Skip to main content

Let

Written by Mike Morton on . Posted in Articles. 3 Comments on Let

Having been involved with project management over the last two decades, I have seen a great evolution in what is expected of a good project manager. The traditional measure of a great PM was one who could focus solely on the success of his or her project to the exclusion of all else. In the name of ‘focus’ (aka blinkers), we might have been allowed to ignore what was going on around us in the organization, be selfish in negotiating the best resources, use creative estimating skills to get a generous budget, zealously guard that ‘signed off’ scope document and cross the finish line on time and on budget!!

Not so any more (thank goodness!). How often have we tripped on a project that was on time and on budget but was not deemed to be successful? As organizations embrace the concept of projects being the most effective method of executing strategy, they are demanding more from their project managers. Much to many a project manager’s dismay, the success criteria for projects are no longer confined to a list of deliverables, meeting timelines and budgets. Measures of success now often include specific references to:

  • Customer satisfaction
  • Increased revenue
  • Decreased costs
  • Seamless transformations

Could it be that projects, and therefore project managers, are now being held accountable for business results?

What an exciting yet intimidating prospect!! The project manager of the past thrived only because there was a huge assumption that every project initiated was the right one, and ‘someone’ usually the project sponsor, would take care of the minor matter of actually delivering the results. The reality is, that in a competitive market place, the way many progressive organizations rely on project management practices has changed significantly. Some of the changes in organizational behaviour are:

  • Management of project portfolios
  • Movement from individual projects to programs tied to delivering business value
  • Recognition that business strategy needs to be flexible
  • More sophisticated measurement of results
  • Global risk management

Though even today an overwhelmingly large number of projects relate to technology and engineering, more and more organizations have recognized the value of applying project management to the full spectrum of their business. It is commonplace to have projects that bring about organizational development, business acquisition and mergers, product development and launch, business process re-engineering, and even strategy formulation and strategic planning.

This more demanding and complex environment, combined with growing demand for leaders to fill the void left by retiring ‘boomers’, provides project managers with an unbelievable opportunity. The time is right to change the role of a project manager from ‘technical implementer’ to ‘strategic enabler’.

Does this shift mean that the traditional strengths of sound project management principles are no longer valued? Quite the contrary. We do need to, however, go beyond applying the people, process and tools aspects of project management. So what can we do to meet the new expectations?

  • Find out as much as we can about the business strategy our project is aligned with and linked to. Ask questions till we are comfortable that we understand the specific business goals and the rationale behind them.
  • Make sure that all activities and deliverables in our project are able to support the strategy and business objectives most effectively.
  • Be innovative and persuasive if we think there is a better way to get to the desired outcome.
  • If our project is a part of a program or portfolio, have a clear and accurate understanding of the interdependencies with other projects within the program and the portfolio. Prepare for contingencies.
  • Be prepared to take the back seat and play second fiddle to a more important initiative – we don’t have to be primary to be critical to the organization’s success.
  • Show integrity. If our project is going to deliver the outcomes but not the business benefits, speak up.
  • In our plan, include organizational change management considerations, as typically benefits are realized within the business operations. Make sure mechanisms are in place to measure and monitor how effectively our project is contributing to business results after it’s completed.
  • Constantly assess the validity of the project in relation to business objectives, especially if it’s one of significant duration. The competitive landscape and, therefore strategies, change quickly. Be prepared to be flexible enough to change direction accordingly.

But first and foremost, let’ s take off our blinkers!

Ruchira Chatterjee, MA, PMP, is a senior consultant with SPM Group, www.spmgroup.ca. With over 20 years of direct project management experience, Ruchira has led a number of highly successful programs and projects both in IT and business areas. She recently successfully directed the transition of a facilities management outsourcing program for a client representing $400 million annual revenue. She was the program director on a $35 million program related to wealth management system implementation resulting from an acquisition. She managed a program to bring about the operational and technology transformation of a property casualty business division. On multiple occasions she has held accountability for projects to bring about organizational changes, start up new departments and implement new processes. She has also managed a variety of technology projects related to such areas as conversions, expert systems implementations, vendor systems selection and implementations.

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). Ruchira can be reached at [email protected]

How

Written by Mike Morton on . Posted in Articles. 3 Comments on How

Editor’s Comments

In Let’s Take off Our Blinkers! Ruchira Chatterjee, uses an equestrian analogy to warn of the danger of too narrow a focus on the success of a particular project, to the exclusion of other corporate priorities. She points out that the success of a project can’t always be judged on the fact that it came in on time and on budget. She says that today’s project success criteria are much broader.

How to Start a Project Management Company without an IT Professional by Curt Finch addresses the idea of having a project management with no, or very few servers. His point is that by having the servers outside the company, the IT professionals within the company can focus on serving customers instead of worrying about solving internal IT problems.

Our bloggers are back with their take on the many issues that project managers have to face every day. Also, please take a look at our forums and give us your views on the important project management issues that our readers are discussing.

And, as always, we’d like to hear what you think of this issue and what you want to see in the future.

Achieving Project Excellence: What

Written by Mike Morton on . Posted in Articles. 6 Comments on Achieving Project Excellence: What

Many organisations are working to improve their business processes in an effort to stay competitive. Most try to travel the ”Toyota Way”, using lean manufacturing approaches including, among others, “Achieving Excellence” (AE) initiatives.

Because of globalization and innovation imperatives, many of those organizations are plagued by projects, programs and portfolio activities in their AE initiatives. They then try to improve their project-oriented business processes, or whatever shadow of a project management process they might think they have. Hence, they mistakenly apply AE frameworks for recurring operations to project-oriented activities and processes. By doing so, they make a very costly mistake, similar to the one that was made when everyone tried to apply ISO 9001-1994 – a standard addressing manufacturing issues – to service industries.

Those who know a bit better include OPM3-type assessments and approaches to their AE initiatives. But, frankly, I am not that sure either that the OPM3 model is based on a proper understanding of “what wastes we are trying to eliminate” when we talk about implementing Lean Project Management processes. Lauri Koskela and Greg Howell, in their landmark article, The underlying theory of project management is obsolete1, published in the 2002 Proceedings of the PMI Research Conference, invite us to ask ourselves very relevant questions about this model. It should be read by anyone who thinks that applying blindly such a model will help his or her organization attain the Nirvana of Lean, World-Competitive Business Excellence.

It is easier to criticize the efforts of others, many of them trying to help each other in complete good faith, than to improve on them. The truth, however, is that improvements on mainstream PM models have already been offered by organisations like the Lean Construction Institute2. Alas, they are not well known, although the true wastes of currently used project management processes have already be identified and documented.

Wastes associated with recurrent production, as identified by Taiichi Ohno (the late father of the Toyota Production System), concern themselves mostly with managing a flow of materials. Opposingly, wastes associated with project work, as identified by Greg Howell, Lauri Koskela, my friend Hal Macomber3 and lately by Norman Bobek, who identified a ninth one4, concern themselves mainly with managing a flow of humans and of human thoughts. They are, including a tenth one of my own design (that I’ll explain in my next blog entry): 

  1. Not using people’s talents 
  2. Underutilized people’s skills and capabilities 
  3. Lack of relevant information (on what to do or how to do it) 
  4. Excess irrelevant information 
  5. Behavioural Waste (not listening, not speaking) 
  6. Not taking advantage of people’s thoughts (wasting good ideas) 
  7. Providing something the customer doesn’t value 
  8. Making do (working without the proper resources) 
  9. Saying No (resistance to change)
  10. Not managing perceptions

Anyone who wants to Achieve Excellence in project-oriented activities should have a very good look at this list, because those are the wastes associated with current mainstream project management processes; these are the wastes to eliminate to become lean. Thus, It would be a very good idea to add a measure of their current status in current AE or OPM3 assessment tools and then take action to eliminate them.

Furthermore, using PMI’s proposed IPECC (Initiate, Plan, Execute, Control, Close) recurring project management process loop – the essence of the PMBOK and a real stroke of genius – would be a very good idea for anyone trying to implement AE initiatives in their organisation. I see many of those initiatives going on; most won’t make it for lack of proper phasing, scope definition, work breakdown structure and target dates. They are not properly defined and planned, although they should be. After all, Achieving Excellence in manufacturing is a project-oriented endeavour…. and it is subjected to the same wastes as those found on any other type of project work.

What do you think?

1 https://www.projecttimes.com/wp-content/uploads/attachments/ObsoleteTheory.pdf
2 www.leanconstruction.org
3 http://www.reformingprojectmanagement.com/2004/08/15/394/
4 http://www.reformingprojectmanagement.com/2007/10/09/841/

Claude Emond is one of the founders and president of Qualiscope Enterprises, a project management consulting, coaching and training firm based in Montreal, Canada. He has degrees in chemical engineering from Canada’s Royal Military College (BEng) and Montreal McGill University (MEng), a MBA from Ottawa University, workshop leadership training from Le Centre Quebecois de la PNL, and is a certified PMP. He has over 25 years experience managing major public and private projects. He teaches project risk management in the Schulich School of Business Master certificate in project management and the PMP certification revision class for PMI, Montreal. He is one of the authors of the current PMI standards for Portfolio Management. Claude can be reached at [email protected]

Which Comes First, the Chicken or the Egg?

Written by Mike Morton on . Posted in Articles. 5 Comments on Which Comes First, the Chicken or the Egg?

Editor’s Comments

A valid and often asked question! In his article, Chicken, Egg, Process, Tool, Terry Doerscher poses it again and lays out his reasons for doing so. He asks it in the context of processes and applications, and takes a good shot at rationalizing which is the chicken and which is the egg. But, he says, in today’s heavily automated business environments, it’s often difficult to tell the difference between the tool and the process.

Chris Vandersluis wonders if we might profitably roll the clock back to the Guild system of 800 years ago. In his current piece, Bring Back the Guild for Project Managers, he asks, “How do I know who is a good project manager?” He agrees that there are worthy academic credentials and he recognizes the standards established by PMI, but he feels that the idea of the Master passing on practical training to the Student, as in the Guild system, still has value. See if you agree!

Our intrepid bloggers are back with their unique views on so many subjects that project managers have to face every day. They’re always interested in your feedback, so please drop them an email whether or not you agree with their points of view.

And please tell us what you think of this issue and what you’d like to see in the future.

Linking Change Management Processes to Projects Early

Written by Mike Lecky on . Posted in Articles. 5 Comments on Linking Change Management Processes to Projects Early

IT projects usually represent change, so why aren’t there stronger links to the change management process at the formative stages of projects? Is there benefit to connecting the dots between business case approval, aligning the project portfolio with corporate objectives and change management? You bet there is!

There are many who would say that business cases need to be approved based solely on the merit of their benefits, costs and the risks associated with them. This isn’t wrong. But just because it passes this bar doesn’t mean the project should be given authorization to proceed. To make it onto the project roadmap the investment needs to be both viable and fitting to the organization. What does it mean to be both viable and fitting? It means that not only does the economic upside of the project have to be good enough, but the organization must also possess the ability to do the work (or get someone else to do it) and to make it pay off.

This is where integration with the organization’s change management process comes into play. According to a recent Tripwire podcast 35 to 50% of time in IT operations organizations is spent on unscheduled work dealing with poorly introduced changes.

Effective change management processes have several features that can help projects get off to the right start. Let’s first consider the progression from business case to project initiation and then see how this fits with the change management process.

Once the business case is shown to meet or exceed the threshold for investment, a project portfolio analysis exercise can be undertaken to assess the investment as being both viable and fitting to the company’s strategic objectives. The project is prioritized against other projects vying for the same total project budget dollars. Then it’s given a placeholder on the project roadmap. Having a placeholder means resources may be made available during a window for the duration necessary and to the extent outlined in the business case.

Has anyone had the experience of a business case understating the cost and duration of a project? Before the project is even initiated there is considerable schedule, budget and scope risk.

This is where an effective change management process can help. And assuming there are portfolio management practices in place, this is where it gets grey for many organizations.

Ideally, before that placeholder on the project roadmap gets inked in, a few things should be in place to keep the risk profile of the project low. First, an initial cut of the project estimate (perhaps budgetary only) and time line with a preliminary scope will confirm the early pre-project cost/benefit assertions of the business case. Second, the rest of the organization needs to be tuned in to the impact of the change.

Using the nomenclature of ITIL (Information Technology Infrastructure Library) the change management process is triggered by an RFC (request for change). This initiates several activities involving all potential stakeholders, internal and sometimes external to the organization, to evaluate the impact of the proposed change in their area. This is vetted by the change board which has significant authority over when, and how, a change request is incorporated into the working fabric of the business processes.

While approving a change is a formal process, the act of developing an approach to introducing the change is facilitative and change management offers an excellent framework to support project managers as they develop the project plan. Visibility and participation is higher when project planning is integrated with change management.

IT project managers win big time when solid change management frameworks are in place. The structure of many of their planning sessions is already served up in readily understood templates to identify and assess the impact of the change. The business wins because budget, schedule and scope risks are uncovered early by the broad audience of the change board. Finally, those involved in the business processes win because new initiatives large enough to warrant a project manager are now brought forward by the change process, giving them a voice early in the project life cycle.

 

Mike Lecky is a consultant at The Manta Group, a management consulting company specializing in IT governance, Project and Portfolio Management, Service Management, Risk and Compliance. Mike has degrees from the University of Waterloo (BScEng), The University of Western Ontario (MBA) and the University of Liverpool (MScIT). He worked for 12 years in aerospace electronics and as a Project Engineer managed several general aviation and US Military contracts. He teaches project management online with the School of Applied Technology at Humber College. Now, with over 25 years experience, he is a PMP and an information security professional (CISSP) and has a broad range of program and technology implementation experiences in the high tech and service sectors. Mike can be reached at [email protected]. This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it.