team communication

I was talking with a friend the other day. He is working on a renovation project. The team gathered requirements, reviewed options, had a lively discussion (or three), made decisions and then sent the final plans to the architect.

If you’re a PM you know what’s coming…

Yup, 2 days later, one of the team members sent an email to everyone: “I don’t think this is going to work. Here’s what we should do instead…”

UGH!

I felt so bad for my friend. And I could complete empathize!

It happens all the time on a project, unfortunately.

But why do certain people always seem to sabotage a project? And what can we do to prevent it?

The “why” is pretty easy: we’re human. And being human means we’re subject to frailty and influence…and we don’t always do what we should, even if we know better.

Here are some common reasons for the late entries:

Shyness. Some people don’t like to speak up. They work up the courage to speak but it’s well after the deadline
Introversion. As opposed to shyness, these folks may not speak up in a meeting, but need some time to reflect. And they may feel more comfortable writing or meeting 1:1 to discuss
Power. Let’s face it. Some people – consciously or unconsciously – feel the need to step in and take over. They may believe they have the better answers and it’s “my way or the highway”
Temperament. This one feels like Power, but it’s more about how they communicate. I know plenty of folks who honestly don’t realize they’re disrupting the very thing they’re trying to accomplish – they think they’re helping by bringing up additional suggestions or solutions, regardless of who they’re stepping on or how much re-work they’re causing

Having these late additions go unchecked can disrupt the project and the good will of the rest of the team. People may even leave the team completely – they refuse to work with the “disrupter”.

And as the Project Manager, if you don’t rein in the late entries your reputation takes a hit, too.

Each case is unique, but given the four common reasons above, there are a few pretty simple ways to minimize the occurrence, or at least the disruption:

Set up a short meeting with the known disruptor pre-decision meeting. Ask their thoughts and if there are any risks they see. Make sure to bring up these risks during the meeting so they’re addressed
Set up a meeting with the disruptor post-decision meeting. Ask for feedback again – you can play on the “did we cover it all” angle
Hedge your bets by giving the decision a “draft”. Give the final decision a buffer period for “new information”. I use this one with requirements. Sometimes we’ll schedule a “soft freeze”, knowing things will come up right after we freeze the requirements – even without a “saboteur” on the team!
Simply don’t allow it. Politely but firmly tell them it can’t be changed without \approval from the executive team. This one is tough to do unless you’ve planned for it. I always set up a change control process early in the project: process, documentation, decision-making. And make sure everyone is aware of this process throughout the project

Identifying project risks is important, no matter when they are raised. Our goal is always to bring the project forward, with everyone on board. Seeking to understand why a team member gives you a late entry helps lead you to the most appropriate response.

The other day my husband Steve asked if I was ready to go for a walk. I replied, “And the dog’s more than ready!”

He said “that’s not what I asked. Are you ready?”

This tends to happen to us. He’ll ask a question. I’ll read into it and give a reply that assumes the answer.

But if he doesn’t hear the actual answer, he can’t interpret what I’ve said. And that is frustrating for both of us.

If I’d simply added 1 word, if I’d answered “Yes! And the dog’s more than ready!” he would have understood and been able to receive the further information. Instead, I assumed he understood that my “and” covered the answer.

We all know what happens when we “ass-u-me”.

As I have a tendency to do this at home, I need to be extra careful to avoid “assuming and extrapolating” at work, too.

Communication with our stakeholders should be concise, as we all have full plates already. In an effort to be brief, to not waste our reader’s time, we naturally make assumptions in our emails, documentation, reports, etc. However, being too concise increases the chance of misinterpretation.

Here are three key methods to keep your communication clear:

Answer the question first. If you’re replying to an email or writing a summary report, there was an initial question or intent you’re responding to. First answer the question, and only then add relevant information
Use formatting techniques. Specifically, use bullet points to group together information. But here’s the key: use a header topic to explain the information. (For example, these bullet points are under a header topic that says the grouping is all about clear communication.)
Re-read your document for assumptions. Do you remember your elementary school teacher telling you to write like you’re explaining to “someone who has never heard of the topic”? That remains good advice! Especially in our distracted world, our team members don’t always pay attention to the details. This is a good way to orient them to the subject before you give them important information

Clear communication takes effort. It’s a balance between data and human nature. If we are going to respond to a question, we must answer it in a way that the person asking can understand and absorb. No assumptions.

Am I ready to walk the dog? Yes. Is he excited, too? Absolutely! Time to get his leash…

Is It Sabotage?

Does That Mean…Yes? Or No?