Skip to main content

Tag: Stakeholder

From the Sponsor’s Desk – Pulling the Project Plug

In my last post, Building Project Management Maturity, we looked at a company that found itself at a competitive disadvantage because of their project management performance and the steps they took to improve their performance and capability and level the competitive playing field.

In this post, we’ll look at the value that a mid-project audit can provide by helping stakeholders confirm or rethink the motivations and rationale for an initiative. In this case, the audit helped avoid potentially costly enterprise wide conflicts through a change in corporate priorities.

The Situation

This Canadian based mining company had contracted with one of the “Big Four” accountancy firms to assess the organization’s readiness to implement the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), determine the impact on their world-wide operations and recommend an appropriate plan of action.

While European public companies have been applying these standards since January 2005, in Canada, the Accounting Standards Board had proposed that Canadian GAAP for publicly accountable enterprises migrate to IFRS over a transition period. The move to IFRS would impact many areas of business including fundamental decision-making processes and would change the way companies presented their business results to analysts, investors and other stakeholders.

The Goal

The company planned to develop and implement IFRS compliant practices and procedures throughout its global operations in accordance with the targeted transition period.

The Project

The Finance organization launched the IFRS initiative and contracted with the accounting firm which assigned senior consultants who had extensive experience planning and implementing IFRS solutions in Europe. A working group was established to liaise with the consultants and included Finance department managers and staff with some consultation with the head office IT organization.

As the consultants were wrapping up their IFRS assessment, the head of the Internal Audit organization heard rumblings from the regions concerning the work being done, its complexity and the regions’ lack of involvement to that point. He proposed to the Finance VP that an audit be done to assess the performance of the project to date, identify gaps and target opportunities to provide the foundation for a successful implementation. His recommendation was approved.

Internal Audit launched the project audit using the Project Pre-Check’s Diagnostic process. The assessment started with the identification of key stakeholders from all global operations and involved interviews to solicit their views on progress to date and thoughts and suggestions on future plans.

The assessment process used a selected subset of Project Pre-Check’s Decision Areas (47 of the 125) covering the nature of the planned change, the environment within which the change would be implemented, organizational processes and practices that could be leveraged and the management of the project itself. The 47 Decision Areas were used to gauge three perspectives:

  1. Stakeholder views from face to face and phone interviews, including stakeholders from the corporate office, from the regions and the consultants.
  2. Review of deliverables from the project to date
  3. Review of any project management methodologies, practices and templates used.

The interview results found that the IFRS project’s overall level of stakeholder agreement at this stage of the project was 2.4 on a scale from 1 to 5, based on the following definitions:

1 – Not addressed, don’t know or disagree with current decision

3 – Somewhat addressed

5 – Completely addressed

The interview results identified 7 of the 47 Decision Areas addressed in the assessment

(15%) as areas of divergence (at least one of the stakeholders was less than comfortable with how a best practice was applied). 40 Decision Areas (85%) where identified as gaps (where the majority of stakeholders expressed a lack of comfort). The results showed that these challenges needed to be addressed posthaste to avoid a less than successful outcome.  

Key areas of concern were those areas relating to the scope of the project, organizational priorities, the target dates, stakeholders (confusion over the sponsor and project manager), decision making responsibilities and ongoing governance.

The audit took about six weeks to complete. The Audit leader presented the findings and recommendations to the Finance VP. The recommendations included:

  • Confirm the sponsor and project manager
  • Form a stakeholder group including stakeholders from all affected organizations
  • Establish the priority of the IFRS initiative relative to other competing projects
  • Work towards full agreement on all 47 Decision Areas included in the audit.

The Results

The project was deferred! After reviewing the audit results and conferring with stakeholders in head office and the regions, the Finance VP acknowledged that the IFRS project would face significant risks trying to go head to head against other initiatives that were judged to have higher corporate priority.

The audit helped bring the disparate views of the stakeholders to the surface and escalate the concerns about corporate priorities to the executives who had the information and authority to make the right call. Prompt action by the Audit head and a comprehensive six week review focusing on the key project stakeholders helped this company make a timely decision and avoid the financial and operational risks of too many projects chasing too few critical resources.

How a Great PM Could Have Helped

The IFRS project was at a disadvantage from the moment it was launched – it had no internal project manager. Sure, the consultants managed their piece of the work. But no one from the company was formally responsible for managing the changes to the company’s practices and operations from inception to successful delivery.

Had a Great PM been assigned, undoubtedly he or she would have addressed the following fundamentals:  

1. Establish the project’s sponsor clearly and publicly. On the internal project documents and the report prepared by the consultants, three different sponsors were identified. That’s a recipe for chaos. Even co-sponsors can lead to muddled and circuitous decision-making. Pick one!

2. Identify and engage the other project stakeholders across the enterprise and around the globe and ensure that they understand their roles and responsibilities. All stakeholders – the sponsor, targets, change agents and champions – need to contribute according to their responsibilities on a multitude of fronts for the project to be successful.

3. Manage the level of stakeholder agreement on the relevant decision areas. Work to resolve the gaps and areas of divergence up front and on an ongoing basis as new issues and conflicts crop up. Early estimates of the cost of the IFRS project ran in the $8 million to $10 million range to be implemented over an 18 month period. That means navigating a mountain of mole hills. A Great PM would thrive on that challenge.

4. Managing stakeholder agreement on the relevant Decision Areas will help a Great PM ensure that critical questions about the planned change and the environment within which the change is being implemented are addressed. A Great PM will ensure that the impact on and/or use of appropriate company assets (methodologies, practices, resources, etc.) is fully articulated and endorsed by all. Finally, a Great PM will ensure the approach to planning organizing and controlling the project is fully supported by the other stakeholders and that project communications address their collective and individual needs.

If you find yourself in a similar situation, put these points on your checklist of things to do so you too can be a Great PM, and your sponsor’s best friend.

Next, we’ll look at the challenges a Great PM faced as he tried to guide the upgrade of extremely out of date but mission critical content management software through the demands of the business and the ineptitudes of two external contractors. In this case, the Great PM’s tough love approach won the day, and a successful project.

In the interim, if you have a project experience, either good or bad, past or present, that you’d like to have examined through the Project Pre-Check lens and published in this blog, send me the details and we’ll have a go.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.

Detecting Stakeholder Misalignment

Over the years I have seen many project managers unknowingly accept an engagement that was predicated on an unsupported cause. Usually this misalignment exists between project sponsors (corporate executives etc.) empowered to initiate the project and the business leaders (vice presidents, directors, etc.) and their front line staff assigned to deliver its objectives. The end result is a project manager caught in between opposing beliefs. This article will discuss why it is important to immediately unearth this type of situation during the initiation of the project.

Why It Is Important

When an engagement is accepted, usually two critical assumptions are made by the project manager. First, an assumption is made that support to initiate the project has been reached amongst all business leaders impacted by the project. Specifically, that a single, universally accepted version of the project purpose and desired outcome is endorsed. Second, since this supported version of project reality exists it is natural to assume that the scope and specific tangible deliverables expected from the assigned project manager are also holistically accepted.

In some cases these assumptions prove to be correct and in others false. When these assumptions prove to be false a project manager is thrust into an aura of competitive political warfare fuelled by opposing ideologies. It is important to not make assumptions – trust but verify diplomatically.

Project sponsors, stakeholders and team members provide the means to help make both the project and project manager successful. However, in an environment of warring project ideologies the aforementioned groups may serve as a barrier to delivery.  This barrier is formed when business leaders impacted by the project do not support the founding principles of the project. Usually, these business leaders are selfishly trying to manipulate the project with the intent to serve their needs with little if any support for the cause. These opposing ideals coupled with strong political alliances held by those equipped with the means to both derail the project and ensure its success is what leads to project strife.

With consensus between the line leaders and project sponsors absent yet acceptance needed to proceed with delivery, the project manager may encounter an intentional stalemate caused by implicit barriers planted by disgruntled business leaders who oppose the project cause. A project manager who has not diplomatically identified this conflict of ideals at the beginning of the engagement as the root cause of these implied barriers will be struggling to overcome these hurdles that prevent timely delivery. These surreptitious barriers will make it difficult for the project manager to introduce a structured and accountability driven project delivery framework, gain commitment from the project team, confirm acceptance of assigned tasks with due dates and deliver the expected project artefacts required in the inaugural phases of a project.

It is critical during the project initiation phase that project managers embark on a plenipotentiary mission and sensitively conduct an effective stakeholder consensus audit. Diplomatic disclosure of this conflict of ideals by utilizing established governance procedures is all that is necessary to ensure the project manager is not straddled with removing the intentional barriers put forth by the aforementioned selfish needs. Failure to do so provides the opportunity to the warring stakeholders to intentionally deflect the cause of the project stalemate from themselves to the project manager which may damage the project manager’s credibility.

Don’t forget to leave your comments below.


George Konstantopoulos, MBA, PMP, PgMP, CMC is a Sr. Consultant at Welch International Management Consulting Group Inc. He has managed strategy portfolios and executed complex program and projects in the high-tech, banking, IT, marketing, utilities, retail and professional services industries. His entrepreneurial spirit and keen business insight have benefited many organizations through his effective consultative engagements and compelling achievements. George regularly lectures on management consulting and project management. Additionally, he facilitates quarterly seminars intended to help project managers understand the qualifications associated with consultative project management. You may contact George at [email protected] or through his blog spot at http://welchconsulting.blogspot.com/.

Educating the Stakeholders: Whose Job is it Anyway?

I closed last month’s post with “As a project manager (PM) it is your responsibility to educate your team, your client, sponsor, manager and those responsible for setting client expectations so that they all understand the realities of estimating.”

Taking it a step further, it is the PM’s responsibility to educate all the other stakeholders regarding the principles, techniques, costs and benefits of project management. Of course, some may be thinking that there is enough on their plate without having to educate the world about PM. If not you, who?

Without a conscious effort to educate the stakeholders about project management, there is the risk that they will not adhere to PM best practices or, if they do, they may do it without the real buy-in that makes for effective performance.

Sharing Practical Knowledge

What do we mean by educating? It is sharing knowledge in a way that better enables stakeholders to play their roles effectively and to clearly understand the trade-offs and benefits of applied project management. Don’t bore people to death by telling them everything you know about the PMBOK. Instead bring out the right knowledge in the right way at the right time. It is just-in-time learning. It is not theory; it is practical and completely relevant to the situation at hand.

A Good Example

For example, the lesson on realistic estimating is best given in the context of estimate negotiation when you share the need to consider deliverables, past performance, resource capacity and availability, uncertainty, environmental conditions and other factors when estimating.

In the midst of the estimate negotiation you have peoples’ attention. Take a few minutes to bring out the fact that, in the past, unrealistic estimates have caused serious problems. See if you can get the other parties to acknowledge the truth of that statement. Then ask “Do we want to repeat that behavior knowing what we know from our experience?” Maybe that will bring up questions about what you (collectively) have learned from past experience. If it does, you are at a ‘learning moment’.

Organic Learning

Estimating is only one topic for educating stakeholders. As the project proceeds there are lessons on project risk management, monitoring and controlling and anything else that is relevant, given the nature of the project, the people and the situation at hand. As you share your PM knowledge in this way, you create and take part in organic learning. Learning and reinforcing learning and best practices becomes a natural part of the process.

As a project manager, it is part of your responsibility to make sure you are sharing your PM knowledge and experience with the greater team so that everyone can perform effectively, eliminating waste, staying in control and delivering quality results.

If not you, who?

Don’t forget to leave your comments below

Implementing PM: It

Implementing PM can be quite a challenge in any organization. There will be a need to put a lot of processes in place, there will be a lot of reporting, there will be training, there will be software implementation, and there will be a significant investment made. Senior leadership has to see a return on investment (ROI) for all of this. Showing an ROI will generate support for the effort. When you begin to sell project management in your organization, you need to be aware of whom the stakeholders are. A list of stakeholders and issues that you should consider are identified as follows:

Stakeholders
  • To have a successful implementation you must have senior level buy-in. Get a C-level officer to sponsor the PMO or authorize the resources to be used for your project management initiative.
  • Consider the structure of your organization. Start with the organization chart. Break down the business units and get their leadership endorsements.
  • The workers in your organizations want to be successful. Offset resistance to PM by rolling out project management in as non-threatening a manner as possible. Let them learn the methodologies of project management – and terminology – before you throw out to many comments like; “get the WBS done, establish an EV measurement system, show me the IRR for the project”. The bottom-line is if they feel comfortable with what is asked of them, they will support your effort.

Methodology

  • There are many ways to slice a loaf of bread. But from an organizational learning aspect – pick only one way. The Project Management Institute has the internationally accepted methodology for project management. The methodology described here follows the PMI’s PMBOK.

Tools

  • There are numerous project management software products on the market. You should select the one that interfaces best with your other software products and applications. You should also consider the size of the project. Some products are better suited for larger projects, while they may be overkill for smaller projects.

Training

  • Developing a curriculum for project management should be done in parallel with establishing a methodology. The methodology cannot be implemented effectively without a training program. Deciding how much training, for whom, when and how are major concerns when making a training decision. Methodology that is proprietary and vendor specific should be avoided. The PM methodology from the Project Management Institute is methodology with the widest acceptance around the world. Look for training that supports the PMI methodology. Some initial questions that should be answered are as follows:
    • How many employees do you have to get trained?
    • Are they geographically dispersed?
    • Do they travel?
    • Do they need to get PMP certified?
    • Has a PM methodology been identified in your organization?
    • Do you have a budget for this training established?
  • These are questions that you should be prepared to answer before selecting a vendor. Do not under-train or over-train your workforce. Match the training they need to the jobs they will be performing. It is important to prepare the employee for their duties before they are in the position where they require the skills.
  • In order to communicate the methodology used for project management, we must train our workforce. This should include the following:
    • Sponsor training for senior management
    • Project management fundamental training
    • Extensive and specialized project management training
    • Advanced project management training
    • Program and portfolio management training
    • Tools and software training
  • Training will enhance the probability of success for the PM initiative. Start by removing the culture that fears the change or acquisition of a new method or tool. Do this by developing your workforce competency towards the new method or tool. As they learn they will develop confidence in their abilities to utilize the new knowledge and skills.

Maturing the Project Management Initiative

Organizations must not only say that they are implementing project management, they must embrace it. This is done through a commitment throughout the organization. The following issues must be focused upon in order to maximize the ROI for an organization’s investment in project management.

  • Senior level sponsorship
  • The PMO
  • Dedicated project management resources
  • PM methodology
  • Training
  • Systems and Software
  • Measures of PM performance

Senior Level Sponsorship

In order for any management methodology to be embraced the initiative must be endorsed and sponsored by a senior level executive. This can include the CEO, COO, CIO, or CFO as well as other senior level executives in an organization. The saying that it starts at the top is imperative to maximize the effectiveness of project management. With the C-level endorsement many an obstacle can be removed. This C-level endorsement will encourage other senior level executives in an organization to support the program. In addition, you will find funding for various resources to be greatly enhanced for your efforts with project management.

The PMO

The PMO should be the focal point for an organization’s PM initiative. The leader of the PMO should report to either one of the following two options. First, the CIO or the appropriate department where the majority of projects reside. Second, and a better alternative, would the COO, so that they do not have a particular departmental function alignment. The PMO should be responsible for defining the methodology, tools and templates to be used, and oversee the PM training.

Dedicated Project Management Resources

Organizations must allow for resources to be used on projects either full-time or part-time. They can report under the PMO auspices or they can maintain their functional alignment. This will require resource utilization management, so that they are not over or under used. The probability is greater that they will be over utilized. Managing the proper amount of resources that should be allocated can be challenging. This will depend on the workload for the organization.

PM Methodology

The internationally accepted methodology for project management is from the PMI. This organization has been evolving the methodology for project management professionals since 1969. A testament to their global reach is seen in the sheer numbers of organizations that have endorsed their methodology and certification – PMP – and the number of international chapters and certified members.

The methodology that is selected must be standardized throughout the organization. Processes must be defined, documented, and communicated to all concerned. It is imperative to mature project management that project documentation be archived. From this archiving, lessons learned and best practices can be accomplished. We will explore this aspect more as we discuss how an organization can develop maturity.

Systems and Software

There will be an investment for systems and software to execute project management. The capability to share information and communicate is constantly and rapidly evolving. Data can be collected, stored, and accessed immediately anywhere by any member of your organization that you wish. Monitoring, control ,and tools are numerous that can help an organization plan, execute, monitor, and report project performance. These tools must be selected prudently and trained to enhance the success of the project management initiative.

Measures of PM Performance

At the very essences of project management is the project plan. If you do not have a plan you do not know where you are going or at the very least how you will get there. PM performance is based on comparing actuals against the plan. A challenge for many project managers is that they rarely know what an acceptable variance is. Projects will not come in as planned. Imagine a large IT project estimated at $58M and 18 months of effort. Do you agree that it is unacceptable that after 18 months the project will be completed and at a $58M budget? What is the project came in at 19 months and $61M; would this be considered a failure? It all depends, what was the acceptable variance? We truly cannot measure performance unless we know what an acceptable variance is. It is imperative to know this range in order to measure the performance for PM. Techniques such as variance analysis, earned value, BCA, and ROI are measures that we look to in order to determine project performance.

Project Management Maturity Model

Maturity models have become quite prevalent in last 20 years. The software engineering institute and Carnegie-Mellon developed a capability maturity model that was used to assess the maturity of processes used to develop software. The model identifies five levels of process maturity for an organization:

  1. Initial (chaotic, ad hoc, heroic) the starting point for use of a new process.
  2. Repeatable (project management, process discipline) the process is used repeatedly.
  3. Defined (institutionalized) the process is defined/confirmed as a standard business process.
  4. Managed (quantified) process management and measurement takes place.
  5. Optimizing (process improvement) process management includes deliberate process optimization/improvement.

There are many models with a great level of similarity to the CMM model have been developed over the last several years to assess maturity of project management in organizations. The PMI has led the way with their model called organizational project management maturity model or OPM3.

An organization needs to realize that they must pursue achievement of higher levels of maturity in these models in order to realize greater ROI for their investment in project management. Consider receiving fantastic training received by rave reviews, what good would this fine training be if not applied in earnest on ensuing projects? The benefits realized would be minimal. To truly see the benefits an organization must utilize the tools and techniques they are trained on in order to start towards higher levels of maturity.

Developing Maturity

Step 1. Level I – Initial

Analyzing what your organization is doing in project management. Figure XX identifies the tasks and activities that a project manager performs on projects. Use this to determine what is done at each the project management lifecycle.

Step 2. Level II – Repeatable

Assess the practice and methodology that your organization utilizes as they use project management. Are there tools or techniques they use to:

  • Select a project
  • Plan a project
  • Develop the product
  • Monitor and control the project
  • Close the project

Step 3. Level III – Defined

The following questions will be helpful in assessing if your organization has properly defined practices for project management. Have polices and procedures using the tools and techniques identified in step 2 developed? Is there training and information about how to use these tools and techniques?

Step 4. Level IV – Managed

The use of measurement tools for project performance must be utilized to develop baseline data for project performance. In addition variance management must be deployed to quantify project performance. An organization must define what is an acceptable variance for a project in regards to schedule and budget performance as compared to the project plan. Configuration management will be useful here to ensure that the expectations of stakeholders have been met. Stakeholder satisfaction is a challenge because it cannot be measured in time or cost units. Qualitative data will be valuable as you look to identify the satisfaction of stakeholder expectations.

Step 5. Level V – Optimized

Best practices must be identified in order for an organization to continuously improve what they are doing with project management. Perform a Phillips ROI impact study to determine the ROI for your initiative. ROI will be ultimate evaluation tool to compile the various qualitative and quantitative data needed to ensure that the best tools and techniques are realized to ensure maximum ROI. For more information on ROI please refer to www.VillanoavU.com or www.ROIInstitute.net

Wayne has taught and consulted project management, quality management, leadership, curriculum development, Internet course development, and return on investment around the world to Fortune 500 companies. He has over 26 years experience from the Air Force as a project manager for AF technology training and curriculum development programs. Wayne has developed numerous AF and corporate training programs, classroom, multimedia, and Internet based programs. A dynamic presenter and trainer, Wayne has spoken at numerous conferences such as; the Project Management Institute (PMI®), the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI), and the American Society of Training and Development (ASTD) annual conferences. Wayne is a doctoral candidate with Nova Southeastern University specializing in Computer Information Technology. Wayne is certified Project Management Professional (PMP) by the Project Management Institute, a Certified Professional in Learning and Performance (CPLP) by the American Society of Training and Development, and a Certified Return on Investment Professional (CRP) by the ROI Institute. Wayne is currently an adjunct faculty member at Villanova University.


Wayne Brantley, MS Ed, PMP, CRP, CPLP is the Senior Director of Professional Education for the University Alliance (www.universityalliance.com).