Monday, 31 August 2009 00:00

A Portfolio of Processes

Rate this item

(0 votes)

Many companies have some form of a portfolio management group to manage their projects and their backlog. The projects they govern range from network pulls to new software development. However, most use only one methodology to run these projects. It may be waterfall, Agile, Critical Chain or some other process. This is analogous to having only one knife in the kitchen. Anyone that has cooked more than a few meals realizes that a table knife is insufficient for all your kitchen needs. It purees tomatoes, cuts meat poorly, fails at filleting fish and suffers as a steak knife. There are hundreds of knives, each designed to do some specific job. As with many jobs, some tools are better than others are for certain tasks.

So why do so many companies use only one methodology for running projects? Each methodology has its own value. If the project is to pull network cable or to do a software upgrade, something where the requirements are well defined, it makes sense to use classic waterfall processes. However, if the assignment is to build a new system, one where the users are unsure of exactly what they will need, then they should use Agile.

If the project is longer and requires sharing resources within and between projects, one that is well defined, but the timeline needs to come in as far as possible, then use Critical Chain. Use different knives to cut through different types of projects. This is simply a matter of applying the correct project management tools appropriate to the situation at hand.

Even in a project recovery, many of the concepts of Agile and Critical Chain are very valuable in getting failed projects back on track to deliver value to both the customer and the supplier.

Failed projects can benefit from one aspect of both of these without the subject of methodology ever being broached—dedicating resources. When a project starts to fail, managers relent to dedicating resources to tasks. The reason is that the project is now a higher priority. Since this works so well, why not do it all that time? The people doing the work know they are far more efficient if they are left to do their task, uninterrupted by meetings and tasks for other projects. Managers must know this since they approve it for high-priority and failing projects. Therefore, it is baffling why this is not done all the time.

Most managers have learned the most effective way to build customer trust and team morale is to deliver something the customer can play with. A prototype of some feature, something with buttons to push or screens to ogle, brings vitality to the project a sense of esprit de corps. It gets projects moving and starts to break down the fears, angst and mistrust. It also starts reprioritizing requirements. Once the features are seen, their relative value is more apparent. What was once important is no long needed and the unimportant is critical. Getting something tangible to the customer calms the project, gains trust and stabilizes the scope.

Apply this in the beginning and the problems may have never occurred. It takes a chef in the project office’s kitchen with the expertise to grab and use the right tools as the recipes are being assigned to the staff. This will keep the projects from falling into the ugly abyss of failure.

Read 8517 times

Tagged under

Related items

People vs Process Track Session/Keynote Example

<p>Sorry, your browser cannot display frames!</p>

If you want educational keynote many of our presentations can be keynotes or track sessions. In the example below, the presentation People or Process: Which Impacts Project Success More? is given as a track session.

Example People vs Process keynote as a track session

This session was given at the PMI Sioux Empire Professions Development Day help in Sioux Falls SD on September 9, 2014.
Transform Your Project Leadership: For Professionals Leading Projects or Company Initiatives
Todd Williams contributed Chapter 7, "Leaders Listen." You can buy it on Amazon.

More coming soon!
Filling Execution Gaps: How Executives and Project Managers Turn Corporate Strategy into Successful Projects

What Filling Execution Gaps Covers

Filling Execution Gaps

by Todd C. Williams
ISBN: 978-1-5015-0640-6
De G Press (DeGruyter), September 2017

Project alignment, executive sponsorship, change management, governance, leadership, and common understanding. These six business issues are topics of daily discussions between executives, middle management, and project managers; they are the pivotal problems plaguing transformational leadership. Any one of these six, when improperly addressed, will hex a project's chances for success. And, they do—daily—destroying the ability companies to turn vision into value.

Check it out on Amazon or the Filling Execution Gaps website

Without the foundation of a common understanding of goals and core concepts, such as value being critical to success, communication stops and projects fail.

Without change management, users fail to adopt project deliverables, value is lost, and projects fail.

Without maintaining alignment between corporate goals and projects, projects miss their value targets and projects fail.

Without an engaged executive sponsor, scope increases, goals drift, chaos reigns, value is lost, and projects fail.

Without enough governance, critical connections are not made, steps are ignored, value is overlooked, and projects fail.

Too much governance slows progress, companies cannot respond to business pressures, value drowns in bureaucracy, and projects fail.

Without strong leadership defining the vision and value, goals are not set, essential relationships do not form, teams do not develop, essential decisions are not made, and projects fail.
Filling Execution Gaps: Building Success-Focused Organizations

Executives define vision, strategy, and goals to advance the business. Projects enable companies to meet those goals. Between strategy and projects, there is a lot of work to be done—work that lays the foundation for project and operational success. Through experience and research, six common gaps exist in organizations that inhibit project success—an absence of common understanding, disengaged executive sponsors, misalignment with goals, poor change management, ineffective governance, and lackluster leadership.
Get Recognized as a Leader: Four Core Leadership Actions

Leaders make decisions. This requires a core set of actions to gather the best information, hear out the concerns of others, and making a decision that everyone will follow—even if there is not unanimous agreement with the decision. Although there are hundreds of actions leaders must take, there are four core actions that all great leaders do—listening, dialog and discussion, selling a vision, and eliminating blame. This session will discuss those actions in a roundtable format that we call a "What Would You Do?" session. In these sessions, the presenter acts as a moderator spending 10 to 15 minutes per topic working with the audience talking about what the action is, how to best do it, and hearing from the group on how they have carried out the action. This brings significant audience interaction, involvement, and broader education.