PM Center Insider Dispelling Myths around Project Sponsorship – by Radhia Benalia, PhDc, PMP, Certified Green Belt Radhia Benalia is a pracademic. In addition to filling a leading position in a reg...
|Scooped by Victor Jimenez|
Being in different levels of leadership roles among the collection of communities I am engaged in at the moment, I found these Myths on Project Sponsorship intriguing. There always seems to be a challenge in finding the proper balance for leadership on a project. Should the leader communicate more to ensure we stay on track? Or should they stay out of the way and let the team execute and learn? There is no one-size fits all answer, but situational awareness is of course always needed.
So I am left with concluding that clear communication about scope and objectives up front is of utmost importance. But here is the next question I get to....As a sponsor, if I am satisfied that I have laid out the objectives clearly and the team is informed, then I can leave them to execute their plan. I only interrupt flow or work to perform whatever level of monitoring we (the sponsor and the project manager) have agreed to beforehand. Ok, no problem there. But inevitably the time comes when something changes one of the objectives we started with. Perhaps an external influence out of our control. What are my priorities as the sponsor at this time? How much do I now need to get involved? I obviously have to inform the team of the change and how it may now impact the objectives we previously discussed. But how do I decide how much I need to get involved to ensure the team has addressed the change? Or do I just identify the change, identify the adjusted objective, and let the team get back to planning?
What are some tips on how to make this decision? Thoughts?