It’s Appropriate to Micromanage….if you only plan to hit your estimate

It is the 80/20 rule that so many facets of business follow, but when a project nears completion, the last 20% (or even 10%) can bleed any budget savings you have achieved along the way.  There is a mistake some project managers make, and that is micromanaging their projects from the beginning to end.  The idea is that by doing so, you ensure that the budget is not overrun at the end of the project through demanding adherence to the project plan tasks that are assigned to specific resources, and making sure the estimates are hit. 

However, the main practice this type of management prevents is innovation and creativity in order to find a more efficient way to complete something.  What is more important, the path, or the destination, especially if the duration is equal or less to get there?  So how do you safely promote this while still feeling confident that allowing this freedom won’t cost you if your team fails?

While I side with the resources a little on this topic, it is a fair conversation to have with your team.  Any project, whether it software, construction, financial, or other has a general project process.  The steps from start to finish are generally the same for projects within a given industry, and therefore when developing a project plan (not a Microsoft Project Plan), you will inherently have the same process from project to project. 

Once the project specific plan is developed, and it is time to execute your resource plan, take the time to review each detail with your project team.  Help them understand the plan.  Help them understand what they are trying to accomplish, and what role they are playing in the overall project.  Once they are aware, and you have reviewed the plan with them, ask them to commit to completing their portion of the work at or below estimate...and then offer them the opportunity to provide the output in whichever means they wish.  This is where you breed efficiency in your project.  A key component to this approach is telling them they are free to produce the output required, as long as it is done in time to consider other dependencies, the quality is still adhered to, and the estimate for TOC is met….then, stand back and let them amaze you. 

Imagine being given sole freedom to produce an output, not being limited to a cookie cutter way of doing so, and being allowed to innovate how you can do it faster.  I can see the wheels turning right now, and before you say, “but resources aren’t going to finish faster, because they are hourly, or they are trying to hit billable targets…”, this is where you create incentives for them to do so. 

Do you know how ASE certified flat-rate mechanics are paid?  Each job a mechanic performs is rated at a certain length of time.  This time is also billed at a regulated dollar amount per hour.  If the mechanic completes the items in less than the time estimated, he is paid the full time for completion.  This allows a tenured or efficient mechanic to bill more hours than they actually work.  They can effectively bill more than 40 hours in a 40 hour week.  Consider the same possibility for your resources, or a version of.   If incented to increase their output, you gain efficiencies on your project, this efficiency is effectively doubled because they are completed quicker with the tasks for your project, and able to work on another project sooner. 

Still want to hover?

Chris Thompson, PMP, SSYB

Managing Projects in a Matrixed Organization – Leading the Leaderless

From my experience, many software companies are built around a matrixed organizational structure.  Whereas, a resource reports to one manager for training, associate development, HR concerns, and other similar items, but is then assigned to a project to complete a specific set of tasks that is managed by a project manager. 

For those who are in general contracting, this may sound very similar, however there are many inherent problems (at least I believe there to be) with this reporting structure.  First, let me explain how the process works in general contracting:

In general contracting, subcontractors are sought to complete specific packets of work.  Electrical, carpentry, concrete, etc.  These packets of work are managed as part of the overall project by a project manager.  The workers that complete this work do not directly report to the project manager, rather, they are an employee of the company who has been contracted to complete the work.

Although these workers do not report to the project manager, the contracted company does have specific conditions contained within their contract that hold them accountable to deliver what they agreed to, when they agreed to, with the quality they agreed to. To explain further, each subcontractor who signs a contract to perform a specific SOW, has done so knowing there are performance metrics that must be met before they can get paid (money, the driving force to adherence).  Generally, the contract covers the scope to be completed in great detail.  It is generally described through detailed schematics or drawings, and is accompanied by a requirements document.  This helps determine the “what” that is to be delivered.  The requirements documentation also covers what specifically will occur to help adhere to a high level of quality.  It covers specific tests that are to be conducted, inspections that must occur, and details the materials to be used and the standards they must meet. 

The contracts also cover timeline, and the obligations of the contractors regarding staffing, delivery, and adherence to the direction of the project manager.  In effect, it gives authority to the project manager to act as the controlling entity of those workers while assigned to their project, and also allows the project manager to withhold payment if metrics are not met.  What a concept!

For those in other industries who have never experienced this, you should take note.  Within the matrixed organization, the responsibility falls to project manager asking associates to complete tasks, and asks to hold them accountable ensuring they are done on-time, at or under budget, and with a high level of quality.  However, if this does not occur, and without direct authority to offer repercussions, then the project manager can be left feeling powerless. 

The theory behind a matrixed organization is that if a resource fails or has a performance issue, this issue is then brought to the person’s direct manager, who can then work to rectify the issue with that individual.  I know this seems like it may work, and some organizations may have disciplinary actions in place that stipulate what happens for specific failures of an associate, but would argue many do not.  This leaves associates in the driver’s seat and can breed a lack of accountability and performance.

If this is true, then how do you elicit compliance and accountability with these resources? Different organizations have different methodologies to control these performance issues, but why over-complicate it?  General contracting (and consulting in general, because that is what general contracting is; a bunch of consultants hired to complete a project) offers a great case study as to the effectiveness of how to hold groups accountable for the completion of work within a project. 

As a project manager within a matrixed organization, try the general contracting approach.  Develop the specific deliverables, requirements for those deliverables, quality standards they will adhere to, and the timeline for delivery.  Make this part of a contract the resource enters into for your project, and (since you still don’t have the authority to inflict repercussions for poor performance) offer an incentive to that associate for each metric they hit. 

I recently created a similar incentive program for a large project I am currently managing to help drive the completion of a large development effort.  Not only did we complete development on time, but we completed it under budget…by 40%.  The work was also delivered with a high level of quality, because the incentive program only paid out to the associates if they completed the work not just on-time or early and below estimate, but it also had to receive a high level quality rating from the inspectors of the work. 

This is a lengthy topic that could be approached in many directions, however until matrixed organizations learn they can operate as general contractors internally, regarding how they manage resources, we must figure out ways to traverse the leaderless Army.