For project managers, “no” is often the toughest word in the English language to deploy. We often prefer the classic PM strategy of “Yes, but…” as the softer, kinder, gentler alternative. “No” sounds harsh. Uncooperative. It sounds reticent and recalcitrant. It sounds negative. And yet, for many of us, the time has come as professionals to set “yes, but…” aside and venture into the world of “no.”
I say this because I note that with increasing frequency, clients are not taking “yes, but…” as an answer. No sooner do we offer a “yes-we-can-do-that, but-it-costs-you-another-million” response that the customer hears only the first half of the equation. They often seem far more interested in capability than cost. As a result, when we come to the table with the costs for their ventures, they balk.
One of my clients recently asked for a much higher level of review and a much higher degree of involvement in my consulting work than that to which I have become accustomed through the years. I agreed to a single review, but during that review, it became very clear that this was not to be a one-time event. They wanted more and more involvement in the work I have historically done to great accolades. And so, at the end of the first conference call, I tried a “yes, but..” approach.
“Yes, we can do additional reviews, but there will need to be a change in our contractual arrangements to accommodate them.”
When they replied that they saw this as work under the contract, I realized it was not a “yes, but…” situation. It called for clear, defined action.
“No. I cannot continue to do these reviews, so we need to develop an exit strategy, as I cannot provide the requisite number of reviews and still achieve my financial objectives.”
The client was flummoxed. They wanted to know why I had suddenly changed my tune. They wanted to know why I was willing to walk away from such a critical opportunity. They wanted to know why we should terminate a long-standing agreement over such a minor issue. I explained that I had attempted to provide reasonable accommodation, but that it was no longer possible to make the required margins with the additional reporting pressure.
They grumbled. They groused. They threatened to walk away from the contract. And then they ceded the point and went back to the original levels of tracking and reporting.
At first the post-event relationship seemed strained and tenuous. But I think the reality is that I was projecting that on them. In fact, since I said “no,” only once, they have actually been more cooperative, more supportive, and more sensitive to my organizational needs. And I’M the consultant!
Read more at ProjectConnections.