I'm curious, does anyone still use a Project Management Plan; not to be confused with a project schedule/timeline but a plan that consists of areas like how risk, change, etc. will be managed? If you do, under what conditions? Saving Changes...
While it might not be called a PM Plan, having an integrated approach detailing how each applicable knowledge area will be addressed is still a relatively common practice in organizations which have some PM policies or standards in place.
Whether it is a shared folder containing individual plans, a wiki or an actual single document, so long as it is right-sized and tailored to the context of the project, it is of value.
For example, if you used the Disciplined Agile toolkit, the team's decisions around the process goals, decision points and options could be collected on a site or a document which would be very similar to a PM Plan for their project.
Kiron Saving Changes...
Anonymous
Thank you Kiron for your prompt and detailed response, it certainly helps. Saving Changes...
For bigger projects with a lot of stakeholders, I'll put together a slide deck that covers the basics of how the project will be run, including risk management, scope change management, etc. I try to keep it simple to avoid death by PowerPoint, but even when it gets a little lengthy, it's shorter than a book that nobody will read.
I usually present it once, but after the first time it's becomes more of a reference document and I only share specific slides, as needed. Saving Changes...
Anonymous
Aaron, thank you the reply I could not agree more. I posted this question to take a temperature on the use of this type of document/template (i.e. a traditional Project Plan). Based on the responses received it seems that it's not indeed that a traditional Project Plan is used but some or many of its elements are addressed in some other form.
What particularly resonates with me, but collides with that of my employer, is that it's presented once and serves thereafter as a reference document; my employer believes that it is a 'living document' which I don't necessarily subscribe.
Again, thank you!
...
1 reply by Aaron Porter
Mar 17, 2021 10:13 AM
Aaron Porter
...
Anything related to scope, cost, or time has the potential to change; those parts could be considered living. As mentioned in another response, these changes are often reflected somewhere else. I have updated my slide deck when the need arose to share it later in the project. If part of a project audit checked whether, or not, the document accurately reflected all aspects of the project over the life of the project I would be consistent with keeping it maintained. Those audit requirements do not exist, for me.
I'd suggest that if you don't update your PM Plan then it has limited value because plans are expected to evolve as our understanding of the projects increases. Saving Changes...
Thanks Kiron. I certainly do agree that updates, revisions, etc. to the original content are necessary as the project evolves but curious how many go back to the original 'PM Plan' or document them in some other document. Saving Changes...
Thomas WalentaGlobal Project Economy ExpertHackenheim, Germany
Working at IBM we had a project management methodology and for each project chose the elements that we would use on it. These elements like the change management plan, would be rather static.
Plans like communication, stakeholder or staffing plans were updated when appropriate.
Other parts like the schedule, cost and scope as well as risk/issue and other registers would be regularily updated, often weekly. Baselines only following approved change requests.
We stored all of this digitally in a project control book, part of the PMIS.
Thomas Saving Changes...
Anonymous
Thanks for the reply Thomas...that seems to be inline w. my experience as well. Initiating documentation was tailored to meet the size, complexity, etc. of the project and updates such as schedule, tasks/deliverables, risks, etc. would be updated in their own documents (e.g. risk register, project schedule, etc.). Saving Changes...
Aaron, thank you the reply I could not agree more. I posted this question to take a temperature on the use of this type of document/template (i.e. a traditional Project Plan). Based on the responses received it seems that it's not indeed that a traditional Project Plan is used but some or many of its elements are addressed in some other form.
What particularly resonates with me, but collides with that of my employer, is that it's presented once and serves thereafter as a reference document; my employer believes that it is a 'living document' which I don't necessarily subscribe.
Again, thank you!
Anything related to scope, cost, or time has the potential to change; those parts could be considered living. As mentioned in another response, these changes are often reflected somewhere else. I have updated my slide deck when the need arose to share it later in the project. If part of a project audit checked whether, or not, the document accurately reflected all aspects of the project over the life of the project I would be consistent with keeping it maintained. Those audit requirements do not exist, for me. Saving Changes...
Anonymous
Aaron - yes that makes perfect sense and I agree that changes to the 3 'legs' would generally be reflected elsewhere. To go back to the original PM Plan, for me, has only been justified when a material change has occurred. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
