To execute their projects, project champions must secure resources from their organizations. Whether proposing new ideas, or seeking additional resources to continue work on existing efforts, they're in the role of "sellers." They must seek approval for resources from decision makers — "buyers" in this situation. Risk creep happens when the decisions of buyers and sellers introduce unrecognized risk into the projects they pursue together. Here are three sources of risk creep. For more examples, see Part I.
- Organizational blind spots
- By applying to new efforts the patterns we used for past efforts, we often leave unaddressed whatever risks the past efforts didn't encounter. Most organizations have risk blind spots. The risks that are overlooked or underestimated tend to be correlated across similar efforts, because of knowledge and experience sharing, and because management tends to hire and promote people of similar strengths and abilities. In some cases, people with unique experiences or unusual knowledge might encounter resistance upon offering those experiences or knowledge, or upon incorporating their insights into plans and proposals. Thus, organizations not only have blind spots, but also harbor mechanisms that tend to maintain those blind spots.
- Sellers exploit the biases of buyers
- Intentionally By applying to new efforts the
patterns we used for past efforts,
we often leave unaddressed whatever
risks the past efforts didn't encounteror inadvertently, buyers disclose their personal preferences to sellers, who then use that information in the selling process, to make their proposals more appealing to buyers. In some cases, this tailoring requires biased assessments of risks of the proposed project. Risk then creeps into the project, even when neither buyer nor seller is aware of the bias. These biases affect sellers not only in how they position their proposals, but also in their choices of what to propose. Some perfectly sound ideas are never even proposed, because the sellers mistakenly believe the buyers wouldn't be interested. - Both buyers and sellers exploit urgency
- When we regard pursuing an idea as urgent, we're more likely to accept risks, more likely to underestimate risks, and more likely to overlook risks. Both buyers and sellers contribute. Some buyers have preconceived ideas about what's important. Whether or not they're correct, they communicate their preconceptions to sellers to encourage them to propose the kinds of ideas they favor. At times buyers add a dash of urgency to these communications to attract the most capable sellers. This biases the portfolio of proposals they receive by replacing importance with urgency. As an element of their "sales pitch," some sellers assert, "…we must do this now or miss the opportunity." This replaces the question of the importance of the proposed objective, with a question of timing. When this happens, both buyer and seller may be mistaking urgency for importance. Whether buyers or sellers exploit urgency, risk creeps in.
Risk is a fact of life. Risk creep need not be. Use open conversations to mitigate risk creep risk. First issue in this series Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Project Management:
- Restarting Projects
- When a project gets off track, we sometimes cancel it. But since canceling projects takes a lot of courage,
we look for ways to save them if we can. Often, things do turn out OK, and at other times they don't.
There's a third choice, between pressing on with a project and canceling it. We can restart.
- Status Risk and Risk Status
- One often-neglected project risk is the risk of inaccurately reported status. That shouldn't be surprising,
because we often fail to report the status of the project's risks, as well. What can we do to better
manage status risk and risk status?
- Shining Some Light on "Going Dark"
- If you're a project manager, and a team member "goes dark" — disappears or refuses to
report how things are going — project risks escalate dramatically. Getting current status becomes
a top priority problem. What can you do?
- Irrational Deadlines
- Some deadlines are so unrealistic that from the outset we know we'll never meet them. Yet we keep setting
(and accepting) irrational deadlines. Why does this happen?
- The Risks of Too Many Projects: I
- Some organizations try to run too many development projects at once. Whether developing new offerings,
or working to improve the organization itself, taking on too many projects can defocus the organization
and depress performance.
See also Project Management and Project Management for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming December 11: White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development
- Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on December 11.
- And on December 18: Subgrouping and Conway's Law
- When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks. Available here and by RSS on December 18.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed