The Many Faces of Project Management

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "The Many Faces of Project Management"

Nathaniel Gilmore
6 years ago
Views:

1 The Many Faces of Project Management May 20, 2014 The Future of Public-Sector Project Management Dr. Harold Kerzner IIL

2 2 The Future of Public-Sector Project Management By Harold Kerzner, Ph.D.

3 3 Part 1: Expected Changes in Public-Sector Project Management: The Growth of PM 2.0

4 4 Comparison of PM 1.0 and PM 2.0 Project approval process Factor PM 1.0 PM 2.0 Minimal PM involvement Mandatory PM involvement Types of projects Operational Operational and strategic Sponsor selection criteria Overall project sponsorship From funding organization A single person acting as a sponsor Required business knowledge Committee governance Planning Centralized Decentralized Project requirements Well-defined Evolving and flexible WBS development Top down Bottom up and evolving

5 5 Comparison of PM 1.0 and PM 2.0 Factor PM 1.0 PM 2.0 Number of constraints Time, cost and scope primarily Competing constraints Definition of success Time, cost and scope Creation of business value Scope changes Minimized Possibly continuous Activity work flow In series In parallel Project flexibility Minimal Extensive, as needed Type of project control Centralized Decentralized Type of leadership Authoritarian Participative and collaborative

6 6 Comparison of PM 1.0 and PM 2.0 Overall communications Factor PM 1.0 PM 2.0 Access to information Localized Localized and restricted Everywhere Real time, unlimited access and globalized Amount of Extensive Minimal documentation Communication media Reports Dashboards Frequency of metrics measurement Periodically Continuously, in real time Role of software As needed Mandatory Software tool complexity Highly complex tools Easy to use tools

7 7 Comparison of PM 1.0 and PM 2.0 Factor PM 1.0 PM 2.0 Type of contract Firm-fixed-price Cost-reimbursable Responsibility for project success Decision making With the project manager By the project manager With the team By the team Project health checks Optional Mandatory Type of project team Co-located Distributed or virtual Access to stakeholders At selected intervals Continuous Stakeholder project mgt. experience Optional Mandatory

8 8 Comparison of PM 1.0 and PM 2.0 Factor PM 1.0 PM 2.0 Customer involvement Optional Mandatory Organizational project management maturity Optional Mandatory

9 9 Necessities for PM 2.0 to Exist Public-sector stakeholders are expected to make informed decisions rather than just any decision Informed decision-making requires more meaningful metrics The metrics information must be shared rapidly

10 10 PM 2.0 PM 2.0 = PM distributed collaboration

11 11 Understanding Distributed Collaboration PM 2.0 changes the way that information is created, used, shared and manipulated. PM 2.0 is more than just retrieving information; the focus is on two-way communication and user involvement. PM 2.0 is a social network with people interaction rather than just the passive viewing of data.

12 12 The Basis for PM 2.0 PM 2.0 is based upon Web 2.0 technology. Web 2.0 is the growth in collaborative software that is easy to use. PM 2.0 uses Web 2.0 technology for people interaction and collaboration.

13 13 PM 2.0 and Web 2.0 PM 2.0 will use much of the social media software that is currently in use. We can input metric information from any location in the world. We can select from a world of project-specific apps that can display data for a given project. We can customize the cell phones and tablets with PM 2.0 apps. Data can be displayed over cell phone or tablet screens.

14 14 Part 2: Better Ways of Defining Project Success and Failure

15 Understanding Project Failures 15 Project success seems easy to define Project failure is difficult to define

16 16 Some Projects Will Fail Failures Projects Successes MATURITY Time EXCELLENCE 2 YEARS 5 YEARS

17 Categories of Success and Failure 17 Complete Success Partial Success Partial Failure Complete Failure

18 Redefining The Triple Constraints Success Criteria 18 Cost The Success Boundary Box Time

19 19 Success Through Competing Constraints Image/ Reputation Scope Quality Risk Value Cost Risk Time Scope Triple Constraints Image/Reputation Competing Constraints

20 Disney s Prioritization of Constraints 20 Time Cost Scope Safety Aesthetic Value Quality

21 21 Part 3: Project Governance

22 Political Failure 22 The Space Shuttle Challenger Disaster Complete Failure Lessons learned: Safety programs should never be bypassed as the result of political pressure or the desire for profitability.

23 Schedule Failure 23 Denver International Airport: The Baggage Handling System Complete Failure Lessons learned: Agreeing to an optimistic schedule without fully understanding the complexity of the technology, and disagreeing with expert opinion, leaves no choice but complete failure.

24 IT Failures: London Heathrow Terminal 5 24 British Airways cancelled 34 flights and was later forced to suspend baggage check-in. Over the following 10 days some 42,000 bags failed to travel with their owners, and over 500 flights were cancelled. Software said the planes took off. (180 IT suppliers, 163 IT systems installed and 2100 PCs) Complete Failure Lessons learned: Sufficient time must be allocated for debugging and testing. You must understand the complexity before committing to a launch date.

25 Understanding the Responsibilities 25 GOVERNANCE Define expected final results Define interim deliverables Define strategic targets Define strategic objectives Define funding limits Define environmental factors Define executive involvement PROJ. MGRS. Develop tactical plans Determine resource needs Look at resource availability Look at capacity planning Establish the baselines Assess implementation risks Identify the metrics/kpis Control of scope creep

Understanding the Decision-Making Authority 26 GOVERNANCE Strategic planning decisions Change the business objectives Approval of scope changes Timing of

26 Understanding the Decision-Making Authority 26 GOVERNANCE Strategic planning decisions Change the business objectives Approval of scope changes Timing of health checks Project cancellation PROJ. MGRS. Preparation of the baselines Maintaining the baselines Negotiating for resources Limited mitigation of risks

27 27 Part 4: Project Management Metrics and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

28 New Developments in Project Management 28 New Success Criteria Governance Metrics and KPIs Dashboard Design Measurement

29 29 Information Overload

30 30 The PMBOK Guide and Metrics RISK MGT. STAKEHOLDER MGT. QUALITY MGT. COMMUNICATIONS MGT. BUSINESS & STRATEGY HUMAN RESOURCE MGT. POLITICS PROJECT VALUE MGT. INTEGRATION MGT. CULTURE & RELIGION PROCUREMENT MGT. SCOPE MGT. TIME MGT. COST MGT. METRICS Adapted from PMBOK Guide Fifth Edition, Figure 3-1, p. 61

31 The PMBOK Guide and Metrics 31

32 32 PART 5 GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION OF METRICS AND KPIS FOR USE ON DASHBOARDS

33 Tech Mahindra s Customer Delight Index (CDI) 33 Symbol Meaning Jan Feb Mar Apr Data not entered Dissatisfied Satisfied Delighted (Adapted from Tech Mahindra s Customer Delight Index [CDI] 2013 Tech Mahindra. All Rights Reserved.)

Metric: Best Practices Promised 34 Number of Best Practices 1 2 7 Best Practice

34 Metric: Best Practices Promised 34 Number of Best Practices Best Practice Used Best Practice To Be Used Best Practice Not To Be Used

35 35 Metric: Management Reserve Management Reserve (x $1000)

36 Metric: Assigned Versus Planned Resources 36 Number of People

37 Metric: Quality of Assigned Labor 37 Number of People

38 38 Metric: Total Project Manpower Number of Employees

39 Metric: Regular Time, Overtime and Unstaffed Hours 39 Hours

40 40 Metric: Deliverables On Time or Late Number of Deliverables

41 Metric: Deliverables Accepted or Rejected 41 Number of Deliverables

42 Metric: Number of Constraints 42 Number of Constraints

of Critical Assumptions 1 9 2 8 3 7 6 6 Month

43 Metric: Number of Critical Assumptions and Those That Have Been Revised or Added 43 Number of Critical Assumptions Month Jan 0 Feb 1 Mar 2 Apr 5 Assumptions New Revised

44 Metric: Scope Changes Approved, Denied and Pending 44 Number of Changes

45 Metric: Number of Baseline Revisions 45 3 Number of Revisions 2 1 0

46 Metric: Open Action Items 46 Number of Action Items

47 47 Metric: Project Complexity (Risk) Factor Project Complexity (Risk) Factor April s Results Complexity Factor Rating Technical 3 Business 2 Delivery 2 Table Legend 5 = Very High 4 = High 3 = Moderate 2 = Low 1 = Very Low

Metric Library: Project Complexity (Risk) Factor 48 Project Complexity (Risk) Factor Factor Description Metric Owner Advantages Disadvantages Metric or KPI Value Attribute Type of Image Measurement

48 Metric Library: Project Complexity (Risk) Factor 48 Project Complexity (Risk) Factor Factor Description Metric Owner Advantages Disadvantages Metric or KPI Value Attribute Type of Image Measurement PMBOK AOK PMBOK Domain Information Shows Changes in Project Complexity Over Time Ellen Stanford Directly Related to Downstream Risks Highly Subjective Metric Not Applicable Stacked Column Human Judgment Risk Management Execution

49 49 PART 6 UNDERSTANDING VALUE- BASED OR VALUE- REFLECTIVE METRICS

50 The Metric/KPI Target Boundary Box 50 Performance Integrity Target + 20% Target + 10% Target - 10% Target - 20% Very Favorably Exceeding Target Exceeding Target Performance Target Unfavorable Expectation Risk of Project Failure Performance Characteristics Superior Good Normal Caution Urgent Attention

51 Value Points for the Target Boundary Box 51 Very Favorably Exceeding Target Exceeding Target Performance Target Unfavorable Expectation Risk of Project Failure Performance Characteristics Superior Good Normal Caution Urgent Attention Value Points

52 Value Metric Measurement 52 Value Component Weighting Factor Value Measurement Value Contribution Quality 10% Cost 20% Safety 20% Features 30% Schedule 20% Total = 2.7

53 Value Metric Measurement 53 Value Component Weighting Factor Value Measurement Value Contribution Quality 10% Cost 20% Safety 20% Features 30% Schedule 20% Total = 2.4

Schedule 4 Features 3 Safety 3 Cost 2 Quality 4 Rating

54 Metric: Project Value Attributes 54 Size of The Value Metric April Measurements Value Rating Attribute Schedule 4 Features 3 Safety 3 Cost 2 Quality 4 Rating Legend 4 = Superior 3 = Good 2 = Normal 1 = Caution 0 = Attention

55 Questions? 55

56 56

Project Management 2.0/3.0: Planning for the Future of Project Management. Dr. Harold Kerzner, Ph.D. International Institute for Learning, Inc.

Project Management 2.0/3.0: Planning for the Future of Project Management Dr. Harold Kerzner, Ph.D. International Institute for Learning, Inc. Topic PART 1: CHANGING TIMES: EXECUTIVE APPRECIATION FOR PROECT