A common warning used by analysts these days when critiquing the dysfunctional state of the government is to advise voters or members of one of the political parties to not vote against their interests.
I recall this phrase whenever clients inform me about staff who refuse to follow a new PPM or PM methodology or tool set.
I have written at length in this blog about the need to “right size” methodologies, to fit the procedures and tools to your culture, to appropriately map procedures to supporting automation and to utilize good change management practices when trying to improve PM capabilities. For many organizations, even when they effectively apply these practices, they still encounter significant resistance.
Unless you are in indentured servitude, most change to your daily work routine IS painful! I know that you’ve got too many projects, staff or operational practices to manage so it is asking a lot to have you start to follow some new rules or use some new systems or templates. But sometimes things will have to get worse before they can get better.
Take a step back from your daily chaos and assess what you are being asked to change – is it process for process sake? If not, evaluate the challenges you are experiencing today due to inconsistent PPM or PM practices – shifting priorities, lack of predictability around resource commitments, “invisible” project sponsors, and unnatural levels of multitasking.
While the changes you are being asked to follow are unlikely to resolve all of these issues overnight, they are a step in the right direction.
Most PPM and PM methodology changes are aimed at one of two goals – providing better information to help executives make better decisions and improving project predictability and success rates. Are either of those goals not likely to be in your best interests? And if you are unwilling to change how you are managing your projects or resources and you are still expecting things to improve, is this not the definition of insanity?
PPM improvement initiatives require behavioral changes at all levels of the organization, especially the executive layer. If the C-levels don’t see their trusted PMs and resource managers supporting a change, what’s the probability that they will? Finally, if the cumulative outcome of people’s resistance is the failure of the PPM or PM change initiative, what is the likelihood that the sponsor or champion will be willing to try again anytime soon?
Fool me once, shame on you…