Risks Associated with Incomplete Stakeholder List / Engagement
Anonymous
Your opinions, please.
I am associated with a program charged with implementing a state-wide financial management system. Many state entities are mandated to use it. Those that remain can use it if they wish, i.e., no one can tell them they have to or should use it. I have been suggesting that the program needs a complete list of stakeholders, those who currently will use the new system and those choosing not to. Further, I am suggesting that we document what functionality those entities will use with the new system.
From your personal perspectives, 1) what risks do you see in not have a complete list of participating agencies, 2) what risks do you see in not understanding well what functionality each of the entities will use?
Understand that I am not the PM and I am new to the team from outside. To me this is a hole big enough to float an aircraft carrier through, but I need some fresh perspectives on how to present the risks to the program's management structure.
Your feedback would be greatly appreciated. Saving Changes...
Before answering your questions, I have some of my own that will help provide context to my responses. My overall response, however, should not be considered definitive - this is a broad topic and PMs with different background and experiences will have different perspectives than my own, which is not to say that one of us is right and the other wrong.
Is the sponsor aware of the situation/risk, and has he/she accepted it?
If the program is charged with "implementing" the application, does that mean it has already been developed?
Were the entities that are mandated to use it involved with providing requirements prior to development, or are they expected to use the system that is being delivered and conform to its functionality and capabilities?
This may well be a gaping hole, but if the sponsor understands the risk and has accepted it, the PM is responsible for abiding by the decision and making it work.
If a schedule has already been set, right or wrong, you may find little acceptance of your suggestions if pursuing them would impact the schedule. Try and define potential impacts to the schedule before submitting your change request to the change control board, if there is one.
If the application has already been developed and has to be used as is, and you do not have a complete list of participating agencies, this potentially reduces some of your risk (although acceptance may be painful) because they don't have a choice about whether or not to use it. But at the same time, not knowing who will use the system potentially exposes the following risks:
* Conflicts with other technologies
* Conflicts with other scheduled activities
* Inadequate resources
* Inability to provide training
* If there are deadlines for when to start using the system an unknown entity might miss the deadline due to lack of involvement
I could go on, but basically, if you don't know who all of your stakeholders are, you can't establish a complete Scope for the effort or identify stakeholder requirements. You should ask yourself which scenario poses the greater risk - not having a complete list of participating agencies and understanding the functionality they will use, or adding time to the project to understand this? How much will understanding these things change the project?
Some final thoughts. Where do the sponsor's and program management's interests lie - the cost of completing the project, the scope of the project, or the time it takes to complete the project? Understand the interests of those that you want to present your suggestions to, and tailor your suggestions to appeal to their interests. Being right may not help your case if the message is not presented well.
Good luck, and hopefully you will get enough perspective from other PMs to impress your leadership with your vision and motivate them to respond to the circumstances in a manner that will help the project succeed. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
