encyclopedias; they
were just an easy source of information. As books and information because available
online, the search engine browser replaced the encyclopedia for many students.
Which brings us to the third group. Most people are curious. Sit down with neighbors and friends for a few hours and you
will likely hear dozens of topics discussed.
The ability to quickly find out about a topic is very enticing to many
people. But the key is “quick.” With our
short attention spans and busy schedules, most people do not want to go to the
library a buy a book for every question they have ever had. They just want an overview.
Here was the opening for Wikipedia. While encyclopedias have always been able to provide
overview information, most of us didn’t want to carry the 24 volume set around
everywhere we went. The search engine on
the internet at first seemed like the answer, but we soon found that it often
was taking us to sites that were trying to sell their products or philosophy
and we had to sign up to get the information.
We didn’t want a sales pitch; we just wanted an answer to the question.
The value of Wikipedia to these people is that
it is a free and easy source of basic information. Wikipedia further added to the value by
letting the readers enhance or contribute to a topic. They have not taken an elitist attitude that
restricts contribution to only an enlightened few. This allows everyone to share what they know
and keep the information current. The
user not only can get the information they need, they can help others
learn.
Lessons from Wikipedia
There are some lessons in the Wikipedia story
about creating customer value that may be helpful for your products and
services:
- Segment your customer base – different users have very different needs. The academics don’t use Wikipedia for research because they have different needs, and that is OK. Wikipedia is not trying to be all things to all people.
- Easy access to information – when people have a question, they want the answer or at least a high level perspective on the answer quickly and concisely. If you make it hard to get the information, they will go somewhere else where it is easier. If you turn the information into a sales pitch they will suspect your motives and your information.
- Keep your message simple – you are an expert in your field or industry and you want to share that expertise, but most people don’t have the same interest or passion. Make it easy for the casual user to get what they want. Then if they are interested, lead them into a “deeper dive.”
So Happy Birthday Wikipedia. Thanks for the information and thanks for the
example of value creation.
Tuesday, January 12, 2016
Powerball Project Management
This sounds a lot like what is happening in
the Powerball lottery. As the payout
keeps growing (it is now estimated to be $1.3 billion dollars), I see more and
more people spending money they can ill afford to spend on lottery tickets. They then cross their fingers and hope they
win; just like this project team kept hoping that one of the ideas they tried
might work.
Risk and Reward
Ask any financial adviser and they will
demonstrate that an individual will be far better off financially if they took
the average amount of money the typical Americans spends each year on lottery
tickets and invested that in a sound investment. Yes, someone does eventually win the lottery
and they receive a huge payout, but the vast majority of people who buy tickets
are losers and the money is wasted.
Even many of the people now buying a
lottery ticket will tell you that it is a stupid waste of money. But they are doing it anyway because the payout
has become so big. The risk is the same –
you are virtually guaranteed to lose your money. But the reward has grown to the point where
people are now willing to take the risk.
The reason the reward has grown is because there
have been no recent winners. The longer
the Powerball lottery goes without a winner, the larger the payout. It was somewhat similar on the innovation
project. None of the earlier ideas had
been feasible. An idea that gave
adequate product performance was too big, or not serviceable. An idea that was the right size, couldn’t
meet the specifications. It was like
having some of the winning numbers on the lottery ticket but not all of
them. The longer the project went
without a viable solution, the more management focused on the project. Whoever came up with the idea that would work
would be big hero in the company and be well compensated for their idea.
So ideas kept coming. In fact, the project team was growing. People were working overtime. There was a frenzy of activity – most of it
wasted effort. The project manager had
no control over what was happening.
Configuration control of product designs was lost. Testing was analysis was ad hoc and
unfocused. Different sub-teams
responsible for different components were using incompatible approaches for
subsystems that had to integrate with each other. The project manager could no longer even
report on project status because he had no idea what many of the people were
doing.
Discipline of Project Management
The company had lost sight of the
discipline of project management. Just
like disciplined investment of money will yield steady predictable growth in
the value of a portfolio, disciplined project management will yield steady
progress on a project. Starting with a
plan and doing regular risk reassessment and pulsing of the project will
identify the problems and issues. A
disciplined problem solving approach will lead to an understanding of the
nature of the problems and point to a solution strategy. Planning the solution and implementing the
solution plan keeps the project on track and moving to a successful conclusion.
Granted this isn’t the adrenaline rush of a
“Eureka” moment when using disciplined project management on an innovation
project. Nor does it lead to the discovery
of “heroes” in the business that suddenly emerge by creating the next
mega-million jackpot product line. But
it will prevent the business from wasting tons of money on worthless ideas. It
does provide a predictable approach to innovation and it keeps the project
manager and senior management informed and involved.
Incidentally, which project disciplined project
management approach you use is not critical.
What is most important is that you pick one and use it on your
project. Just like there are many
financial strategies, there are many innovation project management
methodologies. You might prefer
stage-gate over Agile. You may be a fan
of the PMBOK Guide®, or you may be an advocate of PRINCE2. You may be able to use an industry specific
methodology like APQP or IPPD. You may
prefer the rigor of Design for Six Sigma or the framework of the SDLC. Pick the one that best fits you industry and
culture – then actually use it.
Disciplined project management does not
mean nonsensical bureaucracy. It does
mean that you have a plan which is followed and updated periodically. It does mean that you do regular risk
assessment and variance analysis in order to make tweak the plan. It does mean that you have regular status
updates within the team and stakeholders to maintain alignment and
integration. These same principles apply
to wise financial investing.
Powerball project management is a recipe
for disaster. Chasing ideas with no project
plan, throwing resources at problems with no structured problem solving approach,
and getting caught up in the frenzy of the moment won’t bring you success. Keep in mind, the odds of winning the
Powerball jackpot is 1 in 292 million.
The odds of Powerball project management leading to a successful
innovation are about the same.
Monday, January 4, 2016
The Logical Flaw with Project Management
One of the reasons that companies struggle
with project management is that the approach they use has some basic logical
flaws. A company thinks it has some good project managers, and is disappointed when the results are poor. So the entire discipline of project management
gets a bad name in that company. But the
problem was not with using project management. The problem was that the logic behind their project management approach was flawed.
This is the logic often used in appointing project managers:
Major Premise: The best project managers
create project plans.
Minor Premise: Bob created a project plan.
Conclusion: Therefore, Bob is one of the
best project managers.
But then Bob’s project becomes a train
wreck and Bob and the project team are clueless as to why that happened or what
should be done. The problem was in the approach to project management. Let’s go back to the
major premise that was used.
The best project managers create project plans. There are several flaws in this logic. First, although it is true that the “best
project managers” create project plans, there is no statement about what the “worst
project managers” do. In fact, many of
the worst project managers also create project plans. And some of those project plans use all of
the latest forms, templates, software and are full of excruciating detail.
Second, the “best project managers” do much
more than just create project plans. They
execute their project plans. They
regularly do status checks and risk reviews.
They manage the stakeholder interactions and project teams wisely and
well. It is an ongoing continuous set of
interactions that are not part of planning – but are necessary for success.
Project Plans
Project plans come in all levels of
accuracy and completeness. Project plans
that are based upon incorrect assumptions about resource availability,
technical capability, or stakeholder interactions are doomed from the
start. I have seen many books and
courses on how to do project planning.
They often gloss over some of these points and instead focus on things
like the format of the WBS or critical path calculations. If the underlying assumptions about the
project conditions are wrong, everything else in the plan is just a fantasy.
Project management gurus often talk about
the need for upfront planning in a project.
The focus of that effort should not be just the technical planning
activities; it should be identifying and testing the assumptions and
constraints. There are assumptions about
business conditions and assumptions about project objectives. There are constraints on resources and
constraints on project options. If any
of these are missed, it can destroy the validity of the best formatted and
calculated project plan.
Unfortunately, there isn’t a simple (or even
complex) equation that can be applied to identify and test the assumptions and
constraints. Rather, the project manager
must meet with the stakeholders and ask probing questions about goals and
risks. They need to determine how much
support the stakeholders will really provide to the project – it is just
cheering on from the side lines, or will they dedicate time and money. The project manager needs to determine
realistic resource capability and capacity, regardless of what is
promised. These activities require
cross-functional and multi-level communication skills. It is one of the hardest things to teach
technical professionals. One of the most
challenging aspects of this activity is that you don’t know if you did it well until the project is over – which may be months or years later.
Project Execution
A project plan is a necessary condition,
but not a sufficient condition for excellent project management. The plan must still be executed – or at least
a variation on the plan must be executed.
Inevitably, something unexpected happens. The project manager must be regularly pulsing
the project to recognize the change and make the appropriate adjustment. A project manager who blindly follows a project
plan, even after a risk or issue has invalidated elements of the plan, can lead
the project into disaster.
In addition to regular updates and
adjustments to the plan, the project manager must interact with stakeholders
and team members to ensure appropriate decisions and actions. In many cases the project team members are
matrixed onto the project team. They
still have other responsibilities, often simultaneously working on multiple
projects. The project manager must keep
them engaged and focused. This usually
requires strong interpersonal skills and negotiating skills.
The stakeholders who are involved in project
decisions can delay and derail a project if they are not engaged regularly and
kept informed of the project status and project risks. Stakeholders often change during a
project. The project manager must bring
the new stakeholders up to speed. The
stakeholders often are looking at the “big picture” in the business and the project
manager is often focused on “immediate details.” If the project manager is not careful, the project
communication will actually confuse and irritate the stakeholders. A good project manager is able to switch
between the perspectives and effectively communicate and manage both “big
picture” and “immediate details.”
The Real Logic of Project Management
So let’s review. An organization that only focuses project managers
on creating complete and intricate project plans will likely be disappointed in
the actual project performance. A good project
plan is needed, but the most important aspect of planning is to understand and account
for the assumptions and constraints – not just filling out forms and
spreadsheets. Then once the plan is in
place, the project manager must stay flexible to modify the plan when
appropriate. And the plan is not
enough; the project manager must engage the stakeholders and team members to
keep things running smoothly and achieve project success.
This leads us to a new logical statement:
Major Premise 1: The best project managers
create project plans based upon realistic project assumptions and constraints.
Major Premise 2: The best project managers
adapt their plans throughout the project to reflect changing conditions.
Major Premise 3: The best project managers interact with
stakeholders and team members regularly to ensure alignment and appropriate
actions and decisions.
Minor Premise: Jill creates project plans
that are based upon realistic assumptions and constraints; she modifies them to
reflect changing conditions; and she regularly interacts with stakeholders and
team members to ensure alignment and appropriate actions and decisions.
Conclusion: Jill is one of the best project managers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)