Currently, we use a 13 question survey to sponsors where they can respond 1-5 and make additional comments at the end. This results in a percentage satisfied. However, if one area scores low or (as some sponsors do) see a "3" as average, this skews the end result to be very low - perhaps lower than one would imagine (e.g. 66% for a project that went well by definition). How can we improve this to still reflect satisfaction but perhaps not have such focus on numbers? Saving Changes...
Mel BostHead Project Closeout and Lessons Learned Advisory Services Practice| BOT InternationalCave Creek, Az, United States
I feel it is necessary to examine the Facts first, then the various Perspectives and finally the Deliverables to determine what were the Significant Events of the project that might be worthy to be named Candidates for Project Lessons Learned.
This Framework yields a very actionable process which can lead to major improvements in the overall project processes. Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
I agree with Mel. Those that are familiar with statistics will know that numbers are just indicators. That is why we need to conduct statistical analysis to understand the story and reasoning behind each number. Saving Changes...
Rattanawan RattakulConsulting Project Manager| Anatta IT PM AdvisoryMelbourne, Vic, Australia
Very interesting thread about the post-mortem analysis. I wonder if there is any access eligibility required to view the attached files by Julie Goff and Anonymous. I seem to be directed to a page indicating I do not have the right credentials to access the files. Thank you for your clarification.
Rattanawan Saving Changes...
