Introduction
Extant literature demonstrates that the past several decades have been manifested by rapid growth in the exploitation of project management as a viable means by which contemporary organizations the world over realize their set objectives (Meredith & Mantel 2011; Piyush, Dangayash & Mittak 2011), as well as their competitive advantage (Jones 2008).
As acknowledged by Meredith & Mantel (2011), most projects were external to the organization in the past, but the rapid proliferation in the use of projects in recent years has primarily been targeted to the sphere of projects internal to the organization.
Despite the substantial scholarship focussed on the critical sphere of project management both in the developed and developing world, little attention has been given to understanding the drivers of conflict that profile the trajectory of projects and influence their successful completion (Boudet, Jayasunder & Davis 2011).
The principal objective of the present paper is to identify and critically discuss four social and organisational issues that could be areas of potential conflict in a project. The areas earmarked for analysis include leadership role and style, communication, project procedures, and teambuilding.
Leadership Role & Style
In spite of advances in the project management profession, consecutive research studies demonstrates that many projects fail, underscoring the immense significance of the project manager’s role as manager.
Distinctively, the manager’s leadership role and style are of considerable consequence in not only motivating people but also generating an effective working environment in order for the project team to successfully surmount greater challenges in contemporary global economy (Geoghegan & Dulewicz 2008).
A research conducted by in 2005 by Turner and Muller and cited in Anantatmula (2010) demonstrates that “…different project leadership styles are appropriate at different stages of the project life cycle, and the project manager has a leadership role in creating an effective working environment for the project team” (p. 13).
This therefore implies that leaders themselves may be the cause of conflict in project environments, not only in the context of applying the wrong leadership style but also in failing to create an effective working environment which is needed to reinforce the collaboration of cross-functional team members working in various spheres or aspects of the project.
As suggested in the literature, it may indeed be true that leadership style and competence in project settings are not directly related to project success (Anantatmula 2010); however, it can be argued that these two variables are critical to facilitating various project success factors that eliminate any sources of conflict and hence contributing to project performance.
Conversely therefore, it can be argued that a leader who exercises authoritarian leadership style is likely to lose the confidence of team members in addition to their respect, loyalty, and willingness to cooperate in project activities.
Lack of adequate understanding of leadership role, according to available literature, will not only escalate intergroup conflict, but will also lead to poor project performance, poor decision making, lack of stakeholder satisfaction, and incoherent team development (Geoghegan & Dulewicz 2008; Hanisch et al 2009).
All these issues, in my view, are predestined to cause conflict in project environments and, subsequently, poor project outcomes and performance.
Additionally, leaders themselves propel conflict by failing to develop and internalise leadership challenges.
It mat be true that the quality of leadership in project environments depends heavily on the leader’s personal experience and credibility within the organization (Geoghegan & Dulewicz 2008).
However, good leaders must demonstrate a set of competencies that include conflict management, negotiation, and effective communication (Hudson et al 2005), integrity, charisma and persuasiveness, motivation, vision, supportive of team members, and leadership by example (Piyush et al 2011), as well as good problem-solving skills, ability to handle interpersonal conflict, capacity to plan and elicit commitments, and above-average intelligence (Hanisch et al 2009).
Communication
Available literature demonstrates that “…communication in projects is essential for projects to succeed” (Ramsing 2011, p. 345).
At the outset, effective two-way communication is a critical ingredient in any project activity because it engages both the senders (i.e., project managers) and receivers (i.e., stakeholders and employees) in a meaningful discourse about the vision, context, and scope of the proposed or ongoing project activity and its organisational and personal repercussions, thereby reducing potential conflict or resistance to the project (Levasseur 2010).
Consequently, it can be argued that communication that is not guided by the doctrine of meaningful exchange of ideas presents a critical area of potential conflict in a project because some stakeholders may feel that their ideas and feelings are not taken into consideration in a manner that is not only likely to address their concerns satisfactorily, but also enhance their commitment to the project.
Additionally, due to the ongoing globalization affecting all fronts of our society, projects tasks and activities are increasingly undertaken by team members from a multiplicity of linguistic, racial and cultural backgrounds (Proctor & Doukakis 2003).
This predisposition, in my view, has generated potential hotspots for conflict, especially for leaders who are yet to acquaint themselves with knowledge on how to deal with multicultural work teams.
It is reported in the literature that although multicultural project teams are “…designed to pool resources and increase operational efficiencies, the cultural diversity of team members may create a longer learning curve for establishing effective processes than culturally homogenous groups” (Vesala-Varttala & Varttala 2010).
It can be rightly argued that single most important process that suffers the greatest in multicultural project teams is that of communication, leading to potential conflict witnessed in negative feelings among stakeholders, lack of clear vision of project goals and objectives, unmet project deadlines and expectations, lack of morale and insecurity.
It is very clear from the analysis that these problems arise from failure to use two-way communication as well as failure to develop appropriate communication competencies that are intrinsically needed in multicultural project team settings.
It is important for project leaders to realize that effective communication keeps important information and progress about project goals, objectives, and milestones flooding throughout the system that is affected by the project (Levasseur 2010).
Arising from the ongoing, project managers should not only ensure that the internal information and communication avenues work effectively to the satisfaction of all stakeholders, but must also establish an open information climate with the view to improve interpersonal interactive communication channels in project settings (Proctor & Doukakis 2003).
Additionally, it is imperative for leaders to receive adequate exposure and training on leading multicultural teams with the view to reduce the negative effects that are occasioned ineffective communication.
It should be noted that while ineffective communication may be the genesis of conflict in many organisational settings, successful project outcomes are realized when all stakeholders are fully integrated and aligned with project objectives using effective communication frameworks.
Project Procedures
Available literature demonstrates that many projects fail not only because they are unable to develop and actualise detailed administrative operating procedures to be followed, but also because they do not secure approval from key administrators (Bryde 2003).
As a matter of principle, many projects operate without clearly defined procedures and do not take time to develop a statement of understanding or charter (Lientz & Rea 2002).
In the build-up phase, for example, many projects fail to schedule work breakdown packages, also known as project subunits, in liaison with functional team groups, leading to conflict exacerbated by communication breakdowns, lack of adequate knowledge of project goals and objectives, lack of cooperation between and among teams, as well as lack of effective feedback that could be used by team members to deal with challenges and forecast future project plans.
It is also true that many project leaders not only fail to schedule monitoring and evaluation activities in the project life cycle, but do not consider reallocating available manpower resources to critical project areas that have been earmarked as prone to schedule slippages (Bryde 2003).
In such instances, conflict arises from the inability of leaders to utilise available human resources as well as their incapacity to identify potential hotspot areas and consider possible alternatives.
Additionally, the leaders are unable to attain prompt resolution of arising technical issues which may adversely impact project schedules, not only leading to conflict but also jeopardizing the realization of the targeted project objectives and outcomes.
Power and authority struggles in project settings have also been identified as a likely cause of poor project procedures. According to Sutterfield et al (2007, p. 219), “…there are the departmental or organizational managers who are vested in protecting their own interests in the project, whether directly or indirectly”.
In many instances, these low-cadre administrators consider the authority and sovereignty for autonomous action and decision-making accorded by the senior administration to the project leader to be infringing on their authority.
Such departmental managers are concerned with maintaining the status quo of their own organizations and hence may endeavour to oblige the project manager to conform to each and every regulation pertaining to their separate spheres of interest, leading to conflict espoused by blatant disregard of the processes and procedures set to govern the interrelationships existing between and among project teams.
Lack of properly formulated project procedures trigger deviations from the original project goals and objectives, implying that the project may be unable to justify the heavy investments made as it may fail even before it is completed. This leads to conflict between the funding agencies and the organisation.
Teambuilding
Building a fully functional and collaborative project team is one of the critical responsibilities of the project manager (Thomas et al 2008). In project environments, it is widely assumed that the “…team member’s goals are consistent with one another because any given project is typically focused on solving problems for a homogeneous set of stakeholders within a given functional area” (Jones 2008, p. 113).
However, as demonstrated by this particular author, team building efforts are often affected by the scope and duration of the project, shifts in the initial project goals, change of team members, flagging enthusiasm and reduced financial or material resources. These factors may lead to conflict in a project.
Additionally, important responsibilities of project teams may be affected by lack of collective team participation, inadequate skills and knowledge, lack of shared responsibilities, and insufficient creative talents (Gustafson & Kleiner 1994; Thomas et al 2008).
The problems related to lack of effective team building framework in project settings are often manifested in lack of definition of purpose, lack of a focused future, and absence of focused tasks, creative talents and rapid responses (Thomas et al 2008), as well as poor project performance (Jones 2008).
To be effective, project leaders must, in conjunction with other relevant stakeholders, nurture an atmosphere conducive to the realization of teamwork by not only creating good interpersonal relations and team spirit (Harris & Harris 1996), but also demonstrating team building competencies such as good project leadership, open communication among team members and support organizations, unequivocal commitment to the project, and sincere interest in the professional and social growth of team members (Gustafson & Kleiner 1994; Jones 2008).
Overall, project leaders must realize that they must build teams in such a manner that all stakeholders can and will function together cooperatively and corroboratively to accomplish the shared goals and objectives of the project (Thomas et al 2008).
Conclusion
Conflict in project settings is inevitable and may originate from different quarters within the complex social systems we call organizations, primarily because they have inadequate means with which to satisfy the conflicting interests of their various stakeholders (Butler 1973). The present paper has discussed at length the four social and organizational issues that could present areas of potential conflict in any project setting.
The issues discussed in this paper include leadership role and style, communication, project procedures, and teambuilding, though extant literature demonstrates that projects are also faced by myriad other issues such as politics, conflict of interests, ethics and knowledge management, among others (Bryde 2003; Larson & Gray 2010).
While the other issues may form an interesting topic of discussion in another paper, the present paper has been exhaustive and focused in discussing why these issues may or does often occur.
It is interesting to underscore the fact that all these issues present real challenges to the successful implementation of projects, and hence project managers may find it noteworthy to read and digest the practical solutions contained in this paper for successful project outcomes.
Additionally, it has been demonstrated that these issues are interrelated and therefore require concerted and multi-dimensional efforts to solve them rather than dealing with them on an individual basis.
Reference List
Anantatmula, VS 2010, ‘Project manager leadership role in improving project performance’, Engineering Management Journal, vol. 22 no. 1, pp. 13-22.
Boudet, HS, Jayasundera, DC & Davis, J, ‘Drivers of conflict in developing country infrastructure projects: Experience from the water and pipeline sectors’, Journal of Construction Engineering & Management, vol. 137 no. 7, pp. 498-511.
Bryde, DJ 2003, ‘Project management concepts, methods and application’, International journal of Operations & Production Management, vol. 23 no. 7, pp. 775-793.
Butler, AG 1973, ‘Project management: A study in organizational conflict’, Academy of Management journal, vol. 16 no. 1, pp. 84-101.
Geoghegan, L & Dulewicz, V 2008, ‘Do project managers’ leadership competencies contribute to project success?’, Project Management journal, vol. 39 no. 4, pp. 58-67.
Gustafson, K & Kleiner, BH 1994, ‘New developments in teambuilding’, Industrial & Commercial Training, vol. 26 no. 9, pp. 17-22.
Hanisch, B, Lindner, F, Mueller, A & Wald, A 2009, ‘Knowledge management in project environments’, Journal of Knowledge Management, vol. 13 no. 4, pp. 148-160.
Harris, PR & Harris, KG 1996, ‘Managing effectively through teams’, Team Performance Management, vol. 2 no. 3, pp. 23-36.
Hudson, K, Grisham, T, Srinivason, P & Moussa, N 2005, Conflict management, negotiation, and effective communication: Essential Skills for Project Managers. Web.
Jones, MC 2008, ‘Large scale project team building: Beyond the basics’, Communications of the ACM, vol. 51 no. 10, pp. 113-116.
Larson, EW & Gray CF 2010, Project management: The managerial process, McGraw Hill, New York, NY.
Levasseur, RE 2010, ‘People skills: Ensuring project success – A change management perspective’, Interfaces, vol. 40 no. 2, pp. 159-162.
Lientz, BP & Rea, KP 2002, Project management for the 21st century, 3rd edn, Taylor & Francis, London.
Meredith, JR & Mentel, SJ 2011, Project management: A managerial approach, 8th edn, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ.
Piyush, M, Dangayash, GS & Mittak, ML 2011, ‘A study of critical project success parameters in different organizational conditions’, Advances in Management, vol. 4 no. 8, pp. 50-56.
Proctor, T & Doukakis, I 2003, ‘Change management: The role of internal communication and employee development’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 8 no. 4, pp. 268-277.
Ramsing, L 2009, ‘Project communication in a strategic internal perspective’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, vol. 14 no. 3, pp. 345-357.
Sutterfield, JS, Friday-Stroud, SS & Shivers-Blackwell, SL 2007, ‘How not to manage a project: Conflict management lessons learned from a DODF case study’, Journal of Behavioural & Applied Management, vol. 8 no. 8, pp. 218-238.
Thomas, M, Jacques, PH, Adams, JR & Kihneman-Wooten, J 2008, ‘Developing an effective project: Planning and teambuilding combined’, Project Management Journal, vol. 39 no. 4, pp. 105-113.
Vesala-Varttala, T & Varttala, T 2010, Challenges and successes in multicultural corporate communication, HAAGA-HELIA.