Like all large programmes, and since the deployment of the Network Model, the Integrated Asset Management Information System (IAMIS) programme has been caught up in series of strategic review cycles over the past six months. This does not mean that the programme & project team has been sitting idle whilst the strategic direction is reaffirmed by the Corporate Board, but far from it; the team has been steadily progressing the development of the next phase of deployment in parallel. This was essential to maintain the programme momentum and retain the strategic advantage to move quickly into deployment when the green light has been given.
Does this sound familiar in your programme?
Ok, I'm sure you have come across this scenario in your programme delivery (if not, trust me you will in your career as large scale delivery programme manager). You’re sitting in the monthly or quarterly programme review as a colleague plows through a two-inch-thick detailed programme plan (often summarised into few PowerPoint slide deck for the executives) for the investment in the next phase of IT deployment. When (s)he finishes, the room falls quiet. People look left, right, or down, waiting for someone else to open the discussion. No one wants to comment—at least not until the Senior Responsible Owner or CEO shows which way (s)he’s leaning.
Finally, the CEO or a senior executive breaks the silence. He/She asks a few mildly skeptical questions to show (s)he’s done his/her due diligence. But it’s clear that (s)he has made up his/her mind to back the programme/project. Before long, the other meeting attendees are chiming in dutifully, careful to keep their comments positive. Judging from the remarks, it appears that everyone in the room supports the programme/project.
But you know that such 'group hugging' prompts are often deceiving. Because the reality is, the head of a related division will often be worrying that the next IT deployment will take resources away from his/her operation or endanger other related/dependent projects (s)he may have in his/her agenda. Or others in the room are lukewarm because they don’t see how they stand to gain from the programme/project. But they keep their reservations to themselves, and the meeting breaks up inconclusively. Over the next few months, the programme/project is slowly strangled to point of death in a series of strategy, budget, and operational reviews. It’s not clear who’s responsible for placing the programme/project in a coma, but it’s plain that the true sentiment in the room was the opposite of the apparent consensus.
Yes, I've been there, so what should be done?
When establishing a new programme, programme managers have to accept that corporate decisions (or rather lack of it) might stifle the progress sometimes. It’s not about corporate centre seeking perfection in programme, but often its merely the assurance sought by executives about set priorities and disciplining the programme (and its team) to deliver them. The trick is, as a programme manager, to do well at the things that will move the programme forward, and for everything else, just don’t make any fatal mistakes.
However, this leads to a more macro-level challenge. As the programme manager, you’re defining your programme from the ground up. While my team and I have broadly applicable technology and approach, we have to accept that we can’t do everything, given specific resource and commercial constraints. Having limited resources is the common variable that binds all programmes/projects.
The biggest mistake that I see many inexperienced programme managers make is not clearly defining which opportunities they will target. This can be framed as a sort of Schrödinger’s cat experiment for programmes & projects. In the classic thought experiment, physicist Erwin Schrödinger supposed that a cat could be simultaneously alive and dead if its fate was dependent on the unobserved state of a quantum system. As programme managers, our number one driver is always achieving success for our programme/projects and keeping it alive. But a organisation's fate is dependent on an unknown: Which of the multitude of opportunities is the corporate objective delivery path? The decision is usually made with very limited information, leading to a highly uncertain outcome.
The natural psychological response to this dilemma that many corporate executives have is to simply not make a definitive choice — to run multiple options at the same time. But believing the cat is still alive somewhere in the flurry of activities is a fallacy. With limited resources, you risk running out of capital before achieving important proof points to keep the programme/project alive (especially applicable to Agile type project delivery).
The answer to this conundrum feels unnatural, but it involves making decisions quickly and resolutely with limited information. What’s often not obvious is that if you move fast, you have greater opportunity to recover from mistakes and try another option should the first choice not pan out. The ability to consistently make good, solid decisions lies at the heart of any programme/project initiative, especially those affecting entire organisation or operation.
How to speed up corporate decision making that supports your programme/project?
A culture of speed is required — rather than a piecemeal approach, the most effective strategic solution for increasing speed across the organisation is the development of a “culture of speed.” Just like any other type of corporate culture, a speed culture permeates every department and business process including recruitment, production, product development, finance, decision-making and logistics. In order to maintain speed in a speed culture, every new programme, project, idea, product, process, etc. must be evaluated for its positive or negative impact on corporate decision making speed.
Corporate decision making speed must be defined, measured, and rewarded — As the old adage goes 'what gets measured, gets done' - measurement is critical for improvement in corporate design making speed. The overall speed of an organisation can be measured based on how fast (in weeks) after it identifies a major change or problem in the environment that it successfully plans and invests in its response. Fast-moving organisations start by closely monitoring their environment and then rapidly responding to any new technologies, actions by their competitors, new laws/regulations, changes in economic factors, and changing customer and market forces. All speed related failures must be analysed in order to determine and then fix the factors that contributed to the reaction time. Obviously employees and managers that move fast and accurately must be both recognised and rewarded.
Innovation is closely related to speed — there has to be a reason for moving fast and one of the primary one is the need for innovation. Because innovation may have up to 10 times more economic impact than a focus on productivity and efficiency, the rate of innovation as well as the speed of innovation must be monitored and continually improved. This also applies to the innovation within the programme/project delivery for example, better way to manage configuration, collaborate, document management, governance etc. The speed of collaboration, between employees from different programme/project teams. is important and is an essential component of innovation.
Fast executives are needed — some individuals act, react, think, and learn faster than others. Organisation needs to vigorously recruit those who can operate successfully in a fast environment, because unfortunately a single slow employee like “Homer Simpson” in an organisation's executive board can permanently reduce corporate speed.
Fast programme managers are also needed — you must be a fast programme manager in order to manage fast programme/project team. Unfortunately, not all managers and leaders are adept at moving fast and at making fast and accurate decisions. The rare “fast manager” and leader does understand the process for increasing speed, and as a result they are usually familiar with the most effective programme/project tools and approaches for increasing speed in their processes and their team. Clearly managers and leaders need to be selected based on their capability of moving fast.
Corporate learning speed is critical — in a fast-moving world, organisations must learn rapidly immediately after new knowledge and information appears. For example, 'Infrastructure Asset Management' is the new approach adopted by many construction companies worldwide, and yet others have spent years theorising without actually moving into execution even though it is widely accepted as the common sense and right corporate approach.
The speed of sharing is also important — once an organisation’s staff learn about new information or best practices, there must be a process to ensure that their information is rapidly shared throughout the organisation. Wikis, forums, and social media platforms can all be used to speed up best practice sharing. The time that it takes for the entire organisation to eventually learn about a new practice or solution should be measured to ensure that it is continually getting faster.
Technology is essential for speed — in today’s world, it is almost impossible to be global, low-cost, highly innovative, and fast without the extensive use of technology. Programme and project leaders must constantly search for new software and hardware that can enable both faster speed and more accessibility (to connect often dispersed project teams across the globe). Leaders must also assume when new technology or tools are implemented that each will eventually become obsolete. To avoid a reduction in speed, a process for finding a replacement before the obsolescent date must be included in the implementation plan.
The above are only some of the vast range of options available to corporate executives and programme/project managers to speed up corporate decision making. From the competitive standpoint, if you want to be an industry leader and remain highly profitable, your organisation must master corporate speed and become a “fast company.” And as an individual, you must also realise that, if you want to remain employable throughout your career, you have no choice but to continually improve your own capability for speed in programme/project delivery.
