Monthly Archive for March, 2009

Handling multiple projects

Published
by
Ron
on March 31, 2009
in project priorities, project sponsor and time management
. 0 Comments

What is the ‘best way’ to handle multiple projects? This is a question I am asked on a regular basis.

I usually start by saying that this is a time management and personal organisation issue as well as a project management question. Let me explain why I say this.

From experience of working with individuals or project teams what comes across is that people get involved in work they should not be doing. This is not job description stuff I mean they work on aspects that add no value to them, the organization and their stakeholders. When I mention this to groups there is usually a nodding of the heads. I refer them to the Steven Covey model of urgent and important and many people relate to the fire fighting rather than the more organized approach. Removing the clutter allows you to focus on projects that make a difference.

So, to come back to the title of this blog; how do you handle multiple projects? Neville Turbit in a really useful article ‘Project Multitasking’  quotes a Time Magazine article which looks at the brain’s ability to multitask. This article quotes research findings where people try and perform more than two or more related tasks either at the same time or alternating rapidly between them. They found that errors go way up and it takes far longer - often double the time or more to get the job done than if done sequentially. “The toll in terms of slowdown is extremely large - amazingly so” quotes David E Mayer Director of Brain, Cognition and Action Laboratory at the University of Michigan.

Turbit suggests that quite often people view project managers as multi tasking. But, the research suggests that this is not an efficient way to work. He suggests it is better to focus on one thing at a time and get that done rather than ten things and take twenty times as long.

He then asks an important question; should you give project team members one or two tasks to complete or ten tasks to complete? The research suggests one or two. If you do have to give them ten then give them a priority so they work consistently on one at a time switching between tasks.

He also recommends something I have suggested to many client groups; that people should set milestones for smaller steps. By doing this you will focus on short term goals for delivery- provided of course you keep the long term objectives in mind.

Continue reading ‘Handling multiple projects’

If we had been honest we would never have received project approval!

Published
by
Ron
on March 24, 2009
in government projects, project estimates and project managers
. 0 Comments

This was a statement made by a speaker at an event I attended in London some 10 years ago. I cannot remember what he spoke about. I can however remember the issue he was referring to. It was the estimate of time and cost given to the relevant Government Minister over a significant project. 

What he admitted was that if they had given the true costs then the project would never have been agreed at the political level. There was as you can imagine uproar at the meeting and many people were appalled. The response was simple expediency; the government wanted the project but did not realise the real costs or time involved in the project.

That was ten years ago but it stuck with me.

Switch to modern day and the leader comment in the latest Computer Weekly  They start the column with cynicism around tips for project managers and top of the list is; projects with realistic budgets and timetables don’t get approved….. 

They go onto suggest that “..reality trumps satire: big project continue receive approval on the basis of unrealistic estimates of their cost and time to completion” They suggest that one government project executive told them that budgeting in government is a game: “if the Treasury and the department want the scheme approved, they turn a blind eye to irrationally low initial estimates of the cost and the timescale.” 

The leader article goes on to identify a number of projects which began with cost estimates at a fraction of their prices today. 

Nothing seems to have changed from the meeting I attended some ten years ago.

It seems to me that politics is the real issue here. Note the words: if the Treasury and the department want the scheme approved, they turn a blind eye to irrationally low initial estimates of the cost and the timescale.

Rationality loses over impartiality!!  

Practical Project Management Training - it works!

Published
by
Ron
on March 19, 2009
in project management, project roles, stakeholder management and training
. 1 Comment

No, I am not surprised that it works but I want to shout it long and loud. 

I have been running practical tried and tested project management training courses for many many years. These range from half day overview sessions to much longer events. Some are based on the client’s in-house project management system, others our own methodology which works very well.

Recently, I ran what I call a split course. This was a two day course split with day two being held two weeks after day one. To create a link between day one and day two I asked participants to apply some of the learning from the course to actual projects. The results were really positive;

  •  many tried writing a project initiation document (PID)  They found it difficult but also realised that without having such a document the project became questionable
  •  one person needed to get some clarity over project roles. He was not sure what roles he and others played in the project. He and his immediate manager identified who fits which roles and he as project manager worked with the rest of the team and sponsor ensuring the roles were actually carried out
  •  two people developed a stakeholder map for their project. One person identified a clear problem with a small group of staff possibly blocking project progress. She developed a communications and influencing approach to bring them ‘on board’
     
  • one person worked on developing a  business case for their project. They realised just how difficulty it was but also just how important it is for the project. They wrote it, rewrote it and it is waiting submission. One person did point out that from her experience to get sign off you would often need to go through several iterations of the business case (or any other project management template) 

The course participants felt much more confident at dealing with real project issues via the practical split course approach. 

What was very interesting was that quite independently I have had feedback from a couple of people who have been on certificated project management training courses. They commented that the practical nature of our training made it much easier to not only understand but apply. I have received this feedback before and when I questioned those who gave it, they said that the certificated events were too book based and focussed on passing exams! They felt that they could not use much of the certificated course because it was so impractical. I have spoken with many people on the telephone who support this last statement. 

I am not suggesting that certificated events are no good, far from it. However, feedback suggests that people prefer practical project management events and the two day approach fits that bill. 

So the moral of this tale; get yourself onto practical event and help deliver those strategic projects.

 

 

Project scope proves its worth.

Published
by
Ron
on March 11, 2009
in project management training, project scope and training
. 1 Comment

On a recent project management training course several course members queried the concept of project scope. The course participants are not full time project managers, some are team members and project management is seen as an add on to their normal day job. The group wanted a clear illustration of a good project scope.

I gave them an example by suggesting we decorate the room we were working in. The group identified a wide range of activities that delivered the overall project. Acting as the client I said financial restrictions would not allow us to improve the central heating system (the room was really cold) and two other areas were not needed. They suddenly saw the concept of in and out of scope.

I then got them to look at their own projects identifying what was in/out of scope. Several people fed back that their project scope did not really exist or the scope was very loosely defined. After the activity they reported that these were looking somewhat tighter. The next step was getting senior management support!

Later in the course we explored change control and the atmosphere in the room changed. I could see people being more attentive, reading through notes made earlier and it was not long before someone made the connection with scope suggesting that this is where clearly scope really wins out. One other person said they needed to go back and spend much more time on this area. She mentioned that motivation was an issue and if a clear scope could be developed then it would help this issue enormously.

All is not negative. Another course member mentioned that they had a change to scope which was beneficial to the project. They did however link this to a need for an effective change control process.

The group left the two day event much more confident. The one thing which shone through was the value of a clear project scope and a process for effectively managing inevitable changes.

So, my question to you is how realistic is your project scope and do you have a process for managing changes to scope? Over to you!

Age Concern Project wound up

Published
by
Ron
on March 4, 2009
in project, project failure, project governance and project management
. 1 Comment

A recent report by the Charities Commission has severely criticised the charity Age Concern for its membership scheme called Heyday.

The scheme was established to attract around 3 million members within 5 years of launch in the age range 50 plus. Some of the members were paid for, some non-paying.

The main aim of Heyday according to the charity was to provide “information and voice”

Heyday has now been abandoned.

In its report, the Commissioners point out that the scheme cost some £22 million to set up and run and it failed dramatically to attract the 3 million members - attracting around 400,000 people.

Speaking on BBC Radio 4 Andrew Hinds the Chief Executive of the Charities Commission encouraged charities to be innovative but suggested trustees should be very careful of launching new projects after very careful look at the facts. He pointed out that Heyday did not meet its objectives.

He identified 3 areas of concern:

1. market research before the project was launched was not as strong as expected

2. analysis of risks was not as rigorous as it should have been

3. there were 34 members on the Age Concern Board - too many for effective decision making

Interestingly, there has been an internal review of the project however the Charity Commissions suggests that Age Concern carry out an independent external review which will be done once it completes a merger with Help the Aged in April of this year.

I believe we can all learn from each other and the report is well worth a read. You can see it here. You can also hear Andrew Hinds from the Charity Commission and the Chief Executive of Age Concern here.