Project Charter

Project Charter

The project charter is one of the most important documents on your project. A well written charter will provide everything project team, the project sponsor, and other prominent stakeholders a good understanding of what the project all about. I found that graduate students struggle and developing a good comprehensive charter. It appears that graduate students struggle with either too much detail or not enough breath for the project to be well defined.

The project charter is typically the document that authorizes project. The development of the project charter can vary significantly depending on the organization chartering the project. The Project Management Institute recommends that the project sponsor should author the project charter and this is the ideal situation. The process of writing the project charter and facilitating input from various stakeholders provides a project sponsor with a good overview of the project and provides a good foundation for conversations with the assigned project manager. Often, it is the project manager facilitates the process of developing the charter and then goes to the project sponsors and other stakeholders to develop a group ownership of the project. This is a great opportunity for the project manager to clearly define the roles of the project sponsor and other major stakeholders in a way that supports the ongoing management of the project.

The components and the depth of the project charter are related to the profile the project. Large complex projects can have a very lengthy and detailed project charter, while less complex projects might have a one or two page charter. The Project Management Institute recommends the following:

·         Project purpose; why is this project authorize? What will it accomplish?

·         Project goals and a description of how these goals will be measured. The goals should reflect the success criteria for the project.

·         High level requirements; requirements detail what must be accomplished for the project to be a success. Requirements include business requirements, stakeholder requirements, solution requirements, project requires (such as acceptance criteria) and transition requirements. High level means listing those major requirements identified early in the project. Detailed requirements will be identified as the project progresses.

·         Major assumptions; what are the major assumptions made about the project, i.e. resource availability.

·         Major constraints; what major constraints are known i.e. the typhoon season on a project in India.

·         High level risks; what are the major risks that might impact project success. This is not a detailed risk analysis. This is the identification of the major risk known or suspected.

·         Summary milestone schedule

·         Summary budget

·         Stakeholder list; identification the stakeholder who can influence project success and stakeholders significantly affected by the project outcome.

·         Project approval requirements

·         Assigned project manager, responsibility, and authority level; this is your chance to indicate the requirement for executives and clients to timely approve project deliverables and changes.

·         Name and authority of the sponsor; this is your chance to detail your expectations of your project sponsor and develop alignment on expectations.

Your project may have more or less than the suggestions listed here. The project profile will determine the appropriate components of the project charter. One of the primary purposes of the project charter is to provide an overview of the project. A good project charter reflects alignment of the goals of the major stakeholders and their commitment to project success.  

I am interested in the experience of project managers in developing a project charter and their opinion of its value. Let me know what you think.

Russ

What should we research?

What should we research?

 I asked a question at the latest PMI Research conference. “What would you consider the research that has had the greatest impact on project management performance in the past 10 years?”

The response from one of the Project Management Giants (the session was called standing on the shoulders of giants). “I pass on that question.” After a short discussion and from my table’s discussion, it was concluded that there has not been any meaningful research that improved our understand or our ability to manage projects in the past ten years.

Let’s explore project management research from a model that looks at the knowledge needed to effectively management a project. This model (the Darnall the Dimensions of Project Management) divides project knowledge into three categories (what a surprise). First is the basic or traditional project management areas of knowledge represented in the PMBOK (5 Process Groups and 13 Knowledge Areas).   

The second area of knowledge (skills and processes) needed to effectively manage a project focuses on the industry in which the project executed. The knowledge needed to execute a project in the construction industry (beyond the traditional PM) varies from the knowledge needed to manage an IT Project or even a movie production project (see my last blog).

The third area of knowledge focuses on the specific project. Most projects fall within a comfort range for most industries or organizations. The construction company that builds houses typically has good processes for managing the construction of houses but when the house falls outside the normal range, the project complexity increase and the normal processes may not be as effective. Understanding when the project falls outside the range and what new or additional processes are needed is important for project success.

As I review the current literature on project management, most of the research appears to be focused on the Industry Specific area. It is also within the range that most of the projects are managed. Most organizations have processes for managing projects within the organization and research and new processes seem to focus on improving the means and methods of understanding and managing these project. The literature on PMOs and project complexity appear to focus on this area.

Project management research dealing with project specific knowledge appears to focus on the large and complex projects. There appears to be an impression that many of these projects are not successful and this research and writing in this area suggest ways to better manage these projects.

Currently, I believe the project management research is to diffuse to address my opening question, “What would you consider the research that has had the greatest impact on project management performance in the past 10 years?” If we want to answer that questions differently in the  next ten years we need to develop new models for understand the project environment and focusing our research.

 

2014 PMI Research Conference

PMI 2014 Research and Education Conference; 27 – 29 July 2014, Portland, OR, Standing on the Shoulders of Giants

I was able to attend the 2014 PMI Research and Education Conference this year. This is a much better conference when compared to the Global Conference. The research conference keynote speakers are project management professions with interesting, project oriented presentations and instead the management gurus of the speaking circuit at the typical Global Conference. The presentations do not have the glitz that can compare with the consultants of the Global conference but the presentations typically have more project management substance.

The GAC (PMI College Accreditation) invited Universities with Project Management degrees to discuss issues related to accreditation. The new PMI Vice President for Education and Research kicked of the meeting. As a new hire, he said he had no expertise in project management and then gave a speech proving him his point. Overall, a good session.  

There were a couple of things that struck me at the conference. I listened to several conversations on the need for a theory of project management. Interesting discussion but it did not resonant to me as a need for our profession. I asks at a panel discussion on something else “do we ned a theory of project management” and the consensus of this panel was no. I will be interested to see if this discussion develops traction.

Jack Meredith, author of lots of project management books, was the headliner on an unusual session Standing on the Shoulders of Giant”. Jack deserves recognition for his contribution and Erik Larson, another prolific author, interviewed Jack in a setting that gave the impression of a discussion in your living room. Jack met expectations. He reminded me of my grandfather, he had no political agenda and just said what he thought, so of it very interesting. If you can find a transcript, it would be worth listening to.

During the session I asked; “what were the two or three research finding of the past 20 years (this was a research conference) that would impact project management”? Jack thought a minute and then said; “I will pass on that question.” I wonder if he was avoiding the question because he didn’t want to hurt anyone feelings. That had not been the case so far. A small group discussion at our table concluded that Dr. Meredith did not believe that there was any significant research finding in the past 20 years that significantly impacted the management of projects. Think about the implications of that thought.

Here is a list of research projects recently funded by PMI:

• Establishing a Theoretically Sound Baseline for Expert Judgment in Project Management
  Paul Szwed
• Translational Science and Its Effects on Organizational Structure and Program Management
  Dorothy Kirkman, Kevin Wooten, Alix Valenti
• High-performance capital project front-end: a design commons approach
  Nuno Gil, Rehema Msulwa
• Scaling Agility: Adapting Agile Principles to Large Projects in Large Organizations
  Yvan Petit, Brian Hobbs
• Project Management as a Dynamic Collaborative Social Practice: Collaborative Innovation Revisited
  Roula Michaelides, Jeanne Dorle, Elena Antonacopoulou
• Community engagement strategies during the construction phase of controversial projects
  Melissa Teo

I also had a hallway discuss with Hans Georg Gemunden, editor of the Project Management Journal. PMI has struggled to increase the quality of the Project Management Journal. I mentioned that I often blogged a translation of articles from the PMJ for the typical project manager. (most articles are unreadable and only a few are worth going through the pain)

I was surprised to find that they understood the quality of articles did not meet their own standards. They were working hard to increase the quality. I look forward to seeing their new approach.

All in all, it was a good conference.

Next blog: I will presenting at the PMI Chapter in Charlotte in January and will provide a summary here.

Russ

Navigating Complexity: A Practice Guide

Navigating Complexity: A Practice Guide

The Project Management Institute published the electronic version of Navigating Complexity: A Practice Guide. http://www.pmi.org/Knowledge-Center/Project-Complexity.aspx  The print version is available from PMI, $27.95 Member, $34.95 Nonmember .

The practice guide provides an approach for better understanding complexity on a project. Much of the guide provides a foundation in complexity and presents three categories of complexity: human behavior, system behavior and ambiguity. An assessment questionnaire is the center piece of the approach with  47 questions that can be answered yes/ no.

The strength of the approach is the ease of use. I believe any project team can study the Guide and use the assessment questionnaire to develop a better understanding and therefore a better project management plan. The guide is being currently being tested by PMI with four PMOs.

I believe this is a good foundational approach and as PMI beta tests and as researchers begin to build on this work, the professional will develop better tools for assessing and profiling projects.

Russ

Navigating Complexity: A Practice Guide

Section 1          Introduction

Section 2          Organizational Considerations

Section 3          Encountering Complexity

Section 4          PMI Foundational Standards and Useful Practices

Section 5          The Assessment Questionnaire

Section 6          Complexity Scenarios and Possible Actions

Section 7          Developing an Action Plan

Project Management Defined

A discussion of the definition of project management from some of my earlier works might be a useful foundation for some of the blogs I intend to provide over the next couple months. I hope you enjoy and participate in this process.

Russ

“Project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet the project requirements” (Project Management Institute, Inc. p. 2013). This simple definition represents a compromise that resulted from intense discussions within the Project Management Institute (PMI) during the 1980’s. One of the priorities of PMI during this time was the development of project management as a profession. Although debate continues on whether project management is a profession with an enforceable code of conduct and other traditional criteria for recognition as a profession, the development of the Project Management Body of Knowledge and the project management certification that derived from these efforts, helped promote the understanding and development of the project management field.

The discussion about what should be included in the definition of project management included debates about the purpose of project management. Is the main purpose to meet client’s expectations or is the main purpose to meet the written specifications and requirements? This discussion around meeting project requirements was not easily settled. If it is assumed that the project client is the one that defines project requirements, then maybe project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to meet client requirements or client expectations. PMI’s definition of project management does provide a good understanding of project management but it does not help us understand project success. For that, we must include the client.

Meredith and Mantel (2000) discussed project management in terms of producing project outcomes within the three objectives of cost, schedule, and specifications. Project managers are then expected to develop and execute a project plan that meets cost, schedule, and specification parameters. According to this view, project management is the application of everything a project manager does to meet these parameters. This approach to defining project management shares PMI’s focus on the project outcomes in terms of requirements.

Meredith and Mantel added a fourth aspect of project management—the expectations of the client. One client-centered definition of project management is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to meet or exceed the expectations of the client. This definition focuses on delivering a product or service to the client that meets expectations rather than project specifications. It is possible to meet all project specifications and not meet client expectations or fail to meet one of more specifications and still meet or exceed a client’s expectation. 

Meredith and Mantel discussed a tendency noted by Darnall ( 2007) that expectations often increase during the life of a project. Meredith and Mantel suggest that this is a form of scope increase. A project scope is a carefully crafted document that reflects the performance specifications of the project deliverables. Defining the project scope and managing scope change is a very different process than developing an understanding of a client’s expectations and managing those expectations. Darnall focused on defining and managing client expectations as a critical project management skill that is distinct from scope development and management.

Client expectations encompass an emotional component that includes many client desires that are not easily captured within a specification document. Although closely correlated with project specifications, client expectations are driven by different needs. It is possible for a project team to exceed every project specification and the project end up with an unsatisfied client. 

Interesting discussion is a PMI Discussion Group.

I could not help myself. I have decided NOT to continue to be offended by being called a traditional project manager (whatever that is) and focus on my favorite research topic; how do we develop an understanding of our projects? So I posed in the group discussion. The basic question that started the discussion was; what is the different between Agile PM and Traditional PM? Lots of replies; most focused on defining various aspects of Agile. Some discussed the difference between a methodology and a standard, (Agile vs PMBOK).

Here is my response.

Russ

 

The conversation rest on understanding what is Agile and what is traditional project management. Agile seems well understood. It is a methodology for executing projects, typically in the IT Industry or projects with similar profiles. When people refer to traditional, does this refer to the methodology use to build the Great Wall of China, the project management methodology used in the Apollo Space Program or the methodology to construct offshore wind turbines.

 

The IT Industry has done an excellent job of developing methodologies designed to address the project profiles of the IT industry. There are passionate champions of these methods, creating a strong brand and becoming recognized by PMI and other organizations as best practices in these industries.

 

Do we really believe there are only two methodologies for executing projects? I believe one of the most important research questions of the project management profession focuses on how we develop an understanding of our projects and develop the appropriate execution approach.

 

On three separate occasions beginning in the early 90s, PMI has chartered teams tto explore how we understand, profile, categorize projects. The last effort closed out the charter with a strong recommendation that PMI support research in this area. I just finished reviewing research proposals for funding from PMI and was disappointed; there were no proposals to address these questions.

 

I would like to change the question from what is the difference between traditional and agile project management and ask, How can we profile a project to better understand what methodology is most appropriate for a given profile?

 

Russ

PMI Presnetation at Charleston Chapter meeting

Frinday in Charleston

Yesterday I made a presentation at the PMI Charleston Chapter. It has been a couple of years since I had been to a Charleston Chapter meeting and I ended up at the wrong place. A short call to Nicole got me to the right meeting location well before the meeting start. It was great catching up with some old friends. (the friendship was enduring, not that the people were old)

I talked about one of my favorite topics; profiling projects (you thought I was going to say ME).

Although this is a personal blog I do try to add something about project management. Below is the outline I started with as I prepared the presentation. I stretched and talked about research and our profession.

Heading down to the beach

Russ

1.      Five Assumptions

a.       Project by definition are unique

b.      Projects also have common characteristics (each has a scope, schedule, etc)

c.       These project characteristics can be grouped into project types or profile

d.      There is a management approach that is appropriate for each project profile

e.       The application of the appropriate management approach, tools and skills will have a positive impact on project performance

2.      Project profiling history

a.       PMI Taxonomy Project with Gregory D. Githens

b.      Crawford, Hobbs & Turner, PMI Initiatives

c.       Aaron Shenar

d.      Robert Yonker

e.       Ruth House

f.       Construction Industry Institute   Project Definition Rating Index (2010)

g.      Stretton, (2011)

h.      Stacy Goff

3.      Darnall Preston Project Complexity Index (DPCI)

a.       DPCI Overview

                                                              i.      Project Complexity, Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS)

                                                            ii.      Stress Points

                                                          iii.      Gathering Data

b.      External Dimension

                                                              i.      Size

                                                            ii.      Duration

                                                          iii.      Resource Availability

c.       Internal Dimension

                                                              i.      Clarity of Objectives

                                                            ii.      Clarity of Scope

                                                          iii.      Organizational Complexity

                                                          iv.      Stakeholder Agreement

d.      Technological Complexity

e.       Project Environment

                                                              i.      Ecology

                                                            ii.      Cultural Complexity

                                                          iii.      Legal Complexity

4.      Implication of Project Profile for Execution Approach

a.       Leaderships: styles, knowledge skills abilities.

                                                              i.      Myers Briggs

                                                            ii.      Emotional Intelligence

                                                          iii.      Project Organization/ Span of Control

                                                          iv.      Project Lifecycles

b.      Alignment

                                                              i.      Common Understanding

                                                            ii.      Means and Methods

                                                          iii.      Trust

c.       Use of Goals

d.      Schedule development and control, use of milestones

e.       Cost estimating and control

f.       Risk analysis and mitigation

g.      Quality defining and managing

h.      Scope development and control

i.        Team building, managing

j.        Communication plan, processes

                                                              i.      Listening

k.      Managing client expectation

l.        Measurement

m.    Project culture

5.      Conclusions