New project managers (PMs), you sometimes struggle with “misalignments in understanding” with your members and the difficulty of communication, right?

The cause might be mixing up the objective “fact” and the subjective “truth.”

In this article, we introduce the “detective-style management” way of thinking.
Using hints from Conan’s words, you will distinguish between “facts” and “truths” to smoothly move your project forward.

“There is always only one truth!”
– Detective Conan

However, when you stand on the project floor, you may think,
“Really, is there only one ‘truth’ that we should face?”

Gaps between report contents and the on-site feel, conversations that don’t mesh…
This article contains hints for overcoming those situations.

First, let’s grasp the basic difference in meaning between these two words.

These are objective pieces of information that anyone can confirm with “Yes, that’s correct.”

• The task “Create functional specification document” on the WBS was completed yesterday. (The deliverable has been submitted.)
• 5 bugs were detected out of 100 test cases. (Recorded in the test report.)
• The total working hours of the team members this week were 120 hours. (Matches timesheet records.)
• “Addition of feature X” was formally decided in the meeting with the client. (Clearly stated in the minutes.)

These are objective pieces of information backed by data or records.

These are not necessarily “lies.” For each person, they are indisputable “truths.”

• Developer A: “I think it’s impossible to guarantee sufficient quality with this schedule.”
  (A’s unvarnished “truth” based on their experience.)
• Salesperson B: “The client will definitely be satisfied with this feature.”
  (B’s “truth” infused with expectation.)
• User C: “I find this new system somewhat difficult to use.”
  (C’s honest “truth” coming from their actual experience.)
• And you as the PM: “I think the team’s atmosphere is good.”
  (Your “truth” based on your observation.)

My answer to this question is “It depends on the context.”
Detective Conan’s famous line, “There is always only one truth!”

This mainly refers to the objective reality of an incident, that is, the “fact” itself.
A detective, amid swirling lies, misunderstandings, and conflicting testimonies, pursues the single “event” that actually happened.

• Only one thing really happened.
• If you trace it, there is one real culprit, one motive, one method leading to a single truth.

Under this belief, from the standpoint of pursuing the only fact that must be uncovered, this line is used.
On the other hand, in our everyday life and projects, “truth” includes each person’s subjective interpretations and beliefs.

Therefore, “truth” can exist as many as there are people.
Thus, depending on the context and the subject, the nuance of the word “truth” changes.

A “detective-like perspective” is indispensable in project management as well.
In other words, you need a stance of thoroughly pursuing objective facts.

• Why did delays occur compared to the plan?
• Why do similar defects keep recurring?
• Why did a misunderstanding arise with the client?

The work of identifying the “fundamental factual causes” is very similar to a detective’s investigative process.
Investigate data and records, carefully interview stakeholders, gather evidence, and clarify the causes.

If you accept ambiguous information at face value or get misled by superficial phenomena, you cannot take precise countermeasures.

Projects are not built solely on logic and objective facts.
Many “people” are involved, and there are diverse “truths” based on each person’s “feelings,” “positions,” and “experiences.”

For example, suppose there is the single “fact” that a member was late to a meeting.

• The boss’s “truth”: “Late again. Does he not take his duties seriously?”
• The person’s “truth”: “I was caught up in an urgent issue just before and even reached out. I thought I came as quickly as possible...”

Neither is necessarily “lying.”
Differences in subjective interpretation of the same “fact” can create friction and interpersonal conflicts.

Here lies the human complexity of projects that Conan’s words alone cannot overcome.

We PMs have the important responsibility of collecting and analyzing objective “facts.”
Based on them, we make plans and manage progress.

At the same time, we must also face the diverse “truths” held by stakeholders.
We must sincerely listen to each “truth.”

The PM is responsible for making plans and managing progress based on objective “facts.”
This is the fundamental premise for accurately grasping “issues” and taking countermeasures, as discussed in a previous article.
“Issue” here refers to the “gap between the current state and the desired state.”

These “facts” are the vital signs indicating the health of your project.
And they serve as the basis for objective decision-making.

• Accurately grasp the “facts” such as progress reports, issue lists, and quality data.
  Then share them with stakeholders with transparency.
• Avoid vague expressions like “I feel we’re somewhat behind.”
  It’s important to speak with specific “facts,” such as “We are 3 days behind the plan.”

• Example of a client’s “truth”: “Without this feature, our operations can’t function (so we need it at all costs).”
• Example of a team member’s “truth”: “If we don’t pay down this technical debt, it will definitely become a big problem in the future (so let me address it now).”
• Example of executives’ “truth”: “The success of this project is essential to the company’s growth (so we absolutely cannot afford to fail).”

Unlike objective “facts,” these “truths” include emotions, expectations, and anxieties.
However, they greatly influence project progress.

PMs should avoid ignoring these “truths” or unilaterally saying, “That’s wrong.”
Doing so could lead to decreased motivation and the collapse of cooperative relationships.

So how should PMs concretely handle “objective facts” and “subjective truths”?

1. Thorough fact collection and sharing:
   First, collect “facts” that reflect the state of the project without bias.
   Openly share this as the starting point among stakeholders.
   It’s important to build a common foundation for discussion.

2. Understand “truths” through active listening:
   For the “truths” expressed by stakeholders, listen without immediate evaluation or judgment.
   Ask questions like, “Why do you think that?” “Why did you feel that way?”
   “What’s the background to that?”
   Strive to understand the “truth” as it is for that person.

3. Linking and analyzing “facts” and “truths”:
   Compare the collected “facts” with the “truths” stakeholders express.
   For example, if a member says the “schedule is tight” as their “truth,”
   check if there are “facts” in the data such as progress delays or working hours that support it.
   Or it might stem from anxieties based on past failures.
   This kind of analysis makes it easier to see the essence of the problem.

4. Fostering shared understanding and consensus through dialogue:
   Present the objective “facts” while bringing the feelings and concerns behind each “truth” into the agenda.
   Engage in constructive dialogue.
   Sometimes, it may be impossible to fully satisfy all “truths.”
   In that case, return to the broader perspective of achieving the project’s objectives.
   Prioritize, and make efforts to find a landing that stakeholders can accept.
   In this process, the PM’s role as a facilitator to smoothly guide discussions is strongly required.

5. Transparent decision-making and communication:
   Clearly communicate to stakeholders what has been decided in the end and
   the rationale for why the decision was made.
   Include not only the objective facts but also how you considered the diverse truths.
   Doing so increases stakeholders’ sense of understanding and
   elicits proactive cooperation.

Even if you understand the theory, you might wonder where to start.
It’s okay to begin with small steps.

Here are three actions you can try tomorrow:

• Action 1: Refine how you take meeting minutes
  In meeting records, distinguish between “what was decided (facts)” and
  “who said what (truths/opinions).”
  Try taking notes with these two in mind and separate.

• Action 2: Create time to elicit your team’s voices
  In everyday conversation, gather the courage to ask team members,
  “Is there anything you’re concerned about or find difficult to work on lately?”

• Action 3: Add a line of on-the-ground voices to your reports
  When giving a weekly report, don’t convey only project progress data (facts).
  Also share qualitative information (truths), such as “Here’s what people on the ground are saying.”

The statement “There is always only one truth!” can only be asserted after all information is gathered and verified.
This line refers to the “truth of the incident (= facts).”

However, the projects we face daily are always uncertain.
In them, the subjective “truths” of diverse people are intricately intertwined.

Excellent PMs pursue objective “facts” with a sharp detective’s observation to see through to the core of problems.
At the same time, they also need the stance of empathetically listening to and harmonizing the “truths” of diverse stakeholders.

They have the heart of a counselor guiding the project toward a shared goal.
Discern the facts and listen to the truths.

By valuing this stance, your project will proceed more smoothly.
It’s no problem if you can’t do it perfectly from the start.

From today, practice “detective-style management” little by little.
If you run into trouble, don’t struggle alone; please consult your senior colleagues or supervisors.

We wholeheartedly support your important first steps as a PM.