Which leadership roles should the project manager adopt?

In November 2010, I was lecturing on the characteristics of successful project managers at the University of Cape Town (executive development programme) when a heated debate arose. It centred on the nature of leadership in projects. How far do the leadership responsibilities of the sponsor or business owner extend, and which leadership role should the project manager adopt?

In this type of discussion, I often find it helpful to reference the metaphor of the taxi driver: the project manager may drive the taxi, but he or she will not be successful without directions from the passenger on the target destination.

Far too often, project managers drive the taxi without sufficient engagement with the passenger; or worse still, in their excitement about the destination, get in the back with them! By the time the taxi comes to a stop, the passenger has already jumped out and there is no one to pay
the fare.

Of course, in reality, the cause of the problems is complex. Sometimes, the passenger (i.e. sponsor) never wanted to be in the taxi in the first place; the person in the back may change several times during the journey; or the back of the taxi is so crowded with passengers that they simply cannot agree where they want to go.

One thing is for certain: the project manager cannot drive the project and sit in the back seat as the client.

In projects, the leadership role of the project manager must be focused on ‘action’ leadership while the sponsor must take the ‘visionary’ and political leadership positions for the project to have any chance of success.

The pentagon model of project leadership suggests five distinct leadership roles. These do not operate in isolation, but are necessary elements contributing to the leadership of change.

Individuals may take on several of these leadership roles, or more than one person may contribute to one area. However, an absence or failure of leadership in any one of these key areas will put at risk the entire project or programme.

The pentagon model of project leadership is as follows (Source, CITI, 2003):

• Aesthetic leader – provided by the business, pre-eminently by the sponsor. Visionary leaders will translate general strategies into clear directions.
• Political leadership – provided by the sponsor through a network of alliances and agreements from disparate areas of the organisation. May be a shared responsibility within the business community, often formalised in the project board.
• Action leadership – primarily associated with the project manager, who is tasked with translating the political will and the project vision into a set of concrete deliverables. Action leadership is about delivering the project through the efforts of teams and individuals.
• Ethical leadership in projects may be fulfilled by (but is not exclusive to) the design authority and other ‘rule enforcers’, but requires an appreciation of the impact of change upon established practices.
• Formative (structural) leadership in projects is typically provided by the business champions who ensure changes brought about by projects are embedded in the business and become part of the ‘new reality’. They are concerned with ensuring business change is not only managed into place, but embraced. Formative leaders act to ensure the reception of change supports the original intent.

Ethics and the personal responsibilities of the project manager

Back in the lecture room, the debate extended: What if the project manager has been given clear direction by the business policy-maker, but he/she suspects (with good evidence from his/her experience) that the project he/she is being directed to run is unlikely to be successful and may result in outcomes that the community of ‘users’ are likely to reject and possibly even oppose? What leadership role – indeed, what responsibility – does the project manager now have?

The professional bodies in project management all have a code of ethics for project managers.

The Project Management Institute’s code of ethics is summed up as: As practitioners of project management, they are committed to doing what is right and honourable. They set high standards for themselves and aspire to meet these standards in all aspects of their lives: at work, at home, and in service to our profession.

Worryingly general in its statement, it tends to suggest broader moral responsibilities.

The Association for Project Management identifies that project managers have personal responsibilities that go “beyond those immediately implied by their contract with employers or clients”.

This is expanded upon further, and two statements are particularly relevant to this discussion. The project manager should: act in the best interests of his/her employer and clients in all business and professional matters, have regard for wider public interest concerns and those of any employer or colleague; declare and appropriately manage all matters that are, or could be construed as a conflict of interests.

On complex projects, project managers are inevitably faced with conflicts of interest.

The most important personal attributes for successful project managers relate to having the integrity (and in some cases, bravery) to expose these concerns, and the tenacity to engage as vigorously as required with all stakeholders to seek out the best possible solutions.

Managing conflict, in the sense of identifying and finding negotiated solutions to often complex competing stakeholder agendas, is part of the day job for project managers involved in politically sensitive projects.

The customer and the client:balancing competing agendas

Meanwhile, the debate in the lecture room continued: “But on these projects, there is a history of the building being rejected by our customers, yet we were still directed to continue... what were we to do?”

This plea was not addressed to me, but the manager of the department, attending the session with his project managers. His answer was clear and direct: “We must understand the difference between our client and our customer. There will always be conflicts to manage, and we must do them to the best of our abilities. But as project managers, we are not policy-makers, and we must be guided by government policy.”

Difficult, but wise words?

As the taxi driver, the project managers’ responsibility is to deliver the client to their destination, keeping within the laws, using safe practices and conforming to the accepted standards. We may not agree with the destination, but we do have a professional responsibility to expose (and, when necessary, to manage the risks) and seek out the best possible route. That may mean being tough and direct with stakeholders, including the client. But in the end, once all challenges are considered, we either deliver the client to the destination or get out of the cab.

And the project under discussion in the debate? The Makhaza toilets.

The passion with which the team from the City of Cape Town’s Informal Settlements department debated these issues was captivating. I have since had the opportunity to meet with the team and discuss further with them the challenges they face.

Informal settlements development: A case study in stakeholder-sensitive projects

In Cape Town alone, there are some 240 settlements and more than 100 000 informal dwellings.

The Informal Settlements department deals both with disaster recovery as well as renewal and redevelopment projects. The threat of flooding and fire means that the need to react to emergency situations frequently overturns longer term development projects.

New approaches to construction are providing effective technical solutions in ways not thought previously possible, but as the entire team agrees: “Engineering services is the easiest part of what we do”.

In the next issue, we look at stakeholder engagement in the context of these most politically sensitive projects.

My thanks go to Mzwandile Sokupa, manager: Informal Settlements and his team at the City of Cape Town. ☑

Louise Worsley

Worsley is director of Projman cc and lectures on the UCT executive development programme.

For further information about the UCT programme, contact Mark Massyn: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it or Louise Worsley: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .