Author: Mark Romanelli

Mark Romanelli is a full-time lecturer in the Sports, Culture, and Events Management program at the University of Applied Science Kufstein Tirol (FH Kufstien Tirol) in Kufstein, Austria. His curriculum includes courses in Project Management and Strategic Project Development. He is a member of the Project Management Institute and a Certified Associate in Project Management.

Strategic Project Selection

Written by Mark Romanelli on February 8, 2019. Posted in Articles. 7 Comments on Strategic Project Selection

As project management professionals, we spend a lot of time sharpening our PM tools and mastering the techniques needed to handle all types of projects.

That same level of structure and consideration can also be applied to selecting projects for organizations. Not every project is a good idea. In the best of cases, we might have several good projects to select from. By applying a structured approach to project selection, project managers can increase the chances of selecting potentially successful projects with the most positive organizational impacts.

The Need for Strategic Project Selection

All organizations operate under limitations. In an ideal situation, organizational leadership could initiate an unlimited number of projects in order to create a multitude of outcome benefits. Unfortunately, resources are limited. Time, financing, human resources, material, and skills are just a few of the top items on a long list of constrained organizational resources. The constraints of the organization force choices in all areas of operation, including project selection. There simply isn’t enough of what is needed to go around and undertake every potential project.

Because of these limitations, project selection needs to be approached in a structured, strategic way. The goal should be to select projects with the most benefit to the organization; the greatest efficiency for the resources used. Exactly what that means will be different for every organization. It may even change depending on a given situation. By having a number of different selection tools and techniques at our disposal, we will be in a better position to select the best projects to undertake.

Seven Techniques for Structured Project Selection

There are lots of ways to decide on which projects to select. Here are seven basic techniques for picking projects to undertake. All of the methods listed here can be used alone, or in combination with other techniques.

Financial Analysis

Sometimes, the decision on which project to select comes down to only one thing – money. When this is the case, projects should be selected based on which option creates the most financial benefit for the organization.

Fortunately, there are several various financial analysis tools that can be used to determine which project provides the most benefit. Two of the most common are Return on Investment (ROI) and Payback Period. ROI is a direct measure of the return of capital produced by a project relative to the amount of capital spent on or invested in a project. ROI is calculated with the following equation:

ROI = (Gain from Investment – Investment Cost) / Investment Cost

The higher the return on investment, the more desirable the project.

The payback period of a project examines how long a project will take in order to recover the amount of capital invested. It asks the question; how long will it take for a project to generate enough income to pay for itself? The simplest calculation for payback period is to divide the amount of capital invested in the project by the amount generated (or saved) by the project per period of time (months, years, etc.). Using payback period, the project with the shortest time to recover invested capital should be selected.

Additional examinations covering a wide range of complexities can be used to select among multiple project options. In the majority of cases, project selection comes down to the idea that projects selected have an opportunity cost. The capital invested in a project could also be invested in other projects. Deciding which opportunity to select, based on financial analysis alone, should provide the best possible outcome based on the specific financial needs and objectives of the organization.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Strategic Alignment

Projects can be a powerful tool for achieving the strategic objectives of an organization. When an organization has clearly defined strategic objectives, projects should be selected to help further, or deepen, that strategy.

In doing so, projects should be selected based on their ability to support organizational strategy. For example, if an organization has stated their mission is to provide superior customer service, projects that enhance customer service should be designed and selected. If an organization is focused on innovation as a source of competitive advantage, research and development projects might be the best options to pick.

Problem Solving

There are instances in organizations where conditions can be improved or situations resolved through the implementation of particular projects. This is the concept of using projects to solve organizational problems. When this is the case, projects are selected to remove hindrance and impediments to smooth, efficient, organizational operations.

Taking Advantage of Opportunities

Smart managers are always on the lookout for new opportunities to take advantage of. Opportunities can be identified to further a number of different organizational goals, from increasing profits to entering new markets or developing new products and services. But identified opportunities rarely take advantage of themselves. In many cases, projects can be designed, selected, and implemented specifically to take advantage of opportunities identified by organizational leadership.

Fulfilling Requirements

In a dynamic business environment, the one constant is change. Industry, regulatory, and market conditions often create changing requirements. When this is the case, new organizational projects are sometimes the best way to go about fulfilling new requirements.

A recent example was the implementation of the European data protection laws (GDPR) that went into effect in 2018. In order to achieve compliance, organizations had to undertake projects of all types, such as enacting data security procedures and planning employee training sessions.

Time Frame

If deciding ‘what’ is a question of ‘when’, then the time frame for a project should be the main point of consideration in selection. This can be considered in two ways; time of implementation and total project life cycle time.

Time of implementation looks at when significant portions of the project are to be implemented. For example, are the organizational resources required for a project available when the project is planned for. Feasibility is another consideration; a local sports organization in Austria would be better off implementing a project to plan a triathlon to take place in summer, rather than in winter.

Total project life cycle time considers the total time of the project from selection and initiation to final closing and shut-down. This type of time frame is considered if there is a limited period of time available for the undertaking of a project.

Weighted Scoring Model (Decision Matrix)

Weighted scoring models are useful when the decision on project selection comes down to not one, but several factors. In this case, a weighted scoring model (AKA Decision Matrix) can be the best tool to examine, rate, and select among multiple options.

A weighted scoring model is developed by determining which factors are important to an organization in project selection. Those factors are then assigned a relative level of importance or value (weight). Then, the factors are examined and rated for each available project option under consideration, with the rating multiplied by the relative weight of the factor. The project with the highest total score is the one selected. The illustration below provides an example.

As project managers, it’s not always the case that we are able to select our own projects to work on. But when we can, either in the capacity of project managers or business leaders, the strategic selection of projects can be an important tool to further the success of all types of organizations. This is especially true as the trend continues in the direction of projectized models of organizational operations.

No list of selection methods can be complete or all-inclusive; not even a single best method exists. Still, the seven methods listed here provide a good start. Even when conditions and demands are different for various organizations, project selection should be done with the same level of consideration that goes into managing them.

Picking and Right-Sizing a Project Management Information System

Written by Mark Romanelli on November 21, 2018. Posted in Articles. 3 Comments on Picking and Right-Sizing a Project Management Information System

Projects create a lot of data, documents, and information. A big part of a project manager’s job is deciding how to deal with it all.

An important aspect of managing any project is deciding how to manage the project information; deciding what tools, techniques, and systems are going to be used to coordinate and maintain all of the individual pieces that make up a project plan. In other words, deciding on a Project Management Information System (PMIS). PMIS come in all shapes and sizes. Choosing the right one can make life easier for the project manager and the project team.

The PMBOK Guide, 6th Edition, defines a Project Management Information System as, “An information system consisting of the tools and techniques used to gather, integrate, and disseminate the outputs of project management processes. It is used to support all aspects of the project from initiating through closing, and can include both manual and automated systems.” A PMIS is what you use to organize your project documents and information, and how you store and communicate that information to the people who need access to it. It can be physical, digital, or a combination of both.
In organizations with a structured approach to project management, the PMIS is often predefined. It might be company policy that a project plan should contain a minimum number of documents, utilize particular templates, be stored on the company server, and include a basic milestone plan for a schedule. The particular requirements might be more simple, or more complex, depending on the organization and its needs.

The challenge comes when such standards are not pre-defined. When this is the case, it is up to the project team, at the start of the project, to define the PMIS. The same challenge faces organizations interested in creating a standardized process for all projects taking place.

There are a number of Project Management Information System types out there, from all-inclusive to fragmentary. Microsoft Project, Basecamp, and Monday.com are a few examples of packages with a vast array of capabilities; for a cost. Other systems can be assembled for little or no cost, such as utilizing Google systems for shared storage (Google Drive), documents (Google Docs), spread sheets (Google Sheets), contact management (Google Contacts), and schedule management (Google Calendar). Everything comes with a price and that price is usually proportional to integration and functionality. While price and functionality usually go hand in hand, there are solutions available for any project at any budget.

At a minimum, for projects of any size and scope, all project management information systems should include the following capabilities:

Shared digital access
A scheduling tool
A resource management tool

Shared Digital Access

While a PMIS can technically include physical documents, the days of carrying all documents around in a physical folder are over. When talking about deliverables lists, stakeholder registers, schedules, and meeting agendas, most of these documents are created, used, and stored digitally. This even includes digitized scans of signature documents.

A PMIS should include a system of shared digital access. This can be on a company server or on a shared cloud storage system. Any system selected should be both accessible and familiar to all of the relevant stakeholders. It goes without saying, such as system should also include the appropriate level of security for the project at hand.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

A Scheduling Tool

Scheduling is one of the core areas of project management. How that schedule is kept is an important component of how it will be managed. Anything more than a basic milestone plan will require a dedicated scheduling tool. This can be as simple as a calendar or as complex as a shared access Gantt chart created with project management software. Whichever scheduling tool is selected, it should be defined as a part of the PMIS.

A Resource Management Tool

Projects need things and those things need to be tracked and managed. Resources for a project can include financial resources (money), human resources (people) and material resources (things). A PMIS should define how those resources are identified and utilized. It should also allow for tracking and analysis during project monitoring and controlling activities.

Often times, when project management software is utilized, the same tool can be used for both scheduling and resource management (example, Microsoft Project). These two tools can be one the same, or separate.

The final selection decision of a PMIS should be shaped by the project environment. This includes consideration of available resources and the capabilities of the core project stakeholders. The first consideration in selection should be functionality. This is determined by answering the question, “What does the information system need to be able to do?” On a small project, this might only mean having a shared access cloud drive storage system. On larger projects, the requirements might include scheduling software and mobile device capabilities on multiple operating systems. The functionality is ultimately determined by the requirements for the individual project.

The next consideration is access. The system should make the appropriate access available to all key project stakeholders. This starts with members of the project team, but can extend to external stakeholders as well if deemed necessary. For example, a company network storage system might seem like a good choice for members of the internal project team, but it doesn’t suit the projects requirements if key external team members need access to the project details and company security policies prevent granting that type of access.

Finally, the end goal for a PMIS should be usability. The system should either be one that all users are familiar with or one that all users can be trained to use in a reasonable amount of time. The best designed system in the world can’t serve its purpose if it can’t be operated by those who need it.

Like so many other areas of project management, developing a project management information system is an item that pays off with interest. By investing some time at the start of a project to decide how information is going to be organized, more time will be saved later on down the line in terms of gained efficiency and effectiveness in managing the details of the project.

Preventing Scope Creep

Written by Mark Romanelli on October 24, 2018. Posted in Articles. 2 Comments on Preventing Scope Creep

Why change management should be (a little) complicated

As project managers, we strive to create and achieve efficiency. We endeavour to make the best use of resources. We work to structure well-organized communication strategies. Even with an agile approach to project management, applying structure to the process helps to create order from chaos and make everything work better. Most of the time, it works. When things run smoother, everything is better – and we come out looking better at our jobs.

But efficiency isn’t always the best path forward. There are some situations where efficiency is counterproductive, even dangerous. Scope change requests are a prime example. Scope creep can be a challenge for managing many types of projects, particularly projects with intangible deliverables such as software, processes, or events. Scope creep can be a project killer. Requested changes and additions to a projects scope are a regular occurrence. Very rarely are such requests accompanied by additional schedule time or financing; at least not at first.

Scope changes can’t be avoided and a good project manager knows better than to try. Often times, especially in fast moving industries, new deliverable requirements will come up that simply can’t be identified in the initial planning stages of a project. Whether it’s because of oversight, changing market conditions, or new regulations, many products and services just won’t be successful without a little bit more than was thought of before. Change can’t be avoided and so the next best thing we can do is to proactively manage it. By making the process of change management just a little bit complicated from that start, we can avoid a lot of bigger issues later on down the road.

The scope of a project is all of the work done to deliver the project output. It’s the sum of the products, services, and results that a project provides. Simply put, it’s what a project does and results in. This can include things like features of a project, aspects of an event, or functionality of a software program. Scope change results when any changes are made to the project scope that differ from the originally detailed scope items.

Scope change itself isn’t the problem. The problem comes when, little by little, additional scope items and deliverables are added to a project over time, resulting in an aggregate increase in the scope beyond what is achievable given the other constraints of time, cost, quality, and resources – a phenomena known as scope creep. When allowed to happen, scope creep results in the uncontrolled expansion of a projects scope without consideration or adjustment to the other project constraints.

Scope creep happens for a number of reasons. Little changes are very easy to ask for. Regardless of how necessary or discretionary they are, most clients and customers don’t think much of asking for small favours or tweaks. They are also very easy to say yes to. We all like to have a happy client and nobody wants to seem rigid or inflexible. Project managers want to demonstrate a ‘can-do’ attitude. Logically, we know that these little things add up over time, but for some reason it is still allowed to happen. The results are predictable – nobody wins.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

This is why a little bit of strategic complication can be effective in scope management and preventing scope creep. When done correctly, the goal should be to complicate things just enough to make everyone slow down, pause, and consider the wider implications of all requested changes. The result should be that changes are not so easy to make or grant without thinking about the big picture, while still preserving an avenue for requesting necessary scope adjustments.

Proactive scope management needs to look beyond project scope and consider the wider area of change management and a structured change control system. This is the same type of system that is used to coordinate all changes to a project, including areas such as scheduling and budgeting. Establishing a change control system means putting in place a set of procedures describing how modifications to the project are going to be proposed, considered, managed, and documented. The level of structure and formality is adjustable and should be appropriate for the type of project being managed. At a minimum, a structured, slightly (and intentionally) complicated change management plan should do several things.

Set up a change review board
Require requests in writing
Consider the request carefully
Delay decision making

Set Up a Change Review Board

Setting up a change review board is a formal way of saying you will decide in advance on who will make the decision. Members of the change review board are tasked with receiving, evaluating, considering, and deciding on changes. Ideally, the change review board will include a member of the client team, a member of the project team, and an additional member who is most appropriate for the job given the specific circumstances of the project (i.e., subject matter experts, technical experts, etc.). In many cases, the client will still have the final say when it comes to scope items on the project they are paying for. The goal is to have all of the relevant points of view represented in order to bring all of the applicable information up for discussion.

Require the Request in Writing

Any change management plan should include a requirement for written submission of all change requests. Written requests can be as simple as an email or as complex as a change request form detailing all of the specifics of the change (item, reason, results, costs, schedule implications, etc.). Written requests for change help the process in a few ways. For one, it helps with project documentation. Also, it makes the requester take pause and consider the request a little bit more than by simply verbalizing the idea. Again, the requirements can be simple or complex, depending on the needs of the project.

Consider the Request Carefully

Once the change request is received, it should be considered not only based on its impact on the final output result of the project, but also on how it impacts other areas of the project. At a minimum, diligent consideration of any requested scope change should include discussions of impacts on the project schedule, the project budget, and the overall project output quality. Doing so will help to balance the need for the change against the overall effect on the project as a whole.

Delay Decision Making

The change management process should specify when the change review board will meet and consider issuing a decision on any requested scope changes. This might be at each regularly scheduled project meeting, or, if the nature of the project includes a high number of regularly requested changes, at a regularly scheduled meeting of the change review board itself. Requested changes can be considered at any time that is convenient based on the needs of the project. As a matter of practice, they should not be considered on the spot.

This doesn’t mean that a project team needs to sacrifice all flexibility. There will be situations where requested changes are urgent and need immediate consideration. The change review board should consider requested changes immediately when necessary, but this practice should be made the exception rather than the rule.

By implementing a structured change management process for all project scope changes, a project manager is better able to prevent scope creep from happening. The goals of structuring the process is to slow things down to the point where all scope changes, large, medium, and small, receive complete consideration as to how they affect other constraint areas of the project.

When putting together a structured plan to manage scope creep, it’s important to keep the mind set of managing it – NOT fighting against it. It’s a fight that project managers can’t win and all too often it leads to an adversarial view of the relationship between the client and the project team. PM’s can end up seeing clients as demanding more while giving less. The structured process should be collaborative. As project managers, we need to remember that clients are under pressure too.

Leadership & Management in Projects – Two sides of the same coin

Written by Mark Romanelli on October 10, 2018. Posted in Articles. 6 Comments on Leadership & Management in Projects – Two sides of the same coin

Management and leadership are two words that are frequently tossed around without much regard to how they’re used.

It’s easy to do because there is no clear line between the two. The truth is, most of the time distinguishing between leadership and management doesn’t matter. Leadership involves managing and management involves leading. Project managers do both. Still, there are some cases where it’s important to know the differences and similarities between the two – particularly for students studying the subjects.

Formally, and academically, leadership and management are two completely separate concepts, with many specific definitions for both. Leadership is usually described as an influence process by an individual toward a group in the pursuit of achieving a set of goals or objectives. It also involves setting those goals and objectives for the organization to pursue. No simple, all-inclusive definition of leadership exists. Still, most generally accepted definitions include similar elements encompassed in that explanation.

Management is the process of coordinating, influencing, and organizing the activities in an organization in the achievement business goals. BusinessDictionary.com defines management as, “the organization and coordination of the activities of a business in order to achieve defined objectives.” Another way to look at management is deciding on the best and most effective way to get from point A to point B.

So, leaders set objectives and direction while managers conduct the efforts necessary to achieve them. Where leadership is described as affecting change, management is described as creating order. In theory, the two functions – even though they may be carried out by the same person – are separate.

In practice, things don’t fit into their own little boxes quite so neatly. As already stated, management tasks involve leadership activities and leadership tasks involve management activities. While the two concepts are still independent, there is a lot of overlap between the two. It’s in this space in between that most people operate. Koontz and O’Donnell provided one of the most well-known and accepted lists of management functions and activities. All management activities fall into at least one of the following five functions:

Planning
Organizing
Staffing
Directing
Controlling

Planning involves deciding on courses of action to take in the achievement of organizational goals. It includes considering and deciding ‘how’ to do the ‘what’. This particular function can fall into both categories of leadership and management. Considering planning functions in project management doesn’t take a lot of imagination. The vast majority of activities in the run up to project execution involve planning, including scheduling, budgeting, risk planning, and communication planning – to name only a few. Planning functions are essential to project management and encompass tasks which can be classified as both leadership and management.

Organizing involves bringing together the collections of resources necessary to get down to the work of achieving the goals. This function falls mostly into the category of management. Project managers spend a considerable amount of time organizing the resources necessary to successfully execute projects. Organizing material resources, human resources, financial resources, and other limited assets which need to be utilized as efficiently and effectively as possible.

Advertisement
[widget id=”custom_html-68″]

Staffing addresses the human resource issues of an organization. Hiring, removing, training, promoting, and even rewarding the people who make up an organization. Often it includes creating new positions, and staffing them. Depending on the specific activity involved at a given time, staffing can be a function of both management and leadership. Some projects involve only a single individual, but most involve multiple people. Project team members, both internal and external, need to be managed and led. Staffing issues are faced regularly by project managers, even on short term projects.

Directing is the most leadership-centered function of the five. It includes supervision, motivation, communication, and many other activities involved in deciding what it is the organization is going to do. This is the area where goals and objectives for the whole group are set. While this can sometimes be a management task, it is most often and closely associated with leadership. The degree of directing control by project managers varies from project to project. Leadership-based directing authority often rests with an external owner or project sponsor, but not exclusively. Management-based directing is a central part of a PM’s daily activities, especially during the execution stages of a project.

Controlling refers to measuring organizational performance against planned baseline targets and examining the amount of deviation from set targets. As Peter Drucker said, “You can’t manage what you can’t measure.” Controlling extends beyond performance management to include establishing the standards and systems of measurement for the metrics you want to monitor, as well as establishing preventative measures to ensure limits on deviation from the beginning. This is most frequently performed as a management task, but the use of the information can be very important to leadership in establishing future targets and direction. From project selection to completion, and every step of the way in between, monitoring and controlling is an area of responsibility for the whole project team, managed and led by the project manager. Leadership is exercised in setting quality management standards and assurance procedures. Management is exercised in maintaining those standards. Leadership once again comes into action when making decisions regarding future actions based on the control data gathered and evaluated.

In the practical world, there is more overlap between management and leadership tasks than there is separation. Most of the time, we are operating in the space in between, as the associated diagram illustrates.

Project management is a multidisciplinary skill, involving the practice of abilities in a wide variety of areas. In order to be a consistently effective project manager, PM’s need to also master the skills involved in leadership and management.

Project management skills should be updated regularly in order to stay sharp. Continuing training, education, and development should focus on the skills of management and leadership, as well as subject-specific material. That can include formal training to log PDUs, or simply staying current by reading articles on sites such as this one. However, we choose to do it, broader subject knowledge in management and leadership should be part of the content.