Category: Newsletter Article
Published Date
Written by Harold Kerzner, Ph.D. Senior Executive Director for Project Management
Hits: 2914
For more than forty years, the project management landscape has seen textbooks, journal articles and presented papers discussing the causes of project failures. Unfortunately, many of the failure analyses seem to look at failure superficially rather than in depth.
When trying to discover the root cause of a failure, we usually look first in the contractor’s company for someone to blame rather than in our own company. If that doesn’t work, then we begin climbing the organizational hierarchy in our own company by focusing on the project team, followed by the project manager. Once we find someone to blame, the search seems to end and we feel comfortable that we have discovered the cause of the failure.
It is human nature to begin finger-pointing at the bottom of the organizational hierarchy first, rather than at the top. Yet, more often than not, the real cause of failure is the result of actions (or inactions) and decisions made at the top of the organizational chart than at the bottom. It is also human nature to make decisions based upon how we are affected by the Seven Deadly Sins, namely: envy, anger, pride, greed, sloth, lust and gluttony. Decisions made based upon the Seven Deadly Sins, whether they are made at the top or bottom of the organization, can have dire consequences on projects. Sometimes the sins are hidden and not easily recognized by ourselves or others. We simply do not see or feel that were are committing a sin.
The Seven Deadly Sins affect all of us sooner or later, even though we refuse to admit it. Some of us may be impacted by just one or two of the sins, whereas others may succumb to all seven. What is unfortunate is that the greatest damage can occur on projects when the sins influence the way that senior levels of management must interface with projects, whether as a project sponsor or as a member of a governance group. Bad decisions at the top, especially if based upon emotions rather than practicality, can place the project on a destructive path even before the day the project is kicked off.
THE SEVEN DEADLY SINS 2
The term "Seven Deadly Sins," also referred to as the "Capital Vices" or "Cardinal Sins", is a classification of objectionable vices. They were originally part of Christian ethics and have been used since early Christian times to educate and instruct Christians concerning fallen humanity's tendency to sin. The currently recognized version of the sins are usually given as wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy and gluttony. Part or all of the sins have been discussed over the past four centuries from different perspectives in the religious writings of Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, Buddhism and Judaism. Over the years, the sins have been modified and discussed by the clergy, philosophers, psychologists, authors, poets and educators.
A brief description of each of the Seven Deadly Sins appears in Exhibit 1. Each of the sins can be related to an animal, a specific color and even a punishment in hell for committing the sin.
Exhibit 1: The Seven Deadly Sins
|
Sin
|
Traits
|
Animal
|
Color
|
Punishment in Hell
|
|
Envy
|
The desire to possess what others have
|
Snake
|
Green
|
Placed in freezing water
|
|
Anger/Wrath
|
A strong feeling of displeasure
|
Lion
|
Red
|
Dismembered alive
|
|
Pride
|
The need for inward emotional satisfaction
|
Peacock
|
Violet
|
Broken on the wheel
|
|
Greed
|
The desire for material wealth or gain
|
Toad
|
Yellow
|
Put in cauldrons of boiling oil
|
|
Sloth
|
The avoidance of work
|
Snail
|
Light blue
|
Thrown into a snake pit
|
|
Lust
|
A craving, but not necessarily sexual
|
Goat
|
Blue
|
Smothered in fire and brimstone
|
|
Gluttony
|
The desire to consume more than we need
|
Pig
|
Orange
|
Forced to eat rats, toads and snakes
|
In a project environment, any or all of these sins can cause rational people to make irrational decisions, and this can occur at any level within the organizational hierarchy. At some levels, the existence of the sins may have a greater impact on project performance than at other levels. If a sin is apparent in the beginning of a project, then poor decisions in the initiation phase can have detrimental consequences in all of the downstream phases.
Envy
Envy is the art of counting the other fellow's blessing instead of your own." (Harold Coffin)
•"Envy is ignorance. Imitation is suicide." (Ralph Waldo Emerson)
•"When men are full of envy, they disparage everything, whether it be good or bad." (Publius Cornelius Tacitus)
Envy is the desire to have what others have. Resentful emotions occur when one lacks another's superior qualities such as status, wealth, good fortune, physical possessions, traits, abilities or position. Envy may encourage someone to inflict misfortune on another person and try to undo someone else's advantage or deprive them of obtaining the advantage. Envy can also affect the relationship between people, as when one ignores a person of whom they are envious. Envy is often synonymous with jealousy, bitterness, greed, spite and resentment.
Envy can be malicious or benign. Malicious envy has all of the characteristics mentioned above. Benign envy can be a positive motivational force if it encourages people to act in a more favorable manner such that the desires are attainable. Benign envy usually exists at the bottom of the organizational hierarchy, whereas malicious envy appears most frequently at the top.
The following four situations illustrate how envy can lead to project disasters:
Situation 1: Reorganizational Failure. A company had four divisions, each headed up by a senior vice president. In the past, most of the projects had stayed entirely within one division. Each division had their own project management methodology, and the number of project successes significantly outnumbered the failures. As the marketplace began to change, the company began working on projects that required that more than one division work together on the same project. Using multiple methodologies on the same project proved to be an impossible task.
The president decreed that there must be one and only one methodology, and that all of the divisions must use the same methodology for managing projects. The company created a Project Management Office (PMO), and the president assigned one of the vice presidents with control over the PMO. Employees from each of the other three divisions were then assigned on a "dotted line" relationship to the PMO for the development of the singular methodology.
The people in the PMO seemed to work well together. But the four vice presidents demanded that they have final signature authority over the adoption of the singular methodology. Each vice president believed that the project management approach used in their division should be the driving force for the creation of a singular methodology. Regardless of what design the PMO came up with, each vice president demonstrated envy and resentment, finding fault with the others' ideas, playing out the "not invented here" syndrome. And while this was happening, the number of project failures began to increase, because of the lack of structure for project execution.
It also became obvious to each of the four vice presidents that whichever vice president had control of the PMO would become more powerful than the other three vice presidents because of the control over all of the project management intellectual property. Information is power, and envy for control of the information had taken its toll on the ability to manage and control projects effectively. Eventually, the president stepped in and allowed each vice president to have a PMO. However, the PMOs had to be networked together. This helped a little, but even after they agreed on a common methodology, each PMO tried to seduce the other PMOs into their way of thinking and, as expected, continuous changes were being introduced to the methodology, with the projects still suffering from a lack of direction. Envy prevented decisions from being made that would have been in the best interest of the entire company.
Situation 2: Reward Failure. Believing that an effective reward /bonus system would motivate project teams, senior management announced that bonuses would be given to each project team based upon the profitability of their projects. The company survived on competitive bidding to win contracts and most of the projects were in the millions of dollars. Project managers quickly learned that large bonuses could be awarded if the project's cost estimates were grossly inflated during the bidding process and the contracts could be won. This way, the actual profits on some contracts could exceed the targeted profits.
Although the company lost a few contracts they expected to win because of the inflated costs, some of the bonuses given to the project managers at the end of the contracts were similar in size to the bonuses given to some of the executives. Many of the executives were now envious of the people below them who were receiving such large bonuses. Due to envy, the executives then changed the bonus policy whereby part of the bonus fund would be distributed among the executives, even though the executives were not functioning as project sponsors. The bonuses given to the workers and the project managers were then reduced significantly. Some of the workers then sabotaged some of the projects, rather than see the executives receive bonuses that were awarded at the expense of the workers.
Situation 3: Failure Due to Inflicting Misfortune. Paul was the Director of Operations for a medium-sized company. Paul's company was in the process of establishing a PMO that would report directly to the CEO. Paul desperately wanted the new position of Director of the PMO, believing it would be a stepping stone to becoming a vice president. Paul's major competitor for the position of Director of the PMO was Brenda, a 20-year veteran with the company and considered the company's best project manager. Because of Brenda's decision-making skills, Brenda was almost always empowered with complete decision-making authority on her projects.
When Brenda was assigned to her latest project, Paul requested and was granted the position of project sponsor for Brenda's project. Paul was envious of Brenda's abilities and good fortune and believed that, if he could somehow inflict misfortune on Brenda's project without hurting himself in the process, he could easily be assigned Director of the PMO. Paul placed limits on Brenda's empowerment and demanded that, as the sponsor, he approve any and all critical decisions. Paul continuously forced Brenda to select non-optimal alternatives when some decisions had to be made. Brenda's project was nearly a disaster, and Paul was later assigned as Director of the PMO.
Envy can force us to inflict pain on others to get what we desire. Paul received his promotion, but the workers and Brenda knew what he had done. Paul's working relationship with the functional subject matter experts deteriorated.
Situation 4: The Relationship Failure. Jerry and two of his friends lived near each other and joined the company at exactly the same time; Jerry worked in project management, and the other two worked in engineering. They formed a carpool and travelled to and from work together every day. They also socialized together when not at work.
Two years after joining the company, Jerry had received his second promotion, whereas the other two workers had not received any promotions. The other two workers were envious of Jerry's success to the point where they stopped socializing and carpooling together. The jealousy became so strong that the two workers even refused to work on Jerry's projects. The workers never visibly displayed their jealousy for Jerry, but their actions spoke louder than words and made it clear how they really felt.
We painted a bleak picture here of how this Deadly Sin can have a negative impact on projects. From a project perspective, some of the sins are closely related and cannot be as easily separated and discussed as psychologists and philosophers would have us believe. This can be seen from some of the situations presented previously, for example, where the desire for control of vast resources could be considered as some form of lust, gluttony or avarice.
It is true that, in some situations, the sins can produce positive results. They can force us to become more aggressive, take risks, accept new challenges and add value to the company. Our fascination with pride and lust can help us turn around a distressed project and make it into a success so that we can get corporate-wide recognition. The greed for wanting a large bonus can likewise encourage us to make our project successful. The downside risk of the vices is that they most certainly can have a negative effect on our ability to establish on our interpersonal skills and our relationships with the project teams and functional departments.
So, should we train project managers and team members on how to identify and control the sins? Perhaps not as long as beneficial results are forthcoming. Once again, we all succumb to some or all of these sins, but in varying degrees.
The Roman Catholic Church recognizes seven virtues, which correspond inversely to each of the Seven Deadly Sins. This is shown below in Exhibit 2.
Exhibit 2: Vices and Virtues
|
Vice
|
Virtue
|
|
Envy
|
Kindness
|
|
Wrath
|
Patience
|
|
Pride
|
Humility
|
|
Greed
|
Charity
|
|
Sloth
|
Diligence
|
|
Lust
|
Chastity
|
|
Gluttony
|
Temperance
|
From a project management perspective, perhaps the best solution would be to teach the virtues in project management training courses. It is even possible that in future editions of the PMBOK® Guide, the Human Resources Management Chapter may even discuss vices and virtues. Time will tell.
[2] Adapted from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia [2]There are several versions of colors, animal, and punishments in the literature. Exhibit 1 is just one version.
