Once regarded as the accidental rofession that people fell into, project management has become standalone career in its own right. Emerging from the engineering world, the practice had its 15 minutes of fame when the IT industry latched onto it during the Y2K frenzy.
Technology projects still abound, but the disciplines of project management have since become cardinal skills for all aspects of business change – from launching new product, staging customer event, through to relocating an office.
With the growing realisation that project success is more about engaging strong, experienced project managers than having sophisticated methodologies or software, it’s hardly surprising that project management has become leading university and workplace training topic.
More enterprise-wide projects
What’s also driving the growing reliance on exceptional project managers, says Jane Farley, senior project manager with IBM, is gravitation from functional to more enterprise-wide projects that touch all parts of the organisation. If there’s any notable sea changes in project management dynamics in recent years, says Farley it’s these:
* greater acuteness over complexity and timing.
* Project management techniques now used in change management.
* Greater emphasis on communication and interfacing with individuals.
She says with Australasian corporates now working on projects that are truly multinational there’s greater need to handle more complexity and diversity. “For example, we’re currently working with Swiss-based pharmaceuticals company that’s rolling out an ERP system. With 60 countries involved, many of the complexities are less technical than cultural. Growing realisation that large project failure can catastrophically impact company has re-emphasised focus on project benefits and heightened commitment.”
Farley says efforts to deliver benefits way beyond the business case alone have triggered significant change in project management methodology. Whether they’re delivered or not, meeting basic business benefits is now seen as given for any project. “With organisations now looking for improvements on less definable, albeit real benefits [for example, happier customers], there’s lot more attention being given to benefits realisation, scope management and project governance,” says Farley.
In other words, it’s now deemed not only acceptable, but prudent to shift the goalposts once project has started. With the acceptance of change requests and controls, now second nature within projects, she says it’s possible to drive much more rigour into all aspects of any project’s inherent constraints: scope, cost, time and quality.
Better project governance
“Greater attention to project governance ensures that the right people are making the right decisions at the right time. It also ensures the necessary structures, controls and audits are in place. lot of difficulty on projects centres around poor decisions. This suggests that project’s steering committee isn’t working properly,” says Farley.
What weak participants and those who aren’t doing what they’re charged with fail to bring to projects, she adds is necessary rigour. In short, bad selection of project governance participants can mean insufficient knowledge to ask the right questions. “This can place the project manager in difficult position, especially when it comes to dealing with third party providers – which is where outstanding communications skills come in.”
So what are changes to project methodology really telling companies today? Farley’s IBM colleague Kevin McCaffrey says management needs to realise the importance of the projects they undertake. He says having the best people working on projects, while they’re operating “business as usual” – is paradox many Kiwi firms struggle with.
Admittedly, the competencies required of project managers are better understood within large companies. But the fact remains, says McCaffrey, that there aren’t enough good project managers to go around. As result, companies are getting better at bringing in consultants from outside.
Improved programme management
Mounting pressure to ensure the wheels of any single project stay on track has also led to better “programme management”.
In fact, the need for senior managers to juggle an entire suite of projects simultaneously has led to the birth of the project office. Responsible for prioritising, the project office ensures all projects are managed in an integrated manner.
With large global organisations, allegedly juggling an average 65-plus projects (at any time), the project office is now regarded as key support unit.
“If there’s no prioritisation, then there’s no integration. We once embarked on project in Australia only to have the ‘give-way’ sign put up while more business-critical project was completed first,” says McCaffrey.
He recommends any company with numerous “business-critical” projects running simultaneously to seriously consider establishing project office. Run by an executive with seat at the senior management table, the project office manager tracks and supports all projects to ensure necessary disciplines are applied. “If there’s no deliberate process to answer questions, then there’s no control – this is the single biggest problem most projects encounter.”
Change management road maps
Change management projects, adds McCaffrey, require the most rigorous control, simply because they’re unlikely to have well-warn path structure. This is where outstanding project managers are worth their weight in gold. “You simply can’t have an established methodology for change management. The methodology used by experienced project managers is likely to be far more intuitive that prescriptive. By taking an adapt-and-adopt approach, they typically build their own road map to achieve outcomes.”
The trouble is, says McCaffrey, no company can expect its projects to deliver on outcomes if they don’t clearly define what the “real” benefits are to the business. He says while many of today’s projects revolve around the modern corporate mantra – cost cutting – there’s reluctance to front-up to broader-based issues.
“I’ve seen too many projects get signed off that in many respects didn’t get there. The end goal isn’t to complete the project and then go back to work, it’s to implement new way of working. The necessary close-out and signing-off should be by way of review, year after the project is completed.”
Project culture
While more Kiwi firms now take project management seriously, Ken Robson, president of the Project Management Institute of NZ (PMINZ), says many still fail to instil project culture throughout their organisation. So what is it that Kiwi management has yet to grasp about project management? Simple, says Robson, they don’t fully understand what support structures are required to deliver necessary outcomes. “There’s no silver bullet, if management don’t see immediate results, they’re too quick to assume the project has failed,” says Robson.
Mark Clayton, consultant with Certus Consulting, shares Robson’s sentiments. Most companies recognise the benefits of engaging external consultants to manage projects. Yet Clayton says attempts to delegate accountability and ownership to third parties is the kiss of death. “Commitment by senior management is critical to ensure buy-in at all levels throughout the business.”
Conversely, he says many of the younger, new-breed of CEOs who take project-based approach to virtually everything could, in fact, be beating themselves up. It’s important, argues Clayton for management to recognise three elements that distinguish projects from other business processes.
• Must be unique, one-off activity.
• Must have specific, clearly stated outcome.
• Must have specific start and finish.
If done correctly, he says project management will add necessary checks and balances to the four phases o
