Journyx Project Management Blog

The metrics organizations commonly use to determine whether an IT project is a success or a failure—whether the project is completed on time, on budget, and delivered the initial requirements—do more harm than good for IT departments, according to a new report from Forrester Research.

Organizations use these metrics because they’re easy for business people to understand, writes principal author Lewis Cardin in the report, Debunking IT Project Failure Myths. But these metrics are problematic for IT departments. In a way, Cardin suggests, they set up IT departments for failure.

The problem with these metrics, according to Forrester, is that they perpetuate the idea that a project is only successful when it is completed according to the initial schedule, budget and requirements—and therefore, that anything less is a failure.

Another problem with these metrics is that they don’t take into account the mercurial nature of project management and project delivery.

“Project requirements change for a variety of reasons, and schedules and budgets change during the lifetime of the project based on better information as to effort, complexity and interdependencies,” writes Cardin in the report, published July 28. “This would not be an issue except that project sponsors judge project success in terms of schedule-budget-meet requirements.”

Read more at CIO.com.

I’ve been seeing things lately that make the old software company CEO in me want to start screaming, “Change, or I’ll get someone else who can actually do your job.”

What has me so riled, as I visit the IT shops of my clients, is a lot of wasted energy. People are assigned to projects, sometimes for years at a time, that are just fantasies.

Who gets the blame for this foolishness? There’s enough to go around for both the business and IT.

I see long lists of projects that are officially under way but have no funding — and no plan for funding. Despite that lack of a key ingredient — money — periodic meetings are held, minutes are published, studies are done.

In one case I know of, four IT people are tied up for the third year in a row on a project that still hasn’t made the cut in the corporate plan.

The business wants and even needs this project. But the corporation needs other things more, so it waits. No progress is made, but everyone looks busy. Make-work maintains the fantasy that this project will someday matter enough to be funded. And maintaining the fantasy is all it does. None of the work being done will cut the project’s time frame should it ever receive funding; it will all need to be redone later.

Read on at ComputerWorld.

When a friend suggested that I might benefit from meditation, and generally taking a more “Zen” approach to project management, I had my doubts. How in the world was I going to get anything done while being tranquil?!! Too much serenity is bad for results. On a deadline-driven project the very words “tranquil” and “serene” have the stench of impending disaster. They are filed in my subconscious right alongside phrases like “no progress to report” and “we tried our best.” Visions of status review meetings featuring updates like “everything is unfolding as the universe intended” and “it just wasn’t meant to be” popped into my adrenaline-soaked brain. No way was I going to let thousands of years of introspective tradition anywhere near my projects!

From what I understand, Zen promises the cessation of suffering. No suffering? Project managers unite! This could be a serious threat to our livelihood, since many projects are intended to end one form of suffering or another—insufficient revenues from new products, excessive costs, inefficient processes. And I think a majority of experienced project leaders would agree that most projects either include or inflict a great deal of suffering.

Not that I don’t appreciate inner peace, mind you. I wrote this entire article while sitting in the lotus position. I am always searching for ways to get in touch with that calm, quiet place within—but faster and with more surefire results than old-fashioned techniques like deep contemplation or lengthy introspection. (Did you ever notice that the word meditation is very close to the word medication? Coincidence? I think not.) But sometimes the only force driving a team forward is the nagging feeling that doom is just a couple of steps behind. And, practically speaking, what busy project leader really has time to linger in the inner sanctum of their subconscious? I’ve heard that you should meditate for at least 30 minutes a day, unless you are too busy, in which case a full hour is required. Ha! Imagine what the PMs of this world could do with 60 more minutes a day! Global warming would succumb to our collective might! Poverty, disease, and unfashionable dress among technically gifted engineers would fall before our cumulative strength!

Read the entire article at Project Connections.

Some days I like to be gentle with people. Some days I sit and listen while people explain to me how important the work of a project manager is, how we have changed the business world, and how the present glory barely presages the coming glory of our reign. Perfect portfolios of properly prepared projects proceed purposefully into a paradise. Or something like that.

The reality of a project manager’s life involves a lot more process and a lot less project. Managing risks and performing earned value analysis certainly has its place, but most of our work centers on the simple workaday activities involved with keeping people on track. We build schedules, call meetings, talk with everyone who might be remotely interested in the project’s outcome (and their uncle, just to be safe), then stay up all night with the team while things fall apart. We file reports, oh the reports, and intervene only when the process’ steady hum stutters.

Wait a second. The process? Yes, the process. When we look only at the output, each IT “project” we engage in looks, in fact, suspiciously like a project. We have a unique product created to meet a particular need in a specific context and time. However, having a bunch of product midwives around is not what attracts corporations to the idea of project management. People were producing products long before our profession got off the ground and will be doing so long after PMI, PRINCE, and all the rest vanish into the dust of history. What attracts them is the idea that we can manage a repeatable, measurable, auditable process by which things mostly happen.

Read the rest at TechRepublic.

When we examine organizations or departments with track records of consistent project failure, we usually see problems at the “front end” of their project process. Instead of business value thinking and a focus on results, we see project order-taking, very similar to the drive-up window of a fast food restaurant.

“Fast Food” Order-Taking

The person responsible for the account stands inside the drive-in window wearing a red and yellow cap that says “We Do Projects.” The account drives up in a shiny black cars and stops at the drive-up window saying, “I’m hungry.”

The project management order-taker grins at the account, displaying 163 gleaming white teeth and then gives the account the “thumbs up” signal. The order-taker turns to his or her project team and screams,

“You two, put four burgers on the grill!”

“Dan, dump some potatoes in the deep fry!”

“Monica, we need more buns now!”

The fast food project team has started work and it certainly is impressive how quickly they have begun. The project management “order-taker” gives another toothy grin to the account and says, “We’ve started work on your project and it will be ready very soon.” Now the order-taker, from habit or some need to impress the executive with their technical expertise, decides to get some specifications. “Would you like chopped Bermuda onion and hot jalapeno relish on top? Can we add some of our secret sauce; it has monosodium glutamate. Would you like 1.579 grams or more? We can also add our rare Guatemalan red pepper. Would 6.531 pinches be enough?”

The executive frowns in confusion, then nods agreement with a shrug and says, “I’m on a diet, you know.”

Download the entire PDF at 4PM.com.

“This is what we need. You can use these resources. And you must deliver it by that date.

Does this sound familiar? If so, you are not alone. Many project managers find themselves in just such a situation. There are lots of dictates, no flexibility, and more often than not little realism in the demands.

What value is there in estimation when your sponsor seems to have no interest in finding out what it will really take to do the project? The constraints have been chiseled in stone and we can’t change them. End of story. Our job boils down to trying to keep the project from being too much of a disaster.

Although it may not seem to be true, we can negotiate unrealistic project expectations. And the key is to do a good job of estimating what it really will take to do the project…

Read more at:
http://journyx.com/rss/redir/pcon-negotiate.html

In business, if you ask N people for their definition of risk, you likely will get N unique responses. Within any corporation, each discipline views risk through a colloquial lens. For example, the Health & Safety department typically will define risks as threats to be rooted out and eradicated. Denizens of the Finance department, however, view risk as a positive thing. They seek and embrace risk (hopefully, not more than they can handle) because their job is to maximize return – low risk, low return; higher risk, higher reward. To them risk is an opportunity…

Read more at at:
http://journyx.com/rss/redir/pmwt-riskchange.html

Fair warning: Journyx is based in Texas, the 4th hottest place on earth. Also, it’s the middle of July. And yet I am about to complain about the heat. If I were to read a piece written by someone in upstate New York that complained about the cold in the winter time I’d feel pretty comfortable telling the whiner to shut up and live with it. But I’m asking you to stick with me because despite the whining, I really do have a point that’s germane to projects. Trust me. Would a marketing guy lie to you? Don’t answer that. Just keep reading.

It’s been a very hot summer. Incredibly, painfully hot, even for Texas. It was the hottest June on record, with 20 days at 100° F or higher. It’s also been very dry - like 3 inches below average dry. Why am I going on about this? To make the point clear that, unlike last year’s temperate and waterlogged June, this season hasn’t been very good - or very inspiring - for gardening. You remember my bit about gardening (oh, and time boxing) from back in February, don’t you?

Anyway, the garden has fared rather poorly. Almost entirely due to the heat. Well, that freak hailstorm back in May that utterly destroyed the tomatoes and demolished our bean pole tripod (lovingly lashed together by yours truly - thanks knot-tying merit badge!) didn’t help. But really, it’s the heat. If you have to work the land to survive, it’s one thing. But if it’s really just a hobby, well, there are indoor hobbies that keep you safe from the raging anger of the sun. And that means that the garden suffers alone.

Right, so here’s where we get to the point. Said green brown patch is part of a community garden, and that means that other people care about the state of the plot almost as much as we do. They care because it can affect their plots - if it gets too weedy, say, or if it gets overgrown and blocks out the sun (normally bad, though possibly a good thing this year). You get the idea. So, last weekend an email went out to the gardener list barking at everyone to clean up their plots by the end of Sunday or have their ownership of said plots revoked. Apparently, we’re not the only ones hiding from the intense ball of fusion in the sky.

Now, I’m all for keeping the garden looking nice and going strong, but to threaten to revoke ownership in July - after membership fees have been paid for the entire year, no less - is a bit, well, unreasonable. I suppose the tone was taken to try to spur action, but instead it really just sounded petulant and overly-demanding. Kind of like the way upper management sounds when they demand completion of a project without any effort at understanding the situation on the ground. You see, it’s easy to look at a situation, see something you don’t like and decree that changes be enacted. Heck, it’s probably human nature to do so. But we’re out to change that - in project land, if not in community gardens across the country.

How does a Timesheet company aim to help management get a better idea of what the lay of the land looks like, you ask? Sssssh. It’s a secret.

- Andrew Trent, Journyx Director of Web Content

Managing technology projects can be one of the most challenging arenas of project management. Ironically, it is rarely the technology itself that presents obstacles for the technical project manager. Being mindful of the most common traps that await the unsuspecting project manager can help ensure your technical projects don’t end up as financial disasters that don’t deliver expected function, and diminish the reputation of yourself and your technical organization.

1. It is about business process, not the technical tool

The intent of a project is to move the business to a better place. That better place can mean increased efficiency, additional capabilities or an improvement in the accuracy of the business’ output. Regardless of the nature of the business improvement, it is enhanced process that will drive the superior results. It is not necessarily as a result of a tool, a new IT system or improved technology – these are only the catalyst for the improved process which drives business results. Many project managers and their teams mistake the new technology as being the output of the project, rather than the enhanced process that results in conjunction with implementing new technology.

Read on at PM World Today.

For project managers, “no” is often the toughest word in the English language to deploy. We often prefer the classic PM strategy of “Yes, but…” as the softer, kinder, gentler alternative. “No” sounds harsh. Uncooperative. It sounds reticent and recalcitrant. It sounds negative. And yet, for many of us, the time has come as professionals to set “yes, but…” aside and venture into the world of “no.”

I say this because I note that with increasing frequency, clients are not taking “yes, but…” as an answer. No sooner do we offer a “yes-we-can-do-that, but-it-costs-you-another-million” response that the customer hears only the first half of the equation. They often seem far more interested in capability than cost. As a result, when we come to the table with the costs for their ventures, they balk.

One of my clients recently asked for a much higher level of review and a much higher degree of involvement in my consulting work than that to which I have become accustomed through the years. I agreed to a single review, but during that review, it became very clear that this was not to be a one-time event. They wanted more and more involvement in the work I have historically done to great accolades. And so, at the end of the first conference call, I tried a “yes, but..” approach.

“Yes, we can do additional reviews, but there will need to be a change in our contractual arrangements to accommodate them.”

When they replied that they saw this as work under the contract, I realized it was not a “yes, but…” situation. It called for clear, defined action.

“No. I cannot continue to do these reviews, so we need to develop an exit strategy, as I cannot provide the requisite number of reviews and still achieve my financial objectives.”

The client was flummoxed. They wanted to know why I had suddenly changed my tune. They wanted to know why I was willing to walk away from such a critical opportunity. They wanted to know why we should terminate a long-standing agreement over such a minor issue. I explained that I had attempted to provide reasonable accommodation, but that it was no longer possible to make the required margins with the additional reporting pressure.

They grumbled. They groused. They threatened to walk away from the contract. And then they ceded the point and went back to the original levels of tracking and reporting.

At first the post-event relationship seemed strained and tenuous. But I think the reality is that I was projecting that on them. In fact, since I said “no,” only once, they have actually been more cooperative, more supportive, and more sensitive to my organizational needs. And I’M the consultant!

Read more at ProjectConnections.