Here are three mindsets that create non-productive project cultures. They reduce the probability of implementing change successfully and of your project really changing anything. I’ve seen them in different countries around the world, across national boundaries (though some regions tend to exhibit one or more to greater degrees).

1. Harmony Above All
2. I’m the Boss
3. Short-Term Grab

1. Harmony Above All. This mindset shuns conflict (and project truths). Harmony above all denies problems, preferring to report that everything is possible, everything is going great on a project and that everyone is happy. It stems from a belief that pleasing the project manager is dependent on words and deference, rather than results.

2. I’m the Boss. This mindset breeds conflict. It uses any interaction as a mechanism to assert one person’s control over the other. I’m the boss focuses excessively on interpersonal issues and a project’s politics. Truth and project metrics are used subjectively to illustrate the reporter’s point of view. It stems from a belief that a person’s relative position is more important than results and that the highest reward is to be in a good position relative to other people.

3. Short-Term Grab. This mindset is opportunistic and scheming. Participation in a project is viewed as a means to fulfill a short-term need. People take actions to fulfill those needs, regardless of their impact on the project. Interactions are used to attain those needs or position one’s self (or someone else) to attain those needs. It stems from a paucity of opportunities over the long term and an inability to forecast a consistent path to basic-needs fulfillment with any degree of certainty past today or tomorrow.

Creating Change.

These mindsets distort a project away from results. They share a common feature in that failure is viewed as bad and that a project’s result is secondary to the opportunities presented by simply being involved in a project. Only in a culture where failure is acceptable can change succeed. You can strip these mindsets of their power by rigorously focusing rewards on results and accepting failed outcomes (make sure to communicate the consequences of failure to your team, namely, that it’s a learning experience and not the end of their opportunities –of course, these needs to be handled delicately to reduce moral hazard).

Innovation is critical to economic growth.

To budget for innovation, include the following items a part of your project charter and as part of your project goals.

• Increased team flexibility
• Increased team cohesion
• Increased knowledge sharing

All three of these are important components in having high functioning, high performing teams. High functioning teams, with a high degree of knowledge sharing, are a  basis for innovation and for surviving in today’s innovation-driven world.

By including these goals in your project charter, you assure that even if the project gets canceled midstream or fails to meet other goals like the scope, budget or schedule, if it will have met those three goals, the project will not have been a failure.

This is different then picking “innovative” projects as part of your project portfolio selection process.

When you allocate resources to “innovative” projects you are making a determination that you are willing to accept a higher degree of risk on these projects because you anticipate a higher reward from the successful delivery of the project’s goals. However, you are still counting on the successful completion of the project, and if it fails, you would judge the project to be a failure.

I would argue that the probability of failure on “innovative” projects is similar to that of less innovative projects. At least 50% of them will fail.

By adding team cohesion, flexibility and knowledge sharing as goals for the project itself, you create a culture where projects can “fail” according to more traditional metrics (delivery to scope, budget or schedule) but where the expenditure of effort on trying to accomplish the goals is still worthwhile.

This creates a radically different approach to being innovative.

It gives an organization the strength, creativity and organizational skill-set to continually innovate and continually try new things. Your efforts become focused more on value creation rather than on cost control and the illusory management of outcomes.

Part Four of Four

I’ll wrap up this series with a discussion of power.

Without authority a project manager is stuck.  A project manager needs to exert some form of authority to implement changes and move the project forward.  This authority can be formally granted in the organization or informally obtained and built up over time.

A linchpin needs to make a difference and exert influence over their individual realm. A linchpin project manager needs to exert influence over a process and other people. They may or may not formally have that power. If they don’t, an organization can unlock a wave of innovation by empowering project managers to make changes. Giving project managers formal authority.

But sometimes, a  project manager needs to build up their own authority.  Somehow. There are many different ways of gaining authority and many different kinds of power or influence that you can wield.  This article focuses on the kind of authority a linchpin project manager can gain: innovation driven authority. Authority you build up by being innovative, creative and delivering results.

INNOVATION DRIVEN AUTHORITY
A linchpin takes advantage of those things they have control over, and makes a difference in that realm.

They may realize they have authority over something small (what some may consider small). But it is specifically in this realm that they can affect change by starting and finishing something that is unique. By doing their part differently, they can invest themselves in the project and make it remarkable.

They may have a different read on what the customer wants or a different feel for how the customer wants to be treated. Then, through their own internal strength and belief that its ok to be different, they let that approach influence how they run the project -and how they ask others to work on the project.  Of course, this is not without risk. Their approach might be “wrong.” They could be heading for disaster.

But a linchpin project manager combines the willingness to take risks with formal project management skills.  This includes having a system in place to monitor projects, see when they’re going off track and do course corrections (or kill the project if need be).  It includes identifying and managing risk.  It means knowing how to report progress to other people in the organization, your clients, so they can have an accurate read on what to expect.

The project might fail. But a linchpin project manager will have distinguished themselves by trying to make a difference, of being more than just a competent project manager. By being an innovator.

By building a track record of trying to do the remarkable, a linchpin project manager can build up their reputation and their authority. This is authority based on results and creativity. Innovation driven authority.

PROJECT MANAGEMENT IS A SOURCE OF THE REMARKABLE
Throughout the series we’ve talked about structural changes you can make in your organization to foster linchpin project management. This article talked about giving people the authority to make changes or how to gain authority through innovation.  This is no small challenge and one that even the largest companies are grappling with (see The End of Management from the Wall Street Journal).  One thing is certain, someone who is inspired to be a linchpin has a tremendous amount of creative energy waiting to be used.  If you don’t give them the room to use that energy, to exercise their abilities, they will push for the authority to do so.  And if, after pushing and pushing, they still can’t get it, they will likely try to take those energies elsewhere (or, you’ll kill that energy and lose a valuable asset).  By not creating a culture of linchpin project management you could be fostering your next competitor right in your own shop. At the very least, by keeping creativity chained up, you’ll dull that source of creativity in exchange for the average and known.

By definition, a project manager is someone who ACTIVELY applies the tools, techniques, knowledge and skills of project management to help projects achieve their requirements. The most important word here is “actively.” A project manager, in the best scenario, is an active participant in achieving results. What’s more, a great project manager really is that linchpin who is particularly focused on delivering the remarkable.

Thomas Friedman has an inspiring article in the NY Times on a virtual start-up.  Virtual companies are nothing new in the world of software and services.  What’s new here, though, is that this company is a virtual manufacturing company.

“‘Three guys with laptops’ used to describe a Web startup,’” writes Chris Anderson from Wired Magazine (as cited by Friedman). “Now it describes a hardware company, too” thanks to “the availability of common platforms, easy-to-use tools, Web-based collaboration, and Internet distribution. … Global supply chains have become scale-free, able to serve the small as well as the large, the garage inventor and Sony.”

In the world of the virtual manufacturing company, production capacity and manufacturing flow seamlessly to the cheapest source, much like programming services have in the world of software development. Producing a widget is no longer that special. It can be done in many places at a relatively low cost. Like the name of the essay in Wired Magazine says “Atoms are the New Bits.”

And this is the kind of thing that can actually save manufacturing-based economies like Detroit.

What?

You may ask how it could possibly be a good thing that other countries or regions can produce high quality goods at cheaper prices and that companies can by from them so easily. How is that good for Detroit?

In a word: Value.

You have to look at where the value is.  Where wealth is created, where the unique advantages is.  It isn’t any longer in producing run of the mill goods.  The value is in creating a really great product.

Virtual manufacturing means that a clever innovator with a good idea can experiment with a new product and produce that product for a lot less money than it used to take. Engineers and product managers can get a new ventures off the ground with much less capital and much faster than ever before. It means that the amount of risk involved in manufacturing is less than its ever been.

It means its easier than ever to create a valuable product. It is easier than ever to create a product that is truly remarkable.

All of that is great news for Detroit.

It used to be that only software and service businesses were cheap and easy to get off the ground.  From the 1970’s on the remarkable breakthroughs were in software or innovative financial products.  That helped create the success stories of Silicon Valley, Seattle and Wall Street.

The cost of getting a manufactured product off the ground was high. It made it risky to invest in or to quit the day job, as it were, to give it a try.

But now, that has all changed.  And that plays into the strength of the people in Detroit.

As the article states, this can be a huge engine for growth in the United States.

Invented and financed in the West, further developed and tested in the East and rolled out in both markets.

Inventing and managing the lifecycle of a manufactured product is right up Detroit’s alley.  And not just Silicon Alley. I’m talking about the straight, old-fashioned grease covered alley of Detroit’s past. The alley filled with mechanics, backyard tinkerers and engineers.

If mechanics, engineers and tinkerers can dream it up, it can now become a reality. And if there’s one thing we have lot of in Detroit -its mechanics, engineers and tinkerers.

It is up to them, and to each one of us, to help make it a reality.

Planning is a critical component to being a successful innovator.

It sounds counter-intuitive.

You might think that innovation is all about inspiration and the eureka moment. But its not. Its about executing.  To paraphrase Seth Godin, real innovators ship. That is, real innovators get things done.  And often.  The more often you deliver something, the better you’ll become at delivering more in the future.  Your ability to innovate and implement real change will increase.

The problem with relying on inspiration is that it is often fueled by emotion alone. Soon, those emotions fade. Or, they become harder to generate as problems arise. Then you get stuck.

If everything is on the fly, you are always late.

You can never execute and ship as fast as your ideas come.  Rely on inspiration and you’ll get frustrated when things take longer than “now.”

You need to build project plans. You need to plan the next steps.  That way you won’t get frustrated when things take longer than “now.”  You’ll be able to keep moving forward even when you hit set-backs.

The plan will be in place. You’ll know where to pick up from and where you want to go.

You might have to modify it. Actually, you’ll most certainly have to modify it.  But you’ll have a baseline to move forward on.

The plan doesn’t have to be elaborate. In fact, I would caution against getting too carried away. Many great ideas never became reality due to “paralysis from analysis or over-planning and under executing.

How much planning is enough?

You’ll learn over time as you see one plan be too constrictive or the other too loose, and therefore useless.  Just be conscious of the plan and gauge its success at helping you deliver.  That’s one of the advantages of having a planning. You have something to tweak and improve.

Often enough, whether you can get the idea done or is more a reflection of your plan, and not of your idea.

By consistently measuring the outcome of different plans and tweaking the plan over successive iterations, you’ll find the right plan. You’ll find the mix that allows you to innovate and ship your ideas.

Not every idea you ship will be a hit.   But by shipping, you’ll at least be in the marketplace. You will be executing and delivering innovation. You will have the satisfaction and fulfillment of seeing your ideas through to their fruition.

This, in turn, will give you confidence to try the next idea. And the next. And soon, you will have a steady process to deliver innovation.

I had the pleasure of speaking to a group at the Shifting Gears program this morning in Auburn Hills, Michigan.

These are motivated individuals in mid-career who saw the world change around them as the auto industry in Detroit underwent its massive transition.

They are taking courses on re-learning how to compete and shine in a world of entrepreneurs, small businesses and risk takers. To use a phrase from Seth Godin’s Linchpin, they are being taught how to fight the lizard-brain.

One of the key messages I conveyed was the need to constantly be innovating. The group  has the basic skills to do this, but need to learn how to reapply those skills to generate innovation.

Most of the people in the group are engineers or worked in environments geared to engineers.  They are very accustomed to thinking about and structuring formal processes.

This is wonderful. You can create processes that generate innovation.

The problem is that most of them have been taught to build processes that eliminate costs by standardizing output.  What needs to be taught is how to develop processes that maximize innovation.

The way to generate innovation is to build processes and standards that measure output for its value to the customer.  And by value, I don’t mean providing widget x for the least money. This is what they have been doing for 20 years.  By value, I mean providing a good or service that the customer truly appreciates.

Its great programs like Shifting Gears that can help drive this re-learning in Michigan and help harness the talent that’s here.

Its also this kind of mindset shift, particularly in project management, that can foster a flurry of innovation and lead the economy forward.

Scott Berkun has an interesting survey on his blog. He is researching innovation for a new book. I found his survery thought provoking . Hope he doesn’t mind me springboarding off it (for those interested in the original, check it out here.

To me, innovation is about solving a problem when existing solutions don’t cut it anymore. Underpinning this definition is a belief that there are very few “new” problems (if any), just obsolete solutions. Technical accomplishments and new research are like getting pieces of a puzzle to fit together how we want them to. We didn’t build the puzzle (nobody asked us how the laws of nature should work) but are trying to get new shapes or designs from it.

What drives innovation? Or, in other words, why wouldn’t an existing solution cut it anymore? I think dissatisfaction is at the core of innovation. Somebody or a group of people, isn’t happy with the ways things work. So they try to figure out another way to make things work. The exact way they solve the problem itself isn’t necessarily the innovation. The solution could be made up of existing methods, processes or technologies. But the innovation is in the application of those methods, the fact that it solves a problem and takes away the dissatisfaction.

I’ve found that a lot innovation floating around is cool, but doesn’t necessarily solve any problems or help make people’s worklife easier. This is nothing new. Useless innovation has been around forever. But it seems that the pace has picked up on software being released that doesn’t bring anything new to the table.

Wonder if it has anything to do with more developers spending time on blogs, reading the latest success stories or latest technologies and trying to hop on the wave without understanding the fundamental problems being solved or the thinking that goes on behind the design of the functionality?

How has software already changed now that so many developers get input directly from the blogosphere? Is it creating software that solves problems better? Or, does it just increase the tempation to create something that rides latest, greatest tech buzz?