I just started a new internship as a PMO analyst, and was asked to submit a report on the quality assurance methodology and potential improvment.
What we are doing now is to conduct gate reviews when the projects reach certain key milestones, planning, requirement, developmnet, testing, etc. Just to check the key documents, to ensure that the project has the required documents before it moves to the next key phase. Beside, in the gate review meeting, we investigate five key elements( business case justification, planning, resources, communication, govenance) to see whether the project is on track or not, to see whether there are any new issues or risks that need to brought into the attention of the project sponsor.
Just wonder according to your experience, what are the bad things about this approcach? Are there any areas we can improve? or are there any project management tools/ quality management tools that I can implement? Personally I have thought about EVA( Earned Value Assessment), but obviously this is not enough..
Your suggestions are very much appreciated. Just give me some hints.. Saving Changes...
Sort By:
Rakesh TrivediSenior Project Manager| IT CompanyIndore, Mp, India
Hello ,
Gate reviews are very familiar term in various project Mgmt principle like Six Sigma, CMM, Prince although they may be known as with some other name but meaning remain same. However, as per your post gate review is correct thing you are doing in order to have proper control over the Cost , time and scope and thus quality. With the various points noted below may you can cover some other points like Effort and schedule variance, Effort Cost analysis and Risk Management and customer satisfaction. Saving Changes...
Elizabeth HarrinDirector| RebelsGuideToPM.comLondon, England, United Kingdom
You didn't mention anything about benefits. Maybe there is something to be said for including a review of whether the project is on track to deliver what it set out, although you may be doing this already as a sub-section of reviewing the business case. Saving Changes...
Dave SchnellSr. Enterprise PM| State of North CarolinaRaleigh, Nc, United States
In my experience, gate reviews are more of a viability test that a quality assurance process. EVA will get you a picture, albeit indirectly, of the quality of your planning and estimating, but it doesn't assure quality. Quality comes from enforcement of best practice processes throughout the project life-cycle, not from the checklists produced at "gates." You'd be much better off describing how you will assure that test plans are created, they are followed, and that they enable requirements traceability, and that you have measures of success based on business objectives - make sure you have good change and configuration management practices, and make sure they are followed by auditing, and by flogging the miscreants who don't follow them...:))
It's the daily assurance that good practices are followed that drives quality, so that's where I'd focus.
Saving Changes...
Syed Rehan BaaqriSenior Enterprise Portfolio Manager| PepsiCOMckinney, Tx, United States
Gate reviews is typically a term which is used in Six Sigma methodology but essentially means a "Deliverable Review". As you develop your project plan into various phases, you define checkpoints or reviews to determine progress, variations and measure success that you have planned to evaluate a project health. It can consists of certain checks to ensure quality has been followed throughout the development phase to make sure that agreed upon objectives/expectations are being met. Saving Changes...
Stuart DixonProject Office Manager| Xl CatlinCrowbrough, United Kingdom
For a start I would suggest you are doing a good thing in actually having a gate review in the first place, too many projects move along at such a rate they don;t have a chance to pause for breath, which is what a gate review gives you.
As to what can be improved, I think that gate reviews should be seen like Jansus in having 2 faces one to look backwards, which is the typical job done by a gate review i.e. did we do what we needed to have done according to our methodology. And the other face to look forward into the future, which is it right that this project continues, and is the project still going to deliver successfully for the business
It is the second face the looking forward one that I don't see in too many gate reviews. I think this is because it is more difficult. It is easier for someone to review whether a document has been produced and signed off correctly, rather than do some analysis on whether it it OK to continue.
The other thing that must come from a Gate review is actions that are followed up, otherwise the gate review is toothless, and not valuable for either the project manager (as they can improve as a result) or the business (as the remedial actions to steer the project back on course are not done) Saving Changes...
Dave SchnellSr. Enterprise PM| State of North CarolinaRaleigh, Nc, United States
Some very good observations have been made here, and I think what I will take away is that there should be clarity within each organization as to what a gate review is to accomplish. Each review should have established objectives and outcomes. In some organizations, that may be QA, in others, it is a viability check. In some, it may be both - not something I would reccomend - purpose should be focused IMHO. I will still opt to have my QA institutionalized in daily activitiy, rather than a checkpoint, as I pefer QC activities to be performed more frequently, and at a more discreet level. Saving Changes...
Robin GoldsmithPresident| Go Pro Management Inc.Needham, Ma, United States
Gate reviews are a fine technique which like all techniques can be (and often are) performed poorly. Part of performing them poorly is not being aware how poorly they are being performed.
For instance, most gate reviews of requirements either merely check whether the requirements seem to have been defined in an appropriate manner or use one or two far-weaker-than-recognized techniques to check the requirements themselves.
In contrast, my Proactive Testing™ methodology includes more than 21 ways to review requirements, including many more powerful methods that catch numerous ordinarily-overlooked issues. These methods are described in my seminars and book, Discovering REAL Business Requirements for Software Project Success.
Effective projects and organizations integrate appropriate quality assurance techniques for intermediate as well as final deliverables throughout all project phases. Gate reviews are just one such method and should be double-checking the double-checking.
Saving Changes...
"Thousands of candles can be lighted from a single candle, and the life of the candle will not be shortened. Happiness never decreases by being shared."
