web: email: [email protected] cup to be hosted at ten new and major refurbished world class...

“Oftentimes, it is difficult for people to put the project and

overall goals ahead of their individual objectives.”

Steven Lang, PMP

What you need to know about

Managing Change

How to develop a Program

Management Structure for

your Organisation

MARCH/APR

IL 2

00

9

FOR MEMBERS AND FRIENDS OF THE PMSA

The magnificent Gautrain on the test tracks at the depot near Midrand, Gauteng

web: www.pmisa.org.za email: [email protected]

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

�

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

�

P r e si de

nt’

s P

e

n

I can’t believe that I have been in the position of CEO of PMSA for more than seven months. It has been a bit of a whirlwind of establishing an infrastructure,

improving systems, refining my strategic plan and doing my best to show measurable results to the Board that appointed me, and the members that I serve. I knew it would be hard work, but I never really imagined it would also be fun...and it has been.

With just two other permanent, part-time resources: administration officer, Stacey Bacon, and financial consultant Sue Gornall, ours is a small team with much to do in our allocated four hours a day. But we have had wonderful support from our Executive Committee members, our individual members and the companies that support PMSA as registered education and training providers (RETPs) or by sending us multiple members to add to our growing numbers.

I am inspired on an ongoing basis by how much time, effort and energy the volunteers who are so passionate about this growing profession are willing to contribute. Some days, my biggest challenge is keeping up with the ideas and actions that volunteers want to implement, and linking these to my strategic objectives. It is all starting to gel and the phrase ‘build it and they will come’ has run through my mind several times in the past months, particularly in February and March when two new practice communities were launched and a third found a ready-made committee in the audience of one of the others.

We also re-launched the Tshwane Branch and discovered a group of people ready and willing to kick off our first ever Eastern London branch. Another new venture for us has been to secure copies of PMI standards such as the PMBoK 4th Edition and offer these to members at a special price. As far as I know it’s the first time you have been able to purchase copies from our National Office, and we are looking at ways to extend the member benefit to those of you in areas other than Gauteng without incurring a courier cost.

With practice communities and branches being launched, ongoing member administration and renewals, courting new corporates, publishing ProjectNet and ProjectNet Xpress and generally doing what we can to keep members happy, some things have not developed as quickly as we had hoped. One of these is our website. We have been building up a lot of useful content to serve as a topic-specific repository for our members, but it has yet to find its way to the members-only section. I sincerely hope that by the time I write my next editorial, you will have seen real progress in this regard.

If you have any suggestions, contributions or constructive criticism regarding any aspect of PMSA and your membership, consider me your one-stop shop and call or drop me a line. We love hearing from you and invite you to join the fun in whichever way resonates with your own particular brand of passion for the profession.

T ime fl ies when you are having fun

The year 2009 is fast becoming

a massive sporting feast for all

South African sports lovers, with major

additional International sporting

fixtures being announced almost

every other month. The entrée is

getting better and better for the main

course – the second biggest sporting

event on our planet – the Fifa 2010

World Cup to be hosted at ten new

and major refurbished world class

stadiums around South Africa.

In Cricket: South Africa and

Australia are slugging it out in the

return ten matches series which is

being hosted at all of the major South

African cricket venues, which is turning

out to be one of the most memorable

recent back to back international

cricket series.

The IPL (Indian Professional League)

with its glamour and glitzy Bollywood

connections have 59 matches over six

weeks, together with the Champions

trophy over September and October

between 8 nations, are last minute

additions. This is a major achievement

by CSA (Cricket South Africa), who

moved much faster than the ECB

and thanks to our South African

connections in the ICC (International

Cricket Council). Who says friends in

high places do not help?

The irony is that the IPL is being

shifted from India to SA due to security

concerns as the Indian elections are falling in the

middle of the tournament to SA – the SA elections will

also be in the middle of the IPL. What does that say of

the maturity of our security in SA?

These two additional tours are most welcome

as they will bring some relief to the tourism and

hospitality industry and the CSA coffers, in these

trying economic times. Well done.

Then there is there is also the year end English

cricket tour to South Africa. The English cricket team

has a few South African born members which will no

doubt add to the normal rivalry.

In Rugby: SARU seems to be a well oiled machine

when it comes to project managing not only local

but international rugby tours. The Super 14, Tri Nations

and the bonus of the British & Irish Lions tours and the

host of local tournaments which are extremely well

contested and supported.

In Soccer: we have the Confederations cup in

June as a prelude to the World Cup;

In Tennis: We have international tennis tournaments

in the newly built Arthur Ash tennis stadium in Soweto:

In Athletics & Cycling: The Comrades Marathon

and the Cape Argus; In Golf: the Nedbank Million

dollar; In Swimming: The Midmar mile are unique

International events;

Various local and international pessimists are

rather silent at the unfolding of the confidence that

the world is showing in the new South Africa. Not

only can we host, but we are also fast becoming

very competitive and holding our own in most of the

sporting codes.

Those that have made many sacrifices and who

have campaigned that there can be no normal

sport in an abnormal society must now be smiling

at the rewards. Who could have predicted this

in 1994, the turning point and normalizing of the

South African political landscape, which resulted

in opening the flood gates of International sporting

events to be hosted in South Africa?

This bodes extremely well for our project managing

capabilities to rise up to the many challenges in

planning and executing of these complex sporting

projects that invariably have fixed dates that cannot

be moved.

The project management of these large and

complex sporting projects involves: the scheduling

of the itinerary to avoid clashes, the venues and it’s

relating logistics, the traveling and accommodation

arrangements of the many sports men & women,

support staff, local and international media and of

course the VIP’s, the security to all of these people,

the venues and the paying spectators, food &

beverages, entertainment, broadcasting facilities

and publicity amongst others.

South African project managers have become

extremely good in project managing of these major

international sporting events. Well done to all the

sports project managers for making South Africa one

of the leading sports host countries of the world.

So little time so many games to watch, I need to

give up my day job or become a sports journalist.

Let’s all show our support for these events and make

us proud South Africans.

Planning and budgeting challenges for PROJECT MANAGERS

Hareesh PatelTaryn van Olden

Ha

ree

sh P

ate

l PM

SA P

resid

en

t

Tary

n v

an

Old

en

CEO

of P

MSA

E d i t

or i

al

Email: [email protected]

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

�

For most of us, Gautrain has become synonymous with pride

and awe. It is awe-inspiring to know that South Africa has

the expertise necessary to build a project of this magnitude and

complexity. We are also proud of the fact that Gautrain uses best

global practices and technology to build a much-needed public

transport system in a province frustrated by traffic gridlocks.

Overall progress to date

The first four-car train set is being tested on the mainline test

track section near Midrand. Track laying and the installation of

overhead electrification masts are underway between Linbro Park

and Midrand.

Civil construction works on the Airport Link between OR Tambo

International Airport and Sandton has intensified. Stations and

viaducts on the airport link are making visible progress.

Construction of the external shell of the ORTIA Station concourse

is substantially complete and is visible above the elevated drop-

off road. Inside the concourse, brickwork and plastering has been

completed and finishing works have commenced. The Gautrain

Station concourse is directly linked to the departures level of the

adjacent new Central Terminal Building, one level below.

Viaduct assembly progress is impressive. The viaduct over

Allandale Road in Midrand was completed in April 2008 and

others are quickly nearing completion with the help of three

world-class launching girders.

Drill and blast tunnelling between Park Station and Marlboro

Portal is advancing well and the excavation of most emergency

shafts is in full swing. Just over 13km of total tunnelling has been

completed to date.

The construction of Gautrain’s ten stations is making good

progress. In many instances, parkade and station foundation

works are nearing completion. Of these, Sandton Station is the

most challenging, as it will be one of the deepest underground

stations in the world.

Construction of the Depot facilities, including both the Bus

Depot and the Train Depot administration buildings, is substantially

complete. Installation of the Operations Control Centre equipment

is in progress in the train depot administration building. This

centre will be the heartbeat of Gautrain from where signalling,

telecommunications, automatic fare collection, traction power

and overhead distribution CCTV cameras and maintenance will

be managed using world-class, high technology systems.

Project timeline

Construction started at the end of September 2006. Gautrain

will be completed in two phases:

• The first phase will be completed over 45 months. It

includes the network between the OR Tambo International Airport

and Sandton, and includes the stations at OR Tambo, Rhodesfield,

Marlboro and Sandton, together with the Depot and Operations

Control Centre located south of Allandale Road in Midrand.

• The second phase is scheduled for completion in 54

months, by the end of March 2011. It comprises the balance of

the north-south rail network and stations linking Sandton to Park

Station in Johannesburg and the route from Marlboro, past the

Depot and on to Pretoria and Hatfield stations.

GAUTRAIN The Golden Train for the people on the move

Gautrain is more than just a train. Based in the economic heartland of South Africa, it is one of several strategically integrated Gauteng Provincial Government projects to meet future

transport demands anticipated as a result of economic and population growth.

ProjectNet is an alternate monthly

publication produced by Cyan Sky

Communication Consultancy and distributed

free of charge to the members of PMSA, on

behalf of PMSA.

Editorial Director:

Prof Les Labuschagne, PMSA Board of Directors

Managing Editor:

Taryn van Olden

Design and Layout:

Tracey King

Reproduction and Printing:

Remata Inathi Communications and Printers

Please direct editorial submissions

and enquiries to:

The Editor, ProjectNet, [email protected]

or 082 779-1314.

Advertising enquiries can be directed

to The Editor at the above email address.

Project Management South Africa (PMSA)

can be contacted on (011) 257-8003, by

fax to 088 011 662-2961, or send email to

[email protected]

General contact details related to this

magazine:

Email: [email protected]

Website: www.projectnet.co.za

Address: PO Box 518 Featherbrooke Estate

Ruimsig 1746

Cover image:

Gauteng’s newest mode of transport is sleek

and photogenic. Read more on page 5.

Copyright©

The copyright of all material in this

magazine is reserved by the proprietors,

except where expressly stated. The editors

will, however, consider reasonable requests

for the use of information provided the

source and author are clearly attributed.

Please note: Editorial submissions are welcomed but are subject to review by the PMSA Exco, ProjectNet’s editorial team and editor before a decision is made regarding inclusion. Product- or service-specific information submitted in the form of a news item may be considered for publication in the Industry News section, but may not be accepted in any other section. Please contact the Editor for content classifications to guide your submissions. The editor reserves the right to shorten articles but will consult the author should any adjustments be deemed necessary.

th is e

dit

i onINSIDE

2010 Focus Hey Good-looking.

Have you seen the Gautrain? Pg �

Thought Leadership The Art and Science of Change Management Pg 6

Carts, Horses and the alignment

of projects to strategy Pg 10

Guest Column A Program Management Strategy Pg 14

How Questions Lead to Insight and Change Pg 18

Bookshelf Value Management Practice Pg �0

Industry News The GAPPS Working Committee comes to SA Pg �1

PMSA News Seen and Heard at PMSA events Pg ��

Industry Insight A synopsis of Careers24’s Salary Survey

research findings Pg �4

Dismantling of the Tunnel Boring Machine. The Tunnel Boring Machine (TBM) successfully completed the excavation of the single-track rail tunnel towards Shaft E2 on 31 January 2009, with a cumulative length of tunnel

bored of 2 885 metres.

T hought L

ea

de

rship

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

6

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

�

relationships there is far more opportunity for constructive

engagement and communication, and one would expect

a more positive picture. Alas, this is not necessarily the case.

Marriages end in divorce because couples fail to reach many of

the same outcomes that we listed above. Many parents struggle

to understand their teenage children, and often complain that it

is well-nigh impossible to communicate with them. Children in turn

complain about being misunderstood, about not being heard by

their parents.

The first step towards ensuring good change management is

to avoid underestimating the difficulty, complexity and scope

of work required. If we paused to look beyond the apparent

simplicity and familiarity of change management outcomes like

alignment or understanding, we would realise that these and

others like them remain extremely elusive across the full range of

human co-existence, from a macro social level through to the

micro interpersonal level. There are no grounds for assuming that

we can achieve them any more easily within organisations.

�. PEOPLE WILL ONLY CHANGE IF THEY START DOING THINGS DIFFERENTLYThose who will be affected by organisational change can

often only truly understand the impact of change when they

are required to start doing things differently. The foundation for

sustainable change does not lie only in the “head” and “heart”

understanding and acceptance of what will change but

requires the “hands” being enabled to do things differently and

experiencing things differently.

We may strike comparisons between the work that goes into

a large organisational change initiative before implementation

and a wedding, and also between the actual implementation

and married life. The wedding (if it is a large one) involves many

months of hard work and careful planning of every detail. It is only

once the reception and honeymoon are over and the newlyweds

need to settle into married life that they will be required to start

doing things differently. How much actual preparation has most

people done and what type of support structures are in place for

this stage of the journey?

Similarly, organisations often deploy large project teams

(internal and external) with big budgets and much fanfare around

planned timeframes and activities to drive the implementation of

large change initiatives – a typical example of this would be the

implementation of large integrated business information systems.

Once the system is live and people are actually required to do

things differently, external consultants “roll off” the project, internal

resources go back to their old jobs and no or very little budget

remains to be applied to support and embed the change. This

causes a loss of momentum and the drive required to sustain the

change.

It is at this stage that affected stakeholders should actually

receive exceptional support and encouragement to make the

change happen and then stick. Newly implemented change is

like a very tiny seedling – it requires careful nurturing to allow

it to grow and become strong enough to survive on its own. Of

course, it is not enough that the project team (or at least part of

the team) merely maintains a presence for some time after the

implementation of change – they also need to be focused on the

right things, such as:

• Ongoing communication, support and guidance to

stakeholders.

• Ongoing issue resolution.

• Effective “hand-over” processes and facilitation to ensure

that key project activities required for ongoing sustainability

are carried over into the post-project phase by permanent

role players who accept responsibility for this.

• Alignment of organisational processes to support the new

reality – this includes recruitment, induction, performance

management and training and development.

�. PEOPLE DON’T MIND CHANGE, BUT THEY DO MIND BEING CHANGEDPeople tend to be unaffected by communications regarding

an impending change until they truly get to understand (and

ultimately feel) how it affects them. Simply telling people about

change is not an effective way of managing change - especially if

the “telling” takes the (sadly quite typical) form of a bombardment

of unrealistic hype and inappropriate content through one-way,

mass communication channels such as email, intranets, electronic

newsletters and posters. We call this “change management

lite” – it may make project leadership feel comfortable that the

change management team is producing the goods, but could in

reality cause more problems than it supposedly solves by creating

unrealistic expectations, squandering valuable communication

opportunities, creating more distance between stakeholders

and the project team, and ultimately leaving stakeholders

People tend to be unaffected by

communications regarding an impending change

until they truly get to understand (and ultimately

feel) how it affects them. Simply telling people about

change is not an effective way of managing change

by Ivan Overton, Jannie du Toit & Marilise Smit - ChangeWright Consulting, Johannesburg, South Africa

Change management is a combination of science and art – in the practice of change management, the “what” is often a science, but much of the “how” will always remain an art, as much a function of who you are than of what you know. The “how” is also where much

of the magic of change management – and many potential pitfalls – may be encountered.

FIVE FUNDAMENTAL OBSERVATIONS ABOUT MANAGING CHANGE

Large-scale organisational change is often implemented

by means of projects that have tight deadlines, limited

internal and external resources and fixed budgets. Effective

change management in such project environments requires

a practical, results-focused and deadline-driven approach. A

well-defined methodology and toolset that can be adapted

easily to unique requirements and circumstances can enable

change facilitators (which could be organisational leaders,

internal or external change managers or even project team

members) to add value rapidly and effectively.

A practical change methodology and efficient tools

are usually necessary but never sufficient preconditions for

good change management, for these are largely limited

to what must be done. In change management, how

things are done is often at least equally important. Getting

the “how” right requires a thorough understanding of how

people react to change, a strong sense of what would be

appropriate to the culture of the organisation, and a good

practical understanding of what is required to establish

change sustainably in the organisation (which would also

often require a good understanding of the relevant industry).

Furthermore, the change facilitator has to maintain a fine

balance between compassion and objectivity, creativity and

practicality, flexibility and delivering to plan.

The “what” can be learnt fairly easily, but the “how” comes

rather more slowly with experience. The really effective change

facilitators are those who are able to excel at both the “what”

and the “how”, while remaining authentic by contributing their

own personal uniqueness to particularly the “how”.1

This is a tall order indeed, and it is this combination of self,

art and craft that makes really good change management a

far more difficult proposition than what may be suggested by

a casual reading of material dealing with the “what”.

In our work over the past years, in practising this deceptively

difficult art and science, we have noticed some fundamental

truths that help to illuminate aspects of both the “how” and

the “what”, and we would like to share them here:

1. IT IS ALL TOO EASY TO UNDERESTIMATE CHANGE MANAGEMENT

In the course of our work, we have seen far too many

instances where change management has been under-

resourced, initiated too late or stopped too early, neglected

by leadership, and approached with woefully inadequate

standards and poor discipline.

It is true that the outcomes that we seek to achieve

– alignment, awareness, knowledge, understanding,

participation, commitment, collaboration, adoption, respect,

trust, empathy, and enthusiasm, to name but a few, are quite

simple in nature. And because they are concepts that are

quite familiar to us from our everyday life, we tend to think

“no big deal, we can easily work that into our project”. But it is

also true that a failure to reach these outcomes characterises

much of human social life with tragic consequences:

genocide, ethnic violence, state suppression and wars can

be cited as examples where humans failed to reach mutually

acceptable outcomes by peaceful means.

At the more personal and intimate level of interpersonal

T hought L

ea

de

rship

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

8

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

�

overwhelmed with irrelevance, ill-equipped for the change

and feeling left out in the cold when the real change starts

affecting them.

Those affected by change should not simply just “be told”

about the change before it happens. There should be less

hype and more real interaction – people change when they

talk, not when they listen. The project team and organisational

leadership should also take the time and make the effort to

get to grips with what the major change impacts will be and

how to prepare for this – not only will this help to ensure that

there are no major surprises, but it will generate real content

for constructive communication. Even before the change

starts affecting stakeholders, major change impacts should

be pro-actively addressed through well-laid enablement

plans, and there should be ongoing dialogue and interaction

in this regard. Being involved in getting ready for change, and

having a voice in this process has the effect of empowering

people and is a very valuable intervention in its own right.

4. PEOPLE WILL CHANGE: SOMETIMES BY SEEING THE LIGHT

BUT MORE OFTEN BY FEELING THE HEAT

Practical experience strongly supports Rogers’ innovation

curve2 (as generalised by Rogers from an early study by

Bohlen and Beal in the field of agriculture3 and depicted

below) - about 15% of people embrace change quite readily

(Rogers refers to them as Innovators and Early Adopters), and

the remaining 85% are naturally inclined (to varying extents)

to be more resistant to change.

Readiness to change is strongly influenced by subjective

perceptions of the desirability of the status quo versus the

desirability of a future state. If the status quo is more attractive

(less negatives, more positives) than the future state, change

is far less likely.

The Innovators and Early Adopters in Roger’s innovation

curve tend to see the positives in the future state more readily

– they have a tendency to “see the light” and require minimal

change management intervention (Innovators in particular

can also often become effective change agents), whilst the

remaining 85% require substantially more change facilitation.

Innovation adoption curve categories4

Innovators: Brave people, pulling the change, innovators

are very important communication

mechanisms.

Early adopters: Respectable people, opinion leaders, try

out new ideas, but in a careful way.

Early majority: Thoughtful people, careful but accepting

change more quickly than average people

do.

Late majority: Sceptical people will use new ideas or

products only when the majority is using it.

Laggards: Traditional people, caring for the “old ways”,

are critical towards new ideas and will only

accept it if the new idea has become

mainstream or even tradition.

Most change facilitators are naturally inclined to focus

on “the light” – the positive aspects of the future state. Often

the other component – “the heat” is neglected. However, as

one moves from left to right on Roger’s innovation curve, the

tendency is for people to become increasingly resistant to

seeing the light. Without a careful application of some “heat”,

it is therefore likely that a significant proportion of stakeholders

will attempt to extend the status quo, delaying timely and

effective adoption of change (and of course the benefits

associated with the realisation of the change).

“Creating heat” simply means making the current

situation less comfortable. This can be achieved through

mechanisms which include targeted dialogue, peer pressure,

the careful introduction of elements of competition among

different organisational units, realignment of performance

management agreements, applying leverage through

mechanisms for reward and recognition, and increasing

management pressure for change. It is important when

working with interventions that are aimed at creating more

“heat” to remain true to the principle that no harm should be

done to the individual or the organisation.

The “creating heat” dynamic is well represented in the Nel’s

ESP (Empathy, Space and Pressure) approach to change5. Even

though there will be a few people who adopt and commit to

change quickly and quite easily, there will always be others who

experience discomfort in some form and find it harder to commit

to the change.

• Regardless of the phase of a change initiative, Empathy

needs to be pervasive and requires, inter alia, time to

digest information and to interact with others to debate

the change with freedom from fear that questioning and

voicing concerns will be interpreted as resistance or a

cause for victimisation.

• During the early stages of the change initiative methods

should be employed that offer or create personal Space

that enable people to experience their early human

responses to change and thereby better prepare

themselves for the change. Nel holds that methods that

offer space create the foundation upon which a creative

minority and eventual critical mass can work to build a

committed – although probably inactive and cautious -

majority.

• Pressure methods make it increasingly impossible for people

not to change their behaviours, attitudes and responses.

�. IT REALLY MATTERS WHO “DOES” CHANGE MANAGEMENTIf change management is as much about how you do things as

what you do, and if the “how” is very dependent on the person

who does it, then you should pay very careful attention to who

you employ as change facilitators, and to the roles that you

expect them to fulfil.

Internal versus external resourcesThe ability and capacity to change effectively and sustainably is a

strategic organisational resource – custodianship of this strategic

resource should never be outsourced to external consultants.

Having said that, large change initiatives often place enormous

pressure on internal resources and it makes sense to employ

consultants to assist with the effort.

Organisations should take great care to ensure that they

understand who – at an individual level – will be employed as

external change facilitators, and that these individuals are

suitably qualified and a good “fit” to the organisation.

Good external change consultants should always do their

best to “work themselves out of a job” by enabling leaders to play

the role they should to ensure the successful implementation of a

change initiative and, as far as possible, by working with internal

resources to explicitly transfer applicable skills and knowledge.

The role of leadershipProject teams appointed to deliver change initiatives often take

on an inappropriate role – they try to “sell” the initiative to the

organisation and take accountability for business issues, thereby

implicitly taking ownership for the decision to change, as well

as the outcomes of the change. A more correct positioning of

typical top-down change initiatives in organisations would be that

the senior leadership of the organisation takes explicit ownership

of the decision to change and for the outcomes of change,

and then delegates part of the responsibility for the outcomes

of change to next level of leadership. The project team then

becomes correctly positioned as a resource appointed to help

effect the change.6

The leader’s explicit and visible ownership of the decision to

change needs to be real. It is not wise nor a sustainable strategy

to create false energy by launching a project if leadership does

not have the energy nor the appetite for the change.

Leaders should also have a thorough understanding of how

the change relates to the bigger organisational picture:

• the nature of change

• the impact of change

• whether and how the change supports the organisation’s

strategic objectives

• the organisation’s ability and capacity to deal with change

and whether the organisation is actually experiencing

change “overload”.

They need to understand that much of the success of the

change initiative is dependent on them as leaders, have a

good grasp of the relevant change leadership roles they will

be expected to fulfil and understand the initiative timeline and

detail approach adequately to know where, when and how they

should participate.

IN CONCLUSIONChange management has the potential for adding great value

if done well, or great damage if done poorly. For this reason, it

should be afforded a great deal of attention by all role players in

organisational change, who will be well served by observing the

dictum “do no harm to the individual or the organisation”.

In summary, five fundamental observations regarding

effective change management are:

• Do not underestimate what will be required to manage

change effectively.

• Enable and support people most at the time when they are

required to do things differently. Engage simply, honestly

and consistently with those affected by the change, allow

lots of opportunity for dialogue and interaction.

• By all means show people the light, but don’t forget to also

turn up the heat (but with empathy).

• It matters greatly who facilitates the change – this group

should ALWAYS include leadership who should play a very

significant role.

1 This statement might seem a little esoteric, and might be better explained by an example from the performing arts: Robert de Niro would be considered by most movie buffs to be an excellent actor. He has played in a wide variety of roles, always very convincingly. Yet in every role that he plays, he remains very recognisably Robert de Niro. He brings himself into every role he plays, which makes for so much more authenticity. One cannot engage effectively at a personal level with others as a change facilitator without similar authenticity. 2 Rogers, Everett (2003). Diffusion of innovations. (5th ed). Free Press.3 Bohlen, Joe M.; Beal, George M. (May 1957), “The Diffusion Process”, Special Report No. 18 (Agriculture Extension Service, Iowa State College)v4 Rogers, Everett (2003). Diffusion of innovations. (5th ed). Free Press.5 Christo Nel, “The ESP of Change - A structured way to facilitate constructive transformation.”, 1997.6 Ivan Overton, “Why change goes wrong”, 2007, a publication by ChangeWright Consulting (Pty) Ltd

T hought L

ea

de

rship

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

10

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

11

As shocking as this may sound, “putting your cart before

the horses” does not constitute the only inappropriate

manner of configuring cart and horses – one could

definitely identify quite a few instances whereby horses are

literally sitting “beside” the cart or, worse still, “inside” of it.

Indeed, unfortunate projects outcomes experienced

on a daily basis in organizations ranging from private to

public sectors would rather suggest that the silliest (and

probably the most detrimental) configuration of cart and

horses is to actually put your horses in their right place

(in front of the cart, that is) but fail to suitably yoke them

together; what a pandemonium will this not create once

the two, four, or perhaps twelve horses start galloping,

each one in their own likely direction? If sheer luck would

still hold the cart in one piece, it might well easily find itself

“belly up” – records of some public sector programmes

may bear witness to this blunder.

It is therefore critical that programmes, projects and

similar initiatives (whether capital or maintenance or even

organisational in nature – including any combinations

thereof) that are designed to achieve the same strategic or

business objectives be properly aligned and coordinated

by way of both “vertical alignment” (i.e. to the overall

organization’s strategy or goals) and “horizontal alignment”

(i.e. to any other projects and to the current/future

operations), or else independently successful programmes

(and projects) would not secure overall success and/or

organisational advancement.

Michael Stanleigh, CEO of Business Improvement

Architects (BIA), in his recent article titled “From Crisis to

Control: A New Era in Strategic Project Management”

contends, “Corporations throughout the world are losing

billions in wasted project spending and this waste is

being carefully hidden from management and investors.

A new global research reports shows that one of the

biggest contributing factors to failed projects is the lack of

alignment of projects with corporate strategy”. He goes

on to suggest that the first thing organisations need to

know (and apply) in order to move “from crisis to control”

on their projects is to “ensure all projects are strategically

aligned” – programmes and projects ought to be aligned

to both corporate and departmental strategic plans; but

only 32% of the 750 organizations surveyed did apply!

While it could be appreciated that more and more

organizations are sorting out “vertical alignment” concerns,

not many of those would, at this stage, claim to have

also achieved a workable “horizontal alignment” – e.g.,

the City Council of Johannesburg can boast of a fully-

fledged Integrated Development Planning (IDP) process

that is entirely aligned to its “2030 World Class African City”

strategy but more inter-department alignment is perhaps

needed to prevent its departments from scoring against

each other, which might defeat overall success.

To drive this kind of “horizontal alignment”, some

organisations now request that every single capital project

be supported by a solid Business Case which, in addition to

demonstrating the usual “strategic fit” and other financial

viability in as far as the sponsoring Business Unit (BU) is

concerned, should demonstrate positive impacts on the

broad community, on other Divisions or Business Units

– albeit mostly financial at this stage – and on corporation

as a whole. This surely is a commendable endeavour and

should be taken further.

It would follow that, despite the encouraging fact that

an increasing number of organizations are striving to design

programmes, projects, initiatives and work-streams that

sufficiently contribute to their overall strategy, it so often

happens that by the very attempt of realizing the portfolio

of projects aimed at the pursuance of the organisation’s

(strategic) objectives, such “project efforts” will somehow

conflict, impede or defeat one another, compromising

the value chain within the organization – which leads to

dysfunctional performance, if not utter failure!

The general assessment of the “misalignment” that

has occurred in many organizations (in both public and

private sectors 2) is that some of the most laudable

initiatives, which have cost billions of Rands to generous

South African consumers and tax-payers, have actually

come to naught – if not to a negative value – owing to

either or both of the following reasons:

(1) Inadequate or lack of alignment with other (i.e. current

or future) projects/initiatives, which has resulted in

conflicts in terms of priorities, allocation of funding

(e.g., capital rationing), allocation of key resources,

availability of required capabilities, timing of benefits

realization, limited human ability to bear the “burden

of change” 3 stemming from the sheer volume of

programmes, projects and other strategic initiatives

being undertaken within the organization at any

point in time, etc – e.g., if the new baby clinic is to be

completed this year whereas the new road (including

bridges) leading to the clinic is only to be budgeted

for in the next three-year plan, very little value will be

accrued to the community until then.

(2) Various organizational domains (generally external to

the project or initiative environment) that either affect

the project (i.e. applicable legislation, supporting

capabilities, appropriate mindset, etc) or could be

affected by its outcomes (i.e. existing infrastructure,

current and future operations) were not reviewed

and re-engineered to adequate levels of readiness

Carts and Horses

By Pascal Bohulu Mabelo, MBA, Pr Eng, P2R, PMP, Pr CPM, Pr PMSAPortfolio Executive: Project Management Centre of Excellence at Transnet Capital Projects (TCP)Board Director – Project Management Institute South Africa (PMSA)

Using an allegorical and novel-like style, the author applies the concept of “cart and horses” to tell the sad story of how projects are still failing due to lack of strategic alignment; while an increasing number of organizations are ensuring that their programmes, projects and similar initiatives are (vertically) aligned to the overall strategy, very few organizations are also aligning those projects/initiatives (horizontally) to one another and to work-streams …

Pascal may be contacted for comments via Email to [email protected]

We have often heard of “cart and horses” – which

we might have seen on television or on a

cinema-screen. The cart could represent what we

want to carry from point (A) to point (B), just like any

organization would want to move from its current status

( ) to a more desirable status ( ) 1; however, without the

strength of horses, which here represent programmes

and projects, such an undertaking might prove difficult,

if not impossible. The power resides in the horses!

To implement a strategy, it must be translated

(i.e. broken down in a structured approach) into

programmes and projects, which then need to be

effectively executed to bring about success.

In ancient times, horses were instrumental in war

situations; they provided fighting capabilities to warriors

who fought on horseback or on chariots pulled by one

or two horses. In those days, horses were so impatient for

battle that once the battle cry is heard, they would not

turn back – not even on account of the sword – except

at the command of the halter or driver. Later on, even

as they were utilised in non-military tasks, horses still

demonstrated the same attributes: an unwavering

resolve to carry the “load” and to move ahead until

commanded otherwise. No wonder somebody fittingly

coined the term “horse-power”.

Over the ages, mankind has also come to realize

the unsuitability of “putting your cart before the horses”

– and the saying goes: “Do not put your cart before the

horses”, we have all been warned one time or another.

Why shouldn’t we? Well, because the cart will simply

not move!

In the Project Management context, “putting your

cart before the horses” is, in the extreme, tantamount

to attempting to paint a wall before one has actually

erected it; questions should be asked as to one’s

ability to think, let alone think straight. But do we not

still stumble across “project schedules” that suggest

such ineptness? Do we not still find organizations

procuring and installing complex (and very expensive)

“management systems” before having developed

capabilities to utilise and support these through training

and/or in-sourcing of competent staff?

T hought L

ea

de

rship

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

1�

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

1�

so as to accommodate project success – e.g., the

relatively slow pace at which tertiary institutions are

churning out graduates in critical areas such as

engineering could hamper the current government-

led infrastructure programme and slow down

economic growth.

Alignment, however, should be designed-in

(proactive) as opposed to patched-up (reactive), since

attempting to hitch those horses that are already

galloping adrift could prove perilous.

In seeking to achieve horizontal alignment,

it is generally recommended that all the relevant

organizational domains amongst the following be

considered for review and re-engineering:

• Organizational Architecture

What governance structure, reporting arrangements,

and managerial interfaces with outer organisations are

needed to effect the project and bear the “burden of

change” 3 it entails?

• Safety, Health and Environment

What safety, health and environmental interventions are

needed for a successful project?

• Infrastructure Systems

What infrastructure or utilities are needed to

accommodate the project and its outcomes?

• Human Resources

What skills are required before, during, and even after

the implementation of the project?

• Information and Communication Technology (ICT)

What communication systems and protocols will be

adequate in effecting the project?

• Transport Facilities

What transport systems would best facilitate people’s

movement in relation to the project?

• Inbound and Outbound Logistics

What else is needed to facilitate the flow of goods in

and out of the project “environment”?

• Financial Systems

Will their current setting and workings cope with the

likely nature / volume of transactions?

• Other Projects/Initiatives (not necessarily of similar

nature, but “correlated” nonetheless)

What other initiatives (i.e. current and future) could

affect or be affected by this project?

The above list is only indicative. The aim of the whole

exercise consists in finding the balance between “doing

nothing” (and end up with a misaligned portfolio)

and “changing the world” by re-engineering nearly

everything in the environment (which is neither feasible

nor necessary).

We really do not want to talk about new school

curricula being launched before teachers have been

trained and equipped (with the necessary materials) to

suitably dispense learning or about companies running

projects with overlapping scopes or with conflicting

timeframes; however, if there is any way we could bring

about the realisation that good projects/initiatives could

still produce detrimental outcomes (let’s rather say,

organisational disbenefits) because of misalignment or

similar concerns, then we have somewhat achieved our

humble purpose.

We therefore sincerely hope that our World Cup

2010 Local Organizing Committee (LOC), in addition to

building world-class stadiums (thus creating 10,000+ new

jobs), are considering alignment issues such as these

and that they are engaging the relevant stakeholders,

or else the much cherished “2010 Cart” could descend

into a disheartening pandemonium.

Oh, if at least the high speed underground train

(or Gautrain Project), which might be argued to have

“nothing to do with 2010”, could have been re-arranged

so that the “O.R. Tambo – Sandton” link (connecting

Johannesburg’s international airport to its upmarket

hotel hub) would be completed by June 2009, just in

time for the Confederation Cup!

Questions that still remain are, amongst others: Will

our consulate, border-control, police, and correctional

functions be up to the challenge? Will communications

lines accommodate the increased flow of data (i.e.

up to 60 Mbps, from the current 1 Mbps) without much

clogging? What about protocols with external law

enforcement platforms such as Interpol and Narcotics

Bureau? What about health facilities and the availability

of nurses, paramedics? Will Eskom (i.e. SA sole power-

utility company) generate and supply enough electricity

during the event? (although load shedding reports

of 2008 would perhaps warrant a bigger question

mark here!)

In conclusion, we wish to reiterate the critical necessity

of properly aligning any new programmes, projects and

other similar initiatives, firstly, to the organisation’s overall

strategy and, secondly, to any other current/future

initiatives and to all existing operations and work-streams

as well; for “No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an

old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from

the old, making the tear worse!” [Mark 2:21] – should the

existing “infrastructure” (i.e. administrative, utility, policy,

etc) not be adequately re-engineered to accommodate

all new programmes and projects, overall performance

could indeed worsen.

We therefore ought to ensure that not only our horses

are put in front of the cart but that they also are of

“matching strength” 4 and carefully hitched, which of

course is equally important. 5

Moreover, said the Wiseman, “Locusts have no king,

yet they advance together in ranks.” [Proverb 30:27]

– Yes, they do not need a king for they all understand

their common purpose (i.e. vertical alignment) and

“advancing together in rank” (i.e. horizontal alignment)

is what actually makes them efficient, as the damage to

the crop may eloquently testify behind them.

It is surely not for “lack of knowledge” that organizational

projects are still perishing: there is a sufficient body of

knowledge pertaining to strategic planning and to what

is nowadays referred to as stakeholder analysis and

operational readiness (which might need to be elevated

to the strategic level for the technique to work) that could

assist in building a sound alignment model – please be so

ambitious as to try this out and do join us in promoting this

alignment concept.

1 “IL PROGRESSO E NON IL REGRESSO” [Latin] — Standing still means falling behind; hence, organisations that are not moving to a higher level of performance would not survive for they shall be overtaken by competition.

2 Is it because executives are rewarded on short-term and individual targets (versus overall performance)? Or because they seldom step back to ascertain whether all organisational initiatives are “weaving” together?

3 Change, albeit beneficial, entails “adjustments” to the status quo and usually causes “encumbrances” as well.

4 Or else the weakest horse will not pull its weight but will be carried by others, which then creates an infirmity. Likewise, the project or domain with the least capabilities could impose a constraint to the overall value chain.

5 Alignment is powerful as it creates synergy: “aligned” projects produce more power than their individual sum!

G u es t C

olu

mn

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

14

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

1�

WHY A PROGRAM?An organisation invests in a program

• To create a central focus

• To accelerate change

• To manage effective benefit realisation

And to realign the organisation to:

• Meet the changing demands of its business environment

• Improve service delivery

•Capitalise on business opportunities

This investment and realignment is underpinned by people,

business process improvement and technologies

How does a Program fit into an Organisation?THE PROGRAM THEMESA key component of program management, are the Program

Management Themes:

• Benefits Management

• Stakeholder Management

• Program Governance

Benefits Management is the definition and formalisation of

the expected benefits of the Program. It includes tangible and

non-tangible benefits and includes the planning, modelling

and tracking of intermediate and final results through the

program lifecycle

Stakeholder Management includes those individuals and

organisations whose interests may be positively or negatively

affected by the program outcomes. These stakeholders can

be positive or negative in themselves toward the program.

Governance is the process of developing,

communicating, implementing, monitoring and assuring the

policies, procedures, organisational structures, and practices

associated with a given program.

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PLANNING Program planning is iterative and is dependent on information

from the components. Main outputs of program planning

are:

• Interface Planning

• Transition Planning

• Resource Planning

Interface Planning is aligned to stakeholder management.

Interfaces must be created and mapped to all interrelationships

which exist in the program and must take into account the

organisational constraints and structures.

Transition Planning is performed together with the team

and/or recipients of the outputs of the program. Transition

planning is ongoing and iterative until the final product,

service or result of the program is delivered. Together with

a formal signoff, all training, requirement, templates and

documents must be provided to the recipient.

Resource planning is determining the people, equipment

and material resources required throughout the lifecycle of

the program.

THE PROGRAM ORGANISATION

The Program Board Is cross-functional, and represents a key stakeholder group and makes decisions, as well as: • Initiates the Program• Approves plans and authorises deviations• Monitors progress, benefit delivery and costs• Provides guidance on issues• Manages resource availability across the program • Performs strategic progress reporting• Establishes frameworks and limits• Provides compliance direction

The Program Management Offices which support the process are: 1. The Program Management Office which centralises and

coordinates the management of programs and projects under its domain

2. The Program Office which provides program management support through standardised program policies and procedures

THE PROGRAM MANAGEMENT PROCESSThe program process suggests that Program Managers are

outcomes focused. The Program Manager manages the

project managers to perform their processes through a series

A PROGRAM MANAGEMENT strategy

By Karin Deacon and Adrian Love l-Hall

The purpose of this paper is to provide the requirements, processes and procedures to develop a Program Management Structure for an organisation. It will show how the Program Management Themes, Plans and Offices link the Corporate Strategy

and Direction to the effective management of a Program through various phases from concept to closure by identifying, managing and realising the benefits for that Program.

PMI®’s best practise Standard for Program Management defines a program as a group of related projects

managed in a coordinated way to obtain benefit and control not available from managing them individually. Programs may include elements of related work outside of the scope of the discrete projects in the program.Characteristics of a Program include:• A Program Goal, which answers the question, “what do

we have to achieve?”• Operational impacts and dependencies which need to

be managed• Identification and Prioritisation of program components

PROGRAM COMPONENTS

Program components are made up of projects and

operational work. Each component will have their own

management processes and the work of the component

will still be performed according to its objectives. This means

that the project components will have Project Managers

who will manage their projects according to Scope,

Time, Cost and Quality. The operational components will

manage the piece of work associated with the program

according the rules of that organisational unit.

Stakeholder Management includes those individuals and

organisations whose interests may be positively or negatively affected by

the program outcomes.

G u es t C

olu

mn

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

16

of controls. These controls cover items such as:

• Standards

• Policies and Procedures

• Program Plans

• Reviews

• Oversight

• Audits

• Contracts

• Directories and Distribution Lists

• Documentation

• Regulations

The Controls are a key to the success of a Program and

ensure that the Governance is maintained throughout the

Program.

Pre-Program Setup defines the business objectives for

doing the program and aligns these to the organisational

strategy and business. During this phase a Program Charter

will be drawn up to identify and verify the requirements of

the business or business unit responsible for the benefits of

the program.

In order for the requirements to be effective, the

program must define a vision, a mission. The vision is the

picture of the future and the mission is the achievement

of that. As the program team is constituted, a core value

system must be defined and agreed to by all team

players.

The alternative solutions of implementing the

requirements must be discussed and the benefits identified.

The proposed solution will then be prioritised and the

components identified.

The outputs of this phase are:

o A Program Charter

o A Program Benefits Realisation Statement

Program Setup defines a roadmap for the

implementation of the proposed solution of the Program

in line with the Program Management Plan. This roadmap

aligns the vision, mission and values of the Program and

identifies the process of the program.

The initial detail of the total cost and schedule of the

program is defined against Program Objectives which are

defined in the Program Scope Statement and developed

to program work breakdown structure level.

The Program Management Plan is developed and

must include the:

• Program Structure and Organisation

• Program Schedule

• Program Budget

• Program Resource Structure

• Metrics and systems for the identification, delivery,

realisation and sustainment of benefits

• Program Risk Management Approach

• Program Communication Management Plan

• Program Procurement Management Plan

• Rules for Monitoring and Controlling the Program, e.g.

Earned Value Management

During the program setup phase, component charters

and briefs will be developed and the component

managers will be authorised to start working.

The outputs of this phase are:

o Program Scope Statement

o Program Schedule

o Program WBS

o Program Management Plan

o Program Team Directory

Establishing a Program Management and Technical

Infrastructure ensures that all the infrastructure and support

is supplied for the program and the components. The IT and

communication infrastructure are developed, program

offices are set up, Program management methodology

is defined and implemented and the program control

framework is initiated.

Delivering the Incremental Benefits coordinates the

deliverables of the component levels to create the

incremental benefits against the benefit realisation plan.

The Program Manager provides vision and leadership to

the component managers. They manage variances and

dependencies.

It is important to note that the Program lifecycle manages outcomes and benefits of the program, whilst the project lifecycle serves to produce deliverables, within a defined time and cost.

Closing the Program reviews the success of the program and executes a controlled close down of the program. The program organisation is released, lessons learned are compiled and organisational assets are updated. The final transition to operations occurs once all the component deliverables have been transitioned.

The outputs of this phase are: o Produces the following:o Certificate of Program Completiono Performance Review documentationo Contract Completion documentationo Termination documentation

BENEFITS OF PROGRAM MANAGEMENT• Optimisation of costs, schedules and efforts within a business

unit/s• Centralised reporting of a business or business unit• Management of change to:

o organisational cultureo business processeso physical environmento job design / responsibilityo staff skills / knowledgeo policies and procedures

• Increased value creation which drives shareholder value.

BARRIERS TO PROGRAM MANAGEMENT

• No clearly defined organisational strategy

• No top management buy-in

• Low project management maturity level

• No clear corporate governance structures

• Insufficient prioritisation of projects and programs

CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS

CSF Number 1 Business strategy defined

CSF Number 2 Corporate Governance process

established

CSF Number 3 Establish an Organisational Maturity

Model; focusing on Program- and

Project Management Maturity as well as

Resource Maturity

CSF Number 4 Appoint the Program Board and

Program Manager

CSF Number 5 Define the Program Management

Plan, including, but not limited to,

a Communication and Staffing

Management Plan

CSF Number 6 Define a Benefits Plan, a Benefits

Realisation Plan and the measurement

strategies for Benefit identification,

measurement and sustainment

CSF Number 7 Define Program Reporting Processes

CSF Number 8 Define Component Reporting Processes.

IN CONCLUSIONProgram Management is common amongst businesses today. Effective program management will come through education of

a clear process and implementation. Program Management demands high project management maturity and corporate buy-

in. Following the processes indicated in this paper will provide an organisation with an effective program management tool.

Contact Lesley Rider (PMP ®)Cell: 083 661 7352 or Fax: 086 671 8371

Email: [email protected] Visit: www.ljproject.co.za

One of the benefits of program management is increased

value creation which drives shareholder value.

G u es t C

olu

mn

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

18

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

1�

The key to clarifying is to accurately capture the essence of what the other person is telling you. This requires listening to what the person is really saying (and not saying), and understanding the context within which it is being said.

Jürg

en

Osc

ha

dle

us

QUESTIONS LEAD TO INSIGHT AND CHANGEPart 4: Developing a Questioning ApproachJürgen Oschadleus is a Sydney-based writer and consultant on project and business leadership. This series of articles in ProjectNet focus on how to become a more influential communicator and effective leader in your organisation

This series of articles focuses on the use of questions to stimulate thinking, deliver insight and ultimately drive change. As we

have seen, the development of insight passes through four stages (awareness, reflection, insight and action). Our role in this situation is to help others “join the dots” and develop their own insight.

We have seen that the telling approach does not lead to real insight. In fact, our actions may even be counter-productive and give rise to defensiveness, expressed as either a fight or flight response. Some people reject what you’re saying by arguing, yelling or perhaps even physically assaulting you. Others prefer the flight option, and withdraw from the conversation or the scene. Neither set of behaviours delivers the positive outcome you were trying to achieve.

Instead, we suggested attempting a questioning approach. The benefit is that our questions, if well phrased, allow others to become aware of specific issues and to reflect on them. We have seen that how we phrase a question has a significant impact on how the question is perceived, and consequently how it is answered.

In today’s article we consider a simple four-step approach to asking questions that help us to increase shared meaning and stimulate dialogue, rather than conflict (see Exhibit 1).

Exhibit 1: A Safe Approach to QuestionsStep 1: Get their permissionThe first step in the process is to get people’s permission to engage them in a meaningful discussion. You are going to ask them to think, which, as we have already seen, will require them to spend considerable mental effort and energy. By asking their permission you are demonstrating you respect them and their time. It builds trust, promotes a greater sense of security, and ensures that both parties are engaged in what is to follow.

Failing to do any of the above tends to create defensiveness and resistance, and may even prevent people from hearing what you’re saying.Some typical ways in which you might ask for permission include:• Do you have a few moments to discuss…?• Can we spend a few minutes brainstorming ideas around

this?• Are you okay to talk a little more about…?• I’d like to understand more about your thinking in that area. • Would you be okay to talk more about it?

Note that the questions are designed to keep the conversation safe, and they do not involve a large time commitment. If the discussion is going to last longer, specify how much time you think will be required (and if it ends up taking longer, ask for permission to extend the time). Similarly, if you feel the need to move the conversation to another level, ask for permission to do so. For example, “Thanks for being honest with me; could I probe a little more to help me clarify…?”

Even if you are the boss speaking to a subordinate, still ask for permission. It shows goodwill and builds respect.

One of the dangers of asking permission is that you might not get it. Don’t take it as a personal rejection; the person may have urgent deadlines or be in the middle of something specific. Accept the decision gracefully and ask for a suitable time when you can meet.

Step �: Anchor the conversationOnce you have permission to engage the other person in the conversation, provide an anchor.An anchor –• Sets the scene and suggests what might happen in the

conversation• Outlines where you’re coming from and where you would like the

conversation to go• Identifies what their role in the conversation will be and how you

would like them to listen• Establishes what you’re hoping to achieve in the dialogue

In short, it addresses the “why, when, how, and who” of the conversation, and ensures that both parties are talking about the same thing. The foundation principle of ironic comedy is that the two protagonists are talking at cross purposes, while the audience recognises both sides of the discussion and can laugh. Expect that it’s nowhere near as funny when you’re one of the people stuck in the conversation. So take a step back and create an anchor; make sure the other person understands what you are trying to achieve from the conversation.

Equally important may be to let the person know what you don’t want. For example, “I don’t want to get involved in an argument over what happened in the past; I’d like us to find a way of working together...”.

Remember also that the more complex the issues being discussed, the more frequently you need to re-anchor your thoughts.

Step �: Question the thinkingNow that you both understand the objective of the conversation, you can start asking questions that help the other person to think through the issues on the table. As we discussed in Part 3, the questions asked are critical. British writer Sir Antony Jay once stated: “The uncreative mind can spot wrong answers, but it takes a very creative mind to spot wrong questions.”

Your intent should be to help people focus on their thinking. Help them to become more aware of the subconscious thoughts or preconceptions that direct their actions and prevent them from gaining the insight you want them to achieve.

You may wish at this time to review the earlier articles in this series.

Step 4: Clarify answersThe final step in the process is to ensure that you clarify the answers to your questions. Clarification captures the essence of what is discussed – you might call it the bottom line of the conversation. It’s the piece that ties all the connections together.

The ability to clarify what you’re hearing requires full concentration and listening to what the person is saying and

how. But you’re not listening to each detail; rather you’re trying to

identify the patterns, the key concepts and then to reflect these

back to the other person in a few precise words.

It’s not simply a case of paraphrasing what you’ve heard.

It’s seeking the key concept which will help you move the

conversation to the next level. And, if necessary, it removes the

drama from the situation.

Consider the example of a project manager who returns from

a steering committee meeting and says to his line manager: “The

meeting was a disaster. They hate the project and are looking for

a reason to kill it. I’ve done everything they want, but they’re not

getting it.” Paraphrasing back all the negative sentiments will not

help the self-esteem of the project manager. By contrast, a simple

clarification statement might sound like: “Sounds like you had a

tough meeting.”

This statement is succinctly captured the feelings of the project

manager, indicating that you have been listening. But it also

defuses the emotional content.

The key to clarifying is to accurately capture the essence of

what the other person is telling you. This requires listening to what

the person is really saying (and not saying), and understanding the

context within which it is being said. Often it involves shining a light

on what they cannot hear themselves saying because of their own

perceptual filters.

This last step requires considerable practice, but seeing the

nodding heads when you’ve “got it” is worth the effort. You are

now ready to move the conversation to the next level.

Putting it all togetherThe four step process outlined here provides a framework for

conversations that help people clarify their thinking, without telling

them what to do (or think!).

When an issue emerges, obtain the person’s permission to

discuss it. Anchor the conversation so that you’re both approaching

the discussion from the same perspective and with the same

outcome in mind. Then ask questions that help them think about their

thinking. Clarify their answer and then re-anchor the conversation

(or ask permission to move to a higher level) and repeat the

process. As many times as required.

Remember that real conversations are rarely as sequential

as has been outlined here. However, the patterns exist, and by

focusing your attention on mastering each step, you will find it

considerably easier to improve the quality of the conversations

you have with your colleagues, and the quality of the thinking they

bring to the project.

B o o

ks

he

lf

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

�0

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

�1

GAPPS comes back to South Africa

At the end of February 2009, PMSA and South Africa played host to the 15th Working Session of the

Global Alliance for Project Performance Standards (GAPPS). PMSA is a founder member of GAPPS

and is represented by Lesley Rider and Robert Best on the GAPPS working committee.

The purpose of the GAPPS initiative is to develop agreed frameworks as a basis for review,

development, and recognition of local standards that will facilitate mutual recognition and transferability

of project management qualifications. It is intended that the framework and associated standards be

freely available for use by businesses, academic institutions, professional associations, and government

standards and qualifications bodies globally.

As project management has become a more widely used management approach, both public

and private sector entities have become interested in standards that describe levels of acceptable

workplace performance. Many of these entities operate across national boundaries and are thus

interested in standards and qualifications that are transferable. Governments, concerned with ensuring

an internationally competitive workforce, and individuals, desiring greater mobility, are also interested in

the mutual recognition and transferability of qualifications.

Project Manager Standards The first initiative of the GAPPS has been the development of standards for the Project Manager role. One

of the challenges in doing this was defining the Project Manager role in a way that would be applicable

across a wide range of organisations, application areas and project types. Project Managers are

expected to produce essentially the same results – outputs and outcomes that are acceptable to relevant

stakeholders. However, the context in which these results are produced may differ: Some projects are

inherently harder to manage than others. A project manager who is competent to manage an easier, less

complex project may not be competent to manage a harder, more complex project.

GAPPS has developed an approach to categorising projects based on their management complexity.

The GAPPS framework uses a tool called the Crawford-Ishikura Factor Table for Evaluating Roles, or CIFTER.

The tool, named after two major contributors to GAPPS, is used to differentiate project manager roles

based on the complexity of the projects managed.

The CIFTER identifies seven factors that affect the management complexity of a project. Each factor is

rated from 1 to 4 using a qualitative point scale, and the factors are totalled to produce a management

complexity rating for the project. This was used as the basis for development of two levels of Project

Manager standards, G1 and G2 where the G3 Project Manager would be operating in a more senior role

on more complex projects.

The CIFTER Table also provides a useful basis for categorising projects and therefore selecting the

appropriate Project Manager based on their demonstrated competence.

Following the working session in February, PMSA invited interested parties to attend an open information

session, led by Lynn Crawford and Lesley Rider, who informed attendees about the progress made to date

and how the GAPPS model was implemented at two large companies. PM.Ideas kindly hosted the event,

which gave participants the opportunity to ask pertinent questions and determine how they, companies

and training providers, could become involved.

For more information, go to www.globalpmstandards.org

I n d u str y

Ne

ws

Value Management has been used in a variety of

settings. It has been applied in fields as diverse

as Manufacturing, Construction, and New Product

Development. It has also been used in process

improvement projects.

Value Management is a problem solving

methodology. It is applied to solving problems of

design. It is a sequential and logical set of activities,

commonly described as the ‘Job Plan’. One kind of

problem that Value Management can be used for is

defining client needs. Typically this involves creating a

balance between capability and intent. This is an ideal

use of the methodology.

It is particularly useful where constraints have to be

overcome to achieve a desired functionality. It enables

project managers to align the intent of the customer

with the capability of the project organization. It

enables agreement to be reached about what is

expected or needed. It also deals with how needs can

be met with the available resources.

The ‘Job Plan’ can take a variety of forms, but it

is usually described in a five phase model. The first

phase involves gathering information relevant to the

problem. The next three phases are usually embodied

in a workshop or series of workshops. The final phase

involves creation of an implementation plan, which

presents the proposed solution to the client.

The main features of Value Management are the

‘Job Plan’, and the use of function analysis to examine

the problem. Function analysis is usually conducted

in a workshop session. This involves the creation of a

diagram representing the functions of the product.

The diagram indicates the relation between what is

needed to provide a function, and why the function

is needed to solve the problem. The diagram makes

these relationships explicit. Each function is described

using an active verb and a noun.

Value Analysis enables redundant features of a

design to be identified. And in new designs it enables

the team to build up a complete description of

the requirements. It is also possible to arrange the

list of functions/solutions in order of assembly. This

arrangement of information can be used to create

a product flow diagram. This is useful for project work

scheduling.

Value Management also allows the project to

harness the creativity of stakeholders. This constructive

process can develop innovative new solutions to

problems. By involving different stakeholders consensus

can be reached. Conflicting views of project goals can

be addressed by using the methodology.

The text starts with a brief history of the methodology.

This begins with the origin in the US and brings the reader

up to date on current developments. It then devotes a

chapter to the theory behind Value Management.

This chapter defines a function, explains the team

make up needed for the ‘Job Plan. It then outlines the

‘Job Plan itself. The main body of the text gives details

of the methodology. It pays particular attention to

managing different phases of the workshop. Methods

of identifying ideas and issues, resolving conflicts,

and building consensus are all dealt with. The book

concludes by discussing integration of the method with

Project, Risk, and Quality Management.

This book is well structured and easy to read.

The author makes Value Management accessible to

anyone interested in using the methodology. Michel

Thiry is a Value Management practitioner. He has

written on the subject for various international journals.

‘Value Management Practice’ by Michel Thiry,

1997, Project Management Institute:Newton Square

Pennsylvania, ISBN9781880410141

Value Management Practice Book Review – by Ian Jay

[Pic: GAPPS Pic] GAPPS Working Committee members Lesley Rider, Jane Carnegie and Robert Best with attendees Winston Smart (TWR) and Adrian Lovell-Hall (PM.Ideas)

P M S A N

ew

s

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

��

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

��

New Tshwane Branch Kicks Off with Interactive Session

The long-awaited re-birth of the PMSA Tshwane branch

took place in February 2009, and was kindly hosted by

SITA at their Erasmuskloof, Tshwane auditorium. Dr Peter

Tobin took attendees through a Project Risk Management

case study, and lively discussion followed.

Because many members indicate they would like to

attend both Johannesburg and Tshwane presentations,

the strategy is to alternate Johannesburg and Tshwane

meetings each month and have a slightly different

flavour for each. Tshwane presentations are intended,

as far as is possible, to be interactive and discussion-

based. Keep an eye on the PMSA website for news of

upcoming presentations.

Volunteers have come forward to get the Tshwane

Executive Committee up and running, and will meet at

the end of March to structure the branch according

to the PMSA branch charter. If you are interested in

participating as a volunteer, have a speaker to suggest,

or are in a position to secure a venue sponsorship, kindly

contact the National Office on (011) 257-8003.

Planning and Scheduling Practice Community up and Running

The launch of the PMSA Planning and Scheduling Practice Community took place on 19 March at Microsoft SA in Bryanston, Johannesburg. It was an opportunity for

PMSA members and the stakeholders of the two sponsors, S2R Projects and Microsoft SA, to listen to topical presentations, network with others who are mindful of the challenges associated with the practice of planning and scheduling, and to pledge their commitment to the Practice Community by volunteering to become part of the committee. Kevin In’t Veld of S2R Projects and Stewart Goodwin of RSV delivered presentations and fielded questions from the audience.

While this Practice Community was launched in Johannesburg, the intention is to involve members across South Africa. The committee will look into ways of extending its reach, which may involve the various branches. In the meantime, a DVD recording was made of the session and will be made available to interested members via the PMSA website.

PMSA VP: Practice Communities, Roger Layton, also used the opportunity to secure support from the younger members of the audience, towards starting a Young Project Managers Practice Community. All this youthful energy has already resulted in discussion groups on Google and Yahoo, and all current and aspiring project managers across the country and under the age of 35 are invited to sign up. Contact the National Office to be included in the relevant mailing list, or go to: http://groups.google.com/group/pmsaypm/http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pmsaypm/

Roger Layton has been waiting for the right opportunity to start this Practice Community for more than a year. In calling out to young project managers, he says, “I look forward to your involvement in this exciting new community, and it is my personal vision that through this we can provide an entry point for young people wanting to become project managers – to provide the support and guidance on how to get started, how to learn and practice and eventually how to become experts, and finally, how to grow old and leave the group.”The first meeting of the YPM Practice Community will take place in May.

Participants at the interactive Tshwane Branch presentation work in groups to discuss the risk management considerations of the case study presented by Dr Peter Tobin

KZN Branch Hosts PMO BreakfastPMSA, KwaZulu-Natal hosted a PMO Breakfast at the ICC on 20 March 2009. This event was kindly sponsored by Business Connexion and PM Ideas; who offer a range of project management consulting services and training.

The guest speaker, Philip du Bel (Transnet) gave an address which focused on the way in which Transnet have established an effective PMO, where a shared pool of resources and support is provided to ensure that the current

budget allocation for projects is adequately spent.For further information on forthcoming events in KZN,

please visit www.pmisa.org.za. The KZN AGM will be held in May and a Golf Day is planned for August. We continue to be appreciative of the support that PMSA KZN members offer PMSA and the industry. Project Management is indeed alive in KZN.

1: From left are: Sean van Rooyen (PM Ideas), Phillip du Bel (Transnet), Karin Deacon (PM Ideas) and Roxanne Brews (PM Ideas)

2: From left are: Andre Engelbrecht (Business Connexion), Theresa Condes (Business Connexion), Karen Smith (Business Connexion), Xolani Mbulawa (Business Connexion), Lissa Stewart (PMSA KZN President and Business Connexion) andPhillip du Bel (Transnet)

3: From left are: Hareesh Patel (PMSA President), Lissa Stewart (PMSA KZN President) and Jordyn Grenfell (PMSA KZN Exco)

Clockwise from top left:

1. Roger Layton explains the youth in project management practice community start-up process to volunteers

2. Kevin In’t Veld signs up committee members for the Planning and Scheduling Practice Community

Spotted at the Planning and Scheduling Practice Community launch are:

3. Mxolisi Mnxuma, Lebogang Modisane and Thobela Pinzi;

4. Ann Cameron, Prisie Arumugam and Jaycee Kruger

A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBoK) Fourth Edition

Special PMSA Member Price - R512.00 Non-members pay - R753.00

The Standard for Program Management Second Edition


The Organisational Project Management Maturity Model (OPM3)


Get your PMI® Standards from PMSAThe following titles can now be purchased from PMSA

1 � �

I n d u str y

In

sig

ht

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

Ma

rch

- A

pri

l 2

00

9

�4

Pro

jec

tNe

t •

JM

arc

h -

Ap

ril

20

09

��

Towards the end of 2008, Careers24.com launched

their second annual Salaries Survey. The online survey

was advertised to PMSA members and many of you

may have participated. The research company, Blue

River Stone, with Workinfo.com, was kind enough to

compile a Project Management specific report from the

data collected. The full report will be made available

on the member’s only section of the PMSA website.

Below is a summary of the approach followed, the

typical respondents, and the most interesting findings

that emerged.

Because the survey was web-based, the researchers

caution that responses may be lower for the generation

groups that are less comfortable with technology.

What’s in a Name?The job titles entered by the respondents raised

the first point of interest. We requested that data be

drawn for all responses by people providing project

management-related job titles. Of the 612 respondents

who completed the survey, 270 called themselves

project managers, 61 project administrators, 24 project

engineers and 42 project coordinators. The remaining

200-odd respondents had titles ranging from project

executive, project consultant and project lead, to

project planner, project secretary and assistant project

manager.

DemographicsMore than half of the project specific respondents (57%) were white, 23% black, 11% coloured and 9% Indian. The gender spread was almost even (53% male). The majority (45%) fell within the 26 to 35 age category. An overwhelming majority (63%) are based in Gauteng.

Industry SectorMore than 20% of the respondents represent the IT, electronic and telecoms sector, while 7% work in the services sector, 6% in financial and accounting services, 17% in manufacturing and engineering, and 9% in construction. Most (just less than 40%) of the respondents work for companies that employ less than 100 staff. Just 8% work at companies employing 25 000 or more employees.

CompensationThe main purpose of the survey was to discover trends in earning potential based on experience, qualifications, seniority, age and gender.

The results show that, on average, men are paid more than women, and at the 51-55 age group, men can earn up to double that of women in that bracket.

Respondents across all the age groups citing project-related job titles earn significantly more than the average across the other job titles surveyed. The same applies across all job levels, except at top management level if the person is black or indian, or at the unskilled level if the person is white. (see Graph 1)

What do Project People Earn?

Project people in the mining; and police, private security, legal and correctional services sector appear to earn the highest average monthly salaries (over R40 000 and over R35 000 respectively). (see Graph 2)

Unlike the other industries surveyed, project management seems to pay the highest salaries to those in the 55 to 60 year age bracket (average R46 000 per month) and 65 to 70 year age bracket (R42 000 per month). (see Graph 3)

It is an encouraging sign for our profession that that post graduate qualifications appear to hold value: a project person with a Masters qualification earns, on average, R10 000 more per month than a person with an honours degree. (see graph 4)

PMSA Members – What do the numbers say?

With all these data available, we thought we’d provide a

snapshot of our own membership. We only have one data category that is the same as the Salary Survey (gender) but from what we know about our current paid-up membership, we can share the following:

GenderMale: 78%Female: 22%

Industry Representation (top six only)Engineering / construction: 24% Consulting: 13%Other: 13%Finance / Insurance / Banking: 10%Government: 8%Computers: 7%

What our members call themselvesProject Manager: 25%Director: 7%Programme Manager: 3%Consultant: 2%Project Administrator: 1.5%Project Coordinator: 1.5%Portfolio Manager: 1%

Regional distribution of members (top 4)Gauteng: 63%KZN: 16%Western Cape: 11%Eastern Cape: 3.5%Graph 1

Graph 2

Graph 3

Graph 4

web: email: [email protected] cup to be hosted at ten new and major refurbished world class...

Documents