Fire All Your Project Managers!

By Ted Garrison

The terms "project management" and "project manager" both do a poor job of conveying the responsibilities inherent in the role of running a project. Instead, the terms "project leadership" and "project leader" would better describe the responsibilities necessary to deliver a project on time, on budget, with high performance and with a delighted client.

While titles are often meaningless, in this case I believe they indicate a difference in thinking. For example, most books and programs on project management focus on how to run projects. In contrast, leadership focuses on what needs to be done. The most important question for success is "what must be done?"

I often ask my audiences, "What is more important - to do the "right thing" or do "things right"? That leads to some interesting discussions. There are always those that argue, "We have to do things right." This may seem logical because we have been taught in school that the students that do things right are rewarded. Unfortunately, if the task doesn't need to be performed does it really matter how well it was done?

Therefore, it's critical to first identify the tasks that must be performed - the "what;" then learn how to master the what, or in essence learn how to do the what correctly.
Unfortunately, most project management books and programs focus on the how and not on the what. This is due in part to the fact that too many of these programs or books are designed by technocrats who believe the process is what is important.
In contrast, a leader focuses on results. The leader understands people are only paid for results. No one cares how hard you work if you don't get the desired results, no one cares how smart you are if you don't get the results. Get the results and you are the hero.

This doesn't mean that we can sacrifice safety, legality, morality or ethics in order to achieve the results. This statement shouldn't be required but unfortunately too many seem to have forgotten this cardinal rule the last few years. What's being discussed is the ability to adapt or change business practices and process in order to improve results.

If there is any doubt in your mind about the importance of leadership, consider the following situation. Imagine you have two projects. The first has a great schedule, great budget, a great set of plans and specifications - and a complete jerk running the project. The second has a terrible schedule, a terrible budget, a messed-up set of plans and specs, but a true leader running the project. Which project do you think will turn out better? I have asked that question to thousands of people; and so far everyone has picked the second project. Yes, leadership makes a difference.

I'm not suggesting that project management tools aren't valuable. They can certainly make the job easier. However, the tools don't build the project, people build them, and therefore people skills are the most important project management tool.

Despite this reality, more and more organizations seem to focus on increasing technical competence by adding additional controls and complexity. For example, project schedules have continued to grow in complexity until they are virtually useless for the intended purpose. The schedules are so complicated they are difficult to understand; they take too many hours to create and cause a constant drain on management's time to update them. Despite the extra work and complexity there has been no improvement in project scheduling performance.

The problem is that managers always want more information. Yet, despite drowning in information, they keep asking for more. I often ask managers, "Would you rather have your people tell you what they are going to do, or do it?" Despite the obvious, managers keep asking for more information, while in contrast leaders accept a certain amount of ambiguity.

The leader understands that his or her role is not to tell everyone how to do his or her job. Instead, it's the leader's responsibility to insure the person assigned to the task is qualified, the person understands the problem and the desired results, has the necessary resources and is committed to the desired result. With this accomplished they get out of the way.

The leader's approach results in a work force that is highly motivated and high performing. In essence, results are number one, not control or the process.

The next issue will explore how to find leaders and turn managers into leaders.

Ted Garrison, author of Strategic Planning for Contractors, works with businesses in the construction industry. He can be reached at Growing@TedGarrison.com.