When to Apply “Intelligent Disobedience”

“Intelligent disobedience”, as just discussed, should be applied in specific situations with specific intent, and a specific result in mind. Examples of pivotal instances where intelligent disobedience might be appropriate include:

• Dealing with unresponsive sponsors or key customers
• Managing culture clashes that inhibit project progress
• Needing to shake up lagging teams
• Overcoming resistance to changing processes
• Challenging “time versus quality” decisions
• Considering intuitive versus fact-based decision making

Techniques to apply “intelligent disobedience” in each of these situations will vary from environment to environment, and the relationships that exist between the PM, stakeholders and the project sponsors. The PM’s own personal style should be taken into account as well.

Supporting PMI® Principles

Certainly, engaging in “intelligent disobedience” involves some degree of risk. The PM must correctly read the political climate amongst stakeholders, understand the limits of the corporate culture, and quickly develop trust-based relationships. Misreading any of these while engaging in the “different” behaviors and approaches discussed here can be less than successful. However, h olding back and not sharing what you know – or strongly believe - to be true presents greater risk taking on your part, and could inappropriately introduce or prolong risk to your project. Examples of this are:

• Proposing a new alternative that challenges the “status quo”
• Choosing to take a risk when you consider it worthwhile for the business as a whole
• Taking over a troubled project and demanding expanded authority within the organization
• Saying “no” when your experience and knowledge suggest the proposed approach will fail
• Deciding you need to propose killing a “pet” project as a “proactive alternative to failure”

A cursory examination of “intelligent disobedience” might lead one to believe that the approach is counter to business ethics. Engaged properly with appropriate communication, this could not be farther from the truth. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines “ethics” as – “the discipline dealing with what is good and bad and with moral duty and obligation”. This means the PM should:

• Readily share bad news
• Readily ACCEPT bad news, (and possibly reward those sharing it) and do so gracefully
• Recognize that the best way to be “nice” is not to be “nice” -
• Point out shortcomings directly
• Present your perspective and convey your experience through constructive criticism

continue »