Are your processes fair enough?

Let me play a little game with you, just to introduce the subject of this post.

I am a project manager and you are a member of the project team. 

I have put in place all sorts of management processes and I have bound team members bonuses and prizes to the outcomes of these processes.

This is one process that I put in place and that now you will have to apply.

Your quarterly bonus depends on the fact that I will consider reasonable and satisfying the outcome of the process.

Follow this process. You can use a piece of paper and a pen.

1. Choose a number between 1 and 9. write it on the piece of paper.
2. Double it.
3. Add 8 to the result obtained in point 2.
4. Divide by 2 the result obtained in point 3.
5. Subtract your original number from the result obtained in point 4 and write the result on the piece of paper. 
6. Convert the result from point 5 into a letter in the English alphabet (es A=1, B=2, C=3,...)
7. Choose a U.S.A. state whose name begin with the letter you have found.
8. Add 1 to the result obtained in point 5 and write the result on the piece of paper. 
9. Convert the result in point 7 to a letter with the same method you have used in point 6.
10. Choose the biggest animal you can think about whose name start with the letter you have found.

Now...well...I am very very very disappointed from your performance.

there are no elephants in Delaware...very unsatisfying... you can kiss goodbye your quarterly bonus.

Are you disappointed? I think you are. You have plenty of reason to be disappointed.
Many mistakes have been made in implementing this process, but we will focus on what I judge to be the worst four.

Give measurable targets

At the beginning of the post I wrote that I would have granted you a bonus if, and only if, I would had found “reasonable and satisfying the outcome of the process”.

So? What is this supposed to mean? Nothing.

If you put in place a project management process and you bind your team members bonuses and prizes to the outcome, be sure to give measurable objectives.

Otherwise every denied bonus will be seen as an arbitrary punishment and every granted bonus as an unjustified gift. Each case you will be experimenting a sudden collapse of trust among your team members.

Give team members a chance to influence the outcomes they are evaluated against to

You had no control on the output of the process that I put in place and that I forced you to follow.

Every input you would have given would have led you to the same result. So what is the point in binding your bonuses on that? 

Again, as in the previous point, every denied bonus will be seen as an arbitrary punishment and every granted bonus as an unjustified gift. You will be experimenting a steady collapse of trust in the team and you will grow harsh criticism about every step the management will take. Discontent will spread.

Always perform a sanity check of your processes

The process that I forced you to follow was corrupted (How could I possibly knew your answer otherwise...). Look at the equation you have implemented following my process

1. Chose a number between 1 and 9. write it on the piece of paper. Let’s say the number you chose is X and the result you obtained is Y.
2. Double it. Ok, now you have Y=2X.
3. Add 8 to the result obtained in point 2. Here we obtain Y=2X+8.
4. Divide by 2 the result obtained in point 3. Now Y=(2x+8)/2=X+4.
5. Subtract your original number from the result obtained in point 4 and write the result on the piece of paper. Y=X+4-X=4.
6. Convert the result from point 5 into a letter in the English alphabet (es A=1, B=2, C=3,...). The letter you got was D.
7. Choose a U.S.A. state whose name begin with the letter you have found. There is only 1 U.S.A. state whose name starts with D. Delaware.
8. Add 1 to the result obtained in point 5 and write the result on the piece of paper. The number you got was 5.
9. Convert the result from point 7 to a letter with the same method you have used in point 6. The letter you got was E.
10. Choose the biggest animal you can think about whose name start with the letter you have found. Elephant is a good choice.

If you put in place a project management process and you bind your team members bonuses and prizes to the outcome, be sure that your process is flawless.

Otherwise two things could happen

• Your team members will not follow your process, because they want achieve their bonuses and prizes and because your process outcomes go to detriment of the project.
• Your team members will follow your process and contextually will experience a lot of frustration. You are sure to have an high degree of disengagement...and probably a lot of elephants in Delaware.

Either cases lead to the same result.

The project will rapidly go out of control and disappointment will spread among all of your stakeholders.

Always check that your processes are fair

Make another little experiment. Buy a cookies box and tomorrow morning, as soon as you enter the office, gather three of your collegues and offer them some cookies. You will offer four cookies to two of them and you will say to the third one that he/she can take just one cookie.

Chances are that the third collegue will ask you why he/she can get just one cookie.

There is no point in asking, since cookies are yours and you do not owe nothing to your collegues. You can share your cookies if you want to and decide freely how many cookies offer to whoever you want but still, the third collegue will ask you about it, maybe laughing, but he/she will ask. Maybe even the other two collegues will enquiry you about your behavior. And you know why?

Beacuse deep inside they feel that your process is unfair. Even if they have been prized in this occasion, they know that they cannot trust your process. They know that they cannot trust you.

My point is to always check that your processes are fair.

People can stand almost every situation and deprivation, but just if they feel that the processes are fair.

Quest' opera è distribuita con licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Unported.