International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 137142

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijproman

Group eciency improvement: how to liberate energy in project groups

Cornelia Veil a,*, J. Rodney Turner b
b a Institut fur Integrationsberatung, Heiden/St.Gallen, Switzerland Department of Business and Organization, Faculty of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Received 1 November 1999; accepted 26 July 2000

Abstract To achieve a successful outcome for their projects, project teams often need to liberate energies and capabilities greater than that of the sum of the individual members, during what can be a period of considerable stress. It can be benecial to project teams to understand how this growth in group eciency arises, and to be able to capture it repeatedly. In this paper we give some tips for group eciency improvement suggested by several experienced project management practitioners. # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Project manager; Group eciency; Socio-emotional dynamics of groups; Systemic-constructivist relational paradigm

1. Introduction Experiencing progress and well-being within a project group is of the utmost importance both to the project managers and the project team members. Working together in project groups brings more insecurity and stress than in any other business context: there are new colleagues, the framework is unclear, the context of the project is unknown. Any or all of these can adversely aect the group eciency and the performance of the project team. On the other hand, working in a project group is more exciting than any other business situation: it is meaningful, and it is a continuous process of learning and adapting, and of overcoming of problems. Together, this can add up to that superb feeling of joint achievement and success. How can we liberate group energy to attain such joint achievement and success? From socio-psychological research [14] we know that groups of people working together give rise to dynamics which have the eect either of enhancing group performance, or of impeding, even destroying, group eciency. Increasingly, an important question which needs our consideration is how we would manage the socio-emotional dynamics of a group and of blocked energy in the project group.

At a workshop entitled ``How to free energy in project groups?'' at the World Congress of Project Management in Paris, a small but active group of creative project managers freely shared experiences, questions, problems and solutions inherent in everyday project life. Here we describe some of the remedies and easy interventions generated through the syndicate working. Our experience has taught us that these are appropriate and relevant to the management of project groups, and the promotion of both well-being and progress. However, the solutions suggested by project management experts are supported by research into the systemic, constructivist and relational paradigm from organizational and social psychology [5], as evinced by the references. The group identied not so much ways of enhancing the energy of group working, but ways of avoiding loss of group eciency. The pointers are grouped into four sets:
. energy loss through killing ideas; . energy loss through the project group being pushed to the limit; . energy loss through the static perception of team roles; . energy loss through power play.

2. Group eciency loss (A): energy loss through killing ideas

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +41-71-8917544; fax: +41-718914544. E-mail address: ckveil@bluewin.ch (C. Veil). 0263-7863/01/$22.00 # 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved. PII: S0263-7863(00)00036-3

Although it sounds illogical, project members often turn down new ideas, killing inputs from other experts,

138

C. Veil, J.R. Turner / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 137142

and block co-operative eorts in situations of escalating insecurity. As a result, commitment and team spirit diminishes, and group energy and synergy is blocked. If killing ideas has become a ``sport'', the project group may even disintegrate. The following methods were suggested to avoid the killing of ideas, and thus liberating co-operative energy: 2.1. Only use professional brainstorming techniques A project manager or project team member choosing to do a brainstorming session, should agree and stick to strict rules:
. any idea is welcome . do not use any killer-phrases whatsoever . adopt a policy to ``kill the killer''

2.7. Show respect for the individuals within the group Not every project member is able to express himself or herself eloquently at the drop of a hat. Helping team members to rephrase their ideas, with a supportive attitude (instead of idea killing), contributes to team spirit, and generates noticeable energy. Rogers [7,8] says that such emphatic understanding is an eective approach and can bring about major changes. 2.8. Build commitment to project group success Group cohesion and eciency is strengthened by a periodical review of common goals, by making an assessment of progress made, and by identifying and recording achievements which are due to joint eort. Ego-centric bullies should be made to feel out of place. 2.9. Appoint a watch-dog for killer-attitudes If someone in a project group keeps using killer-phrases (may they be hard core or even very soft phrases), suggest the temporary appointment of a neutral watch-dog to increase the group's awareness of idea-killing as an energy killer. 3. Group eciency loss (B): energy loss through the project group's being pushed to the limit During the life of a project, there will almost certainly be situations which become very demanding. Support by technical resources (PC hardware and software, project planning and controlling techniques etc.) may be helpful to some extent. But when project members begin to show signs of being pushed to the limit, subtle interventions are required. Stress signs might be members beginning to withdraw, being burned out, or shedding responsibility. The following methods are suggested for freeing project team members from some of the stress of these limits, and thus liberating their energy. 3.1. Overcome limits caused by stopping at the thought process We need to be aware that the work of the project team does not just stop after the thinking has been done satised with the thinking, but with no evidence of having put it into action. ``Say what you think and do what you say!'' Help one another to encourage authenticity. Minimise the overlaps between thinking, saying and doing (this concerns everyone: project manager, each project member, the entire project group) to improve the overall group performance [9].

2.2. Limit sub-group working to 1 h Quite often just 1 h of subgroup-work is sucient to come up with constructive and convincing results. Getting results gives a feeling of success which in turn gives a feeling of well-being. Successful groups refrain from killing ideas. 2.3. Form subgroups Controversial issues should be delegated to small taskforces. Small groups of 3 to 4 people can handle group dynamics more easily, work more eciently and they are a source of renewed motivation. They are most likely to present their results with conviction. 2.4. Abolish the devil's advocate Identify this phenomenon, and agree where it might be useful and where it denitely is not. Some people cannot help being obstinate and antagonistic. Tackle their time and energy consuming reexes with humour. 2.5. Make yourself empty as a facilitator Project managers must be aware of their own preoccupations. Taken to excess, these can kill the ideas and initiative of project team members. We all need to reect on our personal mind maps and frames of reference periodically. This can reveal something about the boundaries in our own thinking [6]. 2.6. Outline and dene group climate Communication during times of high pressure can turn into ghting among team members. Emotional over-involvement reduces listening to each other, and increases misunderstanding dramatically. Provide cooling-o breaks.

C. Veil, J.R. Turner / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 137142

139

3.2. Encourage team members to put into words the feelings concerning project related issues Exhausted project group members who have been pushed beyond their accustomed limits seldom refrain from giving their opinions on any sensitive issue. When a project manager asks the group members to discuss a topic of utmost importance, they should encourage such human attributes as emotions and ``professional'' conict into the way things are discussed [10]. However, topics which are subject to individual interpretation and opinion, like ``being honest'' and ``trust'' should be avoided. Take care of the project culture by taking time o with the project group to reect and cultivate communication. 3.3. Use the card method A simple but very ecient technique to overcome limitations is to invite project team members to build something together. The card method enables spontaneous (non-manipulated and non-inuenced, and if necessary ``anonymous'') expression of ideas, fears, and hopes, and brings misunderstandings and conicts into the open, allowing them to be dealt with. This method brings out hidden expectations, scepticism, and resistance, but at the same time it uncovers vital knowledge, good will and resources. Rogers [11] says we should encourage our individual tendency to express and activate our capabilities to the extent that such activation enhances the self. It has strong integrating eect on a group if the card method is used in a fair and correct way. 3.4. Activate the silent resources of the group Make clear to all project members that it is not always the talkative group members who have the right answers. The quiet thinkers also have access to right thinking and action. Look for body language, and distinguish timidity (``I do not dare'') from inability (``I cannot''). This will often reveal hidden talents in project members (the humorous artist, the draft/design gifted, the social integrator etc.) thus setting free blocked energy [12]. 3.5. Use both the written and illustrations to help get a better grasp of the subject During project group-sessions, draw sketches to visualise links, options, decisions and complex situations. Ulrich and Probst [13] ndings prove that models capturing the essentials have an impact on groups (social systems). Spontaneous illustrations (especially with use of colour) can create a common view and understanding of crucial points of the project. Sometimes it will only take an impromptu sketch to reintegrate views thereby freeing energy easily. It can be useful to delegate the drawing to a specically gifted ``visualizer'' within the group.

3.6. Stimulate all the senses Intellectually tired project members, working at their limit, are often grateful for relaxing and refreshing physical exercises. Spontaneous activity such as rhythmic hand-clapping or free style humming, or a work-out by using drums, can be an acceptable and enjoyable means of revitalising a hard-working group. 3.7. Change the pace In a project group-session, take a look at the pace of speech, working and interaction. If it is too fast, slow down. If it is too slow and dreary, quicken the pace. This can often eect a quick x [14]. 4. Group eciency loss (C): energy loss through a static perception of team roles Sometimes a project's life becomes rigid and inexible, reducing progress and eciency. If this is not due to routine, or social-emotional stress from the demands of high performance, it can be because of the perception and rigid interpretation of project roles, which in practise narrows interaction, and makes communication and behaviour in general very inexible [15]. Here is an example of such a rigid perception: Some project team members expect that the project manager will always be ``on target'', will make perfect decisions, motivate awlessly, and nourish the project members [16]. They like to think that project managers are responsible for every aspect of a project, and that caring for the necessary infrastructure and assertive leadership is the project manager's exclusive domain. This perception of the project manager's role as that of superman or superwoman is unrealistic. It indicates the project member's nave perception of the manager's role, and can only lead to increasing disappointment. According to this view, no other behaviour by the manager is deemed to be possible. It never occurs to such project team members to ask themselves such question as:
. ``maybe I can take initiative at the beginning of a project session, as I too am responsible for ...'', . ``how can I get appraisal/nourishment from other colleagues besides my boss ...?'', . ``I may make mistakes the same way my boss makes mistakes nobody is perfect!''.

In turn, project managers sometimes perceive themselves as project owners, the motor, the only one responsible for project success [17]. This, too, is not realistic. However, in trying to be a superman or superwoman, the manager can all too easily become the cause of decreasing commitment and co-operation in the project

140

C. Veil, J.R. Turner / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 137142

group, because project members realize that their boss will do the job anyway. In the manager's perception of the super-role, what does not seem to come to their mind are thoughts such as:
. ``I don't always have to be the best player; let's use the many talents and capabilities of the other members of the group.''

expectations, values and priorities. As we are not totally aware of what we are constructing (taking for ``real''), we have to be careful what we take for ``reality'' [22]. This is particularly true in the case of those elements we consider to be ``good'' or ``bad'' in the project context, as well as what we consider to be ``of value'' or ``of nonvalue''. Some established perceptions might be out-dated or even wrong, and therefore useless. 4.4. Invite each expert to phrase his or her input so that it is understandable for all the project members In a project group every project member has expert knowledge and expert language. Very often the established perception of the expert role (``talking expert language is necessary to be precise and to be acknowledged'') is the cause of communication blocks. Project team members need to communicate with each other to benet their common purpose, and not show o their expertise [23]. 4.5. Let the team members and experts play roles they are not accustomed to Experiment with ``role-playing'', but if you do, do not be scared of carnival like excitement. Role-playing increases sensitivity to others, and to the relevance of one's own role [24]. 4.6. Promote ``both-and'' thinking Condemn either-or arguments. From an external perspective, nothing is really black or white. Seek ``both-and'' solutions and ``as well as'' options. Thus broadened perceptions provide an opportunity to overcome out-dated opinions or false perceptions. 4.7. Negotiate and talk with your people Project managers should not allow themselves to be tempted to hide behind their xed leadership-role [16]. 5. Group eciency loss (D): Energy block through power-play Project leaders and project team members often themselves are constrained by the power wielded by key people looking after their vested interests [25]. Much of the eort and skill of the project team members are blocked through abuse of formal power. Shedding of responsibility follows growing frustration. The project leader faces one of the most demanding challenges. The following methods are suggested for freeing the project team members and leader from the eects of power play and thus liberating energy.

An inexible perception of the roles within a project group reduces creative thinking and problem-solving. It can deprive group members of personal achievements, and be a disincentive for motivating contributions to the project objectives. It makes project life rigid and boring, and it blocks energy. Hastings [18] suggests that looking at senior managers we may recognize outdated perceptions too. They hold opinions such as:
. ``The really successful project manager should not need our support.'' . ``There is no necessity for senior management to sponsor the project.''

These perceptions of the roles of line managers or senior managers do not reect the reality of the interactional complexity of projects [19]. The following methods are suggested for overcoming rigid perceptions, and thereby liberating project group energy: 4.1. Change the physical framework, choose another venue Often the mere variation of positions around the table [20], the way the project group session is started, the planning of or approach to the topics, etc, may work wonders. Project sessions are no longer the same. Energy is liberated, group eciency improved. 4.2. Structures and roles are a hook, not a net Project structures (project leaders' and team members' roles, planning and decision making procedures, meeting and communication routine) should be best understood as a hook, which helps and gives some direction. Perceptions of a xed project-world are simply wrong [21]. 4.3. Encourage project team members to become aware that their frames of reference are personal and individual. Encourage them to understand how they each contribute to the group's meetings and work processes Each project member constructs reality (including project group-reality) through his or her perceptions,

C. Veil, J.R. Turner / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 137142

141

5.1. Invite experienced outside advisers They might bring in new connections, opening new indirect ways of action and foster project group-morale. They may help the project group to develop new strategies and arguments in dealing directly with the powerwielding key-person [26]. The outside expert may educate the power-wielder, or may open up the confrontation by forming a tripartite-negotiation. 5.2. Empower project managers by giving them the authority to meet their responsibilities In the interest of a successful project, the project manager should from the start have their responsibilities and authority clearly dened in writing [18]. A project manager's expert competence must not be blocked by people with formal power but little project management competence. 5.3. Invite on to the project team somebody in who is more powerful There are always other key people in the game who can be brought in to stop power wielding [27]. 5.4. Divert attention from power play to the project-process A power wielder should be given clear indications about the consequences at cost and time from his or her conduct. The importance of the project aims, and the underlying problems to all concerned, should be communicated. Any personal reluctance to deal with such issues should be set aside, and the focus placed on the project process, and the dangers which threaten the achievement of its objectives. 5.5. Expose instances where rules and/or priorities have been overridden There is no need for concern if (directly or indirectly) power players start to block the project process (deadlines, agreed services, project support etc.). The facts and consequences should be communicated to the promoters of the project, for example the steering committee. Superiors should clarify priorities relevant to the success of the project. 5.6. Get the power players out of the way Superiors and power-players should be informed of the true reasons of project deciencies. This might stimulate project management know-how amongst superiors and power-players, who often feel endangered due to lack of project management know-how: Developing the project management culture in the company is not the least task of a project manager.

5.7. Legitimate mistakes, so that nobody may take advantage of ill-events that happen unavoidably more frequently in projects than in routine-procedures If the project team members miss contractual obligations, the manager should communicate why it happened and what lessons there are to be learnt from it, conveying the implications to all concerned. This will help to turn failures into learning opportunities for all [28]. 6. Conclusion We have presented these tips, assembled by enthusiastic believers in project management, to show how to strengthen the innovative capacities of any institution. However, they will not work like recipes, prescriptions or formula in every situation. They may occasionally turn out to make things even worse. However, it was ever thus. Rather, our deliberations are designed rather to spark o the socio-emotional creativity of project managers and their teams. How to liberate energy in project groups is a continuing challenge, and a shared responsibility for all concerned with projects. Acknowledgements This paper is developed from the results of a workshop entitled ``How to free energy in project groups?'' held at the IPMA World Congress of Project Management in Paris. We wish to thank all project management experts who attended the workshop: C. O. Doesburg; C. I. Quispel; Alex van den Honert; Ahmed Seif El-Din; Cornelia Veil; Susan Vonsild, and especially the moderator Morton Fangel. References
[1] Katzenbach J. The work of teams, Boston: Harvard Business Review Book, 1998 (see page 35). [2] Katzenbach J, Smith D. The wisdom of teams: creating the high performance team. Boston: Harvard Business School Press, 1993 (see page 175). [3] Bales R. Interaction process analysis. New York, 1951. [4] Bion W. Experiences in groups. New York, 1959. [5] Veil C. Know your conceptual framework. In: Focus on change management. London: Armstrong International, 1997. 39. p. 203. [6] Wortham S. Constructionism, personal construct psychology and narrative psychology: are constructs personal? Theory & Psychology 1996;6(1):7984. [7] Rogers C. On becoming a person. Boston: Miin, 1961 (see page 332). [8] Stroebe W, Stroebe M. The social psychology of social support. In: Hinggins E, Krulanski T, editors. Social psychology: handbook of basic principles. New York: Guilford, 1996. p. 597621. [9] Craddock A. Resources as buers against the impact of stress. Journal of Psychology & Theology 1996;24(1):3846.

142

C. Veil, J.R. Turner / International Journal of Project Management 20 (2002) 137142 [20] Watzlawick P, Beavin J, Jackson D. Pragmatics of Human Communication. A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxes. New York: Notton & Company, 1967. [21] Probst G, Gomez P. Vernetztes Denken. Ganzheitliches Fuhren in der Praxis. Wiesbaden: Gabal, 1991. [22] Berger L, Luckmann T. The Social Construction of Reality. City Garden, NY: Doubleday, 1966. [23] Linell P. Troubles with mutualities: towards a dialogical theory of missunderstanding and miscommunication. In: Markova I, Graumann C, Foppa K. Mutualities in dialogue. Cambridge, 1995. p. 176213. [24] VanLear C. Communication process approaches and models: patterns, roles, cycles, and dynamic coordination. In: Watt J, VanLear A, editors. Dynamic patterns in communication processes. Sage Publications, 1996. p. 3570. [25] Hosking D. Constructing power: entitative and relational approaches. In: Hosking D, Dachler H, Gergen K, editors. Management and organisation: relational alternatives to individualism. Aldershot: Gower, 1995. p. 5170. [26] Kellner H. Projekte koniktfrei fuhren: Wie Sie ein erfolgreiches Team aufbauen. Munchen: Hanser, 1996. [27] Patch M. The eect of asymmetrical use of metacommunicative behavior on judgment of power. Journal of Social Psychology 1996;135(6): p. 74753. [28] London M, Smither J. Empowered self-development and continuous learning. In: Human resource management. Michigan: Wiley, 1999. Vol. 39, p. 317.

[10] Salmela-Aro K, Nurmi J. Uncertanty and condence in interpersonal projects: consequences for social relationships and well-being. Journal of Social & Psychological Relationships 1996;13(1):10922. [11] Rogers C. On becoming a person. Boston: Miin, 1961 (see page 35). [12] Westra M. Active communication. California: Brooks/Coole, 1996. [13] Ulrich H, Probst G. Anleitung zum ganzheitlichen Denken und Handeln. Bern: Haupt, 1988 (see page 77). [14] Monge P, Kalman M. Sequentiality, simultanety, and synchronicity in human communication. In: Watt J., VanLear A., editors. Dynamic patterns in communication processes. California: Sage Publications, 1996, p. 7192. [15] Kelly GA. The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton, 1955. [16] Dachler H. Management and leadership as relational phenomena. In: Von Cranach M, Doise W, Mugny G, editors. Social representations and the social bases of knowledge. New York: Lewinston, 1992. p. 16978. [17] Hosking D, Dachler H. The primary of relations in socially constructing organisational realities. In: Hosking D, Dachler H, Gergen K, editors. Management and Organisation: Relational Alternatives to Individualism. Aldershot: Gower, 1995. p. 127. [18] Hastings C. Development process for improving project performance in multi project based organisations. In: Team and task: proceedings of the IPMA world congress on project management. Paris: AFITEP, June, 1996, p. 1717. [19] Malik F. Strategie des Managements komplexer Systeme ein Beitrag zur Management-Kybernetik evolutionarer Systeme. Bern: Huber, 1989.