Posted by Blogger@ dsiiti.com on Wed, Apr 14, 2010 @ 01:00 PM
Every project manager needs to conduct a Stakeholder Analysis. Even when not formally done as a facilitated session, every PM calculates who needs which set of information. At one point or another, someone's proverbial glutes are on the metaphoric line. Other Stakeholders may just be satisfied to know who that is.
Following up on communications strategies, this analysis identifies a broad scope of individuals the implementation touches. At the center of this scope should be the names of your core team members. But what will they know about their participation in this project?
Enter the RACI matrix. Responsible - Accountable - Consulted - Informed.
Think of it in terms of who's doing the work, who's name goes on the approval line, who can provide insight, and who just needs to know where things stand.
These "assignments" are by definition at the task level. For example, when setting up Classification, who knows the operation as it stands and will collect and enter the questions? And to whom does that person report?
When we develop the kickoff meeting agenda, we present the major operations to review during our visit. This agenda allows the client to choose the team based on knowledge but also availability. Once the team members are volunteered -- Reality Check: That's usually how teams are constructed -- we can place a name to their responsibility.
At the project scale, we also assign levels of communications. Not every Stakeholder will be contacted, but certainly, every one of them will be impacted by our work. Again, this is all in the spirit of accountability and transparency; but also getting things right.
So Stakeholder Analysis? I prefer mine well-done.
Posted by Blogger@ dsiiti.com on Wed, Mar 17, 2010 @ 01:00 PM
I tend to say that project management is like a drum solo. Seems only interesting to other drummers. So I think I'm going to talk about another unsung rythm section responsible for project success. This past week I had another opportunity to visit with a client and their project team. For those with long memory spans, my previous posts rambled on about building rapport, etc. This trip was no exception. Throughout the kickoff and subsequent meetings, one particular set of behaviors caught my attention. This client was similar to others I've met. They were very well-organized, showed respectful enthusiasm for the project ahead, and seemed to know what they were talking about. This shouldn't be of any surprise in this industry. In other sectors...I've met a lot of, shall we say, non-examples. Part of what made me take note was their interest in communication. All facilities have ways to communicate: The PA systems, radios, email and the trusted phone. I would call these methods or tools more than communication itself. Communication here took its truer meaning of the act of encoding and decoding. We spent a good deal of time figuring out each other's semantics and colloquialisms ... and now and then ribbing each other on the other's 'funny' accents. Go ahead... say it.... "So what?" In all of this, we accomplished quite a few things. Yes, actual work. Not just meeting about next meetings. Sure, we discussed the project approach and philosophy, but there was no session involving a glossary or a thesaurus. Nary a translator was on scene. Imagine. Work and Communication -- together. Sounds like the making of a new candy bar. So what made it work? It was the way that they approached it. This 'interest' was evident in requiring that not only did teams create the right messages but also delivered to the appropriate individuals. For some reason, projects seem to ruin every good 'channel' a jail already has in place. Even though lines of command stay intact, new lines drawn between functional groups (IT v. Operations v. Corrections) shake the very core of the org charts. It's as if we need to restart and learn how to manage sending messages up or down the new dotted lines. It happens a lot, in all industries, and Corrections is no exception. Not here. Either by getting it right the first time, or perhaps a huge 'teachable moment'... This client saw past the TPS reports and worked with us from the outset to create a communications strategy and a RACI matrix (more about that in the next blog). They sent a message that Administration and the Project Team were on the same page. Different team members who may not have day-to-day authority now have responsible roles for the implementation. A single point of contact was assigned to manage vendor-client communication. Sign off was still left to the project sponsor, but by virtue of documentation it created a level of transparency and accountability. Different stakeholders have different needs for information. Different team members may have information but no decision-making authority. And without a strategy, all the Gantt charts and meeting minutes won't show off the forest to those looking for their special tree.