Communication And Project Leadership: The 2009 Model
14. Dec, 2009 
10 Comments
Last year, I summarized my ideas from 2008 in a post called “Second Turn: Structure For Resilience“. This year I expanded on those ideas, putting more emphasis on communication, culture and the role of the Project Leader. This post is my attempt to summarize the main concepts. It’s a work in process, so feedback is appreciated.
There is a central theme running through my Project Leadership Thoughts: it is impossible to look at a project as an isolated entity. It’s about people and interactions. And interactions happen throughout the entire social network. Every interaction effects another one. In this view you are looking at projects as human complex adaptive systems that use “culture” as their operating system.
In this post we will look first at individual interactions (one-to-one communication), communication in projects and organizations, and the role of the Project Leader.
One-to-one Communication
The purpose of communication (to engage in the act of information exchange) is the fulfillment of one’s physical or emotional needs. If you are tired, you start asking around for a cheap hotel.
The effectiveness of the communication is determined by the quality of the communication channel, the quality of the interaction, if you will. If there is noise on a channel, the effectiveness of communication reduces. If people share identical mental models, the effectiveness increases.
Noise on the channel
The risk of noise on a channel is determined by a need to cheat, and the opportunity to cheat.
The need to cheat arises when there is scarcity; when you get in direct conflict with others when trying to fulfill your needs. If the entire village is competing for the same bed, asking around will probably sent you in the wrong direction.
The opportunity to cheat appears when information can be manipulated, when it is possible to provide wrong information on purpose. If information is not clear, complex or ambiguous the opportunity to cheat increases. When there is no way to verify information, when it is difficult to get feedback the opportunity increases also.
Of course, people are aware of the risk of noise on the channel. We have some build in “trust-filters” that should guard is against cheaters on the line. This works fine as long as people have the perception they can fulfill the needs on their own. However, some people need other people to find e.g. food, water or a bed to sleep. This perceived dependency on others lowers their “trust filters” for information, they are quicker to accept information, they want to believe.
In summary, the “trust filters” are influenced by feedback, transparency, reputation and group association (you might be faster in trusting a priest or a PMP, just by seeing the clothing or the title behind the name).
Congruent Mental Models
If two people have the same view of the their world, hold similar belief systems, in other words, have congruent mental models, they understand each other with ease.
If you want to synchronize your model with that of your conversation partner, you are looking for clues about his believe system, like words, rituals and behavior. You are trying the identify the culture(s) he or she is associated with.
Multi-scale Communication
Interaction between people is not just between two isolated people. Normally you would have a group of people interacting. In a project or larger organization the purpose of communication is the fulfillment of certain goals. Project or organizational goals. The “shared” mental model is the culture. Project culture and organizational culture.
There are similarities between one-to-one and multi-scale communication. By looking at projects as a complex adaptive system, we can make use of the concept of self-similarity.
“In mathematics, a self-similar object is exactly or approximately similar to a part of itself, e.g., the whole has the same shape as one or more of the parts.” (Source :Wikipedia)
For self-similarity to make sense in a project context, we have to include the following view:
- A project is a small organization
- An organization is a small society
Applying the concept of self-similarity this means that behavior and patterns of projects can be found in organizations and society.
So, this means that we are operated by our “shared” mental models. This means our “trust filters” are influenced by feedback, transparency, reputation and group association.
The role of the Project Leader is to align culture (means) and goals.
Elements Of Project Leadership.
The elements of (my version of) Project Leadership are:
- Goals and Means on individual, project and organizational level
- Alignment of goals and means on all levels by communication
Goals
A project has a goal, an objective. This is part of the larger context of the goals of the organization.
Individuals have goals, ambitions, interests. If peoples goals are met, they work happy; if not, they don’t.
Job for the Project leader is to align the goals on all levels. Keep on tweaking and adjusting. Make sure everyone understands. Make sure they are all in balance.
Means/Culture
Means are the strategies to reach the goal. This is the set of rituals, artifacts and values shared among the group, the organization and individual. The culture.
The culture can be used to create a strong group; it can be in conflict with the dominant structure.
Job for the Project Leader is to align the means on all levels for maximal effectiveness. Balancing deviance with compliance. Making sure there are rules of engagement the entire team uses.
Bas,
You are really amazing. As I went through your summary I got amazed on the proximity of our thoughts even though we use divergent approaches, but we end up converging to similar conclusions.
In my recent presentation “Balancing the Balanced Scorecard” I concluded that for any work to perform well and before we involve ourselves in measuring performance we need first to align people to the same direction and ensure first that we have a healthy work culture. In a subsequent presentation “The Cost of Vision on Companies” I gave further support to these conclusions.
How could I then differ with you when you write “Job for the Project Leader is to align the means on all levels for maximal effectiveness. Balancing deviance with compliance. Making sure there are rules of engagement the entire team uses”?
Bas, this summary article is a masterpiece
Bas,
I forgot to add a second comment. I want to propose an idea for you. Just think about it. Your drawing of goals and means looks like a binoculars. However; this binoculars resembles my eyes, one of which is short-sighted; the other one is long-sighted. I need to wear two eye glasses, one for reading (short term) and one for driving (long term). The same with your binoculars: one is long-sighted aiming for long-term goals and the short-sighted one investigating the short term. Or, do you have a different type of binoculars?
Hi Ali, thanks for the kind remarks.
I like the metaphor with the glasses and binoculars. It would be a nice way of explaining that people can and should shift focus on the different aspects they are viewing.
I think that’s even a new post
Sure, as one thing I aimed at is Looking at the tree and looking at the forest
I do not wear my glasses at the same time. Yes, I could use a bifocal glasses. Yet; this is more expensive and riskier. If I break the eyeglass I have nothing. But adaptability is greater with a bifocal glass- easily I nay shift my horizon
There us still a 3rd factor
There is still a third factor
I think it reinforces what you said in your summary article.There is a fixed boundary to work within: The needs of short term and long term must always be aligned. The eyeglass must NOT LOSE FOCUS whether on the short term or long term. Imagine if I wear glasses that has a distorted focus. Also, remember that one sight affects the other. Distorting my short sight will affect my long term sight. If my short sightedness increases without fixing it my long sightedness will be negatively affected as well rendering the glasses unfit. We may change our horizon sights, but they must stay aligned.
Bas, I hope that makes sense to you, Bas
Including culture in a team is a great way to team building.
bas, i belieive you are ready for 2010.but a thought- people have swings, thought paterns,goals and/or objective changes as time goes on. issues, sujects or things that matter initially may not matter at all towards the end.sometimes these models may fail.so as much as possible, we should work within achieving a balance of successes that can be achievable.
How seriously fabulous. I am so thrilled to have found this blog. Bas, your thoughts reflect my own so much I feel completely vindicated when I repeatedly hear people ignoring the human aspects of projects in favour of yardsticks. I think I even made the same multi-scale diagram as you in my video on trust on projects here:
http://edge.papercutpm.com/2009/12/why-id-rather-you-go-play-in-the-traffi/
Projects are about people. Work just sits there like a lump until people pick it up to do. And people have foibles: competing agendas, work attitudes, incompatible behaviour, etc. Each of those foibles is a potential barrier to getting work done that the project manager must identify and knock down from the day they start to the day they finish.
Thank you so much for this fabulous blog!!!
Geoff.
PS: Sorry for my enthusiasm! LOL I’m just very excited.
Hi Geoff! Thanks for the exciting response!
I appreciate the link, the video about trust is fabulous.
Great minds think alike. Or is it “weird” minds?