CONTINUAÇÃO....
roberto norori • PM is the focal point to any developing good or bad situation of the Management process, whether he or she reacts promptly or tardly to those situations, the point fingering is not ikely going to point anybody above or under the PM position. If the PM is not aware of this axioma, then he or she is going for unchartered territories
Andy Averre • I fully support and echo Tammo's comments. There are many variables and pressures on projects, and it will always be hard to reach a singular conclusion. I would also emphasise that Senior Execs/Project Sponsors have a significant influence on this topic. The other key dynamic is to understand and appreciate the changing nature of business demands for successful delivery of Projects. This will continue for years to come and is right now demanding that Project Professionals look at how they need to adapt to meet the new global business change demands.
Gideon Koch • Another way to look at it.
During my work as a consultant I can see the difference between organizational cultures.
One of the insights diagnoses is that self-managed firms with teams that are highly motivated, the firefighting is done quietly as part of the ongoing work.
The main issue is how the organization handles issues. One company idea was not to use the term "problems" rather than "cope with new challenges".
I always say: be in constant readiness for persistent changes!
Cheryl Allen • Excellent point from Andy! In my experience, the Project Sponsor or Executive Sponsor plays a very significant role on projects. The Standish Group reports have consistently shown that an involved Executive Sponsor is a key factor in project success. And the most recent 2013 PMI Pulse of the Profession survey backs this up. The Executive Sponsor is the project manager's key contact with senior executive management in the rest of the organization. This role can create an environment for project success by ensuring that the project is in alignment with the strategic goals of the organzation, by proactively working with the project manager to resolve triple constraint trade-offs, and by championing the project with other cross-functional senior executives. On the other hand, a demanding, unsupportive and unresponsive Executive Sponsor can create a chaotic environment for the project manager -- resulting in unreasonable demands, last minute changes, and lots of firefighting ---
Edilson Barros, PMP® , MBA • Pay attention to these symptoms:
- No time to solve all the problems,
- The solutions are incomplete and/or interim, only the superficial aspects are resolved,
- The problems reoccur and often overflow,
- Incomplete solutions make old problems reappear or create new problems,
- The urgency precedes the importance
- Long term activities or efforts for permanent solution are postponed because you need solve immediate problems,
- Many problems become crises
- Problems "ferment" until they explode, usually before a deadline.
In summary, if you are experiencing these effects in your company, your organization may not be the "Fire Department" but your routine is "putting out the latest fires".
Prabhakant Shukla, PMP • In short, Because PMBOK says PM should be pro active but in reality PM is really busy and turns out to be only reactive.
Geoff Warnock • Prabhakant - you can be 'busy' or you can be 'productive'. If you fail to properly plan a project, or are not afforded the opportunity to properly plan the project, you cannot manage it - period. You cannot manage what you have not planned. Managing is proactive by simply addressing the gap between what has been planned and what is happening. If there is no planning, there is a gap that requires constant and at times frantic reactive measures. There IS a reality that the PM is in fact managing by objectives and conducting continuous gap analysis and making mid-course corrections and those PM's are indeed fortunate to have the support of their organizations. I equate most of the other organization managers / directors with the person that says to the his family "Let's go on a 4-week holiday to 'xyz' destination!" Everyone jumps in the car with no thought of what needs to be done / taken etc. to support the holiday plan. Off they go - and from the minute they leave the house, the questions start and the reactionary actions begin, and the cost goes up, and the holiday is soon a bad memory before it's even met the destination. Not everyone plans their holidays like that - but they'll allow themselves to initiate a project like that with no PM or no time for an assigned PM to plan accordingly and then act surprised when it too is soon a bad memory before the project is even finished. What a shame!
Guy Bélanger • If the project plan was built with SME leads that will be involved in the delivery of the solution, so having a good baseline to start with;
If the PM is tracking the Project Plan activities vs the baseline, hopefully using Earned Value technique, to have a good idea of how the project is performing in term of schedule and in term of budget;
If the PM is doing Risk Management, tracking issues to closure, etc…;
If the PM is facing a last minute problems, not identified during the risk management;
In my book, he/she is not a firefighter but he/she is a Project Management.
On the other end, if the PM is:
Tracking Scope;
Not tracking Project Progress ( time & budget );
Spending more time as business analysis instead of doing Project Management;
You will probably have a firefighter in that project and not a Project manager.
Project can be delivered by firefighter, but the project will NOT run smoothly.
Project will be delivered by Project Manager, with least stress to the PM than to the FF.
At the end, unfortunately, some organization, will recognized more the firefighter than the project manager.
Edilson Barros, PMP® , MBA • I would like to add one more comment on the great comments so far, already gave to realize that this is one of the most serious and common situation in many organizations. And from what I could tell by the number of comments, this syndrome is produced by the lack of a systematic approach to problem solving and the correct project management, in other words, we have to get away from temporary solutions or postponed, which leads to the accumulation of problems, otherwise, management becomes an arduous effort of deciding which crisis can be temporarily ignored.
The collision of the Mars Climate Orbiter satellite is an example of the dangers of the syndrome "fires off". A simple communication error caused the disaster: an engineering team used metric units of measurement while the other group used English units (feet). The blunder was not detected in time - the work team was small and engineers were overworked. No time for a previous analysis before making decisions.
Rajesh Mishra • First and foremost, there should be sound project plan, loaded with risks and their mitigation plans. This should be approved in letter and spirit from all stakeholders including the client.
Then comes putting this plan into action religiously and tracking the same diligently. A project manager would have to be on top of this plan to identify the leakages (time, effort, money/etc) coming and should be able to fore-see the risks thereby and sound an alert upfront.
Once those risks (some of them pointed by Ray in the beginning of the discussions) become invetible, the project manager can handle them in the best way to minimize the impact as he has done the risk management as part of the plan and that's a duty or responsibility of a PM.
So reaction to last minute problems is nothing but part of project management I believe.
Max Wideman • 6 days ago Mark Palmquist said: "Three potential reasons why a Project Manager fights fires come easily to mind: vague project charter, poor planning, and ignoring risks."
There's a fourth reason. Well planned project runs smoothly. Everybody thinks it must be easy. Hence little visibility, no glory and ultimately less effective outcome. Ergo, create crisis, solve crisis promptly, everyone is amazed and in awe. Much attention paid to project and its outcome. Leave project smelling like roses.
Jennifer Clémence Graham MBA, PMP/PR2, ISO27, ITIL/OCM Exp • That is the difference between a good PM and one that just has the title.... There are many really bad PMs out there...
Prabhakant Shukla, PMP • Yes Edilson, this is also because Project manager these days are more focused on how to save cost and resources rather than thinking top quality product or add value to product.
Lars Goran Villasenor Carlsson, PMP • I agree completly with Victor Changs comment
Mark Lewis • There have been many excellent responses so far and I run the risk of just reiterating the message in them, but:
It's important to have firefighting skills. You can't anticipate all the issues, and things rarely go according to plan, BUT that's not the job. Part of the job of a PM is to minimize the need for firefighting but even that is not really the job.
It's a serious mistake, and a detriment to our 'profession', to think that firefighting is where the glory is. The value to the organization is in accomplishing the purpose of the project and preserving the value proposition, in spite of the inevitable need for some firefighting. Executives will know this because their focus is on strategy and the alignment of what you are supposed to accomplish with those strategic goals. Middle managers may not as they are mostly focused on operations.
So the question is:
Would you rather receive praise from the executive for accomplishing their goals in spite of the issues you had to face and solve, or praise from the operations manager for being a good firefighter even though you really didn't accomplish anything more important.
Ray Funck • I reiterate my simpler philosophy. P,P,P,P,P,R. acronym for: Pi$$ Poor Planning Produces Pi$$ Poor Results. My character ultimately continues to dictate so I have had many multiple experiences with the 4th reason pointed out and I quote: "Well planned project runs smoothly. Everybody thinks it must be easy. Hence little visibility, no glory and ultimately less effective outcome". The ultimate is the reality that it IS a good outcome. However the recognition received is less attention. I just do not like poorly executed projects. I cannot shake that. There are times though that when no one has come up with the solution I have found myself being the, "savior" or the one who provides the last line of defense that saved the project and my establishment has confidence in that either with a sigh of appreciation or begrudging admittance spoken or not spoken.
Max Wideman • Actually, Ray, I have always rather liked being asked to move in and fix a project in extreme difficulty – simply because it is difficult to do worse than the previous incumbent and the chances of an accolade are much higher. As for your "P,P,P,P,P,R. acronym", let's call it your "P5R" philosophy. That's only three characters rather than a tedious eleven. ;-)
(I'm just kidding, but I too dislike poorly run projects and try to use my influence to get it run better and am happy to see the compliments go to the leader. )
Ray Funck • @Max. Understood. My attitudes and work philosophy are just that.....mine. I have always liked "fixing" more complex issues. I am not in the industry of seeking glory either I am in the industry of projects. I simply enjoy providing a job well done to the best my abilities and of the organizations ability. It reflects my personal brand as well as the company stamp. Ultimately I may outlive the company but my footprint may still be present beyond their longevity and reflects my quality of work.
Chris Baas • Really good comments! A small addition to Cheryl'd description of management / company culture.
When I enter a new company I scan it for its level of 'firefighting' and the appreciation & 'glory' for it. If this is above a certain level then I mix some 'firefighting' into my tactics. (Yes, to answer your question, indeed, sometimes I willingly let a situation develop into a hot fire / crisis.) By doing this I earn 'glory' points in this company and the associated appreciation. At some point, I can use my 'glory' points to start the inevitable change in this company from reactive to pro-active.
For the source of my addition, just have a look at John Cleese in the Ministry of Silly Walks ;-).
Alex Matulich, PMP • "Why so many professionals say they are managing projects, when in reality they are just reacting to the latest last-minute problems?"
I can't answer for "so many" professionals, but I can answer for some. Having worked in the Department of Defense (where Earned Value Management was invented) my experience was that project management is quite formalized with good attention to communication and risks (and of course, EVM). But even then, Unexpected Things do come up.
A event considered unlikely to occur can still occur (say, an aircraft crashing into the Pentagon). One can know, for example, that available resources won't handle a certain eventuality. When unlikely events occur, the project manager, as one coworker put it, becomes "busy peeing on the fires closest to his boots", giving an impression of disarray, poor planning, short term thinking, etc.
Yes, there are project managers and organizations who make a habit out of poor practices. But I'll say of the good ones: even if one plans, communicates, and manages risks perfectly, unplanned disasters happen. One does one's best with the resources one has. Part of our job is to put out the fires, and we all try our best to avoid letting the flames get near enough to lick our boots.
Emily Bidois • Very true, as they want to keep their face alive and thye dont want to be known that there is weakness in the company
Ray Funck • @Emily. I quote, "A company is only as strong as its weakest link.".
On the other comments expressed it is true there is some, "firefighting" that will have to be done. Nature of the beast. In my field which is technology it is important to reduce the variables to controlled risks. The more negative variables that have been removed the better the attention can be given to more pressing issues. There comes a sense of confidence that the right path is being taken without worry. The amount of variables have been removed as suspicious threats to success which will then give momentum to the project. A base philosophy that weighs in is that no one can predict the future. Professionals have touched base on it already however I support the concept again that the first element is the person that is in the position of project manager that has a value system which dictates a strong organizational ethic and focus towards quality in what they produce as an individual...even in the face of adversity. Of course then we begin dealing with politics and personal ego's so keeping in mind that discretion is the better part of valor may apply. The truth will always set you free even in projects.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário