Implementing Hybrid Project Management in Complex Projects

Implementing Hybrid Project Management in
Complex Projects

An overview with Margareth Carneiro

Welcome to another installment of the PPM Hub Interview series! We are honored to have with us Margareth Fabiola S. Carneiro, an accomplished leader in project management with three decades of experience and an impressive track record. Margareth is the only Latin-American woman living outside the USA to have served two terms on the PMI Board of Directors, bringing a wealth of knowledge and expertise to our conversation.

In this interview, we will explore how Margareth has successfully led high-performance teams, delivered impactful results, and implemented eight PMOs across various industries.

We’ll also gain insights into her perspective on the future of project management, her passion for agility, and the strategies she employs to help project professionals excel in their careers.

Hybrid project management (HPM) is often seen as a bridge between Agile and traditional approaches. Can you share your perspective on what defines hybrid project management, especially in the context of complex projects?

Margareth Carneiro

There isn’t a universally agreed-upon definition of hybrid project management (HPM), as different authors and professionals have their own interpretations.

Some professionals consider HPM as mixing frameworks or practices in the same approach (adaptative or predictive), placing approaches like ScrumBan into the hybrid category.

Others see HPM as using adaptive practices within traditionally predictive projects, or vice versa. For example, applying Agile ceremonies, such as daily standups, retrospectives and reviews, in a predictive project.

Authors like Robert Wysocki and Mark Layton go further, defining HPM as the blending of distinct project life cycles. They argue that certain phases of a project might benefit from predictive approaches, while others are better suited for adaptive or iterative methods, depending on the uncertainty and complexity involved.

I am comfortable with all three definitions, but I find the third one the most relevant. It highlights the understanding that certain parts of the project are better managed through distinct life cycles—whether predictive or adaptative.

This approach requires deeper knowledge of how well each approach, frameworks, and practices fit the project and the nature of the work to be done. It’s not just about adopting Agile practices, such as using a Kanban board or implementing Agile ceremonies in a predictive project, but rather about selecting the right approach based on several factors. These include the degree of uncertainty, the clarity of the solution to the problem the project addresses, and the understanding of its requirements.

In hybrid project management, aligning the approach to these variables allows for more tailored and effective project management. This analysis ensures that each phase of the project benefits from either predictive or adaptive techniques, maximizing the potential for success and value delivery, rather than simply following a trend of mixing methods without fully understanding their applicability.

You have extensive experience leading high-performance teams and implementing PMOs. How has your understanding of hybrid methodologies evolved over the years?

Margareth Carneiro

I see hybrid project management as a natural evolution in the field because there is no “one-size-fits-all” solution for every project. The ability to fluidly adapt methods, approaches, and practices in service of the project, its outputs, and most importantly, its outcomes, represents this evolution. For instance, during my tenure as Director of Project Management at the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation in Brazil, the variety of projects was immense. We managed everything from rockets and satellites to social programs, research and development, software development, startup support, and even vaccine development. In such a diverse environment, the PMO had to develop a flexible framework capable of accommodating all these different types of projects. As a result, we implemented a hybrid framework that offered the adaptability required to meet the unique demands of each initiative.

What are the key indicators that a project would benefit from a hybrid approach instead of strictly Agile or Waterfall methodologies?

Margareth Carneiro

The key indicators that a project would benefit from a hybrid approach often depend on the clarity of the scope and solution from the outset. If the scope is well understood early on, the solution to the problem is clear, and the product’s requirements are well-defined in the initial stages, a predictive (Waterfall) approach is often a good fit. For example, building a highway or a government regulatory project, where all the steps are clearly mapped out and the scope is stable, are ideal for a predictive methodology.

On the other hand, when the solution might be clear, but the specific requirements are not, and you need to interact with the customer and receive constant feedback, an adaptive (Agile) approach works best. An example of this is developing software or creating a new product where the final design is shaped by ongoing market feedback.

Finally, for more extreme cases, such as research and development projects, where even the solution isn’t known. For example, in projects like researching a cure for a specific type of cancer, where there is a high degree of uncertainty and discovery.

In today’s complex world, projects can exhibit characteristics that align with different methodologies in different parts of the project. In these cases, a hybrid approach becomes essential.

For example, take the construction of an 84-floor residential building in Brazil. While the physical structure followed a traditional predictive schedule, incorporating new technologies required an adaptive approach. The team had to test different functionalities, such as using a German technology for structural stability, and address challenges like fire evacuation logistics. This involved conducting several simulations, which led to adjustments in the placement of elevators and hallways, something never designed in such a context.

Another example would be the creation of a new fast-food chain. Design Thinking could be applied to create the concept and customer experience, predictive management would be used to construct the first restaurant, and adaptive methods would guide the development of customer service software, where ongoing feedback and iteration are essential.

In your experience, what are the main challenges faced when integrating Agile and traditional methodologies in a hybrid model?

Margareth Carneiro

I can think of 3 key challenges:

Shallow Knowledge of Approaches: Teams or PMOs may lack a deep understanding of both Agile and traditional methods. Successful hybrid management requires more than surface-level familiarity; it demands in-depth expertise in both.
Skilled Leadership and Teams: Hybrid projects require a “bilingual” team proficient in both methodologies, but most importantly, strong leadership. Team leaders must expertly navigate the complexities of switching between approaches, ensuring smooth transitions, clear communication, and effective decision-making. Their ability to balance Agile and predictive methods is essential for the success of the hybrid model and to prevent confusion from conflicting practices.
Cultural Resistance and Biases: Teams rooted in one methodology may resist adopting another. There are cultural biases to navigate, such as balancing directive leadership vs. self-managing teams, controlling change vs. welcoming it, and hierarchical vs. collaborative decision-making.

Remember, being flexible does not mean being chaotic. In a project-driven environment, the focus is on high productivity, customer-centricity, quality, and delivering value. Therefore, when adopting a hybrid approach, it must be a gradual, intentional, and well-managed process, overseen by seasoned professionals. It should align with senior management and be implemented in a way that does not compromise results. It’s a significant challenge.

Could you walk us through a case study where you successfully implemented a hybrid model in a complex project? What were the key takeaways?

Margareth Carneiro

A great example of successfully implementing a hybrid model was during my time at the Ministry of Science, Technology, and Innovation (MCTI). The framework we used required all projects, for the sake of portfolio consolidation and management, to input common data into a central database—things like project name, justification, general objectives, and a macro-schedule. For adaptive projects, this schedule was more high-level, while for predictive ones, it was more detailed.

When teams faced difficulties, even in the conception phase, we used the PMCanvas to help them reach the minimum necessary planning. Each project team had the flexibility to choose the approach they preferred—predictive, adaptive, or a mix. If they were not able to figure it out on their own, we supported them. We provided advisory services to help them choose the right approach and assist with planning.

One of the examples of using a hybrid project was the project involving an Israeli piece of equipment called the Atmospheric Water Generation Unit, a machine that extracts water from the air by cooling it and turning the condensed vapor into potable water. This was intended for use in the Brazilian Northeast, a region plagued by severe drought most of the year. Additionally, the project involved experimental research related to children’s health and other exploratory studies. The project had distinct cycles, making it ideal for hybrid management—combining planned, predictive components with adaptive, experimental phases.

The key takeaways from this experience were the importance of offering structured support and flexibility in methodology choice. We saw the value of a hybrid approach in managing different project cycles effectively within the same initiative.

How do you manage project interdependencies in hybrid environments, where teams may be following different methodologies for different parts of the project?

Margareth Carneiro

I don’t see much difference in managing interdependencies in hybrid environments, as most interdependencies typically revolve around task dependencies or deliverable dependencies. Regardless of the methodologies being used—predictive or adaptive—these dependencies remain clear.

What can be more challenging is time commitment. In predictive environments, a schedule is used, while in adaptive environments, we rely on a backlog. The backlog, however, must be prioritized, and interdependencies can be prioritized accordingly to meet the needs of other dependent projects. This allows for effective synchronization between teams working with different methodologies.

Hybrid projects often involve a variety of stakeholders. How do you ensure effective communication and expectation management with diverse stakeholders?

Margareth Carneiro

In hybrid projects, I approach stakeholder communication and expectation management similarly to how I would in any large or complex project. The key is to use well-established techniques to map and engage stakeholders, understanding their influence/power and interest in the project. From there, develop a communication plan tailored to each stakeholder group, ensuring that the frequency, level of detail, and format of communication align with their specific needs, expectations, and position in the matrix of influence and interest. This targeted approach helps maintain alignment and keeps all parties informed, regardless of the methodologies being used within the project.

What key metrics do you use to measure the success of hybrid projects, and how do you adapt these metrics to accommodate both Agile and traditional components?

Margareth Carneiro

To measure the success of hybrid projects, I use a combination of metrics that cater to both Agile and traditional components.

Some examples:

Delivery on Scope, Time, and Budget: Traditional metrics like scope completion, adherence to schedule, and staying within budget fit well for the predictive aspects of the project.
Customer Satisfaction and Value Delivery: For the Agile components, I focus on customer feedback and the value delivered through iterative releases or sprints. Metrics such as Net Promoter Score (NPS) or customer satisfaction surveys could be used for the whole project.
Velocity and Burn Rate: For teams following Agile, I track velocity (how much work is completed in each sprint) and burn rate (the rate at which the team is completing work vs. estimated work). There are others like Cycle time, Lead Time, etc. that can be used as well.

You can also use Team Satisfaction, a qualitative metric that measures how team members feel about their work, the sprint, or the project. In complex and long-term projects, this measurement becomes even more crucial, as the team can grow tired, anxious, or demotivated as time goes by and challenges arise frequently. With regular feedback, the leader can introduce methods for decompressing, hold one-on-one conversations to address issues, and implement other practices. Ensuring team satisfaction promotes greater sustainability and stability throughout the project.

In complex projects, how do you balance the flexibility of Agile with the need for governance and control from traditional project management?

Margareth Carneiro

In the MCTI, we implemented a hybrid model where each team was required to report general project information and commit to a macro-level schedule, regardless of the chosen methodology. For the predictive parts of the project, I would hold weekly status meetings to track progress against the schedule and deliverables. For the Agile components, I would follow the sprint reviews at the end of each iteration. Even in an Agile environment, metrics like velocity and burn-down charts allow for projections based on backlog and team performance.

It’s essential to maintain transparency across the entire project, regardless of the approach being used, but also respect the limitations and practices of each methodology. A key factor is developing leadership to engage teams effectively, focusing on quality, deliverables, outcomes, and customer satisfaction, rather than fostering a blame culture or witch hunts. Psychological safety and team satisfaction are important parts of the game. This approach ensures a balance between flexibility and governance while keeping the project on track.

What are some of the common pitfalls you’ve encountered when implementing hybrid methodologies, and how can they be avoided?

Margareth Carneiro

Some common pitfalls when implementing hybrid methodologies include:

Lack of Prepared Leadership: I said before, and repeat. Attempting to implement a hybrid approach in large and strategic projects without adequately trained personnel who understand both Agile and traditional methodologies can lead to failure. It’s essential to have experienced leaders who can navigate both worlds and guide the team through the complexities.
Forcing Hybrid on Every Project: Another mistake is believing that every project needs to follow a hybrid approach. Some projects are better suited for purely Agile or purely predictive methodologies. It’s important to evaluate the nature of the project before deciding on a hybrid model.
Implementing Everything at Once: Trying to roll out hybrid methodologies across the entire organization simultaneously can lead to confusion and resistance. This is especially true when the hybrid model is used to create an Agile culture in highly formal, command-and-control environments. The solution is to implement changes gradually and strategically, allowing time for teams to adjust and adopt new ways of working.

These challenges can be avoided by ensuring gradual implementation, preparing the team with the right skills, and selecting the right projects for hybrid management.

What advice would you give to project managers looking to implement hybrid methodologies in complex projects for the first time?

Margareth Carneiro

If you’re a project manager implementing hybrid methodologies for the first time and lack experience in Agile or traditional approaches, my advice is to study thoroughly, plan carefully, and seek out guidance from more senior professionals. A valuable resource is Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme, Hybrid, 8th Edition by Robert K. Wysocki, which provides key concepts and practical applications to help you fully understand the intricacies of hybrid management.

If you are already experienced in both methodologies, it will make the process much smoother.

Regardless of your experience level, it’s crucial to engage with your team early on. Involving them in discussions and decision-making not only benefits the projects but also fosters co-ownership, which significantly reduces resistance to the new model.

Margareth Carneiro,Non Executive Board Member at Agille Aliance
Is a seasoned project and program manager with three decades of experience. She has served two terms on the PMI Board of Directors as the only Latin-American woman living outside the USA and is currently the only Latin-American woman serving on the Agile Alliance board. Throughout her career, she has led high-performance teams, implemented eight PMOs, and delivered impactful projects like Voting Machine and Workflow Automation. Margareth holds numerous certifications, including PMP, Prince2, MSP, SAFe, PMI DASSM, and PMI DAC and has trained over 5,000 students globally. She is passionate about enhancing the effectiveness and relevance of project management worldwide.