Project Management Training – Teamwork and Situational Leadership

Teamwork and Situational Leadership

If you are teaching Human Resource Management as part of your Project Management Training program, you undoubtedly cover Bruce Tuckman’s Teamwork Model. This model was added to the fourth edition of the PMBOK Guide, and it describes the stages of development that a team may go through. The model includes the following stages:

1. Forming – During this stage, the team is just getting together. The team members are trying to figure out their roles and responsibilities on the project. Because this usually occurs during the earliest stages of the project, the team members do not know a lot about each other, and they are usually reserved and independent.
2. Storming – During this stage, the team starts to do the actual work on the project; however, they are now trying to assert their positions in the project, which may lead to some conflict on the team. They are not working in a collaborative way, so they may have trouble respecting other team members’ opinions or ideas.
3. Norming – During this stage, the team members realize that collaboration is a more effective way of accomplishing their goals. As such they begin to change the ways in which they work in order to support the needs of the entire team. The team members begin to trust one another.
4. Performing – During this stage, the team has become a cohesive unit. They are able to work effectively together to accomplish the goals of the project. The team members are no longer working independently, but interdependently.

In addition to the Tuckman Teamwork Model, it might also be useful to introduce Ken Blanchard’s Situational Leadership Model. Whereas the Tuckman Teamwork Model describes the stages of development that a team may go through, the Situational Leadership Model describes how a manager can best serve the team during those stages. Situational Leadership includes the following styles of leadership:

1. Directing – This style requires the project manager to provide a great deal of direction and supervision. Essentially, the project manager needs to tell the project team what to do. Then, the project manager needs to make sure the team actually does the work. This style is most useful during the Forming stage.
2. Coaching – This style requires the project manager to still provide some direction; however, the project manager will now need to also mitigate some conflict. With this style, the project manager may seek out the input of the team. This style is most useful during the Storming stage.
3. Supporting – This style enables the project manager to focus on motivation instead of direction. Once the team is capable of doing the work required for the project, the project manager will ensure that the team members remain confident and motivated. This style is most useful during the Norming stage.
4. Delegating – This style enables the project manager to focus on high-level direction only. Decision making and the accomplishment of the project work will be done by the project team members. This style is most useful during the Performing stage.

As you are probably aware, there is another stage to the Tuckman Teamwork Model: Adjourning (or sometimes known as Mourning). This is when the project is complete, and the team members must come to accept that their work is done and that they must move on to other projects. What Situational Leadership style is best during this stage? Well, that depends. As the name indicates, it varies based on the situation. If the team members are struggling with coming to terms with the end of the project, a coaching style might be more effective. If they understand that the completion of the project is normal, yet they are lacking the motivation to close the project, a supporting style might be best.

The most important thing to keep in mind about these stages is that they can occur at any time during the project. The same is true for the styles. As a project manager, you need to recognize the stages when they occur and use the most appropriate style for that situation.

Project Management Training – Scope

Scope

In Project Management Training programs (as well as in Business Analysis Training programs), the term Scope is bandied about quite frequently. People who have been involved with projects for a long time have a good sense of what the term means; however, it can be somewhat confusing to people who are new to projects. The reason for the confusion is that there are a few different meaning to the term scope.

The first meaning is Product Scope. This refers to all of the features, functions, and attributes of the product that is actually being built as part of the project. This is sometimes also called Solution Scope because you might not be creating a product, but a service or some other result from the project. The Product/Solution Scope is one of the first things that must be defined on a project. It describes what the end result of the project will be. Many times, it is the Business Analyst who defines the Product/Solution Scope.

The second meaning is Project Scope. This refers to all of the work that must be done to actually create the product/solution of the project. Once you know your product/solution scope, you need to create a list of all of the actual activities that will be required to create it. The project scope describes how the end result will be created. It is the job of the Project Manager to define the Project Scope.

Think of it this way: The Product/Solution Scope is the WHAT of your project. What will the end result be? The Project Scope is the HOW of your project. How are you going to create the end result?

Here is a simple example: Imagine that you are on a project to create a new Web site. The Web site (and all of its features, functions, and attributes) is WHAT you’re going to create. Now, you need to decide HOW to create it by defining specific activities, like designing the screens, writing the code, and testing the site in various browsers. Those activities make up the Project Scope.

Product Scope and Project Scope are both important aspects of any project. They are different from each other, yet closely related. You can’t have one without the other.

Project Management Training – Lifecycles

Lifecycles

The term lifecycles can be hard to understand for students in Project Management Training programs. Part of the reason for this is that the term can be applied in several different ways. Let’s consider three of the most common usages of the term lifecycle:

Product Lifecycle: The Product Lifecycle refers to the lifecycle of the actual product that a project is undertaken to develop. This could be an actual product or a service. Its lifecycle can typically be thought of as the duration that the product or service is in existence. Typically, this begins with some kind of conception. Oftentimes, this conception leads to the project’s being initiated. Then, the product might go through a growth period when it is launched and becomes available for use. Over time, the product will go through a period of maturity where many people are using it, or it has become very stable. When its use is no longer common, the product goes through a period of decline. This will ultimately result in the withdrawal of the product from the market.  When you think about these various states, you get a good idea of a product lifecycle:

Conception –> Growth –> Maturity –> Decline –> Withdrawal

Project Lifecycle: The Project Lifecycle is often referred to as a methodology. Each industry has its own methodologies for creating products. For example, in the corporate training industry, one lifecycle for the development of courseware could be the ADDIE lifecycle: Analyze, Design, Develop, Implement, and Evaluate. In the construction industry, the lifecycle might be Feasibility, Planning, Design, Production, Turnover, and Startup. In the IT industry, a common software development lifecycle is Requirements, Design, Development, Testing, Installation, Conversion, and Maintenance. Essentially, a project lifecycle represents the steps that are taken to introduce a product or service in a particular industry.

Project Management Lifecycle: The Project Management Lifecycle is the one that people are most concerned with when attending Project Management Training programs. In PMI terms, these are the Project Management Process Groups: Initiating, Planning, Executing, Monitoring and Controlling, and Closing. The Project Management Lifecycle is designed to take a project from conception to completion. It is different from, yet works with the Product Lifecycle and the Project Lifecycle.  For example, imagine a company is developing a new software application. The conception of the application was done by the organization (with the help of its Business Analysts), and they hope for the software to have a long life. They want it to be developed for market growth and maturity for many years before it is withdrawn from the market. Once the idea for the application is conceived, a project can be chartered. This kicks of the Project Management Lifecycle with the Initiating Process Group. After some initial, high-level goals are established, Planning begins. This is where the Project Lifecycle could kick in. Requirements are gathered, and the high-level design is done. As the Project Management Lifecycle continues to Executing, development and testing are completed (with the help of the Monitoring and Controlling Process Group) so that the software can be installed. Once the application is ready, the Project Management Lifecycle goes into Closing, and the application is delivered to the customer.

Understanding how these three lifecycles interact can be very helpful for students in Project Management Training programs.

Project Management Training | The Value of Training and Certification

The Value of Project Management Training and Certification in the Corporate Environment

Project management training and certification has been gaining a lot of popularity in various industries in the past several years (Project Management Institute, Inc., 2008). While that is a good thing for corporate trainers, there is still a question about its actual value. Is there any actual benefit to providing training (and subsequent certification) in the field of project management, or is project management experience enough to aid corporations with sustained profitability? This question could be the foundation of a comprehensive doctoral study.

Project management is a structured way in which projects (both small and large) can be taken from conception to implementation (Project Management Institute, Inc., 2008). Businesses have ostensibly been managing projects for years, yet the success of those projects has never been guaranteed. Training in project management has been seen as a corrective measure that would increase the success rate of current and future projects. By providing project managers with a comprehensive framework on how to best manage their projects, it could be argued that those project managers will be more successful. Moreover, by requiring certification upon the completion of a training program, businesses are ensuring that their project managers have been able to demonstrate that they can indeed successfully manage projects. Even so, that training and certification requires time and money, and businesses need to be certain that it is worth the investment.

The investment required for project management training becomes problematic because it can be difficult to measure the return on that investment. Several questions arise: Do certified project managers close more successful projects than non-certified project managers? Are businesses able to accurately recover the expenses of project management training and certification through ongoing project management work? Does training make a difference in the success or failure of the project? Can projects be managed without requiring trained (or certified) project managers, resulting in fewer training expenses? These questions form the foundation of an ever-present argument for training in the corporate environment.

The prevailing belief is that training and certification does indeed increase the chance of successful projects (Project Management Institute, Inc., 2008). A research study would be a great way in which to quantify this belief. Instead of merely relying on instinct (i.e., a belief that training is beneficial), a study can be conducted that could analyze both successful and failed projects in an effort to determine if the training of the project manager played a significant role. Once objective data have been gathered, the prevailing belief could be either confirmed or refuted. In addition, actual return on investment could be measured. That measurement, in turn, would provide businesses with valuable information that could help them decide how best to proceed in their project management endeavors in the future.

This would certainly not be an easy study. There are numerous factors that would need to be controlled. Nonetheless, this type of study would be a great way for businesses to choose whether to continue to fund project management training and certification in the future.

Reference
Project Management Institute, Inc. (2008). Value of a credential. Retrieved February 7, 2009, from http://www.pmi.org/CareerDevelopment/Pages/Certification-and-the-Job-Market.aspx