Project Management Articles from the Project Management Advisor™ |
Project Management Articles -
Project Management Screw-Up 1 -
We weren’t addressing the right problem
Excerpted
from The
Project Management Advisor - 18 Major Project Screw-Ups And How
To Cut Them Off At The Pass
(Prentice Hall, 2004)
 |
| |
 |
Virtually every (rational) project has at
its core a need to solve some problem that is perceived by
someone. Problems
can manifest themselves as barriers to getting something done
(“we can’t possibly ship 10,000 units/week with our existing
systems”) or as opportunity to doing something better (“we need
to reduce the cost of processing purchase orders by 20%”)
In any event, there is a desire to do something tomorrow
that can’t be done acceptably today.
Admittedly, some of the most fun projects that I have worked on have been the “omigosh, we need to get this done or else” projects. I have seen the greatest clarity of purpose on projects where there was a very real and tangible consequence to not completing the project successfully. One outstanding example of this that affected virtually every business on earth was the Y2K computer scare. One of my jobs was in ensuring that our mission-critical vendors were adequately prepared for Y2K and that there would not be any business interruption to our company as a result of a vendor’s failure to perform. Everyone knew what the problem was: computer systems that only use a two-digit year and assumed the “19” in the first two years were going to assume a year of “1900” on January 1, 2000 and, depending on the system, everything from power grids to air traffic systems to small appliances had the potential to malfunction. You all know the story; 1/1/2000 came and went with a minimum of problems; not because the scare was overblown, but because there were billions of dollars spent worldwide ensuring that a problem didn’t occur. There was tremendous clarity of purpose and a very real and tangible consequence if no action was taken.
How it happens:
There’s a poorly articulated mission statement – Many
projects that I have seen had some mission statement that was
either vague, unrealistic, or simply didn’t exist.
To say “we need to reduce costs”, may be an admirable
thing to do and something that is generally desirable, is not
something a project team can surgically execute upon simply
because it is not clear what the project is and when the project
will be complete.
The best mission statements that I have seen
have the following components:
- What needs to be done
- When it needs to be done by
- What measure will be used to signify
success
One project that I worked on focused on vendors
entering invoices directly into a company’s invoicing system via the
internet as opposed to invoicing via a hardcopy invoice.
The mission statement for the project was as follows:
“We need to reduce the cost of processing
invoices by 50% by March 1 while ensuring that vendors are paid
within terms 100% of the time.”
The project had a clear
what (reduce the cost
of processing invoices), a clear
when (March 1) and clear
measure (50% cost of
processing and 100% payment within terms).
In the invoicing project, we were able to stay laser-focused
on what we needed to do and make sure all of the project
constituents stayed in sync because we had a super-focused mission
statement.
There’s
an inconsistent understanding of what the problem is – On
projects where you have multiple stakeholder groups there is a very
strong likelihood that each stakeholder group is going to have a
specific agenda that they bring into the project.
Some may view what you’re doing as not being a problem at
all. Very early on in
your project, it is crucial to get a very consistent view of what
the project is meant to accomplish via the use of the clear mission
statement and ensure that the constituents understand the mission
and are bought into working to resolve it.
At times you’re going to have the tree-huggers
that are resistant to the project because it means significant
change or elimination of their job or organization.
It is vital to address this early in mission statement
definition and to identify the concerns of the resister.
One technique that I have used with success is to get your
key stakeholders in a room and to give them each an opportunity to
somehow shape the mission statement.
What I have found is that even if someone only adds or
changes one word to the
mission statement they feel that they have influenced the direction
of the project.
On some projects we’ve been able to turn some
of the resisters around; on others the resisters never got with the
game plan. In those
instances the resister ultimately was taken off the project.
It’s never smooth to remove a resister, but it’s always been
necessary to keep the project moving forward.
It’s a
problem but there are bigger fish to fry – So, maybe you see
something that isn’t working as well as it should or you see some
product or service that could benefit your organization.
It very well could be that implementing the solution could
reap some benefit to your organization; the questions become more
around priorities and focus.
In one organization I worked in we developed an
annual portfolio of projects that identified the project, the
problem the project was addressing, the resource needs, the benefit
expected, a subjective priority of the project based on management
priority and focus, and the duration that the project was to take.
Once each project definition was completed, we put the
projects in a spreadsheet, sorted the project by priority and did a
“draw the line” series of meetings based on when resources would be
consumed. As an example,
if we got to a point where after five projects there were no more
dollars available to work on projects then we “drew the line” after
the fifth project. I’d
be kidding you if this was purely an arithmetic exercise and
everyone walked away doing cartwheels over the outcome.
The process forces a lot of discussion on relative priorities
and, while one organization may feel that a project is vitally
important to their business, in the larger scheme of things there
were projects that were more important.
So, not everyone would be thrilled with the outcome, but
there was a prioritized project list that everyone knew and
understood.
Warning Signs:
You
are having difficulty getting a sponsor for your project –
So you’ve got a project that you think is important but you’re
having a difficult time convincing potential sponsors that the
problem is significant enough that they should care and take
action. It could be that
the problem is truly a problem but it’s not a high enough
priority that warrants immediate action.
Then again it also could mean that you’ve got a poorly
defined mission statement that isn’t compelling enough to take
action.
The
project team is confused about what problem the project is trying to
address – I’ve seen more than one project where the project team
goes through the project with different views about what problem
they are trying to solve. If
each of your project team members are unable to consistently recite
your mission statement then you’re sure to have points of confusion
throughout your project.
It is
difficult to keep the project team focused on solving the problem –
Sometimes on projects I have encountering situations where
project team members stray from solving the root problem to solving
a “problem du jour” which may or may not be related to our project.
At times, there could be
validity to the issue being raised which help you to further
articulate your problem statement and resulting solution.
At other times, though, it
could just be a red herring which dilutes your focus and creates
confusion about what you’re trying to accomplish.
Turning it around:
Keep
your mission statement prominently displayed - I’ve seen
some projects where there’s a great mission statement that is
developed in order to sell the project then put in a drawer for
no one to see ever again.
Ensure that you are re-visiting and re-communicating the
mission statement through the life of the project to ensure that
you’re doing the right thing, that everyone understands what the
right thing is, and that you’re driving toward resolving the
problem.
Adjust
the mission if the problem changes – Problems aren’t immutable;
they can change in complexion and importance.
If something changes about the problem make sure that your
mission changes accordingly. This
could also mean that the importance of your project changes because
the problem is either more or less important than it was prior to
the change.
Put it
on hold – If you can’t get support for the project, then either
put it on hold or recognize that it’s not something that sponsors
care enough to do something about.
Better you do this than try to forge ahead with the project
without sponsorship. It’s
likely only a matter of time before the project dies.
Take Aways:
- Make sure you’ve got a very
clearly articulated mission statement
- Ensure that your key stakeholders
understand the mission statement and have had an
opportunity to tweak it
- Make sure that the mission
statement is in line with potential sponsor priorities
and focus and prioritized appropriately with other
projects
|
|
| |
|
