The two extremes of project management, and why both are right

This has been a recent learning for me. In my experience, there are two broad styles of project management:

  • The teeth-gritted, head-down “just get it done” approach.
  • The status heavy, constant updates, emails to stakeholders, meetings and escalation approach.

These camps tend not to like each other. I’ve spent most of my career firmly in the first: solve the problem, keep moving, minimal noise. That’s often exactly what clients want, a fix, quickly, with as little fuss as possible.

Historically, I saw the “status update” camp as unhelpful: lots of escalation, senior management getting dragged in, tempers frayed, and, in the end, someone still has to grit their teeth and fix the thing. But I’ve come to appreciate that they provide a vital function: awareness.

If you can resolve an issue quietly, without additional cost and with no material risk, then yes, get it done and move on. However, if the fix will incur more than minimal cost or expose the client to more than minimal risk, there must be full awareness. Simply generating noise isn’t useful; it just makes people anxious, but silence in the face of material impact is worse.

A competent manager does both. Do the head-down work to understand the problem and shape a solution. Once you have a plan, validated with subject-matter experts and the business, raise awareness calmly and clearly. Make stakeholders aware of the implications and the risks, alongside the proposed path to resolution.

A note for anyone hiring PMs: you want people who can do both. Perpetual flappers add little value. Perpetual silencers can cost you dearly over time. Aim for professionals who are strong on delivery and strong on communication.
This isn’t an either/or. It’s both.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *