Molecular Voices » Project Management

Posts from Project Management

Project Management excellence covers three tiers:

Expertise in the discipline. It is about knowing, adjusting, and creating tools for the PM tool kit as required. The basics and details are managed carefully, controlled, and shared with the team.
Consulting and Leading. Beyond the tactical nature of project management, success requires active listening and communicating, understanding and addressing business needs, inspiring a project team, breaking barriers, and building relationships.
Value Add. Where do you add value? Design? New technology? Success is adding the additional expertise to the experience. Where is your passion? Share that passion with the team, the client, and the company.

March 31

Creative Thinking and Problem Solving, from a Project Manager’s Perspective (Part 2 of 2)

This is the second of a two-part series that discusses how creative thinking and problem solving can impact the way projects are managed. Part one examined the project delivery process. We will now continue the discussion by exploring the ways we can change our behavior for the better within the existing processes we already use each day.

2. How can project managers work the principles of a creative thinking process into our roles?

All day every day we are called on to solve problems. We have status meetings to identify issues. We have status reports and issue logs to document issues. We have client calls to discuss and resolve issues. We have escalation processes to remind us that we occasionally let an issue get out of control and need help to rein it in.

But what if there is a better way to think about the issues themselves? What if, in addition to tracking issues and talking through resolutions, there are some ways we can better think through solutions to our clients’ problems, both the stated ones and the unstated ones? Here are a few ideas that I found most useful, valuable, and relevant to my life as a project manager. I hope I can remember to put them into practice.

- When trying to solve ANY problem or challenge, ask open ended questions, and ask your team for as many answers as they can imagine. What are open ended questions? In short, they are not “yes or no” questions. They are questions that start with phrases like, “How might we…?”, “What are all the ways in which we could…?”, “What would it look like to you if we were to…?” Use these questions in many contexts: while gathering requirements or defining scope-critical decisions; when you’re up against the triple constraint and need a way out; when none of the obvious answers work; when your client or your team isn’t cooperating with the way you think things should be unfolding; and when you can’t imagine by yourself what to do. I’ve been surprised how this single approach has given some brilliant and unexpected results in the weeks since I took the training.

- Use the PPCO format (Praise, Potential, Concerns, Overcome). It might be just a fancier version of sandwiching bad news between good thoughts on both ends, but I’ve watched it work and gotten really positive client feedback when I’ve used it. The idea is pretty simple. When responding to an idea or a question, use a specific order and format for your response. First, praise the idea. Say something good about it. This is a bit disarming. Second, identify the potential benefits of the idea, when implemented well. This follows up the praise with some specific thoughts showing you’ve considered the idea in detail. Third, identify some concerns that may be relevant. Use open ended questions to express the concerns. Instead of saying, “My concern is we’d never be able to do it in time for launch” say something like, “In what ways might we be able to implement this feature and still meet aggressive timelines for first phase launch?” or “What are the tradeoffs that might allow us to implement this feature now?” Lastly, be ready with some suggestions to overcome the concerns. Brainstorm the ideas with your team. Ask them for the answers that occur to them if you can’t think of them, or even if you think you’ve already thought of all the good solutions. Present these possible solutions back to the client along with the concerns you identify.

- Get comfortable with disagreement or opposing points of view. Learn to put all viewpoints in a context and build a picture that you, your team or your client can use to make a better decision. Don’t assume you have the right answer from the start, even if you think you do. Be willing to let your thinking be challenged. Be willing to acknowledge an opposing view. The PPCO (Praise, Potential, Concerns, Overcome) framework can be a great way to practically frame opposing viewpoints.

- Allow those around you to see (visually) the thinking process you’re going through. Help them to see visually how their words and ideas are shaping and influencing that process. This can be as simple as projecting in real time the notes you’re taking on your laptop, or writing key comments down on Post-it Notes and putting them on the wall in the place you’re meeting. It might involve attributing the good ideas that are captured in your meeting minutes. Letting the team and the client see their thoughts impacting the outcomes of a meeting will go a long way toward having them buy in to the eventual recommendation or solution.

- Continually question whether you are solving the right problem. Often as project managers we get locked in on answering the question we are asked, without taking enough time to consider if we are answering the right question. “How fast can you add this feature?” “Why did this decision get made a year ago?” “Why does X cost so much?” The list goes on. The client changes, the project changes and the context changes but the questions are always the same. If we can get to a correct problem statement, we will have won at least half the battle. If we can get the […] filled in most accurately, within the following sentence, we’ll be on our way to success… “It would be great if […]”. If we stop to help our team or our client or ourselves ask the right questions, we can be more confident that our efforts are being expended in an effective way. While there are several ways to look at the question to see if it’s the right one, a constant awareness of seeking the right problem statement is a great start.

In summary, the training in creative thinking and problem solving showed me ways in which I can make both major and minor modifications in the way I manage projects. I probably wasn’t the most likely candidate to get this training. It certainly took me outside of my personal comfort zone. We didn’t use an Excel spreadsheet or talk through a project status anywhere in the course. It didn’t directly cover any topics from PMBOK or help me to limit and manage my project’s scope. But it did present some ideas that challenged the way I think about and solve problems, and in the short time I’ve had to try it out, I’ve seen it be effective.

posted to: Creative, Project Management | 2 Comments »

March 30

Creative Thinking and Problem Solving, from a Project Manager’s Perspective (Part I of 2)

by Paul Pantzer

Recently I participated in a training seminar focused on creative thinking, brainstorming and problem solving. I was the only project manager in attendance at the training, along with a full complement of experience design, creative and strategy types. I thought maybe I’d get a couple days of relaxing and lying on a mat in a dimly lit room, listening to new age music and thinking deep thoughts. It turned out to be rather different than that… in a good way.

First, I don’t intend to use this forum to describe the specific creative thinking process itself, since that information is easily transferrable through existing training documents. What I hope to do is describe the impression the training made on me as a project manager, and present a few thoughts on how the principles taught can influence my day-to-day work of delivering projects for clients more effectively.

No crazy ideas allowed

What I found interesting about an intentional “creative problem solving process,” as a project manager, is that it really challenges the way I often behave in my job. I often feel my unstated role is to limit what gets added into a project, make sure the list of activities and deliverables is finite, and make sure that all crazy new ideas are immediately relegated to a Post-it Note in a “project parking lot” in such a way that they are sure to never see the light of day.

For better or worse, we usually do some form of requirements definition at the very beginning of the project, when stakeholders are least sure of what they can even hope for, and don’t fully know what they need. Once those requirements are written down, it’s my job to stick to them—or bury the client in an annoying paper blizzard of change requests. But I can’t believe products such as the iPhone or the light bulb came about through such a rigid linear process of thinking.

So, how can a project manager take full advantage of a creative thinking process and yet not completely throw the realities of scope control and timeline and budget management out the window?

The following post is the first of a two-part series that will discuss how creative thinking and problem solving can impact the way projects are managed. Part one examines the project delivery process, and will look to answer the question, should my existing project management process change at all as a result of what I’ve learned about an intentional “creative problem solving process”? In part two of this series, I’ll explore the ways we can change our behavior for the better within the existing processes we already use each day.

1. Should my project management process change at all?

In short, yes. At a bare minimum, we should plan for and budget against a brief internal session (partial day or full day) designed to stretch our thinking about potential solutions to the business problem. This session should occur before the real requirements gathering work starts, in any medium to large project. Beyond this bare minimum, we should aim to do a client version of an intentional “creative problem solving process” as well, also prior to the start of locking in formal project requirements. Usually enough initial data has been gathered in the sales process that there is at least some idea of what the project involves, and this data can provide the initial insight for an internally-facilitated creative thinking session. But too often we jump straight from the sales process into a stodgy set of stakeholder interviews or a “canned” facilitated requirements definition workshop and miss a huge opportunity to understand what the project could be if implemented optimally. Let’s look at one example from the training.

Putting it into practice

The class was asked to look at a color photo of the stairway between floors in an office building, and come up with ideas to improve them. Well, I am guessing that a client-generated RFP for a project to improve the stairway would have listed several standard items like repainting, making a safer and less slippery step surface, and improving the lighting in the stairwell. If I, as the project manager, had taken that level of insight into a requirements gathering session, I could probably quite accurately scope a boring, low-risk, low-reward project.

Once we went through a 15-minute exercise in the training, however, we had about fifty to eighty unique ideas for ways to improve the stairs. Some were a bit outlandish, which is fine and is part of the creative process of stretching our thinking. Some were practical, inexpensive improvements that were unexpected and which probably never would have been considered in a more “normal” requirements definition process.

This exercise made me very uncomfortable for the following reason: if we hadn’t taken the time to think a bit creatively (for well under an hour), we would never have come up with about 90% of the ideas we generated. It both scared and encouraged me to think it might be that easy to improve the pool of potential solutions we bring to our clients. Scared me because I’ve been managing big projects for a long time now, and might have missed out on recommending a whole lot of great ideas… I might have missed an iPhone opportunity somewhere in there. Encouraged me because with a little effort and minimal cost, we can at least make some real improvements in our thinking.

Quality out of Quantity

One of the principles of a good creative thinking process is that quality comes out of quantity, at least in the realm of idea generation. An intentional creative problem solving process gives us a framework to generate a ton of ideas without worrying whether they are good, bad, neutral, crazy, expensive, offensive, or perfect. It strives to get a high quantity of thought onto paper, and gives us a way to bring some informed thinking into the requirements definition process.

Intentionally forcing some unconventional brain activity at the outset might radically alter the expected outcome of the project, but if it happens before requirements are gathered, so what? On one hand we might quadruple the scope of the project; on the other hand, we might decide the project we had in mind isn’t even necessary and there’s a better way to solve the client’s real need.

In any case there is a real possibility – even a likelihood – of discovering something valuable and unexpected, and that’s what our clients will find sets us apart and makes us valuable to them, especially (but not only) in this uncertain economy.

How this fits into a project delivery process

As a practical process matter, the change I would contend is needed is to consistently hold at least an initial / internal version of an intentional creative problem solving process before we ever hit the “record” button in a stakeholder interview or build version one of a client-facing scope document.

I also think the client version of this exercise should come well before the end of the requirements definition process, so that there will be the most openness to building the right scope, timeline and budget expectations at the outset. It takes a lot of work on the client side to overcome organizational inertia and get a project going, and if we force our clients to do all that work twice (once for the project we initially define requirements for, and again for the improved project we creatively imagine), we may have cost them valuable capital or even credibility inside their organization. This is the main process area that struck me as necessary, having gone through the training and considering it from a project manager’s point of view.

I suspect there are additional areas where we could add a valuable level of more detailed change to our project delivery processes, as a result of using the intentional creative problem solving process in the best possible way. This could involve doing small internal workshops at key project milestones, in an effort to identify and problem solve around the key project issues particular to each phase. This type of change, however, may not even need to be built into our formal process. Stay tuned for part 2 of this post where we will look to answer the question, how can project managers work the principles of a creative thinking process into our roles?

posted to: Creative, Project Management | No Comments »

February 6

Exploring the Value of Project Management: Findings from the “Researching the Value of Project Management” Study

by Anna Oswald

Back in 2004 the Project Management Institute (PMI) went on a quest to understand and quantify the value that project management provides to organizations. At the time, the actual value resulting from investment in project management was hard to define and measure. Studies conducted in the past struggled to provide credible evidence of the value that project management provides to the organizations.

The PMI commissioned the researchers at Athabasca University in Canada, who conducted a 3-year study in order to find unequivocal evidence of the value organizations provide when project management is appropriately implemented. After conducting 447 interviews, reviewing 418 project summaries, and looking at more than 60 case studies from a globally dispersed array of industries, they concluded that project management has the ability to deliver significant value to organizations. Janice Thomas, PhD, and Mark Mullaly, PMP, documented the three years of global fieldwork and cross-disciplinary analysis conducted by the team in their book, Researching the Value of Project Management.

To investigate the value of project management, the researchers adopted the value model that consists of six principal components:

Satisfaction (degree to which stakeholders are satisfied with the project management implementation, including project manager satisfaction)
Alignment (the degree to which organizational practices support and are consistent with the need of projects within the organization)
Consistent Practices (the degree to which the project management practices within the organization are aligned and consistently adhered to)
Process Outcomes (the degree to which projects deliver specific process improvements in managing projects within the organization)
Business Outcomes (the degree to which projects deliver improvements in organizational outcomes)
Benefits Realized (benefits realized from the project management implementation, such as cost savings, revenue increases, customer retention, etc.)

The researchers used these six components to identify and describe the types of value being realized by the organizations participating in the case studies. The following six value types emerged:

1. Aligned project management practices, improved process outcomes, and overall business outcomes. The case study organizations reported significant improvements in overall processes and process capabilities, with high level of value being placed on the role of process in creating transparency and improving project collaboration. These organizations also demonstrated improvements in overall performance, including increases in revenues and the ability to attract new project work based upon previous project success.

2. Good Project Management practices, effective Human Resources and no desire for change. The organizations in this group reported extremely high satisfaction with their project management implementations with the desire to sustain the current level. They placed greater emphasis in their project management implementations on the cultural and human resources aspects of project management that resulted in improved human resource effectiveness, improvements in overall quality of life, and attainment of better work-life balance for their employees.

3. Better project results, aligned organizations and corporate culture. The organizations reported that their project management implementation has had a positive influence on the overall culture and effectiveness of the organization.

4. Good project results, absence of process, lower customer satisfaction. The organizations reported satisfaction with their ability to deliver projects successfully. These organizations also reported absence of process capabilities and lower customer satisfaction than other organizations within the case study.

5. Good Project Management, lack of consistent process, high customer satisfaction. The organizations reported good project results with few consistent process capabilities in place. Their customers reported satisfaction with the projects and services provided.

6. New services, staff retention and growth. The organizations reported increases in value associated with the project management services, including ability to either charge for their project management or increase their revenues associated with project services. They also reported the ability to secure additional projects as a result of improvements in their reputation for delivery or successful delivery of previous projects.

The value observed within the framework of this study was further categorized into two groupings - Tangible (defined as the value that can be measured) and Intangible (defined as the value that is much more difficult to quantify).

The following value was observed within the Tangible category:

Cost savings
Revenue increases
Customer retention
Increased customer share
Greater market share
Reduced write-offs and rework

The delivery of intangible value included the following dimensions:

Improvements in the decision making
Enhanced collaboration and communication
Improvements in effective work cultures
Alignment of approaches, terminology and values within the organization
Overall effectiveness of the organization and its management approach
Improved transparency, clarity of structures, roles and accountability.

In the course of the research, it was discovered that tangible and intangible value is being realized to a different degree by the case-study organizations. First of all, not all organizations participating in the case study reported tangible values. Consulting, construction or engineering firms were more likely to demonstrate tangible values. The researchers found little correlation between tangible values and the level of maturity of the organizations. Even organizations with relatively low levels of maturity were able to achieve high levels of tangible value that involved minimal and superficial project management practices.

On the other hand, most of the organizations reported evidences of intangible value. The level of intangible value being observed does appear to be tied to increasing levels of maturity.

Conclusion: “What clearly emerged from this study is that value appears to increase in proportion to the maturity of the project management implementation that is encountered. Tangible value can be attained at almost any level of maturity, and is primarily a result of the nature of the organization and the delivery of customer projects. The attainment of intangible value requires a base level of capability and a reasonable level of robustness to be established for it to be realized. As well, continued increase in maturity of the project management implementation appears to lead to greater levels of intangible value. “

posted to: Project Management | No Comments »

January 23

New Approaches to Managing Complex Projects

by Anna Oswald

Back in October, I had the opportunity to attend the Project Management conference in Denver, Colorado. It is an annual conference organized by the Project Management Institute (PMI). Every year PMI holds four conferences in four locations covering most of the world – North America; Latin America; Asia Pacific; and Europe, the Middle East, Africa.

This is the second time I attended this conference. What was different this time, besides the record participation of over 4,000 program and project managers, was the variety and selection of topics. Past conferences have focused primarily on the project management standards and guidelines, known as PMBOK (Project Management Body of Knowledge). This year, a number of presentations explored other aspects of project management, with several focusing on new trends. Agile project management continues to be a hot topic, with presentations ranging from agile project management in the changing business environment, to application of hybrid agile project management methods.

The presentation by Global Project Design’s Patrick Murray and Susan Thomas on “Designing Complex Projects” stood out for me because it offered an innovative way of thinking about complex projects. While you may find these ideas too revolutionary and forward looking to be considered for immediate implementation, they provide an outline for some future trends in the project management, particularly when viewed in the context of recent developments in the area of agile project management.

The main premise of their presentation was that the business environment and projects are increasingly complex due to the use of the remote teams and multi-cultural business relationships. As a result, some of the project management principles considered the industry norm need to be re-examined and adjusted. One of the areas requiring re-thinking is project initiation and planning. It comes out of a need to design a project in such a way that it allows accommodating for the unknowns.

With projects becoming more complex and global in nature, the amount of coordination increases as the project manager has to deal with time, culture and possibly even language differences. These global factors can increase the amount of coordination required two or three times over. However, coordination often goes unrecognized, resulting in optimistic schedules and budgetary overruns. Even when coordination effort is acknowledged and accounted for in a project budget and schedule, it is challenging to accurately forecast the required level of effort.

So how can you account for coordination? First, there is a direct relationship between coordination effort and project complexity. The following factors contribute to the project complexity and signal that a significant coordination effort will be required:

· Project size

· Teams from different time zones, work cultures, and abilities

· Complex dependencies between activities/tasks

· Concurrency in activities/tasks

· Relationship between projects

· Complex decision making process

· Stability of Requirements (expected results difficult to predict )

· Maturity of Technology

· Process Maturity

Once a project manager concludes that a project requires some coordination effort, he or she can predict the amount of coordination effort required to effectively complete the project by using the following formula –

Coordination = Dependence X Distance, where

Dependence is demand for coordination between the teams and

Distance is team’s ability to coordinate with others

To predict Distance, the following criteria should be considered:

· How large is a project team? Are the members in the same building?

· How many time zones separate the teams?

· How many projects have they worked together before?

· Do they share the same native language?

· Do they share the same profession/function?

· Do they share the same direct boss?

The formula, along with these indicators, helps the project manager recognize project complexity and estimate coordination effort. However, to accurately predict the level of coordination, the authors propose a more complex approach that leverages methods typically employed in product development, such as building prototypes and running simulations to identify and select the most optimal project plan. Identifying and analyzing several possible project approaches during the planning phase helps the team to be more flexible in the implementation phase. The ability to rapidly switch to another project approach helps teams address internal and external changes, such as changes in the project requirements, stakeholder priorities, or earlier delays.

For more information about Project Model and Simulation, please refer to “Designing Complex Projects” (designing-complex-projects).

posted to: Project Management | No Comments »

August 11

Shuttleworth on Project Management

by Craig Andrews

Mark Shuttleworth, of Thawte fortune and Ubuntu fame, has some (IMHO) neat ideas on how to manage software development efforts that may be interesting to spend a few human processing cycles considering.

http://lwn.net/Articles/292031

Despite the article being written for Free Software and Linux, I think it’s incredibly relevant to all development efforts - read it as if he’s talking about Molecular projects, and not Linux distributions.

Here are two key paragraphs:

One of the key requirements that Shuttleworth sees is the need to “keep the trunk pristine”, by doing integration on the trunk and feature development on branches. Along with this is the need for more and better tests. While not necessarily believing in test-driven development, he certainly leans that way. In any case, all the tests should pass before committing to the trunk.

Many projects do not yet have an extensive test suite, but this needs to change. He quoted a Chinese proverb that “the best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, the second best time is today”. He mentioned that he is working on a robot that controls the trunk of a development tree. Developers will request it to merge from a branch, so the robot merges the branch and runs all the tests. If the tests pass, it commits, otherwise it gets kicked back to the developer.

This approach sounds pretty good to me.

posted to: Project Management, Technology | 5 Comments »