Project Management 2.0

Situation: You're in a MS shop, looking at PPM SaaS options.

Many organizations ask "Should we go with MS Project Server or a SaaS solution?"  The folks at SharkPro Software are in the business of giving you both.  Recently we spent some time with Greg Bailey, SharkPro Software's CEO who clued us in on where he sees the industry going.  Whether you are pro or anti Microsoft, I think you'll find his answers interesting.

Q.  Is the future of PM and PPM software in house or in the cloud?  Obviously everything has been moving in the cloud for a while now.  Is that where it all ends up?  If so, when?

Most of PPM will end up in the cloud, and relatively soon.  Even large businesses with well-established IT departments while leveraging their existing infrastructure for some on premise applications will opt to tie into the cloud and get the benefit of both.  Organizations handling financial, medical, or intelligence information may opt for a “private cloud”.  We’ve found the more agile small and mid-sized companies are moving towards SaaS solutions at a faster rate as evidenced by the success of the early PPM SaaS vendors.

Where does sit end up?  With more vendors looking ahead to more open and cross platform technology standards like HTML 5, companies will be able to “turn on and off” and only pay for the features they need on demand.  So whether on the PC, the Web or a Mobile device they will only pay for the capability they need throughout the lifecycle of a project.  Project ramp up may require more of the initial feature set but as a project goes live they will just need more of the update and collaboration capability.  Users will also have a choice to select best of breed features from multiple vendors all seamless to the end user.  As businesses realize the security, accessibility, as well as the ability to rapidly get access to the latest features and capabilities only as they need them, the benefit of cloud solutions and the economics are irresistible. 

Q.  Fast implementation times are a key selling point for SaaS PM and PPM offerings competing against Project Server.  The idea is that they give you "just enough" of what you need, without extensive customization.  Generally speaking, what is the functionality or type/level of customization that you can't get with Project Server in the cloud (whether it's with your company or another) and why?

I agree that fast implementation has been one of the SaaS vendor’s value proposition’s when positioning against Microsoft.  Microsoft Project and Project Server are tremendously successful with over 20 million Project Users and 10,000 larger companies using Project Server.  It still is one of Microsoft Top 10 products so the investment in new development is huge.

Although Project Server has been available in a hosted environment for years, there has not been a “pre-packaged or ready-to-go” version that did not require at least some initial configuration.

When developing SharkPro Projects we decided to leverage the power and popularity of Project and Project Server 2010 as a platform but provide a completely new way to deploy and experience Project Server.  Available via SaaS in minutes or installed on premise in a few hours   It is pre-provisioned and has a fresh web interface so users are ready to go, just like the early SaaS products.  The difference is SharkPro Projects still has all of the new Microsoft Project 2010 and Server capability available as needed.  A company can grow into the more advanced features without having to migrate to another tool later.

The limitations we have seen so far have to do more with architecture deployment decisions rather than features. For example, a large employment agency was looking at SaaS initially but also wanted the option to bring on premise to leverage existing infrastructure when ready.  Typically not an out-of-the-box solution with SaaS only vendors and requires more thought and planning to deploy.  For global companies there are more laws and regulations related to where the actual data resides.  Some have compliance requirements that require that servers and data are physically located in the host country.

Q.  Do you see many IT shops strictly using MS Project Desktop at this point?  Are there specific industries or company sizes that are more likely to be using stand-alone software?

We still see a tremendous amount of MS Project Desktop.  Many still use Project Desktop even when they have selected other SaaS or higher end tools.  Desktop is still great for just learning project management or if you are a project manager managing a large capital construction project and there is not a need to share that information on the web.  We also see Project terrific for off-line work when you may not always be connected to the cloud and are on a plane or very remote region in the world such as an offshore platform.

Q.  At what point do you see an enterprise needing an EPM solution?  Is there a particular set of attributes or pain points that you typically see in companies at that stage of maturity?  Is there a particular situation in which a Microsoft-based solution is best?

Individual project managers are usually successful running their projects using a tool Like Microsoft Project. Companies often realize they have a problem when they start trying to optimize resources across multiple projects or need to understand and optimize the “demand” of all the requests coming in.  Companies also need to be able to support multiple workflows and work streams and need to better communicate and collaborate across teams. I have always felt that the tools did not take into account the likely user scenario or “workflow “and how people interact on a project.  Most tools do fine as a big repository of all the project data but forget to take into account the likely “use case” scenarios of how the information needs to flow within a team or organization.  That’s a good time to use Microsoft Project Server either from scratch or to start with SharkPro Projects.

Q.  Without saying "all of them", what company sizes and industries is your software MOST useful in?  Why is that?

SharkPro Projects is ideal for the upper mid market.  Companies, government agencies or departments within each that have between 250-1500 employees.  They typically would like a “ready to go” solution they can start with due to budget constraints and in house expertise but would like to make sure they have the flexibility to grow with the tool and be able to still do some configuration to their specific needs.

We have seen 3 types of early customers.  Those that started with the early SaaS or SharePoint tools but have started to outgrow them, companies that want to upgrade from earlier versions of MS Project but would like a “ready to go” Project Server to get them started and lastly companies that started with a higher end tool that may be too complex for a specific department to tie into. 

Situation: You could use a pat on the back.

Badges are one of my favorite recent additions to gantthead. At a glance, they help you understand how your peers are contributing to the site. If you look at your profile as your "PM Body of Work", badges offer a fun set of highlights - adding a sort of punctuation to the link-lists of things you've done.

They live on the your profile and and follow you around the site. Every time you make a comment or participate in a discussion, badges tell people a little bit about you.

Since launching badges last week, we've received a lot of questions about how you earn them. So here's a quick list of the launch set of badges and a description of how you can get them. We'll be adding more over time, but these are a great place to start.

Situation: You think "there's got to be a better way."

Peter Taylor is the head of a PMO at Siemens Industry Software Limited, a supplier of global product lifecyclemanagement solutions.  He does a lot of speaking and writing on the subject of ‘The Lazy Project Manager’ .   His elearning modules are available online as are his free podcasts on iTunes  .

So most people would think that being lazy is not something you would want to be known for.  Peter thinks differently.  We recently caught up with to find out why...

Q.  You talk about the Pareto 80/20 rule in the book, but finding that critical 20% is always a trick.  How did you identify the critical parts of PM that are most important?  Do they share common attributes?  Generally speaking, are they the easiest things to do or the hardest?

A:  Answers to each question in series -

• I tell people to just think back to the previous working day and they will most likely be able to identify two or three things that delivered the most impact or produced the most momentum on their project.
• We all have ‘to do’ lists and the moment we enter the office we will get distractions through conversations, meeting invitations and so on. But it is important to focus and deal with the most important things first. If you don’t then whilst you may cheerfully clear many other tasks from that ‘to do’ list you will still have the big one left to do and you just won’t feel good about that. Get the big one out of the way and the pressure will be off, progress will have been made, and more than likely you will ride a wave of positive feeling that will see you clear the ‘to do’ list with ease.
• You asked were these the easiest or the hardest. Well I guess they will be typically nearer the hard end of the spectrum but sometimes procrastination can turn a simple thing in to a hard thing. By just getting on and starting something you realize that it wasn’t so hard at all (sometimes at least).

Q.  You also discuss the way that the leadership potential of Prussian Army officers was judged according to their intelligence and their laziness.  You go into some detail about how laziness and high intelligence in combination makes for good leadership.  Does that mean you believe in born leaders?  Are 3/4 of project managers doomed to be poor or mediocre leaders?

A:  Answers to each question in series -

• Born leaders? Well yes I guess there are people who somehow naturally take the lead in things without too many concerns or worries and other people tend to follow them happily. That said they are in the small minority. No I think that the majority of project managers, myself included in my early days, combine a lot of activity with a reasonable level of intelligence. But that isn’t the most productive or sustainable way of managing projects in my opinion.
• 'Progress isn't made by early risers. It's made by lazy men trying to find easier ways to do something.' Is the quote that I use - Robert Heinlein. It is about working smarter and not harder – it is about a decent work/life balance – and it is about giving yourself the chance of keeping control of your project by not being at capacity all of the time.
• So are all project managers doomed to be less than good project managers? Not at all. We can all learn to be better just as a golfer can learn a new swing to become a greater golfer then project managers can learn what I call The Art of Productive Laziness.

Q.  You use a tool called a power grid to assess a project sponsor.  How does that work?

A:  Well it is all about how to control your greatest asset and potentially your biggest threat. Critical to any projects success is having a good project sponsor, but, like the saying goes ‘you can pick your friends but you can’t pick your relatives’ and the same is true of project sponsors.

So what makes a good project sponsor and how do you deal with the one you have just inherited for your project?

The Project Sponsor is the key stakeholder representative for the project and provides the necessary support for the Project Manager with the primary responsibility of achievement of the project objectives and benefits. An inappropriate choice of Project Sponsor can seriously impact the possibility of success of the project and provide you, the project manager, with an unwanted additional overhead. Now you can’t practically ask a sponsor for their CVand put them through a formal interview process, nice as it would be sometimes to utter the phrase ‘I’m sorry but I just don’t think that this is the job for you right now’. But you should evaluate the sponsor you have and complete, in a subtle way of course, a ‘Strengths and Weaknesses ‘assessment so that you can adapt your project approach and communication methods to maximise their sponsorship support for the project that you now manage.

Tip: At your first meeting with the sponsor don’t ask ‘hard’ project questions but ask ‘softer’ and more open questions: ‘What are your hopes for this project? What are your fears about this project?’ – You will learn a whole lot more.

But let’s not be pessimistic, that isn’t going to happen to you, you won’t get an extreme case of project sponsor and they won’t fail the ‘interview’. So, what is your next move? Well perhaps you should consider the power base that your project sponsor has. Use the power grid to assess your project sponsor, assess their rating of interest in this project from high to low and their actual power in the organisation, also from high to low.

This will give you an indication of the way in which you should work with them. Actually this power grid is for all project stakeholders and if you end up with a project sponsor that is in the ‘low interest’ and ‘low power’ quadrant you really have a problem. It is unlikely that this sponsor is ever going to support your management endeavours.

Q.  What's the single most important take away from the book?

A:  Well people tell me they love the stories at the end of each chapter as they show real situations where I pretty much got it completely wrong but lived to tell the tale and learn a very good lesson.

But if I was to pick one thing that project managers should do it would be to work on your communication. At least 70% of a project managers time is spent in communicating so if you are going to be productively lazy anywhere do it here. That doesn’t mean communicate badly but communicate more effectively and that can often mean less effort overall.

Oh and ‘be lazy’…

Situation: You feel like there's something wrong with the way you hire.

Two weeks ago, at the PMI research conference, 

Dr. Joana Geraldi, Senior Research Fellow at Cranfield School of Management, International Centre for Programme Management gave a presentation entitled Finding the Right Person for the Job: Rethinking Work-Worker Fit in PPM.  The presentation was based on a research paper she co-authored with Harvey Maylor, Sergio Pellegrinelli and Scot Colquhoun. We recently asked her a few questions about how we can put her findings into action.  The answers to the questions below are her personal opinions, but closely tied to the research findings.   Her perspectives, both here and in the research paper are pretty thought-provoking.

Q. During your presentation you discussed the problems with the way that "fit" is judged. (a worker's fit with a work profile, or work fit to a worker's profile) Could you briefly discuss how that fit is currently  determined and the problems with that approach? 

A. Current most common approaches to achieve fit between work and worker are:

• Work-oriented (define the work and based on that, define what the worker would need to do, one of the main problems with this one is that it assumes that one can define all activities that are to be undertaken be the employee, what we know is not possible in project/programme context, moreover, the bridge between the specific tasks and competences is missing) 
   
• Worker-oriented (focus on the worker and then define what would be the job that would fit personal competences. This is interesting, and still much used and powerful, for example, the manager would explore what their employees can do well and make sure he/she explores their talents. The problem here is that it can produce descriptions of competence that are too general or abstract. 
   
• Worker-Work fit (contingency): here we look at the job characteristics and at people's competence. This is a more elaborated concept, and of much use, the problem is that it takes the job and person as static. 

But in general, all the three approaches are set within a rationalist frame.   In relation to project and program management, a number of implicit assumptions may be called into question: 
 

• Objectivity: it is possible to define and measure work, worker, fit and performance objectively; 
   
• Independence of work and worker: there are no mutual influences or dependencies between the work and the worker; 
   
• Causality and Fit: there is a best fit between work and worker and this will lead to higher performance; 
   
• Focus on static nature of the relationship work-worker: the fit is measured at a point in time.

1. Focus on the delivery of project/programme 
    
2. Looks also at the impact of the project/programme in the organisation 
    
3. Preoccupation with high level outcomes of the project/programme 
    
4. Explores the development of organisational capabilities beyond the project/programme 

• A significant number of managers, working on the same project/ program, should be interviewed to allow some assessment of convergence, either across the group, or a within conceptual level. The nature of convergence and divergence would yield insights into the subjective nature of the work and its complexity. 

• A number of instances (projects/ programs) should be examined to explore the existence or otherwise of trends in assessing complexity based on conceptual level. In particular, it would be interesting to discover whether on some projects and programs all parties perceived approximately the same degree and type of complexity, while on others it varied according to conceptual level.
   
• A number of projects/ programs should be tracked over time to explore if and how perceived complexity and conceptual level changes over the life of a project or program. It would be also interesting to understand the dynamics of the worker-work relationship and if and how project and program managers enact their work and transform the complexity of their project. What is the extent of possible agency? Does this relate to the existing or acquired (higher) conceptual level? 
  
   

Situation: You occasionally wonder whether we're moving forward as a profession.

PMI's mission, roughly speaking, is to have business leaders view project management as essential for businessresults.  Obviously, the best way to do that is to show increasing success over time.  That's why I found this particular PMI research report interesting.  Are we getting any better? Comparing project management in the years 2000 and 2008 was a report produced by Erling S. Andersen and present two weeks ago at the PMI Research conference.  Mr. Andersen was kind enough to answer a few questions for us recently about the research he conducted.

Q. Your research was conducted using the X Model, could you tell us a bit about how that works? (both at the micro and macro level) 

The intention of the X Model is to give a comprehensive view of the present situation of an enterprise or an organization. It is extremely valuable for a manager to get such a condensed picture of how the organization is performing and that it is presented in a way that makes it possible to discuss why the situation is as depicted. The X Model was originally development in the 1970-ies with firms in mind. Many years later I started to apply it to projects. The strength of the X Model is that the present situation is presented on one page of paper and that it allows for causal analysis. It is easy to discuss why the results are as we see them. The results must depend on the way we conduct our work processes, and the work processes are affected by personal and factual premises. 

I have quite recently written an article which presents the ideas of the X Model in more detail: Erling S. Andersen (2010): Describing and assessing projects: The X model. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business,3 (3), pp. 369-386. 

At Norwegian School of Management BI we have given Masters-level courses in project management since the middle of the 1990-ies. I have taught our students, who are experienced practitioners from industry and government, the X Model. Many have used it in their Master theses to assess projects they have been writing about. The students have used it on a micro level (to assess their real world projects) to get a better understanding of their projects and discuss improvements. After a while I thought might be interesting to collect all the X Models that the students were making. Then much later the idea appeared that it would be interesting to compare the situation of 2000 and 2008 by looking at all the models from these two years. I then did what we could call a study on the macro level to see if it was possible to identify significant changes over time. And as you see from my paper we are getting better. 


 

Q. You concluded that some areas of project management have shown improvement, saying specifically that team members are more knowledgeable about project work, project objectives are more clearly expressed, project organization is more appropriate, most work processes are improved, team members experience project work as rewarding and are more motivated for future projects, and the results of the project are more balanced. Why do you think this is true? Do you credit PMI? Better Training? Stiffer performance requirements from employers? 

My research does not look into why we have become better. I would think that many factors contribute to progress. Project managers and team members are better educated and have more extensive experiences compared to ten years ago. Of course the professional associations like PMI deserve credits. They have argued strongly for professionalization, use of standards and certifications. 

 

Q. You also talk about areas for improvement, specifically, in achieving the project mission and goals or keeping to the project schedule and budget. Why do you think this is the case? 

It is of great importance at the start of the project to discuss what we mean by project success. Our research shows that there is too little interaction between the project owner (the sponsor) and the project manager. Often, the purpose of the project is not clearly stated. The project manager tends to focus solely on the project constraints (time, cost, and quality), but the project owner is focused on value creation. Better and close cooperation between the two parties always improves value creation.

 

Q. Do you know of other recent and important research in this area? Do you know of other studies being conducted now that might be of interest? 

I have been fortunate to have taken part in two very interesting research projects: "Value of Project Management", chaired by professor Janice Thomas, Athabasca University (the results are presented as a special issue of Project Management Journal, 2009, issue 1) and the UK-initiated project "Rethinking Project Management" (the results are presented as a special issue of International Journal of Project Management, 2006, issue 8). Many international researchers took part in both projects and they have affected the way we think about project management.