Top Tags

Tag abraham maslow

Entries 3 Total

The (New) Hierarchy of Needs – Part III

Oct 25, ’10 7:40 AM

[This is part three of a series on project management that is based upon Abraham Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Needs”]

Constraints

The next level “encapsulates” mission and objectives within the triple constraint: time – scope – budget.

When the topic of project management comes up, one of the fundamental concepts is the triple constraint.  Needless to say, truly understanding the triple constraint and having a subsequent dialogue about each constraint is key to the success of the effort.  Interestingly enough, many assumptions are made during this dialogue that can introduce problems down the road.

For example, instead of asking which constraint is “variable”, it’s sometimes best to ask the question – if we don’t do X, what is the impact?

  • Time – if we can’t finish this by X, what happens?
  • Scope – If we cannot deliver X1, what happens?  What if we deliver X1-Y instead?
  • Budget – If we go over budget, what happens?

It’s recommended that the PM challenge the constraints as much as possible.

The customer may say that the effort must be delivered by date X, but if we fast forward to date X and the project isn’t delivered, what is the course of action?  If there isn’t a defined course of action, then that really isn’t a hard and fast constraint.  If there is flexibility, then it’s best to make it apparent.  Use the constraints to your and the team’s benefit.

Another aspect of this discussion is to think about the triple constraint when things aren’t going well.  If it takes an additional 10 resources to finish the project by time X, will the business still benefit in the long-run?  Scenarios like this should be discussed and planned for in advance so that you have some boundaries that you can work within.

Storytelling

The next level focuses on “storytelling” – describing the project lifecycle and the end-goal in such a way that is easily comprehensible by all involved.

Requirements are typically seen as the central “core” around which all work is driven from.  Regardless of the analysis methodology employed, leveraging “static” requirements as the basis for all work is not ideal.  The reason for this is that people do not think linearly – and traditional requirements gathering is just that.  Since this is materially different from how people think, gaps are likely to arise which can cause downstream problems.  Instead, a recommendation is to employ different “storytelling” methods to describe what the end functionality should look like.

These “stories” can take multiple forms:

  • writing out in paragraph form what the end functionality looks like.
  • creating individual “stories” that align with each objective.
  • describing the objectives using a mind-map.
  • describing how the project progresses over a period of time.

Creating a story isn’t necessarily mutually exclusive from creating requirements – but the story can ultimately build a better framework from where the requirements can exist.  Remember, you aren’t here to create “shelf-ware” – you’re here to create documentation that is going to drive action.

Ultimately, true comprehension comes from natural prose, not bullet points – tell the story first.

Comments Off on The (New) Hierarchy of Needs – Part III

The (New) Hierarchy of Needs – Part II

Oct 19, ’10 8:10 AM

[This is part two of a series on project management that is based upon Abraham Maslow’s “Hierarchy of Needs”]

Having managed projects of various sizes and complexity over the past several years, I was puzzled with the absence of “interpersonal” elements in project management literature given that the team is ultimately at the core of any successful project.  To this end, I formulated a hierarchy of needs that incorporates pure project management concepts along with core interpersonal elements.

This hierarchy looks like the following:

  • Momentum
  • Problem-Solving
  • Accountability
  • Storytelling
  • Constraints
  • Foundation

The key behind this structure is that it has a very close relationship to Maslow’s original hierarchy of needs.

This is important to understand because the “real” goal of any project is to have a team where each individual is striving to be the best.  If each team member can work within an environment or “operating structure” (the layers listed above) such that they are able to realize their full potential (i.e. she/he is involved and engaged) and reach a state of “flow” (self-actualization), the collective team will ultimately build enough positive momentum to virtually guarantee project success.

Thus, you can see why this hierarchy of needs and the concept (and primary goal) of “self-actualization” is extremely important: if team members are happy, the chances for project success are that much greater.

Let’s explore this hierarchy in more depth.

Foundation

At the bottom of the hierarchy is a fundamental understanding of what the project hopes to accomplish.

To this end, going through a formal exercise of defining an explicit mission statement and underlying objectives can be extremely beneficial in the long-term.  This may seem unnecessary or even foreign.  But first, what exactly is a mission statement?

“A mission statement is a brief written statement of the purpose of a company or organization. Ideally, a mission statement guides the actions of the organization, spells out its overall goal, provides a sense of direction, and guides decision-making for all levels of management.” – Wikipedia

In the project management arena, the mission statement is ultimately there to guide the project team and to serve as a “beacon” when things start to become cloudy – “Why are we doing this again?” or “Why is this important to the company / LOB?”  In some circumstances, the explicit definition of a mission statement can start to raise questions across the board where assumptions will start to be challenged.  “Oh, I didn’t know that we are really doing this for LOB A …. if that’s the case, then we need to do X, Y and Z …”

Once there is agreement on the project mission, it’s only then where you can start to identify core objectives.

There really shouldn’t be many – three or four.  If you find that you’re heading beyond that, you may start considering ways to break up the project.  Be careful that the customer is not automatically jumping to the requirements definition “phase”.  This is not a requirements gathering exercise – it’s asking “What are you fundamentally trying to accomplish?”  If you’re struggling at this stage, it’s recommended that you remain at this “level” until you and your customer are certain what you’re collectively going to do.

In some situations where there are multiple organizations involved, it is also valuable to define what each organization/department hopes to gain from their participation.  While this may not directly change things, this level of understanding is helpful when challenges arise – “I see why team A is pushing back on X, because they are really focused on Y …”.  It’s better to know what’s driving behavior now than struggle with it later on.

Comments Off on The (New) Hierarchy of Needs – Part II

The Hierarchy of Needs.

Jun 27, ’09 2:40 PM

In one of my earlier posts, I discussed the concept of “Flow” and how the key to achieving flow – and ultimately happiness – is being able to live a life filled with involvement and enthusiasm in all areas.

In retrospect, is this reasonable given that one’s life circumstances aren’t necessarily such where “happiness” or “flow” is the primary focus?  For example, if my house recently burned down, my primary focus will be on finding immediate shelter – not on being “enthusiastic” or “engaged”.  My focus in this situation is survival.

As you can imagine, there is an ordering of needs that needs to be understood.  Such an ordering – the Hierarchy of Needs – was devised by psychologist Abraham Maslow in his 1943 paper “A Theory of Motivation”.

“Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is predetermined in order of importance.  It is often depicted as a pyramid consisting of five levels: the lowest level is associated with physiological needs, while the uppermost level is associated with self-actualization needs, particularly those related to identity and purpose.  Deficiency needs must be met first. Once these are met, seeking to satisfy growth needs drives personal growth. The higher needs in this hierarchy only come into focus when the lower needs in the pyramid are met. Once an individual has moved upwards to the next level, needs in the lower level will no longer be prioritized. If a lower set of needs is no longer being met, the individual will temporarily re-prioritize those needs by focusing attention on the unfulfilled needs, but will not permanently regress to the lower level.” – Wikipedia

The hierarchy – represented in the form of a pyramid – has the following structure:

– Self-actualization
– Esteem
– Love/Belonging
– Safety
– Physiological

As just mentioned, in this hierarchy the higher needs come into focus only when the lower needs are met.  Thus, the house example presented earlier makes sense given the ordering shown here – i.e. I need to be safe before I can really focus on my long-term goals, etc.  The key is to ultimately address “core” needs such that one can realize her/his fullest potential through a “self-actualization” phase.

This “hierarchy of needs” concept is applicable in other disciplines as well.

For example, in the book “Universal Principles of Design“, the “Hierarchy of Needs” is one of the 210 design principles described.  The specific use of this hierarchy shows how a given design “…must serve the low-level needs (e.g. it must function), before the higher-level needs, such as creativity, can begin to be addressed”.

This particular implementation of the hierarchy of needs looks as follows:

– Creativity
– Proficiency
– Usability
– Reliability
– Functionality

Having some experience with the design lifecycle, this makes complete sense.  An iPod that looks nice but breaks after the first two months clearly isn’t a good design.  The authors recommend using this hierarchy as a “report card” of sorts to determine where modifications should be made to existing designs to further improve them.

Another discipline where this concept is useful is in the project management arena.  Having considerable experience in this space, I was puzzled with the absence of “interpersonal” elements in project management literature given that the team is ultimately the core of any successful project.  To this end, I formulated a hierarchy of needs that incorporates pure project management concepts along with core interpersonal elements.

This hierarchy looks like the following:

– Momentum
– Problem-Solving
– Constraints
– Storytelling
– Constraints
– Foundation

The key behind this structure is that it has a very close relationship to Maslow’s original hierarchy of needs.

The “real” goal of any project is to have a team where each individual is striving to be the best.  If each team member can work within an environment or “operating structure” (the layers listed above) such that they are able to realize their full potential (i.e. she/he is involved and engaged) and reach a state of “flow” (self-actualization), the collective team will ultimately build enough positive momentum to virtually guarantee project success.

Full details about each of these layers will be published in early July 2009.

The thing to remember is that this hierarchy concept can be employed in many other disciplines – not just the three described here.  Think about how a “hierarchy of needs” can work within your particular discipline.  What is the “ultimate” objective / goal?  How can you use this hierarchy to measure not only your performance but others that also rely upon this structure?

Comments Off on The Hierarchy of Needs.