Discussion: View Thread

Looking back at my "dated" program/project experiences, as well as making use of the collective program/project experiences of my former E/A/C Quality Management System Consulting clients, and over the past 9 years or so with my university Fall semester graduate Project Management classes, I have come to understand that we can abstract-out most serious individual, "Troubling" project issues into four categories: People, Process, Technology and Leadership, i.e. attributing, for each project-issue of concern, a contributory percentage such that for each such issue the four estimated values add up to 100%. Astoundingly, I have consistently learned that no more than 30% of the restraining forces to success fall under the heading "Techology."

This means that, as a minimum, some 70% or more of what drives project results "South" at the worst possible time in the life of a project appears to be our collective, undeveloped understanding to routinely apply collaboration, communication, and cooperation as a routine part of how we work together, right from the "Client Selection" and "Proposal Phase" through "Project Closeout." For example, as the project begins, a project task member informs the project manager they suspect a problem with an interdiscipinary coordination matter, and is told "Thanks for that Sally, just continue on with that work, and I'll get back to you later." . . . Right, "Later!"

 So, it turns out that what the CE Profs told us were the "Hard Skills," once we were at work with other people, turned out to be the so-called
"Soft Skills."

In real-world project life, the "Hard Skills" for most CEs seem to be a mix of "How to play nice with others" . . .internally and externally. . .  and learning what "Listening with your eyes" and "Seeing with your ears" really means. Right, that turns out to be the "Hard Stuff!"

 I would be delighted if you had some time to chat.

Cheers.

Looking back at my "dated" program/project experiences, as well as making use of the collective program/project experiences of my former E/A/C Quality Management System Consulting clients, and over the past 9 years or so with my university Fall semester graduate Project Management classes, I have come to understand that we can abstract-out most serious individual, "Troubling" project issues into four categories: People, Process, Technology and Leadership, i.e. attributing, for each project-issue of concern, a contributory percentage such that for each such issue the four estimated values add up to 100%. Astoundingly, I have consistently learned that no more than 30% of the restraining forces to success fall under the heading "Techology."

This means that, as a minimum, some 70% or more of what drives project results "South" at the worst possible time in the life of a project appears to be our collective, undeveloped understanding to routinely apply collaboration, communication, and cooperation as a routine part of how we work together, right from the "Client Selection" and "Proposal Phase" through "Project Closeout." For example, as the project begins, a project task member informs the project manager they suspect a problem with an interdiscipinary coordination matter, and is told "Thanks for that Sally, just continue on with that work, and I'll get back to you later." . . . Right, "Later!"

 So, it turns out that what the CE Profs told us were the "Hard Skills," once we were at work with other people, turned out to be the so-called
"Soft Skills."

In real-world project life, the "Hard Skills" for most CEs seem to be a mix of "How to play nice with others" . . .internally and externally. . .  and learning what "Listening with your eyes" and "Seeing with your ears" really means. Right, that turns out to be the "Hard Stuff!"

 I would be delighted if you had some time to chat.

Cheers.