Starting with a call to arms in the battle against devaluing the profession, Rick Morris explains the state in which the project management profession finds itself arguing that a combination of the halo effect and lack of understanding by organisations means that the reasons and percentage of project failure remain the same as when first identified. He is keen to stress that the advice in this book does not supersede existing methodologies and good practice, but it is to support project managers as they seek to influence their organisations.
The first chapter should be standard reading for senior management – indeed, without this foundation for the advice that follows, much of it would fall at the first hurdle (which is something I found myself thinking as I was reading, and Rick indeed chips in with it throughout the book:)
“[this] approach…will only work if the executives embrace the process of project management and work with their project managers to do a better job”.
This is the argument that we within the profession have been aware of for a long time, but the bite size, jargon-free explanations, particularly where real-life examples are used, could well prove to be enlightening to many organisations. He is clear about the importance of choosing the right projects, and for the right reasons (impact on strategic plan, and business value) advising on a model for evaluating an organisation’ capacity for projects and programmes, and does not beat around the bush about the responsibility of the project community to play their part in the value of the profession as well.
Now that Rick has laid down his hand, he sets about looking at some of the typical ‘games’ that have crept in that threaten the reputation of the profession, and those that, should they continue, will result in the continuing devaluation of the profession. These games are namely around pricing, estimating, communication, supplier negotiation, scheduling, planning, and criticising others within the project community.
A few examples are American (childhood games that are parodied, for example) and I found I wasn’t familiar with them, but this didn’t get in the way as the principles are always very clearly explained. The format is very accessible and the content is just as relevant to those who have been in the profession for a long time as it would be for newcomers. For more experienced project managers, this could encourage you to re-think some of those standard conversations / Groundhog Day scenarios you find yourself in, and for newer project managers, it deals with many of those unwritten ‘rules’ you may find yourself dealing with within organisations. For both, many of the observations made hinge on key discussions with the project sponsor/steering group members that may at the time be hallway exchanges but at a later date become budgets, resource allocation, and deadlines. If you can recognise yourself in this, you’ll find some helpful conversational styles, as well as the reinforcement of when to use some of the stalwart techniques. The challenge with both is then to take action and look at implementing some of the recommendations.
Part of me is saddened that this book has had to be written – in essence its message is to be honest, play nicely, and play fairly. And yet how quickly are the scenarios recognised – this is the environment that we all work in, and as those proponents of the importance of people skills in project management often state, the people skills are often overlooked in favour of the more ‘technical’ aspects. This book sees the healthy combination of the ‘people’ skills with processes and easily applicable techniques to address some of the common political games.
Rick balances well the tensions between confronting some key issues, and not beating the reader about the head. The reasons for these ‘games’ are recognised, and practical constructive advice is given on alternatives to these along with rationale. Some of these alternatives may at first reading appear to be quite simplistic, and Rick himself acknowledges this, but having started with a strong argument along the lines of ‘come on people – this type of thing is damaging our profession’, you almost feel like a sulky teenager as the inner voice of dissent pipes up, as the tone is so reasonable, re-focusing you on the bigger picture, and the fact that there is, in the author’s view, a lot at stake.
