5
Who does what?

In simple a project needs people who come up with the idea (the originator), wants the benefits (project sponsor), who manages the project (project manager) and who undertake the work (the project team).

The players

Chapter 2 showed that a process or method is nothing without the culture, systems and organization supporting it (see Figure 2.2). Those related to projects are no exception. Hence, to understand “projects”, you need to have a firm grasp of who the players are and what is expected of them. The roles described here are relevant to a single project (see Figure 5.1). Roles required for running a programme or a portfolio are described in The Programme and Portfolio Workout.

In simple terms, a project needs people:

• who come up with the idea – the originator;
• who want the project benefits – project sponsor, often supported by a project board;
• who manage the project – the project manager;
• who undertake the work – the team managers and members.

The originator

He/she is the person who identifies the “need” for a project and publishes it in the form of a proposal. This person can come from any function or level inside or outside the organization. Ideally, if the idea comes directly from the strategy, the originator will become the sponsor.

The project sponsor

The project sponsor is an essential role on a project and is accountable either to higher management, such as a programme sponsor (if part of a programme), for the overall success of the project. The project sponsor is accountable for championing the project’s business objectives, engaging senior stakeholders, making key decisions and intervening in high-priority issues involving all benefiting units (using a project board if appropriate), approving key deliverables and making decisions or recommendations at critical points in the project’s life. The project sponsor is usually a director, executive or senior manager.

The project sponsor is ultimately accountable to the chief executive/ president via a project board (where required) or to an intermediate management team or board.

An underlying principle of project management is that of “single point accountability”. This is meant to stop things “falling down the cracks” and applies not only to the management of projects and the constituent work packages, but also to the direction of a project; there should be only one project sponsor per project. In this respect, the term “sponsorship” should not be used in the same sense as “sponsoring Chris to run a marathon,” where the objective is to have as many sponsors as possible. If a project sponsor is to be effective, rather than just someone who gives out money, he/she will need to be:

• a business leader;
• a change agent;
• a decision maker.

The project sponsor as a business leader

Project sponsorship is not merely a “figurehead” role. A sponsor is fundamentally accountable for ensuring “why” the organization is spending time and resources on a particular project. He/she must ensure the business objectives are clearly articulated, that whatever is being created is really needed and this need is fulfilled in a viable way. The project team will have their heads down, developing whatever outputs and deliverables are needed. The sponsor has to keep his/her head up, making sure the need still exists and the capabilities being produced fit the need. This cannot be over-emphasized; current research indicates that a prime cause of project failure is the lack of effective sponsorship and stakeholder engagement (we will come to stakeholders later, in Chapter 26).

The project sponsor as a change agent

Some may see the role of change agent and leader as synonymous. If so, that is good. For others, I have separated these out so it can be related to what many consultants and academics often refer to as “the management of change”. Every project will create some change in the organization, otherwise there is no point in undertaking it! However, some changes are ”easier” to effect than others as they align with the status quo and do not cross any politically sensitive boundaries. In essence, most of the people carry on as they always have done. Other changes, however, are fundamental and will result in shifts in power bases internal to the organization or even external, such as in unions, suppliers, or customers.

All organizations are “political” to some extent and the greater a project’s scope to change the status quo, the more those involved will need to be tuned in. Whilst projects create change, that change may not necessarily be beneficial to everyone it touches and this will trigger a political dimension to the sponsor’s role. People’s attitudes to “corporate politics” differ, ranging from believing it is unnecessary through to seeing it as an opportunity. Suffice to say, you must acknowledge the political aspects, understand the sources and motivations of the key players and then develop an appropriate approach to them.

The project sponsor as a decision maker

The decisions a sponsor will need to make fall into two broad types:

• decisions which steer the project in a certain direction;
• approval of certain deliverables.

The first type relates to go/no go decisions at the gates, decisions regarding how to react to issues and changes and decisions on when to close the project. The second type relates to particular outputs or outcomes from the project.

If a person is unable to make decisions, the project sponsor is not likely to be a role they will be comfortable with. Most of the decisions which have to be made will be predictable (in terms of timing, if not outcome!) and backed up by evidence. The project documentation, such as business cases and closure reports, are designed to provide the sponsor with the information he/she needs.

Attributes of a good project sponsor

If being a leader, change agent and decision maker are what is required of a project sponsor, then what sort of personal attributes does a good project sponsor need to have? There is nothing magic in the answer; as sponsorship is essentially a business role, the attributes are what you would expect for any good business executive. The exception is that, in a project managed context, business leadership is highly likely to cross departmental boundaries (See Chapter 2, lesson 6) and hence the sponsor cannot rely solely on “position power” get his or her way.

Performance in a role can be looked at as a combination of four factors: knowledge, experience, skill, and behaviours and the key ones are shown in Table 5.1. At such

Table 5.1 Attributes of a good project sponsor

a leadership level, however, it is the behavioural attributes which should be paramount. Gaps in knowledge and skills may be compensated for by building a team to ensure completeness, or by appointing project board members for their particular skills.

Table 5.1 shows those attributes which have been shown to be essential to good project sponsor performance. Basically, they need to be sound business leaders who understand how to work across the organization and not just in departmental hierarchies or silos.

Project sponsor working with the project manager

The key relationships for a project sponsor is between them and:

• higher management;
• the project manager.

As far as the project manager is concerned, he or she should expect the following from the project sponsor:

• take an interest in their project – it is, after all, their project;
• communicate their vision for what the project should achieve;
• be clear on what outcomes they need;
• agree the governance arrangements;
• keep the project manager informed of the business context and risks;
• challenge the project manager in a constructive way;
• be realistic;
• make decisions and give the necessary direction and respond to requests for advice;
• accept that all risks are their risks!

Unfortunately, project sponsors are not usually selected for the role but implicitly “self-appointed” through the job they have. In which case, it is the organization’s overall attitude to project management and the role of the project sponsor that will have the most effect on their performance, in other words, organizational maturity, which is looked at more deeply in The Programme and Portfolio Workout. Nevertheless, an executive with the right sponsor attributes in a poor organization will perform better than a poor sponsor in a good, or mature, organization. As far as the project manager is concerned, he or she will need to work with whoever they are told to. If they are unfortunate enough to have a sponsor who displays the wrong behaviours, they should not give up. The project manager should always remember it’s “the sponsor’s project” and their risk. Sometimes a sponsor may make what look like bizarre decisions but this may be because they have information which cannot be released. I remember a chief executive of a top UK company once saying, “I will never lie to you, except when the rules of disclosure from the City require me to.” A project manager needs to make “personal contract” with the sponsor; this is, after all, a person-to-person relationship, where the success of one relies on the other. If the sponsor isn’t performing as expected, assume they want to undertake their role and coach them (sensitively!): make requests for direction and decisions. Most project sponsors will not be trained project managers and will be uninterested in the minutiae of project management techniques; don’t assume or expect them to understand the “jargon”; look at the world through their eyes – think about benefits and risk. Similarly, report the world through their eyes but don’t try to take over their role.

Is project sponsorship really so important?

Publicly available research continually points out that organizations with active sponsors are more likely to have better project outcomes, leading to better overall business performance. Standish believes “The most important person in the project is the executive sponsor. The executive sponsor is ultimately responsible for the success and failure of the project.” I agree. BUT most business leaders spend less than 5 per cent of their time on sponsor related activity. Yet surely, their role is all about leadership and making change happen – leading change . . . and mismanaging change is the commonest reason CEOs get fired. If you look at project failure, six reasons are commonly cited and four, possibly five, of those come under the accountability of the sponsor:

• unrealistic goals – set by the sponsor;

• poor alignment of project and organization objectives – decided by the sponsor;
• inadequate human resources – influenced by the sponsor;
• lack of strong leadership – led by the sponsor;
• unwillingness of team members to identify issues – influenced by sponsor behaviour;
• ineffective risk management – set by the sponsor.

If you do a web search on project failure, you will find a plethora of reasons derived from as many research projects as you care to look at and all of them contain elements of wisdom pointing to failure being determined at an organizational level above the project manager. Despite this wealth of research and learning, many business leaders continue to ignore the issue or treat it informally. Everyone says they believe it is critical to project success and yet sponsors:

• are not “trained” to be effective;
• do not make the “time” to be effective;
• are just expected to “know” how to do the job.

The project board

A project board is usually required for projects spanning a number of processes or functional boundaries and/or where the benefits are directed to more than one market segment or function. Alternatively, the role can be undertaken by a programme board or management team. Unfortunately, bodies such as project boards are often ineffective, adding little value for the project sponsor. It is the responsibility of the chairman to keep board members focused on the key aspects of the project where their experience can be used to best effect. Bearing in mind the political nature of some projects, project boards are often essential as a way of formally engaging senior stakeholders, without whose help, the project may not achieve its aims. Be very careful, however, as boards solely created for stakeholder engagement purposes rarely perform effectively.

In the example structure in Figure 5.1, a project board is there to support the project sponsor role and chaired by the project sponsor. In some cases, the project board may be at a higher level to which a project sponsor is accountable. In other cases, a project board may not even be necessary. There is no wrong or right approach, but if a project board is created, it must be clear what its purpose is, the line of accountability and the limits of authority (including decision making), especially in relation to the accountability and authority of the project sponsor. Such accountabilities and authorities should be defined in a terms of reference.

A project board is often called a steering committee, steering group, or steering board.

The project manager

The project manager is accountable to the project sponsor for the day-to-day management of the project, involving the project team across all necessary functions and engaging stakeholders as necessary. Depending on the size of the project, the project manager may be supported by a project administrator, or office support team.

The bodies of knowledge of various associations, such as the Association for Project Management or the Project Management Institute, seek to define the attributes or competencies of project managers. They are, however, not always easy to apply in practice. To put them in context, consider three levels of project manager competence:

• In tuitive project managers are capable of managing a small or simple project very effectively with a small team. They rely on their own acquired common sense, much of which is inherent good practice in project management. They intuitively engage stakeholders, seek solutions, plan ahead, allocate work and check progress. Many “accidental” project managers fall into this category.
• Methodical project managers are capable of managing larger, more complex projects where it is not possible to keep the whole venture on track using simple tools and memory. Formal methods, procedures and practices are put in place to ensure the project is managed effectively.
• Judgemental project managers can cope with highly complex and often difficult projects. They can apply methods creatively to build a project approach and plan which is both flexible and effective, whilst keeping true to all the principles of good project management.

Performance in a role can be looked at as a combination of four factors: knowledge, experience, skill, and behaviours.

• Knowledge comprises learning a set of tools and techniques which are necessary for effective project management.
• Skills are the application of tools and techniques.
• Behaviours represent the attitude and style used by the project manager towards team members, sponsor, board, and stakeholders.
• Experience measures the depth to which any knowledge, skills, or behaviours have been applied.

Table 5.2 comprises a summary of these and shows those attributes which have been shown to be essential to good project manager performance. The extent to which a person complies very much depends on their level of attainment. You would expect an intuitive project manager to have far less project experience than a judgemental one. (Source: CITI Limited.)

The preceding paragraphs give the dimensions to look for when selecting a project manager and are sufficient for you to discuss a brief either with other managers or your Human Resources department. When it comes down to it, however, how would you distinguish between people with similar skill sets? What should you look for or avoid?

Table 5.2 Attributes of a good project manager

Good reasons for selecting a particular project manager include the following:

• Inherent enthusiasm. They need to understand the role and what it entails or be willing to learn and have the aptitude to cope. Look for the spark that tells you they really want this to succeed.
• High tolerance of uncertainty. They need to be able to work effectively across the organization, without formal line authority or rank authority. They need to be able, especially in the investigative stages, to deal with the many potentially conflicting needs and signals as the project hunts its way towards a solution.
• Ex cellent coalition and team-building skills. People are at the heart of projects, both as team members and stakeholders. If the project manager doesn’t have the necessary “people” skills, the project is unlikely to be a success.
• Client orientation. This means they need to understand the expectations and differing success criteria of the various stakeholders, especially the project sponsor.

Poor reasons for selecting a project manager, if taken in isolation, include the following:

• Availability. The worst reason to appoint a person is simply because he or she is available. Why are they available? What aptitude do they have? This tends to happen in organizations with a low level of maturity in project management, as “project staff” are often not seen as part of the normal work of the organization and having them “do something”, rather than “nothing” is seen as more important.
• Technical skill. This can be useful on a project but not essential. The project manager can draw on technical experts as part of the core team. The danger when the project manager is also the technical expert is that he or she will concentrate on the technical area of interest to the exclusion of everything else. For example, a good systems engineer may ignore the roll-out, training, and usability of a new system as they are more interested in the technical architectures and features.
• Toughness. The “macho” project manager who closely supervises every aspect of the project, placing demand upon demand upon the team (or else!) is the way to demoralize a team. Add to this the likelihood that many of the team may be working part-time, it may be a fast way of losing the very people who are vital to a successful outcome. Yes, a project manager needs to be emotionally tough and resilient but this should not translate into being a bully.
• Age. Grey hairs do not necessarily indicate a more experienced project manager. Maturity in project management comes from exposure to a wide range of different situations and projects, not just length of service. Managing a single project over five years is quite different to managing ten projects, each of a six-month duration. Length of time alone is not an indicator of experience.

The team managers and members

The team managers are the “doers” who report to the project manager and are accountable for prescribed work packages and deliverables. This may range from a complete subproject to a single deliverable. It is essential that the full experience of the team be brought to bear on any problems or solutions from the start. In the case of large projects, the project manager may choose to have a small core team, each member of which manages his or her own subsidiary teams, either as work packages or subprojects. Project teams often comprise two parts:

• The core team – those members working full time on the project and report directly to the project manager. A core team size of six to ten people is about right.
• The extended team – those members who report to the core team (team managers) and who may be part-or full-time.

Team managers form the bedrock of a successful project. Not only do they have to be competent in the specialist work relating to their assigned deliverables, but also need to be competent in a range of project management techniques. If you look at the accountabilities above, you will notice that many aspects including planning, reporting, risk and issues management, change control, and stakeholder management are the same as those required by a project manager. It is not unusual to find that work scopes for some team managers’ work packages dwarf other project manager’s projects in terms of team size and spend. It is for this reason many organizations include project management techniques as a core part of every manager’s training and development. If team managers are not competent at the management aspect of their role, as part of a project team, it is the project manager’s accountability to brief them on what is needed and, if necessary, tailor the techniques to suit the competence levels of those who need to use them.

It is essential that each member of staff working on your project has a clearly defined:

• role and reporting line to the project manager when working on the project (he/ she may maintain their normal reporting line for other activities);
• scope of work and list of deliverables (both final and intermediate deliverables);
• level of authority (i.e. directions on what decisions he/she can and cannot take on behalf of his/her line function).

All groups or individuals associated with the project and which make up the team should be identified and listed with their role, scope and accountabilities.

Project assurance

Assurance covers all interests of sponsorship, including business, user, and supplier needs. It should be independent of the project manager. Assurance should be focused on the project’s business objectives and whether they will be achieved. As such assurance is inextricably related to the project sponsor role.

Everything relating to assurance is the accountability of the project sponsor. Thus, in the absence of project assurance, the sponsor is accountable for the activities. The most common reason for creating a project assurance function is simply because a sponsor may not have the time or competence to undertake the sponsor role effectively. By having a project assurance function, the time pressure can be relieved and more experienced people used when needed.

Those undertaking assurance roles need to be able to take an independent view to enable them to challenge and confront any issues they come across. Often the major issues are well known within a project team, but political or other constraints prevent those involved from speaking up about the “elephant in the room” which everyone can see but no one acknowledges is present; or to point out the facts behind the “emperor’s new clothes” where some aspect of the project is exposed, whilst all those involved pretend it is well covered. Those undertaking assurance must have the gravitas and management style to be trusted by the project team and stakeholders and need to provide constructive and practical views based on insight and experience. Assurance undertaken on the basis of scoring points off the project team or doggedly sticking to checklists will not be beneficial to anyone. Finally, don’t confuse “project assurance” with “quality assurance”; the former is about ensuring every aspect of the project is run to ensure the business objectives will be met, whilst the latter is focused on the processes, procedures, and practices which ensure quality is built into the deliverables.

Project coach/facilitator

The project coach or facilitator is accountable for supporting the project manager, project sponsor, and project board. This may be by pure coaching or by giving advice, facilitation, and guidance on project management. Both approaches will help project teams, experienced and inexperienced, to perform beyond their own expectations. It is a role which is found infrequently but can prove extremely effective.

Remember, in many business-oriented projects, the participants are likely not to be fully trained and capable project managers. They may need to have someone who can give them the confidence to work in a way which may be alien to them.

Project support

At its most basic, project support provides support and administrative services to the project manager on activities such as filing, planning, project monitoring, and control. The services provided by project support can, however be very specialist, and go far beyond mere, though essential, administration.

Project support can provide expertise, support services, specialist advice, and guidance on any aspect of project management. They are often given names such as project office, project management office, or project support office.

Working with the programme or project manager, project support establishes the most appropriate governance strategy and implements planning and control mechanisms, methods, processes, and tools. The provision of any support on a formal basis is optional and in some cases (where the project is relatively straight forward), the project manager provides their own support. Where set up as a specific service, project support can act as the focal point for lessons learned and as a central source of expertise and advice using any methods and specialist support tools.

Specialist roles

All the above roles are related to directing and managing the project; they are agnostic to the type of work being undertaken. In fact, what people sometimes refer to as “the real work” is all directly undertaken by the team manager and team members; the work is whatever the scope of the work package defines it to be. Calling everyone a “team manager” on an organization chart is not very useful, so you will often see team manager’s roles defined by the specialist work they do, whether communications, sales, design, development, engineering, manufacturing, or whatever. The team manager and team members should be skilled and competent to undertake the work assigned to them, often using specialist processes or methods specifically for that work. For example, for a system engineering project, the team manager may be called the “System Engineer” or “System Architect” and they may follow the organization’s prescribed engineering method when developing the specialist deliverable for the project. As they are accountable for those deliverables in terms of quality, time and costs, they will also act as the “team manager”. As you have already read, above, the team manager role defines what management approach they should take and their interactions with other roles, such as the project manager and team members; a person managing a team on a project must be competent at both their specialism and the project management techniques needed for the management of their work package. Unfortunately, you often see people taking the opposite approach, saying, wrongly, that the project manager is accountable for time and cost and the specialist manager for the quality of the deliverable. Projects run in that way can rarely succeed. It is true that the project manager is accountable for time and cost but this is for the entire project; a project manager relies on the plans developed by the team managers and risks perceived by them, drawing everything together to ensure a complete solution with a robust plan.

Workout 5.1 – Understanding your roles and accountabilities

This workout is best done with the project team, but may be done by the project manager or sponsor.

1. Take any one of your projects and identify who (both individuals and teams) is involved in it. List them, one per Post-It Note. Place these on a flip chart.
2. Against each name, write in your own words what that person’s needs or accountabilities are regarding the project.
3. On the left-hand side of a separate flip chart, list the roles described in Chapter 5.
4. Match, as best you can, the names from step 2 to the key project roles described above.
5. For those names listed against “team member,” divide them into “core team member” and “extended team member”.
6. If you cannot allocate a person to one of the defined roles, put him/her in a separate cluster called “stakeholders”.

Look at the role descriptions described in the chapter again. Do the individuals have the knowledge, skills and competences to perform the roles? You should have only one name against project sponsor and one against project manager. If not, your roles and accountabilities are likely to be confused. Further, the sponsor and manager should not be the same person.