Voices on Project Management

By Kevin Korterud

I’m frequently asked how program managers can synchronize projects using waterfall approaches with those using agile or other approaches. As programs are launched to address larger and more complex business problems, harmonizing a program’s projects becomes an essential component of success.

In my last post, I shared two tips for achieving harmony: remember that there’s no such thing as agile or waterfall programs, and make the correct delivery approach choice before a project begins.

Here are two more tips.

3. Establish a Program PMO and an Agile COE

One of the critical success factors for any large program is the program management office (PMO). The program-level PMO enables the program manager to spend time on higher-value activities while the PMO creates the operational governance, reporting and overall management foundations required to run a program.

As agile and other delivery approaches mature, there is a great need for a COE (Center of Excellence) model that fosters efficient and effective delivery approaches for projects on programs. Just as PMI has created a consistent approach to project management, agile and other delivery approaches are at a point in their maturity cycle where consistency is needed for them as well.

An agile COE can facilitate this consistency while serving as a clearinghouse for improved agile practices. This COE can also address different variants in waterfall, supplier and governmental delivery approaches, thus resulting in an overall harmonized approach for program and project delivery. 

4. Speak the Same Metrics Reporting Language  

George Bernard Shaw once said, “England and America are two countries separated by a common language.” Being a program manager with projects utilizing multiple delivery approaches can feel like living in one country separated by multiple languages!

On a program, it is essential that no matter their delivery approach, projects need to be able to both accurately describe their progress and do it in a way consistent with other projects. When dealing with projects with multiple delivery approaches, a suitable translation needs to be in place for progress metrics. This is particularly necessary for stakeholders such as finance, human resources or other business functions where an easily understood definition of progress is critical.

For example, agile projects do a great job in counting projected versus actual requirements and their weighted points. Using the total and completed requirements, a percentage completion can be calculated that is consistent with a waterfall delivery approach. Other agile-specific metrics such as effort per story point can be used to supplement the core progress metrics.

In addition, even between waterfall delivery approaches there needs to be defined a consistent approach for earned value structures, tracking actual cost and other progress essentials. (Note that aside from progress metrics, the concepts of risks, issues, dependencies, milestones, cost forecasts and governance escalations all remain the same no matter the project delivery approach.)

Program managers are orchestrators of both project delivery and the attainment of business results. They need to be always thinking about eventual business outcomes, no matter which delivery approaches are in play. Remember: no one chooses an airline or car model because the company used agile or waterfall on their projects—it’s all about the experience.

What methods have you seen employed in programs to handle multiple delivery approaches? 

By Linda Bourne

As we all know, the problem with best practices is that they slowly slip away as we respond to time pressures, and bad habits take root. We know what’s supposed to be done but settle for good-enough practices—until it’s too late.

Well, the start of a new year brings a new opportunity to refocus on re-establishing good habits in all areas of project management, including stakeholder engagement.

The following four best practices will help you engage with your team and other stakeholders:

1. Listen well and respond promptly

This is the first lesson in stakeholder engagement for a project manager dealing with demanding and influential stakeholders: Listen well and respond promptly to stakeholder requests as appropriate to the level of need and the stakeholder priority.

Responding quickly to a request shows you respect the person making the request; but responding does not mean you’re agreeing or dropping everything else. A suitable response may be to say no or to schedule an action at an appropriate future date.

2. Connect with others who share your goals

Stakeholder engagement is required when you alone cannot achieve your goals, particularly goals that you share with others. You cannot achieve these goals without ongoing, effective stakeholder dialogue. This includes connecting with your team, networking with your peers and building “organizational currency” for use in the future when you need to influence others (see my post from a few years back about “Influence Without Authority”).

3. Commit to consultation before decision-making

Don’t try to engineer in advance the outcomes of stakeholder dialogue. An open discussion, without prejudicing any of the outcomes in advance, almost always results in a better decision. If stakeholders think you are just trying to persuade them to accept an outcome that is already set in stone, they will disengage and become cynical.

However, if you’ve already made a decision, respect your team and pass on the information—don’t pretend to consult.

4. Stay focused on common goals

In project management this ought to be easy—a successful project outcome benefits everyone. But project managers sometimes fear that stakeholder engagement will force them into doing things they may not want to do. This is unlikely to happen if you focus your communication and engagement activities on the common goals you share with your stakeholders. The dialogue then becomes a discussion about options for achieving shared goals, not a series of demands by either party.   

None of this is rocket science, but effectively engaging your stakeholders, leading to constructive dialogue that drives project success, does require planning, processes and time. Given the myriad time pressures we all face day-to-day, it’s all too easy to see these simple practices as low-priority activities and start ignoring your stakeholder community—until it’s too late and you have a major crisis on your hands.

Make 2016 the year you move beyond crisis management.  

By Kevin Korterud

As both a project and program manager, I’m always keen to have projects and programs take the right first steps toward success. In the past, this would involve selecting the unified delivery approach used for all of the projects on a program. The idea was to impart consistency to the way projects were managed as well as produce common metrics to indicate progress.

It’s not that easy anymore. Today’s programs have projects with agile, waterfall, supplier, corporate and sometimes regulatory-mandated delivery approaches. In addition, these approaches as well as the different arrangements made with suppliers (e.g., time and materials vs. fixed price with deliverables) have dramatically increased the level of complexity and diversity of delivery approaches within a program.

So as a program manager, how do I keep all of these projects in sync no matter the delivery method? As a project manager, how can I execute my project in concert with the overall program in order to maximize the value that will be delivered, while avoiding schedule and cost overruns resulting from projects not operating in harmony? 

These are emerging challenges for which there are no single easy answers, of course. But I have found a handful of tips useful in getting a program’s projects to operate in a synchronized manner. I’ll share the first few in this post and the final ones in my next post, appearing later this week.

1. Remember: There’s No Such Thing as Agile or Waterfall Programs  

Given the mix of project delivery approaches, the program needs to properly segment work to manage the budget, resources and schedule regardless of the project delivery approach. In addition, the schedule alignment points, budget forecast process and deliverable linkages need to be identified between the various projects.

Typically, I find that while there is effort to plan for these items at the project level, the upfront effort for this harmonization at the program level is underestimated or sometimes left out altogether—program managers think the project teams will figure this out themselves. This sets the program up for schedule and budget overruns as well as overall dilution of the program business case.

Some ways for a program manager to harmonize projects on a program include:

• Determine which agile sprint cycles will be used for aligning data integration, requirements and deliverables with the other projects.
• Forecast the number of agile sprint cycles possible given the program schedule and budget parameters.
• Use an integrated schedule to constantly generate awareness of relative project progress within a program—no matter the delivery approach.
• Identify key dependencies between projects in the program; this can include event, deliverable and external dependencies.
• Use active resource management across all projects on the program. 

2.  Make the Correct Delivery Approach Choice Before a Project Begins

The type of delivery approach for a project is determined by the type of work being performed and the end consumer of the project’s deliverable.

For example, a project on a program that is slated to create a consumer portal would be a desirable candidate for an agile delivery method. Another project that involves heavy system integration that a consumer never sees would be a candidate for a waterfall approach. A project to pass data into a government system would likely have its delivery approach set by the governmental body.

So before a project starts, program and project managers should agree on the optimal delivery approach that is the best fit for the project.   

Look for more advice in my next post on synchronizing a program’s projects, regardless of delivery method.

By Mario Trentim

Daniel Kahneman, Nobel laureate in behavioral economics and author of Thinking, Fast and Slow, has written about how people tend to make decisions based on the potential value of losses and gains rather than the final outcome. Considering our common cognitive and emotional biases, how can we cope with daily ethics challenges with integrity?

We humans are in some ways predictably irrational. “Common sense” doesn’t mean best practices. Some people might have totally appropriate but opposite stances on the same topic.

Does that mean ethical practices are a matter of choice? Of course not—ethics are a matter of common good: In his book Justice: What’s the Right Thing to Do, Michael Sandel explores timeless philosophical and theoretical questions with real-world examples. He does the same in this video:

My conclusion is that the more we abide by a code of ethics based on strict rules and procedures, the more people tend to display unethical behaviors when faced with gray areas and edge cases.

So what’s the solution?

In How Adam Smith Can Change Your Life, Russ Roberts provides extremely valuable insights to the question above. In summary, we are much better off by teaching and praising Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments than by creating new regulations and sanctions to prevent unethical behavior.

What All This Means for Project Managers

What’s the upshot of all this for project management professionals? We must abide by the PMI Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct, but it’s even more important that we adhere to ethics focused on the common good.

Project managers face extreme pressure. Shortcuts are tempting—but in the long run they seldom pay off. Here are two examples of unethical temptations that put our work into the broader moral perspective that I think is so valuable.

1. Imagine you hire a stockbroker. You ask his unbiased opinion on the best investment, and he provides you information about assets he already manages without mentioning others that might better suit your needs. Is that ethical behavior? What if you, as a project manager, offer a solution to your client that you know isn’t the best one because it’s the easiest for you?
2. Suppose you visit a doctor. He’s in a hurry, so he doesn’t perform the necessary diagnostic steps. He prescribes a general drug that might help you—or might not. And he asks you to come back in two months. Is that ethical behavior? What if you, as a project manager, don’t take the time to gather requirements and instead try to force a one-size-fits-all solution on your client?

It’s easy to point fingers at doctors and lawyers—their work dramatically impacts people’s lives. A mistake made by a prosecutor may imprison an innocent. A doctor’s mistake may kill or handicap a patient.

How about project managers’ mistakes? You may put your project in jeopardy, of course. But that’s not all: You may put your team members, client and other stakeholders at risk. You may even bankrupt your organization.

The bottom line: The most surefire way to maintain high ethical standards is to think frequently about the far-reaching impacts of your work—on worker safety, the environment and social well-being, for example. Our choices matter—in ways we can’t necessarily anticipate.

How do you respond to everyday ethical challenges in your project management practice? Share your thoughts below.

By Wanda Curlee

Compared to project or program management, “portfolio management” is in its infancy. I suspect many still think of investment or financial portfolio managers when they hear the phrase.

Portfolio management—I don’t usually put “project” before these words—will certainly change significantly during the next decade. Think how much project management has changed in the last 10 years.

But instead of looking into a crystal ball to imagine the state of portfolio management in 2026, let’s just think about 2016. I’m keeping my eyes peeled for three things this year.

1) C-Suite recognition.

I expect many more people in the C-Suite to recognize that implementing strategy is doing the hard work. Someone needs to be the push between executives and senior management on one hand, and program and project managers on the other.

Some would say that this is the PMO manager’s position, but that misses the point. The portfolio manager sits above the PMO and does the hard work for the C-Suite. He or she has the ear of the C-Suite and makes tough recommendations to the governance team. This is primarily done by looking at the strategic objectives, aligning the projects and programs to them, and ensuring that the appropriate resources are available for execution.

2) New tools.

What else will we see? Tools! To date, there is no one tool that truly meets the need of the portfolio manager. Yes, some come close. But there is nothing that appears to have the input of a seasoned portfolio manager.

I hope some enterprising software company will retain an experienced portfolio manager to help design a brilliant tool. Because when the end user is asked to help design the software, a much better product happens.

3) Virtual abilities.

Along with the right tools, a portfolio manager needs to be able to work in a virtual environment. With clients, project managers, vendors and leaders in different parts of the world, many companies are now operating in a virtual environment. That means it’s increasingly important that portfolio managers have the ability to deal with time zone and cultural differences.

It’s hard to say exactly how working in a cloud-based environment could impact the world of portfolio management. It could conceivably provide greater transparency to an organization’s leaders, for example.

What do you expect to see as portfolio management matures in 2016 and beyond?