Learning Outcomes: Demonstrate a deep understanding of project management concepts and theories as well as approaches to project management. Demonstrate the ability to monitor and control the project. The ability to write a coherent report on project management case studies. Important Points: Validate your work with the use of appropriate references.The work should not be in less than 1000 words.Use your own words. Plagiarism in case of more than 25% will get zero. Submit your assignment in Word Format Only.
4types_of_project.pdf
mgt323quistions.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
The 4 Types of Project
Manager
by Carsten Lund Pedersen and Thomas Ritter
JULY 27, 2017
Few issues garner more attention among top executives than how best to grow their organizations.
However, few executives work systematically with the types of employees they need to realize
various growth opportunities. Your organization’s growth opportunities fall into four different
categories, and in order to develop your business in a commercially sustainable manner, you need
four specific types of project manager to pursue them. These types emerged from our ongoing work
of understanding how different business development projects can drive strategic renewal in
organizations, and the matrix below has helped in capturing potential misalignments between
employees and projects.
COPYRIGHT © 2017 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL PUBLISHING CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
2
The employee types and the growth opportunities that they are best at pursuing can be positioned
along two dimensions: (1) Is the growth opportunity in line with our existing strategy? (2) Can a
reliable business case be made? These two questions create a matrix that distinguishes the four
different kinds of project leaders, each of which is optimally suited for a different type of project.
Will every organization need all four types of employees to sustainably develop and grow their
organizations? We argue that even the most stable and conservative industries may be threatened by
COPYRIGHT © 2017 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL PUBLISHING CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
3
disruption — and the most dynamic and hypercompetitive industries also entail incremental growth
opportunities that can be quantified and realistically assessed. Consequently, there is often a job
for all four types of employees in most organizations, although the optimal dose of each can differ. At
the very least, executives need to be aware of the variety of growth opportunities that they may be
losing out on by leaning heavily on a single type of project manager.
The Four Types
The four types pursue different growth opportunities and follow different communicative logics to
gain support within the organization (see the table below). In other words, you need them all because
they see and support different types of growth opportunities. In that respect, they complement each
other. This does not necessarily mean that you need an equal number of each, as most organizations
must predominantly rely on executors to ensure the alignment and feasibility needed to maintain
profits in the short term. However, you will need a few prophets, gamblers, and experts to be able to
identify and pursue growth opportunities at the periphery that can help you renew your organization
beyond the chosen path. In the following, we further explain the characteristics of each of the
different types.
Prophet. This type of project manager actively pursues business opportunities that lie outside the
existing strategic boundaries in an area where it is extremely difficult to obtain trustworthy data
concerning the likelihood of success. Hence, the prophet seeks to gain organizational followers for a
grand vision of a growth opportunity that is strategically different from the status quo — and without
trustworthy quantitative evidence, consequently relying on organizational members making a leap of
faith in support of the vision. Obviously, running such projects is risky, as it is likely that the growth
opportunities will not materialize, and therefore that the employee may be a “false prophet.” Be that
as it may, a prophet is needed to challenge the existing strategy and to pursue overlooked growth
opportunities.
A constructive use of this employee type is found at Google, which has a unit called X (formerly
Google X), which is a self-proclaimed moonshot factory. Employees in this unit seek to solve big
COPYRIGHT © 2017 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL PUBLISHING CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
4
problems using breakthrough technologies and radical solutions. Hence, the projects in X tend to be
outside Google’s current domain and strategic focus. In such projects, it is typically impossible to
realistically assess the likelihood of success before they are tried out.
Gambler. This type of project manager actively pursues business opportunities that lie within the
existing strategic boundaries but have no good business case attached, as trustworthy data
concerning the likelihood of success is lacking. Hence, the gambler seeks to gain organizational
followers for a big bet on a growth opportunity that is consistent with the current strategy but
without trustworthy quantitative evidence. In other words, gamblers play by the rules of the game as
they pursue growth opportunities within the existing strategy, but they cannot predict the likelihood
of success. Consequently, the gambler seeks to engage other organizational members who also like
bets. This can obviously be viewed as an uncertain path, as there is some likelihood that the growth
opportunities are not feasible and that they may therefore result in significant losses. However,
gamblers are necessary, as they can update the existing strategy by pursuing analytically overlooked
growth opportunities.
This type of project champion is documented in a study by Paddy Miller and Thomas WedellWedellsborg, which shows that MTV’s first digitally integrated and interactive program, Top
Selection, was initially tried under the radar before the project’s backers had sufficient proof of
concept to get managerial approval to continue. This project was driven by gamblers, as they stayed
inside the existing strategic boundaries but were unable to document the likelihood of success before
the idea had been tested.
Expert. This type of project manager actively pursues business opportunities that lie outside the
existing strategic boundaries but for which trustworthy data builds a solid business case. Hence,
experts wish to gain organizational followers for a change in action in favor of a growth opportunity
that is inconsistent with the current strategy but is supported by solid, trustworthy quantitative
evidence. Consequently, experts rely on organizational members actually listening to their advice.
Although the growth opportunities are well supported and should therefore be feasible, the main
challenge is to make organizational members aware of the need for strategic change and of the urgent
need to act in this regard. The expert is needed to challenge the existing strategy by pursuing wellsupported growth opportunities that lie outside the organization’s current strategy.
Experts in action are seen in the well-known story of Intel’s transition from memory chips to
microprocessors, where key employees within the organization tried to persuade Intel’s management
of the value of the opportunity for some time. It took the executive team several years of internal
soul-searching before they were ready to make the organizational transition. In this case, the growth
opportunity was outside the existing strategy, but it was possible to document the commercial
potential and the likelihood of success with some certainty.
Executor. This project manager actively pursues business opportunities that lie within the existing
strategic boundaries and have great cases. The executor gains organizational followers for a sureCOPYRIGHT © 2017 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL PUBLISHING CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
5
thing growth opportunity that is consistent with the current strategy and is backed by trustworthy
quantitative evidence. In other words, there is no risk, no uncertainty, and no challenge — just a need
for execution. Consequently, executors rely on organizational members to follow their rigorous
analyses of a strategically embraced project. This can be viewed as the most certain path to success,
as the growth opportunity is well documented and aligned with the existing strategy. However, the
executor can only point to a limited number of growth opportunities that are low-hanging fruit — the
executor cannot provide insights into the more radical and unknown business opportunities. Many
who bear the formal title of business developer systematically analyze, prepare, and support growth
opportunities that lie within the strategic boundaries and for which it is possible to realistically assess
the likelihood of success.
For instance, DuPont has a systematic approach for assessing and implementing growth
opportunities. It entails a phased and systematic handling of new opportunities within a disciplined
framework built on best practices, providing standardized guidance throughout the process from
initial concept to subsequent commercialization. A comprehensive business case is essential to
initiate the process — and as the approach involves key work streams and “blocks of work” that the
core team must plan and execute in an effective manner, it is particularly suitable for executors.
How Do They Interact?
The various types of project managers may struggle in their interactions with each other. For
instance, a prophet may see an executor as overly bureaucratic and rigid, while an executor may view
a prophet as unrealistic and disorganized. Consequently, conflict tends to loom among the different
types.
What typically happens is that the logic of one of the types becomes dominant throughout the
organization. The fact that a single logic pervades the organization at the expense of the others may
mean that key employees of a different type leave the organization and take their ideas with
them. Moreover, relying on a single type of logic may lead to organizational inertia, which is
dangerous in dynamic and evolving markets. You need to ensure enough room for all of the logics
within the organization, ideally by introducing boundary-spanning individuals who can navigate
among these logics. In this regard, it is beneficial if top management adopts a “bridging” role to allow
for coexistence and diversity.
As an executive, you can similarly seek to stimulate a fruitful understanding and interaction among
the different types of employees. For instance, having identified the different types within your
organization, you can set up a workshop where one type meets and discusses with their alter ego
(that is, executors talk to prophets, and gamblers talk to experts). This interaction can help clarify
differences in opinions, routines and values — which may help create a greater mutual understanding
and respect among the different employee types.
COPYRIGHT © 2017 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL PUBLISHING CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
6
Do Executives Contribute to the Problem?
Executives partly contribute to unsuccessful projects and unrealized growth opportunities when they
don’t think through who should be assigned to which projects. Prophets, gamblers, experts, and
executors each have their own strengths and weaknesses that are optimally suited to fit certain
project types. Therefore, no type is inherently better or rarer than the others.
Executives contribute to organizational failure when they misalign projects and project managers,
but this fact is often hidden in the ruins of a failed project. There may be a tendency to see prophets
and gamblers featuring on prominent magazine covers or taking newspaper headlines if they succeed
with their high-profile projects. For this reason, executives tend to assume that prophets and
gamblers are the best. In such cases, executives may be likely to promote good executors to run a
prophet-type project, as senior management may think that the executor is finally ready for this big
opportunity (with potentially disastrous results). Or executives may assume that they should tap
prophets to run a project that really needs a great executor — which may lead to managerial
befuddlement when the prophet doesn’t succeed. Instead of assuming that certain types are better
than others, executives need to be aware of, value, and give appropriate room to all four types — and
match them with the right projects.
The bottom line is that the diversity of styles offers a competitive advantage in terms of business
development, and all four types are necessary pieces of your organizational constellation, even
though the optimal dose of each may differ. As an executive, it is crucial that you:
• Make sure you have each type within your organization
• Make room for each type to work in their own manner
• Make sense of their respective ideas, by following their respective logics
• Make time for matching projects and project managers correctly
Meeting the various types where they are, and paying attention to their diverse ways of thinking, will
help you obtain the needed diversity among your employees to develop your business. Moreover,
this resonates with comprehensive findings that emphasize that the hallmark of great managers is
that they discover and capitalize on the unique strengths of individual employees.
Growth and business development are top priorities in most C-suites across the globe, but too few
executives focus on maintaining a wide range of people to ensure the identification of novel
opportunities. Therefore, executives who want to develop their businesses need to first develop the
right amount of staff diversity to drive a diverse portfolio of growth opportunities. Only when diverse
people are on board can an organization drive commercially sustainable growth.
Carsten Lund Pedersen is Postdoc at the Department of Strategic Management and Globalization at Copenhagen
Business School, where he researches in project-based strategy, employee autonomy and matching employee types with
business development projects.
COPYRIGHT © 2017 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL PUBLISHING CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
7
Thomas Ritter is a Professor of Market Strategy and Business Development at the Department of Strategic Management
and Globalization at Copenhagen Business School, where he researches business model innovation, market strategies,
and market management.
COPYRIGHT © 2017 HARVARD BUSINESS SCHOOL PUBLISHING CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
8
Copyright of Harvard Business Review Digital Articles is the property of Harvard Business
School Publication Corp. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission. However, users
may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
o In 400-500 words, summarize the article. Explain, what are the main
issues being discussed?
o What are the different types of project manager suggested in the
article? Do you agree with their categorization? Or can you suggest
alternative categories? (you may use other journals to support your
claim).
o This article is considered a ‘must read’ for project managers. Do you
agree with this assertion? Do you find the article useful or not useful
for managers? Why?
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
