Projects as Knowledge Networks: Using Social Network Analysis ... · The Knowledge Network Lens ‘Whatever a central management imposes, informal networks develop in ways that shape

Projects as Knowledge Networks: Using Social Network Analysis Techniques

to Better Manage a Project-Portfolio

A/Prof Graham Durant-Law CSC, PhD BSc, MHA, MKM, Grad Dip Def, Grad Dip Mngt, Grad Cert Hlth Fin, psc

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

What is the Problem?

Copyright © 2012 – HyperEdge Pty Ltd

‘A good deal of the corporate planning I have observed is like a ritual rain dance; it has no effect on the weather that follows, but those who engage in it think it does. Moreover, it seems to me that much of the advice and instruction related to corporate planning is directed at improving the dancing, not the weather’

Emeritus Professor James Brian Quinn, Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College, 1980.

The multi-dimensional project management problem.

3

Project Start

Knowledge Start

Project End

Knowledge Archive

Project failure is an expensive commercial

reality!

Knowledge Executive

Knowledge Worker

Portfolio

Projects

Programs


Knowledge diffusion is a problem.

Copyright © 2012 – HyperEdge Pty Ltd 4

‘Understanding how knowledge is created, how it is shared and diffused throughout an organization – and not just how to codify and record it in artificial form, or map it into business processes – lies at the very heart of the profound movement from first to second generation thinking. Second generation theory subscribes to the existence of knowledge processes and knowledge life cycles in human organizations.’

McElroy, M 2003, The new knowledge management: complexity, learning, and sustainable innovation, Butterworth Heinemann, New York.

known knowns

unknown unknowns

unknown knowns

known unknowns

Complexity is a problem.

5

• Snowden, D 1999, Cynefin, a sense of time and place: an ecological approach to sense making and learning in formal and informal communities, University of Surrey • Remington, K & Pollack, J 2007, Tools for complex projects, Gower, Aldershot


People (stakeholders) are the real problem!


‘Too often the focus is on the stakeholders themselves without taking into account relationships between them. Indeed, the project management view might regard stakeholders as a group of people who do not interact or form relationships, but do share the same characteristics or the same roles: for example investors, owners, sponsors, consumer-groups.’

Pryke, S & Smyth, H (eds) 2006, The management of complex projects: a relationship approach, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford.

Stakeholder Management Target™ Matrix.

Strong Outcome

Resistance

Some Outcome Resistance

Neutral Wants or Accepts Outcome

Embraces Outcome

Very Strong Process Influence

25 (-) 20 (-) 15 20 (+) 25 (+)

Strong Process Influence 20 (-) 16 (-) 12 16 (+) 20 (+)

Some Process Influence 15 (-) 12 (-) 9 12 (+) 15 (+)

Little Process Influence 10 (-) 8 (-) 6 8 (+) 10 (+)

No Process Influence 5 (-) 4 (-) 3 4 (+) 5 (+)


Outcome Interest 5 (-) = Strong resistance to the outcome 4 (-) = Resistance to the outcome 3 = Neutral 4 (+) = Wants or accepts the outcome 5 (+) = Embraces the outcome

Process Influence 5 = Very strong process influence 4 = Strong process influence 3 = Some process influence 2 = Little process influence 1 = No process influence

Action Behaviour 20 to 25 = Manage 12 to 16 = Inform 6 to 10 = Engage 3 to 5 = Monitor

The Knowledge Network Lens

‘Whatever a central management imposes, informal networks develop in ways that shape how an organisation works. These multiple networks involve information-flow, knowledge transfer, work cooperation, support, friendship and antagonisms. They are crucial to organisational functioning’.

Professor Garry Robins, Network Scientist, Melbourne University, 2006


9

Projects as networks.

Project artefacts can be viewed as networks.

‘Project outcomes are simply milestones in a knowledge management activity and … project deliverables simply consist of knowledge artefacts integrated through a social communication process’.

Lytras & Pouloudi (2003, p. 237)

People work in a network of relationships.

‘In a project people are the main cause of problems. Time schedules, financial projections, and software goals may be abstractions, but it is the flesh-and-blood people whose work determines your project’s status’.

Harry Waldron, Microsoft MVP, 2005.


What is the lexicon of network analysis?

A node is the smallest unit in the network. It is also known as a vertex.

A tie is a line between two nodes indicating there is a relationship between them.

A graph is a set of nodes and a set of ties between pairs of nodes.

A network consists of a graph and additional information on the nodes or the ties of the graph. It is also known as a map.


Typical measures.


Ties (links): in ties and out ties represent the number of connections to and from a node.

Density: the percentage of connections that exist out of the total possible that could exist.

Distance: degrees of separation or the diameter of a network.

Reciprocity: the number of bi-directional links expressed as a percentage.

Centrality: the extent to which a network is organised around one or more central nodes.

Organisational dynamics.


Reveals how much activity is going on and who are the most active members by counting the number of direct links each person has to others in the network. Does not necessarily describe power or influence.

People at the centre of the network: • are the connector or hub of

the network, • may be in an advantaged

position in the network. • are usually less dependent

on other individuals. • are often a deal maker or

broker.

Highlights people with the shortest paths to other people, thus allowing them to directly pass on and receive communications quicker than others in the organisation. Is strongly correlated with organisational influence if the individual is a skilled communicator. These individuals are often network brokers. They are often the ‘pulse-takers’ of the organisation.

Providers and Seekers degree centrality

Transmitters and Receivers closeness centrality

Organisational dynamics (continued).


Reveals individuals who: • connect disparate groups

within the network. • hold a favoured or

powerful position in the network.

• have great influence over what is communicated through the network.

• act as intermediaries

Identifies the bridges within the network. They may act as the true gatekeeper deciding what does or does not get passed through the network, or as the “third who benefits” by passing information to others to secure advantage. .

Measures how well connected a person is and how much direct influence they may have over the most active people in the network Measures how close a person is to other highly connected people in terms of the global or overall makeup of the network Is a reasonable measure of “network positional advantage” and/or perceived power.

Bridges (brokers and gatekeepers) - betweenness centrality

Influencers eigenvector centrality

Brokerage roles (B is the broker).


A B C

A C B

A C B

A B C

Gatekeeper - a person who transmits information and other resources to the same group or team from sources external to that group or team.

Representative - a person who transmits information and other resources from their group or team to an external group or team.

Liaison - a person who transmits information and other resources from one group or team to another group or team, whilst themselves belonging to a different group or team.

Coordinator - a person who brokers connections within the same group or team.

A C B Consultant - a person who intermittently takes the central lead by connecting others in the same group or team, but who belongs to another group or team.

Examples of Projects as Knowledge Networks

‘In all businesses there are two organisations: one that is shown on the formal organisation chart and another that exists in reality. The latter is made up of not job titles or formal lines of authority, but rather influencers and other individuals.’

Doctor Neil Farmer, Network Scholar and Author, 2008


16

Complicated, complex, or chaotic?

“The project environment is a conundrum of facts, preferences, and opinions mixed with immutables and variables. I guess this means the environment is complex, if not chaotic.”

(Project Officer 25)

“As an organisation, we do not understand inter-project and capability relationships. This makes my project environment very complex.”

(Program Manager 1)


Understanding critical interdependencies.


How do you understand 2nd, 3rd, and 4th order, or beyond, interdependencies in other programs? Are you even aware of them?

Alternative world views.

How would you manage your portfolio of projects - by project cost, or by project interdependencies?


Anti-causal relationships.


Which cross-program projects are being delivered too late? Are you even aware of them?

Shared understanding?

Project officer view Primary stakeholder view

Whose view is correct?


Internal problem-solving and advice network.


Who should be resourced?

External problem-solving and advice network.


Is the stakeholder engagement dynamic appropriate and effective?

N = 99

Links = 715 of 9,720

Density = 0.073

Average Degree = 4.370

Reciprocity = 0.397

Mean Distance = 3.136

How work really gets done!


Do you know who: • is influential? • is the gatekeeper? • is the problem solver? • is the pulse-taker?

Personal versus organisational dynamics.


Is your program manager effective? How do you know? How does their communication dynamic compare to the wider organisation?

McDuff personal communication dynamic.

Branch Person Level Process Influence

Outcome Interest

Current Rating Action Behaviour

1 Fraser Same 3 3 9 Engage

1 Gunn Higher 5 4 (-) 20 (-) Manage

2 Logan Higher 5 5 (+) 25 (+) Manage

2 McNab Same 3 5 (+) 15 (+) Inform

2 Munro Same 3 4 (-) 12 (-) Inform

3 McLeod Lower 1 5 (+) 5 (+) Monitor


Summary

‘The real questions refuse to be placated… They are the questions asked most frequently and answered most inadequately, the ones that reveal their true natures slowly, reluctantly, most often against your will’.

Ingrid Bengis, Author, 1973


Network project management.


Summary.

Social network analysis, done properly, provides:

– a powerful quantitative, qualitative, and visual diagnostic, – empirical information on the “real or shadow” structures and relationships

in an organisation, – a means to reach shared understanding and common meaning, – a baseline for organisational and personal improvement.

The key is “done properly”! Use the right tool and presentation for the job, and remember visualisation is not analysis.

Narrative provides additional granularity and allows data triangulation and validation.

Whatever your approach ensure you have multiple lines of evidence.

Above all else you must understand your organisation, the data, the resultant network and visualisations, and the assumptions you are making.


Conclusion - communication in practice

A 2011 study of 2,500 participants by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that the most important predictor of team success is in its communication patterns.

Of note the study found that: – communication patterns are as significant as all other factors, including intelligence,

personality, and talent combined;

– researchers could foretell which teams would out-perform the others simply by looking at the data on their communication patterns, even without meeting the team members;

– connectivity, activity, and energy were the key communication dynamics that enabled or effected performance;

– mapping communication behaviours over time, and making small adjustments to move it closer to the ideal, dramatically improves team performance.

Pentland A, ‘The New Science of Building Great Teams’, Harvard Business Review, April 2012


For more details please visit our website at: www.hyperedge.com.au Example reports can be found at:

http://www.hyperedge.com.au/sites/default/files/Example_Org_Comm_Profile.pdf and,

http://www.hyperedge.com.au/sites/default/files/Example_Pers_Comm_Profile.pdf .

Alternatively contact: Graham Durant-Law +61 (0) 408 975 795 [email protected] HyperEdge Pty Ltd Post Office Box 3076 Manuka ACT 2603 Australia


http://www.hyperedge.com.au/

http://www.hyperedge.com.au/sites/default/files/Example_Org_Comm_Profile.pdf

http://www.hyperedge.com.au/sites/default/files/Example_Pers_Comm_Profile.pdf

mailto:[email protected]?subject=HyperEdge Request for More Information

Documents

Projects as Knowledge Networks: Using Social Network Analysis ... · The Knowledge Network Lens ‘Whatever a central management imposes, informal networks develop in ways that shape