The higher ground

In 2002, British defense contractor Lockheed Martin U.K. Integrated Systems decided to fine-tune its internal and project management processes to create a leaner, meaner business better suited to manage several high-profile multi-billion dollar defense programs. “At the time, it was the biggest systems integration project ever attempted in the United Kingdom,” says Steve Bailey, the program manager who spear-headed the initiative, pointing to a project scope that entailed examining each of the organization's business processes and its entire computer system for potential improvement.

Executive Summary

→ Sponsors must create a project environment that allows project managers to communicate openly without fear of ridicule.

→ Project managers must have a strong handle on project status so sponsors don't misdiagnose or overlook issues that need to be escalated.

→ For complete comprehension, project sponsors must probe for details behind project plans and strategies to ensure they can measure the validity of escalated issues.

→ Escalation should not be marred by conflict; project managers and sponsors should look to conflict resolution strategies to help diffuse situations and ensure issues are escalated in the most appropriate environment.

The project paid off handsomely, saving Lockheed Martin £4.5 million annually and catapulting its contract “win rate” from 30 to 100 percent in 2003. Better still, when aspects of the project hit hurdles—such as when Britain's Ministry of Defense lost three EH101 prototype aircraft in early crashes—Lockheed Martin was able to bounce back quickly and recover slippage in the Merlin MK1 program.

“Part of the success of the program can be ascribed to escalating problem issues in a timely and effective manner,” Mr. Bailey says. “Few programs or projects ever go exactly as the initial project plan predicted,” he says. “It's all about the honesty and integrity of the program managers. If there's a problem, they need to be able to say so, in plenty of time to recover.”

Put in those words, implementing escalation tactics sounds pretty straightforward, almost akin to the unconscious to-and-fro movement of the steering wheel that keeps the car driving in a straight line down the highway. But escalate to whom, exactly when and with what frequency? As every project manager knows, assuming that something is as simple as it sounds can be a fatal mistake.

The Who

Escalation often plays into office politics, and it's easy for individuals to be affected personally by decisions. To this effect, Mr. Bailey developed a common sense approach to problem-solving: If your problem was with a particular function or department, first talk to the head of that department before dragging in your own boss or project sponsor. “Going to your boss first just upsets other people,” he says.

→Project managers often are reluctant to call for help until it's almost too late; on the contrary, project sponsors are sometimes too quick to view a call for help as a sign of weakness or inability. Both parties need personal skill sets that let them respond more productively, and professional project management qualifications are just the starting point. “Understanding A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) tells you a lot of the ‘when’ to escalate, but not enough of the ‘how’ to escalate,” says Brian Doby, senior project manager, MedPlus Inc., Mason, Ohio, USA, and president of the PMI Healthcare Project Management SIG. “There are minimum competencies, but you must build on these.”

Mr. Doby, who has developed a number of problem-solving and escalation strategies in his career, says the same handful of core personal escalation-related skills are cited again and again, and both project sponsors and project managers barely muster a passing grade in any of them.

One major area of improvement is the precise communication—and understanding—of escalation trigger points. Carl Pritchard, president of Pritchard Management Associates, Frederick, Md., USA, says too few project sponsors make it clear enough how soon they want to be involved when things slip. As a result, project managers are unclear as to when they should holler for help, calling either too soon or too late. It's the sponsor's responsibility to set precise ground rules at the start, Mr. Pritchard says. Managing expectations can prevent project managers from becoming easy scapegoats. “A lot of the stress of escalation would disappear if people managed expectations better,” he says.

The What

→For project managers, the issue boils down to being clearer about project status. “A lot of status reporting is garbage,” says Fergus O'Connell, CEO and founder of Athy, Ireland-based ETP and author of Simply Brilliant: The Competitive Advantage of Common Sense. He believes too many project reports are filled with lists of tasks that already have been completed, yet manage to omit two vital pieces of information.

The Partnership Principle

“First, they don't actually tell you, in a simple and unambiguous way, what the status of the project is; the status is implied, rather than made explicit,” he says. “Second, there's no history of the project. These reports don't tell you how the project got to be where it is today. In other words, a three-month delay to the original plan could be slippage, or it could be controlled change. There's often no way of knowing.”

Predictably, when the true project status is unclear, project sponsors will be tempted to ride herd on the project, staying close so as to avoid surprises, says Allison Hall, a senior program manager with the training division of IT services company Parity Group plc, London, U.K. When this happens, there is a consequent risk that the project manager will lose his or her authority. “Openness always is the project manager's best policy,” she says. “Don't try to cover something up by minimizing its impact or by not saying anything at all about it. Dropping something onto an executive sponsor at the last minute isn't going to help you or them.”

The How

→Project sponsors, too, have an important role to play. “They need to better develop the fine art of asking questions,” says Gina Davidovic, director of project solutions at Toronto, Ontario, Canada-based Bay3000. “No matter how many status reports they get, asking the right questions always adds value to the project manager.”

Specifically, Ian Gotts, CEO of Hampshire, U.K.-based Nimbus, says project sponsors need to probe the reality behind the initial project plan and methodology. “Unless they have very regular exposure to projects, a lot of sponsors don't see or work on enough projects to be able to fix things if they are going badly,” he says. “It's especially difficult if the project methodology hasn't been based on the core methodology or approach and is simply a re-hash of what usually works well for the individual project manager involved in the project.”

Project sponsors also must be crystal clear about what circumstances constitute escalation of an issue, specifying those key business performance indicators and dashboard measures that will be used to initiate the process. They must understand and accept—and assure the project manager—that escalation is a normal management process, says Bob DeLeeuw, a senior vice president with Conversion Services International, East Hanover, N.J., USA. Mr. DeLeeuw has overseen business integration for financial services clients undergoing some of the largest mergers in banking history.

“As an executive sponsor, I make it clear that I want to know about any major factor that might impact customers or financial results, and those that deal with regulatory issues or impact Sarbanes-Oxley or the Patriot Act,” he says. “And, of course, I want to know about anything that might impact my timeline.”

→Escalation is best carried out in non-adversarial situations, he adds. “Escalate issues from the operating dashboard rather than at a meeting, when it's usually a surprise to those attending. The idea is to try and avoid surprises and to use the meeting for the isolation of issues and potential solutions, rather than for communicating issues for the first time.”

But while it's important to avoid antagonistic, accusatory conflict that's characterized by head-butting and blaming in the escalation process, conflict avoidance is not the right strategy, either. “Culturally, [U.S. residents], for example, tend to practice conflict avoidance,” says Bill Bartholomew, an independent mediator and conflict resolution specialist with Rezolv-It, Dallas, Texas, USA, who heads PMI's Dispute Management SIG. “They aren't very good at productive conflict, so they avoid it until a point of no return is reached and all hell breaks loose. They don't really teach conflict management as a skill, which is a shame, because people don't understand the impact that conflict and negotiation have on the bottom line.” PM

Malcolm Wheatley is a U.K.-based freelance writer who has written for CIO, MSI and CSO magazines.