“Should I replace my programme director?”
Almost always, the answer is ‘no’. Here are a few reasons as to why, followed by the four exceptional circumstances under which maybe you should replace them.
I’ve been involved in programme recovery a lot over the past three decades. Every single one of those programmes was salvaged by a large team of people, working very hard, and supported by lots of other measures, improvements and ‘tweaks’ that delivered outsized returns. It stands to reason – to my mind anyway – that if it takes a lot of factors to recover a programme, it likewise takes a lot of different factors to create a broken programme in the first place. There’s an old adage that goes “before you blame the people, check the system” and it applies extremely well to most distressed programmes. If you go and look at the system, you’ll probably find that it’s not fit for purpose, and that the programme team are compensating for the deficiencies, therefore camouflaging the problem. If they – or their leader – are guilty of anything, it’s coping.
There is further supporting evidence in our fieldwork. It’s not unusual to find that distressed programmes have had as many as five or six programme directors over time. In other words the difficulties have been wrongly attributed to personal performance before the penny has finally dropped that the individual isn’t the root cause of the problems.
Even when people aren’t doing the right things, is it actually their ‘fault’ anyway? Most people who enter the world of programmes have, at most, a 5-day PRINCE2 course under their belt, and that’s purely a methodology. It doesn’t equip the person with the skills or techniques needed to deliver change, so maybe it’s not a performance issue. Maybe the person just hasn’t been equipped to do the job and is succeeding to some degree in spite of this – again, camouflaging the problem.
Then there’s the question of optics. If the team see their leader undermined and unceremoniously dumped, they’ll likely assume that it’s only a matter of time before the same thing happens to them.
There’s also the issue of continuity. Changes to leadership generally cause deceleration, at least in the short term, and also some loss of knowledge, understanding and relationships.
So when should you replace the programme director? Four scenarios:
1.
When they no longer want the role. It’s a very tough gig, but even more so if the person doesn’t want to do it. It takes a certain type of masochist to want to be a programme director in the first place, so if they don’t or no longer want to do it, don’t fight it. Let them step down.
2.
When the situation turns toxic. The high and sustained pressure of a programme can do funny things to people. I’ve even known professionals who tell me that they didn’t like themselves very much when they were on programme X. Programme environments can give rise to toxic behaviours. Where else would you hear talk of someone having their foot on someone else’s neck? If it reaches that point, the programme director has exceeded the elastic limit of their ability to manage under pressure, and removing them may be the only form of detox available.
3.
When they demonstrably cannot do the role. Despite the support and the coaching, they just can’t raise their game to the standard needed. Sometimes, people don’t know when to quit, so the merciful release has to come from without, not within.
4.
When they won’t change their approach. If you want a different outcome, you have to take a different approach. There’s the old mythical headline: “Fog in channel – continent cut off.” The programme equivalent is “it’s not me, it’s everybody else.”
There is of course the question of what you look for in the replacement candidate, but that’s an article for another day…