How to decide in Copil?

Do you sometimes have projects blocked because of decisions that are not taken? Or to ask yourself why this decision was made? We know that in Copil, decisions can sometimes be difficult to make. We all have in mind a person who monopolizes the word for ten minutes. Someone who asks for a specific detail that prevents us from talking about the substance.

If you are a loyal reader of our “Transfo Pros” blog, you know the equation.”1/2 decision = mess squared“. Formula written by Olivier Bas, Vice President of Havas, author, speaker and teacher in the book Like your job.

Without clear governance, projects are launched, stopped, or extended irrationally. The IT department and the Transformation Department are at the center of this challenge.

Yes: among all the responsibilities of a project steering committee, that of making relevant decisions is undoubtedly the most difficult. how make the right decisions quickly and with a strong commitment from all members of the committee?

In the following lines, we will shed a different light on what happens in this type of meeting, as well as tips to better manage certain blocking situations.

Get ready to discover or revisit the pros and cons of five possible decision-making methods in Copil. You will also discover two pitfalls to avoid and two prerequisites to respect. Project management feedback that can help you choose the most appropriate method of choice according to the decision to be taken. For maybe find the way back to a useful and as decisive steering committee as possible!

Facilitating strategic decisions. A theme that every PMO or project director should work on in the overall implementation. If this is not the case, that's good: a quick detour to the article Steering Committee or Copil: The basics will be very useful to you.

When deciding in a steering committee is synonymous with error: focus on two pitfalls to avoid

Lionel M., former interim CIO, when asked about his feedback on these themes, told us:

We talk a lot about collective intelligence, but not much about its counterpart: collective idiocy! Because, it is a conviction: there is no between the two. A bit like gaining weight. You take it or you lose it. Here, we are collectively intelligent or collectively stupid. Sorry

The effect of collective polarization in decisions increases risks

The fact that a human being becomes a sheep is a phenomenon as old as the world. The effect of the group On the individual is what we call in psychology, conformism: when your opinion conflicts with that of the group, you tend to conform your judgment to that of the group. It's all normal.

In addition to the conformism of groupthink, there is a lesser-known but critical “symptom” in project management: that of collective polarization. It is shown that group decisions can lead to higher risk taking than individually. Indeed, the group has a tendency to take an option that is more extreme than the average of each person's initial positions. We then speak of a polarization effect.

He was thus identified as being at the origin of the failure of the failed invasion of the Bay of Pigs in 1961 in Cuba supported by the United States, or even the explosion of the Challenger space shuttle.

The “HIPPO”: a danger for the steering committee

In business, and especially in project steering committees, numerous variants are observed. One of the most distressing is called The HIPPO effect, English acronym meaning Highest Paid Person's Opinion. In other words: the opinions of the person who is most highly placed hierarchically among the members of the committee have a natural tendency to be retained.

One of basic tips to try to avoid this bias in Copil may consist in asking the greatest “pen boss” present at the steering committee to speak last at each round of the table. But experience shows that, over time, that's not enough - and often, when he's not speaking, he's speaking out all the same!

Nothing new, serious, or irremediable. However, knowing this, now that we have remembered this group effect and the main biases, we no longer have excuses for not improving this process in our project management.

Access to data and definition of project authority: two prerequisites for better decision-making

What if you had access to all the decisions to be made and the key history during Copil?

Before any good practice, the basis of the base is to ensure that the issues associated with the decision are well integrated by the stakeholders, the sponsor, the IT and business project manager, and the management.

There is nothing worse than having to discover and analyze during the session the data, often complex, of a strategic choice on which to decide.

On this problem, discover the feedback from the company OCTO Tech:

Developing agile and/or effective governance cannot be improvised alone. Software is now our allies in objectifying and facilitating arbitrations. Organization coaches say it: these platforms are Must Have !

Project managers must in fact be able to summarize the decisions to be taken in a simple, synthetic and accurate way to move the project forward.
And internal customers, sponsors, members of the steering committee and/or management committee, etc. must be able to make decisions on time so as not to delay project execution and management.

For management, it is often difficult to have a clear vision of all the decisions to be made, and of the synthetic and precise context. And a posteriori, it is difficult to have the history of important decisions (taken or not) on the project. It's hard to understand how we got there.

The use of a platform will simplify governance for you (listing of decisions to be taken, Copil view, etc.) You will no longer be taken aback because you do not have the right information.

Each decision has a status (under consideration/in progress/taken/no longer current). Once created, each decision has its own page where you can post, comment, change decision attributes, and find the associated project.

Define the criteria of authority in the project to successfully carry out co-steering

You have access to the data. Top! The second prerequisite is to set the framework and limits to the power of each of the teams, bodies and stakeholders. “Good fences make good neighbours.”

In general, the three main responsibilities of a steering committee are make decisions and make trade-offs, of ensure the smooth running of the project and Make sure he is in line with the company's overall strategies. No deciding everything! However, we can say that we have sometimes seen a Copil take care of the color of the website instead of trying to resolve conflicts between departments, or taking care of truly giving the project manager the power to act and use the company's resources, for example.

To eliminate this natural tendency of Copil to meddle in what does not concern him, pay attention to the boundaries of project authority, role, and responsibilities of each instance. Management committee, Copil, IT project manager, sponsor, business project manager... your project governance deserves a clear design!

Concretely, the idea is to Charter responsibilities. For example, alongside the RACI project, you can establish key criteria to define who decides on what.. An example: a budget waterline above which the steering committee is consulted and makes decisions. Below that, subsidiarity applies. And above all: once the principle is established, you will cover the choices of your employees, whatever they may be. Because let's remember: 8 times out of 10 will be very good! Taking initiative will be really encouraged.

Deciding how to decide: 5 decision-making methods for steering committees

Below are 5 approaches, from the most authoritarian and rapid to the slowest and most consensual. Overview of the various approaches to the governance of a project in business.

Authoritarian: “I decided!”

• Characteristic: quick decision based on the principle of areas of authority. Each member of the organization has authority over certain aspects of the activities. It may or may not seek the opinion of the committee and stakeholders before making a decision.
• Advantages: speed. The project manager has authority over a range of areas.
• Disadvantage: You can be a super locomotive for the project... but without a team car hooked up. Alone we go faster, together we go further, recalls the saying.
• Our opinion: you have read it above, sometimes the group effect is toxic. This method of project governance, if used wisely, can be the most effective, even if it is not the most popular during meetings.

Advisory: “I listened to you”

• Characteristic: seeking advice from the group, in writing and or orally.
• Advantages: if the cohesion of the group is good and the word is free to speak, this decision-making method enlightens the manager with a useful, confronting, and benevolent opinion.
• Disadvantage: you can be consulted and not listened to. Stakeholders are called upon to express their views on complex issues. Sometimes, rhetoric and politics can win out. There are many possible biases (polarization, HIPPO effect, sample bias, etc.).
• Our opinion: probably the most used in Copil and Codir. This process gives pride of place to everyone's egos throughout the life cycle of a project.

Majority: “Voted!”

• Characteristics: Majority or unanimous vote.
• Advantages: a form of democracy project.
• Disadvantage: much like in politics, this voting system can generate frustrations. If a decision is made with 51% of people in favor, there will be 49% of group members who were against it and will have to live with the decision.
• Our advice: voting is a practice halfway between excess authority and consensus. If the various biases of the group effect are avoided, then voting can be a modern and engaging practice in committee meetings.

Apparent consensus: when everyone says “yes”

• Characteristic: tacit or overt agreement. A group is able to choose without having to vote.
• Advantages: we discuss for a long time, all points of view are respected.
• Disadvantage: the longest and most difficult process. Finding each stakeholder, each member of Copil, can be an endless quest for the project manager. Above all: the initial idea is too often changed, distorted. The implementation of the steering committee's decision becomes counterproductive compared to the initial intention.
• Our opinion: the least advisable decision-making method. In particular because the various amendments to the original idea create a distortion.

Consent: when no one says “no”

• Characteristics: Decisions are made by ensuring that there are no serious objections to a proposal, rather than trying to please everyone and fall into soft consensus. As the saying goes, “Better hard work than soft play!”
• Advantages: you do not devalue the idea of the demand bearer by seeking consensus. Agile decision making in essence. The egos are under control and a speaking time allows everyone to “question” and react.
• Limits: the main one is the good faith of the participants. Also, be careful if too many “operational” decisions are made based on consent, this can be time-consuming and limit the autonomy of project team members in their roles and areas of authority.
• Our advice: ideally test consent with a facilitator the first time. Agile methods and governances inspired by free enterprise and holacracy have long used this decision-making method.

Checklist for sustainable decision-making in a steering committee

1. Examine the problem. There is only a choice if there is a problem that offers several possibilities. Several choice scenarios and several project options are prepared. It is at this stage that the most appropriate decision-making method will be decided based on the criteria of time and commitments targeted.
2. Evaluate The pros and cons, the benefit-value/risk ratio (for the project not for itself!) of each of the options. Seeing all your data clearly allows you to make “mindful” decisions. Ensure that each member of the committee Understanding the methods and steps needed to make decisions is essential for effective management.
3. Choose. This is the key step, the one that pushes us towards a solution by renouncing others. Rather than giving up, let's accept that “choosing is moving forward!” Move forward by accepting not having everything, get out of the omnipotence of Copil, take a risk and assume the consequences. With the firm belief that the choice we make is the best option available.
4. Follow the execution, the implementation. This is the stage where we really take responsibility for our choice. You know it: the Devil, and God, are in the details. This American architect proverb should be engraved on all the cover pages of your PowerPoint.
5. What if you haven't decided? Acknowledging Copil's indecisiveness is just as important. Record it, by acting: “The Copil decided not to decide. The project will be stuck on this axis.” A project manager knows it: “What is not written does not exist.”

The final word: What creates the behavior is the framework! Take action on governance, better project management will follow.

You now have all the cards in hand to better manage certain situations of indecision. To go further and finish improving your next Copil, we recommend that you read the following article: How to properly prepare a steering committee? Because yes: it's all in the preparation! The article to read to strengthen your preparation: definition of objectives, interactions with the sponsor, place of personal interests, management of risks and disagreements before...

‍