Keynote Address to the Second International Conference on Project Management, 5-6 March 2006, Tehran, Iran.

Transcription

1 Project and Program Health Check (PH-Check) Delivers Results Keynote Address to the Second International Conference on Project Management, 5-6 March 2006, Tehran, Iran. Professor A. Jaafari, ME, MSc, PhD, CPEng, FIEAust President, Honorary Research Professor, The University of Sydney

2 You don t hear things that are bad about your company unless you ask. -- Thomas J. Watson ( )

3 Presentation addresses: Theoretical construct Practical implications Assessment framework PH-Check software Conclusions Theoretical construct Practical Implications Assessment Framework PH-Check Software

4 What is the Theory of Project Management? A construct that aids successful conceptualisation, planning, implementation & commercial realisation of projects, programs & organisations

5 Theoretical construct Are current PM theories working? Major projects & programs fail frequently Current theoretical construct = normative thinking Projects/programs as emergent systems, better studied as phenomena Risk, complexity, uncertainty and indeterminacy prevalent Many methodologies gloss over the unknowns Risk management process is mechanistic We tend to force dynamic phenomena into rigid normative structures!

6 Theoretical construct What is normative model? Assumes universality of order, rational choice and intent Objective, rational, technical, best practice. Based on Taylor s Scientific Management approach Nearly one century old; still dominant management mindset The entire QA movement based on scientific management In conditions of instability and chaos the application of best practice may cause failure!

7 Theoretical construct The Cynefin* model see (Kurtz & Snowden, 2003) Disorder Unorder Order *. Pronounced kun-ev in

8 Theoretical construct Thesis advanced A complex project/program experiences all of the states identified in the Cynfin model, e.g. - Plans aims to introduce order - As the project gets underway it descends into unorder (uncertainties, complexities, indeterminacy kick in) - The PM team begins to intervene - Some learning takes place - New state emerges but not complete order - The PM team intervenes again and the cycle continues - With poor capability & incompetence, it may fall into disorder or failure!

9 Theoretical construct Critical Success Factors/ Managerial Principles Influence Project System through Management of Enabling Factors Projects as phenomena Assess Project, t1 1 Project as a Dynamic System, time t1 Assess Project, t2 2 Change Management of Enabling Factors Project as a Dynamic System, time t2 Project as a Dynamic System, time t3 4 Assess Project, t4 3 Assess Project, t3 Influence Project by Changing Management of Enabling Factors Project as a Dynamic System, time t4

10 Theoretical construct What is the good of normative model? Gives newcomers a framework to relate to projects A set of tools that work in areas of known and knowable Humans need organised rational models to get their minds trained (lets call them idealised states)

11 Theoretical construct Projects/programs as emergent systems (Holland, 2000) many agents acting in parallel in an environment produced by its interactions with other agents in the system; because the agent is constantly acting and reacting to the other agents' actions, nothing in its environment is fixed

12 Theoretical construct (Holland, 2000) control is highly dispersed, therefore any coherent behaviour there might be in the system has to arise from competition and co-operation among the agents themselves

13 Theoretical construct (Holland, 2000) many levels of organization, agents at one level serving as building blocks for the next level up

14 Theoretical construct (Holland, 2000) constant rearrangement of the building blocks as a result of learning, experience, evolution, adaptation

15 Theoretical construct (Holland, 2000) all anticipate the future to some degree, making attempts at prediction on the basis of models of their environment

16 Theoretical construct (Holland, 2000) all have niches they can exploit, filling up one niche often opening up new ones that can be exploited they never reach equilibrium

17 Theoretical construct (Holland, 2000) they can improve on some dimensions, but never optimize

18 Theoretical construct (Holland, 2000) the richness of the interactions within the system allows the system as a whole to undergo spontaneous self-organization

19 Practical Implications What is the use of all of these? Enables us to learn & re-engineer our approaches Actors to positively influence the project/program s (emergent system s) state while recognising its changing nature Success depends on the system s state, actors insights & competence, time, and ability to receive feedback System may experience a mixture of states Need tools to provide correct readings of the state of the project

20 Practical Implications Chief Success Factor Capability to understand & intervene in project, includes management of: - Complexity - Uncertainty - Risks It needs: - Creative-reflective managers - Smart tools - Tailored practices

21 Practical Implications Empirical Evidence, Global PM Studies, University of Sydney, 2003

22 Practical Implications Capabilities and tools Managers must have: - transformative competencies to steer the project in real time - need tools for immediate feedback Questions to ask: - Do we know which state the project is in? - Do we have the right capability in place? - Are we managing the project variables correctly? - Are any areas lagging behind?

23 Practical Implications Project Health Check (PH-Check) Applies tools to answer the above questions, using a set of indicators Generates reports on actual capability, approach & distance to desired state

24 Practical Implications Focus of project health check Project Resources Project Success Influenced by Capabilities and Managerial Approach Focus of Project Health Check Commercial & Physical Environment

25 Practical Implications Assessment points vs. project life cycle Project Life Cycle Apply intervention Project status at time t0 Project status at time t1 Next Assessment Project status at time t2 Project status at time t3 Project status at time t4 Project status at time t5 Health of the Project assessed at time t1 by Project Health Check Project progress estimated at time t1 by project manager PH-Check Report Card (enabling factors) Project Progress Report (Cost, Time, Quality,...) Correlate enabling factors & measured results Yes Intervention required? No

26 Assessment Framework Project health check assessment framework o o Two sets of interrelated criteria: For assessing the project s performance on business & strategic front For assessing the project implementation efficiency and effectiveness during delivery phase Measure how well project performs relative to its class

27 Assessment Framework Criteria for business and strategic assessment of projects Customers and markets Financials Stakeholders Internal efficiency Technology Learning and Innovation Risks and Due Diligence

28 Assessment Framework Assessment Criteria Customers & Market Indicators I 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 Stakeholders I 8 I 9 I 10 I 11 Business assessment framework Level 1 (below average performance, within top 65% of its class) Level 2 (average performance targets, within top 50% of its class) Level 3 (above average performance, within top 30% of its class) Level 4 (good to excellent performance within top 15% of its class) Level 5 (outstanding performance, top 5% of its class) Internal Efficiency I 12 I 13 I 14 I 15 I 16 Technology I 17 I 18 Learning & Innovation Risks & Due Diligence I 19 I 20 I 21 I 22 I 23 I 24 I 25 I 26 I 27 I 28 I 29 I 30 Financials I 31 I 32 I 33 I 34 I 35 I 36

29 Assessment Framework Criteria for implementation assessment of projects Governance and leadership Stakeholders management Business case Planning and control Team performance Management of change Management of risks

30 Assessment Framework Implementation assessment framework Assessment Criteria Indicators Level 1 (below average performance, within top 65% of its class) Level 2 (average performance targets, within top 50% of its class) Level 3 (above average performance, within top 30% of its class) Level 4 (good to excellent performance within top 15% of its class) Level 5 (outstanding performance, top 5% of its class) Governance & Leadership I 1 I 2 I 3 I 4 I 5 I 6 I 7 Stakeholders I 8 I 9 I 10 I 11 I 12 Business Case Planning and Control Teamwork Performance Management of Change Management of Risks I 13 I 14 I 15 I 16 I 17 I 18 I 19 I 20 I 21 I 22 I 23 I 24 I 25 I 26 I 27 I 28 I 29 I 30 I 31 I 32

31 Assessment Framework Evaluating actual to target capability/approach Business & Strategic Criteria Below Average (within top 65%) Near Average (within top 50%) Above Average (within top 30%) Outstanding (within top 5% ) Good to Excellent (within top 15% ) Customers and markets Financials Stakeholders Internal efficiency Technology Learning and Innovation Risks and Due Diligence x x x x x x x Target Performance Project Implementation Criteria Governance and leadership Stakeholders management Business case Planning and control Team performance Management of change Management of risks x x x x x x Target Performance Assessed Performance

32 PH-Check Software Project Health Check Business & Strategic Assessment Project Implementation Assessment Criteria for Assessment BS 1 BS3 1 BS 2 BS3 2 BS3 3 BS 3 BS3 4 BS 4 BS3 5 BS 5 BS3 6 BS 6 BS 7 IM 1 IM 2 IM4 1 IM 3 IM4 2 IM 4 IM4 3 IM 5 IM4 4 IM 6 IM4 5 IM 7 IM4 6 Primary Variables for Assessment Enabling Factors Represented by Indicators Project/ Program at Time ti Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Step 6 Step 6 Step 5 Step 4 Step 3 Step 2 Step 1 Managerial Process (applicable to each factor) Level of Practice Metrics for Level 1 Metrics for Level 2 Metrics for Level 3 Metrics for Level 4 Metrics for Level 5 Project Health Check Report at Time ti Level of Practice Metrics for Level 1 Metrics for Level 2 Metrics for Level 3 Metrics for Level 4 Metrics for Level 5 Metrics to assess the maturity of the actual practice applied to manage each factor at each process step

33 PH-Check Software Process to assess approach to each enabling factor Goals and Targets 2 Identification 1 3 Statutory & Operational Due Diligence Performance Analysis 6 4 Implementation and Monitoring 5 Response Planning

34 PH-Check Software The Assessment hierarchy Pro je c t/p ro g ra m A s s e s s me n t, t i Crite ria A g g re g a tio n o f A s s e s s me n t Re s u lts In d ic a to r A s s es s me n t Directio n Pro c e s s Ste p M e tric s

35 PH-Check Software PH-Check Tool

36

37

38 PH-Check Software

39 PH-Check Software

40 PH-Check Software

41 PH-Check Software

42 Conclusions Major projects/programs are emergent systems Approach these as phenomena Success depends on capability & state of practice Tools needed to provide fast feedback PH-Check applies 68 indicators under 14 major criteria Fast assessment enables intervention to steer the project towards its goals It shows areas of weakness in capability & actual practice

43 Q&A?