The project charter – one test of the commitment level of your sponsor!
From the Easy in theory, difficult in practice Blog
by Kiron Bondale
My musings on project management, project portfolio management and change management.
I'm a firm believer that a pragmatic approach to organizational change that addresses process & technology, but primarily, people will maximize chances for success.
This blog contains articles which I've previously written and published as well as new content.
Recent Posts
Leading Through Crisis Means Leading Through Context
"It's the end. But the moment has been prepared for." - retirement lessons from the Doctor
Just because they are non-critical, doesn't mean they are not risky!
Just because they are non-critical, doesn't mean they are not risky!
How will YOU avoid these AI-related cognitive biases?
Categories
Agile,
Artificial Intelligence,
Career Development,
Change Management,
Communications Management,
Decision Making,
Governance,
Hiring,
Kanban,
Lessons Learned,
Personal Development,
PMO,
Portfolio Management,
Project Management,
Resource Management,
Risk Management,
Risk Management,
Schedule Management,
Scheduling,
Tools
Date
The classic difference between theory and practice is admirably illustrated by some of the principles reflected in the PMBOK Guide when we compare them with the organizational project management reality that we are often faced with.
A good example of this gap relates to the Project Charter.
The PMBOK Guide correctly identifies this document as the key trigger that formalizes the existence of a project and that vests a project manager with the authority to apply resources towards the achievement of the project’s vision. The PMBOK Guide further clarifies that while the sponsor is responsible for issuing the charter, they might delegate the actual effort of developing it to the assigned project manager. The charter achieves almost the same level of importance as a foundation document for a religion.
If only it were that straightforward – in many organizations, resources might be busy delivering scope and budget might be expended before a charter document is approved and issued (if it ever is!). The complaint I heard from one practitioner this week was why should the PMBOK Guide be so far removed from the way projects are managed in “the real world” – in the context of learning about how to manage projects, it seems academic to be memorizing theory.
On the surface, this seems like a valid argument – if the majority of organizations that a typical PM is exposed to are at a very low maturity level, what is the point in going through the frustration of learning best practices that can never be applied.
My take on it is that the PMBOK Guide provides a good vision of how project management should be practiced and each organization (and practitioner) could strive to improve their planning and execution capabilities using guidance from it or similar sources of knowledge.
If the extent of our vision is a stone’s throw away, that’s as far as we will progress – once we visualize a goal that is much more challenging, we experience true growth.
This segue brings me back to the point of this article – committed project sponsorship has often been identified as a project critical success factor. If you cannot get your project sponsor to engage sufficiently to issue or at worst to review and approve a charter during the honeymoon stage of the project life cycle, what luck do you expect to have when escalating a project issue or significant project decision to them?
(Note: this article was originally written and published by me in July 2011 on my personal blog, kbondale.wordpress.com)
Posted on: June 05, 2018 06:59 AM |
Permalink
Comments (21)
Page: 1 2 next>
Please login or join to subscribe to this item
Vincent Guerard
Coach - Trainer - Speaker - Advisor| Freelance
Mont-Royal, Quebec, Canada
Very true, Sponsor should be visible and involve
I would say that the majority of projects I have seen do not even have a formal project charter.
Valid point, sponsor has to be involved and engaged from the start.
Thanks for sharing Kiron!
Rami Kaibni
Community Champion
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten Associates
New Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
I hear your point Kiron but PMBOK I assume gives you the guideline of how things are to be done, more or less, theoretically but do not mandate that you do them as is. You can tailor the process in a way to suit your priject needs, resources and so on. I am not sure I can call this a gap, just my opinion.
Rick Morris
Owner / President| R2 Consulting, LLC
Hoover, Al, United States
I have implemented PMO solutions to over 100 companies. I would say about 1 in 10 have a formalized project charter process and the implementation introduced the idea to the other 9. What is amazing to me is without a formalized charter and understanding with your sponsor, how do you know if you are done? How do you know you met the objectives?
Alok Priyadarshi
Project Manager| Tata Consulting Engineers Limited
Jamshedpur, Jharkhand, India
Sponsor engagement is very important for project success.
Elizeu Antonio
Manager for Network Operations| MSTelcom
Luanda, Angola
Good point. Sponsor has the mission to recognize that a project or phase should start and commit to supporting it, so the lack of its involvement is among the reasons for the Project's failure.
Very interesting, thanks for sharing
Thanks all - when I use the term "charter", it can be called by many names. The key is whether or not the sponsor has actually reviewed and signed "something" authorizing the project's existence...
Kiron
Rick, wow 1 in 10, it was worse than I thought ;-)
A project charter is a must, but I have been involved in a lot of projects with no charter. You are directed to just jump in and produce results.
Drew Craig
Sr. Agile & Product Coach| Vanguard
Philadelphia, Pa, United States
Great conversation. Interesting 'inside' statistics. Maybe some of this starts with how a need becomes a project. What does that process look like, if it exists?
Thanks Drake! Andrew - I've found that the use of a charter is often inspired by the introduction of a consistent project intake process. Until there is a sense of urgency from the leadership team to get a handle on stealth projects and to improve portfolio strategic alignment, charters are "nice to haves"!
Drew Craig
Sr. Agile & Product Coach| Vanguard
Philadelphia, Pa, United States
Kiron, exactly! That consistent intake process is the key and unfortunately not very consistent :) leaving many unvetted 'projects' with no business value, justification, or strategic alignment.
For the record when a charter was required. Crystal clear objectives of the project. No charter resulted in keeping scope creep under control.
Al Taylor
I.T. Contractor| Independent
Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
good discussion!
here are metrics that clearly demonstrate the importance of sponsor involvement:
http://www.itprojectstats.com/sponsor_involvement_col.php
Anish Abraham
Privacy Program Manager| University of Washington
Auburn, Wa, United States
Informative article, Kiron and thanks for sharing.
Bill Morgan
Project Manager| Epic Management L.P. Redlands, CA
Moreno Valley, Ca, United States
I would not start a project without a charter.
Thanks for interesting article.
Page:
1 2 next>
Please Login/Register to leave a comment.
|
"If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name at a Swiss bank."
- Woody Allen
|