Establishing Appropriate Checks and Balances on a Project

In my opinion, it is important to separate some of the key review functions of a project from the actual performance/work of the project. What I mean is, for instance, for Information Technology (IT) projects, there are some critical needs that determine if the project and the activities/work being performed are up to standard. These needs are things like:

• Technical Architecture Review – to determine if the design is appropriate and takes into considerations the “Enterprise Perspective” of linking things to the big picture.
  
  
• Security Review – to determine if the appropriate security, privacy and audit controls are in place for the system to comply with internal policies, procedures and legislative or statutory requirement.
  
  
• Quality Assurance and Code Review – to determine if appropriate test cases have been conducted, if there is adequate levels of documentation and if the code written is understandable, maintainable, efficient, etc.

Suggestion: If you have a project director-project manager structure, where multiple project managers report to one director, you could place these critical functions under one PM and have him/her report to the director. Another option is to have a separate audit function within the organization/company with the technical experience to do this type of work either on-going on a project or on a periodic, for instance quarterly, basis.

Regardless of how you implement the functions, they are vital to ensuring things are done right. If you place these functions within a development team, they may lack the expertise or the information to link things more broadly; they may take shortcuts just to simplify their lives but hurt the long-term interests of the project and the organization, not necessarily out of negligence, just because it’s easier to do.

Starting Characteristics of a Good Project Manager

The subject of what makes a good project manager and his/her characteristics are documented broadly in almost every project management literature.  Also, the characteristics are numerous and the combination of attributes differs from person to person and the type of project that needs management.  However, based on my experience, there are some fundamental attributes that distinguishes a project manager that knows what he/she is doing and who can lead a project to success from one that goes through the right motions but results are limited or lacking.

First of all, it is important to note that a project manager has to be a leader, a take-charge person and a negotiator.  Read this short article on selecting or managing quality staff.

The additional attributes that makes a good project manager effective, at the onset, include:

• Ownership mentality - looking at the project as something that they need to do, being conscientious, and ensuring its success and feeling like it's their responsibility.
• What you don't want is someone who is going through the formal project management steps without much thought for what is really necessary and how success can be obtained.
• Is decisive but not stubborn - after having done his/her homework, a good project manager makes the right decisions and communicates it out.  However, should the information be incorrect or not all encompassing, he/she doesn't become defensive and try to push and instill his/her point of view regardless of opposing points of view.
• Develops a project plan - starts the project by planning.  He/she doesn't spend a ton of time doing analysis and trying to figure everything out before a plan can be completed; he/she sets up a structure and continuously modifies and improves on it over time.
• Starts with a context model - determines the scope and boundaries of a project by looking at the highest level of known information and the entities (people, organizations, systems, etc.) involved.  A context model sets in motion what is in and what is out and what are all the interactions and touch points of the main issue/project.
• Does not use jargon - works with simple, straight-forward and easily understandable information.
• For instance:  does not use phrases like "stakeholder analysis, subject matter expert assessment, etc."  Instead, emphasizes meeting with the right people to get the right information to move to the next step.
• Is knowledgeable about the key project metrics - knows what the budget total is and how much has been spent to date and knows the timeline and approaching critical milestones.

I am sure there are many other attributes, these serve as initial guidelines for me in determining who is the right person for the job at hand.

Project Respository - Creating a Structure for Project Documentation

When starting a project, one of the first steps is to define a project repository that can effectively collect project documents and can help the entire team in maintaining a productive team and project environment.  There are many ways to create a repository, you can use web-based collaboration tools, one such tool could be Google Docs; you can use sophisticated / developed document management and collaboration technologies, one such tool is Microsoft SharePoint; or you can use a simple directory structure.  Here I will give some examples of using a directory structure since that can be used by almost anyone in any work environment; the structure can be applied to more sophisticated solutions as well.

Regardless of what method you use, you need some fundamental guidelines for using and maintaining a quality respository:

• Guideline 1:  The project manager is the "owner" of the repository and ultimately responsible for the quality and content.  For large projects a "repository owner/manager" can be designated.
• Guideline 2:  The repository's use must be required for ALL team members.
• Guideline 3:  Some level of standards must be applied to ensure consistency.
• Guideline 4:  In each directory and sub-directory, add a "_readme.txt" file that describes how to use the sturcture.  This way the instructions to maintain consistency are easily available.

Option 1: One approach is to create a structure that mimics the existing or defined project management methodology that is used in your organization.  The benefit of this option is that documents can be stored based on the phase that you are operating under and it will reinforce the method that the project managers should use.  The drawback of this option is that the structure might not be very intuitive for people to work with.

Option 2: Another approach is to organize the documents based on a set of standard documents that are created during the project life-cycle.  The structure can be modified to include or remove certain groupings.  However, the high-level groupings / directory names would be consistent from project to project.  The benefit of this option is that it is easier for project managers to work with during the project life cycle.  The drawback can be that over time, the grouping and conventions might sway from the original intent.

A readme file, for instance, could say something like:

business_case directory is used for:

- project justification/feasibility assessment
- cost-benefit analysis or return on investment
- overall plan/timeline/etc.
- pros and cons
- decisions

Keep your naming conventions / standards simple, clear and easy to use, for instance:

1) Use all lower case letters with underscores to separate words. This will allow for easy copy/paste/publish on multiple platforms, e.g., WebServers, UNIX machines, Windows, etc.

Example:

name_qualifier

meeting_agenda_minutes

2) Keep names short and descriptive: 8 characters to 25 characters (if possible)


3) Whenever possible, add the project acronym to the file names for easy searching, retrieval and grouping.
Example:

[acronym]_[file_or_directory_name]
hr_requirements
hr_designs
hr_training

dw = data warehouse
dw_requirements
dw_rfp
dw_designs
dw_training
dw_business_case


4) For date-specific files/information (e.g., meeting agendas and minutes), use the format:

[yyyymmdd]_name
Example: 20070113_design_mtg_agenda

Whatever method works best for you, use it consistently, improve it over time and establish some simple guidelines so people know what to do and how.

What's the Most Important First Step in Starting a Project?

Q: When you are asked to do a project, what is the first key step that needs to be taken to set the project on the right course?

A: Governance - a sustainable decision-making board

There are many first things that can be done, such as, writing a charter, defining the scope, etcetera; however, projects start moving without much attention to who are all the key stakeholders and how they need to interact:

• The champion / executive sponsor - one who can make or break the project
• Project sponsor - one who really needs the project
• Project manager - one who gets it done
• Steering committee - key, responsible stakeholders who help with evaluating issues and making decisions to guide the project and the project manager
• Other stakeholders - people who are dependent or going to be seriously impacted by the new project and could through up roadblocks
• Various processes are needed too, for instance:
• defining the roles and responsibilities and clearly communicating the expectations to the people involved;
• what information to collect and report, how often i.e., status reporting;
• defining a decision-making process;
• defining a conflict resolution process, etc.

If you don't spend some time setting this all up at the beginning stages of a project, the project starts to go in various directions without good focus, you hash and rehash the same types of issues, progress is slow, you start to encounter problems throughout various phases - for example questions like these are raised: "what is the project about; what are they doing; why isn't it getting done; why aren't we involved; etc.".  Also, resourcing becomes a problem and ultimately the project manager's life becomes increasingly difficult.

What Are the Challenges with Project Management in the Government Sector?

Why is it so difficult to manage projects in government?  From my experience, I would say that the private sector and public sector fall into two groupings in terms of how you need to manage projects and expectations. In the private sector, egos are big…you need to be conscious about this or you can get in trouble. In the public sector, bureaucracy is big…you have to be patient and expect to churn; know that many decisions made are tied to some underlying political issues that may not even relate to your project.

Other specific reasons that make it difficult to manage projects in government include:

• Strategic planning and alignment is nonexistent or very limited – they either think they have it covered or don't need it,
• Usually there is no dedicated champion or one that can last for the duration of the project – leadership turnover is constant and many are political appointees so they either lack certain technical skills or are loyal to someone else's agenda or looking out for their next position,
• Governance and decision making is cumbersome and very political – lots of covering your behind and checking the "Checkers". Also, an unwillingness to make tough, risky decisions, many times making decisions through management by committee,
• The discipline of project management is non-existent or immature if it exists – formal project methodology is missing, many don’t see the value of project management, project planning is considered “cumbersome and a waste of time”; Project Management Offices (PMOs), if they exist, are hardly what you would expect, maybe 30%-50% of a mature PMO process is in place...and so on,
• Funding is limited or non-existent; some feel projects will just get done and funded by someone else,
• You can't easily define ownership or enforce accountability,
• No one really thinks of the necessary resources to support ongoing operations, support, maintenance, etc. once a program or system is put in place,
• There is tremendous weakness in execution,
• The procurement process is complicated and can results in poor decisions – sometimes too "formula driven", so if the formula doesn't take into account all the variables, then your decision is based on limited information,
• ...just to name a few issues...

The key to success on projects in government is: (a) starting with a self-driven personality, (b) patience, and (c) starting projects by establishing a sound governance process and working through all of these issues over time, systematically developing consent for project deliverables; setting realistic expectations - "under promising but over delivering".