Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n
Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Need for goal focused team in projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Argentina\u2019s focus on scoring the goal was complete. Nobody tried a long shot. Nobody tried to run with the ball. It was total and complete focus on one thing \u2013 the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Need for goal focused team in projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
(click here<\/a><\/strong><\/span> to see the replay)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Argentina\u2019s focus on scoring the goal was complete. Nobody tried a long shot. Nobody tried to run with the ball. It was total and complete focus on one thing \u2013 the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Need for goal focused team in projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
It is worth watching the replay of the 2006 Football World Cup - Argentina vs Serbia & Montenegro, even if you have seen it before. The second goal by Argentina in their 6-0 drubbing of Serbia & Montenegro was really something. They quietly went through more than twenty passes and then Riquelme fed Saviola who sent a pass inside for Cambiasso. Cambiasso passed the ball into Crespo who kicked a return pass with the back of his heel to Cambiasso who rammed the ball home from 12 yards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (click here<\/a><\/strong><\/span> to see the replay)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Argentina\u2019s focus on scoring the goal was complete. Nobody tried a long shot. Nobody tried to run with the ball. It was total and complete focus on one thing \u2013 the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Need for goal focused team in projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
It is worth watching the replay of the 2006 Football World Cup - Argentina vs Serbia & Montenegro, even if you have seen it before. The second goal by Argentina in their 6-0 drubbing of Serbia & Montenegro was really something. They quietly went through more than twenty passes and then Riquelme fed Saviola who sent a pass inside for Cambiasso. Cambiasso passed the ball into Crespo who kicked a return pass with the back of his heel to Cambiasso who rammed the ball home from 12 yards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (click here<\/a><\/strong><\/span> to see the replay)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Argentina\u2019s focus on scoring the goal was complete. Nobody tried a long shot. Nobody tried to run with the ball. It was total and complete focus on one thing \u2013 the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Need for goal focused team in projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
We will look at the concluding part of the article on goal focused teams in the next<\/strong><\/span> post<\/a>.<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 2","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:27:09","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:27:09","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9050","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989593,"post_author":"20","post_date":"2017-10-24 09:00:57","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-24 03:30:57","post_content":"\n It is worth watching the replay of the 2006 Football World Cup - Argentina vs Serbia & Montenegro, even if you have seen it before. The second goal by Argentina in their 6-0 drubbing of Serbia & Montenegro was really something. They quietly went through more than twenty passes and then Riquelme fed Saviola who sent a pass inside for Cambiasso. Cambiasso passed the ball into Crespo who kicked a return pass with the back of his heel to Cambiasso who rammed the ball home from 12 yards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (click here<\/a><\/strong><\/span> to see the replay)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Argentina\u2019s focus on scoring the goal was complete. Nobody tried a long shot. Nobody tried to run with the ball. It was total and complete focus on one thing \u2013 the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Need for goal focused team in projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
But, the key thing to remember is that along with learning, the environment must allow for experimentation and failures. Otherwise no one will come up with new ideas. And clearly, all this will not work if the organisation, whether a football team or a software organisation, does not foster a learning environment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We will look at the concluding part of the article on goal focused teams in the next<\/strong><\/span> post<\/a>.<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 2","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:27:09","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:27:09","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9050","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989593,"post_author":"20","post_date":"2017-10-24 09:00:57","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-24 03:30:57","post_content":"\n It is worth watching the replay of the 2006 Football World Cup - Argentina vs Serbia & Montenegro, even if you have seen it before. The second goal by Argentina in their 6-0 drubbing of Serbia & Montenegro was really something. They quietly went through more than twenty passes and then Riquelme fed Saviola who sent a pass inside for Cambiasso. Cambiasso passed the ball into Crespo who kicked a return pass with the back of his heel to Cambiasso who rammed the ball home from 12 yards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (click here<\/a><\/strong><\/span> to see the replay)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Argentina\u2019s focus on scoring the goal was complete. Nobody tried a long shot. Nobody tried to run with the ball. It was total and complete focus on one thing \u2013 the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Need for goal focused team in projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
One of the most damaging things that we see in projects is the propensity to re-invent the wheel. A project manager or a team member needs to be able to re-use what is available. Many team members feel that they can do a better job staring afresh, than if they re-use what is available. This has to be avoided at all costs. The Argentinian team did this well. We saw how Crespo backheeled the ball to Cambassio. A well tried, effective tool, backheeling when other shots are not possible due to defenders\u2019 interference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But, the key thing to remember is that along with learning, the environment must allow for experimentation and failures. Otherwise no one will come up with new ideas. And clearly, all this will not work if the organisation, whether a football team or a software organisation, does not foster a learning environment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We will look at the concluding part of the article on goal focused teams in the next<\/strong><\/span> post<\/a>.<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 2","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:27:09","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:27:09","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9050","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989593,"post_author":"20","post_date":"2017-10-24 09:00:57","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-24 03:30:57","post_content":"\n It is worth watching the replay of the 2006 Football World Cup - Argentina vs Serbia & Montenegro, even if you have seen it before. The second goal by Argentina in their 6-0 drubbing of Serbia & Montenegro was really something. They quietly went through more than twenty passes and then Riquelme fed Saviola who sent a pass inside for Cambiasso. Cambiasso passed the ball into Crespo who kicked a return pass with the back of his heel to Cambiasso who rammed the ball home from 12 yards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (click here<\/a><\/strong><\/span> to see the replay)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Argentina\u2019s focus on scoring the goal was complete. Nobody tried a long shot. Nobody tried to run with the ball. It was total and complete focus on one thing \u2013 the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Need for goal focused team in projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
Similarly, a project team should be able to learn as they go forward \u2013 from past mistakes, from past success, form others projects\u2019 mistakes and successes etc. To be effective, these experiences must be captured and documented and analyzed to identify what is to be learnt.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the most damaging things that we see in projects is the propensity to re-invent the wheel. A project manager or a team member needs to be able to re-use what is available. Many team members feel that they can do a better job staring afresh, than if they re-use what is available. This has to be avoided at all costs. The Argentinian team did this well. We saw how Crespo backheeled the ball to Cambassio. A well tried, effective tool, backheeling when other shots are not possible due to defenders\u2019 interference.<\/p>\n\n\n\n But, the key thing to remember is that along with learning, the environment must allow for experimentation and failures. Otherwise no one will come up with new ideas. And clearly, all this will not work if the organisation, whether a football team or a software organisation, does not foster a learning environment.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We will look at the concluding part of the article on goal focused teams in the next<\/strong><\/span> post<\/a>.<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 2","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-2","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:27:09","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:27:09","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9050","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989593,"post_author":"20","post_date":"2017-10-24 09:00:57","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-24 03:30:57","post_content":"\n It is worth watching the replay of the 2006 Football World Cup - Argentina vs Serbia & Montenegro, even if you have seen it before. The second goal by Argentina in their 6-0 drubbing of Serbia & Montenegro was really something. They quietly went through more than twenty passes and then Riquelme fed Saviola who sent a pass inside for Cambiasso. Cambiasso passed the ball into Crespo who kicked a return pass with the back of his heel to Cambiasso who rammed the ball home from 12 yards.<\/p>\n\n\n\n (click here<\/a><\/strong><\/span> to see the replay)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Argentina\u2019s focus on scoring the goal was complete. Nobody tried a long shot. Nobody tried to run with the ball. It was total and complete focus on one thing \u2013 the goal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Need for goal focused team in projects<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n And this is exactly what is needed for projects also. A completely goal focused team.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, indeed. A goal focused team is key to the success of a project. It is a key vital sign that gives a broad pointer to the overall health of the project.<\/p>\n\n\n\n It is the objective of this article (in a series of blog posts) to analyse the inherent need for a goal focused team for a project to succeed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Clarity and alignment of individual goals<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n If you watch the 2006 game, first of all, you will note that there is a clear alignment of individual objectives and team objectives. No unnecessary shooting. Pass the ball to the person who has the best chance to score a goal. A player\u2019s objective is to perform as a team machine.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Similarly, there needs to be alignment between project goals and each team member\u2019s goals; and the relationship between an individual\u2019s performance and the team\u2019s goals need to be clear. In the Argentinian team, you realize that each player knows that his performance has a bearing on the overall team\u2019s performance.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read the remainder of this article in the next posts (part 2<\/a><\/strong><\/span> and part 3<\/a><\/strong><\/span>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","post_title":"A Goal Focused Team - Part 1","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"goal-focused-team-part-1","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 09:26:46","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9047","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"2","filter":"raw"},{"ID":989602,"post_author":"25","post_date":"2017-10-23 08:53:32","post_date_gmt":"2017-10-23 03:23:32","post_content":"\n Over the years I have managed projects, programs and businesses. One of the fundamentals of managing is to measure the progress, report it and take actions based on it to meet the objectives.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In this process, I have gone thru the process - early on by measuring the pre-defined set of organizational measures and metrics, to defining a larger list of measure that I felt were relevant to measure our progress, to finally focusing on the critical few.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One thing was common across all this - it was always the measurement of what was tangibly accomplished in the project\/ program\/ business. Thereafter this data, the IQ of the project, was used to forecast the future. I have worked in groups which were assessed at CMM Level 5. Yes, the quality of the past data (IQ) was good, but the prediction for the future was a lot of hit and miss.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like many of you, I have the following questions that I have always pondered:<\/p>\n\n\n\n I am sure, there are some good and bad reasons why these happened. But one thing, that is common, is the fact that our metrics and measure - the IQ of the projects\/ programs\/ business was not completely effective in providing us a good forecast of all this.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Yes, we have had customer satisfaction surveys, the annual employee satisfaction surveys, and of course the appraisal cycle - where we would sense what the customer, the team, the management felt about the period. But this EQ sensing was happening at a far lesser frequency than the daily\/ weekly\/ monthly IQ status reports that were getting measured.<\/p>\n\n\n\n I stepped out of the corporate world and the rat race I was in, a couple of years ago. Along with my colleagues, I now coach these managers at various levels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What I noticed is that our Project Health measurement systems belong to a bygone era - the industrial era. It was a period when we were producing goods using machines, and these goods could be measured for consistent quality, duration to produce et al. It was easier to measure (as we view it today). So we all copied that approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n What we missed was the fact, that in today's knowledge era - the machine we use - our brains - is too complex for us to have such simplistic measurement approaches. It gets further complex by the fact, that no two machines (read it as two brains) work the same way, on the same input. In fact, the same machine (brain) can work very differently at different points - without anyone externally even noticing it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If that's the case - then how do we manage projects? Is it not manage-able? Are we saying that projects are like a piece of art (maybe true to some extent - that's a change in my own views)? So do we stop forecasting?<\/p>\n\n\n\n I don't think so. I think we just have to completely re-look at our approach.<\/p>\n\n\n\n We have to move to a system, by which we can sense the EQ of the project. This also means that we have to look at the project holistically. It does not get bound by technology or methodology. It has to be able to perceive the information from all the stakeholders of the project - the decision makers, the doers, the recipients, the orchestra-tor. It has to be done frequently enough, so that you can act on this perception to influence the outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Given today's technology - AI, Data Sciences, ML, IoT, NLP - I think all of this is possible. But we don't need to wait for all of this to completely mature - we can act now with our understanding of how do we sense the project EQ. We just need to have a system by which we listen to all the stakeholders (small or big). We need to simplify the system so that, all the machines (the brains) can respond from their perspective.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Remember the proverbial - Nine blind men and an elephant. Each of them gave their perspective, which individually was true - but did not seem to refer to the same creature. All we have to do was assemble this 360 degree perspective - and soon we have discovered the elephant!<\/p>\n","post_title":"Measuring Project IQ to Sensing Project EQ","post_excerpt":"","post_status":"publish","comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","post_password":"","post_name":"measuring-project-iq-sensing-project-eq","to_ping":"","pinged":"","post_modified":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_modified_gmt":"2024-01-29 13:55:38","post_content_filtered":"","post_parent":0,"guid":"http:\/\/pm-powerconsulting.com\/?p=9039","menu_order":0,"post_type":"post","post_mime_type":"","comment_count":"0","filter":"raw"}],"next":false,"prev":true,"total_page":4},"paged":1,"column_class":"jeg_col_3o3","class":"epic_block_11"};
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n
<\/figure>\n\n\n\n
\n