1019 Views
0 likes
The roles of Change and Project Management are inextricably entwined in the project and programme arena. One cannot exist in isolation from the other and indeed feed into one another in terms of project and programme delivery. Project management tends to place more emphasis on rational factors while change management seeks to compliment this by looking at employee psychological engagement. It is this blended approach along with other key success factors that has the potential to yield positive results. But what happens when the lines between change and project management cross-over or blur? This could be either through poor programme governance, lack of clearly defined scope or a skills deficit on the part of the project manager. This is a reality that many change managers are confronted with, and the decisions that are made may result in positive and/or negative outcomes. The question then stands – should change managers cross this line? And if they do, what are some of the common pitfalls that they should be aware of when crossing this grey divide?
The world of consulting is challenging and rewarding and usually attracts results orientated individuals into the profession. Results are a crucial element of our service delivery promise to our clients. It is what we sell and it is how we secure future business. In addition to this, and speaking from personal experience, results and delivery are aspects that drive many of us. It is important for us to achieve. We strive for success and that end goal often results in us going beyond the call of duty (so to speak), to make a project a success. This is where the temptation begins…and why we may choose to take on project related tasks and deliverable that would ordinarily fall outside of our traditional change management scope.
There are some immediate advantages in taking on a dual role such as increased control and influence over the project and associated resources. The reduced dependency on a project manager may also increase agility. The disadvantages however may outweigh these through one becoming enmeshed in day to day project politics and deliverables; not being able to step back and get a helicopter view of what’s really going on; change scope / deliverables may suffer due to unmanageable workloads and not being able to adopt a neutral stance towards team members and conflict management.
Taking the above into account, there are some non-negotiable factors that should be considered if you are contemplating taking on the dual role of project and change:
Coming from a project management background may make is easier when making the choice to juggle both balls. But this may not be true for many change managers who have no formal training or experience in the realm of project management. Taking on a dual role requires you to be clear on scope and delivery for both disciplines. Individuals who lack previous experience should approach such a situation with caution. If you are not 100% confident in your ability to fulfil both roles, don’t do it. Don’t set yourself up for unnecessary failure.
The larger and more complex the project, the less likely you will be able to successfully balance both roles. Be clear upfront on the timelines and effort that are required for delivery.
The scope and level of effort may vary significantly between managing a project versus that of a programme. Complexity, timelines, team structure, team capability and capacity are all real factors that need to be considered when taking on a dual role.
A recurring theme identified by Prosci through their annual change bench marking study is that of active and visible sponsorship (Prosci: 2016). Ineffective and absent sponsors usually result in both change and project managers having to double their efforts to deliver on time and on budget. That said, being able to determine the strength and commitment of a sponsor in advance may not always be possible, especially when operating as an external consultant.
The attitude, aptitude and ability of the project team will also define the levels of management effort required of a project manager. Teams that comprise of young, inexperienced resources or teams that have capacity issues should serve as a warning flag for change managers looking to take on a dual role.
The time – resource relationship has a direct impact on quality output and delivery. The quality of both project and change deliverables must be upheld and linking in with above points, if there are doubts as to your capacity to deliver high quality work then this must be mitigated accordingly.
Tight deadlines and short timelines may result in project and change managers having to work excessive hours to meet defined milestones. Trying to deliver on one’s change scope can be challenging in itself – including additional project management scope may just be a recipe for disaster.
The choices that we make as change management professionals can have far reaching consequences for ourselves, our clients and stakeholder communities. When faced with the opportunity and decision to take on a dual role, we should always be mindful of what our ultimate purpose is. We are change enablers and we drive change by working with communities towards a common vision and goal. If crossing this grey divide compromises our purpose in any way, then the decision should be that much easier for us to make.
