Considering Options

The group has finally settled on a clear definition of their problem and the manager, Jack, is guiding them through the second phase. The initial symptom was poor on-time performance on customized client project schedules. Their work in the exploring phase moved away from a simplistic skill training assumption to greater focus on poor process design and a culture that rewards the cowboy rather than the systemic leader.

JACK: So we're pretty clear that the fundamental issue is a poorly designed project management process and, secondarily, a culture that really suppresses leading "by the book" and rewards "fire fighting" and "performing miracles" instead. Let's brainstorm for a bit — just throw out some ideas and let's get the creative juices flowing. Who's first?

JUAN: Let's take a good project management system from the last Baldridge Award winner

JUDY: Let's just take our "best run" project and use it as a template for a new process.

GEORGE: We've got some project managers who recently came over from some much bigger companies. Let's ask them to merge their experience into a class on project management.

JACK: These are great ... keep 'em coming.

JOHN: Let's give an award for the most uneventful project of the year.

[ lots more ideas are surfaced; perhaps 20 minutes worth ]

This would be a common opening. The group is sparking each other with any idea, no matter whether foolish or fabulous. Jack is just recording the ideas on a flip chart and encouraging people to keep going. If someone were to criticize an idea, Jack might stop them and redirect their participation to making contributions rather than judgments.

JACK: We've got a lot of options here. Rather than just vote for our favorites, spend a moment and see if you can identify the reasons behind your preferences. Find the option you like the best, and then tell us why you like it.

JUDY: I like options that we can implement quickly; we haven't got a lot of time to do our own development.

JUAN: I like the Baldridge winner idea. Why don't we just go with that one?

JACK: We might end up there, but first tell me what you like about it.

JUAN: I'd like something tried and true, something well tested. We take enough risks with the products we design; let's not take risks with how we bring 'em to market.

JUDY: I'd also like to see something with low cost; I think that would make it more palatable to the senior team.

....

JACK: This is a good list of criteria, people. Now's the hard work. We want to use these to slice 'n dice the options, recombine 'em, until we get something that optimizes as many criteria as possible.

Once again Jack is simply recording ideas and keeping the group on track. When Juan jumps ahead and throws his support behind one of the options, Jack brings him back to the reason behind his preference rather than arguing for or against it.

Like the first segment, this discussion could easily take 20-40 minutes. Undoubtedly other criteria would surface, such as customized for our company, easy to swallow, quick to launch, and so on.

JOE: I've just been listening so far, but I see a possibility. If we got a template from a Baldridge Award winner, we'd have something "tried 'n true", and if we had our most experienced project managers translate it into a class, we'd also get the customization we'd want.

JUDY: I like the idea of combining our own "best case" project with an informal series of Brown Bag lunches with Project Managers. I like it because it would something we could launch immediately, and it would also satisfy the criteria of being palatable.

The role of the facilitator here is to help people go back and forth between options and criteria. The criteria can be used to highlight certain features of an option and make it clear what needs to be retained and what can be supplanted with an alternative. And new options created in this fashion will sharpen the understanding of the criteria.

JACK: Let me see if I can summarize the combination we seem to like the most. We get a project management model from a Baldridge Award winner, and we have 2 of our best project managers translate it into a course. We pick one manager who's known as a "by-the-book" kind of guy, and a second one who's more of a cowboy...or cowgirl. Then we have them "test it out" through a series of brown bag lunches with our newer project managers. Is that about it?

JUDY: Right, that's it. And we have two of us sitting in on the lunches to listen for skill deficits vs. process design issues.

JOHN: And, Jack, you get to facilitate the two project managers so they don't kill each other. We're deliberately mixing oil and water here, so we need to give 'em some support.

JACK: Does everyone believe we're ready to do this? That the company will support this?

GEORGE: I think it'll go. My only concern is whether we can afford the time away from project work for these top two managers. Whose going to keep their projects going?

JACK: Good point. We'll have to juggle some resources and some people.

Eventually an option will surface that just strikes everyone as "the one" and that will highlight the relative importance of criteria and the completeness of the set.

The facilitator switches to checking both for consensus and also for confidence.

He also anticipates problems in implementation by asking where the proposal might stumble.