All organizations can slot their activities into one of two categories: projects or new initiatives, and operations. Everything falls into one of those. To succeed, an organization must do both very well, and both must be supported by strong leadership, discipline, and visibility from top management in particular. For each type of activity, there are numerous ways to get the work done. Unfortunately, not every methodology aligns with every organization or a particular effort. When there’s a poor fit between project and work method, then inefficiency and poor use of resources result.
ADVERTISEMENT |
The quickest and easiest organizational gains can often be found by examining the organization’s methodologies when executing projects. More than 76 percent of organizations use a single methodology to provide the actionable framework. The most common is a waterfall model where activities are done in a four- or five-phase sequence: analysis, design, development, testing, and deployment. This highly linear approach to project execution is the oldest and has its origins in the engineering world.
Another common methodology is agile development. It is frequently found in the information technology world. Agile development makes extensive use of short iterations with significant stakeholder feedback to deliver project results. Each of these methodologies has its fans and detractors, and they represent only the two extremes of the methodology world. However, there is no such thing as a perfect methodology. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. Each has situations it is designed to handle well and situations where using it will spell disaster. Too often, organizations choose simplicity over common sense when choosing the right methodology for a given project.
Many organizational leaders think selecting a single methodology for executing all initiatives is safer than risking diversity. Yet, this choice ensures that one out of every three projects will fail before any work has begun. The desire for consistency in performance and reporting is only valuable if the performance is good and the reporting is accurate.
Facing project reality
The first hurdle when choosing the best methodology should be an open willingness to ask some simple questions:
1. Do you know how often your initiatives are late or over budget?
2. Do you know what your average schedule and cost over- or under-run are?
3. How often do you end up with fantastic technical solutions in search of a business problem?
4. Do you often find things are right on track until the last minute, when suddenly they are not?
5. Do your people often complain about the amount of process or paperwork they must complete?
The answers to these questions often indicate a process or methodology problem. The easy answer is to keep doing things the same way, but that is also the definition of insanity. Fortunately there is a better way. It begins with a few simple assumptions. So long as these assumptions hold true, you can achieve dramatic improvements in short order:
1. It’s likely that your initiatives are not clones. (If they are, then use a waterfall methodology and focus on operations management.)
2. Your people are trainable and capable of making basic business decisions.
3. You sometimes face diverse customer needs and deadlines.
4. It is impossible to know all the requirements at the beginning of an effort.
5. Change, sometimes even significant change, is a normal part of the process.
If these assumptions are true, then the process that follows will add great value. The first step is to generate ideas. This is when someone says it would be a good idea to do something. All that is needed here is a simple method for capturing the idea—a half-sheet of paper or a blank document open on a computer screen. Remember, no one really knows anything yet, so keep it simple with no more than five or six questions in response to the idea.
Once the idea is in the system, someone must prioritize it against all the other ideas in the cue. It is best if the senior leadership team prioritizes the initiative against the strategy. A common mistake is to not begin tracking until the idea reaches the execution stage. When this happens, you have no idea how much time or money is being spent to plan your initiatives, and that is dangerous.
The kickoff meeting
The next step is to hold a kickoff meeting. Keep this simple as well. It should be about 1 hour and never longer than 90 minutes. All the major stakeholders should attend, and the idea sponsor should always start the meeting. However, the sponsor only needs to be there for the first 10 minutes. If the sponsor is not willing to be there, don’t proceed with the project. At some point the project will run into trouble, and if the sponsor won’t give 10 minutes to start the initiative how much support can be counted on later? The objective of this meeting is to determine what will be the best way to get the work done, not to find the technical solution. Having the technical team at the kickoff is fine, but only if the team members can listen.
Here are some questions that can help you select the best methodology once the kickoff is complete. Remember, it is as much about observing behaviors as it is capturing what people say.
1. How well understood are the project requirements by the business and project stakeholders?
2. Does the project require the use of new technology?
3. Does the project involve a high-volume transaction system or process?
4. Will the project require the use of external consultants?
5. Will the project team have constant access to business stakeholders?
6. What is the experience level of the project team?
7. How large is the project team?
The less comfortable the team is with the project and the less well understood the requirements, the more an iterative process is required. Implementing a multimethodology process can be confusing, but if one out of three efforts are failing today because of misaligned methodologies, can you really afford not to change?
Add new comment