I will probably incur the wrath of many a Project Manager
with this post but hey I have had that happen to me many times when working
with them on various change initiatives.
Anyway here we go …
It never ceases to amaze me how the words Project Management
and Change Management can be used in the same breath. In my experience (and
this is not a criticism of PMs) Project Managers cannot execute Change
Management because the two disciplines require a whole different set of skills
and competencies. Unfortunately this seems to be something that is on the rise
and it makes me wonder whether this contributes to so many change failures.
Both disciplines aim for totally different outcomes:
•Project Management is about installation. It focuses on a
plan built around events and timelines with the aim of getting from a current
state (no installation) to a future state (installation achieved).
•Change Management is about adoption. It focuses on the
people aspects of the change with the aim of getting a critical mass of people
to be committed to the change involved, to learn new behaviours and to sustain
them willingly.
Project Managers want to deliver on time, to quality and
within budget whilst Change Managers ultimate aim is Adoption/Business
Readiness … the two are sometimes in direct opposition e.g.:
Project Management
role:
•Drive solution delivery.
•Communicate progress and impact on solution deliverables
and project goals.
•Implementation and technical risk management.
•Focuses on project time, cost, quality, scope.
•Follows project management lifecycle.
•Steps and tools for managing the project from start to end.
•Delivering project solution.
Change Management
role:
•Work towards change sustainability and integration.
•Communicate progress and impact on people readiness.
•People-side risk management.
•Focuses on people-side strategies and planning for change
adoption and timely benefits realisation.
•Follows change management lifecycle.
•Steps and tools for managing and motivating people who are
experiencing change.
•Concerned with the optimal ownership, use and benefit of
the delivered solution
I believe what is needed is a collaborative effort between
PMs and CMs where they both take responsibility for their own activities but
work together to ensure that these activities are fully aligned. While my PM
skills are used to good effect when planning CM activities I regard this as a
secondary skill. For the most part planning CM activities is quite simple e.g.
Communication… messages to be communicated, channels to be communicated
through, stakeholder groups to be communicated to and frequency of
communications. On the flip side I would argue that it is nigh on impossible
trying to plan activities such as culture change and managing employee
resistance especially the latter as this can crop up at any time and in any
shape or form. Change initiatives invariably throw you several “curved balls”
during their life-cycle which will not be on any plan and these have to be
dealt with intuitively and in a timely manner to ensure things do not go off
track.
In previous assignments I have worked in partnership with a
PM to deliver the solution required … each responsible for their own sections
of the plan and deliverables but jointly responsible for the delivery of the
overall solution. Of course there can be problems regarding delivery e.g. as a
CM my view is that a project should not go live until the Adoption/Business
Readiness tracking has achieved it’s intended target which may be at odds with
a PM’s deliverables and potentially delay a project. Having said that if you
can identify the “readiness” issue(s) that is/are causing the threat to go-live
early enough and then talk them through with the PM so both of you instigate
actions to bring the “readiness” back on track then this usually solves the
problem.
For me the CM and PM model of working in partnership is the
way forward, but unfortunately this is an overhead a lot of organisations will
not want to bear. The PM with a responsibility for change or conversely the CM
with a responsibility for PM just puts too much pressure on an individual and
they may not necessarily have the right experience and skill-set to manage both
elements.
Some additional
supporting information for you:
·
A report published by ESI, a project management
teaching provider, predicted that in 2013 many organisations will hold on to
the belief that their Project Managers lack key leadership skills such as
communications and negotiation skills. Yet companies will keep investing their
training budgets in cultivating “hard” skills, instead of instilling leadership
capabilities.
From Prosci:
Top change management obstacles 2012 Edition of Best
Practices in Change Management by Prosci cites “Disconnect between project
management and change management” being a major obstacle to success” … study respondents
noted conflicting priorities and misalignment between project management and
change management teams as a large obstacle to success. Respondents reported
that a lack of consensus on how to integrate the two practices became a large
challenge throughout the life of projects and often resulted in change
management playing “second fiddle” to project management. Specifically, study
participants cited difficulty involving and getting assistance from project
managers.
·
2012 benchmark study:
◦Projects with poor Change Management stay on schedule or
meet desired outcomes only 16% of the time.
◦A Project stood a 95% chance of success (defined as meeting
or exceeding project objectives) when using excellent Change Management.
◦Projects with excellent Change Management are on or ahead
of schedule 72% of the time.
·
From a LinkedIn Survey by Beyond Strategy in
2012:
How important is Project Management to Business Change success?
◦Critical = 27%.
◦Necessary = 68%.
◦Nice to Have = 5%.
How important is Change Management to Project
success?
◦Critical = 49%.
◦Necessary = 46%.
◦Nice to Have = 5%.
So there you have it. Don’t get me wrong I am all for some
kind of alignment of both disciplines and there has to be a focus on getting
the solution implemented. If that means either integrating both roles or having
separate roles for a CM and PM then so be it. There is an old saying that goes
“horses for courses” and that’s the way it should be.
Comments
Post a Comment