1. 13-10-2008 Page 1
THE THIRD WAY
Using the consultancy
approach to avoid the
seven deadly sins of
internal project teams
Version 3.7
October 13 2008
Internal projects don’t always deliver what they promise
These days, you can hardly read a business or
financial article without encountering the
phrase ‘Businesses and organizations are
increasingly facing a complex and rapidly
changing environment’. In fact, this sentence is
so ubiquitous that it is easy to start taking the
situation for granted. But changing business
scenarios do result in real-world challenges for
businesses – challenges that they have to deal
with every day, whether they like it or not.
Internal project teams often fail to
deliver the required results
One of the main consequences of our new
business environment is the increasing
reliance on projects to deliver answers to
specific, one-off issues that need to be dealt
with outside of day-to-day organizational
structures. These projects can be externally
focused (developing a new service) or
internally focused (improving internal
processes). They can be strategic (the
development of a new market segment
strategy) or operational (streamlining a process
in a factory). They can also be short-term (an
immediate response to a competitor’s action)
or long-term (such as planning and monitoring
the roll-out of a new technology).
Whatever the case, the projects being carried
out by typical organizations are becoming
more complex on both external and internal
dimensions. External complexity is often
related to challenging goals and targets that
are open to interpretation and which require
buy-in from different stakeholders. Internal
complexity arises when distance grows
between the project and team members’ day-
to-day business, compounded by the level of
sophisticated data collection and “out of the
box” thinking required to reach optimal results.
External consultancy often brings
problems of its own
An executive faced with a complex issue faces
a choice: either they give the responsibility for
resolving the issue at hand to an internal
project team, or they call in a blue-chip
consulting company of their choice. More often
than not, management is unhappy with the way
earlier critical projects have been carried out
and the results that they have delivered. The
too common response is therefore to bring in a
team of consultants. But this isn’t always the
golden solution it promises to be. In addition to
large invoices, consultants bring their own set
of issues and problems, ranging from
insufficient understanding of critical issues to
implementation delays due to limited buy-in of
the project conclusions.
Projects are going to keep on increasing
in complexity
It is clear that projects are going to become
even more complex on both internal and

2. 13-10-2008 Page 2
external dimensions, meaning that dealing with
them in the most effective way possible is
going to become even more critical. As the
pressure to cut costs continues, there will be
less room for the ’easy answer’ of hiring in
expensive consultants. One of the most
important key questions executives face today,
therefore, is how to make internal project
teams so effective and efficient that they
deliver the required project results on time
without the need for expensive external
consultants.
A ‘third way’ answer is to run internal
project teams like consulting teams
We believe that there is an answer to this
dilemma. We have been helping companies
run and manage their internal project teams for
years, and our work has clearly demonstrated
that all organizations can make their internal
project teams more effective and efficient by
structurally using the very methods and tools
that consultants routinely use in running their
projects. By using this “third way” combination
of an internal project team run as a consulting
team, companies can resolve many of the
vexing problems typically associated with
internal projects while avoiding the huge fees
demanded by leading consulting companies.
Knowing your project ‘type’ helps focus time and resources
In order to understand the ways in which
internal project teams can use consultancy
methodology to improve their results, it is
important to understand and differentiate
between different types of projects. The
reason? Each type of project has specific
issues and challenges, and understanding the
differences allows a better focus of resources,
time and energy on the most critical issues.
Understanding the four types of projects
Our experience has shown that the overall
complexity of a project is driven by its external
and internal complexity, the level of each which
can be determined by four factors as shown in
Figure 1.
Figure 1: Key complexity drivers

3. 13-10-2008 Page 3
Every project will vary on all of these factors.
However, by scoring each factor and
combining the scores for the external and
internal factors, projects can be positioned in a
project complexity matrix, as shown in Figure
2.
Figure 2: The four types of projects
Internal
Complexity
Low
High
High
Q3 Political Projects
Q1 Standard Projects
Q4 Complex Political
Projects
Q2 Complex Projects
Projects which need to resolve
politically sensitive issues
The straight-forward “bread
and butter” projects of an
organization
The projects that face complex
political issues and need to
carry out complex analytics
The projects which are
difficult to execute due to
“intellectual” challenges related
to data collection, and
analytics
Standard Projects are low in external
and internal complexity
Projects which are low in both external and
internal complexity are Standard Projects.
Typically, they are the daily projects such as
those related to service delivery, which are a
standard part of the company’s core
processes. These projects can certainly be
very large and crucial, and can have issues
and challenges of their own, but are well-suited
to standard project management tools.
Complex Projects are low in external
complexity and high in internal
complexity
Complex Projects are those projects that are
difficult to execute due to the intellectual
challenges related to data collection and
analysis, but where the external environment is
fairly straight-forward in terms of goals and
acceptance of results. An example of this type
of project is the development of a complicated
technical solution to a one-off problem.
Political Projects are high in external
complexity and low in internal
complexity
Political Projects do not require complicated
analytics. The complexity of these projects lies
in the political sensitivities of the issues that
the project has been asked to solve, and the
need for building broad consensus and
acceptance for conclusions. An example of
such a project is a cost reduction project within
a given department.
Complex Political Projects are high in
both external and internal complexity
Complex Political Projects are projects that
score high on both complexity dimensions.
These are typically projects that are complex to
carry out on a stand-alone basis, but which
also have a very complicated political
environment leading to unclear goals and a
complicated communication process.
Examples of such projects include the end-to-
end transformation of a business process
crossing different organizational units and the

4. 13-10-2008 Page 4
joint development of a new product by two
separate companies.
Complex Political Projects represent the
biggest challenge
In our experience, the more that the
classification of a project moves upwards and
to the right (in other words, towards quadrant 4
of Complex Political Projects), the greater the
probability is that the project results will not
meet expectations. These projects are almost
by definition the most crucial projects to the
ongoing success of the organization, so they
are often outsourced to consultants, resulting
in high costs and implementation issues. The
‘third way’ approach will therefore have the
greatest value for projects in this quadrant. The
methodology will certainly also work for
projects in quadrants 2 and 3 but the clearest
lessons can be learned from projects that are
complex both on external and internal
dimensions.
The reasons that Complex Political Projects fail
SIDEBAR
Lunching with a senior IT executive from a large European utility, we were told a story that highlights
most of the reasons that complex projects fail. The company was thinking of moving a number of key
operational processes to a country with a different regulatory and operating environment, and needed
to get a good understanding of the IT consequences. A team of people from different IT departments
was briefed and asked to come back with strong recommendations within eight weeks. Six months
later they were still working – they had come across new issues and needed to carry out more
interviews before developing their conclusions. When the team finally did deliver their reports, they
were focused on the project’s process and did not offer the clear cut answers required by
management. No analytical work had been done besides reproducing statements from others, and the
reports invariably presented the individual views of project participants which represented the political
views of the departments the participants came from, and typically raised more issues than they
resolved.
What are the issues with internal project
teams?
The IT story provided in the sidebar provides
an extreme but very useful example of the
typical problems encountered by management
when they use internal teams to carry out
complex projects. When we ask executives
and senior managers about their typical
experiences with internal project teams, we
invariably hear variations on these themes:
 “Our projects always use more time than
agreed”
 “The project teams are incapable of
delivering useful answers on time”
 “The project teams are unable to carry out
structured and complex analytics”
 “The project teams are unable to
communicate the results of the project and
get buy-in for their conclusions”
When we ask executives why their internal
teams fail, the first answer they give is that the
internal team members are not smart enough,
not experienced enough, and not motivated
enough, especially when compared to carefully
selected and trained, very intelligent and
motivated consultants who populate the top
blue-chip consulting companies.
Therefore, the typical response of the
executives is to call in consultants. When
asked about the main value provided by
consultants, the answers are the mirror-image
of the problems with the internal project teams:
 The ability of consultants to provide
concrete recommendations supported by
strong analytics
 The ability of consultants to present
findings in a well-structured manner and
get buy-in for their conclusions from the
key executive stakeholders

5. 13-10-2008 Page 5
 The knowledge that the consultants will
deliver within the agreed timeframe.
The positive view of the executives on the
added value of consultants in Complex Political
Projects is balanced by the executives’
experience that the use of consultants can lead
to additional problems such as analytical
answers that do not take sufficient
consideration of the company’s politics,
missing buy-in lower in the organization,
delays in implementation, and so on.
Therefore, they also expressed the strong wish
that they could achieve the required results
with internal teams.
We believe that this wish can be fulfilled. Our
experience is that all organizations have smart
and motivated people, and most executives do
agree with this statement. We also believe that
the lack of certain analytical skills can be
compensated by a better understanding of the
real issues faced by the organization. In other
words, we believe that it is possible to make
internal project teams more effective and
efficient. Based on our many interactions with
companies and client teams, both as a
consultant and a coach, we believe that we
know why these teams are not able to be as
effective and efficient as required by their
sponsors. This is a crucial first step in the
process of improving the performance of
internal project teams.
The 7 deadly sins of internal project
teams
Our analysis shows that people are not the
basic reason why internal projects fail. Rather,
there are other, more important reasons why
internal project are less successful than they
could be, and we call them the “7 deadly sins
of internal projects”:
 The project isn’t set up to focus on the
right issues
 The project sponsor receives limited
feedback
 The internal teams do not work effectively
as teams
 There is limited control of the project
process
 There is limited availability of analytical
skills
 There is limited ability/willingness to draw
conclusions
 Projects teams are not trained in how to
communicate/get buy-in for their
conclusions
The project isn’t set up to focus on the
right issues
Internal projects usually start with a meeting to
discuss “a problem”, and a project manager is
then asked to go away to solve “the problem”.
However, the discussion around “the problem”
has invariably been conceptual and broad,
and a lot of more or less trivial issues have
also been discussed. The project leader then
has a choice. They can try to solve “all” the
issues, but this lack of focus will almost always
result in a failed project. Alternatively, the
project leader can choose a sub-set of the
issues discussed, but unless they have the
skill required to develop a focused
understanding of the key issues combined
with a feedback process to the sponsor to
ensure that the thinking of the sponsor and the
project leader are aligned, this approach, too,
will fail.
The project sponsor receives limited
feedback
Developing a clear and common
understanding of the goals and deliverables of
the project is typically the first example of
insufficient communication between the
sponsor and the project team. Left
unaddressed, it will continue throughout the
project, with the project team working in
relative isolation from the sponsor. Sometimes
this is driven by the project team; often it is
driven by the “full” agenda (and possible low
interest) of the sponsor. The consequences of
this lack of feedback are that the team does
not have the opportunity to test its hypotheses
or get feedback from the sponsor about what
they are doing.
The internal teams do not work
effectively as teams
By definition, complex projects require a
project team consisting of individuals from
various parts of the organization who have no
or minimal knowledge of each other. Yet these
same people are expected to work under a

6. 13-10-2008 Page 6
great deal of time pressure to resolve
extremely complex key business and political
issues. Many employees are not comfortable
working in teams to start with, and may not
necessarily see any advantage to the
teamwork itself or even solving the issues at
hand. The consequences are that the project
team loses a lot of time trying to develop a
structured way of working and an efficient
allocation of key tasks. Sometimes they may
fail completely, especially if the original project
definition is unclear.
There is limited control of the project
process
All projects face issues related to controlling
the project process, such as managing scope
creep, understanding dependencies between
activities, managing to milestones, ensuring
that optimal use is made of the scarce
resources available to the project, and many
more. Numerous books have been written and
methodologies developed for dealing with
these types of issues. While these
methodologies can work well for standard
projects, they do not work well for complex
political projects, because:
 Project methodologies usually assume that
the final deliverables are standardized and
can be well defined. For Complex Political
Projects, the key issue is usually
answering a question, but the form and
structure of the answer cannot be pre-
defined
 Project methodologies assume a stable
external environment that has little or no
impact on the progress and direction of the
project. For a Complex Political Project,
dealing with the external environment is
usually one of the key challenges that the
project has to deal with
 Project methodologies assume that a
stable team used to working together is in
place. But as previously stated, the team
members asked to solve Complex Political
Projects come from different parts of the
organization, do not know each other, and
often have conflicting political interests
These differences make it extremely difficult to
manage Complex Political Projects. It is not
possible to clearly define the final project
outputs, it is difficult to estimate how much time
and effort will be required for specific tasks,
and finding the right balance between (internal)
analytical activities and (external)
communication-related activities is complex.
When these tasks are carried out by a team
with limited experience in running this type of
project, it is not surprising that delays and sub-
optimal use of time and resources occur. In
fact, even greater problems can arise if the
project team is given a “project manager” who
attempts to use standard project management
tools on a Complex Political Project, as this will
lead to a methodological strait-jacket, with too
much focus on process and insufficient focus
on content.
A general problem faced by almost all internal
projects is scope creep. This problem is even
bigger in Complex Political Projects because it
is often difficult to define in advance the issues
that need to be analyzed. Typically, scope
creep takes place when somebody (sometimes
the sponsor, sometimes not) asks the project
team to look into something that is outside of
the original scope of the project. Sometimes
this is unavoidable (due to the complex
external environment), sometimes it is unclear
whether the suggested activity will add value to
the goal of the project, and sometimes it is
welcomed by the team because it provides an
“excuse” for not finishing the project on time.
There is limited availability of analytical
skills
Carrying out Complex Political Projects
requires a broad range of analytical skills such
as collecting data from third-party sources or
face-to-face interviews, developing
sophisticated spreadsheet or database
models, and recognizing patterns,
understanding what they mean, and translating
them to the issue at hand. If the project team
does not have (or can’t develop) these skills,
the project will be limited in its ability to solve
issues through analytics, and will tend to rely
more on anecdotal evidence for any
conclusions they make.
There is limited ability/willingness to
draw conclusions
In every project, the time comes when
conclusions need to be made. This is either

7. 13-10-2008 Page 7
because all of the required analysis has been
carried out, or, more often, because the time
given to the project is up. However, if the
results of the project are uncomfortable to the
participants (as in the IT department example
in the sidebar or in projects dealing with
efficiency improvements), the project team
may try to avoid this obligation. They either ask
for more time for further analysis, or focus the
end results on the process and analytics. As a
consequence, the project is not just delayed –
it also does not deliver the clear
recommendations required by the sponsor.
Project teams are not trained to
communicate/get buy-in for their
conclusions
A key element of complex projects is ongoing
communication. This is important throughout
the project, but towards the end it becomes
even more important. Too many times, we
have seen project teams make presentations
to Steering Committees, Boards, or
Management Teams that are too long, boring,
full of process related issues, and without
recommendations or answers to the issues
that the project was supposed to deal with. We
have also seen final meetings in which there
was no agreement on basic data points, and
even violent disagreements on key
assumptions or conclusions. The
consequences were raising frustrations, further
delays, and another “nail in the coffin” of the
ability of internal project teams to deliver
meaningful results.
The solution is to run projects as consultants do
In order to improve its ability to successfully
carry out Complex Political Projects, an
organization needs to think about projects as
consultants do and ensure that the
organization as a whole is structurally able to
carry out this type of projects. Luckily, project-
focused changes are independent of structural
changes, and can be implemented as stand-
alone solutions for ongoing and new projects.
Structural changes are easy to apply
The structural changes required for increasing
the organizations overall ability to carry out
complex projects are the same as those
required for many other organizational
improvements. There are plenty of books and
articles on structural changes that describe
these changes, and there is no need to go into
details about these changes here. In brief, they
include fairly standard factors such as hiring
the right people with the right skills and attitude
for complex project work, developing reward
systems that motivate people to participate in
project work, offering training in project-related
and analytical skills, etc.
In addition, there are a number of activities that
need to take place in order to facilitate the
specific improvements required on a stand-
alone project level. Key examples of such
activities include developing an overview of
internal staff members who have successfully
carried out a Complex Political Project, which
can be very helpful in the staffing process, and
in setting up “Blue Teams”. There should also
be easy access to training modules focusing
on key analytical skills that are often required
for these types of projects. Such training
modules include spreadsheet modeling skills,
analytical skills, Pyramid Principle Training,
etc. The ability to give such training can be
developed internally, or can be given by
external staff.
Project-focused solutions are based on
the three phases of a project
In addition to these structural changes, there
are project-related solutions that are used by
all top consultants. These solutions can be
implemented on a stand-alone basis to help
individual projects minimize the effects of the
“7 deadly sins”. The starting point for improving
the efficiency and effectiveness of a project is
the realization that all projects consist of three
distinct phases. These phases are shown in
Figure 3.

8. 13-10-2008 Page 8
Figure 3: Three phases of a project
Preparatory Phase Project Phase Finalization Phase
•Setting up the project
•Agreeing key issues,
goals, and
deliverables
•Developing approach
•Putting together
team
•Aligning and training
team
•Collecting data
•Carrying out
interviews
•Developing models
•Etc
•Developing
conclusions
•Developing final
reports
•Developing and
carrying out
communication plan
•Ensuring
implementation
The bad news is that the “7 deadly sins” of
internal projects appear across of all these
phases. The good news is that in each of these
phases, lessons can be learned from the way
in which consulting companies carry out similar
projects. These lessons will enable internal
projects to deal with the “7 deadly sins” and in
turn help ensure the overall success of the
internal project. Figure 4 shows the three
phases and their relationship to the “7 deadly
sins”.
Figure 4: Where to deal with project issues
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3
"7 Deadly Sins" Preperatory Phase Project Phase Finalization Phase
Unclear initial definition
Limited feedback to project sponsor
Ineffective teamwork
Limited control of project process
Insufficient analytical skills
Inability to draw conclusions
Inability to communicate
The preparatory phase – a carefully
controlled beginning
The preparatory phase determines the overall
success of the project. The activities carried
out here will set the scene for all of the
following activities. In worst-case scenarios,
projects that have had a bad start must be
restarted. Consultants are therefore careful to
carry out a set of closely coordinated steps
during this phase of a project. They:
 Agree the project sponsor
 Choose the project manager
 Develop the project charter
 Set up the team
 Kick-off the team

9. 13-10-2008 Page 9
Each of these activities should also be carried
out by an internal project team. Doing so will
enable the team to deal with four of the “7
deadly sins” right at the start (as shown in
Figure 5).
Figure 5: Preparatory Phase activities
Unclear initial
definition
Limited
feedback to
project
sponsor
Ineffective
teamwork
Limited
control of
project
process
Insufficient
analytical
skills
Inability to
draw
conclusions
Inability to
communicate
Agree the project sponsor
Choose the project manager
Develop the project charter
Set up the team
Kick-off the team
"7 Deadly Sins" of Internal Projects
Choose a project sponsor who has
interest, time and energy
For consultants, the project sponsor is usually
a given, and will be the executive who comes
up with the issue to be solved. This will also
often be the case for internal projects, but
sometimes it will be the executive who has the
responsibility for the area to which the issues
pertain. In cases in which the project sponsor
is not self-evident, careful thought should be
given to who is chosen to perform this function.
The executive in question should have interest
in the issue, as well as the time and availability
required to give sufficient input to the project.
The knowledge and the interest of the sponsor
should play a key role in ensuring that the
project gets a clear and crisp initial definition.
In addition, the interest of the sponsor should
translate into ongoing time spent with the
project team to ensure that the team is heading
in the optimal direction, developing the right
conclusions, and thinking about the external
environment and the required communication
process. In addition, the sponsor must help the
team deal with organizational issues. If it is
decided that the project requires a steering
committee, there may be some overlap in
responsibilities between the sponsor and the
steering committee.
Choose a skilled, motivated project
manager with an affinity for the key
areas
The next step is to choose the project
manager. This is also a crucial step – this
person will have overall responsibility for the
project and will be the main “linking-pin”
between the project and key executives. In
consulting organizations, this is a job function
and a career step for consultants with
considerable experience in carrying out and
leading complex projects. This specific
combination of experience and skills may be
difficult to find for internal projects. However,
you should be able to find a project manager
with an affinity and understanding to the key
areas to be covered by the project, the right
motivation for making the project a success,
and the right skills for carrying out the project.
The project manager will play a key role in
ensuring that the project has a clearly defined
background, goals, and deliverables. As is the
case with a consultant, the project manager
should be made to understand that he will be
measured on the success of the project, and
will be expected to manage and develop both
the team and the overall analytical process
itself.
Develop a project charter based on an
executive/sponsor briefing
The first task for the project manager will be to
develop the project charter. In a consulting
project, the project charter is written in the form
of a proposal, has been discussed extensively
with the sponsor, and has been formally
agreed to by the sponsor (as the contract with
the consultant). As previously stated, not
having this type of structured and formalized
“contract” is one of the key reasons why
internal projects fail. A project charter must be

10. 13-10-2008 Page 10
developed and discussed, based on a briefing
with the sponsor and other relevant executives.
It should include the following items (typically
included in all consulting proposals):
 The background to the project, explaining
why it is required
 The overall goal of the project
 The concrete deliverables for the project
so that it reaches its goals
 A suggested approach for the project
 The required team for the project
 The required timing for the project
Creating this project charter will be time well
spent – it will serve the same purposes as a
consultant’s proposal, by ensuring that there is
a clear definition of the project to be carried out
by:
 Providing a concise and agreed
description of the situation leading to the
project
 Suggesting concrete goals and
deliverables that are reachable by a
project in a given time-frame
 Providing an agreement on how the project
will be carried out and what resources are
required
 Providing a fixed time frame for how long
the project will take.
Teams should reflect the issues at hand
and contain the right mix of skills
The project charter will help you select the best
team possible. A consulting company creates a
project team by choosing people with the right
set of skills, experience, and knowledge of the
relevant industry and company, but always
faces issues related to the availability of its
“best” consultants. An internal project team
will also need to be staffed with the “best”
people, as this will help resolve many of the
issues related to ineffective teams and
insufficient analytical skills.
Two critical dimensions should be kept in mind
when staffing a team. First, the composition of
the team must reflect the issues that the
project will be dealing with. If the project
involves several countries, then the project
team should be appropriately international to
ensure that country-specific issues are
addressed and that buy-in is created
internationally for the conclusions. Second, if
the issues to be solved involve several
organizational units (such as sales and
production), this must also be reflected in the
choice of team members.
Teams also need to have the right mixture of
skills. Three broad categories of skills will be
required for each project:
a) Technical and functional skills directly
related to the issues to be solved and/or
the approach to be taken within the project
b) Analytical skills
c) Interpersonal skills
It is important to keep in mind that the required
skills do not have to be proven through
experience. Just as consultants do most of
their training “on the job”, skills can and will be
developed within the project. For example, if
the project involves building a fairly complex
model, then the team should include
somebody with relevant modeling experience
or somebody with some modeling experience
who is very interested in increasing their skill
and experience in this area.
Use a formal kick-off to create shared
understanding and build skills
A consulting project always starts with a formal
kick-off. The goal of this kick-off is to ensure
that the whole team understands the
background and goals of the project, knows
what the deliverables are, and has a clear
understanding of the roles to be played by the
different team members. A team kick-off is also
important for internal projects, and should
cover the same issues, but an internal team
will not have the same understanding of how
teams work, nor the same skills and
experience. The internal kick-off should
therefore work through these types of issues.
Internal project kick-offs typically take one day,
and should include the following items:
 A “get to know” session
 A training session on how to become an
effective and successful team
 A training session in key (generic)
analytical tools

11. 13-10-2008 Page 11
 An explanation of the project (background,
goals, and deliverables)
 A discussion on the approach and
development of a detailed work plan
Going through these items will ensure that the
team understands what the project is about
and what it needs to do to be successful. It will
ensure that the group of people allocated to
the project becomes a successful team who
will work together effectively and efficiently to
reach the agreed goals and targets.
The project phase – meeting complex
challenges with internal teams
This phase is normally the longest of the three
phases, and is the phase during which most of
the work is carried out. The focus of a
consultant’s team in this phase is to:
 Create a situation in which the team can
work together
 Monitor milestones and deadlines carefully
 Guard against scope creep
 Keep the sponsor/steering committee
involved
 Create a “Blue Team”
 Provide ad-hoc training
Each of these activities should also be carried
out by an internal project team. Doing so will
enable the team to deal with four of the “7
deadly sins” (as shown in Figure 6).
Figure 6: Project Phase activities
Unclear initial
definition
Limited
feedback to
project
sponsor
Ineffective
teamwork
Limited
control of
project
process
Insufficient
analytical
skills
Inability to
draw
conclusions
Inability to
communicate
Create a good working situation
Monitor milestones
Guard against scope creep
Keep sponsor involved
Create a "Blue Team"
Provide ad-hoc training
"7 Deadly Sins" of Internal Projects
Create a situation in which the team can
work together
The key challenge in this phase for the internal
team is to enable the team to work together.
This involves ensuring that all team members
are able to use the time allocated for the
project, and that as much time as possible is
spent working together. Consultants often use
a ‘trick’ here to achieve this goal – they request
a project room for the team and have every
team member commit to working out of this
room for a certain number of days each week.
This close proximity assists in team
cohesiveness and ensures that issues are
dealt with immediately thereby increasing the
overall efficiency and effectiveness of the
internal team
Monitor milestones and deadlines
carefully
Monitoring milestones and deadlines is more of
a challenge for an internal team than a
consulting team. Remember, a key part of
building a successful team is enabling the trust
that comes from keeping agreements and
commitments. While this is “second nature” for
consulting teams, internal teams will face
pressure from the team member’s own
organizations, internal cultures which are not
strong in following up on commitments, and so
on. The project manager of an internal team
must work hard (with help from the sponsor if
required) to ensure that deadlines are met. In
addition, the project manager will need to
coordinate activities across different work
streams, and carry out quality assurance tasks
related to individual deliverables.

12. 13-10-2008 Page 12
Guard against scope creep
One of the most important roles of the project
manager during this phase is to guard against
scope creep. All projects, even those carried
out by consultants, have this issue. The project
manager of a consulting project guards against
scope creep by assessing whether requests for
additional work fits within the scope of the
project and whether it can be done within the
agreed resource and time limitations. If this is
not the case, then they discuss the issue with
the sponsor and agree the solution. The
solution can be a) not performing the extra
activities, b) performing the extra activities but
dropping another activity, or c) performing the
extra activity and extending the available time
or increasing available resources. The project
manager of an internal project should handle
this in exactly the same manner, and use the
project charter as a basis for discussions on
this topic. While this will not “magically” ensure
that the project is completed on time, it will, at
the very least, enable a structured discussion
on priorities.
Keep the sponsor/steering committee
involved
A consultant ensures that the sponsor/steering
committee also plays an ongoing role during
this phase. The internal project manager
should do the same. Sponsors should be
available to deal with ad-hoc issues that pop
up and need to be “kicked upstairs”. The
steering committee should meet regularly to
receive progress updates and choose the
optimal direction at key decision points. These
meetings should also be used to discuss
issues related to possible scope creep and
new directions which the project might need to
take.
Create a “blue team” to discuss specific
challenges and issues
A tool used by some consultants in this phase
is a “blue team”. This is a structured meeting
where the project team presents its
hypotheses and potential solutions to a
selected team external to the project. The
people selected for the “blue team” should be
experts in the key areas relevant to the project.
Their role is to give constructive criticism to the
ideas and work of the project team, with the
goal of improving their work. The project team
can also choose to use the “blue team” to
discuss specific issues or challenges that they
are facing.
It should not be difficult for most internal
projects to put together a team that can play
the same type of role for their project. The
“blue team” can consist of people from internal
organization and, depending on the sensitivity
of the project, external experts such as
professors, industry experts, etc. Using a “blue
team” will help ensure that the team has
covered all the key issues related to the project
at hand, and will also provide input on the
hypotheses that the team has developed, what
it has done to prove or disprove these
hypotheses, and suggest alternative activities
to move the project forward.
Provide ad hoc training for specific tools
While consultants ensure that team members
have ongoing training in specific analytic tools,
a key challenge in this phase of the project for
an internal project team is to make sure that
the best use is made of key analytical tools.
The broad overview of potential tools provided
during the kick-off provides a good starting
point, but internal teams also need to be
trained to use specific tools for key issues that
they are facing. This should be done on an ad-
hoc basis related to the specific issue. The
project leader and the rest of the team play a
key role in helping each other define analytic
methods within the project, and helping each
other carrying out the required analytics. As
stated earlier, the ideal team will include
people who have experience with specific tools
such as spreadsheets. Where this is not
possible, training opportunities should be
created, even in situations where this creates
problems for the project’s timelines. A key
enabler for this will be an overview of other
people within the company who have the
relevant experience or knowledge, and who
can provide tips and ideas on an ad-hoc basis.
The finalization phase – where internal
teams form conclusions and
communicate results
In this phase most of the work related to
developing the project’s conclusions have
been carried out (although it pays to keep in

13. 13-10-2008 Page 13
mind that the borders between the phases are
never sharp, and all-nighters involving last-
minute analytics before final presentations are
fairly common). The main activities carried out
by a consulting team in this phase are:
 Developing conclusions
 Using the Pyramid Principle
 Communicating these conclusions in such
a way that they are accepted and
implemented
Each of these activities should also be carried
out by an internal project team. Doing so will
enable the team to deal with two of the “7
deadly sins” (as shown in Figure 7).
Figure 7: Phase 3 activities
Unclear initial
definition
Limited
feedback to
project
sponsor
Ineffective
teamwork
Limited
control of
project
process
Insufficient
analytical
skills
Inability to
draw
conclusions
Inability to
communicate
Developing conclusions
Using the Pyramid Principle
Communicating the conclusions
"7 Deadly Sins" of Internal Projects
Make clear to the team that the only
acceptable result is a conclusion
A consulting team knows very well that it is
obligated to come up with firm conclusions and
recommendations. Ensuring that an internal
team recognizes this responsibility starts
during the first phase, where it must be made
absolutely clear to the team that the only
acceptable result from the project is a firm
conclusion. This must be inherent in the stated
description of the issue at hand, and must also
be hammered into the project team at every
possible moment. The finalization phase can
therefore be seen as a final push process in an
ongoing effort to “force” the team to develop
and agree the key conclusions. If the deadlines
are tight (and they should be) the team will not
be able to use the “more analysis” excuse.
Use the Pyramid Principle
Consultants use an extremely useful method
called the Pyramid Principle to ensure that
both the process leading to conclusions and
the communication process is efficient. The
Pyramid Principle should also be used by
internal teams to force them to develop a
supportive structure for their conclusions, and
at the same time structure the final reports.
Learning to use the Pyramid Principle should
therefore be one of the pillars of the training
program for the internal project teams.
Meet with steering committee members
before the final presentation
Consultants can sometimes be seen as
obsessive in their quest to get meetings with all
senior members of a steering committee
before the final presentation. However, there is
a reason for this beyond the development of
the consultant’s network, as these meetings
ensure that all participants at a final meeting
have seen the presentation beforehand and
have had the opportunity to ask their specific
questions and give their comments. This
minimizes the risk of “surprises” at the final
presentation, and increases the probability of
the Steering Committee agreeing to and
accepting the conclusions developed by the
team, and thereby the probability of a
successful implementation. This approach
should therefore also be followed by internal
project teams.

14. 13-10-2008 Page 14
Internal project teams can replace consultants
External consultancy is used too often
Sometimes projects should be carried out by
external consultants. Perhaps the results have
to be booked very quickly. Maybe key parts of
the analysis involve external benchmarks or
other specific analytical skills which
consultants have. It may also simply be clear
that the required manpower is not available
within a given organization. However, our
experience shows that there is a large “middle
ground” of projects that could be carried out by
in-house project teams that are currently
outsourced to consultants.
Internal consulting groups can bring
more problems than they solve
Sometimes organizations that want to reduce
their dependency on external consultants
develop an internal consulting group. These
groups are typically staffed by ex-consultants
and carry out projects for different parts of the
organization. While this model works well in
certain types of businesses (Private Equity
investors such as KKR have their own
consultancy groups who initiate and lead
projects at newly acquired businesses), the
signals are mixed in many other organizations.
Often, the consultants from these groups are
treated as “external”, just as if they came from
a consulting company, or they are viewed as
simply following the political agenda of HQ.
This distrust is often made worse by the fact
that the ex-consultants often see their function
as a stepping-stone to a good job within the
organization, and are therefore perceived as
having their own political agenda for
highlighting problems. Our experience is
therefore that while such groups definitely add
analytical skills and power to the overall
organization, projects carried out by such
groups typically have many of the issues (buy-
in, delays in implementation, etc.) that external
consultants have.
Most organizations can learn how to use
internal project teams effectively
Any reasonably large organization has the
competence to ensure that certain basic skills
are in place. Using the methods outlined in this
article, they can carefully set up, perform,
monitor and finalize projects very successfully.
Organizations can optimize their internal
project teams by learning from the approach
consultants’ use, and transforming some of the
key “tricks of the trade” into dramatically
increased success.
Description of author
Rune Aresvik has been a consultant since 1990, working in a wide variety of consulting companies
ranging from a strategy/M&A boutique to a Big 4 consultancy to a large, international, high added
value management consultancy. He has worked at all levels of the consultancy organization, from
being a team member, to managing teams, to finally coaching teams as a Partner. He now runs Team
Based Consulting, which specializes in helping internal project teams become more successful.
Sources / Further reading
The Wisdom of Teams: Creating the High-Performance Organization - Jon R. Katzenbach & Douglas
K. Smith (Harvard Business School Press)
X-teams: How to Build Teams That Lead, Innovate, and Succeed - Deborah Ancona + Henrik
Bresman (Harvard Business School Press)
The Pyramid Principle (Third Edition) – Barbara Minto (FT-Prentice Hall)