Search Results for: Role

Role

At the very onset of a given project, one of the most important tasks tat befalls the project management team and or the project management team leader is to do a careful analysis of exactly what the project is going to entail from a personnel standpoint, how many people they will have to assign to the project, and as a result of the answers to each of those questions, what role they will assign to each individual team member,. Specifically speaking, roles refer to the particular defined function that is assigned by the project management team and orthe project management team leader to an individual project team member that they are to specifically undertake. This particular role can be in any number of areas associated with the project, such as day to day activities, conducting specific tests, conducting an completing filing, conducting and or performing inspections, and doing some sort of coding function,.

This term is defined in the 3rd and the 4th edition of the PMBOK.

The Role Of Expert Consultants In Project Management

Tom · Dec 18, 2010 · Leave a Comment

Successful project management is always a team effort. However, sometimes this team isn’t all in house. For larger and more complex projects, it is not unusual for even an experienced project manager to require outside assistance to help with the planning process or to perform some of the work. When is a specialist worth the extra expense?

The Need is Temporary

In some cases, the expert knowledge required is only needed for the project at hand. For example, a project for a large telemarketing organization might be to implement a new suite of software applications for call routing, billing, customer service, etc. The necessary IT leadership resources for such an ambitious project are unlikely to be available on staff. The current IT personnel may be generalists or might have been hired mainly for their familiarity with troubleshooting the existing system.

Creating a full time position to fill this gap can cost much more in terms of total compensation than hiring a consulting firm. An added advantage of sourcing an expert to collaborate with existing team members is that the firm can share responsibility for ensuring a successful project outcome.

The Issue is Complicated

Project management planning is only as good as the information it is based on. In some situations, contracting with an expert to collect data that will be used in scope planning and scheduling makes sense. This might be the case when industry-wide information on a specific topic is needed. An outside consultant with lots of industry networking connections may have a better chance of compiling accurate statistics and other information for use in planning than someone on your staff.

Risk identification is an example of such an area of expertise. A ‘blind spot’ in risk planning can lead to disaster. This type of mistake is particularly likely when historical information is low (e.g. when the current project has little in common with previous projects). A third party risk assessor who does not have a financial stake in any risk protection coverage purchased may be able to offer more accurate insights and strategies.

Potential Problems with Hiring Consultants

There are a number of potential pitfalls to consider before investing in an outside knowledge expert. First, this can represent a significant expense. With a tight budget, it can be difficult to justify hiring a consultant for the planning phase when (in the minds of some stakeholders) no visible work is produced. They may question why you need to pay for advice since you are the project management expert and “should already know all this stuff”. Let the consulting firm share the burden of making the case that their services are necessary and valuable.

Second, bringing in an expert may create friction with your team members. This is especially true if someone on staff feels that they are being passed over in favor of an outsider. A consultant should not be hired unless and until you have fully explored the resources available in house. Acknowledge each team member’s expertise in their field and reward their contributions. Also, make it clear that the role of an adviser is to help out – but that your team will be taking the credit for a job well done.

How has Project Management changed in a Web 2.0 world?

Tom · Jul 1, 2008 · Leave a Comment

The role of a Project management in the past was to coordinate the efforts of a group of individuals working toward a common goal. This was accomplished through a variety of tools, such as teleconferencing, meetings, white board sessions, and printed project status reports. A Project Manager lived with a phone glued to his or her ear.

A Web 2.0 world didn’t change the role of project management, but it did simplify, and in most cases, increase efficiency. A project manager in a Web 2.0 world can conduct meetings via web conference, can create a common project workspace that automatically tracks changes, and can keep a record of conversations via e-mail correspondence. But additional social networking capabilities add the ability to coordinate talent around the globe to focus on a project. So while the project manager may be based in Silicon Valley, he can utilize the talent of a programmer in New York, a marketing maverick in Dallas, a graphic designer in Orlando, and other talent scattered around the world meeting in one portal.

Additionally, with increased globalization, a smart project management team can work during “normal” business owners to solidify concepts, and send the entire project to an outsourced team of MBA’S in India to continue the work, so that when they show up the next morning during “normal” work hours, the project has advanced by a day or more! A Web 2.0 world can increase productivity almost exponentially.

This ability does require a strong hand in the project management team, with superior organization skills, but all of those tools are available online as well.

Total Quality Management (TQM)

Total quality management (TQM) is a project management technique or strategy that is implemented to assure that an awareness of quality is embedded in all phases of the project from conception to completion. Used in industries from manufacturing to aerospace, total quality management requires the careful and consistent review of all phases of a project, and the coordinated effort of all involved. Communication is key to the process. Standards must be developed, procedures well defined, and all involved must follow strict adherence to the plan to assure its success.

The first paradigm of the strategy, “total,” calls for an integrated system of dependent variables. Here, planing is of the utmost importance. In the planing stage obstacles to success can be identified, confronted, and conquered. Procedures for inspection, evaluating, reporting, and rectifying anomalies are established that will assure consistency and quality will be developed and implemented. All parties involved, from workers to management must become familiar with the process and committed to its success.

The second paradigm of the total quality management (TQM) strategy, “quality,” requires that once a standard has been established it must never be violated. This necessitates a certain amount of cross training, so that one party along the chain of project management can spot the errors that might have occurred at a prior stage in the process. This not only assures quality, but also tends to inspire greater commitment and conscientiousness among the individuals involved.

The third paradigm of total quality management (TQM) is management itself. In order to insure success, the strategy must function as a cohesive element that unites the individual efforts of all involved. The system must be managed properly in order to insure the quality of the strategy itself. Therefore, it is the role of project management role to oversee the training of all involved in the process, to ascertain whether or not the process is being strictly adhered to, and to develop and implement corrective measures designed to rectify any problems that might divert the strategy from its ultimate goal: Total quality management.

This term is defined in the 3rd edition of the PMBOK but not in the 4th.

Should Your Organization Have a Project Management Office?

Tom · Mar 19, 2011 · Leave a Comment

Do you have the time and resources to sit down and look at the big picture regarding how your portfolio of projects is managed? Not every organization needs a project management office. But those that do are missing out on some tangible benefits if they fail to put a PMO in place.

PMO vs. PMO

First, it’s important to note that the acronym PMO is often used to refer to a program management office. To find out the difference between project and program management, go here. If you’ve got program management established in your organization, you’ve already reached the level of complexity where a PMO is essential. So, in this post, we’ll just use the term PMO to refer to a project rather than a program management office.

IT Leads the Way In PMOs

Information technology is one of the most common areas where a PMO is implemented. The term “office” in this context refers to a function rather than a physical place (although a location may be set aside as a headquarters for this purpose if needed). The responsibilities of a PMO include:

Developing and administering project management policies, processes, and principles
Providing a centralized view of the full portfolio of projects (past, present, and proposed)
Planning strategically to ensure the highest rate of success for all projects
Determining how to handle resources to serve the needs of multiple, concurrent projects
Assisting, facilitating, and mentoring individual project managers/teams as needed
Collecting and reviewing knowledge gained from each project (managing lessons learned knowledge base)
Analyzing all data to discover areas for improvement in project processes

Who Needs It?

For an organization that only handles one project at a time, having a separate individual or team fulfill the role of the PMO may not be necessary. A project manager could work in concert with upper management (or a consultant) to ensure all the functions listed above are taken care of.

However, organizations that juggle multiple projects should consider creating a PMO. Otherwise, there is a risk that PMs who are better at negotiating for the resources they need will have success while those with less skill/experience will fail. A PMO plays the role of a neutral third party with the final say in determining how projects are administered.

The Numbers Don’t Lie

Research from the Gartner Group indicates that businesses that establish organization-wide project management standards and a PMO might cut project cost overruns by 50%. According to a survey from PricewaterhouseCoopers, it’s hard to pin an exact dollar amount on how much money is saved by having better control and more in-depth information. However, of those companies surveyed, the ones that had their PMO in place the longest tended to report much better rates of success for their projects (a 65% improvement for organizations with a PMO that had been in place for 4 years of more). Since an enormous percentage of projects in the IT industry experience cost and schedule overruns, instituting a long term solution such as a PMO can make good business sense.

Why Is Project Management Benchmarking Important?

Tom · Apr 30, 2011 · 2 Comments

What role do benchmarking metrics play in project management? In the broadest sense, benchmarking is what gives an organization the ability to test and evaluate PM processes and methodology, project outcomes, and the performance of individual project managers. Without this type of oversight, it’s still possible to recognize that projects are failing, going over budget, and running past schedule – you just won’t be able to figure out what to do about it.

Benchmarking Overview

Laurence Nicholson published a report on benchmarking in PM World Today back in 2006 that is still relevant and useful now. You can read it free online here. The focus is geared somewhat toward IT projects, but the same principles Nicholson discusses can easily be adapted to any industry. Here are some takeaway points:

Not every organization can or should use the same metrics for project analysis. Failing to correctly match metrics with real life objectives simply leads to wasted resources with no added value to show for it.
Using a balanced blend of subjective and objective metrics makes sense. Easily measurable factors like cost and time should be weighed alongside more subjective factors like customer satisfaction and team cohesion.
Metrics may be used to determine whether processes are consistent or if there are areas where approved methods are not being used.
Staffing levels and employee engagement are critical to the success of projects. PMs should understand HR metrics that impact project performance and collaborate with HR to increase the quality and availability of project team members.
One of the most often overlooked aspects of project management benchmarking is its role in determining if projects are aligned with larger organizational goals.

Who Uses Project Benchmarking?

Large business enterprises and government agencies that have a well developed project or program management process are more likely to make effective use of benchmarking. Such organizations can be a great resource in providing examples of how benchmarking works. For example, the Department of Energy collaborated with the National Academy of Sciences to publish a report on its own project management processes for educational purposes. Here are some highlights:

Many projects can be broken down into a series of critical decision points requiring approval: mission need, system requirements and alternatives, baseline, implementation, and transition to operations. Benchmarking done at each of these junctures can aid in appropriate decision making.
Goals should be clearly defined, actionable, and measurable. They should have their origin at the organizational level and flow down to the PM level. To aid in goal alignment, similar performance metrics should be used to measure whether goals are being met at both an organizational and project management level.
Data collection is most effective when centered on known sources of accurate, repeatable, and verifiable information (not discounting the fact that subjective data should also be collected and used in benchmarking).
Feedback systems should be in place to promote continuous improvement of all aspects of project management from processes to results.
Benchmarking should be cumulative so that multiple projects can be compared and evaluated to identify larger patterns of performance.