People-focused knowledge management

Enterprise Execution Capability
Many enterprises excel by being able to execute successfully. They
build internal capabilities, and practices that focus on developing a
“can do” mentality. The mentality is backed up with broad individ-
ual and team expertise and systems, procedures, and practices to
ascertain that all necessary resources are provided and that people
are motivated and the enterprise is flexible and ready to assist when
problems occur. Apart from providing the needed understanding as
indicated in the previous illustration, successful Implementation
depends upon the quality and sufficiency of the capabilities and
resources that are made available to execute the decision — to im-
plement the selected action-option. In many instances, execution 
failures are caused by budget limitations, miscalculations or misun-
derstanding, time pressures, and many other factors, as indicated by
the following example.
The Project Is Late and Will Cost More Than
Projected; Working Hard Instead of Working Smart
Does Not Always Work!
Leon Pavarotti, project manager in Prego Systems’ Informa-
tion Services Division, was leading a new project to create the
“Starburst” business system. Halfway into the project, Leon
started to have problems. He was an accomplished project
manager, but this project used a new and sophisticated tech-
nology with which both Prego and Leon lacked previous expe-
rience. The project was high priority and, when fully completed,
would bring considerable benefits that were central to Prego’s
continued success. Hence, it was important to finish Starburst
early and with all its planned features. However, now it
appeared to Leon that the project would exceed both its 
schedule and budget. Worse, there were issues that Leon and his
team did not seem to be able to overcome and Starburst might
fail to meet some of its design criteria.
Frank Hayes, the chief information officer, had been warned
that it might be risky to conduct the project with only in-house
staff and that it might be wise to bring in outside expertise,
which would at a minimum provide guidance. However, Frank
had seen Leon lead difficult projects before and was confident
that it would be quicker, less expensive, and a good learn-
ing experience for him to go it alone. When Leon reported 
Enterprise Situation-Handling
191
ch06.qxd 5/3/04 2:34 PM Page 191

---

problems, Frank decided to add several senior in-house people
to the team to help out and asked that together they should
work through the problems. Leon was not sure that it would
work but agreed and told the project staff to work harder and
start working overtime. He also asked professional friends
outside Prego for insights into their problems but received little
valuable help since the complexity of the project made it diffi-
cult to get assistance without total immersion.
The project was not rescued. It was several months late and
way over budget, it was missing several key features, and it was
of limited value to Prego. Since Prego had relied on the new
system for its success, the company suffered in the marketplace
and needed to cut back its staff across the board. Leon was fired,
but Frank — who was mainly to blame — was retained.