Jeremy Akin

Dana Barnett

PMG 320

2/19/23

Module 6: A Reflection on Risk

“The harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph”—Thomas Paine

Conflict is commonly seen as something negative. Historically, conflict involves violence.

From an early age, we are all conditioned to avoid conflict with those around us. Conflict is

present in all environments; conflict is not always visible. Conflict is not always comfortable

either. Sometimes it is much easier just to ignore the conflict in front of us and choose the

simple way out of a problem. Organizations experience conflict similarly to an individual.

Sometimes it is less costly to avoid a concern, or a conflict, than it is to deal with it and create a

contingency plan to deal with the possible repercussions. Leaders have a choice to avoid

conflict or embrace it.

Within module six of this week, we read about a case study involving the Altex

company. After World War II, the United States invested hundreds of millions of dollars into the

researching of powerful weapons of defense. Altex won the bid to develop a product for such

investments and during the planning of the product, the sponsor discussed risk management

with the selected project manager. The sponsor tells the project manager to scrap the risk

management and focus on completing the minimum requirement of 60 to 70 percent of the

project specifications. The first issue presented is that the project manager was brought into

the project after the bid has been completed and the customer has been told that Altex is
confident with the expectations, and deadline, and may even exceed expectations. The project

sponsor shows no desire to follow up with the project vision and only wishes to complete 60 to

70 percent of the requirements. One of the most important stakeholders is the sponsor, and

Altex’s sponsor does not care about risk if the project produces a monetary profit and promises

future projects. The risk management plan should be part of the proposal process and be

considered essential when placing a bid. To hide the risk of a project is both unethical and

dishonest to the customer.

The second core issue surfaces when the sponsor tells the project manager that any risk

management plan will not be a part of the official project. The sponsor is hyper-focused on the

Army’s perspective of the project and is overwhelmed with “what if” situations. Such a mindset

can be dangerous when dealing with a project of such magnitude. Even if the project was

funded from within, the sponsor's focus is on the profit margin. Additional investment in risk

management would take away from the bottom line. If the project manager were to follow the

requests of the sponsor and develop a risk management strategy in seclusion, it would not be

effective. The risk management strategy is dependent on the wealth of knowledge of all

stakeholders and will be inaccurate without the proper data.

After reading the case study of Altex and the conflict aversion of the sponsor, I reflected

upon how I felt about the argument between two of the most important stakeholders of the

project. The sponsor has his eye on the prize and wishes to profit from the project. The project

manager wishes to follow project management practices and create a risk management

strategy. Unfortunately, the project manager does not have the confidence to find a way to

emphasize the importance of risk management and fails to find a way to incorporate risk
management in a way that is attractive to the sponsor. Situations like this may come up in my

own career path and I must be prepared to find a solution or find a way out of unethical

projects. Strong leadership skills are important when dealing with conflict and giving in to the

opposition without proper discussion can lead to unethical projects.

Conflict is not comfortable, but it is essential to successful projects. In her TED talk titled

Dare to Disagree, Margaret Heffernan talks about the value of conflict and the importance of

conflict within organizations. Margaret states that “organizations cannot think because the

people within them are afraid of conflict.” Margaret draws parallels between thinking and

conflict participation. As an individual working for an organization, it is important to seek out

people that are different from us. This allows us to challenge our own perspective with a

different one and work together to overcome obstacles. Heffernan states that “openness alone

can’t drive change.” When managing projects, openness to new information will not suffice, it is

important to implement it in the project and challenge the project with different perspectives.

Each stakeholder within a project has their own blind spots and their own detection of risk. If all

stakeholders open themselves up to conflict, and work together to find a solution, the project

will accomplish more. The project will also suffer from less unexpected risk as the perspective

of all stakeholders will better prepare the project to prepare for such challenges.

Watching Margaret Heffernan’s TED talk made me reflect on my personality type and

my avoidance of conflict. Throughout my development as a leader, conflict aversion has caused

the most setbacks and the most personal failure. I have learned from my decisions to avoid

conflict, but I continue to do it. It is going to take practice and courage to face conflict and I

must change the way I look at conflict as a whole. The first step in solving a problem is
acknowledging that it exists. As Heffernan said, “openness alone can’t drive change.” I must

face conflict head on and see it as essential to an organization. “Openness isn’t the end; it is the

beginning.”—Margaret Heffernan