Skip to main content

Trends in Business Analysis and Project Management to watch for in 2009

Written by Cynthia Low on . Posted in Articles. 2 Comments on Trends in Business Analysis and Project Management to watch for in 2009

The close of the year tends to make one reflect on the past and ponder the future. Here we ponder some trends in the business analysis and project management fields for 2009. We invite you to read some of these trends and ponder for yourself our views about what project professionals can do about them.

  1. Convergence of PM and BA Roles. As the economy tightens, organizations will decrease their project budgets. But, they still need projects done, so look for organizations to try and combine the role of the BA and PM on projects. A recent survey on BA Times finds that an equal number of “project professionals” (our term to encompass both project managers and business analysts) feel that the PM and BA role will be combined on many projects in 2009. Project managers will be asked to do more requirements elicitation and analysis. Business analysts will be required to manage more projects. Oh, and by the way – you will need to do that in addition to your normal roles!

    What Project Professionals can do about it: If you are a project manager, sharpen your requirements elicitation and analysis skills. If you are a BA, learn how to plan and execute projects better, and to manage risks. The other advice we can give is “Concentrate on the work, not the worker.” No matter what your job title, make sure you know the tasks and outputs expected of you to help achieve project and business success.

  2. Greater Emphasis on Requirements in Project Management. The upcoming 4th edition of the PMBOK® (Project Management Body of Knowledge) is due to be released in 2009. The Project Scope Management Knowledge Area contains a new section 5.1 called “Collect Requirements” that was largely written by us (Elizabeth and Rich).  It contains a number of requirements elicitation techniques that project managers should be able to use to elicit requirements for projects. They are a subset of the techniques described in the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge (BABOK®), so BAs also need to be familiar with these. The section places an emphasis on the Requirements Management Plan and use of the Traceability Matrix for managing requirements and product scope.

    What Project Professionals can do about it: When the new PMBOK® Guide becomes available, make sure you obtain it and read the section on Collect Requirements. It’s not because we wrote much of it (well, we are proud of it!). Both PMs and BAs should be aware of what this widely-used and referenced guide says about requirements. The PMBOK® has heavily influenced the practice of project management the past several years, and the new edition promises to do the same. 

  3. Change in Requirements Approaches. We see a continued trend in business analysis techniques continuing into 2009. Here are some to consider:
    1. Slightly less reliance on use cases and movement towards user stories and scenario-based requirements. Use cases will still be used, especially with complex requirements with intricate interfaces or tricky infrastructure considerations.
    2. Less emphasis on requirements specifications, more emphasis on modeling, prototypes and diagrams. For many reasons, there is a trend away from only formal written requirements specifications. That doesn’t mean written requirements have no place, but it does mean the industry is using additional methods of documenting requirements. 
    3. More requirements management. To control scope and fulfill business needs, there will be continued increase in business analysis and requirements planning in 2009. We see more and more organizations using traceability to control and manage product scope. Both the upcoming PMBOK® and current BABOK® feature this technique and emphasize the use of a traceability matrix.
    What Project Professionals can do about it: Keep using use cases, but bear in mind there are other good requirements analysis techniques. Supplement your requirements specifications with models to document and help you better analyze requirements. Learn about other methods, such as user stories and use the technique most appropriate for the type of requirement you are analyzing. For example, do data modeling for refining your data requirements.

  4. Increased use of Agile Approach and Techniques. Integrating Agile methods into project management and business analysis is a trend that will continue in 2009. Currently, the industry has a wide, varied, and inconsistent use of Agile techniques. This trend is likely to continue as organizations adopt Agile techniques and the industry adopts commonly accepted practices. Agile itself is evolving to the needs of the industry. For example, the need for more planning has been recognized. For instance, the concept of “Scrum of Scrums” to coordinate Agile teams has surfaced. Another trend we’ve noticed is Agile teams incorporating traditional techniques like requirements workshops and more documentation.

    What Project Professionals can do about it: Like any new approach, make sure you learn the generally accepted practices, not just the way a consultant or a single “expert” advises. There are many self-proclaimed experts out there, and some shortcuts on planning and requirements are being taken and justified by being called “agile.” 

  5. BABOK® continuing to have an impact. The practice of business analysis is being positively influenced by the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge (BABOK®). The BABOK® Knowledge Areas of Enterprise Analysis are beginning to gel in organizations, as is the need to do requirements planning. We’re seeing more formality and standardization in the methods, say, of doing business cases, or using traceability to manage requirements. 

    Also, the various elicitation techniques in the BABOK® area are being more widely adopted. Interviews and requirements workshops are common forms of elicitation, but we feel the BABOK is influencing BAs to use additional techniques such as prototyping and interface analysis and to include them in their requirements planning.

    What Project Professionals can do about it: Download the BABOK® from the IIBA and start reviewing it. Use it as an input to recommending business analysis standards in your organization. Being some of the firsts CBAPs (Certified Business Analysis Professionals), we believe in and urge others to pursue certification in business analysis. It helps promote the profession of business analysis in general and helps you to solidify and integrate the tools and techniques in the BABOK®, and to “personalize” them to your organization. 

  6. Business Intelligence Continues to Grow. This area of information systems has been growing steadily and 2009 promises to have no letup. As BI tools and techniques improve and solid benefits are realized, organizations will invest more and more in this tactic. Since BI relies heavily on tools such as Business Objects or Cognos, the underlying business requirements can be easily overlooked in favor of what the tools can produce.

    What Project Professionals can do about it: Learn how to identify how BI can help your business perform better. BI applications should be actionable and project professionals should focus on true business requirements instead of particular tools. Learning to ask the right questions is key, and anticipating how clients will use their data, although challenging, is well worth the effort. 

  7. “The Economy, Stupid,” as a past political slogan said. A slumping economy tends to affect travel and training budgets, and this one is no exception. That translates into fewer trips to national conferences or travel to out-of-state training classes.

    What Project Professionals can do about it: Attend local conferences that you can drive to.  Many local chapters of PMI and now IIBA are launching Professional Development Days or PDDs. Watch for announcements to these and plan to attend. If you have a conference such as Project Summit/Business Analyst World in your town, take advantage of the opportunity and you will find excellent speakers and workshops there. Have you noticed the big increase in webinars as a way of exchanging information and interacting virtually without travelling? Watch for more of the same in 2009. We plan to offer regular webinars throughout 2009.

    Interestingly, national conferences like the PMI Global Congress North America attracted many foreign workers this year, from expanding economies such as Brazil and Russia. These growing countries will have larger travel budgets than some of their US counterparts. We also see continued rising international interest in PMI and IIBA.

Elizabeth Larson, CBAP, PMP and Richard Larson, CBAP, PMP are Principals, Watermark Learning, Inc. Watermark Learning helps improve project success with outstanding project management and business analysis training and mentoring. We foster results through our unique blend of industry best practices, a practical approach, and an engaging delivery. We convey retainable real-world skills, to motivate and enhance staff performance, adding up to enduring results. With our academic partner, Auburn University, Watermark Learning provides Masters Certificate Programs to help organizations be more productive, and assist individuals in their professional growth. Watermark is a PMI Global Registered Education Provider, and an IIBA Endorsed Education Provider. Our CBAP Certification Preparation class has helped several people already pass the CBAP exam. For more information, contact us at 800-646-9362, or visit us at http://www.watermarklearning.com/.

Building an Initiative Oriented Culture

Written by Cynthia Low on . Posted in Articles. 3 Comments on Building an Initiative Oriented Culture

Today’s businesses are pushed and pulled in many directions. Strategy execution has been recognized as critical by leaders and organizations to give the edge and competitive advantage over competitors, and is needed even more in the turbulent times we face. And yet, statistics and results indicate that most organizations do not execute strategy successfully – in fact less than 34% of corporate strategy is ever executed and many initiatives fail to deliver the expected and necessary results. Common challenges include: introducing and managing change, rapidly changing landscapes and markets, and the effective use of human capital.

Role of Culture

One of the critical factors SPM has seen year over year while working with clients on their key strategic initiatives is the impact of culture. The right culture can overcome gaps in infrastructure and process. An adverse culture can sabotage even the best process and intent. In many instances culture is often skirted around than considered an important contributor to more effective strategy execution. We also see a very strong ‘tension zone’ between executing strategic initiatives and running the day-to-day business as usual operations (BAU). The ideal culture for ‘business as usual’ may be different than what is needed for initiative execution and can further exacerbate the tension zone between strategy execution and BAU. A recent study reported that 72% of executives indicate that a culture gaps exists within their organizations and is interfering with strategy execution and goal achievement. And as Connie Curran wrote ‘Culture will eat strategy for lunch every time’. All these factors point to the role of culture as a powerful component of an organization’s success, laying the foundation for productivity and progress.

In SPM’s Enabling the Effective Enterprise model an Initiative Oriented Culture is one of three key underpinnings. The diagram below shows the key components of an effective enterprise and how they interact in a continuous transformation cycle.

Developing an Optimal Culture

So what is culture and what is the optimal culture for an organization? By definition, culture is a set of stated and unstated, explicit and implicit beliefs and assumptions shared by a group. It is often invisible and unconsciously at work, yet ever present and lasting in its impact. Culture shapes and harmonizes behaviours of all members in the organization or group. There are generally three functions of culture in the workplace: simplification and adaptation of decisions, integration and affiliation, and member motivation and activation.

The culture components to consider in an initiative oriented environment are:

  1. Values: behaviours and attitudes have a powerful impact on the outcome by teams charged with strategy execution and include: leadership, empowerment, trust, risk tolerance, engagement and results orientation.
  2. Process: strong, repeatable processes that also address the risk inherent in temporary endeavours (such as initiatives, programs and projects) will play a critical role in strategy execution; best supporting processes should include: clarity and communications of strategy, knowledge sharing, change management, innovation, and organizational alignment.
  3. Structures: the environmental structure within which work is done for initiatives versus ‘business as usual’ is different and will be a key enabler to success. Key factors include: team structures, hhiring practices, alignment of reward and recognition systems, recognition and usage of change agents, and effective use of virtual teams.

Building awareness and deliberately designing culture appears to provide higher cohesion around priorities and establishes ownership for behaviours and beliefs that impact success, rather than leaving it to chance. Culture can accelerate getting to the next level of success or just as easily act as a drag. By recognizing the need to fit culture with strategy and in particular allow for culture to drive execution, organizations can target specific actions to build the culture needed for successful execution of strategy.

The optimal culture for one organization will not be the same for another. Each organization needs to recognize its own unique set of culture patterns, strengths and areas of collective practices that represents its culture. The strategy or combination of strategies for an organization will determine the best culture. For example, a cultural environment that supports a strategy of innovation may not be the same as one of a high reliability organization. Culture may need to change over time as strategies shift. The evolution of the organization and its maturity will also guide the development of optimal culture.

Enabler or Barrier?

At a recent conference SPM launched a national survey to examine culture as an enabler or barrier to strategy execution. 62% of the respondents indicated their organization does not have the right culture to allow for the effective implementation of strategy. Surprisingly comments indicated that most people feel culture is a positive factor, in other words an enabler rather than a barrier, despite the response to culture misfit with strategy. 58% indicated there have been attempts by their organization to change or alter culture deliberately. This demonstrates some level of understanding by leaders of the importance of culture. As Isadore Sharp states: ‘If you don’t understand the culture of the company, even your most brilliant strategies will fail. Your vision will be resisted, and all kinds of things will go wrong.’

The survey also tracked key indicators that impact strategic initiatives. Key positive cultural indicators included:

  • 66% of respondents felt that they had leadership support for their initiatives and 71% felt that they were being motivated to succeed.
  • Most respondents felt strongly that they understood how their work contributed to the overall strategy of the organization and also clearly understood priorities and expectations of them

Key negative cultural indicators:

  • Only 33% of respondents indicated that they had learned from their past experience – success or failure
  • Majority of respondents felt that they did not have the right mix of people on their team and that conflicting interests of team members interferred with success of initiatives

Conclusion

While the survey results show a certain level of awareness of the importance and positive impact culture can have on strategy execution there is still a need for more deliberate design and implementation of culture. Building an initiative oriented culture can create a much higher success rate on strategy execution. It must be deliberate, encourage an appreciation of culture strengths, rapidly focus on culture weaknesses, build cohesion around strategic priorities, and generate high performance results.

Catherine Daw, MBA, PMP is CEO and President of SPM Group Ltd. She provides the vision and leadership needed to evolve the firm including the current corporate direction to enabling the effective enterprise through strategic initiative management. Her focus is on results that matter to SPM’s clients and to ensure solutions exceed client expectations, save time and money, and help clients achieve superior business benefits. Catherine holds a Bachelor of Science degree in Mathematics and Computer Science from Queen’s University and a Masters of Business Administration from York University. She is an active member of the Project Management Institute and is a certified Project Management Professional (PMP) as designated by the Project Management Institute. Catherine can be reached at [email protected]

Ruchura Chatterjee, MA, PMP is a Senior Consultant with SPM Group Ltd. and has over twenty five years experience managing progressively larger and more complex departments and projects. She has held positions as Program Director, Director Client Services IT, Director Model Operations in a business unit, and managed Application Development and Business Systems functions. With a M.A in Economics from Calcutta University, India, Ruchira has also completed a Company sponsored Executive Management training program at Kellogg, Northwest University. She is a Project Management Professional (PMP) as certified by the Project Management Institute (PMI). Ruchura can be reached at [email protected]

Crisis or Opportunity? Lead like Barack Obama!

Written by Cynthia Low on . Posted in Articles. 6 Comments on Crisis or Opportunity? Lead like Barack Obama!

In recent months our headlines and the world’s attention have been directed towards two things, the US Presidential Election and the drastic downturn in the economy. These issues are both separate and related.

Corporations of all shapes and sizes across all industries are looking at the best course of action they can take to withstand today’s economic pressures. Most see the situation as a crisis, some see the opportunity; Warren Buffet for example is investing while others are in a state of panic.

I would suggest that as well as looking at what, corporations should also look at who! Not only what course of action they need to take, but also who they have in a leadership role that can carry them through.

Let’s take a look at the leadership style of Barack Obama. Put your politics to one side for now and consider the qualities of the person. Is this the type of leadership that you would like to have in your organization? In listening to two hours of CNN the night after the election here are a few of the words various people used to describe him:

Competitive; Winner; In touch with his people; Smart-Intelligent; Calm; Gracious; Empowering; Inspiring; Trusted; Respected; Honest; Knows it’s not about him; Visionary; Great communicator.

I am not sure if it is possible to compile a more impressive list of qualities you would like to see in a leader. Barack Obama has inspired an incredible sense of hope and community. He has proven that by working together and uniting around a common sense of purpose and vision we can achieve the impossible.

How many leaders like this do you have in your organization? How many will you have a year from now? For many the gut reaction is to slash all discretionary spending. Cut here, cut there and ride it out.

To every CEO and executive team I would suggest this is the worst possible course of action you could take.

Of course we all need to exercise fiscal restraint and think carefully about where we allocate our resources. We must search to determine how we can stretch our dollars further while strengthening leadership in a cost effective way. But to put people on hold is a mistake. Now is a time for innovation, inspiration and leadership. Visionary companies and leaders will be looking not just to ride out the storm but be prepared to emerge stronger than ever and be ready to seize the opportunities when the recovery begins.

Consider these words from Jerry Grandey, the CEO of Cameco Corporation the Saskatchewan- based uranium mining giant:

“When the times get tough, the last thing companies should do is make sacrifices on the human side. You should do the exact reverse. When times get tough, it’s the leaders that you have that are going to carry you through it.”

Leaders are going to be making a lot of decisions. Leadership development, team building, inspiring top performers and overall employee unity is essential to weather the economic storm.

What is your course of action? You can dwell on the crisis, retreat into a corner and hope everything turns out okay. Or you can lead like Obama, look for opportunity and inspire your own employees with hope, vision and a sense of community.

Bryn Meredith is President of Bluepoint Leadership Development Canada. He has extensive experience as a business leader, entrepreneur and leadership development specialist. Bryn is based in Oakville, Ontario and can be reached at [email protected]

Anticipating and Resolving Resource Overloads

Written by Cynthia Low on . Posted in Articles. 6 Comments on Anticipating and Resolving Resource Overloads

The Concept of a Project Resource

In the context of project management, a resource is any entity that contributes to the accomplishment of project activities. Most project resources perform work and include such entities as personnel, equipment and contractors. However, the concept of a resource (and the techniques of resource management presented in this article) can also be applied to entities that do not perform work, but which must be available in order for work to be performed. Examples include materials, cash, and workspace. This article focuses on the resource that is of greatest concern to most organizations – personnel. In a project management system, personnel resources may be identified as individuals by name or as functional groups, such as computer programmers.

The Purpose of Resource Planning

After a detailed schedule has been developed for a project, a nagging question remains to be answered: Will the resources required to execute the project according to schedule be available when needed? In the process of developing each project schedule, the average availability of resources should have been taken into consideration when activity durations were estimated. However, this estimating process does not guarantee that the total workload on any given resource (person or functional group) from all projects and non-project assignments will not exceed the availability of that resource during any future period. When resource overloads occur, personnel are subjected to unnecessary stress, and project activities fall behind schedule. The quality of the deliverables produced is also likely to suffer. Thus, the purpose of resource planning is to anticipate resource overloads, so that they can be resolved for the benefit of both the people and the projects.

The Range of Approaches to Anticipating Resource Overloads

The approach taken to the challenge of anticipating specific resource overloads in specific future periods depends upon the number of simultaneous projects undertaken by the organization and the extent to which people are shared across multiple projects.
If the organization undertakes only a very small number of projects at one time, or if each person is dedicated to work on only one or two projects at a time, a “short-cut approach” may be employed. The easiest and probably most effective short-cut approach is to:

  • Give each person a copy of the newly-developed project schedule showing only those activities in which that person will be involved, and
  • Ask the person to check the schedule against their personal calendar and other work commitments (including the schedules for the few other projects in which they may be involved) and report any obvious conflicts.

A person may realize for the first time that, during a week which is three months in the future, they are scheduled to work on five major activities in two different projects, while preparing their operating budget request for the next fiscal year and participating in a two-day training program. Clearly, “something’s got to give!” The key to this approach is that each person is given the opportunity and the responsibility to identify their own overloads.

However, if the organization shares resources (again, individuals or groups) across a significant number of simultaneous projects, short-cut approaches to the anticipation of resource overloads are inadequate. A “comprehensive approach” is required. To be effective the comprehensive approach must capture the workload associated with all projects in which the personnel are involved. Fortunately, most popular project management software systems support the comprehensive approach as described in the next section.

The Comprehensive Approach to Anticipating Resource Overloads

The first step in the comprehensive approach is called “resource loading,” and it occurs during the planning process for each new project. For each activity in the project schedule, the quantity of each resource required to perform the activity (typically measured in staff-hours for personnel resources) is estimated and entered into the project management software system. Thus, we might estimate that an activity called “Develop computer code” should require about 30 staff-hours of Linda Baker’s time and 120 staff-hours of effort from a group called “Computer Programmers.” Since the estimates are attached to the activities, the project management software has the ability to determine when the resources will be needed based on the scheduled start and completion dates for the activities. In other words, we now have a time-phased projection of resource requirements or workload for each resource (e.g., Linda Baker and the Computer Programmers). It is also necessary and possible to estimate and enter resource requirements for project-level work (such as project management) and non-project work (that is, the ongoing background process workload) for each resource.

The next step is performed periodically and must be centralized at the project-portfolio level, rather than being performed at the project level. For each resource, the time-phased resource requirements are summed across all projects (as well as the non-project workload) within the project management software system. The resulting “resource profiles” can be displayed in graphical and/or tabular format. By comparing the total workload projection for each resource with the resource’s planned availability, overloads during specific future periods become obvious.

The above description makes the process sound easier than it really is. Challenges include:

  • Developing, maintaining, and applying on all projects standard ways of identifying organizational resources.
  • Developing the ability, confidence, and discipline to estimate resource requirements for all activities on all projects.
  • Establishing the centralized infrastructure that supports the accumulation and analysis of total resource requirements across all projects.

Resolving the Anticipated Resource Overloads

Once a specific resource overload has been anticipated in a specific future period, explicit action must be taken to resolve the overload. The action will involve either increasing the planned availability of the required resource and/or decreasing the planned workload during the period of the overload.

Common methods of increasing planned resource availability include:

If the overload is significant and long-term, use the resource analysis as the justification for seeking approval to hire additional personnel.

  • Plan to use overtime
  • Plan to employ temporary personnel to supplement the resource group.
  • Reschedule vacations, training, etc.
  • Common methods of decreasing workload on the resource include:
  • Reassign project or non-project work to other people.
  • Contract out work.
  • Cancel or delay the start of low-priority projects.
  • Delay the start of selected activities.

Most popular project management software systems provide algorithms for selecting/suggesting activities to be delayed. Typically, these algorithms will start by selecting activities in the lowest priority project that can be delayed without affecting the scheduled completion date of the project (i.e., activities with slack).

If the methods listed above cannot resolve the overload, two last-choice options that are legitimate if authorized, but that should be avoided if possible, are:

  • Reduction in the scope of one or more projects.
  • Extension in the duration (scheduled completion date) of one or more projects.

The key to being able to resolve resource imbalances is the ability to anticipate them. Most of the methods listed above require advanced decision making and preparation in order to implement them when needed.

The good news is that you are not required to anticipate and resolve resource overloads. Indeed, few organizations make any attempt to do so. The overloads will always be resolved automatically. The bad news is that if you fail to resolve the overload, the default solution will virtually always be the unauthorized application of one or both of the two options listed above that should be avoided; that is:

  • Some of the work on some of the projects will never get done, and /or
  • Some of the projects will be completed late.

And, as mentioned earlier, the people working on the projects will experience unnecessary stress that is due primarily to the inadequacy of the organization’s project management system.

Thomas B. (Tom) Clark, Ph.D., Co-founder and former Executive Vice President of Project Success Method and Project Success Inc., Tom is heavily involved in the development and delivery of PSI’s courses. In addition to his work with PSI, he is Professor Emeritus of Management at Georgia State University. He also served the University as Chair of the Department of Management and as Interim Dean of the College of Business Administration. Previously, he was an Assistant Professor of Industrial and Systems Engineering at Georgia Tech.

Tom has provided project management consulting and training services for a variety of business, government, and non-profit organizations. Prior to beginning his academic career, Tom served in the U.S. Army Management Systems Support Agency at the Pentagon and was employed as an industrial engineer with a national firm in the printing industry. He holds bachelors and masters degrees in Industrial Engineering from Georgia Tech and a Ph.D. in Business Administration from Georgia State University.

PSI consultants have been engaged in more than 10,000 projects in 25 countries on six continents. For more information contact [email protected] or visit www.projectsuccess.com.

The Rules of Lean Project Management: Part 5

Written by Claude Emond on . Posted in Articles. 5 Comments on The Rules of Lean Project Management: Part 5

Rolling the Waves

My little series on the rules of Lean Project Management was supposed to end with Rule No. 4 (Humans, Humans, Humans) discussed in this blog last October. However, I will now expand my set of “rules” following Lean Project Management specialist Hal Macomber’s enlightening comments on my series in his blog (http://www.reformingprojectmanagement.com/2008/11/09/883/).

Hal observed that I left out three important principles underlying Lean PM, namely: make commitments at the last responsible moment, PDCA everything (Deming Wheel), and produce deliverables in small batch sizes of one or single-piece flow. I did not cover those, since I believed they were not unique to Lean Project Management. However Lean gives them a special slant, certainly worth presenting as additional rules or principles. To the three extra principles proposed by Hal, I will also add, in retrospect, another one: the single tasking of multiple tasks.

So let’s continue with Rule number 5 of 8 (….until we find other ones!): The Roll the Waves rule.

Hal notices in his blog that (as last planners – my addition) you should make your choices and commitments at the last responsible moment». He, and other Lean practitioners, noticed a habit on projects to lock down requirements early, to get material on order early, to grab resources early. These steps rarely help and usually add waste to the project. Further, we lose options when we act early.

I would somewhat equate this principle of making commitments when we are more certain of possible outcomes with the practice of Rolling Wave Planning alluded to in the PMBoK and very well presented by Gregory D. Githens in his excellent white paper, Rolling Wave Project Planning (https://www.projecttimes.com/wp-content/uploads/attachments/NP02.PDF). Good project managers and their team understand that it is useless to plan in detail the whole of a project when one does not have the results of the current project phase or stage necessary to elaborate clearly the next phase. For example, it is quite a waste of effort to detail the development phase of a new product before we have a clear definition of its concept and design criteria. It is also presumptuous to commit oneself on the design of a building’s foundations when the results of required geotechnical studies are not yet available.

On one of the projects I helped plan for an architecture firm, the project client ask me to be more specific on things that were planned to happen three years later; he wanted to discuss details about this period. I had to tell him then that this was useless to discuss these points further while nobody had made precise commitments about the feasibility study phase we were about to begin; these commitments were still impossible to make then, because we had yet to have his permission to enter the future project site to assess initial conditions.

The Rolling Wave Planning principles are very simple: take commitments and detail your planning for the work about to begin, for which you have all the information necessary to take proper action (very low uncertainty). These are “work packages” that you can commit to deliver with a high level of certainty for a given budget and schedule. For the work to accomplish in a later phase, most often requiring as input the results of the work packages you are working on, you should stay away from too much detail, since you do not really know what will be needed then. Rather, you can present this latter part of the project as a set of “planning packages” that will be revisited and detailed only when appropriate – when we have a clearer understanding of what has to be done and what CAN be done.

Rule No. 5 of LPM – Make your choices and commitments (promises) at the last responsible moment. Make them in the form of work packages that will deliver the desired results anticipated with a high degree of certainty….

…Roll the waves: plan the work, execute the work, learn and adapt, plan the work, execute the work, learn and adapt, plan the work, execute the work…succeed