Download Thought Leader session with Professor Ralf Müller

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