Even if PSI’s headquarters weren’t in Atlanta, we’d still be fans of the Hawks.

They gave us an exciting season – and gave the Cavs a close call in Game Three despite injuries.  They also brought to life the importance of teamwork. (Earlier this year, the NBA named the Hawks’ entire starting five “Player of the Month.”) In the Eastern Conference finals with the Cavaliers, the contrast could not be starker:  a team playing as a unit, vs. a team with a Superstar – the Superstar – LeBron James.

They were swept by the Cavs, but they succeeded in other respects.  They demonstrated that real teamwork, with no one player bigger than the rest, sharing the ball, communicating, and helping teammates is a powerful strategy.  Injuries and questionable behavior from opponents took a toll, but this is a young team committed to a long-term strategy.

That’s a lesson that project managers trying a new approach might take to heart – institutional success is a long game that requires a long-term commitment.   In project management, that’s a compelling and relevant lesson. A superstar is a phenomenon, but everyone in project management works on a team.

We can’t wait till October.

“Paralysis by Analysis,” “Information Overload,” “TMI.”

If the key to a successful project is controlling time, one timewaster to eliminate is over-reporting. Some managers spend too much time tracking too many activities at too low a level of detail.

Luckily, reporting doesn’t have to be like doing your taxes, if you have some guidelines on how much detail is enough:

Each activity should produce a deliverable or change in product status with just enough information to indicate a change in status.

• Subdivide long-term activities into tasks of about a month, so you can track and monitor progress reliably.
• As a rule of thumb, a good level of detail is between three and fifteen working days.

Of course, some large, complex projects – just like large, complex tax returns – need some outside help. Our hands-on course in Control Methods & Practices with Microsoft Project streamlines controlling the performance of projects characterized by complexity and dynamic change.

A concise reporting strategy lets everyone spend their time on the project and not on reporting. Whoever said “the Devil is in the details” was likely a project manager.

During PSI training, there’s one moment when attendees sit up straight and their eyes widen. I can practically hear their hearts race. It’s when we first mention “accountability.”

Properly exercised, however, accountability can be liberating and empowering…and so much more.

This was demonstrated by a young man whose long-range project plan – a year in the making – was a viral hit.

He and his team were fully committed to the project and accountable to each other and to the project’s success. Moreover, he modeled an approach to scheduling project activity I describe in my book as “Try to be Normal.” He realized his effort would take place amid other activities. He didn’t make each step happen in the same place, same time or same way. Whether he did it while brushing his teeth or riding with friends, the priority was doing the activity and being committed to the process.   In fact, it added to his project’s charm and its successful conclusion.

We all knew that accountability was empowering – but who knew it could be romantic as well?

Leaders like Bill Gates worry that Artificial Intelligence will create havoc. Even now, ethicists grapple with the unintended consequences of automated programs – like illegal activity.

The fascination with AI is part popular culture and part business savvy. It’s tempting (in cost and time savings) to automate – to remove or limit the human element and personal interaction.

It’s a false economy.

Several studies prove that nothing beats face to face meetings for transparency, trust, cohesion, and persuasiveness. Leaders of in-person meetings obtain better information. They pick up on cues by individuals and ‘read the room” as a whole to get subtext that no software or AI program can detect.

More important, periodic, in-person meetings of team members makes sure the Worry CurveÒ is shifted. Teams reinforce mutual accountability and support each member.   As they continue to meet and solve problems, their commitment to the project, to each other and to their own role grows in a way no software can duplicate. It’s a lot more satisfying than monitoring via Skype or filling in boxes in a software program.

And of course, with face to face meetings with real people, you can rest assured some AI software isn’t blowing the project budget playing internet poker or doing insider trading.

At the start of most ventures, problems seem far away; future challenges seem manageable. It’s “the Honeymoon Period” – the most enjoyable and durable part of a personal relationship; in business, less so…

…and it’s the biggest obstacle to project management success.

My book, the Project Success Method, reveals that during a project’s “Honeymoon Period,” everyone thinks there’s plenty of time, and the project scope and complexity itself is underestimated. PSI calls this “Uninformed Optimism.”

About halfway through the project, the team begins to sense that things are not going very well. Poor planning, lack of focus, and ineffective controls lead to a sense of foreboding. Worries increase. Teams fragment, quality suffers, and budgets explode before the deadline is reached.

Our approach not only accepts that there’s an expiration date for the Honeymoon Period – we move it up.

With our Shifting the Worry Curve^® method, we offer some common sense steps at the outset:

-the team meets face to face to develop a project plan

-individual team members commit to specific activities

-team members meet regularly (every two weeks) to report their status and solve problems

Clients have told me how their teams appreciate not facing a Mount Everest of problems towards the end of a project. By avoiding the Honeymoon Period, team members remain engaged and committed to their projects because they have successfully managed the most critical dimension of project performance: Time.

It’s not happier ever after, but it’s close.

That’s Incredible….

….is not always a compliment.

You don’t need a Brian Williams-like meltdown to lose credibility. The biggest credibility risk for project managers and staff is how they handle time estimates for task duration.

True, they’re fighting human nature: the planning fallacy – that people are naturally optimistic in estimating their own task duration.

One solution is to add staff when the project is late. This happens so often (and is so ineffective) that it generated Brooks Law, summed up in the adage, “Nine women can’t make a baby in one month.”

Our solution is to temper that optimism by introducing deadlines sooner. As important, however, is how we train project managers to gather duration estimates. The worst thing a project manager can say to an activity manager is “Why should it take so long?” PSI teaches managers that it is more important to secure the activity manager’s commitment to the duration estimate than the estimate itself. The commitment is more important.

Otherwise, team members will over-inflate their time estimates anticipating the pushback. We call it the “escalating estimate padding and slashing game.” Trust is the first casualty.

My book describes multiple processes for determining a reasonable time estimate, but there are some quick, additional tips:

• Don’t challenge time estimates that are too long. Challenge the ones that are too short.
• Ask how many working days (not hours) would get the activity done.
• Reassure staff not to worry about the inaccuracy of the time estimates, but to worry about the activities that haven’t been identified yet.

Above all, remember that without the team’s full commitment on the time estimate, the project schedule is simply incredible. And not in a good way.

A recent Wall Street Journal article described a photo of a war scene as “grizzly.”  Another article said a politician was “unphased” by protests.

This happens so often there’s a word for it.  “The Cupertino Effect” is over-reliance on spell-checker software that produces mistakes.  In college, the worst outcome is a C+, but the stakes are higher in project management.  I’ve seen the poor techniques created by dependency on project management software:

-insufficient collaboration

-gaps in scheduling

-disengaged staff hiding behind software and email

It lets staff avoid accountability and ownership of their tasks.

PSI insists our clients put everyone in the room for the first planning session, because software doesn’t lead projects, people do.  Despite initial pushback, our clients uniformly say the conversations, commitment and ownership is incomparable.  The Project Success Method^(SM) doesn’t let people hide; it harnesses the power of collaboration.

Once people get out from behind their screens and engage, they develop ownership, accountability, and true teamwork in a process that is collaborative, actionable and that everyone believes in.  Software alone can’t do that; the human element makes the difference.

…Or else you’ll have people scanning a photograph wondering where the bear is.

Connect with me:

• LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/clintpadgett
• Twitter: @clintpadgett

Clint Padgett is the president and CEO of PSI. Since joining the firm in 1994, he has provided consulting, training, and account management to clients in a wide range of industries. His project experience covers many traditional and special applications, including: product development, equipment installation/startup, facility construction/moves, marketing, software/hardware system implementation, and international sporting events. He is a graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology with a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering. He also holds a master’s degree in business administration from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University. He is associated with the Project Management Institute, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, and the Product Development & Management Association, among others. Additionally, Clint is a published author and frequently speaks at conferences on the subject of project management, including the Executive Education program in the Scheller College of Business at the Georgia Institute of Technology, where he is an adjunct professor.

During the first few hours of any Project Success Method(SM) class, I can practically see the thought balloons over the heads of the attendees:

“Why should I spend all this time here when I already know Project Management?”

“I have a ton of work waiting for me! My company is wasting my time.”

“I’ve been a project manager for years and I’m sitting here with people who don’t know the first thing about it.”

Their attitudes remind me of the movie Groundhog Day:  Been there, done that.

However, as we proceed, it’s gratifying to see the thought balloons turn into light bulbs, as people understand the difference the Project Success Method(SM) offers. Attendees from different locations and departments become an effective team working off the same playbook – regardless of how well they know project management.

Nowhere is this more important than large, complex projects involving widely dispersed teams, where the lack of a shared context and little to no ‘face time” can create logjams and bottlenecks.  One PSI client, with a background in construction, insisted that everyone involved in one project, even attorneys and vendors, take the training so that everyone understood how they integrated into the process and how their roles could be a critical path item.

“For highly complex, high-value projects, it is worth it. If a $20 million project goes over by 10 percent, that’s an extra two million dollars in costs.  While there are no guarantees, you have a much better opportunity to avoid that cost by using the Project Success Method,” he said.

For project managers, that means the only kind of deja vu they’ll have is the satisfaction of completing complex projects on time and on budget. Now that’s what I call a happy ending.

Connect with me:

• LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/clintpadgett
• Twitter: @clintpadgett

Clint Padgett is the president and CEO of PSI. Since joining the firm in 1994, he has provided consulting, training, and account management to clients in a wide range of industries. His project experience covers many traditional and special applications, including: product development, equipment installation/startup, facility construction/moves, marketing, software/hardware system implementation, and international sporting events. He is a graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology with a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering. He also holds a master’s degree in business administration from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University. He is associated with the Project Management Institute, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, and the Product Development & Management Association, among others. Additionally, Clint is a published author and frequently speaks at conferences on the subject of project management, including the Executive Education program in the Scheller College of Business at the Georgia Institute of Technology, where he is an adjunct professor.

One theme from the recent Consumer Electronics Show is the growing acceptance of automation and robotics, promising increased efficiencies and better outcomes in a future that is “more digital, less personal.”

Not necessarily.

Research published by the Harvard Business Review  https://hbr.org/2012/04/the-new-science-of-building-great-teams maintains that success lies in more face to face engagement within teams, not less – no hiding behind texting or email.   Further, teams aren’t made by memo but by the soft skills and methodologies applied by a gifted project leader.  This is especially relevant in project management, where staff from different departments work together for a limited time.

I’ve found that providing opportunities to engage the group in teamwork leads to the development of a real team with real ownership – a cornerstone of the Project Success Method (SM).  Participants learn to achieve superior project performance in as little as five days because our Method demands active involvement by attendees in a face-to-face environment as part of the learning experience.    Besides encouraging “ownership” of project tasks, the improved dynamic among team members increases energy and engagement, improved intergroup communication, better results…and maybe creates a few more friendships along the way.

Connect with me:

• LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/clintpadgett
• Twitter: @clintpadgett

Clint Padgett is the president and CEO of PSI. Since joining the firm in 1994, he has provided consulting, training, and account management to clients in a wide range of industries. His project experience covers many traditional and special applications, including: product development, equipment installation/startup, facility construction/moves, marketing, software/hardware system implementation, and international sporting events. He is a graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology with a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering. He also holds a master’s degree in business administration from the Fuqua School of Business at Duke University. He is associated with the Project Management Institute, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, and the Product Development & Management Association, among others. Additionally, Clint is a published author and frequently speaks at conferences on the subject of project management, including the Executive Education program in the Scheller College of Business at the Georgia Institute of Technology, where he is an adjunct professor.

As professionals in our respective industries, we share common interests, such as meeting goals, searching for a competitive edge, or leveraging our existing resources. Undoubtedly, these interests require completing progressive steps grouped into what might be called “projects.” The success of executing these projects usually correlates to the success of achieving your desired goal. You would think that with so much depending on the project, it would consistently have a flawless execution; yet, many projects fail.

Why? What can you do to ensure that every project successfully meets its deadline?

Shift the Worry

Within the project timeline there is always a moment when team members begin to feel the pressure of the project. Panic, stress, fear, burden, and chaos are all words typically associated with meeting a project’s deadline. Approach the project tactically in its initial stage to offset the effects of stress and chaos experienced near the deadline. In particular, it is important to:

• Know your timeline requirements.
• Clarify project expectations.
• Define team roles.
• Create easy deliverable cycles.

Sure, this is common sense. Create a plan and everything will be OK. Right?

Achievement

Knowing what to do and actually doing it is the key difference in project success and failure. Meeting deadlines is not about being smart—it is about being practical and disciplined, while knowing how to execute a plan that includes both characteristics. My expertise in meeting project deadlines is in knowing how to execute.

I would like to educate you on how to apply my proven Project Success Method to any framework, regardless of type or scale. Whether it involves a merger and acquisitions, global outsourcing, green initiatives, product development, or technology implementation, you will learn to effectively complete these projects within the timeline and budget.

Join me at the ASTD 2014 International Conference & Exposition in Washington, D.C., where I will discuss my book, The Project Success Method: A Proven Approach for Achieving Superior Project Performance in as Little as 5 Days.

Connect with me:

• LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/clintpadgett
• Twitter: @clintpadgett

Clint Padgett is the president and CEO of PSI. Since joining the firm in 1994, he has provided consulting, training, and account management to clients in a wide range of industries. His project experience covers many traditional and special applications, including: product development, equipment installation/startup, facility construction/moves, marketing, software/hardware system implementation, and international sporting events. He is a graduate of The Georgia Institute of Technology with a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering. He also holds a master’s degree in business administration from Duke University. He is associated with the Project Management Institute, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, and the Product Development & Management Association, among others. Additionally, Clint is a published author and frequently speaks at conferences on the subject of project management.