About Motivating in Project Management

Regarding the Paris Olympics, there has been much discussion about the conditions for success. A well known coach put it this way:

“Ability is what you are capable of doing

Motivation detemines what you do.

Attitude determines how well you do it.”

Project management’s focus is “getting things done” therefore many PM discursion

centered around “motivation” from beginning.

Many psychologists have established the existence of a prioritized hierarchy of needs that motivate individuals towards satisfactory performance. In particular, Abraham Harold Maslow (1908-1970), often quoted in project management literature, put forward a hierarchy depicted as a pyramid. This displayed basic psychological needs at the base and worked up to ‘self-actualization’ at the top.

Another motivational theory frequently referenced in PM literature is Frederick Irving Herzberg’s (1923-2000) Motivation-Hygiene Theory. According to this theory, the absence of hygiene factors can lead to dissatisfaction, but their presence alone does not significantly boost employee motivation. These include salary, working conditions, and leadership style. These factors are fundamental requirements to avoid dissatisfaction.

In contrast, motivational factors directly affect employee performance and satisfaction, fostering a positive attitude at work. Examples include responsibility, recognition, and creative work.

It might not be irrelevant to note how these two approaches relate. We can map Herzberg’s two factors onto Maslow’s pyramid

Taking a step toward practice, let’s see what the workplace or project can do to meet Maslow’s hierarchy of needs:

Self-actualization	Creative work Opportunity for development Involvement in planning own work
Esteem needs	Challenging work Opportunity for advancement Recognition, award, status symbols Sharing background of decisions, own decision opportunity
Love and social needs	Teamwork Supportive co-workers Networking opportunities Beyond the project interaction opportunities
Safety needs	Job security Safe working conditions, co-workers’ friendship Sound policies and practices Fringe benefits
Physiological needs	Labor supporting devices Work-Life balance Adequate compensation package

The complexity of motivation is also indicated by the fact that Maslow himself later expanded his pyramid, which is less well-known, with new levels:

Cognitive needs such as creativity, foresight, curiosity, and meaning. Individuals who enjoy activities that require deliberation and brainstorming have a greater need for cognition. Individuals who are unmotivated to participate in the activity, on the other hand, have a low demand for cognitive abilities.

Aesthetic needs to beautify one’s life. This would consist of having the ability to appreciate the beauty within the world around oneself, on a day-to-day basis.

These needs are less related to workplace motivation or are not clearly distinct but can be embedded in other need levels. For example, helping with learning, improving knowledge of the world, and seeking truth beneath the surface address cognitive needs. Or workplace orderliness, cleanliness, and harmony satisfy aesthetic needs, but these aren’t strong motivating factors.

The need for transcendence isn’t really meant to be fulfilled in the workplace. Here, we set aside abstract political promises, focusing on a professional context. However, an interesting project management aspect has recently emerged that relates to this topic: the ability to handle unpredictability, a skill now in focus with the onset of pandemics, wars, and a chaotic world. This adds to the usual IQ (problem-solving ability) and EQ (emotional intelligence), with the addition of SQ, or spiritual intelligence.

SQ is the ability to analyze situations, recognize the possibility of change, and potentially modify circumstances to control a situation. Characteristics of SQ include:

Flexibility (active and spontaneous adaptability)
High self-awareness
Allowing oneself to be inspired by values
Willingness to find connections between different things (thinking holistically)
Willingness to ask questions like: “Why?” “What if?” and seeking fundamental answers
Possessing the ability to work against conventions

The relationship between SQ abilities and project management knowledge is illustrated in this diagram.

After the 1960s the discussion of motivation moved towards “on-the-job

development” from the general to the specific motivation and interpersonal and management competences.

This is the contingency approach (Fred Edward Fiedler, 1922 – 2017) to motivation recognizes that there is no one-size-fits-all method to motivate individuals in the workplace. Instead, it suggests that the effectiveness of a motivational strategy depends on various situational factors. This approach adapts to the unique needs of employees, the nature of tasks, and the organizational environment.

We can illustrate the complexity of motivation and the many factors that influence it with Edwin A. Locke’s (1938) diagram of the motivation process.

Maslow acknowledged the multifaceted motivational system behind human actions, but his model was somewhat static, which he realized when he introduced the transcendence level. Modern motivational approaches, while recognizing Maslow’s pyramid, focus on practices that consider specific environmental and interpersonal relationships. Studies and models examining leadership styles and their impact demonstrate how to manage and implement these aspects.

Imre Szalay

Sources:

· Wikipedia

· Max Wideman: Dominant Personality Traits Suited to Running Projects Successfully, 2002 http://www.maxwideman.com/

· Janice Thomas – Thomas Menge:l Preparing project managers to deal with complexity International Journal of Project Management 26 (2008)

Project and Project Management in Extreme Situations

Project and Project Management in extreme situations

– Lessons from a Unique Antarctic Project –

Antarctica is home to 66 research stations from various countries, 37 of which are permanent. At the PMI PMXPO 2024 conference, an insightful presentation was given about the reconstruction of the Brazilian station, which had previously burned down, between 2016 and 2020. How was it accomplished, and what generalizable project lessons can be drawn from this unique reconstruction under extreme conditions?

Projects, by definition, are about creating unique, non-routine things (services, products, processes). But when can we say that this uniqueness becomes extreme? Let’s look at the challenges of this Antarctic project:

Spatial Challenges: Distances

Brazil: The client, the Brazilian Navy, was the project’s commissioner, overall program leader, and quality assurer.
China: The construction team.
Portugal: The project and engineering consultant.
Antarctica: The construction site.

Temporal Challenges: Strict Constraints and Unpredictable Obstacles

Work could only be done on-site during the summer. The construction site had to be vacated by March 15, ensuring that the work done wouldn’t be destroyed by winter and could continue the following summer. This required modular planning, preparing parts at the Chinese site, and practicing assembly there. This provided an opportunity to estimate and schedule work phases.

Scheduling was further complicated by the unpredictability of transporting materials from the ship to the island, affected by sea conditions. This impacted not only the transfer of modules but also the ship’s role as a temporary storage, whose inaccessibility occasionally caused critical delays.

Resource Challenges: Non-Expandable Limits

Workers were housed in living containers, limiting the number of workers present at any time. Thus, it was impossible to involve additional workforce during a work period. Managing tensions from close quarters and the need for isolation was essential to maintain work intensity and motivation.

The Project Triangle

Considering the project triangle, the dimensions were far from being set in iron. Quality requirements (safety of people, long-term functioning station) were non-negotiable, while the other elements required continuous monitoring and re-planning. Adaptation was needed for goals and scope, renegotiation for costs, and constant attention and new schedules for timelines.

Risk Analysis

A thorough and extensive risk analysis was conducted, addressing various risk factors: technical (e.g., differing standards), external (e.g., weather unpredictability), legal-financial (e.g., contract modifications due to changes), human (e.g., cultural differences), material (e.g., missing parts), logistical (e.g., dependency on naval logistics), health (e.g., accidents, illnesses), and communication (e.g., differences between military and corporate styles).

Successful Completion and Project Management Lessons

The project was successfully completed, and the research station is operational. Key lessons:

Patience is needed for uncontrollable conditions.
Preparing alternative plans to respond to unexpected events is worthwhile.

This exceptional project illustrates that project management, as a method, can be used under extreme conditions – conditions that are knowledge-intensive, continuously evolving, high-risk, and full of unknowns. Relying solely on rule-based and standard-based planning doesn’t necessarily lead to success in such conditions. A project manager’s role is complex, requiring much judgment and maturity, dependent on the situation and context.

Project management, by definition, aims at innovation and discovery within an organization, in contrast to the repetitive, maintenance-oriented, exploitative role that is essential for the maintenance and efficiency of organizational operations. However, as project management becomes more widespread and integrated into organizational relationships, it tends to become institutionalized worldwide. This leads to the rationalization, or even over-rationalization, of project management. The logic behind rationalization is that following best practices, procedures, rules, and principles leads to success. This stems from the expectation of success, and the fact that success is usually measured based on a few criteria. Despite the immense growth in project knowledge, the success rate of projects, according to the Standish Group Chaos reports, has not improved for years because strict success metrics do not account for deviations due to adaptations to circumstances. Based on those criteria, the project for building the Antarctic station would not be considered successful, even though the clients and implementers deemed it successful.

In our rapidly changing world, economic and social events, changes within organizations, and strategic modifications bring unforeseen complications, and a project’s life is full of unexpected events. The traditional strict approach can no longer handle these frequent changes, requiring a more flexible methodology. (An example of this is the spread of the agile approach.)

Project Management Models considering extremity

Verganti proposes two management models for projects: traditional and flexible. The traditional model relies on standards and learned methods, being plan-centric. Project managers handle uncertainties during the project and try to mitigate problems’ costs and delays. The flexible model is action-centric, supporting the novel resolution of continuous uncertainties.

Interaction of Plan and Action-Based Approaches

The two models should not be viewed as mutually exclusive; rather, it is essential to develop the use of both approaches. This dual capability is known as planned flexibility:

where the knowledge of methods plays an important role,
but equally indispensable are adaptation to circumstances and learning from the given project. These should be integrated into one’s own knowledge base

Throughout a project’s lifecycle, there is a constant interaction between the plan and action-based approaches. Initially, operational modes are used, but during implementation, new circumstances trigger a shift to exploration modes, emphasizing renewal and adaptation.

A well-known study on organizational learning examined exploitation (efficiency, implementation) versus exploration (research, risk-taking, innovation). Aubry and Lièvre extend this dual capability (ambidexterity) concept from organizational context to project management, illustrating with two Arctic projects.

Conclusion

A project executed in extreme conditions sharpens the message that project managers need dual capabilities. Alongside deep knowledge (e.g., certification), they must adapt this knowledge to situations. Project management’s novelty factor requires the ability to see beyond rules, expectations, and “good enough” execution.

Imre Szalay

Sources

Wikipédia
Marta Krafta: Project Management in Extreme Situations: An Antarctic Experience. PMI PMXPO 2024
Monique Aubry – Pascal Lièvre : Ambidexterity as a Competence of Project Leaders: A Case Study From Two Polar Expeditions. Project Management Journal, June 2010
Roberto Verganti: Planned flexibility: Linking anticipation and reaction in product development projects. Journal of Product Innovation Management, Volume 16, Issue 4, July 1999

On Human Intelligences in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

Nowadays, the hottest topic everywhere, including in project management writings and conferences, is artificial intelligence, its various implementations, and its impact on life and work. Less is said about the role of human intelligences, such as emotional, cultural, ethical, and organizational human intelligences, with the advent of artificial intelligence, how their interaction in leadership evolves, and what changes can be expected in this area in the future.

Human intelligence areas represent adaptability and problem-solving skills, aiming at how to survive and thrive in our incompletely knowable world. Artificial intelligence, on the other hand, attempts to translate various human knowledge into computer systems, trying to algorithmize and support them with computers. However, it is also important to see that today these algorithms are trained on such large databases, often in a self-learning manner, that they become opaque even to the developers, functioning as a kind of “black box.”

With this black-box algorithmic approach, numerous new types of ethical dilemmas can arise in managerial/project management work with the greater application of artificial intelligence, especially if ethical decisions shift from the individual to the organizational level. Such questions may arise, for example, during a conversation with a chatbot or an analysis of a video interview, where artificial intelligence is already capable of evaluating human emotions, often correctly recognizing them and providing appropriate responses and reactions, thereby imitating human feelings. Evaluating this, understanding the decision, comprehending the consequences, and considering these in a broader context requires greater awareness, extra attention, control, and the acquisition of new knowledge in decision-making.

In the natural world, cooperation and competition create new solutions. Similarly, organizations would not be able to achieve their goals without cooperation, and without competition, they would not develop and lack motivation. The ability to formulate organizational strategy is an important human knowledge and skill: determining the right direction at the right time. Artificial intelligence might not provide the ability to be open to new things, but it can assist with data, analyses, and scenario development. However, even in this area, human decision-making and risk-taking are currently indispensable and irreplaceable.

According to generational researchers, our media consumption habits and the spread of characteristic technologies define our shared experience domain, thus setting generational boundaries. Although artificial intelligence has been with us for 70 years and has evolved through many waves of innovation, it now seems that generative solutions imitating human abilities and accessible to the broadest audience represent such a generational boundary. A generation is emerging that is being socialized in the AI age. As project managers and leaders, working with this new generation in the future will require the development of one’s own abilities from all involved. Thus, without cultural intelligence that can handle cultural differences and emotional intelligence that can build trust, managing a new generation team will not be possible.

These examples also show that we must not give up on our human intelligence and its multifaceted individual and organizational development. A leader’s human value system, exemplary behavior, and intelligence determine the motivation and efficiency of project teams and partners. For leaders supported by artificial intelligence, stress management, quick problem-solving, and the ethical and creative, situation-dependent adaptation of the suggested steps based on the large volumes of data processed by AI will become increasingly important capabilities.

The true impact of AI will depend on how consciously we use the technology in our lives, for our projects, and for the benefit of our companies, and consciousness relies on our own abilities, skills, and human intelligence.

/Imre Szalay/

Sources: