To be fair i’ve been pretty busy last year and this year seems to be going in the same direction.

I ended the year with a great landmark as I passed the mark of 1000 people trained since i started training PRINCE2.
That makes me very happy.  

PRINCE2 is also growing nicely in France and this year will mark a definite growth of the french market.  
In fact we are not far away from a french version of the manual being printed. 
I’ll keep you informed.

Have a great year 2008 full of great projects.

Take care and keep in touch.

john higham 

Please login to access that part of our site and download our highly acclaimed PRINCE2 Memo Chart.

If you have not done so, you will need to register for an account :

Register here

Registration to our site is FREE now and will remain so.

Thank you for visiting our site.

john higham

DO remember that projects are about change. A quote from John Barnfield of Reading Borough Council in a recent article about a project case study is, “Change frightens people and they need to understand what you are doing, why you are doing it and how it affects them.”

DO get top management support. This has to include sufficient training for top management that they understand their responsibilities.
DON’T exclude the management of the customers or recipients of the results of projects from this education. Another John Barnfield comment is, “Our experiences highlighted that some early doubters became accepted users of the methodologies once misunderstandings and early fears were identified and corrected.” He also said, “Lengthy, detailed presentations are inappropriate at senior level. Concentrate on the benefits for them and how they will be directly affected.”

DON’T skimp on training Project Managers in the method.
DON’T assume that, having given the training, all projects will run smoothly.

DO ensure that there is a sensible business case for a project – and monitor project progress against that business case.

Be prepared to stop the project if the business case for it disappears.

If you are senior management, DON’T think that you have passed all responsibility for a project to the Project Manager.

The appropriate representatives of senior management, representing business, users of the final product and suppliers of the development effort, should have ultimate responsibility for a project. The Project Manager presents information about progress, accomplishments, changes, risk, quality and business case status at key points, but the decision to stop or continue rests with this directing body. The Office of Government Commerce recently commented on work done by the Cheshire Constabulary, “The overriding message that emerges from reading this case study is that the Cheshire Constabulary was able to achieve senior level commitments to the adoption of (a project management method), which gave credibility and visibility to the way the major change programmes were to apply the approach. We know from experience that this commitment is crucial to an on-going improvement programme in project delivery capability.”

DON’T assume that if you are the Project Manager of a medium-to-large project you can combine project management with performing a technical job for most of your time. Project management takes time. The bigger the number of staff, the more time is needed for co-ordination, work allocation, monitoring, planning, controlling changes, risks, quality, reporting, and so on. I remember being asked by one new Project Manager why he had to work until 7.00 o’clock most evenings just to keep up with his plan, which had seemed very reasonable when he set it out. We had a look at his plan and, sure enough, there he was, 100% dedicated to the most difficult technical jobs. He had not allowed himself any time for updating the plan, checking how all the staff were performing, reporting to senior management, holding team meetings, making telephone calls, being interrupted, and so on. Even in a small project the Project Manager must dedicate some of the time to actually doing the project management job. In a medium-to-large project the project management job quickly becomes full-time.

DO remember that quality does not look after itself, just because you are paying high wages to attract the best staff. You need to know at the outset what the customer’s quality expectations are. These are not always “The product must never fail, must be easy to use and be a tremendous advance on what we have today”, but whatever they are, it is important to clarify them at the outset. Let me give you two examples.

Many years ago I was ready to take a job with a telecommunications company who were about to win a major project to set up a packet-switching network in Australia. Suddenly, some intelligent person working for the customer realised that most of the network would run across the desert middle of Australia, and therefore any faults would be costly and lengthy to repair. So the invitation to tender was withdrawn and reappeared with quality requirements that said the mean time between failure of any hardware or software product was to be four years. This was backed up with penalty clauses. The telecommunications company looked at their development plans and realised that they did not contain production and testing standards that would guarantee the required level of quality. In the end they decided not to bid for the contract as they felt there was a risk of failing to meet the quality criteria.

The second example comes from an oil company. An exploration party had returned from South America with data from a seismic survey. There was very little time left in their exploration contract with that government, and they needed to know very quickly whether the data showed the likelihood of gas or oil reserves. The results were to be studied by scientists, so their quality criteria were speed and accuracy. It didn’t have to be easy to use and its useful life was just the one use and then throw it away.

Two radically different approaches to quality expectations, but they make a great difference to how the product is developed. I remember one lecturer saying, “Quality is like carpet underlay. It prolongs the life of the product, but it’s very difficult to put in after the event.” Once you have defined the quality expectations, you have to plan how to achieve that level of quality, including identifying which standards, tools and personnel you need, then you need to identify in detail how that quality is to be checked and what records of the quality work need to be kept. You can guarantee that if time or bonuses come under pressure, the first unofficial (i.e. without your knowledge) avenue for time saving will be to cut down on quality work. Your project management method must have enough checks and balances in it to ensure that this does not happen.

I particularly like a comment that came from the Cheshire Constabulary – “There is an understanding that projects are like ‘silly putty’. If you squeeze them in one place, they will expand somewhere else, and people are encouraged to talk scope and risk, rather than just cope, which is the natural tendency.”

Filing sounds like a boring topic, hardly relevant to good, dynamic, thrusting project management! But DO support project management with a standard filing structure. It can bring many benefits, including less frustration when you can’t find a document that you want, or you suddenly realise that you or someone in the project is working from an obsolete version of a document. Here is what Reading Borough Council has to say. “Standards for a corporate filing area applicable to all Project Managers were established. This includes a standard folder structure with a ‘copy and paste’ facility to allow anyone to establish the required hierarchy quickly and easily…. (Wide viewing capability) allows people to learn from other projects.”

DO remember that a move to working with a project management method will not happen overnight. John Barnfield observed, “Be realistic in your expectations. Change like this does not happen overnight, however well you promote it. Culture change can take 3-5 years.” Once you recognise this, you will be ready for the next ‘don’t’ – DON’T expect everyone to have the same enthusiasm for the approach (as you).”

Here are some other comments from three case studies. These happen to be from companies that have implemented PRINCE2 as their project management method, but you should be looking for the same benefits from any other structured method.

In answer to the question, “What have been the major benefits of using PRINCE2”, the Cheshire Constabulary said “We could not have delivered such extensive business change without a structured approach and the strong business involvement in the process.” When looking at the difficulties encountered, they said, “Most of the difficulties were one step removed from the method itself and were difficulties we would have had even if we were not using PRINCE2, i.e. projects mean change and change itself can be difficult for some people.” As far as drawbacks went, the comment was, “Some people at grass roots level who perhaps can’t see the whole picture perceive it as an overhead. People who are carrying responsibility for project see PRINCE2 as an investment. It’s an overhead in the way oil is to an engine – without a structured approach the business change projects would grind to a halt.”

The use of a structured project management method by Reading Borough Council resulted in the following statements of the benefits achieved:
“The (project management method) ensures that each project has to be justified by a business case, which is open to on-going scrutiny to ensure that objectives are going to be met. If not, the project can be stopped before further resources and expenditure are wasted.”

“Efficiency is improved, which links well to the Best Value regime, because:
there is a common approach and language for managing change the common approach is easily understood and communicated staff can be interchanged easily project documentation is easy to access there is a good mechanism for passing on lessons learned problem projects are more easily identified risks are identified and managed.”

“Staff recruitment and retention are improved because a structured approach provides a career qualification path for Project Managers and Programme Managers.”

“Management by exception reduces input required by senior management without them feeling that they lose control and there are clear lines of accountability.”

“The approach facilitates audit and is supported by external auditors.”

“Stakeholder and corporate communication and control are improved by good working links into existing corporate management processes.”

I hope that this brief note encourages others to examine their approach to projects and, as the song says, “accentuate the positive, eliminate the negative.”

Summary

Implement the introduction of a project management method from the top down. Senior management must be involved and supporting the use.

Don’t skimp on training – for all levels of staff, including senior management. Consider the use of a consultant expert in the method to advise on roll-out of the method to existing projects and its use on that important first project.

Remember that a valid business case should be the driving force for any project. Make sure that it’s there before a project starts and continue to check its survival throughout the life of the project.

Remember that project management is a job, not just a title. It takes time and resource. It may seem like an overhead, but it will yield more successful projects if done properly.

Don’t use a sledgehammer to crack a walnut. The project management method you select should be tailorable and flexible to fit any size of project. Just like the old Erasmic shaving soap; not too little, not too much, but just right!

Do ensure that you find out what the quality expectations are at the beginning of a project and build in the necessary quality standards, work and checking to provide a quality product. Remember the motto – Get it right first time.
Projects mean change. That means that there will be opposition and fear. People skills will be needed outside the scope of the project staff.

Colin Bentley

We are changing quite a few things here at PMguru.com.

Mainly because we are aware of the growing need for web security and also we like finding new ways to present content.

Not only the look and feel of the site has been improved but we hope that the whole experience of our site will make each visit more useful and increase membership.

We hope every visitor and each user will experience better performance and enhanced useability on the site.

We are also preparing for growth in terms of content.
We will have guest appearances of big names in the industry who will now and then bring an insight of their experience and share tips and tools with us right here on our PMguru.com site.

looking forward to meeting you here.

john higham
PMguru.com

we’ll bring you all the pictures and all the gossip.

follow this link carefully to be given the main info of that major event in France.

john higham
PMguru.com

First, one has to realize that PRINCE2 is recommended, not mandated. There is an English saying that ‘you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink’. Similarly, although PRINCE2 is available to them, not all government projects make use of it. When we look at establishments which either have or had close ties to government, such as police departments, public utilities (water, electricity, railways), we find PRINCE2 adopted and many very successful projects being the result. But in government there are many departments that don’t currently use the method.

There are many reasons for the (relative) failure of some government projects. Let’s have a look at a number of these.

First, politicians do not always take kindly to the discipline of PRINCE2 or any project management method that requires them to identify all their requirements at the beginning of the project – and then stick to those requirements. Too often they like to announce to the public that they have started a project to react immediately to a perceived problem – usually one that has just received some adverse publicity in the media. One example was the reaction some years ago in England to adverse publicity about the disease affecting coal miners who got coal dust in their lungs. A feasibility study was rushed through and the project was launched with a budget suitable to the cost forecast in the feasibility. Before long it was realized that the equipment required would cost far more than originally thought and the whole project was restarted with a more realistic budget. The problem then was that the responsible minister had already announced in parliament that the pension scheme for these miners would be ready by date x, and there was no way he was prepared to say publicly that this would be delayed. So everything else, such as cost and quality had to be sacrificed in order to meet the deadline. Luckily this project was run under PRINCE2, so all the impacts, options – and cause of the change – were documented and the project limped through to some semblance of success. The difficulty is caused by – in this case – ministers liking the feel of power and the good publicity of announcing a date by which they have ordained that a solution to a problem will be available. (This also happens in private business).

Linked to this is the problem that politicians, for similar reasons, like to change their minds, and we know what that does to important project items such as target dates and cost. Changing their minds about requirements – usually adding, rather than taking requirements away – is not always matched by a willingness to make appropriate changes to budget and we have already mentioned the reluctance to amend target dates. I was consulting in a government project when we met to discuss the Project Initiation Document. One point that worried us was that the Project Plan slightly exceeded the cost tolerance – set again on the basis of a brief feasibility study. The Executive replied that he had already had one fight with the minister in order to obtain the budget that had been forecast in the feasibility study, and he wasn’t about to go back and ask for more!

I was asked recently to Team Manage the delivery of the major product of a project. The Project Manager, working for a quasi-governmental establishment, had produced a Stage Plan without any reference to me. When I estimated the work, it lasted 3 weeks longer than the Stage Plan. When I pointed this out, I discovered that the target date had been set in order to meet a government deadline, nothing to do with how much work was involved.

Another major reason for the failure of some government projects is the lack of understanding of the PRINCE2 concepts. One military project was handed down to the Fleet Air Arm. It was a small project, but the issuing body was insisting that there must be at least one person identified for each PRINCE2 role in the project management team. It was very nice to have PRINCE2 mandated, but this was not accompanied by any real understanding of PRINCE2, such as the philosophy of tailoring the organization structure, combining roles.

One point about government projects that we mustn’t ignore is that the users tend to be a very large body, i.e. the general public, and it is almost impossible to get agreement on what is needed from such a diverse set of users.

One point that always comes to my mind – although I am accused of being too cynical – is that in government project people are not spending their own money. Those developing the solution tend to be external suppliers and their view of the public’s purse (and that of a number of people in government or public service) is very different to those of the general public. Add this to the tendency to write vague statements of requirement or changes of mind on what is required and you have a recipe for project disaster.

I mentioned that there are government departments that do not use PRINCE2. One department insisted for a long time in continuing its use of a variation of the original method from which PRINCE2 came.

Although PRINCE2 was a major improvement and contained many new features, we were up against that old enemy, reluctance to change; the worry of having to relearn. So, although PRINCE2 is owned by the U.K. government, not all of its employees use the method.
Many managers are ‘too busy’ to learn it and, of course, PRINCE2’s philosophy is that the Project Board carries ultimate responsibility for a project – not a point appreciated by a number of people in these positions of responsibility.

Colin Bentley