continues on a regular basis as the situation develops or changes . If there is one thing outsiders dislike , it is unpleasant surprises . Good teams ensure that there are none .
The SLV-3 team developed their own internal success criteria . We articulated our standards , expectations and objectives . We summarised what was needed to happen for us to be successful and how we would measure success . For instance , how we were going to accomplish our tasks , who would do what and according to what standards , what were the time limits and how would the team conduct itself with reference to others in the organization .
The process of arriving at the success criteria within a team is an intricate and skilled one because there are a lot of things going on below the surface . On the surface , the team is simply working to achieve the project ’ s goals . But I have repeatedly seen how people are poor at articulating what they want — until they see a work centre doing something they don ’ t want them to do . A project team member must in fact act like a detective . He should probe for clues as to how the project is proceeding , and then piece together different bits of evidence to build up a clear , comprehensive and deep understanding of the project ’ s requirements .
At another level , the relationship between the project teams and the work centres should be encouraged and developed by the project leader . Both parties must be very clear in their minds about their mutual interdependence and the fact that both of them have a stake in the project . At yet another level , each side should assess the other ’ s capabilities and identify areas of strength and weakness in order to plan what needs doing and how it should be done . In fact , the whole game can be seen as a process of contracting . It is about exploring and arriving at an agreement on what each party expects of the other ; about realistically understanding the constraints of the other party ; and about communicating the success criteria while defining some simple rules about how the relationship is to work ; but above all , it ’ s the best means of developing clarity in the relationship , both at the technical and personal levels , in order to avoid any nasty surprises in the future . In IGMDP , Sivathanu Pillai and his team did some remarkable work in this area through their home-grown technique , PACE , which stands for Programme Analysis , Control and Evaluation . Each day between 12 noon and 1 p . m ., they would sit with a project team and a particular work centre that was on the critical path and assess the level of success among themselves . The excitement of planning ways to succeed and the vision of future success provide an irresistible form of motivation which , I have found , always makes things happen .
The concept of Technology Management has its roots in the Developmental Management models which originated in the early Sixties out of a conflict between harmonyseeking and output-oriented management structures . There are basically two types of management orientations : primal , which values an economic employee , and rational , which values an organizational employee . My concept of management is woven around an employee who is a technology person . While the primal management school recognizes people for their independence , and rational management acknowledges them for their dependability , I value them for their interdependence . Whereas the primal manager champions independent enterprise and the rational manager serves cooperation , I moot