Project Management

The Risk of "Information Hiding" Behavior in Project Management: Implications and Strategies for Prevention

April 6, 2023GeneralEdward Kiledjian

A study conducted at George Washington University involving undergraduate students found that the likelihood of decision-makers concealing negative information or problems increased significantly as a project approached completion. Specifically, when a project was 90% complete, the study found that 81% of decision-makers were likely to hide negative information or problems, compared to just 37.5% for a project that was only 10% complete.

There are several potential reasons for this phenomenon. One possibility is that decision-makers may feel pressure to meet deadlines and achieve certain targets and may therefore be more inclined to conceal problems to keep the project on track. Additionally, decision-makers may be motivated to avoid negative consequences, such as criticism or punishment, if they report problems or setbacks.

One study published in the Journal of Business Ethics found that individual and organizational factors can influence the likelihood of "information hiding" behaviour. These factors include an individual's level of power and influence within the organization, as well as the organization's culture and reward systems. For example, the study found that individuals with a high level of power and influence within an organization are more likely to engage in "information hiding," as those who work in organizations with a culture that values competitiveness and individual achievement over collaboration and transparency. The study found that reward systems that emphasize meeting short-term goals and targets may also contribute to "information hiding" behaviour.

Another study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology found that "information-hiding" behaviour can negatively affect individuals and organizations. The study found that individuals who engage in "information hiding" behaviour may experience negative emotional consequences, such as increased stress and anxiety, and may also be more likely to experience negative career outcomes, such as reduced job satisfaction and career advancement opportunities. Additionally, the study found that "information hiding" behaviour can have negative consequences for organizations, including reduced trust and collaboration among team members, decreased decision-making quality, and reduced project success.

To minimize the risk of "information hiding" behaviour, it is important to create an open and transparent culture within an organization where decision-makers feel comfortable sharing information and raising concerns. This can be achieved through several measures, such as establishing clear communication channels, encouraging a culture of honesty and accountability, and providing training and support to help decision-makers feel more confident in raising concerns.

It is also important to recognize that "information hiding" behaviour is not limited to decision-makers and can occur at any level of an organization. Therefore, it is important to create a culture where all employees feel comfortable speaking up and raising concerns, regardless of their position or level of authority.

Overall, the study at George Washington University provides valuable insights into the potential for "information hiding" behaviour as projects approach completion and highlight the importance of creating an open and transparent culture within an organization to minimize this risk. By fostering an environment where decision-makers feel comfortable sharing information and raising concerns, organizations can help ensure that problems are identified and addressed promptly, ultimately improving the chances of project success.

Keywords: "information hiding," project management, decision making, transparency, accountability, project success.

The Power of the Next Action Concept in GTD

March 20, 2023GeneralEdward Kiledjian

The "Next Action" concept is a key principle of the Getting Things Done (GTD) productivity system developed by David Allen. It involves focusing on the specific, physical actions you need to take to move a task or project forward rather than getting bogged down in the details or abstract concepts.

One of the main reasons the Next Action concept is so powerful is that it helps to break down large, complex projects into smaller, more manageable chunks. So instead of feeling overwhelmed by an entire project, you can focus on the specific action you need to take next, making it more achievable.

For example, let's say you have a project to create a new marketing campaign for your business. The next action for this project might be to research potential target audiences. Once you've completed that action, your next action might be to create a list of possible marketing strategies to reach those audiences. By breaking the project down into smaller actions, you can more easily track your progress and stay on track.

Another benefit of the Next Action concept is that it helps to clarify your priorities. By focusing on the specific actions you need to take, you can more easily identify the most important tasks and which ones can be put on the back burner. This can help you to stay focused and avoid getting sidetracked by less important tasks.

Overall, the Next Action concept is a powerful tool for managing large, complex projects and staying on track. By focusing on specific actions rather than abstract concepts, you can break down a project into manageable chunks and clarify your priorities. This can help you stay organized and progress toward your goals.

What is GTD?

Getting Things Done (GTD) is a productivity method developed by David Allen that helps individuals and organizations increase their effectiveness by better managing their time and attention. The GTD method involves creating a system for capturing and organizing tasks and regularly reviewing and prioritizing them. The goal of GTD is to help individuals and organizations focus on what is most important and get things done more efficiently and effectively. GTD has become a popular method for personal and professional productivity and is used by people worldwide.

Keywords: Getting Things Done, GTD, productivity, Next Action, time management, project management, priorities

9 most important questions to determine if a project is worthwhile

January 16, 2017GeneralEdward Kiledjian

George H Heilmeier was a DARPA director and developed 9 questions to help the agency determine the worthiness of project being submitted to it for funding. These 9 powerful questions as referred to as the "Heilmeier Catechism" and have become a core operating paradigm for DARPA [Defense Advance Research Projects Activity] And IARPA [Intelligence Advance Research Project Activity].

These questions are so powerful, they are used in the business world day in and day out. I first learned about these questions while having lunch with a VC in San Francisco. He explained that many of his peers also use these questions when determining the funding worthiness of a proposal.

There have been variations to the questions but I recommended sticking with the original 9:

What are you trying to do? Articulate your objectives using absolutely no jargon. What is the problem? Why is it hard?
How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice?
What's new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?
Who cares?
If you're successful, what difference will it make? What impact will success have? How will it be measured?
What are the risks and the payoffs?
How much will it cost?
How long will it take?
What are the midterm and final "exams" to check for success? How will progress be measured?

This is a variation on the journalists who, what, where, when, why and how strategy. Obviously answering these questions will not change the world or guarantee the success of a project. They will greatly reduce the risks you take by ensuring the key concepts are thought off and understood

Every project manager should be performing a pre-mortem

June 12, 2014ManagementEdward Kiledjian

As a business leader, I have participated in and managed hundreds of post-mortem reviews for projects and deals. It is a sound strategy to identify the elements that failed or that could be optimized/

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

— George Santayana

But what if you could gain all of the benefits of this activity before the initiative fails thus potentially saving it? A pre-mortem (or premortem) basically is a role playing game where participants assume the project has already failed and then determine why it failed and how failure could have been prevented.

Why this works

Issues rarely "just happen". Typically there are warning signals that show up prior to any failure. Typically these are:

You know you are not undertaking the required maintenance which will likely lead to failure (project monitoring, follow-ups, etc)
You can "feel" the project deviating from its core purpose
You start noticing "out of the ordinary" or unexpected results

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure

Instead of retrospectively looking at why the project failed, why not take the time to foresee what could go wrong and fix it?

The best way is to invite a core group of knowledgeable experts and ask them to imagine the project failing then lead the group to identify possible preventative measures. It sounds easy because it is.

The Pre-Mortem Process

Step 1 - Doom and Gloom

Lock up your key people in a room and ask them to imagine every possible way the project could fail. Big or small it should be written down individually on a sheet of paper. Remind the team that no failure is too big or too small. Every issue should be started with "what if"

What if the supplier doesn't deliver the part
What if the supplier goes out of business
What if the price of the part shoots up significantly
What if...
what if...
what if...

As a moderator, your role is to ensure everyone spends this time thinking about problems and not solutions. No judgement and no logical thought. We don't want participants making risk judgements to eliminate possible failures.

Step 2 - Prioritization

Share all of the failure possibilities with the participants and narrow down the list to the top 10, top 20 or whatever other number you are comfortable with. For most projects, I typically like top 10 lists. For more critical or larger projects, I may go to a top 25 list.

When reviewing the list (collectively), remind the participants that there are really 3 things to consider in this step

Choose failures whose realization will have a severe and catastrophic impact on the project.
Choose failures who are likely to happen. There could be some debate but the threat of a comet hitting your datacenter could probably be crossed off the list.
Choose failures that are in your span of control. Some failures are outside of your control and cannot be mitigated by you. Chuck those out.

Step 3 - Solutioning

“Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe.
”

— Abraham Lincoln

If the first 2 steps where done properly and diligently then this last step should be fairly easy and straightforward. Assigned the final problems to owners and each owner must:

Come up with a plan to prevent the failure from occurring
Come up with a backup plan in case prevention doesn't work

The final step is to ensure every action item is given an owner and a due date. These should be tracked as part of the master project plan and reported on weekly.

Your project teams may be hiding problems and negative information

March 9, 2011Behavior, Management, Team buildingEdward Kiledjian

An interesting article was published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology Volume 41, Issue 2, pages 401 428, February 2011.

It is clearly demonstrated that as a project get's closer to completion, decision makers are more likely to conceale problems that may jeapordize it.

This interesting work was undertaken at George Washington University using undergraduate students.

The crux of the analysis is that a 90% complete project meant that 81% of decision makers were likely to hide nagative information or problems. In contrast, a 10% completed project only showed a 37.5% "information hiding" rate.

We all know that information is key to succeddfully delivering projects (on time, on budget and to specifications). How does knowing the above information change your view about project management? How can you mitigate this risk in your environment?