Ditigal Presentation Week#5 Comm 613 by Tanisha Walker

Digital Presentation-Video Introduction

Ditigal Presentation- “Uh Oh-Moment” During my professional career within corporate there have been many “Uh- Oh” moments. However, one that stands out was during the time I worked for an insurance company as a treasury analyst and was given my first opportunity to lead a project to convert one treasury data analysis platform to another. This entailed major participation from various stakeholders as well as the technical team. Weekly meetings were established in the beginning to gain an understanding of what each stakeholder wanted to achieve from the project as well as how to achieve the goals within a realistic timeframe.

Ditigal Presentation- “Uh Oh-Moment” Most of our technical team were outsourced which meant we also had to overcome language barriers in order to convey the message properly and ensure the desired results. It was towards the first phase of the project I realized the technical team did not understand the direction the project was heading when we had to prepare test samples. It was due to lack of technical clarity on my part which set the project back an additional month since we could not move forward until we corrected the first phase issue. I was embarrassed, I started to doubt I could handle a project of this scope, and it cost the department more money since it extended the project an additional month.

Steps to take to prevent previous scenario In order to learn from this experience, I am proposing we examine Focault’s discourse archaeology. According to Foucault, discourse archaeology and genealogy to language is a method for assessing the discourse occurring in a communicative situation. For scenarios related to an isolated communication message that creates power (realized or imagined) in an organization, a discourse archaeology approach can uncover the foundations and re-vision future communication (as cited in McArthur, p. 27). Focault describes four types of discourse technologies which could exist in a scenario: Technologies of production, technologies of sign systems, technologies of power, and technologies of self.

Focault’s Discourse Archaeology Technology of Production Is a discourse strategy that create, transform, or manipulate the situation Technologies of sign system Is a discourse strategy that construct meaning in the situation Technologies of power and Self Technologies of power are discourse strategies imposed on individuals compelling them to behave a certain way Technology of self is discourse strategy that is chosen by individuals to harness personal satisfaction

Focault’s Discourse Archaeology Let’s discuss further what each discourse of technologies mean. Although there are four, not all discourse of technology may apply to this situation. I believe technology of production and power are worth accessing further for this particular scenario. Each strategy employed will assist the project manager in successfully navigating the project from start to finish. How? By establishing strong foundations of structure which will aid each participate in developing behavior to ensure the project success.

Focault’s Discourse Archaeology Let’s begin shall we… In the aforementioned scenario, there were key elements that were missing which caused the project to become problematic in the beginning. First, there wasn’t enough clarity with all the stakeholders as to what they wanted accomplished. Two, diminishing credibility of the project manager became an issue due to difficult managing meetings and gathering information needed from some stakeholders. Three, limited resources given for technical assistance, the alternative were outsourced team members who did not know the banking platform nor had the expertise desired to convert existing platform to another platform.

Strategies Recommended to employ technologies of power: Meet separately with each stakeholder and gain understanding of the functionality they believe the new platform will afford them and level of commitment they have to the project. This includes time and resources. Make certain each stakeholder has a realistic expectation of what can be accomplished within the time span allotted. If not reasonable, indicate clearly in the beginning verbally and in writing the reasons why and the alternative. Ensure each stakeholder understands the importance of attending weekly meetings and make certain they are prompt. If there are any questions or concerns they are to submit prior to the meeting to determine if can be added to the weekly agenda. If they are not able to make the meeting they are to send a proxy instead. This person is responsible for relaying the communication of the meeting as well as receiving the recap of meeting.

Strategies Recommended to employ technologies of production: Communicate with senior leadership the importance of having a strong technology team in order to help implement the necessary changes within the timeframe allotted. Although nothing can be absolutely controlled, the importance of reducing risks are crucial. Make certain the technology team has a firm understanding in beginning of the expectations of the project. As the project manager, it is my job to pull together a team of people who are qualified to support the project. To help minimize language barriers, make certain to have someone who can interpret and translate effectively the needs of the project team. Meet 2x per week with technology team to discuss strategy and ensure proper understanding of communication needs. Make certain they have the proper resources available to support the project. The meetings will be 2x per week for the first 2 months.

Conclusion Each strategy is a guide to help the project manager garner the support by senior leadership, stakeholders, and technology team. The project manager will become more confident in his/her ability to manage project within a structured timeframe. Ambiguity around technology communication will be reduced by ensuring proper translation of goals in alignment with project deadline. This model will help with legitimacy of the project, credibility of project manager, and minimize potential risks of delays.

Reference Ihlen, O., Van Ruler, B., & Fredriksson, M. (2009). Public relations and social theory: Key figures and concepts. New York: Routledge McArthur, J.A Planning for strategic communication: A workbook for applying social theory to professional practice. Lexington, KY