Every project leader eventually faces the same uncomfortable moment:A project is off the rails. Now what?This week’s PM Debate episode dives into one of the hardest judgment calls in the profession:👉 Is it better to bail out and restart a troubled project, or to double down and push through the pain?It’s a deceptively simple question with massive consequences for scope, cost, culture, and credibility.In this episode, Mary Elizabeth and I take opposite sides of the argument, because both perspectives are true depending on the situation.The Case for Restarting (Mary Elizabeth’s Argument)Some projects fail not because the idea is wrong, but because the execution has drifted so far off course that minor corrections won’t fix anything.Restarting can bring:* A renewed planning process* Clearer visibility into risks that derailed the first attempt* Permission to re-evaluate non-performing resources* A stronger team with a fresh start* The discipline to stop throwing good money after badIt’s the project equivalent of pulling the car out of the ditch instead of turning the wheel harder.The Case for Doubling Down (My Argument)But there’s a darker side to restarts. If organizations restart too quickly, they create:* A culture of false starts* Teams that lose momentum* Project managers who avoid working through difficulty* Executives who become risk-averse* A delivery ecosystem afraid to push past discomfortSometimes the hard part isn’t a signal to quit, sometimes it’s the gateway to the real work.Momentum matters, team learning matters, and finishing what you start matters.When Do You Choose Which?In the open discussion we tackled the questions leaders actually face:* How do you define a project that’s truly “in trouble”?* Which warning signs matter and which are noise?* When does sunk-cost thinking blind us?* How should PMOs use stage gates to reduce bailout risk?* What role should sponsors play in deciding direction?* And the biggest one: When is it actually harder to finish than to restart?This episode isn’t about giving the “right” answer, it’s about sharpening judgment.Great project leaders don’t just follow process, they read the world their project is operating in and choose intentionally.👉 Listen to the full debate here.Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
Most organizations who agree that they need a PMO are far less likely to agree on how to build one.This week’s throwback episode of the PM Debate Podcast tackles a question that still divides executives, consultants, and PMO leaders today:Should companies outsource PMO setup to expert consultants or trust internal staff to build it?On one side of the debate:* External consultants bring experience, objectivity, industry knowledge, and credibility.* They’ve done this before, know the pitfalls, and can accelerate structure and delivery.On the other side:* Internal staff know the culture, the politics, the personalities, and the reality behind the org chart.* They’re embedded, invested, and far better positioned to tailor a PMO to actual needs.It’s a debate that reveals something deeper about organizational maturity, leadership expectations, and what it really takes to build a PMO that lasts.In this episode, Mary Elizabeth and I explore:* What skills truly matter in a PMO setup* Whether PMOs can be built “out of the box”* The risks of outsourcing vs. the risks of going internal* What executives consistently misunderstand about PMO budgets* Why capability handover is the make-or-break factor* And how organizational size and industry complexity change the equationIf your organization is considering a new PMO, or rethinking the one it has, this debate will give you the clarity (and honesty) that most conversations avoid.Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
Every PMO leader has lived some version of this story:A strategy consultant walks in with a slide deck full of vision statements, transformation pathways, and a list of 70+ “strategic initiatives” that all need to be delivered in the next 12–18 months.Then they walk out and the PMO is left holding the bag.In this week’s Throwback Thursday PM Debate Podcast, Mary Elizabeth and I revisit one of the most controversial topics we ever tackled:“Blame it all on the strategy consultant, why PMOs fail.”👉 I argue for the motion. Strategy consultants often underestimate organizational capacity, dilute accountability, and hand over beautifully written plans that violate basic laws of physics. (82 initiatives in 13 months? With 213 people? Come on.)👉 Mary Elizabeth argues against. Organizations should know better. If you outsource your thinking, accept generic reports, and never push back, isn’t that on the client?Together we explore the bigger questions:* Is the failure in the idea, the plan, or the people delivering it?* Who owns accountability when the strategy thinkers disappear before the strategy doers show up?* Are PMOs set up to succeed… or set up as the fall guys?* And how do we stop the blame game between strategy and execution?If you’ve ever inherited a strategy that looked great in theory but impossible in practice, this episode will hit close to home.🎙️ Listen to the archived episode here. After you listen, I’d love to hear your take:Who’s really to blame when strategy looks perfect on paper but collapses in delivery?Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
This week on Standards Week, we’ve been talking about foundations, structure, and what helps organizations deliver consistently.So for Throwback Thursday, I’m revisiting an episode from 2017 that looks at the other side of the coin: pace.The question we debated was simple but uncomfortable:“Must organizations change fast… or die?”In this episode, Mary Elizabeth and I take opposite sides of the argument: speed vs. stability. We explore the tension leaders still wrestle with today:* How fast is too fast?* When does “adapt or die” become harmful?* Can organizations slow down change without falling behind?* Does rapid change erode excellence?* Are people resisting… or being resilient?* What’s the difference between deliberate action and knee-jerk reaction?Seven years later, these questions feel even more timely.🎧 Listen to the 2017 episode: “Organizations Must Change Fast or Die”Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
Have you every heard this question?“Can someone with no project management background successfully run a PMO?”Half of all PMOs fail within three years, at least that’s what some studies claim. Many of those failures could be traced back to leadership. But what kind of leadership matters most?In this PM Debate throwback, Mary Elizabeth and I went head-to-head on one of the most controversial questions in our field:“An organization that appoints a PMO leader with no experience in project management and no track record in PMOs is doomed to fail.”Mary Elizabeth argued for the motion, experience is essential.I argued against, leadership, influence, and organizational fit matter more.We explored:* Whether industry and cultural understanding can compensate for limited PM knowledge* The difference between technical expertise and leadership capability* Why some PMOs thrive under unconventional leaders while others collapse under expertsIt’s a conversation that’s just as relevant today, especially as PMOs evolve to balance firefighting and foundation-building.🎧 Listen to the full episode: PM Debate Podcast – “An Inexperienced PMO Leader Is Doomed to Fail”#CtrlAltPMO #PMODebate #Leadership #ProjectManagement #PMOPodcast #RapidStartPMOThanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
In this week’s PM Debate throwback, we explore a provocative question:👉 Can projects succeed even when companies have bad or failing strategies?🎙️ I argue that project success must be tied to strategy otherwise, we’re just delivering activity, not value.🎙️ Mary Elizabeth counters that strong project delivery can be the saving grace, even in companies with poor strategic direction.From mismatched metrics to misunderstood impact, we tackle:* What “success” really means in project management* How PMs should act when strategy is unclear or flawed* Why good projects don’t always mean good outcomes“You can finish on time and on budget but still deliver the wrong thing.”🔁 Give it a listen. Then join the debate.Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
Should Project Managers Be Responsible for Benefits Realization?Some say no, it’s outside the PM’s scope and sits firmly in the hands of program and portfolio leaders.Others argue, if the PM doesn’t ensure value is delivered, who will?In this archived episode, we go head-to-head on one of the most misunderstood expectations in project leadership.Mary Elizabeth argues for the motion: the PM is not responsible.Philip argues against it: the PM must step up to own value.🎧 Listen and decide for yourself💬 Then join the conversation: Should benefits realization be in the PM’s job description? This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
There’s one question that still sparks real debate: If you have project managers, do you really need change managers?This week’s throwback episode of the PM Debate Podcast dives straight into it.🗣️ I argued for the motion:“Organizations that employ project managers have no need of change managers.”🎙️ Mary Elizabeth took the other side, challenging that idea from the perspective of change maturity, people dynamics, and organizational readiness.Why this debate still matters:In one corner: The argument that project management = change management– Every PM is a change agent by default– Most of the job is stakeholder engagement, expectation-setting, and alignment– Adding a change manager risks duplicating roles or undermining authorityIn the other corner: The argument that change management is its own discipline– Not all change is formally “a project”– Change managers focus on the people side of change– When organizations lack maturity, change managers bridge critical gapsQuestions we explore:* Is “change management” just another name for good project management?* Should every PM also be a change expert, or is that unrealistic?* What happens in orgs where no one owns the people side of transformation?* Is change management leadership, or is it a role?Whether you’re leading a transformation or building a PMO from scratch, this episode challenges how we think about who is really responsible for making change stick.🎧 Listen to the full episode and join the debate📍 Let me know in the comments where do you stand on this one?Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
This debate episode is one of our most downloaded, and for good reason.We go head-to-head on a question every PMO leader has faced:Is firefighting a breakdown of planning and culture?Or is it a skill leaders must embrace in a high-stakes, high-pressure world?🎧 PM Debate: Firefighting vs. Project ManagementNow streaming again for #ThrowbackThursday.This topic is all about culture because firefighting doesn’t just happen, it’s taught, rewarded, and normalized.What behaviors is your organization reinforcing?And what would it take to break the pattern?👇 Join the debate in the comments.#PMDebate #CtrlAltPMO #ProjectManagement #WorkCulture #Leadership #Firefighting #ThrowbackThursday #PMOThanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
In this week’s PM Debate Podcast throwback, we go head-to-head on a question that’s even more relevant today than when we first recorded it back in 2017:👉 “Can virtual teams ever match the effectiveness of collocated ones?”I argue for the motion.Mary Elizabeth argues against.We cover:* The role of trust, presence, and “read of the room” moments* Whether technology truly bridges the performance gap* How talent access and time zone flexibility reshape delivery* And why virtual can work but collocated still holds the edge (for some)This one will hit home for anyone managing hybrid or global teams.🎧 Listen to the episodeThen drop your take:Are virtual teams just different or inherently disadvantaged?Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
This week’s PM Debate podcast digs into one of the profession’s biggest questions:Should every organization have a PMO?I say yes. Mary Elizabeth says not so fast.In this archived episode, we debate:* Whether PMOs are strategic necessities or expensive overhead* Why small businesses might be overspending on structures they don’t need* What it really takes to make a PMO succeed, and what makes them failWe also tackle questions like:* What is a corporate PMO, really?* Are some industries just not built for them?* Can a bad PMO do more harm than good?The debate is still just as relevant today as it was then, especially as PMOs evolve into transformation engines in a changing world.🎧 Listen to Episode #14👇 After you listen, let me know:Do you believe every organization benefits from a PMO? Are we forcing a structure where it doesn’t belong?Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
Is “Win-Win” Just a Boardroom Fairytale?Project managers are told to be diplomats.Find common ground. Build trust. Negotiate a win-win.But what if that mindset is actually holding your project back?In this archived episode of the PM Debate podcast, Mary Elizabeth and I go head-to-head on a hot-button topic:“Negotiating a win-win is not in the best interest of your project.”I argue for the motion:* Projects are finite. Relationships often aren’t long-term.* Win-win assumes symmetry in intent, and most times, it’s an illusion.* In high-stakes negotiations, someone will leave value on the table.Mary Elizabeth argues against:* Vendor trust and long-term viability matter more than a one-time win.* A partner that feels respected is more likely to go the extra mile.* Practicing win-win negotiations internally builds stronger teams, not just deals.🎙️ We dig into:* Why negotiation is different from bartering* What to do when a deal breaks down* Whether you can really “win-win” with someone who’s playing to win-lose* How to handle internal vs. external negotiationsThis one’s a gut-check.Are you trying to be liked—or trying to deliver?🔁 Listen to the full debate and join the conversation:👇 After you listen:Have you ever regretted going for a win-win? Or did it pay off long term?Drop your thoughts in the comments or reply with your own negotiation lesson.Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
🎙️ THROWBACK THURSDAY: PM Debate Podcast"The contract is not the responsibility of the project manager."Do you agree?Because we debated it.One side says:👉 Contracts are legal landmines best left to specialists.👉 PMs are already juggling scope, cost, time, and stakeholders.👉 Adding detailed contract oversight dilutes focus and invites risk.The other side says:👉 If you're the PM, and the contract shapes scope, cost, and timeline... how are you not responsible?👉 Every disconnect between what’s promised and what’s delivered is a contract issue, and it lands in your lap.👉 If you don’t shape the agreement, you inherit the consequences.This was one of the most foundational debates we ever recorded. Because it speaks to the real tension in modern project management:Are we administrators or leaders?🗣️ Rewind the debate. Hear both sides. Then weigh in:👉 Should PMs manage contracts or leave it to legal?🎧 Listen here: Link in the comments🔁 Share your take. Let’s reignite the debate.Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
In this throwback podcast episode, Philip and Mary Elizabeth Diab debate the timeless tension between brainpower and people skills in the world of project delivery.This week's theme has been all about PMO evolution and relevance and today's throwback takes us back to one of the early debates that helped shape how I think about project leadership.The question: Are there times when IQ is more important than EQ for project managers?In this episode of the PM Debate Podcast, Mary Elizabeth Diab and I take opposite sides of this surprisingly nuanced argument.We explore:* Why emotional intelligence has become a core leadership skill* When technical complexity demands more than just empathy* How project managers can balance people-savvy with analytical rigor* Whether EQ or IQ matters more when you're thrown into a new industry or technical domainYou’ll hear personal stories, hard truths, and practical takeaways for any project leader navigating high-stakes delivery.As always, our debate isn’t about who’s right. It’s about seeing both sides clearly so you can lead with clarity.🎧 Listen to the full episode now and weigh in: Which side do you find yourself on?Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
In a world where project timelines are tight, stakeholders are demanding, and priorities shift by the hour, should project managers be expected to develop the skills of their team members?That was the core question back in 2017 when we recorded this episode of the PM Debate Podcast.We think it’s still relevant today.The motion:“The project manager is not responsible for developing team member skills.”I argued for it. Mary Elizabeth argued against. The back-and-forth was as lively as ever.We unpacked:* The tension between project delivery and people development* Whether PMs should act as skill coaches or leave that to line managers* How organizational structure and project duration change expectations* Why emotional intelligence matters, even if skills training isn’t in your scope📌 The insights we explored might challenge how you see your own role as a leader.What’s your take?Do you think developing team member skills is part of a PM’s job or a distraction from the real work?Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
This week’s archived PM Debate episode asks a deceptively simple question:Do facts matter… if your stakeholders are happy?I argued that in today’s chaotic project environment, hitting your timeline and budget won’t save you if your stakeholders feel unheard or unsatisfied.Mary Elizabeth countered with a powerful reality check: projects don’t run on feelings. They run on baselines, budgets, and outcomes.This debate covers:* Whether we’ve entered a “post-project management” era* Why the Sydney Opera House is both a masterpiece and a case study in failure* What it really means to define project success upfrontWhether you side with perception or precision, this one’s worth the listen.💬 Drop your take in the comments, especially if you’ve seen this tension play out in real life. Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
What teaches you more: training or doing?Some professionals swear by certifications and courses. Others say the best lessons come from the field, where success and failure are both brutally honest teachers.🎧 In this week’s PM Debate throwback, we tackled the question:“Is on-the-job experience more valuable than continuing education?”I argued against the motion. Mary Elizabeth argued for it. And together, we broke down what actually moves the needle for PMs trying to grow their careers.We covered:* Why training often fails to stick* What experience teaches that classrooms can’t* When formal education becomes essential (and when it’s a crutch)* What hiring managers actually look for when evaluating skillYou need both. But neglecting structured learning means you risk applying yesterday’s playbook to tomorrow’s problems.📻 Listen to Episode 8: “On the Job vs. In the Classroom”👇 Where have you learned the most, experience or education?Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
Does a project manager need to understand how strategy is made? Or is that outside the scope of the role?In this throwback to The Project Management Debate Podcast, we put that question under the microscope. I take the stance that it’s not essential, project managers can drive results without knowing every detail of strategy formulation. Mary Elizabeth Diab pushes back, arguing it’s a critical skill that helps PMs connect their work to real business value.🎙️ This debate covers:* Whether PMs are execution arms or strategic players* How strategy and delivery interact (and sometimes clash)* What happens when PMs don’t understand the “why”* Where influence begins (and ends) for a PMIf you’ve ever wondered whether project managers belong at the strategy table, or should just focus on delivering what’s handed to them, this one's for you.📌 Listen now and let us know where you stand.Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
Should Every Project Change the Culture?Peter Drucker said “culture eats strategy for breakfast.”But here’s the counter: project management assumes culture can be changed.In this week’s throwback episode of the PM Debate Podcast, Mary Elizabeth and I take on a deceptively simple question:👉 Should changing corporate culture be the aim of every transformation project?I argue yes, because if the culture stays the same, nothing really changes.She argues no, because culture change is hard, rare, and not every project needs to carry that weight.Together, we debate:* Whether PMs can (or should) overcome culture* The difference between adapting to norms vs. resetting them* Who’s really responsible for culture change, the PMs or the Executives?🎙️ Listen to the episode📌 Save this post if you’re wrestling with cultural friction in your current project.👇 And let us know: can a project really shift a company’s culture?Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! This post is public so feel free to share it. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com
This classic episode still sparks real questions for today’s leaders.Back in 2016, we recorded a debate that’s just as relevant now as it was then:What should you do with a team that works?Do you keep them together to maintain the magic or break them up so their skills can elevate others across the organization?This episode from the PM Debate Podcast archives features both sides of the argument, one pushing for cross-pollination, the other saying don’t fix what isn’t broken.It’s a timeless tension in project environments. Revisit the episode and weigh in:💬 What would you do split or stick?Thanks for reading Project Management Matters! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit philipdiab.substack.com