Getting Difficult People to Successfully Deploy Difficult Technology

Difficult People
Difficult people aren’t difficult when they are alone. The problem occurs when people are put together in a setting where a common goal or objective must be reached. That is when we see the personalities and styles of each begin to compliment and contrast with each other. Very few people, if any, arrive at work each day saying, “I want to be as difficult as possible today with everyone with whom I interact”.

Two broad categories of difficult people can be identified as:

The Difficult Leader – “My way or the highway”
The Difficult Follower – “Just tell me what I’m supposed to do”

In dealing with “The Difficult Leader”, we are left with the choice to either go along with them all the time, or picking and choosing our “battles” carefully. These individuals usually have specific skill sets or strengths that allow them to be seen by others as “experts”. My experience has been that while these individuals exhibit a strong, impenetrable exterior, they will often accept being challenged, provided the person doing the challenging has won their respect. Going along with them all the time (being a “yes” man or woman) truly harms them in that they don’t benefit from other ideas and suggestions. Building a relationship based on trust and respect with The Difficult Leader is an excellent way to work harmoniously with them. Effectively selecting your words in a way that challenges their ideas and not their personality, will likely have the best chance for successful communication and cooperation.

In dealing with “The Difficult Follower”, we encounter individuals who often do not want any authoritative responsibilities placed upon them. They are content to do what they are told. Yet, experience has often shown me that these individuals, while appearing agreeable, can do serious damage by undermining those in authority through practicing gossip -- talking to others about someone they silently disagree with. This can, and often does, have a corrosive effect on a group of people; causing divisions, arguments, poor attitudes, etc. Practicing and encouraging “straight talk” with “The Difficult Followers” is an excellent preventive measure.

The dynamics of putting many people’s skill sets and personalities together on a large information technology project can often become a nightmare, if problems are not frequently and consistently addressed. The topic of group dynamics is indeed too large to cover in this paper, and I am not qualified to offer an expert opinion. My experience, however, has shown time and time again that the executives in charge of the project, to a large degree, set the “tone” and the “demeanor” for any group dynamic. This includes an Executive Steering Committee, a User Project Director/Manager and a Supplier Project Director/Manager. If the men and women in these positions are “dysfunctional,” then there is a high likelihood that the overall project implementation will be plagued with problems such as miscommunication, lack of trust, lack of schedule integrity, high rate of project resource turnover (both user & supplier), etc.

Creating and Keeping “The Team” Together
There is no magic answer as to how to keep everyone “pulling together” in the same direction over a period of years on a large information technology project. It takes a lot of hard work and cooperation. Looking back over the years at successful, large multi-year project implementations, I have observed several common characteristics that consistently appear.

Communication – A huge impact factor in a successful large project is the degree of meaningful communication that transpired over the course of the effort. Even though team members may be displaced in different buildings, separate states or other parts of the world, successful project teams effectively communicated in a timely and consistent manner. I want to focus on the word “effectively”, since we can have frequent communication between individuals that is redundant and useless. People generally do not mind being involved in meetings where there is a concise agenda, where specific issues are discussed, tangible action tasks are newly created and older issues are resolved. People quickly become disenchanted and de-motivated, however, when meetings are seen as “boring” and repetitive. with no action being taken and no issues being resolved.

Cohesiveness – The best way to keep a team of people motivated over a long period of time is to allow them to create an identity -- a unique identity that exists when they come together as “the team”, and continues when they leave the workplace. Successful project teams often attend extra curricular activities together, such as picnics, sporting events, etc. This allows the team members to see each other in different settings. Some teams have even participated in extreme team trust-building activities, or “survival” adventures, where team members are put in situations where they must literally trust each other with their lives. In this manner, relationships can form that are healthy, and serve to encourage the teamwork that is needed during difficult periods on a long-term project.

Conduct – The early establishment of rules of conduct is also a crucial element that is found in most successful project teams. Principles such as respect, truthfulness, honesty and integrity are critical to building trust among team members. These things must be practiced and not just given “lip service”. Team members must be able to hold each other accountable in a friendly, lighthearted way and not in a judgmental manner.

Celebration – Another very important aspect that successful project teams have in common is the consistent celebration of milestones and the reaching of important goals and objectives. This is especially critical on multi-year projects. Team members need continual encouragement and reassurance that the project is moving along a planned timeline and progress is being achieved. Celebration details are not as important as the celebration itself. The message is clearly being communicated to all team members that they are valued, that their hard work is being noticed and rewarded, and that the whole team is making visible progress toward the ultimate goal of system delivery.

Change – It is inevitable that, especially during a long-term project, certain team members will leave and new ones will come on board. Successful project teams have already accepted this fact and have transition plans in place to minimize disruption to the overall project and schedule. Team members should always have a “backup” in mind for possible absences due to any number of reasons (sickness, promotions, death, etc.). The old adage that, “Cemeteries are filled with indispensable men and women,” especially applies here. Key team members, by their very definition, should have a backup plan in place.

Conclusions
Dealing with difficult people can be, well, let’s face it – downright difficult. Selecting the right personality and skill set mix at the beginning of the project is absolutely crucial. Often these decisions are made with little regard to potential long-term problems because these people are either “currently available and not in a critical position,” or seen as “troublemakers” in their existing position and this project is one way to “get rid of them.” Negotiating adamantly for those with the right personality and skill set is always a preferred course of action. Bringing a new and different technology or information system into the organization will only compound the problem with difficult people. Further compounding the problem is a supplier who also has some of the same challenges with difficult employees.

An often-overlooked item is the present state of the organization in light of its ability to change and handle new or revised work processes. All too often the management of an organization will approve a thorough and detailed business case for a large technology or system implementation project, without taking the required time to assess the “readiness level” of the employees with regard to their ability to change.

How many efforts in the past could have been successful if the implementation plan was altered or phased-in to take into account the “organizational readiness for change” of its users? I would submit to the reader that many (not all) system implementations catalogued as “failures” in the past, were due to the organization’s failure to take the necessary steps to understanding their people, and the amount of change they could absorb.

In my experience, the success or failure of technology/system implementations has not been as dependent upon the technology or system itself as it has been on the people developing and implementing the solution. An organization certainly would not choose to implement technology if it did not believe it would work. So therefore, the success or failure lies chiefly in how well the solution has been communicated to the eventual users, how well the solution replaces the existing business processes, how well the users have been prepared and trained, and how well the promised benefits are actually measured and realized.

References
The following may be useful sources of information for continued reading on this topic.

Action Management [PriceWaterhouse Coopers]; Stephen Redwood, Charles Goldwasser, Simon Street, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158-0012 ISBN:0471-34547-4
Managing the Change Process [Coopers & Lybrand]; David Carr, Kelvin Hard, William Trahant, McGraw-Hill, 1221 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020 ISBN:0-07-012944-4
The Change Management Handbook - A Road Map To Corporate Transformation; Lance Berger, Martin Sikora, IRWIN Professional Publishing, 1333 Burr Ridge Parkway, Burr Ridge, IL 60521 ISBN: 1-55623-975-0