This Guest paper was submitted for publication and is copyright to Mark A. Seely© 2016.
Published here March 2017

PART 2 | Editor's Note & Table of Contents
Chapter 4: Level 1 - Process Management | Level 1 Management | Performance
Chapter 5: Level 2 - Project Management | Level 2 Management | Performance
Chapter 6: Sociolytic Mindscaping  | Analysis of Analysis | Custom vs. the Standard Stereotype
Open System vs. a Closed System Stereotype | Governance versus Management
Level 2 in a Level 4 World - Much Simpler than Possible | Gaming Systems | PART 4

Chapter 6: Sociolytic Mindscaping

Living the Dream

So, how many times has this happened? The project is launched to much fanfare. The new management superheroes are unveiled. Shortly after the champagne corks are popped, the project management plan is rolled out, the architects of which need to find a new career path before reality sets in. The project team is left to pick up the pieces.

Embracing those implicated in the project positively requires that you both set the motivators for success and communicate a readily comprehensive and thus simplistic way forward. This is where the dichotomy sets in - the cognitive dissonance in simultaneously clinging to fact and fiction.

Death of the Dream

Where the sponsor elects to undermanage the initiative as with, for example, a Level 2 application in a Level 3 reality, or a Level 2 in a Level 4, this amounts to relinquishing control to the law of entropy. The project team is left with a dilemma — embrace reality for what it is, with all its uncertainty and intricacies — external determinacies, dynamic complexities and the like - or simplify the implementation to a more readily manageable construct.

There is something to be said for simplification. A scenario that encompasses a diverse number of individuals and accountability centres can easily lose focus without some reduction of the issue to a more readily embraceable proposition. That said, we realize that, in an under-targeted mismatch, the obligation conveyed to the various parties does not rationally compare to the greater challenge they face. This response may not be logical, realistic or fair. The end may justify the means - for a while - provided there is greater plan developed for bridging to reality.

With mismatching, as reality unfolds, the various parties engaged will be left to their own devices to find their way of the box you have put them in. Extensive and prolonged mismatching will lead to cynicism, a loss of integrity, and disenfranchisement of the various players. As one would do in a Level 2 environment, holding the team's "feet to the fire" on the simple plan will only exacerbate a bad situation.

The problem with reality is that it will not go away. The earlier gained enthusiasm for change, and the illusion of success generated in the formative stages of the project, will cede to reality as the dream fades away.

Performance   Performance

Home | Issacons | PM Glossary | Papers & Books | Max's Musings
Guest Articles | Contact Info | Search My Site | Site Map | Top of Page