Reality Hidden in Plain Sight

 

I recently witnessed several project executives show body language displaying complete shock over a project schedule update that indicated unanticipated delay.   For the rest of the observers, it was more a surprise that it was not recognized by them earlier.  

Managing projects from a distance or from a desktop that is not near the project activities requires some added techniques and tips for recognizing, understanding and assessing project health.   It is particularly applicable to executives responsible for overall management effectiveness and for critical decisions affecting the ability to achieving project goals for scope, schedule, cost, quality, safety and security.    

Early in my career, my job positions included Draftsman and Jr. Engineer with a railroad in the Maintenance of Equipment department.   The position responsibilities included design of components to replace obsolete materials, detailing modifications to implement product improvements, and defining overhaul projects to rehabilitate passenger cars and locomotives.   While a significant part of the work was based on as-built and record drawings, there was the risk that the paper products may not reflect the actual conditions.  As a result, all of my work products required field inspection to verify actual conditions were consistent the drawings and that the designed product was compatible with a range of conditions. 

Later in my career, I held numerous roles in project management on rail transit design and construction projects.   As part of the roles, it was instilled by management leadership and my supervisors, peers and mentors that there is a need to understand the process of writing and reading progress reports, to conduct field verification of reported progress, and to assess first hand the actual site conditions.

Whether an executive, program manager, project manager or an oversight consultant, it is essential to diligently review and assess verbalized status reports and published progress reports and progress, and to thoroughly review and promptly respond to Emails and other correspondence.    In the project environment, attention to these items is essential for verifying actual progress, assuring feedback is provided to maintain progress on scheduled work, and for initiating corrective action to manage risks and issues.   However, the managerial skill required to evaluate the information must be complemented with a corresponding amount of experience on similar projects within the same industry domain. 

Here are some tip-offs for recognizing and interpreting the actual conditions and challenges on projects.      

Progress Reports:

Projects and individual contracts typically include deliverables for monthly progress reports.   The scope and content of the reports may vary but the purpose is consistent – to provide the client with a summary of the work completed, earned value/physical progress to plan, key performance indicators for cost to budget and progress to schedule, changes and issues/concerns.   Tips-offs in content or observations include:

• Physical progress shows a large differential to actual planned progress without indication of action to recover.   This indicates there is a pending change in critical dates or that there is excessive float with predecessor and successor projects/contracts.  This may be resolved by explaining the variance, describing recovery actions and by obtaining executive support.     
• Expenses are higher than physical progress without mention of corrective actions.    This indicates there is an advance payment for materials not installed or higher than planned expenses in support services.  This may be resolved by explaining the variance and confirming estimate at completion will be within budget.         
• Expenses are lower than physical progress without explanation.   This indicates there is a delay in processing of payment requests.  This may be resolved by explaining the variance and initiating expenses accruals in project accounting.
• Items “under review”.  This indicates a problem or risk is being mitigated and there are unspecified actions to determine if there are any impacts to project budget, schedule and quality milestones.  This is not uncommon, but it may overtly indicate that executive intervention on established time-consuming project and organization processes is required. 
• Mitigation actions on risks continue for months or years with no apparent resolution or initiation of response plans.    This indicates mitigation is not effective or actionable.   As a result, mitigation requires higher executive authority or political intervention to optimize actions to resolve the risk event or to accept the risk and resulting project changes. 
• Earned Value is based on actual invoice payments.  This indicates actual progress may be underreported.  This may lead to unnecessary managerial effort and decisions for corrective action that is not be required.  This may be resolved by assuring timely and effective processing of invoice payments.
• Remaining project duration requires production/month and expenses/month that have no historical backup.   This indicates that potential corrective actions may not recover progress from increased to increase production.  As a result, may lead to changes in schedules milestones and goals.
• Status on Submittal/RFI/Correspondence Logs show a large amount of open or late items.  This indicates that primary participants, stakeholders and oversight do not have the resources, expertise, knowledge or experience necessary to effectively complete these processes within established timelines.   Uncorrected, this may lead to delays in progress and requests/claims for time extension and changes in dates.
• Milestone dates frequently slip month-to-month.    This indicates there may be a systemic problem in estimating the durations of various project and organizational processes, which leads to specifying dates that are overly aggressive and not realistic for production in the industry domain of the project.     

Schedules:

Projects and individual contracts typically include deliverables for monthly schedule reports, which complement the progress reports.   The scope and content of the reports may vary but the purpose is consistent – to provide the client with a summary of the activities completed, changes in start and end dates for activities, and proposed actions to recovery from delays or to adjust work flows for better progress than scheduled.  Tips-offs in content and observations include:

• Updates break major portions of predecessor/successor activity links.   This indicates that activity dates are being forced to temporarily maintain milestone dates.  Links that are not restored will require changes to activity characteristics and attributes for new interdependencies.  
• Updates routinely adjust activity links and interfaces.    This indicates that continuous changes to activity relationships is being implemented to recovery progress and maintain critical milestone dates.  Links that continue to be adjusted may be the latest recovery actions prior to conceding to changes in project milestones. 
• Percent of remaining work exceeds the remaining project duration.    This indicates that recovery plans may require significant increases to manpower, materials and equipment to achieve original milestones.  
• Re-sequencing activities.   This indicates there are changes in project conditions to mitigate accelerated progress or delayed progress.   Re-sequencing work can affect the means and methods of work; availability of equipment, materials and labor resources; and change work periods and access constraints. 
• Re-sequencing interdependent contracts.   This indicates there are significant changes that affect execution of work on predecessor, successor or interdependent contracts.  This may be the latest mitigation action prior to implementing changes to original milestone dates.

Meeting Minutes:

Meeting Minutes are deliverables from project management processes at the project and contract level.  Minutes record the discussions, document critical decisions, and highlight the action items, responsible person(s) and the action completion dates.  Tip-offs in content and observations include:

• Action items open longer than established timeframes for decision making.   This indicates that higher level management and authority is required to complete the needed action on the topic. 
• Topics listed without actions and with potential to impact to scope, schedule, budget and quality.    This indicates team members do not have authority or resources to commit to a completion date. 
• Poor attendance by team members.   This indicates that team members have more responsibilities that restrict support to the project, or there is a lack of interest due to poor leadership, low team coherence or from failing to adhere to the project charter.
• Topics do not include risks or coordination of work by other projects or contracts within or adjacent to the work boundaries.   This indicates that integration processes needs to be reviewed and evaluated to determine adequacy of support for identifying and mitigating events that could affect execution plans.  

Contract Submittal and RFI Logs:

Submittal and RFI Logs are created and maintained at a project and individual contract level.  The Logs, which can be part of meeting minutes discussions and monthly progress report, record item description, date received, date response required, date response received, and disposition.   Tip-offs include:

• Resolution of submittal comments remain open as corresponding contract activities progress as scheduled.   This indicates that corrective actions are required by the PM/CM team to assure submittal requirements are met before deliverables arrive at the project site.   
• RFI processing is too close to scheduled contract activities.   This indicates the PM/CM team needs to improve advanced planning and execution of administrative processes ahead on scheduled activities.    

Oversight/Independent Engineering Consultant Reports and Presentations:

Many government funded projects involve management oversight consultants (MOC) and independent engineering consultants (IEC) to provide subject matter expert analysis of the project and contract performance.  Without replacing or undermining client governance or the project team leadership, the MOC and IEC provide supplemental technical expertise for the project deliverables as well as managerial expertise for executing the project and contracts in the specific project environment.  The MOC and IEC prepare and submit monthly or quarterly reports on project team performance.  Tip-offs include:

• Observations are routinely described by consultants to pursue opportunities or avoid threats to project performance.    This indicates that the consultant acknowledges the team’s focus on attributes that can affect overall performance on the project or on contracts in the project.
• Recommendations are cited for implementation by project team.    This indicates that the consultant has attempted to mentor the project team on actions required to improve performance but action is not yet undertaken.        
• Concerns are cited regarding the project progress and conditions.   This indicates that the consultant previously reported conditions that if not addressed by the project, the consultant (aka - subject matter expert) will advise funding agencies or project governance that formal corrective action is required. 

What are other tip-offs?