网友分析五 

Some good points being made in this discussion. Here’s my $0.02:


1. This situation sounds like a classic IT cultural issue. This manager’s resources have not been managed at all in the past - they have been left to do what they want to do, when they want to do it, and how they want to do it. Now they are being managed - and they (predictably) don’t like it. I have watched managers try to start actively manage such technical IT people, and there is always a big emotional push-back ("how dare you manage me!").
2. In case anybody hadn’t noticed, there is a recession on. My evidence, although anecdotal, suggests that those folks who leave or lose a job at present are taking 6-9 months to find another one. Any of those insubordinate team members may want to consider that issue, or have it gently brought to their attention...
3. The folks who whine and threaten to leave are always the last to leave. Period. Some of the folks on the first project I managed for my current employer are still there - 3 years after they were vocally threatening to leave if anybody made them do anything different. Sometimes it is true that empty vessels make the most noise.
Having said all that, I agree that this manager needs to start soliciting her management’s support, making a business value-based case for change upwards, and managing the team as a set of individuals, rather than falling into the "it
’s me against them" mindset. Typically in this sort of situation, there are one or two leaders and a number of followers. The followers can often be detached from the leaders over time, leaving those leaders with limited options (quit, whine and lose credibility, or change).
Another syndrome that you need to guard against is the tendency for the team members to try to "end run" the manager by taking their concerns to upper management. This project manager needs to keep an eye out for this to occur. Typically this will happen after she starts turning up the heat on the reluctant team members...
Factors not mentioned in this discussion are the time factor for change, and the probability that the team is in denial about the issues and the need to change. I have discovered that sometimes it takes 18-24 months before meaningful change to occur. Often the team members are in denial about the nature of the problems, so the entire change cycle (Denial onwards) must be worked through.
This manager needs to develop a Change plan which is supported by upper management (so that when the team members try to end-run they will be rebuffed) and which focusses on individual performance and contribution expectations. The team members need to be given every opportunity to change - but the consequences of failure to change need to be spelled out, with HR backing if necessary. This will give some of the less intransigent team members pause for thought (some of the more entrenched members may not want to play, but they’ll change their minds when they find that they have no captive audience any more). I agree with the poster who commented that nobody is indispensable. If anybody threatens to resign, it’s time to push the paper and pen across the table, and invite them to follow through....
This is a difficult nut to crack. I wish this person well. I’ve been there, and things can get ugly. 

网友分析六 

This looks like a classic case of an over hyped management inclined discussion. All the "posts" have been looking at only the PM angle and "management", how do we get work from the resources.

It has been explicitly mentioned by "The Anonymous" that the team anyway works for about 5+hours a day. Which is pretty productive. It is just that they need to be stretched for an hour+ more and also the main point as the discussion goes is "get them stick to conforming the processes?. First things first, Does the PM has the required skills to manage the project. I am sure her intensions are good to get the project on track but if she hangs loose on her subject, bang there she goes DEAD. The thing is she’ll never get respect (Which is exactly the point in this discussion), secondly to cover up her role she might be pushing things down the line to the team, who however would feel the pressure. I mean if were in her position, I would have studied the resources perfectly well before embarking onto the project in that role. I would have estimated the project accordingly, taking their skills sets and time consideration into count (All this if I have "confidence" signed off from all the stakeholders). If after estimation, I get to see that the project is not meeting the deadline as per the estimates and existing resources, I would change the team totally. Simple. Recruit new people, shift and share resources, contract a few or whatever.

I guess the PM in a fit of enthusiasm, definitely did a mistake I guess, of not estimating accurately and not escalating issues upfront because of which the project seems be in a chaos now.

I rather suggest instead of concentrating all efforts on resource management, concentrate all efforts on project management, at the end of the day customer and the company should in no way get affected.

I guess the discussion is more about ?Performance? and ?Conformance? and not about ?Management?. 

上一页2345下一页