If you are new to the idea of Team Praxis, please read our introduction to the concept before using the table below to improve your communications with team members, stakeholders and anyone else involved in your project, programme or portfolio.

The goals of assurance are to:

  • review management planning;
  • monitor effectiveness of functions and processes;
  • give stakeholders confidence that the work is being managed effectively and efficiently.

When implementing these goals people with different character traits would perceive assurance in different ways.

Concientious behaviour would typically propose or want to see:

  • a consistent and systematic approach to assurance;

  • assurance processes being rigorously followed and compliance being monitored through quantifiable measures;

  • comprehensive and robust management plans;

  • a long-term commitment to assurance including the resources necessary to carry it out to the end of the project or programme;

  • clear principles identified that are understood by all parties;

  • relationships between management plans mapped and inconsistencies resolved.

Someone exhibiting concientious behaviour would typically be perceived as:

  • bureaucratic through insisting on comprehensive and regular assurance;

  • taking a black and white approach to compliance, requiring evidence to be presented.

Dominant behaviour would typically propose or want to see:

  • a focus on the objectives of the work and risks to delivery;

  • assurance processes being followed and compliance to it being monitored through simple quantifiable measures;

  • swift action being taken following the identification of any necessary remedial actions;

  • clear accountabilities and responsibilities required to ensure compliance, including for the sponsor.

Someone exhibiting dominant behaviour would typically be perceived as:

  • focusing on the end objectives and being flexible about how it is achieved;

  • focusing on short term benefits from assurance and taking a pragmatic view as to the acceptability of management plans.

Steady behaviour would typically propose or want to see:

  • assurance being done in a way that assists the delivery team;

  • a focus on the processes and clear responsibilities for those involved

  • a fair and balanced assessment of compliance based on the situation and context;

  • relationships between management plans identified.

Someone exhibiting steady behaviour would typically be perceived as:

  • supportive of assurance where it plays a part in assisting as well as checking the team;

  • being sympathetic to challenges that the team faces in creating and following management plans.

Influential behaviour would typically propose or want to see:

  • a focus on the objectives of the work and how these are being communicated to the team;

  • clear communication on the importance of assurance in improving performance;

  • assurance being carried out with a range of stakeholders on the project, potentially through a workshop structure;

  • not requiring absolute compliance to standards for management plans.

Someone exhibiting influential behaviour would typically be perceived as:

  • being flexible around what is and is not acceptable and therefore possibly not being rigorous enough;

  • not focusing in sufficient detail on assurance activities.



Thanks to Donnie MacNicol of Team Animation for providing this page.


Please consider allowing cookies to be able to share this page on social media sites.

Change cookie settings
No history has been recorded.
Back to top