Character Compatibility
I’ve been trying to pin down some thoughts around the frustration, drama, and friction that seems to arise on workplace projects, and I think almost all of it comes down to the character of the people in the project. We’re often tempted to pin it on impersonal attributes of the project’s context, but it really comes down to the people. Put another way, if the project itself were so terrible, then everyone would think it sucks, but in fact, some people thrive on the project.
Think of a case at work where there’s drama or friction, and then think of some of the key people in the drama, and list 5 adjectives or phrases that best describe each of them. (Google some if good words are escaping you.) Next, list 5 adjectives or phrases about the project or context of the drama.
I bet between those lists, you’ll find incompatibilities in (at least) one of the following ways.
- 2 opposing traits in 2 key people
- A person assigned to do tasks incompatible with their own traits
- The project traits are incompatible with a person’s traits.
For instance, you’ll get friction with an intuitive person working with a metrics-based analyst, a perfectionist on prototype project, or an impatient person on a highly regimented project.
What can be done about it?
First, a tiger can’t change its stripes. It is foolish to try and change the person to fit the situation, and if you do, you’re going to end up with friction from #2. A good manager will naturally assign a detail-oriented person to tie up a multi-faceted project implementation, and not try to pull the details out of the laid-back, wing-it guy. Don’t try to fix the trait with “coaching,” you’re only fooling yourself.
Second, stop looking at character types as being right or wrong. All character types just are, and only get labelled as good or bad when viewed in a particular context. If we look at traits as inherently good or bad, we miss out on assigning people to projects where those traits might be beneficial. For example, even laziness is a virtue, in context.
Finally, work to match projects and people to the traits are compatible.
This may all seem like a big “duh,” but instead of just blaming project problems on the situation or the people in isolation, doesn’t it all come down to putting the wrong people in the wrong situation? On the flip side, when you match up the perfect person with the project, isn’t success nearly guaranteed?
Thought provoking.
>…a tiger can’t change its stripes…Don’t try to fix the trait
>with “coaching,” you’re only fooling yourself.
I agree that multiple personality types lead to friction which leads to project team impact. But this solution seems overly binary. People can be told to temporarily “focus on x not y” and don’t need to be reprogrammed.
I think a good (project)manager can say, “Now I know you’re not comfortable with (x=)ambiguity, but for this project I’m asking you to support it despite the fact you like (y=)formality.” Often this isn’t assessed and addressed straightforwardly, or, similar to your second point, it gets presented as “the Right Way to do things is My Way and I want you to do it My Way.”