Communication is an art and a science

So many of us take our ability to communicate entirely for granted.  We feel that because we can write and speak, we can communicate.  We forget that communication implies not just what we can do as the one trying to communicate ideas, but the role of the person receiving and making sense of the message.  With effective communication, we need to make our goal: to be understood.

In project management, it is particularly important to communicate effectively; to understand what others' are seeing, hearing and feeling and ensure that the message we are trying to convey is received as we intend.  How can we do this most effectively?  I believe this depends on the receiver of the communication.

“Communication is first and foremost about the other person. It's not about what would be easiest, fastest or least scary for you” (Pollack, 2009).  It is important to know how this person prefers to receive information.  Look at how the person has communicated with you in the past.  If they normally leave a voicemail, it is likely that this is a preferred method of communicating for them.

In an exercise about effective communication, I read, heard and saw the same message delivered via email, voicemail and a face-to-face exchange.  I wondered which method worked best for me. 

Ø  As I read the email, I felt that the sender was clear, polite but honest about her needs.  Although I felt uncomfortable that I, as the reader, may have placed the sender in a difficult situation, she provided a medium for solving the issue and I felt like she would genuinely appreciate my quick response.

Ø  As I listened to the voicemail, I felt fear and shame.  I felt her disappointment and I wished I had not placed her in that position.  This is definitely not a way I prefer to be contacted. 

Ø  The method that surprised me most was the face-to-face exchange.  Although I initially believed this was my preferred method of communication, I did not like the way this particular message was relayed.  In the video, I only saw one person speaking and for me the best part of the face-to-face method is the possible exchange between the two people.  There were places in the dialogue where the receiver may have spoken perhaps apologizing or immediately providing the requested information, which were not there.  The one sided communication was too long, in my opinion, to be a fair representation of effective communication face-to-face.

From this exercise, I learned that I like email communication if it is clear, simple and sincere and may even prefer it to a face-to-face exchange if the request is a simple one.  However, as Pollack (2009) in the ABC article, The Best Way to Communicate in the Workplace explains, “If you have something complicated to explain, if you have a super-urgent message to deliver, if you get the sense someone is annoyed at you or if you are annoyed at someone, your best bet is to talk one-on-one”.   I certainly agree with that. 

Recognizing your preferred method of communication as compared to that of others can have a powerful impact on your overall effectiveness as a project manager, and for that matter, in all areas of your life.

Reference:

Pollack, L. (2009). ABC News. The best way to communicate in the workplace.  Retrieved from http://abcnews.go.com/OnCampus/story?id=6681011&page=1.

Why projects fail despite best intentions

Designing, developing, implementing and evaluating curriculum is a time consuming, necessary process for all schools. At small schools, not part of large districts, the burden falls firmly on the laps of teachers already busily addressing teaching and learning in their classrooms. Still, the job must be done.  A few years ago I lead a Language Arts curriculum review committee during its design stage.

This was the first time I lead a curriculum design team but had participated in various teams before.  None of these had been completely successful and I was determined to make this project different.  I quickly held a meeting with the teachers and administration to discuss the rationale for the project.  I explained the curriculum development cycle, the need for the process and the goals of the current committee.  I asked for teachers from all grade levels to join the team at that time and filled the committee with interested teachers who would be directly affected by the project’s outcomes.  The following week we held our first meeting where I shared our objectives and agenda items for the remainder of the year.  The only constraint I shared at that time was that of time.  We needed to have the document completed by the end of the school year.

We began our work enthusiastically but it wasn’t long before we realized that this would not be an easy project.  In the end, we completed the Language Arts curriculum including grade level benchmarks, program philosophy, essential questions and enduring understandings and summative assessments.  However, we were not entirely proud of our results.  What could we have done differently?  We followed the plan.  Everyone was on board.  We had the support of the administration.

We did not understand the constraints of the project and how they would negatively impact the outcomes. The project plan I developed was not feasible and it took me too long to make the required changes.  I find some comfort in the knowledge that this is described as a common mistake.  “Even when project managers do their best to assess feasibility and develop detailed plans, many find out that they cant achieve what they thought could be done” (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, Sutton, Kramer, 2008, p. 106).  Specifically, the job of unpacking the standards is extremely time consuming but an essential step in the early stages.  This took 3 times as long as I had initially planned and the job was rushed which affected the quality of the work.  I tried to adjust the schedule to fix the problem, but here emerged a problem I had not counted on (naïve, I know), the constraint of budget.  Although I enjoyed the support of the administration, fixing the schedule would entail coverage for teachers that was not a part of the budget.   

The project was completed, but it was rushed and over budget.  The assessments were weak and had to be revamped the following year. Although the process was a great learning experience for all, not just in the area of project management, but also in improving teaching and learning Language Arts at our school, the deliverables were weak.  This is so primarily because I as the project manager did not “[anticipate] and [plan] for risks and uncertainties” (p. 107).

Lessons learned:

1.     Do not skimp on the planning stage

2.     Ensure that your feasibility study is complete and accurate

3.     Include all team members in the development of schedules and responsibilities

4.     Hold everyone accountable for their performance, including yourself.

5.     Use ‘intelligent flexibility’ keeping to your outcome goals, but remaining flexible with the process.

** Communicate, communicate, communicate!

References:

Greer, M. (2010). The project management minimalist: Just enough PM to rock your projects! (Laureate custom ed.). Baltimore: Laureate Education, Inc.

Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R., Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Stolovich, H. (2012). Project Management and Instructional Design. Retrieved on January 5, 2012 from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_2097260_1%26url%3D