Using the emotional bank account for enhanced project delivery and compliance. 

PMO managers may find that project managers do not always follow established project management processes, methodologies, or standards. This leads to inconsistencies in project execution and documentation which is a problem for governance, risk and compliance.  

Cutting corners 

A project manager’s primary concern is delivery. So, when their workload is too heavy, corners typically get cut on process, methods, and standards, with the intention of catching up later.

Project soft skills, and in particular the use of the emotional bank account, can help project managers alleviate this issue, because it increases the productivity of their team and hence the effectiveness of their delegation, reducing their personal workload.  

Use of the emotional bank account also helps the PMO manager engage with project managers more effectively. Thus gaining a deeper insight into the challenges they face balancing the various claims on their time, and why PMO process and standard corners are cut.  

Least worst options 

Project managers often face situations where they must make tough choices. Choices on where to focus limited resources and what to let slip.  

Often this involves selecting the “least-worst option” in terms of consequences, when choosing what not to do. And accepting those consequences as part and parcel of delivering projects in challenging environments. 

Rock and a hard place 

This is why a “sanctions” based approach to forcing compliance with PMO processes and standards often doesn’t work.  

Project managers must deliver on their project objectives. Faced with the ‘rock’ of PMO compliance and the ‘hard place’ of project delivery pressure, project managers will often choose the ‘pain’ involved in not following PMO standards. Since it will rarely rank higher than the ‘pain’ involved in missing major deadlines. 

Process, standards and paperwork always lose out where there are limited resources and/or time, and a hard deadline to meet. In situations like this, the project manager is no more comfortable than the PMO manager. 

Delivery is what it’s all about 

The Project manager knows however, that it’s ultimately project delivery that counts. And explaining to executives that you chose to prioritise following process, standards and complete paperwork perfectly, over hitting a major deadline won’t wash.  

To be clear here, we’re not talking about Project managers cutting corners that compromise governance, risk and compliance. No one wants a project over the line that has left a trail of collateral damage for the business. 

Not all corner-cutters are mavericks. 

We’re also not talking about project management mavericks. Those who have the time but not the inclination to play by the rules.  

What we’re talking about are project managers under pressure. Project managers burning off the bureaucracy and “boiler plate” than can build up over time, and which can prove time consuming for project teams to navigate.  

Why less is more. 

Unfortunately, in the face of corner cutting in projects, the PMO will sometimes introduce more PMO checks and balances to control this. Unfortunately this can lead to more corner cutting and even more tension between project managers and PMO managers and colleagues. 

And the reason it doesn’t work, is the ‘pain’ of non-delivery for a project manager, will out-weigh any sanctions for PMO non-compliance. High stakes projects for example come with a real risk of the project manager being fired, if they fail to deliver. Particularly contract project managers.

So, if non-adherence to PMO processes and standards is an issue, it’s likely that the PMO Manager has already tried the traditional approaches to achieve compliance without or with only partial success. 

So, what’s the answer? 

Project Soft skills offer a different approach for both the PMO Manager and the Project manager, encouraging cooperation where other methods have failed. Leveraging goodwill and emotional connection, rather than appeals based purely upon standards, responsibilities and the threat of sanctions.  

Projects are delivered in the real world. Not the idealised world of project management and programme management methodologies. In that idealised world, corners are cut because of ignorance, laziness, or incompetence. In the real world however, things are rarely so clear-cut. 

Engagement and active listening 

Take the time to talk to each other, and actively listen to the pressures that drive each role. This helps PMO managers and project managers get a better understanding of the context and prism through which the PMO processes and standards are engaged with.  

Discuss why certain rules exist and why they are bent. This provides insight for both on the relative importance of those rules, and the consequences and impact of breaking them. Is a rule there to make PMO reporting easier for example? or is it there to guard against serious governance, risk, or compliance issues?  

If it’s necessary to break the rules, understanding why the rule is there and the impact of doing so is crucial, to avoid spending limited time and resources on following the less important rules at the expense of those where compliance is critical. 

Blind compliance with rules, in some cases of course is as unhelpful as non-compliance. So taking the time to explain and understand the benefits of a rule is time well spent. In this way decisions to break a rule are informed decisions. 

Compliance through consultation and design 

When compliance with PMO processes and standards is poor, It’s important to check how much engagement, consultation and communication with project managers actually took place.  It’s also useful to verify that Project manager induction processes include suitable training before the PM starts work.

If PMO process and standards design or reviews takes place, within the context of strong emotional bank accounts with stakeholders involved, the resulting trust, goodwill and emotional connection makes for an excellent basis upon which to agree a balanced workable framework. 

The resulting PMO framework will be more likely to recognise and cater for the different perspectives and challenges of those who will use it. Leading to greater compliance in its operation. 

Balancing continuous improvement and change fatigue. 

Continuous improvement is the watchword for many organisations, so a balance must be struck. A balance between the benefits that flow out of improvement to processes and standards, and those that flow from well-understood and consistently practiced processes and standards. 

Continuous, poorly consulted on and communicated, rolling changes, to any processes or standards, can be a large source of confusion, frustration, and non-compliance.  

It’s important therefore to have periods where processes and standards don’t change. Continue to consult and actively listen to what’s working well and what perhaps isn’t, but have the discipline to resist making reactive changes. Better to collect and apply such changes at the end of agreed periods of stability. 

High frequency changes to PMO process and standards, no matter how well-intentioned, will not only drive-up selective compliance – it will create a chaotic environment. Consequently, some project managers will struggle to keep up and comply with the changes, whilst others ignore them and wait for the next change. Neither of which help the PMO, or the project managers involved.