Hate is a strong word. But when you manage projects and lead teams, it\u2019s easy to hate constraints. \u201cIf only we had more time. Or money. Or people. Or __________. Then we could deliver.\u201d<\/p>\n
Constraints limit our options, and by limiting us, they hold us back from getting better results.<\/p>\n
Or do they?<\/p>\n
Scott Sonenshein is the author of Stretch: Unlock the Power of Less\u2014and Achieve More Than You Ever Imagined<\/em><\/a>. His book just hit the shelves this month and it\u2019s filled with lessons that challenge us all to reframe how we look at constraints. Sonenshein provides a compelling case for why constraints\u2014having less\u2014may actually be a good thing, or at least provide benefits that are not offered when we have excess.<\/p>\n In this post, I share three ideas from Stretch<\/em> that you can apply to your day-to-day leading of people and projects.<\/p>\n I can accept that constraints are capable of fostering new ways of thinking. That\u2019s not a new thought<\/a> and seems reasonable, in theory. Yet it can cause headaches, in practice. I\u2019m more apt to whine about the limits of constraints than I am to see them as catalysts for creativity.<\/p>\n But here\u2019s a practical application of the idea that I use with my executive coaching clients. Too often, when faced with a constraint, we can easily become the No<\/em> person.\u00a0Here\u2019s what I mean\u2026.<\/p>\n A CEO of a mid-sized company was walking me through her facility, introducing me people along the way. When we eventually got back to her office, she asked if I remembered one of her project managers. I did. She confided, \u201cHe\u2019s the No<\/em> guy.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cWhat do you mean?\u201d<\/p>\n Shaking her head, the CEO shared, \u201cIt doesn\u2019t seem to matter what the question is, his answer is \u2018No\u2019. If I ask him if we\u2019re going to hit the project due date, he\u2019s likely to respond \u2018No, we have issues.\u2019 If I ask if we can add functionality to a project, his response? \u2018Nope. Not in scope.\u2019 Can he make it to a meeting? \u2018Sorry\u2014I\u2019m busy.\u2019 He\u2019s the No<\/em> guy!\u201d<\/p>\n I decided to ask the Dr. Phil question: \u201cHow\u2019s that working for him?\u201d Without hesitation, the CEO said, \u201cHe\u2019s about to get fired.\u201d<\/p>\n I want to be clear: sometimes the best answer is \u2018No\u2019. If it\u2019s an ethical, safety, or quality issue at stake, the best response is likely a direct, emphatic \u2018No\u2019. But that\u2019s not what was going on here. This guy, when faced with constraints, only saw reasons why something wasn\u2019t doable, so that\u2019s what he communicated. I\u2019m guessing he isn\u2019t lazy or unwilling. He just tended to see why things weren\u2019t possible.<\/p>\n Being the \u2018No\u2019 person is not generally good for your career. Yet being the \u2018Yes\u2019 person can set you up for failure as well. So what\u2019s a constrained project manager to do?<\/p>\n When faced with a constraint\u2014let\u2019s say a time constraint\u2014instead of being the \u2018No’ person, try to reframe the problem. Instead of \u201cNo, it can\u2019t be done!\u201d, or \u201cSure! No problem, Chief!\u201d, how about this\u2026. Consider what can<\/em> be done in that timeframe.<\/p>\n Surely you\u2019ve learned to not bring problems<\/em> but solutions<\/em>, right? Think of solutions<\/em> in this context as options<\/em>. What options can you bring to your sponsor or stakeholders that acknowledge the constraints yet strive to best meet the needs of the business?<\/p>\n Bringing options shows you\u2019re trying to help\u2014you’re trying to be part of the solution. It can depend on context, but I’ve found offering three choices is better than just one and certainly better than twenty. Bring options to your sponsor and work with them to see which one best serves the organization. This approach is far<\/em> more beneficial than just saying No or Yes.<\/p>\n In Stretch<\/em>, Sonenshein shares that one way to think differently about our constraints is to get beyond ourselves by tapping into people with fresh eyes who are perhaps not as emotionally invested in our project. There are remarkable examples of how the further a problem is from a person’s expertise, the more likely he or she is to solve it. Sonenshein tells of biologists who solved more chemistry problems compared to chemists. Scientists outside a specific field had different, and ultimately better, ways of approaching problems than the experts.<\/p>\n The lesson for us? If you have a problem to solve or constraint to deal with, consider bringing some outsiders into the discussion. Maybe it\u2019s someone new to the company or group. Maybe it\u2019s someone who has solved a similar problem in a different domain. Perhaps it’s asking a millennial for their thoughts despite their limited experience.<\/p>\n The point is that expertise has its benefits, but sometimes it\u2019s a curse<\/a>. Outsiders can connect dots or bring ideas to the discussion that would not otherwise have been considered. Give that a try in the coming weeks and let me know how it goes!<\/p>\n Sonenshein suggests You get what you expect<\/em>. He\u2019s speaking to the biases we have when faced with constraints. If we\u2019re convinced there\u2019s no way to do something, we\u2019ll find the data to support that bias.<\/p>\n As I\u2019ve studied cognitive biases and talked with experts on the topic, the biggest lesson I\u2019ve learned is not just that these biases exist. That’s indisputable. The greater threat is we\u2019re more blind to them than we realize.<\/p>\n When you are soon faced with another constraint, try to intentionally start with your expectations. Even if it’s suspending disbelief, try to force yourself to say, \u201cHey, there\u2019s a way around this! We can solve this!\u201d Changing the mindset to expect a solution is a great place to start.<\/p>\n Constraints can drive us crazy when we\u2019re faced with delivering projects. The easy answer seems to be that fewer constraints\u2014or more resources\u2014is the answer to our problem. Sonenshein provides compelling evidence that Having More Resources<\/em> \u2260 Getting Better Results<\/em>.<\/p>\n You can listen to Scott talk about this in his own words at http:\/\/PeopleAndProjectsPodcast.com\/165<\/a>. You\u2019ll hear him talk about additional ideas, such as how to increase the psychological ownership of your team members. And Sonenshein will challenge you to take an honest look at whether you\u2019re a Chaser<\/em> or Stretcher<\/em>.<\/p>\n So what\u2019s your take? What questions or concerns do you have? How have you seen excess hurt a team or company? Or how have you seen constraints help? Share your thoughts and questions in the comments below. I look forward to discussing this with you!<\/p>\n Andy Kaufman is a keynote speaker who helps organizations around the world improve their ability to deliver projects and lead teams. He is the host of the <\/em>People and Projects Podcast<\/em><\/a> which provides interviews and insights to help you lead and deliver. Learn how to earn free PDUs at http:\/\/PeopleAndProjectsPodcast.com\/FreePDUs<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Hate is a strong word. But when you manage projects and lead teams, it\u2019s easy to hate constraints. \u201cIf only we had more time. Or money. Or people. Or __________. Then we could deliver.\u201d Constraints limit our options, and by limiting us, they hold us back from getting better results. Or do they? Scott Sonenshein… Continue Reading →<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[34],"tags":[108,130,125,110],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/s488Wj-449","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/449"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=449"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/449\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":462,"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/449\/revisions\/462"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=449"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=449"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.leadershipintherealworldblog.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=449"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Constraints Are\u2026 Good?<\/h2>\n
Tapping Into the Wisdom of Outsiders<\/h2>\n
You Get What You Expect<\/h2>\n
A Fresh Look at Constraints<\/h2>\n