When the first-line manager discovered that his team appeared, he did not immediately rush to the boss to report this frustrated news. The team can make up for progress bias, he can think of the method or rescheduled progress to solve problems, why do you want to trouble the boss? From this perspective, it seems to be not bad. Solving such problems is indeed the responsibility of the frontline manager. The boss has a lot of truly troubles that need to be dealt, he doesn't want to make more problems. Therefore, all dirt is hidden under the carpet.
But each boss requires two information: a planned problem that needs to be taken, and the status data 3 is used to analyze 3. For this purpose, he needs to understand all the development team, but it is very difficult to get the truth.
The interests of the first-line manager and the interests of the boss are intrinsic conflicts. First-line manager worry that if reported the problem, the boss will take action, these actions will replace managers, reduce their own prestige, and messy other plans. Therefore, as long as the project manager thinks that you can solve the problem independently, he will not tell the boss.
There are two ways to open the blanket to exhibit the dirt exhibition in front of the boss, they must be used. One is to reduce role conflicts and encourage status sharing, the other is to pull away the carpet.
Reduce the conflict of roles. First, the boss must distinguish between action information and status information. He must regulate himself, do not respond to the problems that the project manager can solve, and will never make arrangements when checking the status report. I once met a boss, he always gave a message to the phone before the first paragraph of the status report. Such a reaction is affirm that the compression information is completely disclosed.
However, when the project manager learned that the boss received the project report, he would not panic, or if he would gradually submit the real assessment results.
If the boss will meet the meeting, review, the meeting is obviously marked as a Status-Meeting and the Problem-Action meeting, and the corresponding behavior is controlled, which will help the entire process. Of course, the situation has developed to fail to control, the status inspection conference will evolve into a problem - action meeting. However, at least everyone knows "how much is the score of the game", the boss will also think twice before I have received "leather".
Slaid open the carpet. Regardless of collaboration or not, it is necessary to understand the truth of the status. PERT chart and frequent milestones are the foundation of this review. In large projects, some parts may be reviewed every week, and overall review is performed around about one month.
There is a report that the key document is a milestone and the actual completion. Figure 14.1 is an excerpt from the above report. It shows some questions: The approval time of the manual (SLR) has conflict, one of the time is still late than the start time of the independent product test (alpha). Such a report will be the agenda of the meeting on February 1, making everyone know the problem, and the product component manager should prepare the reason for the delay, when is the end, the steps taken and any help - boss Or indirectly provided in other groups.
