| Key Elements of Successful Project Management | |
| By
Jody Bullen Edited from a BSc course paper prepared for the Business Information Technology Dept of the Canterbury Christ Church University, Kent, UK. Introduction At its most simplistic level "projects are a temporary endeavour undertaken to create a unique product or service". Projects are unpractised, unrehearsed, and are prone to internal and external uncertainties and ultimately risk. Lock (1996,p3) acknowledges the concept of risk in his definition of project management.
What is
project management Projects have a life cycle: traditionally Conception, Definition, Execution and Finishing or closing. Project require extensive planning, monitoring and controlling throughout their life cycle, in other words they require managing. Indeed it is the emphasis on planning that separates project management from general management. Project managers ultimately hold the single point of responsibility for the project and are responsible for the continual planning, monitoring and controlling cycle, through the use of modern project management methods, techniques and tools. It is his or her responsibility to do "Whatever is required to make the project happen". In order to successfully achieve these three objectives of quality, cost and time, the Project Management Institute (1996) outlines nine key project management knowledge areas.
Within the scope of this essay I will critically assess two of these nine knowledge areas: scope management and risk management. Focus
on Scope Management
Scope management is a crucial part of project planning and is present throughout the project life cycle. It starts when a project is formally recognised or when a project continues into its next phase. Scope is defined by Microsoft as "The combination of all project goals and tasks and the work required to accomplish the project objective". In other words project scope is what will be delivered, and more importantly, what will not be delivered in order to successfully fulfill the projects objective to stakeholder expectations. Sscope management also includes the process of project selection i.e. choosing the project that will provide the best financial return, that best satisfies the organisational need and that best fits in with the current organisational strategy. Managing scope may seem like an easy task but in reality the majority of projects fail due to the lack of clear objectives and lack of appropriate scope management. For example, recently the Home Office have scraped a 100 million pounds criminal database after it had been criticised after users complained that the system was unable to track offenders who used aliases. Hampshire probation service committee described the system as a "terrible, disaster, a nightmare", Ford (2000). Application of appropriate scope management would most probably have lead to the delivery of a successful system, Bill Hewlett, co-founder of Hewlett-Packard, was reputed to say, "You can't manage what you can't measure". This is all very well in theory but not in practice, changes and problems are inevitable. Planning in too much detail can lead to a spiral of planning and re-planning if original specification is proven deficient, items have been over looked in the scope estimate or there is difficulty meeting quality. All of which are problems that a project manager should expect to go wrong. In such cases perhaps it is better to be roughly right than precisely wrong. Scope,
planning and scope creep There is in effect a planning wave that rolls ahead of activity execution and elaborates the detail work about to be done. Tthere are many different opinions to the detail and approach to scope and project planning that should be applied. A scope statement that contains too much detail can result in a planning spiral. On the other hand scope statements that contain too little detail, are fuzzy and leave room for interpretation. This can result in all of the following:
Scope creep is "A progressive increase in scope. As some projects progress, especially through development, requirements continuously change incrementally, causing the project manager to add to the project objectives", adapted from Wideman, (1999). According to Zucker (2000) scope creep is the leading cause of project failure. Scope creep can have drastic effects on the overall project. New work results in increased scope and will often result in increased costs and required time, hence an overall greater project duration. Which in turn, will most likely result in the delay of the project. Misinterpretation of the scope definition statement can potentially result in arguments or legal disputes as the project scope is deemed to include something that is not acknowledged by the project team and manager, this is especially a problem in fixed price contracts. Changes in scope are not just brought about by client's misinterpretation of the scope definition statement. They are also brought about by the fact that clients do not always know exactly what they want until they see it, or do not see as the case may be. This especially applies in environments that are very dynamic. Scope creep can also be brought about by unforeseen requirements or the unrealised complexity of a project deliverable. A prime example of this would be a project such as the Channel Tunnel which finished several years later than originally scheduled and double the proposed budget around 10 billion instead of 5 billion, Maylor (1996). To overcome scope creep the PMBOK outlines a scope verification procedure that allows the formal acceptance of project scope by the project sponsor. Scope changes are pretty much inevitable within a project. It is nearly impossible to foresee all the work required and the complexity of the tasks required to successfully complete the project. It is suggested by PMBOK that the use of experts, past experience and historical data can be used to improve chances of accurately predicting the work required. However, projects are unique, unpractised and unrehearsed so any decision making must be based on a set of assumptions laid down by the project team. Focus
on risk Risk can be defined as "a potential future problem that has not yet occurred that prevents or limits the achievement of your objectives as defined at the outset of the project", Burke (1999, p230). Risks may be internal, those within the control of the organisation such as staff workload or external those risks that are uncontrollable by the organisation such as interest rates. Regardless of the type of risk each one can potentially impact the overall success of the project. It is the job of the project team to recognise and reduce or eliminate the impact of such risks on the project by applying a proactive rather than reactive approach to project planning and risk management. Risk management is "what the project manager does to counteract or prepare for the risks", Field and Keller (1998, p109). Risk identification in its most simplistic form is a process of identifying possible risks. However Project Management Institute (1996) and Burke (1999) suggest that as well as identifying risks, characteristics such as cause, triggers and there effect on the project should be documented. The identified risks are then assessed so that a feasible decision can be made as to the possible counter measures required by the risk. The risk is avoided, migrated or accepted. Avoiding risk involves eliminating the potential risk completely. This can potentially be extremely expensive and is usually very difficult to achieve. For example the largest construction project in Europe to interlink a number of Danish islands and Sweden by a series of tunnels and bridges was reviewed after the realisation of the risk of restricting the vital periodic flow of salty, oxygen rich waters from the North Sea. This risk needed to be eliminated, subsequential changes in design increased the estimate for the links by $100 million, Field and Keller (1998). Migrating risk involves reducing the probability that a risk will occur. Transferring the risk to a 3rd party usually does this. In most cases transferring risk will usually refer to subcontracting work to a more experienced and knowledgeable organisation. There is also some doubt as to who will ultimately be responsible if the risk should actually occur. Risk acceptance is accepting the consequences of the occurrence of a risk, the Project Management Institute (1996) suggest that this can be an active process where by contingency plans are developed in order to combat the risk or a passive process where by lower profits are accepted. It is nearly impossible to identify every single risk that will potentially have an impact on the project, let alone accurately predict its triggers, cause and its likely impact. Even if it were possible, the question remains: Would it really be cost effective to identify every single possible risk regardless of the frequency or the probability, as suggested by Project Management Institute (1996)? Maylor (1996) suggests an evaluation of the top twenty percent of risks will be beneficial and should outline the large majority of risks that are likely to cause eighty percent of the problems. Summary The application of these processes is not an easy; task scope and risk management are very complex; require knowledge, expertise, time and capital, all of which are usually constrained within the project. There are also decisions to be made as to what detail and the approach to scope and risk management and indeed planning as a whole that should be taken. It is the responsibility of the project managers to create a balance between the costs incurred in the processes of scope and risk management and the benefits that will be reaped from it. It is also their job to apply the approach that he / she deems feasible for the project based upon the complexity, associated uncertainly and the internal and external environment in which the project is executed. It is for this reason why the expertise and experience of the project team is so essential. Bibliography Maylor, H. (1996) Project Management London, Pitman Rosenau, M. (1998) Successful Project Management New York, Wiley Reiss, G. (1996) Project Management Demystified London, E & FN Spon Field, M. and Keller, L. (1998) Project Management London, International Thomson Business Press Anderson, E.S. (1995) Goal directed Project Management Guildford, Coopers & Lybrand Walther, S. (2000) E-commerce programming with ASP USA, SAMs Spinner, M. (1997) Project Management Principles and Practices London, Prentice-Hall Morris, W.G. (1994) The Management of Projects Wiltshire, Thomas Telford Harrison, F. (1992) Advanced Project Management Gower Lock, D. (1997) The Essentials of Project Management Gower Slack, N. (1998) Operations Management Prentice-Hall Microsoft Corporation (1997) User's Guide for Microsoft Project 98 Microsoft Press Chicken, J.C. (1994) Managing Risks and Decisions in Major Projects Chapman & Hall, London sited in Field, M. and Keller, L. (1998) Project Management International Thomson Business Press Publications of International
Bodies and other reports |