pm-lotus by Howard Vaughan

Posts Tagged ‘Planning’

Its always amazing how small things can make a big difference in the world of project management. Consider the describing of a risk:

The Wrong Way

Oftentimes we see a ‘shorthand’ approach used – for example, a risk captured simply as “Insufficient resources”. The danger (the risk?) of such a brief description is that it creates three problems:

• We misinterpret what exactly was meant (Which resources? On which tasks? With what consequences?)
• We may not correctly assess the risk’s importance because of the description’s ambiguity
• We can’t remember what we meant when we revisit the risk log at a later date

For these reasons, it makes good sense to describe a risk in a way that clearly states the possible situation and its effect.

The Right Way

A recommended approach is to write a risk like this:

EVENT may occur WHEN, thereby causing IMPACT

So rather than a bland, ambiguous risk statement such as “Lack of training”, we drill down and explain clearly what is meant – maybe:

“Competing work commitments may prevent staff attending the training, thereby slowing adoption of the enhanced project planning process.”

Now its clear. We understand both the effect and its root cause. Clear statements of what we really have in mind when we identify risks promotes consensus in (1) understanding the risk, (2) assessing its importance, and (3) generates more creative thinking in the development of risk responses. A little extra effort for a big benefit.

Of all the processes within project management, it would seem that risk management is the one that most often turns into a paper exercise. Lots of projects have lists of identified risks, some have plans to manage those risks but only a few properly integrate risk responses into the overall project plan.

A Small but Crucial Step

Creating risk logs and defining response strategies is a ‘non-productive use of valuable time’ if performed merely to satisfy management, increase comfort levels or just conform to company policy. Those documents will gather plenty of dust. What’s needed is for that information to become an essential component of the detailed schedule. This is a small but crucial step – and often missed.

Here’s how to do it-

1. Once the project risks are identified, define clear mitigation strategies – i.e. specific actions to proactively (a) reduce probability or (b) minimize or alter the impact of the risk occurrence.
2. These actions can then easily be defined as “tasks” in a verb/noun format – which means they can, and should, be added to the project Work Breakdown Structure (WBS).

In the example above, a section for Risk Management has been added to the end of the WBS task list in the Microsoft Project plan. Each of the tasks within that section is an explicit risk response activity. Each task will therefore be assigned an owner, linked into the schedule with appropriate duration and resource estimates, and then executed and tracked in just the same way as any other task in the schedule.

Now, we have made risk management real. Its an integral component of the execution plan – not a paper exercise. Remember – if its not in the WBS, its not in the project.

An important aspect of the project manager’s role is the appropriate balancing of trade-offs among the primary project constraints. In most cases this means determining priorities among schedule, scope and resources. The relative importance of these should be defined unambiguously by the project sponsor and then reflected by the PM in a matrix:

Forcing clarity on project constraints and priorities

In the example above, schedule is deemed to have the least flexibility, meaning that everything possible shall be done to meet the target completion date, even if scope has to be compromised in some way, or more preferably, by adding resources to expedite the schedule. It is important to state WHY a particular constraint is either least, moderately, or most flexible, according to the sponsor’s priorities, with guidance on the relative limits of flexibility (so no blank cheques).

This little tool is invaluable to the project manager during both planning (in ensuring the right focus in optimizing the project plan before baselining) and execution (in guiding both the tracking effort and corrective action in the event the project deviates from the plan).

While the relative priorities can be changed by management as desired, a simple rule must be followed to prevent insistence that everything be least flexible – only ONE check allowed per column and ONE check allowed per row.

Most projects are underplanned. They’re already late before they start. For a host of reasons – the usual suspects include a lack of project management discipline, inadequate tools and training, unclear objectives, top-down influence, overworked and under pressure team members – projects get planned with insufficient detail.

The reality is that detail is the basis for accuracy in all projects. Plans that lack appropriate detail can’t be believed. This is what I call the Second Law of project management.

The consequence of a lack of detail is a project suicide spiral:

Understate what’s needed… Misunderstand what ‘done’ looks like… Miss stuff out… Underestimate time and effort requirements to do the work… Overcommit resources to unrealistic schedules…
Present bad news to customer.

Breakdown Checks

Without a credible plan, a project manager lacks credibility with the team and stakeholders. Only when we get to the detail is the full extent of work revealed, which means developing a great Work Breakdown Structure. Here are a few WBS must-do’s:

• Ensure tasks are small enough so that-
  • Estimates of effort and duration are as accurate and credible as possible
  • Task durations are typically no greater than the time between progress updates
• Define explicitly what ‘done’ means-
  • Especially for any task that is unfamiliar, complex or difficult to break down
• Assign a single owner to each task-
  • Have them verify that the expected workflow minimizes likelihood of any missing tasks
• Use a checklist of often forgotten tasks-
  • e.g. meetings, defect resolutions, reviews and approval cycles.

They say the devil is in the details – and just looking for a chance to cause trouble. Good process and a little extra planning time will build protection.

(See all 5 Laws summarized in The 5 Laws of Effective Project Management)

When I first started in the project management services business, I was repeatedly led to believe that the construction industry was the beacon of leadership in project management maturity. My own experience over the years tended to question that wisdom and now the truth is out that this is indeed all nonsense. According to a recent survey by the Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB), which represents 42,000 members and sets standards for the management of the total building process, the construction industry has much to learn about project management.

The Shocking Truth

Not a towering force in project management

The survey results are based on data from 73 companies and over 2,000 projects. Its conclusions are available on the CIOB website – you can also watch an interesting video of the CIOB president Keith Pickavance presenting the results at the Project Management Asia Conference 2008. They make for a highly uncomplimentary denunciation of the state of project management practices in the industry- for example:

• less than 15% used a linked network to define the schedule
• more than 50% used only simple bar charts
  • (no chance of a critical path)
• more than 50% used paper (not computerized) records
• less than 15% kept logs of changes
  • (not much good in court)
• 95% did not report delays to progress because they:
  • hoped no-one would notice
  • hoped they could catch up
  • did not want to upset the client
  • thought they could blame someone else.

Its not a pretty picture. Little wonder then, that the industry is dogged by delays, compensation claims and disputes.

The Way Forward

Clearly there is a need for some serious project management skills development. In the words of Mr. Pickavance himself:

We have no standards, we have no training, we have no qualifications.

All of which should be manna from heaven for project management educators, particularly in those regions where construction investment is being pumped up to help resurrect limp economies. Assuming of course that the building firms are open to changing their ways.

Not so clear

Ambiguity is the enemy of project success. Its one of the first things I instruct new project managers on. I call it the First Law in project management.

Its not hard to find ambiguity in projects. Look closely at the objectives, the requirements, the scope definition and the schedule. Are they each as clear and as accurate as they can be? Most importantly, do we know what “done” really looks like? This is crucial. (Glen Alleman’s prolific and consistently excellent blog at Herding Cats has a host of outstanding posts on this – check it out). Each ambiguity is a potential source of conflict, rework and failure.

Clarity Checks

The antidote to ambiguity is clarity – here are a few items that must be on the ‘Clarity Checklist’:

• Are deliverables defined with clear boundaries?
  • Are there detailed and explicit descriptions of inclusions and exclusions?
• Are completion and acceptance criteria clearly stated for each deliverable?
  • Do we know what “done” looks like for each deliverable?
• Are tasks defined at an appropriate level of detail?
  • Are most tasks in the range of 4-40 hours of duration? (a useful guide for most projects)
• Are task outputs tangible?
  • Have the outputs been agreed upon by their owners and dependents?
• Is progress tracked at task level?
  • Is evidence of progress validated before being reported upward?

Leaving ambiguity unchecked simply increases project risk. The pursuit of clarity isn’t always popular because it makes people have to think ahead a little harder. But its necessary. So put on your flak jacket and go on a mission – seek out ambiguity and destroy it… before it does some damage.

(See all 5 Laws summarized in The 5 Laws of Effective Project Management)

PMI gives only scant coverage to interfaces (inter-project or external dependencies) in its Standard for Program Management. However, mis-managed interfaces have the potential to cause days or even weeks of delays and consequently wreak havoc with schedules – and often do.

Effective interface management involves full and complete interface definition. A good list of defining attributes would include the following:

Outputs don't always match input requirements

• Interface name
  (unique naming and identification)
• Interface description
  (nature and purpose of the interface)
• Output source
  (which sub-project supplies the output)
• Output owner
  (who is accountable for the output)
• Input receiver
  (which sub-project is the ‘customer’ for the output)
• Input owner
  (who is accountable for receiving the input)
• Completion criteria
  (what the interface ‘looks like’ when its done)
• Date constraints
  (if applicable)

The completion criteria should be defined as a checklist of requirements from the input owner. He/she will then use these as the basis for full acceptance of the interface as ‘done’ or ‘not done’.

A hammock task can be defined as either a summary task that aggregates a related set of activities, or an actual ongoing activity whose start and finish is driven by other tasks or milestones that may or may not be related. In the first case, summary tasks are easily created using the outline feature in Project of course but the second case can present more of a challenge.

In the simple example below, two non-summary hammock tasks are shown.

Both hammocks reflect ongoing activity from the start to the finish of the project. To create Hammock A:

• Click in the Start cell for the project “Start” milestone and choose the Copy command
• Click the Start cell for “Hammock A” and choose Edit, Paste Special, Paste Link, and click OK
• Click in the Finish cell for the project “Finish” milestone and choose Copy
• Click in the Finish cell for “Hammock A” and paste as a link again

A problem with hammocks is that they may show up as critical items (as here with Hammock A) whereas in reality they do not actually drive the project schedule. Hammock B shows how we can avoid this by linking the finish date to a ‘dummy’ milestone “Finish -1″ that we set to finish just before the project finish (predecessor is Finish milestone SF-1).

Using either approach above will allow the hammock to ‘stretch’ or ‘shrink’ as the durations of the other tasks change, during plan updates for example. If necessary, a manual click on the F9 key will force a correct recalculation of the hammock’s duration.