Posts Tagged ‘managerline’

The project manager?line manager interface from POME by Gautam Koppala

The project manager–line manager interface

We have stated that the project manager must control company resources within time, cost, and performance. Most companies have six resources:

Money
Manpower
Equipment
Facilities
Materials
Information/technology

Actually, the project manager does not control any of these resources directly, except perhaps money (i.e., the project budget). Resources are controlled by the line managers, functional managers, or, as they are often called, resources managers. Project managers must, therefore, negotiate with line managers for all project resources. When we say that project managers control project resources, we really mean that they control those resources (which are temporarily loaned to them) through line managers.

It should become obvious at this point that successful project management is strongly dependent on:

A good daily working relationship between the project manager and those line managers who directly assign resources to projects
The ability of functional employees to report vertically to line managers at the same time that they report horizontally to one or more project managers

These two items become critical. In the first item, functional employees who are assigned to a project manager still take technical direction from their line managers. Second, employees who report to multiple managers will always favor the manager who controls their purse strings. Thus, most project managers appear always to be at the mercy of the line managers.

Classical management has often been defined as a process in which the manager does not necessarily perform things for himself, but accomplishes objectives through others in a group situation. This basic definition also applies to the project manager. In addition, a project manager must help himself. There is nobody else to help him.

If we take a close look at project management, we will see that the project manager actually works for the line managers, not vice versa. Many executives do not realize this. They have a tendency to put a halo around the head of the project manager and give him a bonus at project termination, when, in fact, the credit should go to the line managers, who are continually pressured to make better use of their resources. The project manager is simply the agent through whom this is accomplished. So why do some companies glorify the project management position?

To illustrate the role of the project manager, consider the time, cost, and performance constraints. Many functional managers, if left alone, would recognize only the performance constraint: “Just give me another ,000 and two more months, and I’ll give you the ideal technology.”

The project manager, as part of these communicating, coordinating, and integrating responsibilities, reminds the line managers that there are also time and cost constraints on the project. This is the starting point for better resource control.

Project managers depend on line managers. When the project manager gets in trouble, the only place he can go is to the line manager because additional resources are almost always required to alleviate the problems. When a line manager gets in trouble, he usually goes first to the project manager and requests either additional funding or some type of authorization for scope changes.

To illustrate this working relationship between the project and line managers, consider the following situation:

Project Manager (addressing the line manager): “I have a serious problem. I’m looking at a 0,000 cost overrun on my project and I need your help. I’d like you to do the same amount of work that you are currently scheduled for but in 3,000 fewer man-hours. Since your organization is burdened at /hour, this would more than compensate for the cost overrun.”

Line Manager: “Even if I could, why should I? You know that good line managers can always make work expand to meet budget. I’ll look over my manpower curves and let you know tomorrow.”

The following day …

Line Manager: “I’ve looked over my manpower curves and I have enough work to keep my people employed. I’ll give you back the 3,000 hours you need, but remember, you owe me one!”

Several months later …

Line Manager: “I’ve just seen the planning for your new project that’s supposed to start two months from now. You’ll need two people from my department. There are two employees that I’d like to use on your project. Unfortunately, these two people are available now. If I don’t pick these people up on your charge number right now, some other project might pick them up in the interim period, and they won’t be available when your project starts.”

Project Manager: “What you’re saying is that you want me to let you sandbag against one of my charge numbers, knowing that I really don’t need them.”

Line Manager: “That’s right. I’ll try to find other jobs (and charge numbers) for them to work on temporarily so that your project won’t be completely burdened. Remember, you owe me one.”

Project Manager: “O.K. I know that I owe you one, so I’ll do this for you. Does this make us even?”

Line Manager: “Not at all! But you’re going in the right direction.”

When the project management–line management relationship begins to deteriorate, the project almost always suffers. Executives must promote a good working relationship between line and project management. One of the most common ways of destroying this relationship is by asking, “Who contributes to profits—the line or project manager?” Project managers feel that they control all project profits because they control the budget. The line managers, on the other hand, argue that they must staff with appropriately budgeted-for personnel, supply the resources at the desired time, and supervise performance. Actually, both the vertical and horizontal lines contribute to profits. These types of conflicts can destroy the entire project management system.

The previous examples should indicate that project management is more behavioral than quantitative. Effective project management requires an understanding of:

Quantitative tools and techniques
Organizational structures
Organizational behavior

Most people understand the quantitative tools for planning, scheduling, and controlling work. It is imperative that project managers understand totally the operations of each line organization. In addition, project managers must understand their own job description, especially where their authority begins and ends. During an in-house seminar on engineering project management, the author asked one of the project engineers to provide a description of his job as a project engineer. During the discussion that followed, several project managers and line managers said that there was a great deal of overlap between their job descriptions and that of the project engineer.

Organizational behavior is important because the functional employees at the interface position find themselves reporting to more than one boss—a line manager and one project manager for each project they are assigned to. Executives must provide proper training so functional employees can report effectively to multiple managers.

POME Case Study

Considering the Nontechnical Social Factors in Hiring — Case Problem: ‘‘The Shining Star”

Overview

Upset about the unexpected meeting that had just occurred in his office, Tom, director of new product development, walked over to the office of Eric, a senior research engineer in the department.

‘‘You won’t believe what just happened,” he said. ‘‘Sam, the newest member of our department, just up and quit.”

‘‘Well,” replied Eric, ‘‘I’ve got to be honest. Bets were out he wouldn’t have lasted this long.”

‘‘What are you talking about?” asked Tom.

‘‘Admit it, Tom,” said Eric, ‘‘the guy was discontented from the very beginning. I didn’t get the impression he was ready to work with characters like Ernie and Max. And besides, you knew he was single, and this is a very settled area with almost no social activities for single people.”

‘‘Look, Eric, we need good people here,” Tom said defensively. ‘‘Sam was very competent and eager to come on board.”

‘‘I don’t like to say I told you so,” said Eric, ‘‘but remember we’d agreed to get department input on hiring to ‘feel out’ the different candidates because we’ve had the same type of problems in the past.”

‘‘Maybe I should have gotten some input,” admitted Tom. ‘‘I was just so enthusiastic about Sam’s technical background that I didn’t want to wait.”

‘‘By the way, what were his reasons for leaving?” asked Eric.

‘‘Well,” replied Tom, ‘‘he said that while he liked the work and the people he worked with, he felt frustrated because his family and friends lived so far away. And as a single person in this town, he had no opportunity to meet other singles.”

‘‘Did he say anything about the rural location of our plant?” asked Eric. ‘‘You know, Tom, the fellow lived in Philadelphia all his life, and I had wondered if that transition would be hard to make.”

‘‘Yes,” replied Tom, ‘‘he did mention that hardship but felt that a good social situation might have compensated for it. There was just nothing I could say, Eric. He had his mind made up. I guess I was just too shortsighted and too quick in making up my mind.”

Case Analysis

Sam’s grievances should not have surfaced in the form of a resignation. This situation might have been prevented in the hiring process. As the senior research engineer pointed out to his boss, participation by other staff members in the selection process might have revealed the new employee’s concerns about his social life. In addition, the director of new product development should have openly shared as much information as possible about the company, its community and lifestyle.

In a hiring situation, it is tempting to focus attention on—and overly emphasize—technical credentials, while paying too little attention to the candidate’s personal and social concerns.

Solution:

Consider the following action tools in the hiring process:

As a buyer of talent for the department, the manager must screen each candidate on a number of important factors. In addition to exhibiting the necessary technical capabilities, a job candidate must possess interests and preferences in line with the company’s geographic location, community lifestyle, and other social-related matters.
During the interviewing process, the manager should control any impulse to make quick judgments on ‘‘shining star” candidates—seemingly outstanding applicants—and be certain to fully discuss and assess all aspects of each individual.
The manager can gain valuable information by assembling a staff selection team to assist in the selection effort. Such a team can provide invaluable information and contribute many different helpful insights to create a total profile of the candidate.

Gautam Koppala,

POME Author

More “project Management” Articles