Your company is embarking on a new project, and you're tasked with the mission to define the project management structure for the lifetime of the project.
You're given the vision, a draft of the business case, the project's scope, its expected timeline, information about project funding and the list of identified stakeholders to date.
Your immediate inclination as the hiring manager is to learn of leverage opportunities within the organisation. After all, it's the easiest, cheapest and fastest approach which is sure to satisfy project timelines and provide the initial assurance to the sponsorship team that you're handling the on-boarding process with ease and minimal cost. In fact, you have just become aware that some projects have successfully or prematurely closed and that they freed up some of the project management team. You inspect their skills and experience and although none of the available management team had embarked on a similar project before, you think that you can easily train one of the managers on the job and achieve a successful outcome.
What do you think about the above scenario? Is there anything that you would have changed in the approach taken by the hiring manager? It seems pretty logical way to go about things, doesn't it? After all, why should you invest in the costly and time-consuming process of hiring if you already have the project management team readily available, already employed and well integrated within the culture of the company?
As logical as this approach may seem, the analysis done by the hiring manager in this scenario didn't include the full scope of the hiring process. The hiring manager disregarded the magnitude of change proposed by the new project, the company's culture, its short- and long-term prospects and its readiness for change.
The following are the top 5 things to consider prior to deciding which hiring approach to follow:
1. Culture
Your organisation is known for relatively high job security and consistent culture. Employees tend to remain in the organisation for an average of 5 years or more or even remain in the company until retirement age. If your project is aimed at delivering a considerable transformation which would require changes to existing processes or job functions, hiring an external consultant who is detached from the complacency of the organisation and is an expert in delivering change may aid in achieving the objectives of the project. The consultant brings a fresh outlook and is focused on delivering change without the worry of risking long term alliances. However, if your project enhances current roles, empowers positions and continues to accentuate the existing cultural grounds, as is the case in some human resources related projects, then assigning an internal project team will assist in maintaining or even enhancing the status quo, minimise resistance and bring the teams together around common and shared goals.
2. Long term prospect
Does your company intend on hiring additional project managers for follow up phases of existing projects? Are projects ongoing in a consistent manner and are they similar in their nature of transformation? Such an environment in example is one that is driven by regulatory requirements and is aimed at enhancing or expanding existing products on an ongoing basis. In this event, its best to utilize existing project managers or otherwise hire full time employees. Considering this particular context, you will find that it's imperative to maintain a cultural identity and consistent attitude towards change, and long-term employees tend to promote this type of an environment. However, if the company's long-term prospect is unclear, as is the case in emergent environments, and it's dealing with "one offs", or different and unique projects which require specialized knowledge, considering utilizing external consultants would be wise.
3. Skills and area of expertise
Different projects require different set of skills, expertise and experience in order to drive the vision forward towards tangible fruition. Some skills can be learned and acquired on the job, and some require an extensive experience spanning several years. Appointing a project manager, change manager, project coordinator, or any other central project management role in the hope that he or she would learn the required skills on the job is a risky approach which should be carefully examined. What seems to be the easiest, cheapest and quickest approach to hiring could materialise as your worse nightmare! Not only that it could end up being the most difficult, most expensive and most time consuming approach, but more critically, it could be one that demoralizes the teams, breaks the bonds of trust, reduces levels of assurance and leaves the executive team wondering whether their organisation is ready for change. Researching all options and making an educated decision upfront is of utmost importance.
4. Scope of change
The vision, business case draft and the proposed timelines should provide the hiring manager with a great deal of insight into what's involved. Analysing the origin of the project is also of crucial importance when considering the make up of the new management team. If the project is derived from existing projects, leveraging the experience of existing management team, their knowledge and expertise would be beneficial to maintaining a continuous and steady advancement. However, the final decision will still need to be examined alongside the analysis of extent and scope of change. If we lived in a "black and white" world, we would say that long term projects, spanning several years and forming the grounds for future projects or strategic goals, would greatly benefit from a steady workforce. Consultants on the other hand are extremely useful when it comes to short term projects, scheduled to complete within two years with relatively short term benefit realisation scope.
However, as is the case in all things in life, between black and white there's always a grey area to consider. Embarking on the full scope of hiring-approach analysis, it may become clear that your short- term project would best benefit from leveraging existing employees or a full-time hire, while your long- term projects would in fact better benefit from external consultants. The combined assessment of skill, company's culture, level of transformation and readiness for change should play a big role in the overall determination process.
5. Maturity assessment
Maturity assessment is an area that should be discussed more often and more openly among the executive team prior to embarking on any initiative within the organisation. It should be an honest topic of discussion, where the organisation can assess its level of maturity, identify areas of improvement and set clear goals aimed at improving the organisation's readiness for change. Hiring consultant, preferably ones that are represented by a consultancy firm, would be beneficial if your organisation is not yet ready to embark on the proposed change on its own. This means that your organisation doesn't yet possess the solid formulation of processes and governance structure. It hadn't embarked on a similar project before and the organisation's strategic goals heavily rely on the successful outcome of the proposed initiative. Organisation maturity assessment should be taken on a regular basis as to refine goals and assess accomplishments. There are several approaches to maturity assessment and choosing the one that best suit the organisation would be of assistance in shedding light on current state and areas of improvement.
Deciding which hiring approach best suits your organisation and prospective projects is not an area to be taken lightly. The full analysis of the hiring approach should be undertaken as to ensure that the pros and cons of each approach are established based on educated conclusions. Embarking on the wrong approach could mean immense costs, lost time and diminished confidence and trust in the organisational capability. Conversely, choosing the right approach would allow the organisation to reap the benefits on an immediate basis. Morale and confidence will be high, sponsorship team will move forward without hesitation, stakeholders resistance and opposition will be minimized, targets and milestones will be met on time, risks will be timely mitigated and the project team will successfully work together towards achieving a mutually shared goal.
Comments