Focus on the Problem; Focus on the Solution; Don’t kick your client / business partner when they are down

June 21st, 2010

Many years ago, when I was a new First Line Manager, a client had a very nasty technical infrastructure problem that required a team of subject matter experts to resolve.  During that same time, our company was going through the transition of trying to take the letter “R” out of “Free” with respect to support services.

The new corporate direction…support services are no longer free.  The client contacted us and told one of my team members about their problem.  Before the 1.5 hour one way drive to tackle the problem, the client was told the support services assistance would be billable.  Before we understood the problem, we had already communicated to the client they were going to pay for the support…In other words, we kicked them while they were down (literally).

Needless to say, the client’s leadership team was not happy about our conversation.  The technical team went out to work the client’s technical issue and after a few days, the problem was resolved.  The client was happy the problem was resolved but, they were extremely irritated about the “fee support services” discussion before the root cause of the problem and more importantly, effort to resolve the problem was understood.  Our business relationship was strained for quite some time afterwards.

Shortly after we solved the problem, I had a one-on-one, face to face meeting with the client and he gave me some very sage advice.  His guidance was this…“we don’t have a problem paying for help – our problem was your organization appeared more focused on telling us we had to pay for your help than you were fixing our problem”.  He also told me, “If you want to be a true partner, when we are in trouble, focus on getting our problem fixed and then let’s have the conversation on who should pay and for what”.  His comments echoed an old saying, “your client does not care how much you know until they know how much you care”.

I have always remembered the conversation and my client’s advice could not be more relevant with respect to the April 2010 British Petroleum (BP) Oil Spill in the Gulf of Mexico.  BP is a business partner of the United States of America.  BP Oil provides fuel and lubricants that propel America.  BP also provides jobs and community service projects in the geographies they serve around the globe.

The Program Leader who will lead BP and the U.S.A. out of the oil spill challenge will do so if they:

  • Understand each of the core issues and the key parties competing interests on each of the core issues
  • Resolve each major issue as a project
  • Identify and align the right skilled resources where they can deliver the greatest value to drive success
  • Manage / Lead the effort as a integrated Program

So the next time you have a large client or, business partner, with a very large complex problem, focus on the problem; focus on the solution; and don’t kick your client when they are down by making a big deal about who pays until you understand how the problem is going to be resolved.

Have you ever put your client and/or business partner in this situation?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

© Copyright 2006 – 2010 Hendon Group, Inc.  All Rights Reserved.

Share and enjoy this Hendon Group article:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted in Communications Management, Leadership, Risk Management, Troubled Projects | No Comments »

Leadership – Independently verify before you make a public announcement

May 23rd, 2010

There is an old saying, “when a ship misses the harbor, very seldom is it the harbor’s fault”.  This couldn’t be more relevant with respect to making any major public announcement.  A retraction of a previously made public announcement (“missing the harbor”) can damage an organization’s brand and/or leadership team’s reputation.

Two recent examples are:

  • Walgreen’s retraction of their earlier announcement to sell the Pathway Genomics “Insight Saliva Collection Kit” to screen for 37 genetic diseases (through DNA / recessive gene testing) and,
  • President Obama’s Executive Order closing the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center “within the next year”

Let’s examine these two examples from a Program / Project Leadership perspective.

Walgreens – Pathway Genomics Announcement

On the surface this looks like a situation where the Pathway Genomics Program / Project Leader under-estimated the FDA approval risk prior to starting negotiations, with Walgreens, about selling their product.  Having worked with organizations that require FDA approval it is hard to say what was the root cause of this embarrassment.  The breakdown could have been for many reasons:

  • Pathway Genomics assumed they did not require FDA approval to market the product
  • Pathway Genomics were earlier informed, by the FDA, approval was not required – After the announcement the FDA changed its mind, requesting additional discussion
  • Walgreens in their zeal to be the first to market the Collection Kit did not independently validate Pathway Genomics’ claim that FDA approval would not be required prior to announcement

FDA approval is always a major risk item and the Program / Project Leader should have received either FDA “approval” or, “approval is not required” (in writing from an FDA authorized representative) prior to making a public announcement and certainly before customer / client negotiations.

President Obama’s Executive Order

The second example does not occur very often within large corporations but, does occur occasionally, as cited above.  It was a very surprising misstep by the President of the United States.  That is, the signing of an Executive Order announcing the closing of the Guantanamo Bay Detention Center within “one year” and eight (8) months later state, “I am not going to set an exact date because a lot of this will depend on cooperation from Congress” (1).  For the President of the United States to state this key dependency downstream suggests the senior staff (or, the President of the United States) did not do their due diligence before the announcement (or, at least did not do it very well).

Before public announcements are proclaimed, the leader needs to make sure they can deliver.  Otherwise, the leader is viewed as weak.  Within corporate circles, these kinds of pronouncements occur frequently with new / college hire “Green Beans” but, rarely from seasoned leaders.  When this happens by a “Green Bean”, that individual would have been viewed as “not ready for greater responsibly” and lost credibility in their judgment by their peers and the organization’s key stakeholders.  In fact, you may even hear quotes from the old Wendy’s commercial, “please step aside – step aside please”.

Leaders who make announcements and do not deliver quickly lose credibility and even bring the thought into play, “does the leader have the juice to lead – deliver on future agreements / commitments made, etc.”

Guidance and Recommendations

An organization’s leadership team should leverage their Program / Project leaders to help make sure the proper due diligence has been performed.  In addition, Program / Project leaders must help protect their organization’s leaders, brand and reputation by ensuring they have identified and completed the critical work that could be potential road blocks prior to the leader’s public announcement.

Organizational leaders and Program / Project leaders must work collaboratively as an integrated team to make sure the organization and brand reputations are protected.  By executing on these critical steps Program and Project leaders will deliver significant value to their organization and position themselves for potentially greater responsibilities and compensation opportunities.

(1) Source: WSJ Video – Nov 18, 2009 – Major Garrett, Senior Fox News Correspondent, interview with President Barack Obama.

– © Copyright 2010 Hendon Group, Inc.  All Rights Reserved.

Share and enjoy this Hendon Group article:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted in Leadership, Project Leadership, Risk Management | No Comments »

Monitoring and Controlling Process – Is Scope Control one of your allies?

December 14th, 2009

Background

Project Management Institute’s (PMI) A Guide to The Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK), Third Addition describes the Monitoring and Controlling Process Group as those processes performed to observe project execution so that potential problems can be identified in a timely manner and corrective action can be taken, when necessary, to control the execution of the project”(p. 59).

Challenge

As mentioned in the Scope Management blog (July 9, 2007), a common challenge is “scope creep”. One of the key Monitoring and Control processes to manage “scope creep” is “Scope Control”. If you have a “scope creep” problem, chances are you have a scope control process problem.

Helpful Hints

One way to fix your Scope Control problem is to focus on the fundaments. One of those fundamentals is ask a lot of questions. Some questions that should be able to help you are:

1. Why is a change being requested?
2. Does the change have a direct impact on whether the program/project goals and objectives, as stated in the Program/Project Charter, are met?
3. Can the change be implemented in a subsequent project and/or phase?
4. What impact will the change have on cost, schedule and/or quality of the currently defined scope?
5. For support projects (in particular), is the change an enhancement or, a true break fix item? If an enhancement, ask the requestor if they are willing to treat the additional functionality as a subsequent phase (or project)?

Remember, for brining work efforts within budget and/or schedule, Scope Control is one of the core allies for the Program/Project Leader…

Ira M. Hendon, PMP®
President and CEO
Hendon Group, Inc.

References

Project Management Institute (2004). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (3rd ed). Newtown Square: Project Management Institute.

– © Copyright 2006 – 2009 Hendon Group, Inc.  All Rights Reserved.

Share and enjoy this Hendon Group article:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Mixx
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz

Posted in Monitoring & Controlling Process | Comments Off

« Older Entries |