Projects & Politics: Evil or Just Inevitable?
Mark Mullaly, PMPOctober 27, 2004
Sooner or later, all of us must face the inevitable. No matter what we do, where we go or how much we hope otherwise, politics eventually emerge as a force to be reckoned with. Politics are seemingly inevitable, whether it's participating in a volunteer organization, serving on a board of directors, attending a meeting or--more often than not--managing a project. The fact is that politics are ever-present. It's just that some situations stick in our minds as being more politically charged than others.
In their most benign sense, politics are the dynamic forces that define the practice of organizational governance. As a nice, neat analytic theory, that's all well and good. The politics that most of us are more typically referring to are more overt, and more negative. They are the activities of individuals and interest groups who try to gain advantage for themselves at the expense of someone--or, in the case of our projects, something--else.
For many of us, we confront and deal with politics daily. Some of us are the instigators, and many more of us are the recipients. We deal with political interference from sponsors, executives, colleagues, managers and even team members. For certain project managers, I would hazard a cautionary estimate that upwards of 75 to 85 percent of their role and day-to-day activities are defined by politics, rather than dealing with the more rational and objective aspects of project management.
Many of ask the question of whether politics are a necessary evil, or are simply part of the project role. The most common perception, based upon feedback from many clients and training course participants, is that people simply wish that dealing with politics was not a part of their role, all the time recognizing that on some level it is. I've observed a range of responses, from the active to the passive, in how project managers respond to politics:
The Player
This project manager doesn't just accept politics, they thrive on them. Politics is a sport to be played and played well. Not only will this project manager actively engage in politics, but in many instances is the instigator behind them. The project simply becomes a vehicle to engage in the pursuit of personal interest. The danger of this approach is that the purpose of the project runs a strong risk of playing second-fiddle to the political goals of the person running it. Just like the debater that goes looking for an argument or the troubleshooter that will create problems just so they can be solved, there is a very real risk that the quest for politics here trumps all else, including an efficient and successful outcome of the project.
The Manager
This project manager views politics as a necessary evil, to be dealt with when required. While not inherently political themselves, those that respond to this type know how to play the game when pushed, and will jump in the fray as needed when others begin to work in conflict with the objectives of their project. To an extent, this profile takes a similar approach to that of risk management--expect the worst, allow for it and engage your contingency plan should it in fact occur. The only caution in this approach is that there are situations where the point of realization of political problems is well beyond the point at which a proactive--or even constructive--resolution is possible.
The Passive-Aggressive
This project manager uses politics as a shield, deflecting problems onto others in order to prevent having to deal with situations themselves. For the passive-aggressive project manager, their project would be fine if it weren't for everyone and everything else. The consequences of this dynamic are readily obvious--deflection of accountability for problems, even to the point of identifying imaginary problems elsewhere to deflect attention and focus from the project and the project manager. While the implications of this approach are painful, this behavior can persevere for a significant amount of time before it surfaces, at which point problems in the project may be well beyond the point of fixing easily.
The Avoider
This project manager doesn't like politics, and doesn't want to know about them. Not only will they not engage in politics, but they will deny their existence even in the face of objective evidence to the contrary. Those that respond to this type believe that hard work and objective fact will eventually prove out, and are constantly astonished when this doesn't occur. While the view may be perceived as naïve, the reality is that it is a perspective that many project managers hold, and that many more wish they could, if only as an ideal. Unfortunately, wishing politics away won't make them disappear, and refusing to deal with them cuts off our ability to effectively control the fate of our projects--and sometimes our careers.
Many of us will see ourselves in one or more of these types. Still others will prefer not to. Regardless of the motives behind each type, however, what emerges is the fact that politics are an inevitable part of the job, but also a potentially dangerous and not necessarily constructive part. Equally important is the recognition that politics comes in many different styles and flavors. It isn't just the Players that we need to watch out for, even if they are the most overt.
Our ability to choose how we respond to the presence of politics first depends upon acknowledging their existence. Without a doubt, there are approaches that are going to be more or less effective in different circumstances--whether these differences are due to the sponsor, customer, team or organizational culture. To be successful, it is important that we know ourselves and our attitude toward politics, and have sufficient perception to recognize when we need to engage in political action and which approach will be most effective. The way we deal with the Passive-Aggressive will not work for the Manager or the Avoider.
Lastly, it's important to keep politics in perspective. While we have to deal with them, our first priority should--wherever possible--be the project, not the politics. It is incredibly easy to get sucked into political turmoil that consumes our every waking thought, only to emerge out the other end and wonder where our perspective was. To paraphrase Henry Kissinger's comments on universities, "[The] politics are vicious precisely because the stakes are so small."
Mark Mullaly is president of Interthink Consulting Incorporated, an organizational development and change firm specializing in the creation of effective organizational project management solutions. Since 1990, it has worked with companies throughoutNorth America to develop, enhance and implement effective project management tools, processes, structures and capabilities. Mark is also the author of Interthink's Project Management Process Model (PM2), a maturity model that has been used to assess over 550 companies worldwide.
Copyright © 2008 gantthead.com All rights reserved.The URL for this article is:
http://www.gantthead.com/article.cfm?ID=220158
