Projects * Unique * Finite * Deals with Future * Revolutionary change * Disequilibrium * Initiate change * Objective to be defined * Transient resources * Flexibility * Effectiveness * Goals * Risk and Uncertainty

From lists above, if a project is not actively seeking to initiate change in operations, then it is, in effect, a set of operational activities; improving situation incrementally.

Operational activities do not, in general, cause disequilibrium. It is operational activities that are destabilised. By project. Not other way round. Though there are plenty of examples of operations destabilising projects... But this is a resistance to change rather than initiation of change.

There is, however, a link between two. And successful projects need to have this made explicit. To take example of change. Projects are change efforts. But managing change is part of an operational manager's responsibility. Projects identify change required to move operations into future. Operational managers then manage introduction of those changes into their domains so that new operational practices are different from those before project.

Conclusion

Problems with mixing Projects and Operations: If a project begins to have characteristics that resemble those of operations, it is probably a good idea to bring it to an end. And ensure handover in a timely and professional manner.

Equally, if a project has within its plan elements that involve operations, it is probably better to take them out. Otherwise there is a risk that operational management falls to project manager.

So we need to be wary of "projects" that are: * Uniquely repetitive, * Continuously finite, * Projecting present into future, * Evolutionary rather than revolutionary, * Are stable, efficient and role based, and * Secure.

None of these bear characteristics of a project. Rather they are a mixture of both. They become "projerations", and are generally unsatisfying for everyone working on them.

Overcoming Mixing: One way to overcome mixing of projects and operations is to ensure that operational activities are properly resourced. The absence of correct operational resourcing often leads to projects being "loaded-up" with operational tasks such as report generation, cube building, process mapping, etc.

The people working on projects know this and react, causing tension with their operational activities.

The solution? Ensure that operational activities are correctly resourced. And don't, as far as possible, move unresourced operational activities into projects.

Stephen Hay is the principal of People and Process, http://www.the-process-improver.com , providing process mapping and enterprise architecture services to small and medium sized businesses and not-for-profit organizations.

"Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host, That he which hath no stomach to this fight, Let him depart; his passport shall be made, And crowns for convoy put into his purse; We would not die in that man's company That fears his fellowship to die with us."

Now, apply this lesson to those people who tell you they want out. You may find yourself reshaping your relationship with them in positive ways and boosting your leadership effectiveness with people who remain.

Here's how you do it. Offer them "crowns for convoy." Have them draw up specific leadership actions that they will take to leave. Provide milestones and ways that you and they can monitor their progress. Support them in their taking leave as you would any cause leader who is staying.

One might say that if somebody wants out ... good riddance! But let's examine this. When somebody wants to leave, two facts apply. One is that, clearly, that person - for whatever reason - is dissatisfied and is looking for satisfaction elsewhere. And two is that you have a relationship with person. It might be a good relationship. It might be a bad relationship. But here's point: You don't want to get two facts mixed up in a bad way. Because that relationship will continue in one way or another even if you don't set eyes on each other again.

A bad relationship with an employee that left your organization can come back to haunt you in many unforeseen ways. For instance, it may poison your relationship with people who remain behind. By supporting that person in taking leadership of their leaving, you are creating an opportunity for you to change your relationship with them, to work together in a positive way. This may help redress any bad feelings that might have otherwise grown worse.

When CROWNS FOR CONVOY are not offered in spite or rancor but out of a genuine desire to help, you'll transform a potentially bad situation into a beneficial one. And who knows? Maybe, like Henry, you'll achieve an unexpected upset win.

2005 © The Filson Leadership Group, Inc. All rights reserved.