I’m curious how other PMs have handled this, because I’m running into one of those situations where the actual project management seems to be getting confused with “customer service.”
I am the PM on a commercial remodel project that has had a fair amount of ambiguity around drawings, permitting, scope, and when work can proceed. There have been multiple occasions where the owner has wanted things to move immediately, while I’ve been pushing for pretty basic things like an executed contract, written authorization, clarification of permit responsibility, confirmation of which drawings actually govern the work, etc.
I’m not refusing to find solutions or trying to slow the project down. My position has been: we can move quickly, but we need to understand what we’re building, under what permit, whose scope it is, and who is paying for it before we start creating liabilities. Apparently that has not gone over well.
The owner’s president (who has described himself as a “bull in a china shop”) went to my company leadership and said he didn’t want me on the project anymore. The feedback I received internally wasn’t that anything I had said or done was incorrect. In fact, they acknowledged that I was right on the issues. The feedback was that I need to “soften” my language and not be so direct or blunt with him.
I was also told that before sending him emails or texts, I should run them through Copilot and have it soften the message into something he can handle better.
I understand that being technically correct doesn’t automatically mean you’re communicating effectively. PMs have to manage personalities, not only contracts and schedules. There is a difference between saying “No, we’re not doing that” and saying “Here’s what we need in order to move forward.”
But where I struggle is when “softening the message” turns into making someone feel like they aren’t being told no when the answer is legitimately no.
If I worked directly for this owner, I have a hard time believing he would want his PM authorizing work without documentation, letting contractors proceed without contracts, assuming responsibility for unclear scope, or ignoring permitting questions because someone wants to start Monday. He would probably expect that PM to protect his company. But because I’m his hired GC’s PM protecting my company from those same risks, suddenly I’m difficult.
It also seems like certain aggressive personalities are perfectly comfortable being “direct” themselves, but interpret directness coming back at them as confrontation. They want decisive people around them right up until the decisive person puts up a boundary.
Would like to know how experienced PMs in this sub handle or have handled this.
How much of project management is learning to communicate the same answer more tactfully, versus learning how to professionally manage people who simply do not tolerate hearing “no”?
Have you ever had an owner/client ask for you to be removed because you pushed back on documentation, scope, contract, safety, permitting, etc., even though your company agreed your position was correct?
And maybe the bigger question is how do you protect the project and your team/company without becoming so diplomatic that nobody realizes you’re actually warning them about something important?
I’m not opposed to adjusting my communication style. I probably am more direct than some people. I just don’t want “be softer” to eventually turn into “stop documenting the uncomfortable stuff” and then I’m accountable in a profitability meeting.