Voices on Project Management

By

Peter Tarhanidis, Ph.D.

Project management methodologies have evolved significantly over the years, with waterfall and agile emerging as two of the most prominent approaches. Each has its strengths and weaknesses, making them suitable for different types of projects and organizational needs.

• Waterfall is a linear, sequential approach to project management. It is characterized by distinct phases; each phase must be completed before the next begins with limited ability to revisit or revise previous stages. Waterfall is effective for projects with well-defined requirements and a clear path to completion, such as construction or manufacturing projects.
• Agile is an iterative, incremental approach designed to accommodate change and foster continuous improvement. It emphasizes collaboration, customer feedback, and small, manageable units of work called sprints. Agile is well-suited for projects where requirements are expected to evolve, such as software development or other innovative fields.

Surveys indicate:

• 51% of companies implement waterfall and 71% of companies utilize agile.
• PMI’s 2020 Pulse of the Profession® report Ahead of the Curve: Forging a Future-Focused Culture indicated that 11.4% of investment is wasted due to poor project performance.
• The Standish Group’s CHAOS report showed only a 31% project success rate.
• Harvard Business Review estimated a $3 trillion annual global financial loss, wasted resources, missed opportunities, and negative societal impacts due to project failures.

Given these statistics, you may ask which method is best for a given project. Many organizations find value in blending these methodologies to create a hybrid approach, leveraging the structured planning of waterfall and the flexibility of agile. This hybrid model can offer a balanced framework that enhances efficiency, adaptability, and customer satisfaction.

While waterfall's structured approach provides clear milestones and accountability, its rigidity can be a drawback in dynamic environments. Agile's flexibility and responsiveness to change make it ideal for such settings, but it can struggle with scope creep and lacks the clear, long-term planning of waterfall.

The hybrid approach seeks to combine the best of both worlds, providing a structured framework that remains flexible and adaptable. By relying on a competency and development framework, management can highlight the key components of hybrid—consistently applying best practices to mature success and project outcomes.

Key components of hybrid project management include:

1. Phase-based structure with iterative execution: Projects are divided into phases similar to waterfall, but within each phase, agile sprints are used to execute tasks. This allows for detailed planning and requirements gathering upfront, followed by iterative development and testing.
2. Defined milestones with flexible deliverables: Hybrid project management sets clear milestones to track progress and ensure alignment with overall goals. However, the deliverables within each milestone can be adjusted based on iterative feedback and changing requirements.
3. Customer collaboration and feedback loops: Regular interactions with customers and stakeholders are maintained to gather feedback and make necessary adjustments. This aligns with agile’s emphasis on customer collaboration and helps ensure the project remains on track to meet user needs.
4. Comprehensive documentation with adaptive planning: Initial project documentation and planning follow a waterfall approach to establish a clear roadmap. Throughout the project, adaptive planning is used to refine and update this documentation based on iterative insights and changes in scope.

Steps for implementing a hybrid model:

1. Assess project requirements and environment: Evaluate the project's nature and complexity, and the environment in which it will be executed. Projects with stable requirements and clear end goals may lean more toward waterfall, while those with uncertain or evolving requirements may benefit more from agile practices.
2. Define phases and iterations: Establish major project phases with clear objectives and timelines. Within these phases, implement agile sprints or iterations to manage work increments, allowing for continuous assessment and adjustment.
3. Foster collaboration and communication: Create a culture of open communication and collaboration among team members, stakeholders, and customers. Regular meetings, such as daily stand-ups and sprint reviews, can help maintain alignment and address issues promptly.
4. Balance documentation and flexibility: Ensure that initial project plans and requirements are well-documented but remain open to revising them as the project progresses. Use documentation as a living document that evolves with the project.
5. Monitor progress and adapt: Use waterfall’s milestone tracking to monitor overall progress, and agile’s sprint reviews to assess interim deliverables. Be prepared to adapt plans and strategies based on feedback and performance metrics.

The leadership required in hybrid project management has a blend of strategic oversight and adaptive facilitation to balance the structured rigor of waterfall with the dynamic responsiveness of agile. Effective leaders in this context must embody several key traits and skills to ensure project success:

1. Visionary thinking: Leaders must articulate to the team a clear vision of the project’s goals. They need to establish long-term objectives while accommodating short-term adjustments, maintaining alignment with overall project aims.
2. Flexibility and adaptability: Leaders must pivot between structured planning and iterative development. They must be comfortable with change and capable of guiding their team through unexpected challenges and shifts in project scope.
3. Strong communication skills: Open, transparent communication is essential. Leaders must facilitate continuous dialogue among team members, stakeholders and customers. Regular updates and feedback loops are crucial for maintaining alignment and addressing issues.
4. Collaborative mindset: Encouraging a culture of collaboration is vital. Leaders should promote teamwork, ensuring that all voices are heard and valued. This involves fostering an environment where team members feel empowered to contribute ideas and solutions.
5. Strategic decision-making: Effective hybrid project leaders must be adept at making informed decisions quickly, balancing the need for detailed planning with the flexibility to adapt plans based on real-time insights and feedback.
6. Risk management: Proactively identifying and mitigating risks through both structured risk assessment and iterative reviews is crucial. Leaders must be vigilant and responsive, adjusting strategies as necessary to keep the project on track.

By embodying these qualities, leaders can successfully navigate the complexities of hybrid project management, ensuring that projects are both well-organized and adaptable to change. The overall benefits of hybrid project management provide for:

1. Enhanced flexibility: Combining structured phases with iterative sprints allows for greater adaptability to changes in project scope, requirements and market conditions.
2. Improved stakeholder engagement: Regular feedback loops and collaborative practices ensure stakeholders are consistently involved and satisfied with the project’s direction.
3. Risk mitigation: The hybrid approach can identify and address risks earlier in the process through iterative reviews, reducing the likelihood of major issues arising late in the project.
4. Balanced planning and execution: It provides a comprehensive planning framework while maintaining the flexibility needed for creative problem-solving and innovation.

In conclusion, hybrid project management offers a robust framework that leverages the strengths of both waterfall and agile methodologies. By blending structured planning with iterative execution, organizations can achieve greater efficiency, adaptability, and customer satisfaction, making it a versatile approach for a wide range of projects.

Please share in the comments how your organization defined hybrid project approaches and any case studies that you would like to share.

References

1. PMI Pulse of the Profession®: Ahead of the Curve: Forging a Future-Focused Culture
2. The Standish Group: Benchmarks and Assessments
3. It’s Time to End the Battle Between Waterfall and Agile
4. Agile vs Waterfall: Which Approach Should You Choose for Your Project
5. Waterfall vs Agile Methodology: What’s Better for Your Project?

By Peter Tarhanidis, Ph.D.

In the ever-evolving landscape of corporate strategic planning, organizations face the perpetual dilemma of choosing between capital spending for growth—and optimizing operations for efficiency. Striking the right balance amidst economic trends and leveraging organizational strengths becomes paramount when navigating through strategic projects. Meeting shareholder and stakeholder needs, while aligning with the organization's mission, presents a constant challenge.

To anticipate potential initiatives, project managers must consider global macroeconomic conditions and CEO outlooks. A preliminary assessment based on the United Nations World Economic Situation and Prospects and OECD Economic Outlook reports for 2024 reveals a projected global economic growth slowdown from 2.7% to 2.4%. This trend suggests a delicate balance between slow growth and regional divergences. Key considerations include:

• Global inflation showing signs of easing from 5.7% to a projected 3.9%
• Slowed global investment trends due to uncertainties, debt burdens and interest rates
• Fading global trade growth attributed to shifting consumer expenditure, geopolitical tensions, supply chain troubles, pandemic effects and protectionist policies
• Notable regional examples include the United States expecting a GDP drop from 2.5% to 1.4%, China experiencing a modest slowdown from 5.3% to 4.7%, Europe and Japan projecting growth rates of 1.2%, and Africa's growth expected to slightly increase from 3.3% to 3.5%

Examining the corporate landscape, a survey of 167 CEOs in December 2023 indicated a confidence index of 6.3 out of 10 for the 2024 economy—the highest of the year. The CEO upsurge assumes inflation is under control, the Fed may not raise interest rates and instead reverse rates, setting up a new cycle of growth. Furthering the CEO agenda, McKinsey & Co. identified eight CEO 2024 priorities:

• Innovating with GEN AI to dominate the future
• Outcompeting with technology to drive value
• Driving energy transition for net zero, decarbonization, and scaling green businesses
• Cultivating institutional capability for competitive advantage
• Building out middle managers
• Positioning for success amidst geopolitical risks
• Developing growth strategies for continued outperformance
• Considering the broader macroeconomic wealth picture for identifying growth

As project managers, navigating the uncertainty of economic shifts necessitates staying vigilant. The year may bring variables and predictions that impact the execution probability of strategic projects. Shifting between growth plans and efficiency drivers demands different preparation. To stay prepared, consider the following:

• Regularly monitor global economic indicators and CEO outlooks
• Foster agility within the team to adapt to changing priorities
• Develop scenario plans that account for potential economic shifts
• Collaborate with key stakeholders to gather real-time insights
• Continuously reassess project priorities based on evolving economic conditions

In an environment of perpetual change, proactive monitoring, adaptability and strategic collaboration will be key to successfully steering projects through the dynamic economic landscape.

How else can you stay prepared as the demands shift on you and your team?

References

1. JP Morgan: Economic Trends
2. Economic outlook: A mild slowdown in 2024 and slightly improved growth in 2025
3. UN: World Economic Situation and Prospects 2024
4. McKinsey: What matters most? Eight CEO priorities for 2024
5. CEOs Gain Confidence About 2024 On Hopes Of Lower Rates

By Marian Haus, PMP

There is obviously a high interest in the project management community and literature about what drives project success. For example, searching online for “why projects succeed” will return you five times more web pages than “why projects fail.” Similarly, there are four times more pages about “project success factors” than “project failure factors.”

This is no coincidence! The overwhelming interest in project success insights is driven by the struggle of many organizations and project managers to understand what drives success.

But before answering the question of why projects succeed, let’s first try to define project success.

The most common definition of success is delivering the project on time, on budget and in scope. PMI’s PMBOK Guide^® says a project is successful if the following parameters are met: product and project quality, timeliness, budget compliance and customer satisfaction.

Others define project success by measuring the project ROI (or business case) over a certain period of time. If the ROI is positive, the project is declared successful, regardless of its deviations along the way.

I have my own definition: A project is successful if it meets its given goals, within acceptable variance boundaries (e.g., in terms of scope, time or budget). This is a relative definition and relies on the fact that the world is not perfect. Hence even a successful project will rarely be a 100 percent success.

A civil construction project might be declared successful if it meets its scope and quality. Acceptable time or budget deviations might not be seen as failure. Similarly, an IT project might be declared successful if it meets its scope on time, with acceptable deviations from quality or budget.

A project’s success is relative: it depends on how the success criteria and metrics are defined from the very beginnings of the project, along with who will measure them.

OK, there are clearly many definitions of project success. Similarly, there are also many views and studies on why projects succeed.

Let’s take a look at a few studies and try to find a common denominator.

According to PMI’s 2015 Pulse of the Profession®: Capturing the Value of Project Management, over the last three years the number of projects meeting their goals—hence being successful—has remained steady at about two-thirds of projects. This success is the result of organizations supporting project excellence by focusing on fundamental aspects of culture, talent and process.

But size matters, too. A Gartner study from 2012 shows that small IT projects (below US$350,000) are more likely to succeed than big projects (budgets over US$1 million).

Other studies reveal that project success is tightly linked to clear project objectives and requirements that are fully understood and supported by actively engaged stakeholders.

My view on the common denominator that leads to project success is simple: the main drivers of project success are rarely of a technical nature. Instead, the drivers are the basics of the project management culture and discipline within the project organization.

In other words, fix the project management basics, and your chances of reaching project success will increase.

By Marian Haus, PMP

There are dozens of studies about project failure. (To name just three: Standish Group’s Chaos reports, PMI’s 2013 Pulse of the Profession^®: The High Cost of Low Performance and Gartner’s 2012 survey on why projects fail). There are at least as many reasons why projects fail.

Although in some cases forces external to a project can imperil its success, I am convinced that properly managing internal factors, particularly scope, is a key enabler for project success. This is because internal factors can be controlled, while external factors can merely be influenced.

Let’s take some classic reasons projects fail and tackle their root causes from a project scope management perspective.

Vague or unclear requirements and no change control—aka the never-ending scope. These are typical problems related to poor project scope management. The remedy is straightforward. Complete and clear requirements should make it to the scope; anything else poses a risk. In addition, at least a basic change management process is required to keep scope creep under control.

Lack of clear roles and responsibilities (R&R). You tailor your project team around the scope work that needs to be carried out. Because of this, you have to be clear about what your project needs to deliver. This includes product specifications, product design, implementation, integration with other related product parts, validation, delivery, etc.

If the lack of R&R clarity lies within your client organization or with an organization external to your project, then break down your project scope into specific deliverables and lay out the assumption and prerequisites for delivering them. For example, a product specification will have to be reviewed and signed off by the client, the client is expected to provide you with the validation benchmarks, etc.

A lack of R&R often results in lack of ownership and accountability of deliverables.

Underestimated timelines. This can happen especially if estimations are done based on insufficient information or when the scope is not well understood. Estimates are consequently rough, based on previous experience, approximations and assumptions. If conditions are changing during the project lifecycle, this can lead to time or budget overruns.

Unclear and/or unrealistic expectations. This is often related to the project scope. Your project team might be unclear about what it is supposed to deliver or what level of quality and maturity your deliverable will have to pass to meet the acceptance criteria. In other cases, the team might be unclear on how the delivery of your project scope will impact the receiving organization.

Project complexity. This relates mainly to the failure to break down a large scope into more manageable pieces and deliverables. If the list of deliverables is not clear, the sequence in which these are to be produced will not be determined. If the deliverables’ relation to each other isn’t clear, then team members will just be busy delivering something, sometime, for some level of effort. This leads to missing the project goal or ending up with time or budget overruns.

A well-understood and executed scope brings you a huge step closer to finishing your project successfully.

What is your experience with managing project scopes? What key factors, other than scope, do you see as enablers for project success?