Sign in

The impact of behaviour on project delivery White Paper

White Paper

The impact of behaviour on project delivery White Paper

White Paper

  • White Paper
  • Behaviour
  • Methods & frameworks
  • Knowledge management
  • Leadership
  • Processes
  • Project management
  • Requirements
  • Roles

Author  Ann Cheung

June 29, 2015 |

 25 min read

  • White Paper
  • Behaviour
  • Methods & frameworks
  • Knowledge management
  • Leadership
  • Processes
  • Project management
  • Requirements
  • Roles

Behaviour impacts every aspect of project delivery. Successful project delivery is achieved when the desired behaviours are consistently and regularly exhibited, and undesired behaviours are mitigated and eliminated. Success in this context goes beyond delivering the output to time, cost and quality. It is possible to deliver a project to time, cost and quality using undesired and unpleasant behaviours however, very few of those people involved would consider this to have been a successful delivery.

The AXELOS suite of products provides a framework for portfolio, programme and project management that is comprehensive yet flexible to ensure that the key principles can be best applied. They are not prescriptive and do not provide a specific recommendation of ‘how’ to deliver the portfolio, programme or project. This White Paper provides an overview of the impact of behaviour on project delivery.

There are very few people who set out to deliberately sabotage a project through their behaviour, but either though a lack of knowledge, skill, guidance or clarity they exhibit unhelpful or undesired behaviours which impact adversely on the project. Successful projects recognize this and use data to identify the nature of the shortcoming and implement effective mitigation measures.

The impact of behaviour on project delivery can be evidenced by the success (or otherwise) of the project during delivery and on completion. Successful projects have clear objectives and identify the desired behaviours that will deliver the outputs and outcomes. They create a delivery environment which encourages desired behaviours and discourages undesired behaviours by providing effective reinforcing and punishing consequences. Leaders of successful projects are aware of the downstream impact of their behaviour and ensure that they regularly and consistently demonstrate and reinforce the desired behaviours within the delivery environment. In particular, servant leadership approaches have shifted the emphasis from command and control to people and behaviours.

Some projects consider behaviour to be a ‘nice to have’: something to consider if there is the time and/ or budget; however this is very misguided. Behaviour is occurring continually from the moment people wake up to the moment they go to sleep and so ensuring that the necessary behaviours are occurring during the time that is allocated to the project is vital.

There are two main approaches to understanding and managing behaviour; Behavioural Science and Behavioural Psychology. This White Paper briefly compares them before recommending the use of Behavioural Science as the more effective approach to managing behaviour for successful project delivery.

No one size fits all because we are all individual and respond differently to the local environment and the available consequences.


The Axelos suite of products provides a framework for portfolio, programme and project management that is comprehensive yet flexible enough to ensure that the key principles can be best applied. The products highlight the importance of:

  • Effective leadership
  • Good communication
  • Competent and motivated individuals
  • Appropriate team selection
  • Recognition of the cultural and people issues involved with change.

Key roles are defined and the areas of focus are highlighted for successfully fulfilling the role in terms of the authority, accountabilities, responsibilities, and abilities. The approach to executing the role is not specified leaving flexibility for the individual role holder to select their behaviours. Key attributes are provided in terms of what the effective role holder must know and do (tasks and outputs).

PRINCE2® highlights that people management is a key competency and the requirement for the behavioural expectations of the team members to be established.

Managing Successful Programmes (MSP®) identifies the key principles for effective leadership:

  • Ability to create a compelling vision portraying a beneficial future and to communicate this future in inspirational ways to all kinds of stakeholders
  • Empowered decision-making, giving individuals the autonomy to fulfil their roles effectively. Motivation, reward and appraisal systems are vital for fostering the attitudes and energy to drive the programme
  • Visible commitment and authority, with enough seniority to:
    • Ensure that the correct resources are available to the programme
    • Influence and engage with stakeholders
    • Balance the programme’s priorities with those of the ongoing business operations
    • Focus on realization of the business benefits
  • Relevant skills and experience to provide active management of:
    • The cultural and people issues involved in change
    • The programme’s finances and the inevitable conflicting demands on resources
    • The co-ordination of the projects within the programme to see through the transition to new operational services, while maintaining business operations
    • Risk identification, evaluation and management.

A successful delivery framework such as PRINCE2 or MSP includes arrangements that ensure that the project team works as required. This involves defining the roles and identifying the duties in terms of tasks and outputs. The majority of role profiles include the role title, description, duties, accountabilities, responsibilities and the minimum knowledge and experience requirements. They do not however define the desired behaviours. This creates uncertainty as to whether the person will deliver the outputs and discharge their accountabilities and responsibilities using desired behaviours.

In January 2012 the NAO/Cabinet Office published an agreed list of common causes of programme/ project failure:

  • Lack of a clear link between the project and the organization’s key strategic priorities, including agreed measures of success
  • Lack of clear senior management and Ministerial ownership and leadership Lack of effective engagement with stakeholders
  • Lack of skills and proven approach to project management and risk management
  • Too little attention to breaking development and implementation into manageable steps
  • Evaluation of proposals driven by initial price rather than long-term value for money (especially securing delivery of business benefits)
  • Lack of understanding and contact with the supply chain industry at senior levels in the organization
  • Lack of effective project team integration between clients, the supplier team and the supply chain.

The majority of these relate to the lack of something. The lack of structure, agreed measures, ownership, engagement, management arrangements or team integration are a result of people not doing something or doing something that is ineffective or contrary to achieving these requirements. Therefore all of the common causes of failure relate to insufficient or ineffective action, and this action comprises people’s behaviour. This highlights that on failing projects not enough of the desired behaviours occur and/or undesired behaviours occur.


There are two different approaches to understanding and managing behaviour. Behavioural Science is concerned with everything we ‘say or do’ whereas Behavioural Psychology is concerned with what we ‘think or feel’. In the project delivery environment it is much more effective to consider the objective facts of what we can see a team member say or do, rather than subjectively try and interpret what a team member is thinking or feeling.

Behavioural Science emanated from the work of American Psychologist B F Skinner (1904-1990) who recognized that whilst previous research had been trying to understand people’s behaviour based on what was happening in the mind it had achieved limited progress. He decided to research behaviour based on what could be objectively observed from what people said and did. His research provided the basis for our understanding of Behavioural Science.

To understand behaviour there needs to be recognition that many of the terms used to define behaviours are not behaviours in their own right. Currently there is emphasis on ‘behaviours’ such as trust, professionalism, communication, collaboration, accountability, respect, inclusion and outcome driven, however these terms are summarizing a collection of behaviours. These terms are a shorthand that we use in conversation but, without pinpointing the component behaviours, there remains subjectivity as to whether the overarching activity is occurring or not.

Behavioural Pinpointing

Behavioural pinpointing ensures that there is an objective definition of an active behaviour that can be seen or heard, agreed upon by more than one observer, and therefore is measurable. Pinpointing provides for the accurate and unequivocal definition of both desired and undesired behaviours. Using pinpointed descriptions of behaviour makes communication of desired or undesired behaviours much more straightforward and leaves nothing to interpretation or chance. Pinpointed behaviours are always active; something is happening. Often, undesired behaviours are stated in terms of what is not happening, which isn’t pinpointed e.g. “he doesn’t submit reports by the deadline”. For this to be correctly pinpointed the behaviour that is actually happening needs to be identified e.g. “he submits reports after the deadline”. This distinction is important because something that isn’t happening cannot be measured and managed.

The local environment

In Behavioural Science the local environment is defined as the physical setting and the behaviour of the people within that setting, e.g. a meeting room. The local environment influences behaviour such that while shouting is likely and acceptable at a sports fixture it is not likely or acceptable in a library. The behaviour of shouting is the same but the likelihood of the behaviour occurring is influenced by the local environment. Each person within the local environment is able to influence the likelihood of particular behaviours, desired or undesired.

Servant leadership which is being embraced within the Agile community focuses on creating the environment for the project team to best succeed with much more emphasis on people and behaviours than command and control.

In the project environment, if the leader(s) use their mobile devices (mobile phones, laptops, tablets) in meetings it is far more likely that team members will use their mobile devices in meetings. The use of mobile devices in meetings will be prevalent in the local environment. The downstream impact of a leader using their mobile devices in meetings is that it is more likely that the use of mobile devices in meetings will become common practice and contribute to the prevailing team culture. (The potential consequences for using mobile devices in meetings are discussed later in this paper.)

Sources of reinforcement

All behaviours occur for a reason. They occur because the person doing the behaviour was reinforced for doing the particular behaviour. For example, we do the behaviour of connecting a laptop to a projector so that we can share a presentation with stakeholders or colleagues. We get something we want. Reinforcement also occurs when we do a behaviour in order to avoid something we don’t want. For example, we talk to the client and give them up-to-date information to avoid them finding things out from other sources. Reinforcement is the consequence of doing this behaviour.

Antecedents and Consequences

Consequences have the most impact on behaviour however, they are not the only driver. Prompts, referred to as antecedents, are in the local environment and can have the effect of prompting a particular behaviour. Antecedents often take the form of instructions, email, phone calls etc. and have varying levels of effectiveness at prompting desired behaviours. The most effective antecedents are those that are paired with an appropriate consequence. For example, a meeting action log is an antecedent however, the likelihood of attendees completing their actions is increased if the manager regularly applies consequences by following-up, reinforcing those who have completed their actions and holding to account those who have not.

Types of consequences

The consequences that flow from a behaviour can be reinforcing or punishing: indeed there is often a series of possible consequences for each individual behaviour and they influence whether we are likely to do that behaviour again, see figure 3.1. It is important to note that the definition of whether something is a reinforcing or punishing consequence is specific to the person doing the behaviour. Different people find different consequences reinforcing or punishing. Recognizing the completion of a project to time and budget with a day trip to a theme park will be reinforcing for some but punishing for others. This is an important consideration when managing behaviour and is often overlooked.

Reinforcing consequences

Reinforcing consequences take the form of:

  • R+ characterised by getting something I want - want to
  • R- characterised by avoiding something I don’t want - have to.

In both cases behaviour is occurring. The difference is that whilst R+ leads to unconstrained behavioural improvement, R- leads to ‘just enough’ behaviour which is just at or above the specified standard. Therefore it is important to be clear about the behaviours that just need to be executed to a required standard and the behaviours that, if executed frequently, will benefit the project.

Image of Figure 3.1 Types of Consequences

The role of the leader is to create a local environment which provides the appropriate balance of R+ and R- consequences. Leaders who manage by fear can still deliver project success, however this will have been achieved by creating a predominantly R- environment, and it is likely that team members would be reluctant to work for that leader on subsequent projects. It misses the opportunity to achieve unconstrained success and is unlikely to improve the success of the project.

Punishing consequences

Punishing consequences take the form of:

  • P+ characterised by adding punishment - Punishment
  • P- characterised by removing something I want - Penalty.

There is no ‘one size fits all’ solution to providing effective consequences. If a consequence is received as punishing by a team member they are far less likely to do the behaviour in future because they got something they didn’t want either because you added Punishment or withdrew something they wanted as a Penalty. Providing a punishing consequence for an undesired behaviour is an effective means of mitigating undesired behaviours.

Punishment is often considered only in the context of dismissing someone or blocking a pay rise or promotion but this is incorrect. Any action you take (consequence you provide) that causes the person to cease a behaviour is a punishing consequence. Punishment can only be considered to have been effective if the undesired behaviour no longer occurs. It is important to recognize that it is possible to punish both desired and undesired behaviours by providing a consequence that the person doesn’t want or like. For example, in a meeting, asking a person why they haven’t completed their actions from the previous meeting may be very uncomfortable for the person such that they ensure in future that they come to the meeting prepared. You have successfully punished e.g. stopped, the behaviour of attending meetings without completing actions, and increased the behaviour of attending meetings with completed actions. Alternatively if you provide public praise for an excellent piece of work (thinking you are reinforcing a desired behaviour) to a team member who does not like fuss you may be effectively punishing that person for doing a good piece of work because they got something they didn’t like or want. You will recognize if this has happened because the quality of subsequent work will be decreased.

Sometimes we feel that we have been punished by the behaviour of others, such as receiving late payment of invoices, however because we continue to do the behaviour of submitting invoices we have not been punished as defined in behavioural terms. In this case, what we are experiencing is an undesired behaviour or response.

In contrast the consequence of Penalty is when something the person wants is taken away. This is the basis of some child raising techniques where a toy is removed each time the child exhibits an undesired behaviour. However it is possible for the child to run out of toys before the undesired behaviour ceases. Examples of Penalty would be when:

  • A key deadline has been missed and all annual leave sanctioned for the next period is rescinded;
  • Production quality has declined so discretionary rewards are withdrawn.

Penalty is not a regularly used approach because it is much more effective to clearly articulate the desired behaviour as an alternative to the undesired behaviour and provide appropriate reinforcement.

Finally, Extinction can be experienced when a person no longer receives reinforcement for exhibiting a behaviour that they have received reinforcement for previously. Extinction can be an effective means of modifying unhelpful behaviour that may have been inadvertently reinforced previously. Extinction is often provided by ignoring a behaviour to the point where the person no longer exhibits the behaviour. Extinction differs from Punishment in that the behaviour reduces over time whilst when punishment has been received the behaviour will stop quickly.

Whilst Extinction can be an effective means of reducing an undesired behaviour it is very important to ensure that we do not inadvertently extinguish desired behaviours. In the heat of project delivery it is common to focus attention on the poorest performing areas however it is also important to continue to reinforce all of the good performance. Otherwise the areas of good performance will start to decline and it will resemble a plate spinning exercise lurching from one management intervention to another.

Consequences range in size, effort and cost and do not just involve the ultimate consequences of pay rises or termination. Consequences can be the day-to-day reinforcers which may be as simple as a “thank you”, prompt approval, a returned phone call, email acknowledgement or assistance with a problem.

Returning to the behaviour of using mobile devices in meetings, the possible consequences are shown in Table 3.1. The list isn’t definitive or exhaustive because the particular consequences that are in play will depend on the individuals and also the local environment. In this quick example it is clear to see that the R+ reinforcing consequences provide an indication of the driver(s) for the behaviour. Whether this is acceptable behaviour will also depend on the local environment. It is important to recognise that reinforcing consequences can generate both desired and undesired behaviours. The person is exhibiting the behaviour because they are getting something they want R+ or avoiding something they don’t want R- however it is entirely possible that the behaviour is an undesired behaviour.


Avoid missing a call

Take an urgent call
Avoid a build-up of emailsCatch-up on reading emails
Action emails so there is less to  do after the meeting
Write actions directly onto a task list

The call/emails are more interesting than the meeting

Read news or social networking sites





Biscuits moved to other end of the table

Being assigned unwanted actions

Agreeing to actions by mistake

Misunderstand the discussion

Misunderstand the discussion

Re-opening a closed discussion

Table 3.1 Behaviour of using mobile device in meetings.

Table 3.2 shows the consequences to the person exhibiting the behaviour of submitting inaccurate reports; they are not the downstream impact on stakeholders or the organization. The downstream impact of inaccurate reporting is well known because it leads to decisions being made on wrong or incomplete data/information. Opportunities are then missed to identify and implement mitigating actions. These are key contributors to project failure.

Therefore it is imperative to ensure that the behaviour of providing inaccurate reporting is not reinforced. This can occur when someone else corrects the report ‘because it’s easier’ and so the potentially punishing consequences of having to stay late to correct it or receiving an irate phone call do not occur, and because they haven’t occurred the undesired behaviour continues.

Avoid having to check raw dataGet on with the next task sooner
Avoid having to chase for missing informationGet to go home on time 
Avoid getting behind with other workGet the report allocated to someone else to do 
Approval for extended lunch break cancelledHave to stay late another day to complete the corrections
An irate phone call from the recipient 
Table 3.2 The behaviour of submitting inaccurate reports 

It is often suggested that ‘there are no consequences’ however this is incorrect. There is always a consequence for a behaviour because that is the reason the person is doing the behaviour in the first place. What is really meant by ‘there are no consequences’ is that nothing punitive was done in response to the undesired behaviour; that there was no perceived effective response to the behaviour. If a leader shouts and swears at their team, the consequence to the leader is that they’ve vented their frustration and feel better for it. The team have likely had an unpleasant experience of what is for them, an undesired behaviour. (Conversely it is possible that the team have deliberately provoked the leader to get a reaction and are enjoying, are being reinforced, having achieved their mischief!)

Roles, Responsibilities and Competence

The Context section outlined that defining a role should also include details of the desired behaviour, however it does not follow that the role holder will automatically exhibit the behaviours. Indeed, ensuring that everyone has the necessary competency for their role is also important however it does not guarantee that the person will perform to the required standard. Competency is a person’s ability to do something but it does not confirm that they will do it. The local environment and the available consequences will influence whether the person performs the tasks to the best of their ability and/or to the required standard.

It is important to provide project team members with the appropriate training so that they have the necessary knowledge and skills for their role. Without the necessary knowledge and skills the person can’t do the tasks. However, if there are no barriers to doing a task, and a competent person won’t do it, then this is a motivation problem and is mitigated by applying appropriate consequences.


Motivation is a person’s desire to exhibit a behaviour which is influenced by the available reinforcing consequences. By creating a positive project environment and providing appropriate reinforcement for desired behaviours it is possible for tasks to become self-reinforcing. The satisfaction of doing the task well is in itself reinforcing. For example, when learning to play a musical instrument, being able to play a piece a little better each time reinforces us to practice more.

Project success

It is recognized good practice to define outputs and outcomes for a project and agree the critical success factors. These represent the desired result(s). Often from this point the project is developed through the business case and the planning of the activities. To effectively harness the significant impact of behaviour on project success this is the point where the behavioural aspects of the project need to be developed.

This should comprise identifying the desired behaviours that are necessary to achieve the desired result and creating the environment that will increase the likelihood of the desired behaviours occurring. Creating the appropriate environment will involve a combination of regularly and consistently applying appropriate consequences and optimising the physical environment.

Establishing and communicating an agreed list of key pinpointed behaviours will provide the project team with a clear expectation of the behaviours required. The opposite of each behaviour clearly defines the key undesired behaviours and provides a basis for providing feedback to eliminate undesired behaviours. The list of key pinpointed behaviours does not have to be exhaustive and the pinpointed behaviours may be grouped under headings for ease of communication.

For example, the roles of Executive, Senior User, Project Manager and Team Manager hold key accountabilities and responsibilities and their duties differ, however many of the desired behaviours are similar as demonstrated in the table 4.1.

RoleKey responsibilities*Pinpointed behaviours apply to all roles**
ExecutiveDesign and  appoint the project management team
Oversee the development of the Project Brief and the outline Business Case
Oversee the development of the detailed Business Case 
Secure funding for the project
Set clear expectations
Provide accurate, compete and timely information
Review information and provide accurate, complete and timely feedback
Collect performance data and regularly review against agreed performance parameters 
Provide regular objective feedback (positive and/or constructive) based on the data collected
Let the other person finish speaking before starting to speak
Ask the other person to recap the discussion to check for understanding 
Senior UserProvide the customer's quality expectations and define acceptance criteria
Ensure that the desired outcome of the project is specified
Ensure the project produces products that will deliver desired outcomes
Ensure expected benefits are realized
Set clear expectations
Provide accurate, compete and timely information
Review information and provide accurate, complete and timely feedback
Collect performance data and regularly review against agreed performance parameters
Provide regular objective feedback (positive and/or constructive) based on the data collected
Let the other person finish speaking before starting to speak
Ask the other person to recap the discussion to check for understanding
Project ManagerPrepare baseline management products, reports and records
Prepare the project plan
Liaise with  corporate, programme management and suppliers
Lead the project management team
Ensure behavioural expectations of team members are established
Set clear expectations
Provide accurate, compete and timely information
Review information and provide accurate, complete and timely feedback
Collect performance data and regularly review against agreed performance parameters
Provide regular objective feedback (positive and/or constructive) based on the data collected
Let the other person finish speaking before starting to speak
Ask the other person to recap the discussion to check for understanding
Team Manager Prepare Team Plan and agree with the Project Manager
Produce checkpoint  reports
Plan, monitor and manage the team's work
Set clear expectations
Provide accurate, compete and timely information
Review information and provide accurate, complete and timely feedback
Collect performance data and regularly review against agreed performance parameters
Provide regular objective feedback (positive and/or constructive) based on the data collected
Let the other person finish speaking before starting to speak
Ask the other person to recap the discussion to check for understanding

* extract from Managing Successful Projects  with PRINCE2
** these are examples of relevant pinpointed behaviours that are required for the role holder to execute their responsibilities
Table 4.1 Pinpointed behaviours

It is imperative to ensure that there is nothing in the project environment that will drive behaviours contrary to or in conflict with the key pinpointed behaviours. Consideration should be given to the alignment of the key pinpointed behaviours with:

  • The objectives from the perspective of all of the departments and organizations involved with the project including suppliers;
  • Corporate and project objectives;
  • Governance;
  • Contractual arrangements.

Often project teams build positive inter-relationships between the key parties which are then harmed by behaviours either driven by the organization’s corporate requirements, or by conflicting contractual arrangements. This can have a substantial impact on successful project delivery. When local agreements are made by the project team that are not subsequently honoured this highlights that there was a stronger source of reinforcement elsewhere. Or when a part of a project team appears to be focused on a particular agenda which is unhelpful to the project this indicates that there may be a fear of a consequence from the home department or organization that is stronger than the consequence which will ensue from the project.

Analyzing the consequences of a particular behaviour will identify the particular consequence (from the perspective of the person doing the behaviour) that is driving the behaviour. This forms the basis for identifying a suitable response to commence behavioural change so that undesired behaviours can be mitigated or eliminated and desired behaviours increased.

The effectiveness of common corporate approaches to reward and punishment are often limited. They are often insufficiently anchored to the particular behaviours that are to be rewarded or punished, and assume that everyone is reinforced and punished by the same things. For example, Employee of the Month schemes may (but not necessarily) be reinforcing for the selected individual but what about everyone else? Is it worth reinforcing one person at the expense of indicating to everyone else that their input for the previous period has gone unrecognized? Furthermore these initiatives would appear to only provide 12 opportunities for reinforcement per year.

Employee rewards are exactly that, however they should not be mistaken for reinforcers for desired behaviours because often they are available to all irrespective of performance. It is a reward for being employed by the organization rather than a reinforcer for a specific desired behaviour.


In recognizing that behaviour is occurring all of the time, project success is dependent on frequent and consistent desired behaviours with the elimination or mitigation of undesired behaviours. Successful projects harness this resource and create the conditions for success through establishing a positive local environment and the appropriate use of consequences.

Behavioural Science focuses on behaviour in terms of what people ‘say or do’ compared with Behavioural Psychology which focusses on what people ‘think or feel’. Whilst everyone has thoughts and feelings these are personal to the person and can leave behavioural management to guesswork or amateur psychology. Objectively observing what people ‘say or do’ provides a reliable platform for managing behaviour in the project environment.

The impact of behaviour on project delivery is becoming more of a consideration, however many of the high profile behaviours are not actually behaviours but summary words which comprise a number of behaviours. Behavioural pinpointing is important to ensure an objective behaviour has been defined which can then be executed by the team.

Behaviour is driven by consequences (reinforcing or punishing) and the impact of the local environment, and flows to the source of most reinforcement. There is no ‘one size fits all’ solution and so it is not possible to provide a definitive list of behaviours or positive consequences. The local environment will be influencing behaviour and by its very nature, it is varied and specific to the particular circumstances. Therefore understanding Behavioural Science and applying the principles to manage behaviour objectively will be the differentiator for success over the next decade.


A prompt for a behaviour.

Any activity of a living thing. Anything we say or do.

behavioural psychology
The scientific study of the mind.

behavioural science
The scientific study of observable behaviour.

Something the performer receives as a result of exhibiting a behaviour.

When the performer has something they like/ want removed.

pinpointed behaviour
An objective description of an active behaviour that can be seen or heard and agreed upon by more than one observer such that the frequency of occurrence can be measured.

punishing consequences
Consequences that decrease the frequency of a behaviour.

When the performer receives something they do not like/want as a direct result of exhibiting a behaviour.

When the performer either receives something they like/want or avoids something they don’t like/want as a direct result of exhibiting a behaviour.

reinforcing consequences
Consequences that increase the frequency of a behaviour.


Cabinet Office (January 2012), Review guidance. Common causes of programme/project failure. version 1.1 - which can be found at: file/62076/PPM-Common-Causes-of-Failure.doc

AXELOS. (2011) Managing Successful Programmes 4th Edition, TSO.

AXELOS. (2009) Managing Successful Projects with PRINCE2 5th Edition, TSO.

Further Reading

Blanchard, K & Johnson S. (2004) ‘The one minute manager.’ Harper Collins.

Braksick, L W. (2007) ‘Unlock behaviour unleash profits.’ McGraw-Hill.

Daniels, A. (2000) ‘Bringing out the best in people: how to apply the astonishing power of positive reinforcement.’ McGraw-Hill.

Daniels, A. (2005) ‘Other people’s habits : how to use positive reinforcement to bring out the best in people around you, Performance Management Publications.

Fournies, F. (2007) ‘Why employees don’t do what you want them to do and what to do about it’. McGraw-Hill.

About the author

Ann Cheung is an independent consultant using Applied Behavioural Science for effective portfolio, programme and project management. For some clients she provides advice and support using behavioural management techniques and for other Clients she provides behavioural management consultancy (including training, leadership team development and 1:1 coaching) within the programme and project delivery environment.

A Chartered Civil Engineer by background, Ann has more than 25 years of experience across the full delivery lifecycle having worked for construction contractors, consultancies, public sector client organizations and SMEs. She regularly speaks at conferences and as an Associate of Outperform UK, Ann is an APMG Registered Consultant in MSP and PPM and is a P3M3® Maturity Assessor.