When Technology Projects Break Down and What to do About it: Conversations that Make a Difference

This is the sixth article in a series that enquires into what it takes to design, implement and sustain technology projects that produce results as promised for stakeholders. In recent articles, we have been discussing the difference that leadership makes. In this article, we will move one level up in the IT Hierarchy of Needs as shown in Figure 1 and talk about conversations, why they matter and managing them effectively.

Figure 1: IT Hierarchy of Needs

Three Domains of Conversations that Make a Difference

There are three domains of conversations that make a difference:

Conversations for possibility - what do we want to achieve in the future?
Conversations for opportunity - what is the written plan to make our achievements real?
Conversations for fulfillment - what have we done as compared to what we planned to do, and how do we need to modify our promises, plans and actions in the light of new information we did not have when we put together our original plans?

Conversations for possibility begin with people who are willing to be held accountable for producing results in the future. These people meet and begin with conversations about what the current state is and how and why and how the current state is working and not working. These conversations about the current state are documented facts that can be verified. For example, when the IT department of an organization begins planning a budget for the next fiscal year, it starts by reviewing what it spent this year using financial records that are based upon accepted accounting practices. Once there is agreement about the past and the present states, the conversations move to discussions about the future. People begin to meet regarding the coming new year and speculating about how much money will be available, what the business objectives will be and how the money could be spent. Effective conversations for possibility conclude with written consensus (commonly called a requirements document) about what the future might look like. This consensus may change during the opportunity conversations.

In my experience it is a mistake to believe that a requirements document by itself constitutes a contract or a promise for what will be produced in the future. On the other hand, a plan without an approved and agreed upon requirements document cannot be trusted to produce future results either.

Conversations for opportunity use the written objectives documented during the conversations for possibility and answer the following questions about the objectives:

Who will be accountable for which high-level objectives?
How will the high-level objectives be broken down into smaller, more manageable goals and tasks?
Who will be accountable for these smaller goals and tasks?
What specific resources other than money will be needed for each of the objectives, goals and tasks?
What will it cost to pay for the resources needed?
How long will it take to complete each of the objectives, goals and tasks?
Where will the work be done?
What strategy will we use for the high-level objectives?
What tactics will we use for the mid-level and low-level objectives?
How will we manage and control the work - what is our plan for organizational structure, accountability, financial controls, communication and risk management?
What structure do we plan to use to follow the plan, document the actions we take and the results we produce, and how will we modify our plan as things break down and change during the life of the project?
How will we measure customer and employee satisfaction during the life of the project?
Who is accountable for producing, reviewing and approving the detailed written budgets, schedules, organizational structure and project requirements documents?

Conversations for fulfillment document what is actually done over the life of a project as opposed to what the plan said would be done, and what was actually accomplished by when, as opposed to what the plan said would be accomplished, and by when. In addition, during the fulfillment phase of a project the plan is modified to reflect the inevitable breakdowns occur. The key venues for conversations for fulfillment are rigorous daily, weekly and monthly review meetings where promised versus actual actions and results are documented and assessed.

Domains of Conversation that Make No Difference

Here are some examples of domains of conversation that make no difference and often do damage:

Pretense - people pretending in conversation that a situation is a particular way when the in fact know that it is not that way
Complaints - people griping about what is wrong with no commitment to change through effective action
Gossip - people with no commitment to producing positive future results talking about other people's business
Speculation - people talking about what has happened or is happening in the absence of factual knowledge
Cynical resignation - people asserting that things are bad and will get worse because no one can be trusted to know or to do the right thing.

Managing Conversations to Make a Difference

Contrary to what some say, talk is not cheap. Conversation is at the heart of what it means to be a human being and managing conversations effectively is what makes the difference in the qualify of life. In the next article we will discuss managing conversations to consistently and powerfully affect the outcome of information technology initiatives.

John Lee is a Director with Navigant Consulting Inc. and has 21 years of experience in the information technology field. Prior to joining Navigant, he was a manager with a Silicon Valley startup, spent eight years with Oracle Corporation and founded an IT consulting firm. He can be contacted at (314) 566-3603 or at jlee@navigantconsulting.com.

Filed under:

Risk Management