I've just finished my latest interim position - delivering change in the digital space of a UK Financial Services organisation. These tend to be high pressure environments and this was no different. On several occasions in the last three months I was there, I had to really challenge myself and the leadership around me to consider the options and their implications available to us to keep an important and highly technical and complex delivery plan on track.
We had many conversations about what would be officially called "the extended triple constraint model" in project management speak. These days it's understood to be more of a star, with technological innovation and other changes creating greater complexity resulting in additional factors to be considered and therefore potentially leveraged.
Current convention now accepts a 6-aspect model that needs to be included in change management considerations. The basic tenant of the model hasn't changed though. Whilst you can fix some others will have to flex in response.
That is where the complexity of modern day project management comes in. The view points of different stakeholders, the complexity of digital estate in terms of security and fraud. The stringent financial management that often leaves little wiggle room. Even the resources models of supplier outsourcing, offshoring and virtual and flexible working affect the leverage you can have utilise to support delivery.
For example, in my recent role the 3 core factors of Schedule, Budget and Scope were all fixed, leaving us only the secondary factors of Risk, Resource and Quality to play with. Resourcing was also fixed within an outsourcing agreement, and quality really wasn't something we wanted to use given the remit of the change was the banking app which has a high security threshold. So Risk was the most flexible lever. To many stakeholders that was not very comfortable - esp. given the context.
So, why am I blogging about this. As I unwind from the assignment, I find myself reflecting on how I wish I'd had a conversation upfront with the decision-makers as to the relevant fixed or flex of the different aspects. I would have challenged them to get a clear articulation of their personal risk appetite. I would have gotten a sense from them on their quality assessment - as I discovered this varied extensively between the product owners and technical leads. I'd have worked with them to get us all on the same page, so that as we progressed through delivery, I could have kept a better view on the various aspects, understanding and flagging if we came close to a limit on any one aspects, and being able to articulate potential impacts and solutions in the context of their views. That is what makes the difference with stakeholder management, speedy decision-making to have exceptional delivery management.
I would have added a radar type diagram to my stakeholder map that shows the individual and accumulative views on the fixed nature of 6 aspects. This example shows that with my recent assignment, Schedule, Budget and Scope were totally fixed (10) and the other 3 very high too. (blue lines). I would then overlay their attitude to flexing each aspect (orange).
These two combined show the space you have to play in (the white area).
Having an appreciation at the start on the scale and areas of flex helps to manage the messaging and solutions. A lot of white allows you to take more opportunities earlier one as you have plenty of options to address issues as they arise. Less white means a tighter need for management with more regular updates, some really honest conversations about likelihood of achievement as time passes.
A proactive approach like this, would have saved me a lot of stress and could have helped increase the likelihood of a positive result for all involved.
This approach doesn't need to apply to "projects" the same aspects impact many areas of operational work - anything that requires collaboration and consideration of perception and judgement. You can create radar diagrams for any key team members, stakeholders etc, and use that to help you articulate the progress of any type of activity - a process efficiency play, regulatory compliance, factors affecting employee satisfaction or engagement. They are really useful ways to visual the areas you need to comply in and where you can apply innovation, creativity or ones that can be used to help move issues forward or resolve them.
Try and see if it works for you...
Comments