Philip.coach

Blog

  • Circular .vs. Linear Thinking

    I’ve experienced numerous situations, both at work and in daily life, where I felt stuck in a loop of repetitive thoughts, unable to move forward. This has occurred in both professional and personal contexts. When faced with certain engineering problems, I felt the pressure to find a solution but couldn’t pinpoint one. In my daily life, both at home and work, I’ve experienced negative consequences when I or someone else said, did, or didn’t do something. And again, I found myself going in circles, seemingly ‘thinking’ about what happened or was said, yet making no progress.

    I call this Circular Thinking and mentally it looks like this figure:

    Article content
    Circular Thinking

    Circular thinking isn’t true thinking; it merely gives the illusion of it. It keeps you busy without results, it prevents progress towards a solution.

    Circular Thinking can also affect entire groups. On one occasion, I was called into an emergency meeting to cover for my manager who was away on a business trip: a critical server was down, affecting operations and costing the company money by the minute. While the technical teams were working to restore the server, the immediate need in the emergency meeting was to devise a strategy to manage the resulting consequences. Despite being outranked by two levels, the others in the room could only focus on and discuss the problem: “We have this big issue”, “it affects reputation”, “it will cost money” (and internally they might be thinking “my bonus or job might be on the line”). Focusing only on the problem prevented anyone from articulating a path forward. Their circular thinking prevented them from doing so. It wasn’t until after several loops of problem amplification that they could begin to think about how to address the issues caused by the service interruption.

    Contrast circular thinking to what I call Linear Thinking. In its purest form, linear thinking takes you directly from problem to solution, as illustrated by the arrow below:

    Article content

    So how do you get out of the trap of thinking in circles and move towards a solution?

    To break free from the loops of circular thinking, I’ve found that adopting a problem-solving attitude is most effective. Instead of getting caught in a loop saying, ‘I have this problem’, shift your mindset to: ‘This must have a solution, and I’m working to find it.

    You might have a direct solution, maybe you need to evaluate different options or you might need to investigate deeper to find a solution. In any case, you will be making progress!

    The mental shift from circular to linear thinking can be visualized as follows:

    Article content

    Next time you face a problem, try to focus on the solution and not on the problem. Good luck going forward!

    I’ve also developed some theories about the underlying reasons why we sometimes fall into the trap of circular thinking. If you’d be curious to learn more about these ideas, please let me know in the comments section. Your feedback helps shape future content!

    If you found this article insightful, please consider subscribing to my newsletter.

  • Part 2 – When clients push for wrong choices; Advocate for what you know is best

    Reflecting on my journey as project manager, I recall one opportunity where I applied the lessons learned from Part 1 – and by exposing myself – guided the organization to stay away from what I was convinced was a flawed idea and pointed it toward an optimal one. I hope that this article can provide you with some useful insights that you can apply in similar situations.

    One day, at this company I received a call from the CEO’s personal assistant, requesting me to accompany the CEO and COO to an off-site visit the next day. With no details provided, I joined them to meet with a well known IT outsourcing company. During the meeting, the company showcased their extensive IT capabilities. I surmised that my inclusion was due to a significant IT outage a few months before, during which I had organized one of the response teams to manage operations during the emergency with our main IT systems.

    Throughout the meeting, I observed and listened, given that I hadn’t been briefed on my role in it.  At first glance, the proposal to completely outsource our IT operations seemed a good plan: it promised “peaceful” IT operations by outsourcing all of our servers, data, and IT staff. However, I identified a point that for me constituted a critical flaw: as part of this plan, our essential systems and data would be outsourced. While I agree that outsourcing can yield numerous benefits, I believe that control over core operations should not be relinquished.

    On our return, I respectfully asked why I had been invited. The CEO and COO answered that they were planning to outsource all IT operations and wanted me to lead the migration project. They felt that the current IT manager, who was nearing retirement, was not ideal for the role and that my intervention during the IT emergency mentioned above, positioned me as the best candidate to lead this migration.

    I thanked them for their confidence, yet I expressed significant reservations about this plan. I acknowledged the benefits of outsourcing most IT functions but emphasized that the core data and critical processes should remain in-house. I assured them of my commitment to leading such a migration project, provided we retained control over the essential operations. By saying that, I had put my job on the line as my contract allowed for easy termination with no hassles! But past experience had taught me to better say no and advocate in time for the right decision than regret it later.

    My response took the CEO and COO by surprise, and they replied that they needed time to consider my objections. Two days later, the CEO informed me they had reconsidered and decided to abandon the IT outsourcing plan altogether. A few months later, I was promoted to Director of the IT department following the IT director’s retirement. This marked a highly rewarding phase in my career, working with a professional and motivated team that delivered substantial value to the organization.

    Throughout my career, I’ve encountered numerous instances where clients (both internal and external) requested approaches I knew were flawed. Each time I succumbed to such requests, it went wrong, sometimes ending up in quagmire.

    Therefore, when faced with similar requests, I urge you to think twice and strive to guide your clients toward the right project choices. Effective leadership often means advocating for what you know is best, even if it involves taking some personal risks.

  • Part 1 – When clients push for wrong choices: Insights from a project manager

    In my role as a project manager, I’ve encountered numerous instances where clients adamantly pushed for misguided choices, whether concerning scope, costs, or technical intricacies. Allow me to recount my first, rather unsuccessful, experience of this sort and offer suggestions for handling similar situations.

    At the start of my career, alongside two classmates, I embarked on a garage-style venture to design and manufacture electronic devices. We had already produced some small batches of custom devices when a new client engaged us to produce a device for which they had already pre-designed part of the electronics. Trouble was, they had made some suboptimal choices in their design, and the devices could be unstable in the field. Despite our professional warnings, they stubbornly insisted on their design, reaching the point of “take it or leave it.” Being young, eager, and inexperienced, we ended up accepting their demands. And guess what happened? The outcome was disastrous! Within a brief period, the devices we produced began to malfunction. Our client had to recall all the units we made for them, affecting their sales and tarnishing their reputation, leading to blame being directed at us.

    Subsequent analysis revealed the root cause of the failures lay in the design specifications dictated by the client. Despite our offer to rectify the issues with an improved design, they remained obstinate. In their eyes, the fault was ours. To say that rather heated arguments ensued would be an understatement. The story culminated in the termination of the project and irreparable damage to our professional relationship. This experience still comes back to me from time to time.

    Years later, while working at a multinational electronics corporation, I learned about testing in climate chambers, accelerated aging, and other tests. I said to myself: Aha! These guys burnt their fingers before, just like we did. I realized how naïve we were back then.

    Remarkably enough, I still see big companies embarking on unsound projects. Below are some practical strategies for navigating similar scenarios should you find yourself in such a case. In my professional experience, the first one has the highest probability of success of dealing with a client who has preconceived – but flawed – ideas.

    • Engage in Probing Dialogue: Pose incisive questions to comprehend the client’s rationale thoroughly. Not to antagonize your client, but to uncover the underlying motivation behind their particular requirements. This facilitates collaborative problem-solving. Employ questions such as: Is there a specific reason it should be done this way? Is there a company or regulatory reason for this? How does this help you to get the expected project benefit? Is this the only solution available?
    • Present Risks and Consequences: Prepare a comprehensive presentation delineating the risks and potential consequences associated with the client’s preferred approach.
    • Formalize Requirements: Register all project requirements and obtain formal client approval for them. Formal documentation often prompts clients to reconsider their stances.
    • Incorporate an Exploratory Phase: Integrate an exploratory phase into the project to investigate the subject, simulate the client’s desired solution, or develop early prototypes for informed decision-making.
    • Consider Rejecting the Project: When necessary, be prepared to decline projects that are inherently flawed or pose significant risks.
    • Contractual Safeguards: If all else fails and you opt or are forced to proceed with the project, ensure legal protection by naming specific client requirements in the contract and stipulating a waiver from any liability related to those requirements. Consider that you might then be legally protected but might still need to deal with the consequences of a failed project. These recommendations are equally applicable when interfacing with internal or external clients and stakeholders who have power over your project.

    Stay tuned for future articles where I delve deeper into applying learned lessons about project management in real-world scenarios. In Part 2, I’ll share how I leveraged these insights to challenge requirements in another project, yielding a very favorable outcome.

    For additional insights, please subscribe to this blog. Thanks!