After completing my Ph.D., I taught strategy and management consulting at Indiana University's Kelley School of Business. I just returned to UNC, only this time as a professor in the Kenan-Flagler School of Business. I have also delivered numerous executive and consultant education programs on strategy, management consulting, and strategic thinking. It was during this time that my research on consulting training at many of the top firms helped me to finalize my framework for project management, which is presented in this book.
In writing this book, I wanted to make an incremental contribution to the ideas previously presented in The McKinsey Way and The McKinsey Mind. The key difference, and my reason for believing that another book will be helpful, involves this book's level of tactical implementation advice. As a starting point, it uses many of the same concepts presented in the model from The McKinsey Mind (that model centers on Analysis, Management, and Presentation, which are common to all team problem-solving projects), although they are organized a bit differently and the implementation advice goes to a deeper level.
Many readers of the first two books in the series (as well as the publisher) inquired about the possibility of such a field guide that would have very specific advice for tactical implementation of the ideas, along with more illustrations and tools for using the concepts on team problem-solving projects. That became the focus of my energy. Could I create a guide that would help several different audiences and add value to the already-crowded project management, problem-solving, and consulting fields of literature? While this book was theoretically similar to The McKinsey Mind at the start, I hope that it will add specificity and tips that will benefit current consultants, executives working in teams, and students and faculty in top academic institutions by offering some guidelines, checklists for projects, and illustrations of tools and templates for more high-impact deliverables.
My military observations developed primarily over the past year as I delivered several workshops to consulting firms on this approach to team problem solving. One day, while on vacation in the beautiful mountains of North Carolina (I am so glad that my wife, Meredith, comes from such an amazing area), I happened to come across a special program on the History Channel that was entitled "The Complete History of the Green Berets." In addition, the Army conducts much of its Green Berets training in North Carolina. The depiction of how the Green Berets were founded and how they go about their training, revealed some amazing similarities to those experienced at McKinsey. Everything—the core values, clear missions, consistency in techniques, and significant investments in training and world-class results—mapped across both organizations. The more I researched the special forces organization and its training, the more parallels came to light. I even borrowed the terms Rules of Engagement and Operating Tactics in my organizing framework.
THE APPROACH
During my journey to create a team problem-solving "Master Guide of SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures)," the goal of making a high-impact contribution was paramount. After developing a formal set of Rules of Engagement for top projects, the concepts were tested through training programs, secondary research, and more than 100 interviews with consultants. Training programs were created and delivered to students, faculty, executives, and consultants; each session focused on pragmatic, actionable tactics for successful project management. Also included in the approach was research on books on project management, consulting, and strategic thinking. My most valuable sources of input were conversations with current and former consultants from McKinsey and other top firms who graciously listened to my ideas and shared their own thoughts, stories, and anecdotes.
What did I learn during this process? A few key takeaways come to mind. First, the concepts are not rocket science. Very little in this book is complex, new, or revolutionary. That having been said, the value proposition of the thoughts presented herein (and my motivation for continuing with the book-writing effort) is the organization of the concepts, prioritization of implementation considerations, and real-life examples that should bring the ideas to life. Also, the templates and tools will save teams time as they work to use the concepts in their projects.
Second is the critical importance of discipline in execution. The more one analyzes the success that McKinsey continues to enjoy year after year (and the success of organizations such as the Green Berets), the more it is apparent that such success stems from consistent delivery of a clearly articulated sense of values and protocols. I have observed similar concepts in discussions and training programs in many other consulting firms, but very few of these firms have achieved the level of project management excellence (referred to here as "team problem solving," as it is a bit broader than just managing the project) and continued impact throughout the world that McKinsey has (working for the vast majority of the Fortune 100 companies in the world). One of the key elements enabling this discipline is massive investment in recruiting, bringing people on board, training, mentoring, and rewarding people for the desired behaviors that McKinsey has identified as being critical for success.
Finally, good consultants must understand and excel at the art of storytelling. Among other things, a good story can help to hold people's attention, to build an interpersonal connection, and to persuade an audience. This concept is built into the model discussed here, and its contribution to successful completion of this project is signficant. In addition to sharing stories (good and bad) from top consultants about their implementation of many of the ideas from this book, a team of MBA students volunteered to work on a pro bono project to apply the tools, to document the results, and to tell the implementation story of a real-life engagement. Our approach to this project involved testing a hypothesis about the most important tools for project management and seeking confirming and disconfirming evidence from people who do this for a living (and from students learning the art). What follows is the latest iteration of a model inspired by my experiences at McKinsey but amplified after years of reflection. I hope you find it helpful!
INTRODUCTION
THE MODEL
I would like to introduce you to the TEAM FOCUS model, first describing the ideas at a high level here, then going into much more detail later in the book (each element has its own chapter). In each section, you will find a core concept, detailing a clear and straightforward set of SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) with the following five parts:
Concept: a brief overview of the chapter topic
Rules of Engagement: three high-priority, action-oriented recommendations
Operating Tactics: very specific tactical advice
Stories from the Field: applications and insights from ex-McKinsey consultants and business school students
Case Study: a true story of how the ideas were implemented during a pro bono consulting project
The concepts are captured by two acronyms that I believe emphasize the model's most critical elements and, more important, capture the essence of the model's two key components. The framework for the book is TEAM FOCUS, which is described here. Note that you will not find the TEAM FOCUS acronym in the training manuals of McKinsey. In the creation of this model, my starting point was the documentation of the key takeaways from my research and experience at McKinsey and other consulting firms that related to team problem solving. Over the past six years, I have been refining the model in pursuit of a framework that summarizes what I feel are the most important concepts for success in this arena. Thus, while the actual framework is not used at McKinsey, the concepts are consistent with those taught to the up-and-coming advisors to the top corporations in the world at McKinsey and elsewhere.
Figure I-1 TEAM FOCUS Model
The first component covers four key elements of the interpersonal interactions that affect project management and team problem solving; thus the key word TEAM:
TALK—One of the most important elements of high-quality team problem solving is establishing very clear channels of communication. This chapter discusses special communication tools and
provides guidance concerning best-process communication, inclusion of important constituents outside of the core team, and tips on managing interpersonal dialogue. The chapter also features a special section about listening.
EVALUATE—Teamwork is a dynamic process, and the most successful teams are those that are able to assess their current level of performance and adapt accordingly. The starting point for good evaluation is an open dialogue about expectations, group norms, specific work processes, and tools for monitoring progress. Implicit in the team evaluation process is an individually based personal plan that allows each team member to grow and develop on a continual basis. We all have strengths and weaknesses, and evaluation is the only way in which we can adequately identify where to focus our energy for improvement.
ASSIST—Once the evaluation process is underway, the next critical phase of the teamwork process is assisting others to complete the team's objectives. This builds on the Evaluate phase, which identifies particular strengths of team members that can be leveraged for the good of the team. Strategic leverage of unique capabilities is an underlying component of all "special forces" organizations and is just common sense. At the same time, team members must hold one another accountable for their assigned responsibilities. Direct, honest, and timely feedback will ensure that the Assist process is operating correctly.
MOTIVATE—The last element of the model's interpersonal component involves very specific strategies for motivation. One of the most important considerations is the realization that team members are motivated by different factors. Accordingly, engaging in informal, candid conversations at the beginning of the project about what those unique motivators are and paying close attention to individuals' drivers will go a long way. Similarly, the best teams are those that provide positive recognition for individual contributions and take adequate time to celebrate as a group (many of us seem to do less and less of this the older we get).
The second component of the model relates to the core analytical elements of successful project management. The word itself is conveniently right on target: FOCUS.
FRAME—The first element in the FOCUS component is widely regarded as the most important in the entire model. Essentially, framing the problem (before you begin extensive data collection!) involves identifying the key question that you are studying, drawing issue trees for potential investigation, and developing hypotheses for testing during the project. Good framing translates into more effective problem solving, as you will be ensuring that the work you are doing will translate into high-impact results—the ultimate measure of effectiveness.
ORGANIZE—This element is a boring but necessary step in preparing the team for efficient problem solving. All teams organize in some manner or another, but my research suggests that more efficient teams organize around content hypotheses with the end in mind. Unfortunately, in many cases, there seems to be a default approach that compels teams to organize quickly around the buckets that seem to surface most easily, rather than on the basis of potential answers to the key question under study.
COLLECT—The next element of the model provides guidance that leads to the collection of relevant data, avoiding the overcollection of data that are not useful. The most efficient teams are those that can look at the two piles of data collected and smile as they realize that the relevant data (pile 1) far outweigh the irrelevant information (pile 2) because the team continuously analyzed the difference.
UNDERSTAND—As the team gathers data, these data must be evaluated for their potential contribution to proving or disproving the hypotheses. At McKinsey, the term used on an almost daily basis is "so what?"—what is the meaning of the insight from these data for the project, and ultimately for the client?
SYNTHESIZE—The final element in the model is to synthesize the information into a compelling story. Here is where the well-known "pyramid principle" related to organizing a written report or slide deck comes into play. In this chapter, I cover the guidelines for putting together and delivering a great final product.
MARCHING FORWARD
This is a guidebook for action. Each chapter builds the toolkit—tool by tool. The goal is to have all team members review the contents before starting a project, then dig deeper into the chapters over the course of the project. The book can also be used in academic settings to teach team problem solving, consulting, or project management. Courses with any sort of field study or consulting project may be able to immediately apply the concepts and templates contained herein. Each chapter concludes with a first-person account of how the tools worked in a real engagement (our case study).
The case study is a key aspect of this book. While I lived these principles during my years at PricewaterhouseCoopers and McKinsey and reflected on them during my years of teaching them to students, it was important to put them to the test in a live engagement. Six students surfaced who were willing to work on a pro bono project with me as a learning and résumé-building experience. One of these students, Tim Krzywicki, will tell you more about it throughout the book as the "narrator" of the team's experiences.
THE CASE STUDY
My name is Tim Krzywicki, and I am a first-year MBA student at the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University. I have been asked to recount my experience utilizing the TEAM FOCUS model while working on a pro bono consulting engagement with Dr. Friga. I'd like to begin by giving you an overview of the project, providing the team members' backgrounds, and then finally explaining how this case study will unfold throughout The McKinsey Engagement.
My team was charged with the task of conducting research and issuing recommendations about the strategic plan of an unincorporated area in Johnson County, Indiana, known informally as Center Grove. Specifically, we examined three options for Center Grove: 1) incorporating as an independent entity, 2) inviting annexation by another neighboring town, and 3) doing nothing.
My team members and I volunteered (somewhat unwittingly) to work on this project both for the opportunity to get some real-life experience and also to have a real impact on the community. It was immediately clear to me that this project would be different from a standard business consulting engagement because it was addressing a public issue; however, this interesting dynamic also gave us the potential to affect an entire community. Adding to the unique nature of this engagement was the fact that the project had been initiated by a previous year's group of MBA students, so we were neither jumping onto a project nor starting one from scratch. Rather, we had to pick up the pieces and charge ahead, reviewing dormant and somewhat haphazard research with our eyes firmly fixed on our already-established final deadline: a presentation to key stakeholders at a town meeting in four months.
Our "superstar" team (bear in mind that Dr. Friga seems to call everybody a superstar) consisted of five MBA students—Alan, Bhavin, Rachita, Shalini, and me—and was headed by Dr. Friga as our engagement partner. We also had special contributions from Chris Cannon, a second-year MBA student who filled the role of engagement manager and is now serving the country as an Army officer in Afghanistan. At the time of the project, I was in my second year of Indiana University's joint JD and MBA program, but I was in my first year at the Kelley School of Business. My eclectic studies also include an undergraduate degree in engineering, so I provided broad knowledge as well as valuable nonbusiness expertise. Even without my multiple fields of study, however, the group members' talents were well balanced. Alan's background was in general management and finance, Bhavin had multiple degrees in computer information systems and information technology, Rachita had engineering and finance concentrations and was consequently quantitatively focused, and Shalini's unique contributions were marketing insight and a truly international perspective (she had lived in six countries and spoke five languages!). There were certainly overlaps of experience within our group, but our backgrounds and especially our interests were diverse enough to provide many perspectives and to help us to be creative as well as effective.
At the end of each cha
pter, I'll provide my insights into how the key points from that chapter's Rules of Engagement and Operating Tactics applied to our project. Keep an eye out for documents and charts, as I'm also including some of our team's relevant deliverables. You'll see that my reflections are hardly exhaustive; I've chosen to highlight the important points that best show how the framework functions in a real-life project. I'll be honest: some of our experiences were extremely positive, while others are most kindly described as less than neutral. Similarly, we used many of Dr. Friga's Operating Tactics, but we didn't use them all. Ours was not a perfect project, and we certainly ran into our share of obstacles; however, the Johnson County case study was a huge success, and from what I understand, it continues to have lasting impact in the community. More important for your purposes, though, it provides an arena where you can view the strategies and tools detailed in each chapter in a practical light, prodding you to think about what a successful implementation of your next project might look like. I hope that through this real-life application of the TEAM FOCUS framework, you will learn from both our bursts of (brief) brilliance and our mistakes.
The McKinsey Engagement Page 2