Although it’s Spring, the No Pants Festival has nothing to do with Spring Break and everything to do with an evolving management trend – the remote management of digital nomads. I call this type of workplace management “Radical Flexibility.”

The newest take on Radical Flexibility is ROWE (Results Only Work Environment).  The ideal ROWE workplace eliminates office norms: no set hours, no required meetings or office hours unless required to do your job.  The only measure of value is the results.

More accountability and less micromanaging are Project Success Method bywords, and some studies suggest positive impacts…but the underlying assumptions are less promising:

• you could get so much more work done if you didn’t have to bother with other people

• structure is a cage

A collaborative environment needs some structure – how can people work as a team without set hours? – and a meaningful team can’t be formed with people only known to each other as an email address.

The Project Success Method offers a better, hybrid alternative.  Our techniques encourage in-person meetings to strengthen mutual support, collaboration and commitment to projects – but individuals are free to decide whatever pace or solutions work best. The Method has worked for small new product launches and large-scale, mission critical, time-sensitive, cross functional projects across an entire enterprise – while combining accountability and freedom for individuals, teams and managers.

Now that’s what I call Radical.  But no, it’s not pants optional.

A survey of 32,000 employees revealed that people who met with their managers up to six hours a week were more inspired, engaged and innovative at work. That confirms PSI’s preference for in-person, biweekly team status meetings to shift the Worry Curve.

We know it’s difficult to make time, coordinate schedules, and reserve the room. However, consider the pitfalls of relying solely on electronic status reports – for project managers and teams:

• It encourages procrastination:  Emailed status reports and updates sit in an inbox with other email – easy to overlook or put off. It doesn’t command the attention a meeting would.

• It discourages group problem solving:  Electronic reporting deprives the project of the collective insight and support of the entire team when problems arise.

• It hinders accountability: The biggest problem electronic reporting creates is enabling team members to avoid public accountability for their tasks by hiding behind email.

In-person meetings create team commitment to the project, to each other and to their own roles in the project, while project managers find it easier to monitor progress, see deviations from the plan and tap the insights of the whole group to find solutions.  Being in a room together drives accountability, results, and a sense of community.

It’s a lot better than hiding behind an email.

“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?

The list of project management stakeholders is getting bigger –and so are the potential headaches for project managers.

As enterprises become more proficient at data collection via the Internet of Things (IoT), some think they need a Chief Data Officer to manage it. Gartner predicts that by 2017, some 25 percent of companies will have a CDO.

Still others think the solution is a Chief Digital Officer, an evolving position.

Whatever the acronym, speculation is rampant that the CDO, however defined, will usurp the CIO role, or even eliminate it entirely.

Even the most diplomatic project managers, aware of how office politics can torpedo even the best plans, might need additional strategies for stakeholder and sponsor management.

One option is to have an objective third party coach sponsors, advisors and other stakeholders. An unbiased viewpoint can sharpen executive commitment, untangle resource planning, and sort through the hot button issues.

“Great teamwork is the only way we create the breakthroughs that define our careers,” said Pat Riley, one of the NBA’s all-time greatest coaches. It’s as true in business as it is in sports.

This year society reached a game-changing milestone.

In 2015, millennials (ages 18 – 34) will be the nation’s largest living generation. They use a different playbook (There’s actually a quiz.).

The generational clash is most evident in the workplace, where recruiters note the exodus of talent. The stakes are high (between $15,000 and $25,000 for each replacement). Are project managers (with neither hiring nor salary authority for team members) vulnerable to millennial staff turnover?

Not necessarily. Some of the qualities millennials value are:

-The opportunity to be part of a team

-Challenges and opportunities for career growth

-Guidance and support available when needed.

The Project Success MethodÒ incorporates these factors. It is a fast, cost-effective way for millennials to learn how to get things done, while instilling workplace values and techniques that will benefit them and their employers long-term.

Compared to that, who cares if they never heard of an answering machine?

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.

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.

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.