PoddarCo

Recently, I was working with a PMO Director on improving the quality of her team’s project schedules (built using MS Project). Note that these schedules were fairly basic, so we are not talking about complex cost tracking, WBS linkage and resource leveling. At this point, the goal was just to identify the most critical pieces to capture on a project schedule given this company’s structure and operations. Working in conjunction with other project managers on her team, we identified the following as critical components that even the most basic schedule should reflect:

1. Have adequate coverage of all activities and milestones critical to the project (see note below regarding what level to track at)
2. For each activity, clearly capture estimated duration and effort. In this organization getting an accurate indication of effort was quite challenging, so duration was used more often. While this presents some resource management challenges, it was an acceptable approach given the realities of the organization.
3. It is also important to indicate the dependencies / predecessors so all activities and milestones are clearly linked to each other. This not only makes it easier to administer changes to the plan but also to assess impact of any slippage very quickly.
4. For all activities identify the resource accountable for the activity’s completion. Dependent on how you do this, and how you set up other linkages in the MS Project file, assigning resources can also help you in estimating costs, in preparing budgets and in resource leveling.

One can do a lot more with MS Project, but we identified these as the most basic requirements given the organization’s and the project team’s needs.

Another important point underlying all this was the level at which to track activities in the project schedule. This depends on the needs of the project – some projects warrant detailed task level tracking, while for others, tracking by deliverables/milestones works just as well. The level at which you track is also a function of which methodology your organization is using as the rules of the game may differ. Although, the gist of it stays the same – what needs to be done, how long will it take, what are the dependencies, who is accountable.

Related posts that you might want to browse through -

• Managing Projects – by tasks or by deliverables and milestones

• Relevance as a skill for PMs

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Recently I attended an event led by a New York University Professor. Here I had the opportunity to listen to two of the best entrepreneurs in NYC (Barry Silbert – Founder and CEO of Second Market, and Marc Cenedella Founder and CEO of The Ladders). A lot of valuable insights came out of this, but one very simple piece of advice really stood out – and the best part is it can help everyone, no matter at what level of the organization.

Have you ever thought that things would improve if only you could change something in your organization but you did not know where or how to get started? Here’s the tip: Think, if you were to get fired, what would your replacement do? Would he or she run things the same way, or would they immediately change something and how would they go about it?

Perhaps this simple question will give you the drive you need to actually execute the change. Go for it – be the change agent your organization needs!

Also, I am planning to attend another exciting event soon! Click here to read more about it…!

Click the image to read about some of the speakers at this upcoming event -

The complete list of speakers at the event -

• DOUG AKIN Chief Engagement Officer, Mr Youth
• KRYSTAL BALL Congressional Candidate
• MATTHEW BISHOP New York Bureau Chief, The Economist
• JANE BUCKINGHAM Founder, Trendera
• JARED COHEN U.S. State Department, Project Lead: ‘Text Haiti to 90999′
• CINDY GALLOP Founder & CEO, IfWeRanTheWorld
• SCOTT GALLOWAY Founder, L2
• BEN KAUFMAN Entreprenuer-in-Chief, Quirky.com
• STERLING LANIER President, Chatter
• LAURA McEWEN Publisher, TeenVogue
• DR. JAY PARKINSON Founder, HelloHealth
• ERIN SCHRODE Founder, Teens Turning Green
• GREG SHOVE CEO, Halogen Network
• ADAM WALDEN General Manager, Noise Marketing
• ANDREW WAGNER Editor in Chief, ReadyMade
• MARK ZANDI Chief Economist, Moody’s Analytics

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Generally in software development projects, it is no surprise that it is harder to release the first iteration of a software than future iterations.  The team is new, often the technology is new, requirements and processes are vague, uncertainties cloud post-release adoption, a fair share of skeptics spot the user landscape and in general it is hard for everyone to see true progress.

So, why mention version 1.0 software releases and how they relate to a project manager or to a project management organization (PMO)?

Well, version 1.0 releases generally require the project manager to tweak their normal project management approach and build more flexibility in almost all facets of the project. They require the project manager to wear multiple hats – often taking part in requirements capture, user interface design, market studies, application testing, training and other duties that might otherwise be deemed to be beyond day-to-day project management activities.

From a PMO’s perspective, the PMO leader should guide project managers in these areas as necessary. The PMO leader should also realize that the needs of such projects are different, and ensure that the PMO’s own processes do not stifle progress on the project.  Some areas to be conscious of in this regard are -

• a PMO that establishes a hard stance on no scope changes – requirements will shift constantly on 1.0 releases, so at times, scope will change too. The key is to re-prioritize what can be delivered in the software’s first release given all project constraints, and embrace the highest priority must-have changes.
• a PMO that has rigid processes around how and when code updates move through various environments (such as development, integration, quality assurance / testing, staging, production, disaster recovery) – it is understandable for organizations to have strict controls on what gets implemented in their staging, production or disaster recovery environments. However, IMO, it helps maintain momentum if code is allowed to move quickly from development to integration to quality assurance environments. This could be set up as an exception to the norm, only applicable for certain such projects.
• a PMO leader may need to provide additional coaching – for reasons mentioned earlier in this post a PMO leader may need to spend more time with project managers coaching them in areas outside their domain. Simple endeavors such as value stream mapping, building flowcharts and workflows, using dashboards with critical metrics to measure and communicate progress, and various other techniques mentioned in several project management publications can be very effective in building team morale, creating a common vision and balancing expectations, especially when uncertainty runs high prior to a software application’s first release!

In fact, balancing expectations is so crucial that its worth highlighting a few points on it. Depending on the nature of the project, you might have a sponsor that constantly micro manages every aspect of the project, or one that just wanted the finished goods yesterday.  In 9 out of 10 cases, I have observed that software applications in their first release or initial rounds of major cutting edge technological upgrades tend to be pretty close to a sponsor’s heart. It is important for the project manager to realize these situations, as they demand extra facilitation and frequent expectation reseting, whether it be in terms of budget, timeline or resources.

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Various publications term project management to be leadership without authority.  Authority or no authority, as leaders project managers constantly have to make decisions, and facilitate others to help them make decisions as well. Recently I read a good summary of various decision making levels and thought I’d share this with everyone.

Gordon, Miller and Mintzberg defined three levels of decision making: operative, administrative and strategic. Some of the characteristics of decisions at these levels are:

As a project manager, it helps to be aware of these decision making levels when you work with everyone on your team, on other teams or in different companies.  If you get a chance, try to read more about decision making.  In the near future, I’ll post another short blurb on some behavioral factors that influence decision making. 

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

It’s December – end of year to-do’s, vacations, last minute shopping, scrambling with work requests, enjoying time with families, etc. So instead of a regular post, just a brief thought to share.

Scoping and budgeting are integral to any software release or project.  One month’s left in the calendar year, and 40% of the budget is still there to spend or lose. That doesn’t mean you rush order more hardware than you planned for.  Or you cram many extra features through development even if you don’t have the requirements flushed out or the developers / testers available.  Use left-over funds judiciously and plan project spend/cash-flow for the next year better.

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

Processes should exist as a catalyst for getting work done, not to slow it down. Checks and balances are needed to ensure nothing slips through the cracks, not to cover one team’s tracks so the next in line can be blamed. Documentation is prepared to pave the way for others who follow, not to constrain projects till every excruciating detail is noted.  Dates are necessary for planning, scheduling resources and aligning other work, but need to be kept real.

Some PMs get caught up in demanding these elements from their teams and resources. Releases don’t get scheduled till project codes, install instructions, help guides, dev complete dates, QA completion notices, team-to-team hand off meetings, multi-layered sign-offs and varied support procedures among other things are in place. By then the business (client) needs move on, project demands change, resources shift.

It’s here that a customer focus plays a crucial role.  A customer focus can shed new light on questions like – how can the process minimize redundancy and overhead while maximizing productivity and utilization? Does the process have to be so standardized? Where can you make the process flexible?

My two cents in conclusion: question the rigidity of processes and other must-haves; be alert to these things when they start becoming roadblocks.

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down.)

A bad system will beat a good person more often than not…

Recently, I came across this statement in a book, and started to think more and more about it, wondering about the statement’s validity, application and logic. Thinking out loud, many instances come to mind where this is indeed the case:

1. Corruption anywhere, for example in certain departments in India. Even a good person falls prey to the system.
2. Our building’s condo association and management team – people have the best of intentions when they join, but the established processes and rules hamper their ability to make improvements.
3. A spiraling downwards quality control process or lack of the right procedures in a software development environment – the lack of code checks, test cases, documentation, etc. can quickly affect a motivated newcomer’s good intentions.

Just sharing the thought – a bad system does beat a good person more often than not.

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down)

A buzz word in the PMO’s mission statement (j/k, let’s take a deeper look)

gov⋅ern⋅ance [guhv-er-nuh ns] –noun
1. government; exercise of authority; control.
2. a method or system of government or management

gov⋅ern [guhv-ern] –verb
1. to rule over by right of authority: to govern a nation.
2. to exercise a directing or restraining influence over; guide: the motives governing a decision.
3. to hold in check; control: to govern one’s temper.
4. to serve as or constitute a law for: the principles governing a case.

Almost all the definitions above instantly validate what you and I think project governance is about.  Still, are you confused wondering how it applies to your PMO?  What are some practical, actionable steps to create better governance?  Let’s see what the heck is under the hood.

Project governance comprises of “efforts to work with executives and senior managers to solicit and implement their guidance regarding oversight and control of project performance and project management activities” (Chapter 5: Project Governance. The Complete Project Management Office Handbook, Second Edition).  Mostly everyone realizes this.  However, many PMO’s limit governance to establishing project management guidelines, reviewing some performance metrics and checking progress against the triple constraints.  They miss out on the first half of the description above – efforts to work with executives and senior managers to solicit and implement their guidance.

Without executive involvement, the effectiveness of project governance gets limited, especially when a PMO is striving to establish itself within the organization.  Project governance is the catalyst that the PMO needs to become a viable, effective project management capability.  So, stretch the application of governance beyond setting policies and reviewing performance to using it as a relationship building strategy.  Described below is my interpretation of the project governance framework described in great detail in The Complete Project Management Office Handbook, Second Edition.  This framework efficiently breaks governance into a few practical and actionable steps.

Simple steps to better governance

Most PMOs I have come across had great project charters, policies and authority guidelines.  Some had fairly established project classification guidelines.  Hardly any had an executive control board or a formal committee ensuring business and technical alignment.  How many times have you observed project governance diminishing after the initial funding stage?  Some form of continued executive participation ensures that executives are involved not only in project selection and approval, but also in project execution and delivery.

To that end project governance is more than a buzz word.  It is critical to the PMO’s maturity, adoption and respect within the organization.  Chances are you are already doing many things that fall under governance.  As you try to further streamline your governance efforts, if any particular step leads to heart burn, let me know and I’ll research the cure.  I try to keep blog posts brief, so for more details on this read Chapter-5 from the book referenced below or e-mail your questions to me.  My email address is varunpoddar@poddarco.com.

References:
Hill, Gerard M.  The Complete Project Management Office Handbook, Second Edition. Auerbach Publications. © 2008

(On the homepage, click speech bubble next to the title to leave comments. On the post page, scroll down)