- 3 -2/3/2009IT Projects keep failing…Standish Group research:Only 29% of IT projects are completed successfully2007 study by Dynamic Markets Limited62% of IT projects fail to meet their schedules49% suffered budget overruns47% had higher-than-expected maintenance costs41% failed to deliver the expected business value
- 4 -2/3/20095%12%14%14%55%0% 20% 40% 60%Misalignment between business and project objectivesProject Team gets powerless by going through too muchprocessesPM processes being viewed as extra overheadProject Team doesnt follow a standard, repeatableproject management processLack of executive support; project sponsor is not 100%committed to the objectives, lacks understanding of theproject and is not actively involvedPROJECT MANAGEMENT PROCESSES AND METHODOLOGY1 - Lack of executive support
- 5 -2/3/20091 - Lack of executive supportIMPACTUnlikely to assign needed resourcesLack of company-wide visibility of the projectExecutives less likely to defend the projectDifficult to engage cross-functional teams
- 6 -2/3/20091 - Lack of executive supportSOLUTION / AT PROJECT INITIATIONBuild your executive summaryBuild a business case (ROI)Have GANTT Chart with hard milestonesClarify roles and responsibility of the sponsor.SOLUTION / AT PROJECT EXECUTIONManage the sponsor as you would manage any other project resourceTIPExecutives want numbers, status reports and no surprises
- 7 -2/3/200912%20%28%40%0% 10% 20% 30% 40%Insufficient or non-existent approval processUnclear or unconvincing business caseLack of thoroughness and diligence in the project start-up phasesLack of business ownership and accountabilityPROJECT INITIATION ISSUES2 - Lack of business ownership and accountability
- 8 -2/3/20092 - Lack of business ownership and accountabilityIMPACTTasks slippages , low quality of deliverables, team/projectconflictsSOLUTIONDefine your RACI chartMake project tasks VISIBLE among stakeholdersUse a defined communication mechanismEngage the end-user/clientEliminate excuses!TIP: One task , one owner.
- 9 -2/3/20095%5%12%12%20%46%0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%Wrong or inappropriate technological choicesUnfamiliar or changing technologies; lack of requiredtechnical skillsProduct owner unclear or consistently not availableLong and unpredictable bug fixing phase at the end ofthe projectIntegration problems during implementationLack of user involvement (resulting in expectation issues)TECHNICAL AND REQUIREMENTS ISSUES3 - Lack of user involvement
- 10 -2/3/20093 - Lack of user involvementIMPACTUnrealistic expectations about how and when things will be doneScope creepSOLUTIONInvolve Users very earlyLook for Subject Matter Experts and User representativesSet clear expectations about User’s participationSet requirements “in stone” to prevent scope creep
- 11 -2/3/20092%17%20%24%37%0% 10% 20% 30% 40%Project schedules are incompleteInsufficient time or money given to projectLack of sufficient planningLack of understanding requirementsFailing to see the dependencies between projectsPROJECT INTEGRATION MANAGEMENT4 - Failing to see dependencies between projects
- 12 -2/3/20094 - Failing to see dependencies between projectsIMPACTUnrealistic project completion timesMissed opportunities to address potential problems earlyDomino effect across the pipeline of projectsSOLUTIONGANTT chart, Critical PathFind your Subject Matter ExpertsTake dependencies into account during project planning, via projectdiagramming
- 13 -2/3/20097%21%32%40%0% 20% 40%Not tracking changes to the scope of the projectScope of the project is too vagueNot taking enough time to define the scope of theprojectScope creep; lack of adequate change controlPROJECT SCOPE MANAGEMENT5 - Scope Creep - lack of adequate change control
- 14 -2/3/20095 - Scope Creep - lack of adequate change controlIMPACTThe budget for the project explodes. So does the timeline.SOLUTIONEstablish a formal change request process: at the IT project initiationphaseEvaluate the effects of changed requirements on: timescale, cost andriskUse phased approach: change will have less chance to affectdevelopmentIf change is inevitable: follow change control processProject Sponsor has to sign off the change-in-scope request
- 15 -2/3/200921%31%48%0% 20% 40% 60%IT does not push back on unreasonable deadlinesProject deadlines are ignored by the project teammembersProjects are rushed in order to speed throughdevelopment efforts and systems implementationsPROJECT TIME MANAGEMENT6 - Projects are rushed to speed throughdevelopment efforts and system implementation
- 16 -2/3/2009IMPACTQuality is compromised and budget is impactedCustomer Requirements are not metSOLUTIONTrack and review progress regularlyDocumenting important decisions, deliverables and milestonesRe-plan and reschedule to accommodate new initiativesIssue a procedure for schedule change6 - Projects are rushed to speed throughdevelopment efforts and system implementation
- 17 -2/3/20097%22%32%39%0% 10% 20% 30% 40%Project Cost over-runProject budget is mismanagedProject budget is not managed by the Project ManagerProject budget is underestimatedPROJECT COST MANAGEMENT7 - Project Budget is underestimated
- 18 -2/3/20097 - Project Budget is underestimatedIMPACTProject may be cancelledProject will not be able to face unplanned issuesSOLUTIONInvolve the right people in budget estimation exerciseAllocate enough contingency in the budgetDo deep analysis of the current technical environmentDo NOT accept budget cut upfront underexecutive pressure
- 19 -2/3/20092%17%29%52%0% 20% 40% 60%Projects lack experienced Project ManagersProjects lack the right resources with the right skillsIT staff are not dedicated to project-work (inability toestimate their availability to work on a given project andinaccuracies in task estimation)Team members have other multiple priorities inorganizationPROJECT HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT8 - Team members have other multiple prioritiesin organization
- 20 -2/3/20098 - Team members have other multiple prioritiesin organizationIMPACTPuts stress on the team membersReduces productivity and quality of deliverablesSOLUTIONDiscuss the project with the line managerCome to agreement about how you will handle conflicting prioritiesIf conflicting priorities will start to affect your project performance, relyon your agreed-upon procedures
- 21 -2/3/200922%26%52%0% 20% 40% 60%Inadequate testingTest plan development and implementation can beviewed as wasted time or overkillPoorly defined Project Quality criteriaPROJECT QUALITY MANAGEMENT9 - Poorly defined Project Quality criteria
- 22 -2/3/20099 - Poorly defined Project Quality criteriaIMPACTDecisions to act on non-quality (bugs) are difficult to takeEarly versions of project deliverables do not meet quality standardsTeam spends time and $ fixing the wrong problemSOLUTIONAgree up-front on project success criteria and measuresPut a quality measurement and reporting system in placeAddress quality issues immediatelyReassess quality criteria (if necessary)
- 23 -2/3/20097%19%19%22%33%0% 10% 20% 30% 40%Communication to stakeholders and executives is tootechnical ( i.e. hundreds of pages of specs)Poor collaboration, communication and teamworkInadequate visibility of project statusInsufficient attention to stakeholders and their needs;failure to manage expectationsLack of communication planningPROJECT COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENT10 - Lack of communication planning
- 24 -2/3/200910 - Lack of communication planningIMPACTEven best managed projects, delivering on all their promises can stillget a bad reputation and be perceived as failuresSOLUTIONIdentify the different category of stakeholder and definecommunication methods that best suits the group:Executive Sponsor/Business SponsorProject Team MembersCustomers/UsersProject Management Office (PMO)Project Manager-yourself!
- 25 -2/3/200920%21%23%36%0% 20% 40%Risk Management strategy is poorly identified from thebeginning of the projectProject Risks are ignoredProject Risks are poorly managedProject Risks are poorly identified from the beginningof the projectPROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT11 - Project risks are poorly identified from thebeginning of the Project
- 26 -2/3/2009What is Murphy’s law?“If there are two or more ways to do something, andone of those ways can result in a catastrophe, thensomeone will do it” (Edward A. Murphy Jr, 1947)Anything that can go wrong, will – at the worstpossible moment.
- 27 -2/3/2009Train wreck at Paris Montparnasse 1895Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong
- 28 -2/3/2009Bread & Butter LawI never had a slice of bread,Particularly large and wide,That did not fall upon the floor,And always on the buttered side.American newspaper in Norwalk, Ohio, 1841
- 29 -2/3/200911 - Project risks are poorly identified from thebeginning of the ProjectIMPACTProject delay, cost over-run, early termination of the projectSOLUTIONBrainstorm with stakeholders to predict possible threats to the projectFocus on the quantity of risksRecord all mentioned risksBuild risk management plan and maintain it.
- 30 -2/3/2009Conclusion : How to avoid common errors in ITProjects1. Obtain executive support2. Ensure project accountability. One task – one owner3. Manage expectations of your End-Users by involving them early in theprojects4. Use help of your SMEs to identify dependencies between projects5. Introduce formal Change Control procedure to avoid Scope creep6. Introduce formal procedure to track your schedule and document allimportant decisions regarding re-scheduling7. Carefully estimate your budget with contingency8. Agree with line department manager about how to handle conflictingpriorities of project resources9. Clearly define Project Quality Criteria10. Use Project communication methods that best suit your various groups ofproject stakeholders11. Include your stakeholders from all levels of the company to predict projectrisks. Issue a Risk Log and maintain it
- 31 -2/3/2009ReferencesProject Management: The 14 Most Common Mistakes ITDepartments Make , July 23 2008, Meredith Levinson, www.cio.comProject Communication: how to keep your team engaged andinformed. November 13, 2008 | Author: PM Huthttp://www.pmhut.comHow to cheat at IT Project Management , 2005, Susan Snedaker,www.syngress.com