Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Project Half Double Morning meeting #7 Key takeaways from Thought Leader session with Professor Ralf Müller 1 +100 community members – and a great ambiance! 2 PURPOSE OF THE MORNING MEETING - THOUGHT LEADER EDITION - 1. Explore how personal leadership style and customization of governance can drive impact in your project 2. Accelerate our ability to use selected Half Double methods through intense and hands-on casework 3. Network across the community 3 Professor Ralf Müller Professor of Project Management Lectures and researches in leadership, governance, organizational project management and research methods (Co-) author of more than 200 academic publications, including his latest book titled Governance and Governmentality for Projects 2016 PMI Fellow of the Institute Award, 2015 PMI Research Achievement Award (a life-time achievement award), the 2012 IPMA Research Award, and a number of best paper and reviewers awards 30 years with consulting experience in the industry and line management experience, e.g. as Worldwide Director of Project Management at NCR Corporation 4 The Half Double methodology related to Ralf Müllers key note 5 To put it simple, we will deliver Projects in half the time with double the impact Together we will develop a new and radical project paradigm to increase the competitiveness of the Danish industry 6 7 Active Project Ownership approach Show up and engage Own the impact Pave the way for impact creation At least 4 hours every second week Ensure resource commitment +50% allocation of high caliber people Be an active, committed and engaged Project Owner to support 8 the project and ensure stakeholder satisfaction. Collaborative project leadership approach Put people first Create purpose, autonomy and mastery for the team and key stakeholders Lead the impact Be hard on impact and flexible on deliverables Facilitate interactions Energize team and key stakeholders with great facilitation and domain insight Be a collaborative project leader with a “people first” 9 approach to drive the project forward. Governance is an essential part of local translation 1 Customize to the uniqueness of the project Create willingness to twist the governance model (gates and templates) to enhance flow 2 Trust before control Prioritise dialogue over status reports 3 Anchor with key people Ensure executive sponsorship and involve PMO to operate as an active co-player (20%) Principle: Local translation in a reflective practice is the key to 10Half Double. The community and sparring sessions 11 CONGRATULATIONS to community member.. #1000! Igne Valutyte 12 Project Half Double Morning meeting #8 21. April 2017 Results from the pilot projects and how to apply the methodology Sign up at www.projecthalfdouble.dk/en 13 The sparring sessions “We had a very valuable sessions – it was a peer to peer session where we could share insights, learning and ideas” - Linda Vestergaard 14 Appendix - Leadership quotes 15 "THE TASK OF THE LEADER IS TO GET THEIR PEOPLE FROM WHERE THEY ARE TO WHERE THEY HAVE NOT BEEN.“ – Henry Kissinger 16 “MANAGEMENT IS DOING THINGS RIGHT; LEADERSHIP IS DOING THE RIGHT THINGS.” – Peter Drucker 17 “MOTIVATION IS THE ART OF GETTING PEOPLE TO DO WHAT YOU WANT THEM TO BECAUSE THEY WANT TO DO IT” ― Dwight D. Eisenhower 18 "EVERYONE IS A LEADER. IT DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU ARE THE CEO OR A LARGE COMPANY OR THE MOTHER OF A CHILD. ALL OF US PRACTICE EVERYDAY LEADERSHIP.” ― Drew Dudley 19 “BE A YARDSTICK OF QUALITY. SOME PEOPLE AREN’T USED TO AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE EXCELENCE IS EXPECTED.” ― Steve Jobs 20 “AS WE LOOK AHEAD INTO THE NEXT CENTURY, LEADERS WILL BE THOSE WHO EMPOWER OTHERS ” ― Bill Gates 21 "LEADERSHIP IS NOT ABOUT TITLES, POSITIONS, OR FLOWCHARTS. IT IS ABOUT ONE LIFE INFLUENCING ANOTHER." – John C. Maxwell 22 Leadership and Governance of Projects by Prof Ralf Müller BI Norwegian Business School, Norway PM Concepts AB, Sweden for Project Half Double Thought Leader Session February 28, 2017 Hellerup, Denmark 1 Agenda • Leadership and success • • • • • Leadership versus management Leadership as Critical Success factor in projects The role of sponsors and steering groups Choosing appropriate project managers Reflexivity and leadership 2 Leadership –definition and positioning • Management • Goal oriented activity, being accountable, controlling and accomplishing something – objective/rational • Doing things right (Bennis & Nanus, 1985) Leadership Management • Leadership • People oriented activity, resonance, giving sense of direction, rapport* - subjective/emotional • Doing the right things (Bennis & Nanus, 1985) • Situational balance • Balance of leadership and management is contingent on project situation- hence, continuously changing • Relative impact on project success • Recent years show the balance moving towards leadership * = a close and harmonious relationship in which the people or groups concerned understand each other's feelings or ideas and communicate well. 3 Success in the realm of projects • • • Continuous evolvement of the understanding of project success (Jugdev & Müller, 2005) A matter of worldview and perspective (Müller & Jugdev, 2012) A balance of hard and soft measures (Turner & Müller, 2006) PROJECT LIFECYCLE PRODUCT LIFECYCLE Conception Planning Production / Implementation Hand – Over Utilization Close Down Period 1: Project Implementation and Handover (1960s - 1980s) Period 2: CSF Lists (1980s - 1990s) Period 3: CSF Frameworks (1990s - 2000s) Period 4: Strategic Project Management (21st century) 4 Does attitude impact success? Importance of Success Criteria Reoccurring business Measured Success Overall success Meeting user requirements Meeting project purpose +*** Reoccurring business +**** Customer satisfaction End -user satisfaction Team satisfaction Stakeholder satisfaction Supplier satisfaction Meeting self defined criteria Customer satisfaction +** +* End - user satisfaction +** +* +* +**** +**** Team satisfaction Supplier satisfaction Self defined criteria +**** +*** +**** +*** +**** +*** +**** Other Stakeholder satisfaction +**** +* +**** + = positive correlation, * = significant at p < .05, ** = significant at p < .01, *** = significant at p < .005 **** = significant at p < .001 +**** +* Müller & Turner 2007 5 The role of the sponsor/owner • Sponsor sets the vision for the project • Visionary project managers compromise time and cost objectives (Turner & Müller, 2006) • Sponsor’s engagement is decisive for success • Skeptical and involved sponsors have more successful projects (Turner & Müller, 2004) • Sponsor engagement is subject to bounded rationality • In fixed-price contracts, engagement is reduced due to risk on supplier side • In time & material contracts engagement is high due to risk on buyer side (Müller & Turner, 2005) 6 Choosing appropriate project managers Leadership Management 7 The competency school of leadership Group Intellectual (IQ) Managerial (MQ) Emotional (EQ) 2. 3. Competency critical analysis & judgment vision and imagination strategic perspective 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. engaging communication managing resources empowering developing achieving 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. self-awareness emotional resilience motivation interpersonal sensitivity influence intuitiveness conscientiousness 1. Dulewicz & Higgs, 2005 Conscientiousness Critcal thinking 3 Motivation EQ Strategic perspective 2 1 Influence IQ Vision Managing resources 0 Sensitivity Communication Intuitiveness Empowering Emotional resilence Developing Self awareness Org. Change Achieving IT Engineering MQ Turner & Müller 2006 8 Competences and leadership styles Different personal profiles lead to different leadership styles Leadership style Goal-oriented Involving Engaging Related popular style Transactional Transformational EQ M H H IQ H M M MQ M M H Project complexity for best performance Low Medium High Dulewicz & Higgs, 2005 9 Importance of leadership competencies by project type Project type Engineering & Construction IT Organizational Change Communication Main competencies Conscientiousness Self-awareness Communication Sensitivity Developing others Motivation (vision) (vision) (vision) Situational competencies Supporting competencies Managing resources, empowering, critical analysis & judgement, strategic perspective, emotional resilience, influence, conscientiousness Achieving, intuitiveness Turner & Müller 2006 Engineering and construction projects • A sense of duty and good interpersonal communication are the leadership attributes contributing to project success in engineering and construction projects. • Conscientiousness - clear commitment to a course of action in the face of challenges. Matches ‘words and deeds’ in encouraging others to support the chosen direction. • Interpersonal sensitivity - aware of, and takes account of, the needs and perceptions of others in arriving at decisions and proposing solutions to problems and challenges Müller & Turner, 2010 11 IT and Telecom projects • Finding the right ‘tone’ with others, together with good control over their own feelings and helping project team members to take on challenging tasks, are the attributes of successful leadership in these projects. • Engaging communication – being approachable and accessible, engaging others to win their support through communication tailored for each audience. • Self-awareness – being aware of the own feelings and able to recognize them • Developing others- encouraging others to take on ever more demanding tasks and roles Müller & Turner, 2010 12 Business and Organizational Change projects • Actively creating the required dynamics for change, together with accommodation of those involved helps organizational change projects to be successful. • Engaging communication – being approachable and accessible, engaging others to win their support through communication tailored for each audience. • Motivation - the project manager shows drive and energy to achieve clear results and make an impact Müller & Turner, 2010 13 Predicting project success 15 competencies together All projects Explained project performance 9% High performing projects All Engineering & construction 17% 43% Information & Organizational Telechange & communication business 21% 17% Turner & Müller, 2006 Agenda • Governance • Governance levels • Governance paradigms • Governance mechanisms 15 Governance in the realm of projects • Management runs the business, governance makes sure that it runs in the right direction and that it runs efficiently (Tricker, 2012) • Governance, as it applies to portfolios, programs, projects, and project management, coexists within the corporate governance framework. • This comprises the value system, responsibilities, processes and policies that allow projects to achieve organizational objectives and foster implementation that is in the best interests of all the stakeholders, internal and external, and the corporation itself (Müller, 2009) 16 Governance layers and corporate governance Four principles of good corporate governance (OECD 1998, Milstein report): • Fairness: moral principles (e.g. in contractual relationships, ethical business conduct, etc.) Select the right projects Synchronize measures, methods and reporting Governance of projects Fairness Responsibility Accountability • Responsibility: execute task within the standards of the society Transparency • Transparency: disclosure of accurate, timely information to stakeholders • Accountability: clear understanding of roles and rights (e.g. who delivers what and when) Define business goals, Develop policies, objectives, ethical principles Corporate governance Define goals Provide resources Control progress Project governance Provide project process, define specific performance measures, escalation point and reporting PM methodology Müller, 2017 17 Governance paradigms Outcome control e.g.project outcome (Brown & Eisenhardt, 1997) Shareholder orientation: Companies maximize RoI for their shareholders Flexible Economist Versatile Artist Conformist Agile pragmatist (Clarke, 2004) Stakeholder orientation: Companies maximize benefits for a wide set of stakeholders (Clarke, 2004) Behavior control e.g.project process (Brown & Eisenhardt, 1997) Müller 2009 18 Predominant governance paradigms by country Müller & Lecoeuvre, 2014 19 Average paradigm by project size Müller & Lecoeuvre, 2014 20 Average paradigm by project type Müller & Lecoeuvre, 2014 21 Leadership profiles by governance paradigm Outcome control High performing PMs relative to all managers (50) Shareholder orientation EQ EQ MQ MQ IQ IQ EQ EQ Müller & Turner, 2010 Müller & Lecoeuvre, 2014 Porthouse & Dulewicz, 2007 IQ MQ MQ 22 Behavior control Stakeholder orientation High performing PMs relative to all project managers IQ PM methodology, paradigms and success Methodology accounts for about 6% of project success Joslin 2017 23 Governance mechanisms: Control and trust • Control: ….we all know • Trust: The willingness of a party to be vulnerable to the actions of another party based on the expectation that the other will perform a particular action important to the trustor, irrespective of the ability to monitor or control that other party”. • Measured as trustworthiness: • Ability • Benevolence • Integrity Mayer, Davis, & Schoorman, 1995 24 Consequences of governance: trust Trust the governance structure to help: 20% (N) / 80% (Y) Müller et al 2014 Authorize to decide & implement: 30% (N) / 70% (Y) © Ralf Müller 2015 25 Governance paradigms and mechanisms Outcome control Increasing success of projects Increasing trust Stakeholder orientation Shareholder orientation Governance mechanism: trust Governance mechanism: control 26 Behavior control Müller et al 2014 Joslin & Müller 2015 That’s All Folks Contacts: Ralf Müller: [email protected] Per Svejvig: [email protected] Michael Ehlers: [email protected] 27 References • Brown, S., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1997). The Art of Continuous Change: Linking Complexity Theory and Time-paced Evolution in Relentlessly Shifting Organizations. Administrative Science Quarterly, 42(1), 1–34. • Clarke, T. (2004). The Stakeholder Corporation: A Business Philosophy for the Information Age. In Theories of Corporate Governance: The Philosophical Foundations of Corporate Governance (pp. 189–202). London, UK: Routledge. • Dinsmore, P. C., & Rocha, L. (2012). Enterprise Project Governance. New York, NY, USA: AMACOM. • Dulewicz, V., & Higgs, M. (2005). Assessing leadership styles and organisational context. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 20(2), 105–123. http://doi.org/10.1108/02683940510579759 • Franck, E., & Jungwirth, C. (2003). Reconciling Rent-Seekers and Donators - The Governance Structure of Open Source. Journal of Management & Governance, 7(4), 401–421. • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the Firm: Managerial Behavior, Agency Costs, and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360. • Joslin, R. (2017). Governance and project success. In R. Müller (Ed.), Governance and Governmentality for Projects: Enablers, practices and consequences (pp. 159–172). New York, NY, USA: Routledge, USA. 28 References • Jugdev, K., & Müller, R. (2005). A Retrospective Look at Our Evolving Understanding of Project Success. Project Management Journal, 36(4), 19–31. • Klakegg, O. J., & Haavaldsen, T. (2011). Governance of major public investment projects: in pursuit of relevance and sustainability. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 4(1), 157–167. • Miller, R., & Hobbs, B. (2005). Governance Regimes for Large Projects. Project Management Journal, 36(3), 42–51. • Millstein, I. M., Albert, M., Cadbury, A., Feddersen, D., & Tateisi, N. (1998). Improving Competitiveness and Access to Capital in Global Markets. Paris, France: OECD Publications. • Müller. (2009). Project Governance. Surrey: Gower Publishing. • Müller, R. (2017). Governance Theories. In Governance and Governmentality for Projects: Enablers, practices and consequences (pp. 27–35). New York, NY: Routledge. • Müller, R. (2017). Organizational project governance. In R. Müller (Ed.), Governance and governmentality for projects: Enablers, practice and consequences (pp. 11–24). New York, NY: Routledge. • Müller, R., & Jugdev, K. (2012). Critical Success Factors in Projects: Pinto, Slevin, and Prescott - the elucidation of project success. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 5(4), 757–775. 29 References • Müller, R., & Turner, J. R. (2005). "The Impact of Principal-Agent Relationship and Contract Type on Communication between Project Owner and Manager. International Journal of Project Management, 23(5), 398–403. • Müller, R., & Turner, J. R. (2007). The influence of project managers on project success criteria and project success by type of project. European Management Journal, 25(4), 298–309. • Müller, R., & Turner, J. R. (2010). Leadership competency profiles of successful project managers. International Journal of Project Management, 28(5), 437–448. • Müller, R., Zhai, L., & Wang, A. (2017). Profiles of governance and governmentality in projects: Relationships with success. International Journal of Project Management. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2017.01.007 • Smith, A. (n.d.). The Wealth of Nations. Retrieved May 18, 2016, from http://www.bibliomania.com/2/1/65/112/frameset.html • Tricker, B. (2012). Corporate Governance: Principles, Policies, and Practices. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, UK. • Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2004). Communication and Co-operation on Projects Between the Project Owner as Principal and the Project Manager as Agent. European Management Journal, 22(3), 327–336. • Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2006). Choosing Appropriate Project Managers: Matching their leadership style to the type of project. Newtown Square; USA: Project Management Institute. 30