John Hunt Observation No. 1 "You get SUNRISE or SUNSET people."

Yesterday I accidentally came across a video series from John Hunt and the Berlin School of Creative Leadership. Today I had some time during lunch to begin watching Hunt's multi-part discussion of concepts from his book, The Art of the Idea. I'm surprised he doesn't have more hits given the quality of the presentation (only 778 for part 1 at the time of writing, part 2 317 views, and part 3 240 views...).

The first observation he discusses touches on a concept I've been struggling to articulate, and that's the difference between positive and negative people in a creative environment. Hunt describes SUNRISE people as those who "think the world will be better tomorrow" and those who "radiate energy." Clearly there are people in every organization who suck energy from the room and only offer negative feedback (the SUNSET people). The problem is SUNSET people do have their place. I think Hunt is talking about essentially the same thing in his Observation No. 5 LOGIC is KRYPTONITE. As he says, logic has weight and mass, but in the idea business is applied too early and it kills the idea. "Logic is a nice ballast and filtering process, but not a catalyst for ideas...Apply logic at the end."

I often see the SUNRISE/SUNSET split in meetings between the emotional/logical people in the room. Perhaps, then, this is the real way to look at the difference...what filter does each person bring with them to the creative process? When I first looked at Hunt's observation written out, I thought he was going to discuss people who are better at the initiation of an idea versus those who can close on an idea and give it tangible form. My first reaction might not be too far away from the truth. Sunrise thinking is exuberant and energetic, providing the raw passion and drive to get a project moving. Sunset thinking is restrained and analytic, providing the contextual and concrete implementation of an idea. This also suggests a third kind of thinking, midday thinking where decisions are made in the full light of day but with the knowledge that an end will come all too soon.

Communities of Practice from the bottom up

Floating Network by Anthony Reeves

Today I talked to a good friend with a problem, or more likely problems. He recently conducted several SME interviews for new service level development only to find the SMEs had participated in similar interviews with multiple other teams. Upon further investigation he discovered each of these teams was working on part of a more systemic need at their company. The problem was that each duplicated effort of the others, took up valuable SME time, and didn’t align requirements or scope.  He asked me, “Would running these through as projects help fix this problem?” My answer was it depends...

An effective, mature PMO could certainly help limit the number of similar projects and combine efforts into a unified whole. In fact, that’s an excellent reason to improve project management maturity and create a program or project management office. However, his company has multiple PMOs all of which coordinate through a central enterprise program management office that only exists to monitor high-level alignment with strategic initiatives. This leaves a gap in managing similar objectives for mid-sized and small projects, which is where my friend spends his time. Additionally, silos within the organization and individual managers refusing to accept feedback or suggestions from employees creates a culture of distrust. In such an environment, I don’t believe his problems with duplicated effort can be solved just by creating a project. What needs to happen is a cultural shift in sharing information, specifically information being shared between groups with similar interests and across project offices.

My initial recommendation is to create a grass roots community of practice movement. Yes, this same formula could be used as a top-down initiative, perhaps under a Chief Knowledge Manager or Chief Simplicity Officer (I plan to write more on this when I find my bookmark about a C-level position with lots of power and very little budget who is tasked with finding improvements in operations...I want to give proper credit to the original innovator). However, following a community organization model from political movements might be just as effective and not require advanced sponsor support. Here’s how it would work:

1. Interested parties create communities of practice by networking at the lowest levels in the organization to find groups with similar roles and interests. Ideally these groups should form around topic areas. (These topic areas could later form the core of an enterprise ontology for communities of practice.)
2. These communities of practice then use existing communication infrastructure (wikis, blogs, portals, email lists, or whatever else is available) to discuss possible improvements and form definite objectives for future activities. The objectives are there to help inform decision making when possible. For example, if an objective was implementing a knowledge management system, then the community of practice could advocate for doing so in multiple sites throughout the company.
3. Provide expertise and promote attention with the ultimate goal of showing enough value to the organization that management will want to expand the concept and recognize communities of practice as an integral (and culturally approved) method of collaboration.

Even though it sounds idealistic, there have been a number of times I’ve personally seen major changes in a company as a result of a few prepared individuals who could produce a plan as soon as their manager was ready to listen. Even if you don’t get official support, you could very well find better alignment based only on internal networking and information sharing. 

Social Media and Project Management Offices #1

Today while searching for other communications programs situated within a PMO, I came across Social Media and Project Management Offices (PMOs) by Wayne Caccamo. I like the way he defines the relationship:

At its foundation, PMOs provide a centralized point for gathering and disseminating project, program and portfolio information regarding issues, risks, schedule, cost, quality and other status updates. Various social media tools can provide the communication channel between the PMO, project teams, business leadership and stakeholders. Candidate tools include micro-blogs, RSS and Twitter.

General collaboration and knowledge management may be a core function of the PMO. In this case, it behooves PMOs to be on the leading-edge of social media and network technology to share best practices, company PPM standards, methodologies, etc. that it is promoting. Further, best practices in the use of social media and networks to manage projects may represent a new service offering for PMOs once they have practiced what they endeavor to preach.

Looking at this from another perspective, that of the professional communicator, we should go where the action is and where our contributions can provide the most benefit to the organization. A mature PMO holds significant influence over the methodology, processes, and tools used for cross company collaboration. After all, new service development and implementation of business improvements normally run through the PMO. Project managers act as lenses for directing and focusing information exchange and productive effort. I agree that communication services tried in the fires of project management often become standards much easier than trying to implement them as stand-alone initiatives.

Project Management #1: Tools for assessing PM KSAs

As part of the second phase in our PMO maturity program, I'm developing a project manager (PM) KSA assessment instrument per PM level and career path. We'll use the assessment instrument to help guide ongoing employee training, performance reviews, career path development, and possibly as part of the hiring process for new PMs. In doing research for this custom development, I thought it might be worthwhile to share several of the better resources I found on similar topics.

The Project Manager's Desk Reference by James Lewis includes a useful skills and competencies model in Chapter 19: Profiling the World-Class Project Management Organization. Lewis defines skills as the easily observed and measurable characteristics of a PM which can be trained. For each level of PM (Team Leader, Project Manager, Senior Project Manager, and Program Manager), Lewis identifies which level of skill is necessary. His explanation of competencies is more problematic:

...those traits (competencies) that lie below the surface, out of the range of the visible. We can see them in practice but we cannot directly measure them in the sense of determining whether a particular person has them and, if so, to what degree. They are also the traits that are more difficult to develop through training. Some of them may, in fact, be hereditary.

While this view might be contentious, Lewis provides a clear self assessment that could also be given to a PM and work associates as part of a 360 degree review process. If you are looking for a simple, easy to implement framework this book could be just what you need.

The Project Manager Competency Development (PMCD) Framework from PMI would work best for a PMI/PMBOK aligned environment with enough resources to create custom evaluation tools. The information is excellent and as aligned with PMI standards as possible, but after reviewing the content would take significant effort and may be overkill for making quick assessment tools. I see this as a resource for in-depth quality efforts and building a standards compliant maturity framework. As we mature the PMO's ability to provide career planning and mentoring in line with education and training this will be an essential tool.

Executive Communication #1: Republicans don't get new media!

Regardless of your political affiliation, you have to admit the 2011 State of the Union Address given by President Obama achieved its aims. Not only did President Obama deliver a compelling oration laced with key terms that resonate with his followers, he also successfully integrated slideware in the form of an "Enhanced Version" online. Then candidate Obama's use of new media and online presence clearly helped to push him into the presidency.

Compare this slick online branding and regular online updates from the White House to the response given by Michele Bachmann and her two charts (1, 2). Then look at a capture from the Enhanced Version of President Obama's remarks. Congresswoman Bachmann's slides look like something from every poorly designed PowerPoint presentation ever given in a corporate meeting room. But, to her credit, she did at least attempt some use of visual media. Perhaps there aren't any Republican friendly communication companies. For example, one of my favorites, Duarte Design, is known for helping Al Gore win the Academy Award for An Inconvenient Truth! I don't recall any of the communication design companies I follow even saying anything remotely conservative in orientation. Does this mean Republicans and conservatives are doomed? I guess it will all depend on how quickly new media advocates like Hugh Hewitt can get the message out: you need to look at least as good as the opposition to survive! Excellent advice for us all.

I also recommend viewing the short video Inside the White House: State of the Union where we get a behind-the-scenes look at preparation for this important public speaking engagement. I feel a little closer to President Obama after seeing him using my favorite pen at 02:41 in the video. It sure looks like a uni-ball Vision Elite to me!

What to say while still thinking!

Russell Davies posted an exceptionally helpful video on "how to look clever and knowledgeable when faced with a difficult problem" by using a rule-of-three. In case you're not familiar with the rule-of-three, think about how many times each day you hear someone giving a list with three examples, supporting an argument with three pieces of evidence, or calling your attention to a triplet like The Father, The Son, and The Holy Spirit. The Western tradition in general tends to favor breaking your subject down into three parts. We might as well use this to our advantage when communicating.

Davies explains the scenario as a meeting where someone has just presented a lot of complex information and then immediately asks for your input without sufficient time to think. His solution is to write down three key concepts from the subject at hand then spend some time exploring the relationships they have with each other. The video provides several examples.

I also recommend this approach as a valid method for understanding new challenges in general. Activity theory, for example, bases human interaction on a three part system of the actor, an objective, and a tool to mediate the activity. This has proven fruitful as a model to learn and discuss many forms of collaborative work effort including application in fields like HCI and user factors. In writing, Kenneth Burke proposed a similar five-part tool to discuss purpose and activity in communication (it's called Dramatism or Burke's Pentad). In each case, what's important isn't the three part or five part structure as much as the activity of breaking a problem into a finite number of parts (five would be a maximum in my opinion) and examining the relationships they share with each other.

By the way, Russell Davies is not the same as Russell T. Davies, script writer and re-creator of the Doctor Who franchise. Doctor Who: The Complete Third Series is, in my opinion, the best season of the show! The Doctor, The Master, and Blink...what's not to love? (Oh, there's one of those pesky triples again).