AI Driven PM: S2E3 - The Halo Effect

Just Because You're Good at One Thing Doesn't Mean You're Good at Another

I do this exercise every time I speak at a PMI chapter or project management conference.

I get up on stage and say, "Everybody who's a practicing project manager right now, raise your hand."

Hands go up across the room. Hundreds of them.

"Okay, keep them up. Keep them up," I say. "Now—who came out of college wanting to be a project manager?"

And I watch every hand in the room drop.

Except for three or four people. Maybe.

That right there? That's the Halo Effect.

We were all good at something else first. I started as a technical engineer. You probably started as a developer, analyst, designer, accountant, or subject matter expert in your domain.

We didn't set out to be project managers. We fell into it because someone looked at us one day and said, "You're really good at [X]. You should lead the team."

And here's the problem: Being really good at [X] doesn't automatically make you good at leading people who do [X].

But organizations make this assumption all the time. It's called the Halo Effect—the cognitive bias that says if you're good at one thing, we assume you'll be good at something else.

And it's killing project success rates.

What Is the Halo Effect (And Why It Matters for PMs)

The Halo Effect is simple: Just because you're excellent at something doesn't mean you'll be excellent at something else.

But we promote like it does.

We take our best engineer and make them a project manager. We take our best project manager and make them a PMO leader. We take our top salesperson and make them a sales manager.

And then we wonder why they struggle.

Here's why: These are completely different skill sets.

Let me show you.

Great Engineer vs. Great PM: The Skill Mismatch

What makes a great engineer:

• Deep focus and technical mastery
• Love of solving hard, complex problems
• Delivering working code or product
• Individual contribution and craftsmanship

What makes a great PM:

• Broad coordination across stakeholders
• Fluency in navigating ambiguity
• Managing energy, decisions, and people dynamics
• Influence without authority

See the disconnect?

A great engineer wants to solve the problem themselves. A great PM needs to orchestrate others to solve the problem.

So what happens? The newly promoted PM tries to apply engineering rigor to people problems. They delegate, get frustrated when it's not done "right," and then just do it themselves.

They burn out trying to do everyone else's job.

Great PM vs. Great PMO Leader: Another Mismatch

Here's another one I see all the time: We take our best project manager and promote them to PMO manager.

And they crash.

Why? Because these are also totally different skill sets.

I wrote a blog post years ago called "The Kindergartner's Guide to PMO," and the key insight was this:

A project manager has been taught to color inside the lines.

A PMO manager has to establish the lines that everyone else colors in.

One role is about controlling a project within constraints. The other is about negotiating ambiguity and setting organizational standards.

Totally. Different. Skills.

And here's where I see it go wrong: The newly promoted PMO manager thinks, "I was successful doing it this way, so everyone should do it this way."

But that's not leadership. That's replication.

When I ran a PMO, I was very intentional about not forcing my way onto my team. I'd say, "Here's what we need to accomplish. You figure out how you want to do it."

You need meeting notes? Great. Do it in Word, dictate it, put it in bullet points in an email—I don't care. As long as we have clear, actionable notes, you do it your way.

That's how you build a high-performing team. You set the standard, not the process.

My Uncomfortable Truth About Being a PMO Leader

Let me tell you a story I don't share often.

When I ran a PMO, I found out I'm not a very good HR manager. At least not in the corporate sense.

Here's what happened:

We were a brand new PMO. Our goal was to hit 60% of our milestone and production dates. Industry standard at the time was around 30%.

We hit 99% in our first year.

Everybody crushed it. Not just met expectations—exceeded them. Our sponsors were thrilled. Our teams were energized. It was one of those rare moments where everything just clicked.

So when it came time for annual evaluations, I gave everyone fives.

HR came to me and said, "You can't do that."

"Why not?" I asked. "That's what happened."

"Someone has to fall below your expectations," they said. "Most people can meet expectations. Maybe one person can exceed. But you can't give everyone fives."

I thought that was the dumbest thing I'd ever heard.

I pushed back. And then they said the line that killed me:

"If you don't do this, then the problem is your expectations."

I looked at them and said, "Or it's yours."

They didn't like that.

I said, "You want me to forcibly tell someone they're not doing their job—or just barely meeting it—when what we're actually doing is exceeding every possible expectation and building leaders?"

"I'm not doing that."

So no—I'm not a good HR manager in the corporate sense. But I am a good people leader. And I had an incredible HR partner in Carrie Blaise (still one of my best friends) who taught me something invaluable:

Preparation is everything.

Carrie would come into our monthly one-on-ones with a bullet-point list of things he was concerned about, things he was proud of, observations he'd made. The level of detail he could hold onto and bring into coaching conversations was phenomenal.

And I learned: If I want to coach well, I need to prepare well.

That's where AI comes in.

AI as Your Coaching Preparation Partner

Here's what most people miss about AI: It's not just for typing emails or generating status reports.

AI is a thinking partner for coaching.

I use AI now to help me prepare for coaching conversations. I ask it to:

• Assess skill gaps objectively
• Build development plans for struggling PMs
• Surface blind spots I might be missing
• Frame hard conversations with empathy

I even use it for my own work. I've got a new methodology I'm developing, and I've had AI:

• Do deep research on competing frameworks
• Ask me 30-40 clarifying questions to refine my thinking
• Look for holes in my logic
• Make sure I'm not accidentally copying something I read years ago

AI runs research in the background while I do the high-value work.

And that's what today's episode is about: Using AI to help you become a better coach, a better leader, and a more objective evaluator of talent.

Three Prompts to Fight the Halo Effect

I'm going to walk you through three prompts I use to assess PM talent, build development plans, and create competency frameworks.

I ran all three live in ChatGPT and Claude. And interestingly, ChatGPT followed my Socratic prompting instructions better this time, while Claude kept wanting to skip ahead.

Just goes to show—you've got to experiment with multiple tools. What works best changes depending on the task.

---

Prompt 1: PM Skills Gap Analysis

This is your non-negotiable experiment for this episode. I want you to run this on yourself—or on a PM on your team.

Here's what it does:

• Identifies the 8-10 core PM competencies needed for a role
• Assesses which competencies the PM likely excels at
• Surfaces growth areas and skill gaps
• Provides a 90-day development plan

What happened when I ran it:

ChatGPT asked me great clarifying questions:

• What authority do you formally have as a PM? Can you approve scope changes or push back on the sponsor?
• How is success measured for you on this project?
• What's the sponsor's level of PM maturity?

Then it gave me competencies like:

• Scope and change management
• Stakeholder management
• Strategic communication
• Risk anticipation
• Team energy management

And a 90-day plan broken into:

• Month 1: Shadow a senior PM on stakeholder conversations, practice framing scope changes
• Month 2: Lead a retrospective, facilitate a decision architecture session
• Month 3: Present a project health diagnostic to leadership

That's actionable coaching.

Claude, on the other hand, skipped my questions and went straight to the assessment. It said:

"Given your background and the context I already have on this project, I have enough to give you a substantive assessment without asking you to repeat yourself."

Not what I wanted. I wanted it to ask me questions because that's where the thinking happens.

But you know what? Claude's assessment was still good. Just a reminder—these tools have personalities. Experiment and find what works.

---

Prompt 2: Halo Effect Audit

This one's for diagnosing whether your organization is suffering from Halo Effect bias in PM hiring and promotion.

What it surfaces:

• What skills you tend to prioritize (hint: probably technical ones)
• What critical PM skills you're overlooking
• Evidence that you're promoting the wrong people
• How to change your selection criteria
• Interview questions that reveal actual PM competencies

What ChatGPT told me:

"Your pattern is clear. You prioritize deep product knowledge, technical credibility, system architecture understanding, and individual performance reputation. The implicit belief appears to be: The best engineer will become the best PM."

Ouch. But true.

It then said:

"In a 200-person software company, PM success depends heavily on: stakeholder boundary-setting, scope governance, executive communication, strategic framing, conflict navigation, cross-functional influence without authority, and change containment."

None of which have anything to do with being a great engineer.

Then it gave me interview questions that would actually reveal PM competencies:

• "You need to tell your executive sponsor the project will be three weeks late. Write the first three sentences of that email right now."
• "How do you prevent scope creep when priorities change weekly?"
• "Explain this technical roadmap to a non-technical executive in two minutes."

These questions don't test technical knowledge. They test influence, framing, and communication under pressure.

That's what separates good PMs from great ones.

---

Prompt 3: PM Competency Framework Builder

This one's for PMO leaders or anyone building career paths for PMs.

What it creates:

• 8-12 core PM competencies tailored to your org
• Observable behaviors at "developing," "proficient," and "expert" levels
• Which competencies matter most for junior vs. senior PMs
• How to assess competencies in hiring/promotion
• Development resources to support growth

What I loved from the output:

It gave me a competency matrix like this:

Strategic Alignment / Executive Communication

• Developing: Shares updates focused on tasks, struggles to translate technical details
• Proficient: Frames updates in terms of outcomes, timelines, and risks; pre-aligns executives before major decisions
• Expert: Shapes priorities before execution begins; anticipates executive concerns and addresses them early; reduces rework caused by shifting direction

That's a promotion rubric right there.

If you're a new PMO manager and someone just asked you to define PM1, PM2, and PM3 levels—this prompt will give you 80% of the framework in 10 minutes.

Then you customize it for your org.

---

Your Non-Negotiable Experiment This Week

Run the PM Skills Gap Analysis (Prompt 1) on yourself or a PM on your team.

Be honest. Where do you think you're strong? Where do you think you're weak?

Let AI ask you clarifying questions. Let it surface blind spots.

Then identify the top two gaps and one concrete action to address each.

Here's what I want you to notice:

1. Were the gaps what you expected, or did AI surface something you weren't anticipating?
2. Did it reveal any blind spots you'd been avoiding?
3. How does having a structured 90-day development plan change the conversation?

Because here's the truth: Most PMs never get objective feedback. They get vague performance reviews and assumptions based on whether their last project shipped on time.

AI can give you the structured, evidence-based assessment most organizations never provide.

---

The Takeaway

The Halo Effect is real. And it's why so many great engineers fail as PMs, and why so many great PMs fail as PMO leaders.

Being good at one thing doesn't automatically make you good at another.

We need objective competency frameworks. We need to assess the actual skills that make PMs successful—not just assume technical mastery translates to people leadership.

And we need AI to help us do it objectively, without bias, without politics, and without the uncomfortable truth that maybe we've been promoting the wrong people for years.

So run that skills gap analysis. Be honest. Surface the blind spots.

Because the best leaders aren't the ones who were always great. They're the ones who were willing to see where they weren't—and did something about it.

---

Next time: People skills vs. domain expertise—which one actually matters for project managers? (Spoiler: It's not what you think.)

Want these prompts ready to copy/paste? See below!

If you would like to see the podcast live, check out this link: https://youtu.be/-9CvnXoPsFs

Now go find your blind spots. Your team is counting on you.

— Rick A. Morris

---

The Prompts (Copy/Paste Ready)

Prompt 1 - PM Skills Gap Analysis

You are a senior project management coach and assessor.

First, ask me 3–5 questions about the PM's background, current role, challenges they're facing, and what success looks like in their context.

Then provide an assessment answering:

1. What are the 8–10 core PM competencies needed for this role?
2. Based on what I've shared, which competencies does this PM likely excel at?
3. Which competencies are likely gaps or growth areas?
4. What specific behaviors or outcomes would indicate strength or weakness in each gap area?
5. What is a 90-day development plan to address the top 2–3 gaps?

PM background: [Add your background]

---

Prompt 2 - Halo Effect Audit

You are an organizational psychologist specializing in team composition and role fit.

Ask me 2–3 questions about how PMs are selected and promoted in my organization.

Then help me analyze our hiring/promotion patterns by answering:

1. What skills or background do we tend to prioritize when selecting PMs?
2. What skills critical to PM success might we be overlooking?
3. What evidence would indicate we're suffering from halo effect in PM selection?
4. How should we change our PM selection criteria to reduce halo effect bias?
5. What interview questions or assessments would reveal true PM competencies?

Organization context: [Add Organization Context]

---

Prompt 3 - PM Competency Framework

You are a PMO director building a competency framework.

First, ask me 3–4 questions about our project types, organizational culture, and what "great PM performance" looks like here.

Then create a PM competency framework answering:

1. What are the 8–12 core PM competencies for our context?
2. For each competency, what does "developing," "proficient," and "expert" look like in observable behaviors?
3. Which competencies are most critical for new PMs vs. senior PMs?
4. How should we assess these competencies in hiring and promotion decisions?
5. What development resources (training, coaching, mentoring) support growth in each area?

Organizational context: [Add Organizational Context]