On April 11, 1951, in the midst of the Korean War, U.S. President Harry Truman relieved Gen. Douglas MacArthur, replacing him as "Supreme Commander, Allied Powers; Commander-in-Chief, United Nations Command; Commander-in-Chief, Far East; and Commanding General, U.S. Army, Far East." This historic act followed months of conflict between the General and the President, in which MacArthur repeatedly and publicly criticized Truman's policies. Worse, he had repeatedly and publicly offered his own analyses and alternative policies for comparison with Truman's. Some of his statements might even have influenced the North Koreans and the Chinese in formulating their own policies and strategies.
In effect, Gen. MacArthur's actions led to the wartime analog of the scope creep that is so familiar to project managers. But unlike many scope creep incidents, this scope creep originated not at the top, but somewhere below — at "ground level."
And something similar can happen in projects, when scope creep results from the behavior of team members who aren't high-level decision makers. Here are three examples.
- Technology aficionados
- Technology aficionados usually have technical roles and purely technical interests. They're more interested in the technical issues than they are in balancing the technical and the business agendas. When they encounter or generate an idea that is outside the scope of the effort, they urge it forward if they feel it's "the right thing." They act publicly, using meetings, email, or other communication channels to make their ideas part of the overall task. When they act without first consulting those responsible for managing organizational resources, they create "fires" that managers must extinguish.
- Tactically oriented sales representatives
- Tactically Some people act publicly, using
meetings, email, or other
to make their ideas part
of the overall taskoriented sales reps focus on immediate sales opportunities to the detriment of a more strategic perspective. In some cases, they promise customers features or capabilities that the organization must then deliver, even if they weren't originally in scope.
- Embedded consultants
- Technology consultants are sometimes embedded in the organization on a short-term basis. They often have technology-specific knowledge and perspective, and some bear certifications in proprietary technologies. Sometimes, they acquire a bias in favor of their own areas of expertise. They lose objectivity. When that happens, their advice can conflict with the larger goals of the organization. That is, even though we invite technology gurus into our organizations for specific purposes, they can exert influence on the people they work with relative to their specializations, and beyond their charters. However innocent their motives might be, their advice can nevertheless lead to scope creep.
Were it not for the effects of organizational politics, a combination of training, orientation, and performance management could prevent or contain the effects of these mechanisms. But in organizations, as in war, once the unwelcome ideas float upward from ground level, politics can limit the ability of the organization to contain them. Top Next Issue
For more about scope creep, see "The Perils of Political Praise," Point Lookout for May 19, 2010; "More Indicators of Scopemonging," Point Lookout for August 29, 2007; "Scopemonging: When Scope Creep Is Intentional," Point Lookout for August 22, 2007; "Some Causes of Scope Creep," Point Lookout for September 4, 2002; "The Deck Chairs of the Titanic: Strategy," Point Lookout for June 29, 2011; and "The Deck Chairs of the Titanic: Task Duration," Point Lookout for June 22, 2011.
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenhgoSavUezwJciwHoner@ChacwZEMdouGHTlwLNTnoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Workplace Politics:
- Stalking the Elephant in the Room: I
- The expression "the elephant in the room" describes the thought that most of us are thinking,
and none of us dare discuss. Usually, we believe that in avoidance lies personal safety. But free-ranging
elephants present intolerable risks to both the organization and its people.
- Getting Into the Conversation
- In well-facilitated meetings, facilitators work hard to ensure that all participants have opportunities
to contribute. The story is rather different for many meetings, where getting into the conversation
can be challenging for some.
- On Badly Written Email
- Even those who aren't great writers do occasionally write clearly, just by chance. But there are some
who consistently produce unintelligible email messages. Why does this happen?
- Some Hazards of Skip-Level Interviews: II
- Skip-level interviews are dialogs between a subordinate and the subordinate's supervisor's supervisor.
They can be both heplful and hazardous. Here's Part II of a little catalog of the hazards.
- Problem Displacement by Intention
- When solving problems creates new problems, or creates problems elsewhere, we say that problem displacement
has occurred. Sometimes it's intentional.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming January 24: Understanding Delegation
- It's widely believed that managers delegate some of their own authority and responsibility to their subordinates, who then use that authority and responsibility to get their work done. That view is unfortunate. It breeds micromanagers. Available here and by RSS on January 24.
- And on January 31: Nine Brainstorming Demotivators: I
- The quality of the output of brainstorming sessions is notoriously variable. One source of variation is the enthusiasm of contributors. Here's Part I of a set of nine phenomena that can limit contributions to brainstorm sessions. Available here and by RSS on January 31.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenkmprAHfiWBxhwrDQner@ChacolgfWVEqpcFeILLeoCanyon.com or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
- Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program. Here's a date for this program:
Beware any resource that speaks of "winning" at workplace politics or "defeating" it. You can benefit or not, but there is no score-keeping, and it isn't a game.