1. Is there a correlation between PM practices and project delays
2. If yes, is it due to lack of PM skills or application of strategies
Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Richard HowProgramme Management Consultant| How Associates LtdHarthill, South Yorkshire, United Kingdom
I think there is a correlation between poor application of PM practices or poor PM practices and project delays so it could be due to a lack of PM skills meaning they are unable to apply the practices or overly complicated and mandatory practices which make it impossible for a PM to run their project effectively.
what you need is good practices that are flexible enough to allow good PM's to run effective projects. Saving Changes...
Darren KosaPlanning & Controls ContractorHampshire, United Kingdom
The simple answer to the question is yes on the surface there is a correlation. There are many more of course, but f you look at some of the common causes of project failure…
Unrealistic deadlines or long timescales
Inadequate planning
Poor requirements definition (If indeed there any)
Poor scope management
Lack of an adequate change control system
Ineffective stakeholder engagement
Poor risk and issue management
Lack of user input
Environmental changes
Most if not all would find the blame laid firmly at the feet of the lowly Project Manager. In these cases I would reason, they are carrying the can not for the actual failure of the project, but more for not recognising the early warning signs and taking appropriate corrective action.
However, dig a bit deeper and you will always find more than meets the eye. If the project management culture of the organisation isn’t mature enough or sponsorship at the executive level is not as staunch as it could be, you can pretty much guarantee that the silk purse will not be made out of the sow’s ear.
Frank Winters did a whole series in gantthead on this very subject. Take a look and see what you think.
I agree with both Darren and Richard - there is a correlation between poor PMs and project delays. I would add that poor PM skills/execution can result in poor quality, cost overruns, and many other problems.
The biggest place that I see poor PM skills hurting project results is in the estimating phase. A poor PM is not going to be able to estimate well, nor negotiate appropriate benchmarks, milestones, and so on. Because the targets for the project are set poorly, the project is almost guaranteed to miss the targets, resulting in delays and other problems.
Darren and Richard have listed many other great points. I will not repeat those items.
The second question is more difficult: skills or application of strategies? Which matters more? To me, they are both interrelated. Particularly in project management, having great skills means knowing what tools and strategies to apply at what time. I do not know how to separate the two. A PM who has great skills but no strategy is a poor PM. Likewise a PM with poor skills but great strategy will also do poorly. I would much rather have a PM with average skills and strategy! Saving Changes...
Robert PennSr. Project ManagerAlexandria, Va, United States
There is definitely a correlation between poor PM practices and schedule delays, as described by the other people who have posted to this question. A key PM practice that is little discussed is negotiating ability. The PM needs to be willing to negotiate with stakeholders to tell them what is possible within the constraints imposed on the project. I've worked on many projects where stakeholders have imposed delivery dates, budgets, or both and then expected the PM to deliver to those constraints. Sometimes these dates and budgets are based on business needs and other times they are based on the stakeholder's perception of the difficulty of the process. If the constraints are not realistic, the PM needs to be able to recognize it and negotiate relief in one form or another or delays, budget overruns, or poor quality become inevitable.
Project management is far more than a set of technical skills. It is the process of getting people, both within the project and outside of it to do the things that need to be done to complete the project successfully (on time, within budget, and with the required quality level). It may mean negotiating scope changes with stakeholders, getting clients to understand and critically review products on time, or negotiating overtime work with employees, or even just getting people to talk to each other to agree on interfaces or share assumptions. Saving Changes...
To add a bit more color to many of the previous excellent posts, part of the skill set of a good project manager is sales. Specifically, the ability to sell the sponsor, team members, etc. on the benefits of defining the deliverables, budget, etc. as precisely and reasonably and swiftly as possible and of continuing to observe disciplined - not cumbersome! - processes.
In many organizations, that entails (gently) educating and re-educating management and colleagues. Saving Changes...
Josh NankivelEngineering Project Manager| AppleSioux Falls, Sd, United States
I agree with these replies, and would add to Darren's response specifically. The most helpful way to think about this as a PM is that all failure is your responsibility.
I think the #1 reason for project failures and delays is that project managers are good at finding someone else to blame.
"OK, if that's what she wants....but there's no way we'll make that date now."
"When this project fails, I can point to this poor performer and their line manager as the cause."
"I'll do the planning and we'll meet their requirements, even though this isn't going to work for them. At least my butt is covered, I can point the finger at their requirements."
Fault and blame are not helpful ways to think about it. It's your responsibility to make the project successful, period.
Examples:
Blame: "It's the sponsor's fault this failed because they hamstringed me"
Responsibility: "How could I have better managed my sponsor?"
Blame: "It's that team members fault because they did a terrible job."
Responsibility: "How could I have better monitored performance and caught this problems earlier, and dealt with them before it killed my project?"
Blame: "If my company would have sent me to training, I would have been able to run this project better."
Responsibility: "I was not prepared for this. I will go and educate myself and improve myself in these areas where I did poorly."
You get the idea. Here's the gist. A decent manager who takes ownership and initiative can deliver 80% of the value without any formal PM skills. Because they take ownership, they WILL improve their ability to manage projects and their process knowledge as they go along.
The #1 reason for project failure or delays is a lack of ownership by the project manager. Truthfully, even the best project managers I have worked with do this at times. I have done this myself. That's usually about the time when the risk meter should be hitting the ceiling.
