Everybody who has ever dealt with a project knows this situation: in the final phase it gets very stressful, the project manager feels pretty much under pressure and starts adding last second resources. This might solve the problem in some cases. But in most challenging business or IT projects it rather leads to an almost chaotic situation. Our latest presentation shows how to effectively schedule a project and illustrates that digging a hole is an entirely different project than the bearing of a child. Go to presentation…
The benefits of organizational change management are well documented, and well understood. The same is true for the methods and tools which are available for planning and communicating organizational transformation. And, if we ask a top manager in an international firm, we will most likely hear, that (s)he spends a lot of money on change initiatives. That is one part of the truth. The other, quite in contrast, is actually organizational behaviour and everyday corporate practice. It appears that senior management still prefers to invest in ad-hoc activities and external consultants rather than developing sustainable structures and systematic processes.
The big question is why we see such an enormous gap between broadly acknowledged importance and poor practical implementation of organizational change management.
At first sight, this gap appears to be a paradox. On second thought, we can put this phenomenon down to current leadership approaches and so-called “rational” behaviour. This is something, which can be learnt from taking a look back into management history and studying similar stories: Management approaches which are quickly hyped up after public announcement, but then take a long and stressful period to eventually prove valuable. Prominent members of this group are quality management, customer relationship management, performance management and talent management.
If management disciplines show comparable characteristics like change management, their lifecycle features analog challenges, setbacks, and frustrations. In the same way, we can search for aspects which finally led to their breakthrough. Doing this, we can identify four common myths in management. Understanding and overcoming those myths can be seen as a major milestone for eventually institutionalizing organizational change management.
Want to read more?
The full article will be published in zfo – Zeitschrift für Führung und Organistion (in German), available from December 2, 2010. For requesting an english copy please comment on this blog post.
Would you climb a mountain? Would you jump from a bridge? Would you wrestle an alligator? Do you tend to think in best or in worst case scenarios?
Your personal attitude (as well as the corporate culture) pretty much impacts your risk management approach. In other words, it determines the amount of effort which you are willing to invest in managing the “what happens next machine” (aka each damn business project)!
You can download this week’s “Risk Management” presentation here.
In this week’s lecture we spoke about envisioning, scoping and contracting. For most people, these are possibly the most trickiest things in project management. In any case, they are extremely hard to explain to students who typically lack business experience (and thus sufficient practical examples). Therefore, in order to avoid talking about abstract stuff, I was searching for common ground and found this video: any project should start with such a clear assigment!
You can download the presentation here.
We put the next part of our “Project Management” knowledge pool online. Slides are available for download on the here.
We put the first part of your knowledge pool regarding “Project Management” online. Slides are available for download here. Feel free to share the slides, if you like the presentation.