One of the interesting parts of running projects and programmes is that not everyone involved in delivery works for the same organisation.
We work with vendors, utility companies, municipalities and public authorities. They all have their own priorities, processes, limitations and, sometimes, completely different ways of working.
And this is where project and programme management can become a very different game.
In a corporate environment, we are often used to a relatively simple escalation path.
Something is not delivered?
You ask.
It is still not delivered?
You escalate.
Someone higher up gets involved and, usually, the delivery gets pushed through to a successful end.
But working with authorities, municipalities or public-sector organisations can be a completely different story.
They have their own pace of working. Public procurement, formal processes, decision sequences and responsibilities can mean that simply asking for something to be done faster does not make it happen faster.
And this is where I think human-to-human relationships can make a real difference.
Try to understand their world
My strong advice is to start with the positive approach.
Try to understand how the other organisation operates.
What are their processes?
What are their limitations?
What pressures are they dealing with?
What behaviour will support our project or programme?
And what behaviour might close the door or move us backwards?
Rather than simply expecting them to adapt to our delivery, try to bring them into the project journey.
Let them understand what we are trying to achieve.
Let them see why their part matters.
And, just as importantly, show genuine interest in their process and challenges.
Sometimes a phone call can achieve more than another formal email.
Sometimes trying a different approach can unlock something that seemed stuck.
It is often a bit of trial and error.
But this is one of those areas where being proactive and innovative can really pay off.
Meet face to face
If there is one thing I would strongly recommend, it is to try to have a face-to-face meeting at the beginning of the cooperation.
Even if it is only once.
It can be a game changer.
Ideally, there will be several physical meetings during the project. It could be at our site, their site, or somewhere in between.
And if the project is geographically split and business travel on your own is not possible, perhaps someone from our organisation in that country can become our local representative.
A kind of physical avatar for the project.
Because sometimes the person on the other side of the email or Teams bridge becomes very different once you have actually met them.
Nowadays we run so many meetings online, often with cameras on. But even with cameras on, it is still not quite the same as sitting across the table from someone.
You understand each other better.
You know who you are calling.
And suddenly the relationship becomes more human.
This is also where understanding local culture can be a key factor for success.
There is rarely a simple recipe waiting for us on the internet.
If there is significant time pressure, especially when dealing with public-sector organisations, local consulting companies can sometimes be very valuable.
They know the market, regulations and culture. Sometimes they even know the people we are trying to work with.
The world is small, believe me.
And for a very specific local challenge, I would not automatically assume that the biggest global consulting firm is the best answer.
Sometimes a country-based consultancy specialising in the relevant industry or matter can provide much more useful insight.
Positive influence before formal escalation
My strong advice would be to understand how the entity operates and use positive influence first.
But that does not mean there is no escalation.
Even public authorities have escalation paths. They may not be as obvious or well known as those in a corporate environment, but there is usually a higher authority or another formal route that can be used.
The challenge is often understanding how the system works before trying to push it.
Local experts can help with that.
Sometimes it is simply about finding the right person, the right way of communicating or the right moment to move something forward.
And if that does not work, then use the formal escalation route.
Projects still need delivery.
Vendors are different. Or are they?
With vendors, the situation is somewhat different.
There is a contractual relationship.
We are the customer.
We are paying.
We have requirements.
And yes, we are entitled to demand delivery.
This is exactly why a good RFP process matters. A detailed SOW is your ally. A good contract protects your interests when things start going in the wrong direction.
Proper vendor management, regular follow-ups, monitoring and controlling are natural and necessary parts of project execution.
This is one of the PM’s responsibilities. There is no argument here.
But contracts are not the whole relationship.
There is also the human factor.
Make them part of the journey
How do we build successful cooperation with a vendor?
How do we make them genuinely care about the project?
One thing I have seen working particularly well is narration.
Don’t close a vendor inside the single product or deliverable they are responsible for.
Of course, they need to focus on their technical scope.
But help them understand the bigger picture.
What are we trying to achieve?
What is the overall project or programme outcome?
Why is their delivery important?
Who depends on them?
If Vendor A understands that Vendors C and D are waiting for their deliverable, and that the whole chain is connected to the project or programme Go-Live, the conversation becomes different.
Suddenly they are not just delivering their piece.
They are contributing to the bigger outcome.
And who doesn’t want to be part of a big success?
This narration matters at the beginning of the project, during implementation and even after Go-Live.
Because Go-Live success is not only the ordering company’s success.
The vendors and authorities involved contributed to it too.
If you are having a big Go-Live at the site, invite them.
If you are making a Go-Live announcement on LinkedIn, in the press or on social media, recognise their contribution.
Or simply send them a Go-Live announcement or a short project summary email and acknowledge what they contributed.
Make them part of the success.
Good relationships do not mean being soft
I am not an advocate of becoming reluctant to manage vendors properly just because we want to maintain good relationships.
A friendly relationship should never mean unclear responsibilities, weak monitoring or accepting poor delivery.
There is a difference between being demanding and being bossy.
There is also a difference between cooperation and becoming too friendly to challenge someone when it is necessary.
Projects and programmes are not democratic spaces.
We still need accountability.
We still need monitoring.
We still need control.
But we don’t need to become unnecessarily authoritative just because we represent the investor or ordering party.
Listen to the experts you have around you.
Take full advantage of their subject matter expertise.
I am saying this not only as a PM working with vendors, but also from having been on the vendor side myself.
I have seen both ends.
Think about two friends or neighbours asking you for support.
Assuming there are no special circumstances, which one are you more eager to help?
Isn’t it usually the one you have a better relationship with?
If this is how it works in real life, why would project situations be completely different?
Without proper monitoring, a vendor can become underproductive.
If the ordering party doesn’t seem to care about the project, why should the delivery party care?
But the opposite can also happen.
When a vendor is treated fairly, understands the bigger picture and feels like a real part of the project team, I have seen the level of engagement move to a completely different level.
The hidden benefit
There is another benefit to this approach which I find particularly interesting.
Good cooperation can spread.
If a vendor or authority experiences a fair, respectful and well-run project, they may carry some of those behaviours into their next projects with other organisations.
We are not only delivering our own project.
We are also contributing to the way projects are run around us.
This is where I think PMs and programme managers can have a much bigger impact than we sometimes realise.
Our professional ethics as project managers should not be just a phrase.
The way we work every day, the way we communicate, the way we treat vendors, authorities, stakeholders and our own teams all shapes the environment in which projects and programmes are delivered.
And maybe this is the bigger message.
Project success is not only about what we deliver. It is also about how we deliver it.
A successful project or programme where everyone involved wants to work with each other again is, in my view, a better success than one delivered through pressure, escalation and burned relationships.
Win-win is something we should aim for.
Not because projects are supposed to be easy.
But because good cooperation can make difficult projects easier to deliver.
Over and out.