executive - Henning Zeumer Projektmanagement

The new PMI Pulse of the Profession 2017 is out

PMI members have already received mail, for all others it is available here: The new PMI Pulse of the Profession Report is out. Again it is constituted that companies with a higher maturity in project management have better and more profitable projects – seems to be no wonder. But different to the preceding years the study for the first time since five years has detected an improvement of meeting project objectives: “Only” 9.7% of the investment sum were “burnt”, that is 20% less than the year before!

Consequently the report describes this time less what advantages companies have when taking care of good project management, but focuses the actual benefits that a “champion” with more than 80% of projects conducted to plan (time, cost, quality) has compared to an “underperformer” with less than 60% success rate. That applies specifically at strategic important projects where achieving the intended business goals and savings from better project performance does not only pay back during the project but even more after it with long and sustainable effects.

I wish you much pleasure when reading and many good inspirations for your company and business!

To download the report, please click the PDF icon:

Pitfalls in Project Management

German Companies have discovered efficient project management’s value. But what is often less considered yet by the corporate leaders is the right mix of the many single projects.

Computerwoche - Portfolio Management In Computerwoche Magazine’s issue of 12. June 2012 the authors Marcus Berger (Director EMM Consulting) and Dr. Thomas Henkelmann (Director Consulting Sevices, TPG The Project Group, München) write about Project Portfolio Management (PPM) and the pitfalls which come up for companies without a structured PPM. The article is in German.

https://www.computerwoche.de/article/2664316/fallen-im-projekt-management.html

I discovered again how small the Project Management world can be when I had a talk with a friend, a senior program manager these days about an implementation of a Corporate Project Governance to support and ensure strategic alignment of all corporate invests (= projects and programs). Focus topics were

the elaborated drill down of strategic and tactical corporate goals to “measurable” benefits and connected KPIs, formulated in project objectives,
development of a corporate Balanced Scorecard for the projects in the pipeline aligned to these corporate goals/ benefits,
and the definition of adequate processes, including helpful templates, to make this project and program toplogy governance reasonably manageable.

In short: we puzzled our heads over lived program and portfolio management, and resumed (once more) that “usual project management” gets to its limit soon here. Well, it is an own league… ;-)

Learn more about the topic at http://www.pm-professionals.eu/?page_id=57

Project Management: Why Projects fail

In many of my articles I have tried to visualize the sources of bad projects: companies’ insufficient acknowledgement and consciousness for good project management ‘s value. Today I’d like to dedicate a little time to my experiences I encounter in my project recovery practice all over again.

Technics is overrated

There is a lot of research about issues and reasons why projects fail. To say it upfront: technical problems only cause a little fraction of it, not more than ca. 10%. However most of the responsible people in management and within the projects investigate first and with focus here. You can see this especially in engineering environments…

Four major root causes

The problems mostly are not of technical nature, rather than there are four main factors which repeatedly have led to project distresses according to my long project and project recovery experience:

the individual “project manager”,
insufficient project support from the company respectively the organization,
not enough time, for the project as well as for project management, and
the task itself, especially its complexity.

The respective statistics list factors like communication, resources / skills, unclear requirements etc. which overlap with my categorization, but are in my opinion the effects of the clusters I have chosen.

Weak project management is a result of weak management decisions

Individual - Project Management In one of my case studies (https://eobz.de/?p=1454) an “experienced” project engineer, an eminent authority in his profession, had been assigned project manager. He was taken up in his science, research and development, but didn’t find a good rapport to project management and team leadership. The “human” result: He invested the majority of his time and attention into the product while the project’s planning and coordination fell apart. When the project got distressed he focused on what he was best in – and again project management suffered.

If take managing your projects serious – and that should be the case at executives, similar to managing their business – then it should be clear that employees don’t automatically become good project managers just by having contributed to many projects. Best case they become as good as their examples, but they may also copy some bad practices.

You can learn good project management practices

Toolbox - Project Management If you want to lead a project successfully you need, similar as in other professions, a good, methodical education which includes recognizing the specific project situation’s requirements and reasonably applying the adequate tools and techniques situatively and virtuously. That’s at project management like with craftsmanship where you find trainees, advanced and masters.

Therefore a good project manager would not have undergone flaws like in our case because he would have taken care for a clear target and task definition from the start, and would have requested his superiors’ support consequently – for the sake of his project and himself. His planning would have based on realistic assumptions, and he would have identified and escalated risks and deviations and initiated counter measures early.

Project management is a leader position

Seal - Project Management To achieve he also needs another skill: leadership qualities. He is his project’s manager, responsible for the result, and he must steer his team and his superiors so that each one contributes his part to the whole. Not an easy task, in particular if the company doesn’t work project affine. And not everybody is the person for a leadership role, feels well in it. But if he takes his job serious he will apply project management including leadership consequently. Otherwise he will soon become a scape goat if the project fails. Not a very motivating perspective, or a subject for opportunistic PM nomads who sometimes call themselves project managers…

Have time for project management

Time - Project Management Another frequent factor for troubled projects is time. I don’t mean the duration granted to the project for execution. This actually should always be sized realistic, not determined by wish thinking or arbitrarily. That means it must be based on realistic estimates done by the executing team members and taking the interdependences and frame conditions into account. Therefore “duration” falls into the category “Individual” for me, i.e. that the project manager does a competent job.

I’d rather reflect the time granted for project management. If you look at many project budgets this position often appears calculated significantly too narrow or even not at all. As if you could do this job with cheap resources or just at the side – that’s how expensive projects arise !

pmquota - Project Management In fact many statistics, e.g. the one at https://eobz.de/?p=854, show that may project managers spend only a fraction of their working time actually with project management. The majority is dedicated to activities like business development, technical execution, functional line tasks etc. The reason mostly is the way the company “does” project management, but also often the project manager’s self-conception as described above in “Individual”. But if everything else is more important than project management you don’t need to complain about miserable project performance.

Have time for the project

The time for project management can obviously be scarce for the project manager because he must take care of multiple projects in parallel. That’s probably even the usual case in small and midsized company. It may be acceptable if the projects are in various phases with different needs for attention and communication. But in general – this is proven by many studies – multitasking is very inefficient because of the permanent need for getting-again-into-the subject. Thus it costs more time, money and risk than concentrated work in only one project.

The more people work together in a team, the higher is the communications and coordination effort even in a single project if it is supposed to run effectively and efficiently, and project management is a full-time job. Then it is reasonable to bolster up in staff with the advent of many projects, be it with own well educated project managers of with externals. Because the better or less the project manager can take care of his projects the better or worse it will go. Simple logic, isn’t it?

But that’s the point where we already are at the projects’ integration into the corporate organization by the management, the hot spot why projects fail which I will regard more in detail next.

Competing projects and lines

Did you know? More than half of the issues in troubled projects are not caused by sources inside the project itself ! That’s why you can only cure the symptoms there and recover, but at the next occasion problems will re-occur.

Classic example: The project manager is requesting resources for his project, but he does not get enough and not the ones he needs skill wise but those who are on the bench. These are often not the best as those are needed for line tasks obviously. And if there is a lot to do at the lines even these resources will be re-prioritized…

Organization - Project Management So the predominant part of project issues arises out of an insufficient support from the executing organization, which in turn is founded in the project culture, the management’s and established organization’s mindset.

Where departments or plants are responsible for P&L, projects always be in the second lane. What a pity if the company even makes it’s money with projects as in IT, consulting, machine and plant engineering etc. Then the business units may be quite profitable, but not the customer projects. I’ve seen top quality being delivered that way so often, but unfortunately not at the agreed upon milestone or within the calculated budget.

Insufficient Project Management organization and infrastructure

No project can perform decently if it permanently faces resource issues, if collaboration and communication within the team, between team and organization, and among the department silos doesn’t work out because it is unfamiliar, or if the project manager’s authority doesn’t fit to his responsibilities.

In many companies in addition well attuned, fast interlocking procedures for decisions, escalations, risk and change control etc. are missing. Sometimes there is not even a sufficient infrastructure for projects in place, e.g. standards, processes, and tools. Being all alone on his own the project manager is like Don Quixote, and the “work floor” team members’ motivation for engagement in project work as well as the project’s results are unsatisfactory accordingly.

Do the home work !

Before holding the crisis project manager the scape goat at the management executives should do their very own home work and critically investigate whether the company’s projects find the frame conditions to prosper and be successful. In case the business model is even project driven further reflections (see https://eobz.de/?p=2142) might bear enormous surplus strategic potential.

Trouble cause task

Usually the endeavour is weighted heavy as being the source of problems in projects. How that applies to technical challenges I already described at the beginning of this article. But many times there are very different aspects of project work that make projects fail. Task - Project Management

Dependence due to lacking internal know how

Let’s think about projects of which the subject is beyond the company’s core competence, e.g. an IT project in a producing company. Then in many cases there is only limited internal know how with the project’s IT solution but also with experience in handling the external supplier or consultancy. Project management is purchased together with the trade, and so you get at the mercy of the supplier all too often – if you do not have a good project manager at your side as a counterbalance.

The endeavour’s complexity

Or let’s talk about the project’s own complexity instead about technical green field challenges. There are a multitude of interfaces between the departments (cue cross-functional work), suppliers and sub-suppliers, all with an own understanding of project work, different organizational maturity and eventually reliability. But any case with high requirements towards complexity - Project Management communication and coordination.

May be there are also dependencies from or with other projects. In international projects this possible source of issues will potentiate with distributed and/or virtual teams, cultural differences, and work across time zones.

And then there also some more and sometimes prominent examples where complexity is driven up to absurdness by politics, interests and influencing…

Project success lies in management’s hand

As I already said: There are a lot of parameters which, badly managed, may quickly lead to failing projects because they are underestimated by managers responsible for the project, and staffed cheap but underqualified or even not at all at important positions. Last but not least – but not exclusively – it is the matter of the deciders on management level, how they anticipate and acknowledge the role projects play in their company, and how they define the rules according to which corporate projects are set up, staffed, executed, and supported. It’s a good example of how corporate success is really determined by the management.

Read comprehensively more about this topic in my Book…

PMI Pulse of the Profession 2016

I admit that this time I take up this year’s PMI report very late due to project engagements, and that while I was “hawking around“ with it at my clients whom I was able to help out of some bad project distresses again this year: Look, You are not the only ones who have to catch up backlogs here !

pmi-pulse-of-the-profession-2016 The PMI Pulse of the Profession 2016 (again) shows very clearly and easy to understand why project success, business success and good project management are directly interrelated: projects are 2 ½ times more successful (and profitable) when proven project management practices are used. It bases its argument this time as expected on PMI’s newly introduced Talent Triangle and stresses the necessity of interacting technical project management, leadership, and strategic and business management for corporate success.

Unfortunately the research’s findings also show a deterioration of the project results correlated with a decrease of maturity in corporate project management: We see US$122 million wasted for every US$1 billion invested due to poor project performance, a 12 percent increase over last year !

PMI considers the reason to be anew decreasing awareness and acknowledgement for good project management practices at the Executive Management, and appeals:

Look beyond technical skills of your project managers, and seek added skills in leadership and business management
Recognize the strategic role of corporate project management and an enterprise-wide Project Management Office (EPMO) aligned to the company’s strategy
Drive success with engaged Executive Sponsors

But discover it yourself – and use the study as an (additional) argumentation aid for good project management in your company. Have an inspiring reading.

To download the PMI Pulse of the Profession 2016 report, please click the PDF icon:

An experienced Project Manager doesn’t make a Project Doctor

Project Recovery: It takes more than an experienced project manager to rescue a troubled project:

What’s most scarce at a project recovery is time. The Project Doctor must be able to ramp up extremely short-term. Affinity and understanding of the project context is key, industry expertise not necessarily. There are always nearly the same mistakes happening in all industries…
Project recovery is for absolute hands in the project management subject. They need deepest methodologic competence far beyond normal project management, i.e. not only knowledge but comprehension, and safe application of project and programme management and agile methods.
To quickly find effective measures for recovery it takes much experience in rescuing distressed projects: proficient identification of the main reasons and corresponding adequate measures.
At troubled projects often nerves are strained. To succeed the Project Doctor must bring along high leadership skills, knowledge of human nature and much empathy in Stakeholder Management.
This also involves distinct conflict resolution, moderation and mediation abilities.
Sometimes the devil or the agreement is in the detail. That’s why a good legal appreciation for contract set up and interpretation in the cultural context is an important asset for a Project Doctor and his client.
Projects in distress often require changes in many areas. Therefore a Project Doctor who is also an expert in Change, Supplier, Contract, and Claim Management is an advantage.
And finally a Project Doctor need a “solid back“, independence and readiness for confrontation. He must not fear “high-ups”.

You already lost enough money in your troubled project. Do it right this time, and acquire help from a real project recovery expert! He will always be more economical than a cheap solution…

Learn more about the topic Project Recovery…

Portfolio without Management creates disappointing Results

“But we do have a Portfolio Management!” recently claimed a CIO, who couldn’t understand why his projects permanently struggled from resource issues. Definitely: Portfolio Management (PPM) serves to utilize scarce resources – probably the usual case – at a maximum of business benefits. Benefits are measured by the contribution to achieve (strategic) business goals. But PPM is not a tool but a transparent and consistent process by which the portfolio is managed (which can be supported by a tool). And this needs to be consequently applied if it is to help !

I’d like to show three missed prerequisites as reasons why in my example here the PPM was to fail:

Who wants to meet objectives needs to have such ! And they need to be harmonically coordinated, e.g. with a Balanced Scorecard or categories like long-term (such as growth, market position etc.) and short-term goals (e.g. innovation, market entry etc.) and sustainability. If strategic objectives compete or even contradict the portfolio will not be efficient, and also will not achieve it’s targets effectively.
Prioritize – and keep with it ! Following the priorities the resources are to be assigned to the projects, not opportunistic or because someone is yelling louder. That doesn’t mean it would be impossible to change priorities due to better insight, but changing direction frequently doesn’t help achieving targets.
Never do more than you can ! Those are doing right who do the yearly planning for the project pipeline by matching the planned capacities with the desired projects’ efforts in sequence of their priority. But if you find you also urgently need X, Y and Z to be done (on top), and you add further initiatives during the course of the year, you will overwhelm your organization’s capabilities and capacity for suffering. And you don’t need to wonder why not more but less than planned is finished…

I wish that more managers in the C-Suite would self-limit their “flexibility” and “autonomy of decision” in favor of comprehensible decision processes and a realistic discipline of expectations, thus increasing their business results effectively and efficient by a structured PPM. And by the way they will strengthen their employees’ motivation and significantly improve projects’ results (time, cost, quality, business benefits).

Learn more about implementing Project Portfollio Management accurately…

Project Organization – the Third Dimension of the Matrix

He would have never asked me for advice because I’m just knowledgeable about project management. At a lunch among good acquaintances he told me about his business, that all plants were achieving black figures due to good controlling and Sales was acquiring good contracts, but the EBIT was not really going to start flying. During our conversation he developed an understanding that his company wasn’t earning its profit with its products but with their commission and delivery to its customers – in projects.

The organization no longer fits to its market

This was exactly the point. The company had been established product oriented with a functional line organization. As the market was growing internationally it had implemented a matrix a few years ago with a sales organization clustered by regions. Now it was time to adapt customer oriented to the project-driven business because they often lost a lot of the profit generated in the functional matrix. In essence the customer projects needed to become more profitable to increase the entire company’s bottom line.

Business Administration thinks too egocentric

To approach the issue we need to look back a little into the past of Business Administration. Line and matrix come from a product oriented, egocentric view to the market. Until the 1990s the market thankfully absorbed the economy’s products and services. By technical leadership sometimes monopolistic or oligopolistic structures arose at the offering side in which the customers were quite dependent from their suppliers due to missing alternatives. Business Administration therefore focused, following the economic principle, on describing, analyzing and optimizing production and the organization of the running business, and developed management models accordingly.

Since globalization increased traditional market leaderships are questioned from the millennium on latest. International competition, cheaper and/or simple, but sufficient product alternatives from emerging countries with lower production cost as well as transparency of prices and services available through modern communication etc. have challenged the dominance of our companies in many industries. In addition there is an increasing customer emancipation fostered by the new competition situation on the offering side. The change from vendor to customer market demands for more flexibility at the producers, and also for keeping selling proposals in order to not suffering from claims, deductions, re-work and margin losses.

Established management approaches and systems are insufficient

This kind of change has not been re-enacted by many companies (like my acquaintance’s one) but also modern Business Administration sufficiently. Established management approaches and systems made for repeating processes and widely known influence factors are not tailored to the management of (customer) projects or unfit for with every contract changing or even unknown frame conditions. Often there isn’t even awareness for this difference in characteristics and imperatives of running and project business. Leading projects from out of the functional line reasonably therefore mostly fails because of the line managers’ time and goal conflicts as well as of the resource conflicts between line and projects resulting.

Established structures are overwhelmed

A project-driven business model (see definition in my article “Does Your organizational Structure still fit Your Business?“) demands for an organization structure and culture that concedes the same priority to the project earning the company‘s revenue as to the product built and delivered by the project. Global optimization must be the management’s focus instead of local KPI optimization at plants or departments with successes spoiled in unprofessional projects. It seems reasonable to also assign P&L responsibility and far reaching competences to the projects being the bracket from bid to acceptance.

The existing line or matrix does not achieve the cross-departmental function in most cases due to conflicts of responsibilities and competences. But projects need leadership across departmental borders on contract and project level as well as in the company management. Actually there also is currently a more functional and “classic” business competence at the department leadership level rather than extensive project management skills.

Adapt the company to the business model

Matrix 3dim_E There is only help in a transformation of the organization and corporate culture concerning established hierarchies, responsibilities, compensations, thinking and priorities etc. towards an organization focused on the project business. In a pure line organization this means the change to a matrix “function vs. project”. At an already matrix-organized company it will be the implementation of a third dimension on peer-level to the existing ones. What it takes and what to pay attention to I have described in my article “Turn-around for Enterprises with project-driven Business“.

This needs to be accompanied by building internal project management competence and an own career path in the new dimension. As project management is “management under heavy-duty conditions” it is also a perfect opportunity for leadership development within the company. Universal management skills like stress resistance and risk sensibility, methodologic knowhow, structured approach, social competence and leadership qualities are nurtured. Therefore the Third Dimension should be attractive for motivated employees to leave the functional line’s bosom with their company-specific expertise, join project management, and there win acceptance for the department soon.

We shouldn’t fail to recognize that this transformation will afford some mid to long-term effort, and will come across many fears and resistance in the established organization. Siemens Chairman Peter Löscher illustratively described this 2010 with his „bed of clay“ comparison. The colleagues in the projects urgently need it for the quality and success of their work, the top management wants to enforce it as acknowledged being critical to survive, and the middle management needs to comply – or leave. That’s what I finally suggested to my acquaintance for his company.

Turnaround for Enterprises with project-driven Business

My last article dealt with the way how to turn a distressed project to success or at least receive a useful benefit from it. It ended with an appeal towards the managers responsible for projects and company not to stop at this point but to use the insights received from the mistakes made to reasonably terminate the ultimate causes for repetitive issues in projects, to achieve a sustainable turnaround.

Theses causes are sufficiently known latest after my many previous articles (see https://eobz.de/category/tips-discussions/), but also looking at the uncounted studies on this subject. In most cases the sources can be found in the company’s acknowledgement of projects in general and of good project management in particular.

Companies with project-driven business model are impacted most

At this business model the dominant business happens in projects, e.g. in customer projects. But also enterprises whose business is vastly influenced by changes that imply a high number or frequency of investments and adaptations in their business are project-driven.

Linienorganisation_E - Turnaround, Organization, Project Management, project-driven Business In Europe enterprises typically have an established line organization structure with functional and central departments. This is especially the case in our traditionally strong industries like Mechanical and Plant Engineering and in particular in privately owned, mid-size companies, but also at consulting and IT firms, engineering and development bureaus etc. Often I find a distinctive own life of the departments, production locations or plants with silo thinking, insufficient communication and cooperation. This becomes very evident with cross-functional work in projects.

A pity if the company actually depends on profitably delivering projects i.e. seamless overall collaboration, and actually not on prospering of single organizational units. In most cases of companies with a traditional set-up but project-driven business this discrepancy can be detected also in the books with revenue, profit and market share decreases. That is because for them the market has changed dramatically in the recent years. These companies urgently need a turnaround not only in single distressed projects but for the entire organization.

Rebuilding the culture must be the first step

Nothing is harder to change than established, beloved habits. Many entrepreneurs and executives already have failed to break up traditional structures and delineated thinking, to “turn” department princes, and to have their enterprise undergo a drastic treatment to achieve the turnaround. To succeed the company culture concerning its projects first needs to change authentically. And this starts at the very top at the executive management.

An intensive Change Management process commences which can’t happen overnight. This is what counts:

Understand where the money comes from. That is no more just having a good product. It also needs to be delivered reliably, assembled and commissioned, at a fair price as contracted. The business actually is no longer product- but project-driven. And by the way the company needs to earn good money (after all). Ergo
Comprehensive instead of local optimization. This means that the profit doesn’t derive from the single production lines and functional departments but in the projects which deliver the whole completely as a package. Efficient collaboration across department borders makes nice company margins, not good single functions’ results alone. It also takes to consequently
Incorporate prestages and suppliers. They also need to be driven by the projects, at least when collaborating with them. Because if they don’t contribute to plan even the own, compelling project planning becomes maculation. Therefore you need to accurately investigate who fits in concerning his performance and organizational maturity, re-negotiate contracts with the new criteria, sharpen and align control mechanisms, expediting and claim management accordingly.

Only if all involved have understood what project-driven business is about, and only if the management backs it up authentically, the turnaround will succeed. And only then you will succeed to implement the reshaping now following without costly resistance.

Rebuilding the organization is logical consequence and fundament

If you focus on your projects’ commercial success your corporate organization needs to fit and reflect this. A profitable, project-driven firm needs to have a good and professional project management. Ergo your company in the future needs a strong

Project management as a core competency and strong department. Quit with functional specialists who lead the projects at the side. Project management needs full attention on planning, coordination and leadership – actually same as with corporate management. Time and objective conflicts of two hearts in the project leader’s chest are poison for concentrating on the essentials. His “thinking” also needs to be project-driven, no longer product love struck. Everybody contributes his core competence, the engineer his functional knowledge, and the project manager his PM skills, for success of the total. Process models and best practices make it replicable and calculable.

Flanking focused resource assignement and legwork

Unfortunately companies mostly have too few of both subject matter experts for all of the important projects at hand. This is why they need a structured and economically effective

Portfolio management, to prioritize their projects objectively and assign their resources for an optimum of business benefit. It’s not gut feeling and preferences, and not at all who shouts the loudest that determines which projects are important for the company. You need to consider that there still will be critical internal projects which are only linked indirectly with the revenue even with a project-driven business model. Criteria for all projects need to be corporate objectives, strategy, risk, profit, balance of initiatives and load capacity of the organization. The means are cost-utility analysis, (may be) Balanced Scorecard and tangible KPIs. Controlling must be consequently according to facts and to time. That is how the discussions und decisions get transparent and safe.

So far with the „new brooms“, but to succeed with the transition for the turnaround you still need a re-shaping at the layout and self-image of

Functional and central departments as service providers for the projects. The previously gone through change in your corporate project culture will help you here. The engineers’ provisions will now not only serve for the product’s perfection but also for the whole task’s delivery to contract. Procurement will not only look at the terms and conditions but also (may be even sometimes with concessions supporting the project targets) at the reliability of delivery. Legal will probe partnership in collaboration; QM controls the project’s product quality and drives process quality (Continuous Improvement). HR will search for skills instead of positions, train for future project requirements, take care for a corporate identity among the employees, etc.

This is no „clean sweep” but indeed an extensive re-shaping of the corporate organization, not only in its structure, because accompanying you need to

Also relaunch incentive systems

All structure and mind-set changes will fall back into old patterns and the turnaround will get stuck if the colleagues will go on to be rewarded for the old instead of the new behaviours i.e. not project-driven as well. Department managers must no longer be measured by their departments’ success and size only, colleague no longer primarily by product quantity or quality. What’s essential is the contribution to the complete picture, the performance in the projects, teaming, reliability, taking responsibility, process improvement, personal growth and skills enhancement, usability and flexibility. These are the success factors for the turnaround and the company’s fitness for the future.

For example Sales will no longer be provisioned for a maximum of sold projects but for good ones with good margins and realistic agreements on delivery. Procurement’s target will no longer be highest discounts possible but favourable conditions which allow suppliers realistic approaches and calculations and still are attractive for prioritized, reliable deliverables. A success measurement could be e.g. provisions on time or low failure.

At HR this is analogous properly staffed projects or less resource bottlenecks at good utilization same time. QM receives bonus for process improvements that further increase efficiency and effectiveness of communication, process flow and cooperation. You probably have plenty more good examples now, do you? In any case the basis for incentives for sure will be a close collaboration and coordination with each other and with the project and portfolio management, because this is also the basis for the turnaround.

Your reward

When your company finally has managed the turnaround and is completely wired project-driven you will not need to fear any benchmark in your industry. You will regain eventually already lost market shares and even more. Most of all you will come back to enjoy your margins and profits, not to talk about the joint success that all colleagues will feel and appreciate. Success makes sexy – that also applies to enterprises !

I hope I could give you some helpful suggestions with these lines. Believe me: these thoughts can be continued infinitely. I find a lot of pleasure in it, and, if you like to, also together with you in your very individual turnaround.

Tag Archives: executive