Project Team Members and Project Goals and Objectives

Abstract

This is the seventh and final article of the series: Project Management for Team Members (aka Project Followership).
Here we will deal with the role of project team members in defining and interpreting project goals and objectives. We believe this topic deserves special attention since in many studies focused on Project Critical Success Factors, project goals and objectives are frequently listed among the top factors. However, to our knowledge, nobody has commented on whether project team members should contribute to the definition of project goals and objectives and how they interpret them.

Full text

PM World Journal Project Team Members and Project Goals and Objectives
Vol. V, Issue VIII – August 2016 by Marco Sampietro
www.pmworldjournal.net Series Article
(c) 2016 Marco Sampietro www.pmworldlibrary.net Page 1 of 7
Project Team Members and Project Goals and Objectives
Marco Sampietro
SDA Bocconi School of Management
Introduction
This is the seventh and final article of the series: Project Management for Team
Members (aka Project Followership).
Here we will deal with the role of project team members in defining and interpreting
project goals and objectives. We believe this topic deserves special attention since in
many studies focused on Project Critical Success Factors, project goals and
objectives are frequently listed among the top factors. However, to our knowledge,
nobody has commented on whether project team members should contribute to the
definition of project goals and objectives and how they interpret them.
Before going any further, it is important to clarify what project goals and objectives
are. In fact, by surfing the web or reading different project management books, you
will find slightly different to very different (and even contrasting) definitions. The first
thing we noticed (which surprised us) is that the definition of project goal(s) is not
particularly frequent in project management literature, while more attention is paid to
the definition of project objectives. For example, the PMBOK® defines objectives
and not goals. We also noticed that many books and articles report “project goals
and objectives” together and we had the feeling that the terms were used with very
similar meanings. Our feelings were supported by the definitions provided in English
dictionaries where the difference between goals and objectives is subtle.
For example, The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language defines
an objective as something worked toward or striven for; a goal; and goal as the
object toward which an endeavor is directed; an end.
Since we do not wish to bore you with all the definitions we found, to summarize, in
Table 1 you can find the main differences between Goal and Objective.
Table 1. The Differences between Goal and Objective
Goal
Objective
Most appropriate
definition1
Something one wishes to
accomplish. Broader,
more timeless than an
A concrete statement
describing what the project
is trying to achieve. The
1
This definition is also based on a personal evaluation since many different and even contrasting definitions
are available. We selected these definitions because to us they set quite clear boundaries between goals and
objectives.

PM World Journal Project Team Members and Project Goals and Objectives
Vol. V, Issue VIII – August 2016 by Marco Sampietro
www.pmworldjournal.net Series Article
(c) 2016 Marco Sampietro www.pmworldlibrary.net Page 2 of 7
objective. Expressed as a
desired and targeted
happening.2
objective should be written
at a low level, so that it can
be evaluated at the
conclusion of a project to
see whether it was achieved
or not. A well-worded
objective will be Specific,
Measurable, Attainable/
Achievable, Realistic and
Time bound (SMART)3
Measure
In can be qualitative
and/or quantitative.
It should be quantitative.
Link with the project
effort
Indirect. External factors
may influence the ability to
attain the project goal.
Direct. If the project tasks
are correctly implemented,
project objectives should be
achieved.
Time frame to measure
the achievement
Normally some time has to
pass after the project end
in order to see the effect
on the project goal.
Normally right after the
conclusion of the
project/deliverable/
actions/tasks that should
achieve the objective.
Impact type
Normally measured in
business terms (sales
increase, costs reduction,
market share, time to
market, agility, reputation
etc.).
Normally measured in
technical terms (acceptance
of the solution, respect of
schedule and budget etc.).
Numerosity
One or just a few.
One to many relationships
with goals. There can be up
to a few dozen.4
Project Team Members and the Definition of Project Goals and
Objectives
An initial question involves trying to define whether it is correct to involve project
team members in the definition of project goals and objectives.
By following the suggestions and interpretations we gave in the previous articles of
the “Project Management for Team Members” series some may think that the
answer must be a big fat yes!
2
Batten, J. D, Tough-Minded Leadership, AMACOM, New York, NY, 1989
3
Mochal T, the TenStep Project Management Process Glossary
4
It depends case by case however, and it is good practice not to confuse technical requirements and the
desired performances of tasks, sets of tasks, and deliverables with the project objectives. Project objectives
refer to the project as a whole and in order to have a focused team there should not be too many of them.

PM World Journal Project Team Members and Project Goals and Objectives
Vol. V, Issue VIII – August 2016 by Marco Sampietro
www.pmworldjournal.net Series Article
(c) 2016 Marco Sampietro www.pmworldlibrary.net Page 3 of 7
However, this is the time for exceptions. As a starting point we can say that “it
depends.” Now we shall try to explain why.
Team members are usually experts of a particular professional/technical domain.
Team members might be best placed to propose innovations related to their
expertise but they are not always able to see or understand the big picture. In
addition, team members tend to promote incremental innovations since disruptive
innovation may put their work at stake and render their skills obsolete. Put another
way, what at team member level may be considered a disruptive innovation, at top
management level may be considered an incremental or limited innovation. Let us
consider an example related to the car industry. For a person working on light
components, the advent of LED could be considered a disruptive innovation (the
next one seems to be the laser) because LEDs have much lower energy
consumption compared to other commercial available solutions (such as Xenon),
they are more durable and they permit more freedom in the design of a car. From a
top management perspective, however, LEDs are still an innovation but they are not
“game changers” in the car sector. Elon Musk with Tesla is a game changer, and
from a completely different perspective Sergio Marchionne was a game changer
when FIAT took control of Chrysler with a one-of-a-kind financial transaction.
If we buy this interpretation (we are aware that there are many exceptions), when
radical innovation and big performance improvement are needed, projects goals and
objectives should not be set or too influenced by project team members. In this
scenario the paradigm is: first let’s set ambitious goals, then let’s translate them into
project objectives, finally let’s find a way to accomplish them. There are well-known
examples of this approach: Steve Jobs was quite famous for proposing solutions that
were considered impossible by technicians, while Ratan Tata decided to build a
$2000 car (the Tata Nano) when all the estimates of other car makers suggested
that it would be impossible for less than $4500. The Tata Nano is actually a good
example to show the difference between goals and objectives. From a technical
perspective the project objectives were met, while the goals, in term of sales, were
not. This is because a wrong assumption was made, namely that people would be
eager to buy a very cheap car. Consumer behavior analysis has revealed that
placing great emphasis on the concept of it being the cheapest car in the world
triggered the impression that owning a Tata Nano would mean showing that you are
poor and have no ambitions. It seems that many people preferred to buy a
secondhand car rather than a brand new Tata Nano for fear of being judged as
mentioned above.
Of course these are extreme and famous examples, but people who have had the
opportunity to work with all organizational layers (from C-levels to blue collars) have
noticed that many successful projects started by setting very ambitious goals and
objectives that were even originally refused or deeply criticized by the project team.
However, the same people can also report that the most unsuccessful projects
started in the very same way and that greater involvement of the project team could
have prevented such disasters by informing top management of the objective
reasons why such goals and objectives were impossible.

PM World Journal Project Team Members and Project Goals and Objectives
Vol. V, Issue VIII – August 2016 by Marco Sampietro
www.pmworldjournal.net Series Article
(c) 2016 Marco Sampietro www.pmworldlibrary.net Page 4 of 7
It would be nice to have a scientific formula to determine when project team
members should be involved in setting project goals and objectives, but
unfortunately there isn’t one.
As a personal observation, it seems that some top managers are able to understand
when a sector/technology is too fixed on traditions and thus when there is room for
feasible disruptive innovation. On the other hand, not all top managers have this
ability and in an attempt to change the rules of the game they end up in a “game
over” situation.
Project Team Members and the Interpretation of Project Goals and
Objectives
Some organizations evaluate project performance by considering the project
objectives while other organizations consider the project goals as well. As project
goals are influenced by external factors too, it seems more reasonable to evaluate
the project team on project objectives only. However, we can also argue that
measuring projects on objectives only may create the paradox of running many
successful projects in an unsuccessful organization or, to use an idiomatic
expression, the operation was successful but the patient died. For this reason, some
prefer to stretch the concept of project success by also taking into consideration the
achievement of the project goals, in full or in part.
The way an organization evaluates the performance of the project team has an
influence on how it interprets project goals and objectives and subsequent
behaviors.
If an organization measures the project success by only considering the
achievement of the project objectives, project team members are not incentivized to
develop what we called Global Vision (see PMWJ N.43, February 2016). In this way
the links (they can be synergies as well as conflicts) between one project and other
projects or processes are overlooked and extra-project communication is not
fostered. An additional risk is to reinforce an “it’s not my job” culture where people do
not care about the real outcome of the project, and compliance with organizational
processes and rules is more important than real customer satisfaction. In theory,
properly designed project objectives and the definition of the interfaces among
different projects may limit these issues. Unfortunately, very often there is no time or
expertise to design such perfect systems.
The alternative is to empower the project team with respect to the project goals too,
or at least some of them. If project goals are not considered completely independent
from the project effort, team members may change their perspective and behaviors
and they may interpret their role in a more extended and complex way. Some of the
most important changes we can mention include:
 trying to understand the relationships established in the project and other
related efforts (other projects, processes, operations etc.). In this way the
team can discover how they influence the project and how the project can

PM World Journal Project Team Members and Project Goals and Objectives
Vol. V, Issue VIII – August 2016 by Marco Sampietro
www.pmworldjournal.net Series Article
(c) 2016 Marco Sampietro www.pmworldlibrary.net Page 5 of 7
influence them and, in turn, this can reveal new opportunities to achieve the
project goals;
 seeing the project from a broader perspective by exploring and understanding
how the project fits into the overall strategy, thus including additional variables
that should be managed in order to achieve the project goals.
From a technical perspective, measuring the project performance on project goals
too (note: in addition to project objectives and not as their replacement) means
adding more flexibility to project objectives. For example, if a direct measure of
customer satisfaction is not part of the initial agreed project objectives but in order to
achieve the project goals above-average customer satisfaction is required and the
team recognize this aspect during project execution, in practice it is as though an
additional project objective has been added without it having been formalized.
From a team member perspective, interpreting project objectives is easier than also
dealing with project goals. Unfortunately, in dynamic and complex environments
being focused on project objectives only may not be enough to sustain
organizational success in the long run. The paradox is that in an attempt to be very
rigorous and accurate in defining the project objectives, we are also adding an
element of rigidity that might not fit with the environment the team has to deal with.
On the other hand, project goals are subtler when viewed from team member
perspective and they may lead to different interpretations and possible conflicts
among team members and between team members and the rest of the organization.
This is especially true if those members have not been trained to think in a systemic
way.
Conclusion
As stated at the beginning, this contribution concludes the article series on “Project
Management for Team Members”. We have presented different topics which were
not strictly related to each other since the idea was not to create a comprehensive
and systemic work (which was the purpose of our book) but rather to address topics
that have not been discussed elsewhere and that we thought were relevant.
If you like, we will continue to publish articles on “Project Management for Team
Members” and other topics too in the PM World Journal.
Thank you for your attention and stay tuned!

PM World Journal Project Team Members and Project Goals and Objectives
Vol. V, Issue VIII – August 2016 by Marco Sampietro
www.pmworldjournal.net Series Article
(c) 2016 Marco Sampietro www.pmworldlibrary.net Page 6 of 7
Bibliography
Archibald, R. D. 2003. Managing High-Technology Programs and Projects, 3rd
Edition. New York, NY: John Wiley&Sons.
Batten, J. D. 1989. Tough-Minded Leadership. New York, NY: AMACOM.
Biafore, B. Microsoft Project 2013. The Missing Manual. California, Sebastopol:
O’Reilly Media
Goal vs. Objective. Diffen.com. Diffen LLC, retrieved on July 28, 2016.
Mochal, T. The TenStep Project Management Process Glossary.
Project Management Institute. 2013. A Guide to the Project Management Body of
Knowledge (PMBOK Guide, Fifth Edition). Pennsylvania, Newton Square: Project
Management Institute.
Sampietro, M. Villa, T. 2014. Empowering Project Teams. Using Project Followership
to Improve Performance. Boca Raton: CRC Press
The Free Dictionary by Farlex. www.thefreedictionary.com
Webster’s. 1996. Webster’s encyclopedic unabridged dictionary of the English
language. New York, NY: Random House.
Wideman, M. Project Management Glossary of Term, V 3.1.
http://www.maxwideman.com/pmglossary

PM World Journal Project Team Members and Project Goals and Objectives
Vol. V, Issue VIII – August 2016 by Marco Sampietro
www.pmworldjournal.net Series Article
(c) 2016 Marco Sampietro www.pmworldlibrary.net Page 7 of 7
About the Author
DR. M ARCO SAMPIETRO
MIL AN , IT AL Y
Marco Sampietro obtained a Ph.D. at the University of Bremen, Germany. Since
2000 he has been a professor at SDA Bocconi School of Management, Milan, Italy.
SDA Bocconi School of Management is ranked among the top Business Schools in
the world (Financial Times, Forbes, Bloomberg, and The Economist rankings). He is
a Core Faculty Member at SDA Bocconi School of Management and teaches
Project Management on the MBA – Master of Business Administration, and GEMBA
– Global Executive Master of Business Administration programs. He is Faculty
Member at MISB – Mumbai International School of Business, the Indian subsidiary
of Bocconi University, and Visiting Professor at IHU – International Hellenic
University, Greece. He is also a Contract Professor at Bocconi University and
Milano Fashion Institute for the Project Management courses.
He was a speaker at the NASA Project Management Challenge 2007, 2008, and
2011, in the USA, and a speaker at the PMI Global European Congress, Italy, 2010.
He is a Member of the Steering Committee of IPMA-Italy.
He is contributor, co-author and/or editor of 11 books on project management and 7
books on IT management. Among them: Empowering Project Teams. Using Project
Followership to Improve Performance. CRC Press, 2014. Finally, he is the author of
award-winning case studies and papers.
Dr. Sampietro can be contacted at: marco.sampietro@sdabocconi.it