Following the open end left in the previous article, I will start this one with two stories to illustrate the topic:
First story related to a USD billion project. I was attending the client/contractor regular monthly meeting. Suddenly, both project managers engaged in technical discussion for nearly two hours about where to place a 4” valve in a bypass (I recognize, a couple of times I checked if I went to the correct meeting and almost fell asleep). The management meeting was converted into a detail engineering meeting, leaving all other topics and issues in the project aside and, of course, conditioning engineering specialist work.
Second story related to an international corporation. Project control team members associated to a project were frustrated and disappointed on how their team manager was doing everyone’s works, while team members were transformed in mere clerical support with the subsequent overload and stress of the team manager working more than twelve hours a day on regular basis.
I believe many of you have found similar situations and are interested to know why this situation happens.
If we dig on how careers progression in the area management of projects occurs in companies, we find that the good common practice of promotion is better performers promoted to higher positions in the organization; and eventually, those better performers are promoted into a managerial position within the project management team.
If we analyse in detail, we find a really interesting paradigm in career progression. Professionals are being trained to increase their technical skills as they progress in their career, increasing their expertise and specialization. Reaching to a project management position, suddenly all previous skills are put aside and substituted for a new set of soft skill requiring to manage several disciplines without being performer, knowledge of a new scenario with stakeholders never seen before and requiring a high level of trust on team members and leadership, together with a good political ground.
This situation keeps similarity with a multistage rocket; you burn and deplete the fuel of the first stage, once it is released start burning the second stage. One stage keeps a relation with the following. The first stage put the rocket in a certain position and speed, but once the first stage is depleted; the continuation of the trip solely relies on the second stage.
Individuals framework moves from being responsible for doing the work to being responsible for the people that do the work, which require strong leadership skills promoting a comfortable working environment, allowing team members to perform their best. We shall bear in mind that leadership has a bitter side because the leader should consider any success as the success of the team members, while any failure is team leader’s failure, to protect team members from exposure and preserve the working environment. Paraphrasing Simon Sinek, leaders are not in charge of the people, but responsible for the people under its charge.
If we ask to project managers: What is the most relevant discipline in a project? Many of them will reply the discipline where they are coming from and will deny all disciplines and processes are equally important for project success. As stated before, they feel how project management is an extension of their past and doesn´t feel how their horizon widens and why it widens. They continue burning a depleted first stage of the rocket, simply because they can´t identify the second one.
Even though the correct approach is to give people in organizations equal opportunities to grow up, I often find negligence in the organization to prepare the candidates for the jump. Even in some of them, they expect by memorizing a couple of books and passing a test of 200 questions will work the miracle.
Of course, by living the environment, personal culture, natural or maybe even genetic reasons, there are natural leaders and individuals with a different view that will make them successful in project management. To give equal opportunity and reduce company sufferings, companies should support and train them. To teach and show them that there is a second stage, as it is the only one will allow continuing the trip.
Even more, companies should inform candidates about: what to expect with the change, how in the new condition their performance will be measured, what is the new scenario they will face, reinforce skills on weakness and, why not? if their psychological profile will match with what will be required from them (remember, psychopaths are really sympathetic and charming but they just want to eat your liver).
One more time, up to here this article, obviously based on personal experiences, readers can agree or disagree but I hope it can help to some of you and confirmation to others on how candidates in the organization to switch from doers to leader, company support is needed to ensure a smooth and fructiferous transition for the individual and the company.
