PMI Global Congress, Denver, CO

Chuck’s Snippets 9.0; page 1 of 10

Chuck Millhollan,

October 20 - 21, 2008

Friends and Colleagues,

Welcome to “Chuck’s Snippets 9.0!”

I have included highlights of the workshops I attended during the PMI Global Congress held in Denver, Colorado.

If you are interested in discussing any of the specific topics and/or speakers in more detail, please feel free to contact me.

Previous “Chuck’s Snippets:”

Version 1.0: Project World; Orlando, FL; Nov 2006

Version 2.0: Regional Project World; Boston, MA; Jun 2007

Version 3.0: Northeast Florida PMI Regional Seminar; Nov 2007

Version 4.0: National Project World & World Congress for Business Analysts, Nov 2007

Version 5.0: Nashville PMI 2008 Spring Symposium, Apr 2008

Version 6.0: Southwest Ohio PMI Professional Development Mega Event, Apr 2008

Version 7.0: Regional Project World & World Congress for Business Analysis, Jun 2008

Version 8.0: TampaBay PMI Symposium, Sep 2008

My standard disclaimer: While I believe all of the content of the attached summary is extremely valuable, I do not fully accept each premise or believe that all of the concepts would fully apply in every organizational environment. However, these basic principles of effective management, leadership, and project management are definitely worthwhile contributions to our professional development.

Remember…if you do not want me to send you these summaries, slap me down electronically, and I’ll remove you from the distribution list.

Speakers: Janice Thomas, PhD, AthabascaUniversity & Mark Mullaly, PMP, Interthink Consulting Corporation

Topic: The Value of Project Management (PMI Sponsored Research)

Chuck’s comments: Their presentation was largely focused on the research approach and provided anecdotal conclusions, but there are some nuggets of gold in their findings.
The research proposed that the primary building blocks of value provided by our profession are centered in the following five elements:
Satisfaction – This includes not only customer satisfaction generated as a result of a customer (product and/or service) focus, but also internal satisfaction from a structured approach to clearly defining project scope, coordinating activities, resource allocation, etc… These internal sources of satisfaction tend to imply mid-level leadership within the organization (resource management and project management), but also included levels of satisfaction from senior leadership surveys.
Aligned use of practices – Leveraging the basic quality concept that you cannot realize the full benefits of a process, or improve that process, unless that process is “in control,” one of the value propositions for project management is the definition and facilitation of a structured approach to managing corporate initiatives. The underlying assumption in this value driver is that the methodology applies best practices appropriate for the specific organization on a consistent basis across all projects.
Process improvements – Building on the aligned use of practices, once a process is in control (or being applied consistently), you can identify opportunities for improving the process. The focus must be to improve the project management methodology in such a way to enhance the end-to-end management of projects. Often, this requires eliminating unnecessary steps, modifying current practices that were originally based on an “out-of-the-box” methodology, etc…
Outcome improvements – Aligned use of practices and a proactive approach to improving the project management processes should naturally lead to improved project outcomes. Remember, the PMO…or governing body for organizational project management resources, must implement a method for measuring project performance to demonstrate outcome improvements.
ROI – This assumes that projects are evaluated for benefit and that the organization has a defined process for measuring expected return on investment. Without a structured, centralized method for managing an organization’s investments in projects, it is difficult (if not impossible) to fully understand the costs associated with delivery. Effective project management practices provide a comprehensive decision support system that includes project costs, impacts of changes on expected benefits, etc…to help realize the true return on investment. There was an assumption that the organization has a process to estimate life-cycle costing for projects that include the ongoing cost of operations in the ROI analysis.
Tangible benefits of project management
Cost savings – The primary source of the cost savings benefit was a proactive planning approach to projects. This concept highlights the fact that changes made on paper are significantly less expensive to correct that changes made during execution (or rework).
Revenue increases – If benefits remain constant and costs decrease, the result is an increase in revenue (or benefit).
Customer retention – While this is a measurable benefit, the speakers did not provide the details to link customer retention directly to project management. I’ll be interested to see the support in the full white paper.
Increased customer share – Again, the direct link between project management and increased market share was not apparent in the presentation. Similar to customer retention, my guess is that these proposed benefits are heavily influenced by other organizational processes (such as sales, customer support, product support, etc…).
Intangible benefits of project management: Although these benefits cannot be measured in a quantifiable way, the research with senior executives indicated that these are some of the most valued (and commonly identified) paybacks associated with investments in project management.
Development of a common language – This benefit is partially realized through developing common project related terminology throughout the organization, and the benefit is increased when there is dedicated training and familiarization for everyone that is impacted by project management processes (from senior sponsors and stakeholder to project team members).
Projects are formed (requested and approved) on a common basis, structured (managed) in a standard way, and presented (information distribution, status reporting, etc…) in a recognized format. This gives senior decision makers the ability to compare apples-to-apples and saves time as stakeholders become more familiar with the structured approach to projects.
The research identified several potential barriers that will not only prevent value realization, but also destroy the perception of value if not proactively addressed.
Inconsistent alignment of need – Simply put, are processes, policies, etc…being applied consistently. If some departments, some sponsors, etc…are not required to follow the structured approach to project requests, selection, and management, there will be a tendency for other departments within the organization to bypass the structure when it does not serve their needs.
Changes in responsibility for driving and leading implementation – Similar to when a project looses sponsorship, when the senior leader that supports a structured approach to managing projects leaves an organization, the incentive to follow the processes can quickly atrophy. The best way to prevent loosing support is to ensure you’re regularly demonstrating the value of project management.
Over-implementation or over-bureaucratization – Do not implement process for the sake of process. If the processes, templates, etc…do not add identifiable value and/or increase the likely hood of project success, then target those processes for evaluation and potential elimination.
Lack of attention, focus, maintenance and will – This tends to happen when external consultants are brought in to define an organization’s project management methodology or implement a project portfolio management system. Once the consultants end their engagement, the dedication to the process and/or system leaves with them. Organizations must make a dedicated effort to fully transfer the consultant’s work into operations prior to the end of the engagement, which will generally take the addition of resources to manage the system and develop subject matter expertise. The ongoing resource demand is the most overlooked requirement with these implementations. It becomes someone’s collateral responsibility and that resource does not have the time and/or incentive to maintain the focus on leveraging the processes or system.
(Chuck’s comment: In my humble opinion, the following comment was the most salient finding in the research.) Regardless of an organization’s level of maturity as related to project management, the most significant value is realized from consistent application of the simplest, most fundamental project management techniques and approaches, such as defining scope, chartering projects, integrated change control, task lists, etc...
As organizations, and their project management methodologies and processes, mature, the continued value comes from critical judgment…not just maturing standard processes. Organizations, and project managers, need to recognize the need to adapt and evolve with the factors that are influencing the business and associated processes. The role and promotion of standards in managing projects needs to be revisited on a regular basis (not always changed, but evaluated for value contribution).
Standards and certifications are simply a starting point for the value proposition of our profession, not the end. The skills most valued in “high value-attaining” organizations is the ability to address complexity and apply the concepts of critical thinking.

Speaker: Glenn Strausser, MBA, PMP & Joseph Sopko, MSEE, PMP, MSP, OPM-3, Siemens Corporation Technology

Topic: Case Study for Improving Organizational Project Management Maturity

The goals of improving project management maturity involve more than completing a checklist to demonstrate you meet a documented standard, such as OPM-3 or CMMI. Ultimately, the goals of maturing your methodology should focus on more predictable delivery and less risk exposure.
To get a real understanding of your maturity level, evaluate the theory vs your organization’s practices.
What are your defined procedures (documented guidelines) and what happens during actual application? Is your methodology, as defined, aligned with implementation practices? It is not always the implementation practices that need to change.
Compare your templates to actual documents. Are the templates utilized as intended? Why or why not? It may be time to modify your templates to match reality or train to why certain elements are necessary to increase delivery predictability and reduce risk. Anecdotal evidence and/or justifications are not enough. Provide hard evidence of the necessity for using templates (or following processes), preferable organization specific examples.
Understand the link between your organization’s business strategy, your project objectives and the associated benefit realization.
Improvements in your project management methodology are “business” changes, not just process changes. Remember that you must apply the concepts of change management to facilitate acceptance and adoption of change.
If you are not going to improve or change something, do not survey and/or assess for improvement opportunities. This same concept applies to conducting lessons learned sessions and then not applying the “lessons.” Asking for input and then ignoring that input (intentionally or not) will have a negative impact on production and morale and will eventually impede contributions.
The PMO is the ideal organization to facilitate the measurements to demonstrate benefit realization. If theses tasks are left to the business units that defined the projected benefits for project approval, there will be a natural bias in the measurements.
The average “as-is” lifespan of a PMO is 2 – 3 years. Most PMOs restructure within 2 years of creation and every couple of years thereafter. To ensure the viability of your PMO, focus on demonstrating the value provided to the organization. If you cannot quantify how the PMO, or project management, contributes to organizational goals, you can be confident that senior decision makers in the organization cannot either.

Speaker: James Pennypacker, Director, PM Solutions Center for Business Practices

Topic: Resource Optimization: The Most Significant Challenge to Project Management Effectiveness

The primary challenges to resource allocation (in order of impact) are:
Not enough appropriately skilled resources – Project duration estimates tend to be made by subject matter experts; however, project resource assignments are generally made based on availability. Remember, availability is not a skill. It is the project manager’s job to ensure duration estimates are updated when actual resources are assigned. These estimates should be conducted by the resource performing the work. An analysis on the impact of duration changes to the project schedule should be conducted and the results used to validate or update schedules, negotiate for alternate resources, or (at a minimum) communicate expected impacts to stakeholders.
Resource utilization is not optimized – Having the right resource, with the right skill set, with the right amount of availability, on the right task takes a coordinated effort between the project manager and the resource manager.
Project & functional priorities are not aligned – In a matrix environment, the resource manager’s priority will usually trump the project manager’s priorities. The most effective project managers develop a strong relationship with resource managers and ensure they are effectively communicating project priories and understanding functional priority conflicts.
Unrealistic deadlines – There are several causal factors associated with unrealistic deadlines. For example…
We generally know when a project is due before we fully understand the scope and deliverables.
The resources available do not have the skill to complete the work in the duration estimated (See 1.a. above).
The assigned resources have multiple competing priorities and only a portion of their bandwidth is dedicated to your project.

In each of these cases, it is the project manager’s responsibility to identify and communicate the impacts, recommend solutions, and communicate the risks to delivery.

Resource planning best practices
Management clearly understands their responsibility to provide the resources required. Remember, the project manager is generally the first leader to understand the true resource requirements and the impact to delivery. Management understanding their responsibility is only half the equation.
Develop and maintain activity lists that identify scheduled activities and the associated resource requirements. Chuck’s comment: This is PM 101! We cannot plan for resource requirements if we’re not doing the fundamentals consistently.
Project staff requirements are effectively negotiated with functional managers and/or other project managers. This requires that project managers developed their interpersonal skills and develop relationships with not only the resource managers, but also their peers.
Resource planning worst practices (not bad…just the least used)
Resource career plans – It is a best practice to have resource (individual) career plans and ensure their project assignments are aligned with career goals, contribute to growth and development, etc…
Staffing management plans – Detailed plans that describe when and how resource requirements will be met.
Barriers to effective resource planning
Lack of information on the scope of work, which prevents accurate resource planning as related to the number of resources, specific skill sets required, duration estimates, etc…
Using Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) for effort estimating. This can provide a skewed estimate if the actual assigned resource is not as experienced and capable as the SME used during estimating.
Lack of understanding of the project critical path activities, which can lead to ineffective resource management as resources are taken off of critical activities and moved to non-critical activities simply because task-level dates are slipping. The squeaky wheel does not always need the grease…

Speaker: Don Wessels, PMP, Management Concepts

Topic: The Collision of Strategic Project Management & Business Analysis

Chuck’s comment: Don focused on how the IIBA (International Institute of Business Analysis), their CBAP (Certified Business Analysis Professional) certification, and the BABOK (Business Analyst Body of Knowledge) are encroaching on areas traditionally claimed by the PMI and the PMBOK. My take is that the CBAP is addressing a gap that our professional community has identified for years as a primary contributor to project failure; incomplete and/or insufficient requirements. As the business analyst (BA) role evolves, their role will overlap many of the traditional project management responsibilities. I believe that the two roles can co-exist and collaborate to increase the probability of project success through pre-project business process analysis, project requirements definition, and ongoing system/business process support as projects are transitioned into operations. But hey…I’m an eternal optimist.
The current BA role evolved out of necessity from the system analyst role as the need for business process focus increased; however, the overwhelming majority of BA roles are still IT driven and directed “inside” of IT systems.
The two primary sources of organizational work that produces value are the management of authorized projects and the management of ongoing operations. Project management has historically drawn the line of responsibility at product/service delivery. The BA role straddles both work streams.
In strategic project management, the term “strategic” is added to give rise to a new focus on strategic alignment for capital investments and management of the organization’s project portfolio versus the traditional project management focus on project delivery (on schedule, on budget, and within scope).
Tactical project management (or the current emphasis of the PMBOK) is the set of tools, techniques, processes, and skills required to manage a project from initiation to close-out.
An organization’s project portfolio is made up of the following components:
Strategic projects – Enterprise initiatives dedicated to growing revenue streams, generating return on investment, reducing costs, etc…
Business unit projects – Department projects conducted in a silo. These projects may be aligned with strategic objectives, but frequently are not in alignment.
Fix projects – These included large scale investments (in time and/or money), such as system enhancements that provide needed functionality for production systems and maintenance work focused on restoring functionality.
Pet projects – As the name implies, these are projects initiated to deliver on narrow objectives and goals that serve a single, often influential, stakeholder or sponsor group.
Mandated projects – Legislated and/or compliance work.
Current trends indicate that the majority of portfolios have an abundance of effort expended on business unit, fix, and pet projects. Strategic project management proactively helps ensure alignment with organizational investments and strategic intents, which shifts investment focus (hopefully) to strategic projects.
Strategic project management concentrates on more than tactical project management and understands the cradle-to-grave impact of how project work impacts operations. In strategic project management, project level planning includes evaluating the impact to ongoing operations after project delivery, such potential maintenance requirements, support requirements, de-activation, etc… These factors should be considered in the business case to fully understand lifecycle costs and potential benefit. For example, if we add scope to a project, how does delaying the deliver date impact the benefit equation? How does a scope change impact ROI? Are there additional support and training requirements that must be included in the total cost of ownership?
The BA’s knowledge areas fall into the following categories:
Requirements elicitation
Requirements analysis
Requirements specification
Requirements validation
Requirements management

This is a needed focus that bridges the gap from business users and customers to the project team. As mentioned earlier, the primary causes for project failure include lack of user involvement, lack of clear requirements, incomplete or missing requirements, etc…