Application of IFM - Incremental Funding Method

Keith,

I understand this method, and as you mentioned other cost-driven methods, as an additional tool when evaluating new ventures/initiatives. Sometimes good ideas and strong business case are not a recipe for a success.
Do you have a particular example? I am looking for a project/case study where this, or similar methodology, has been applied.

KIron -

Interesting that you mention the work of Dr. Goldratt, I am just in the middle of reading Critical chain and I am exploring more on the topic of ToC.

I am thinking now that IFM could be seen as the cost world where we need to protect the cost and optimize the spending/funding.

Do you have any case study or project in mind? I would like to collect examples of successful applications of the IFM in particular but now I think this might become even bigger research.

I don't know of any published case studies offhand, but have lived through a couple that I can describe at a high level.

Software development, or implementation/modification of COTS software is usually dealing with a modular system with different functionality in different modules. For example, a CAD system might include solid modeling, specific modeling features that support special types of manufacturing, stress analysis, kinematics, and other tools in a larger toolbox.

At the outset, the stakeholders who bought onto the whole plan are touting how all these features are going to transform the engineering dept. Functionality that seems like it would be simple to implement, may actually require significant work to either customize the software, or other parts of the business system to make them work, and the business case might not add value over existing processes.

As the implementation progresses, the net present value calculations change based on the current understanding of both cost, and value after implementation. The final configuration implemented will often be quite different than the original sales pitch. Some items may be deferred until later if funding is not available, or until some prerequisite functionality is available.

As they say, the devil is in the details, and the details often aren't known until you dig deeper into the problem. Then the financial rationale changes, driving changes in priorities.

Teodora -

I never had the chance to write a paper or article on it, but when I worked for a large bank within their EPMO, I had the opportunity to work with others to design their progressive funding approach for projects & programs. Whereas the old model provided initial seed funding to enable teams to get to a high degree confidence estimate which was then approved and fully funded (regardless of the remaining duration of the initiative, the refined approach provided tranches of funding with a maximum duration of one year and with lean governance checkpoints built in over the life of the funding spend to ensure that the project remained on track to deliver expected benefits.

The design was sound but the implementation suffered from the reality that regardless of how big or small a funding ask was, certain areas of the organization would make the funding approval process extremely onerous and as such, it could take longer to get approval on a tranche than the time to deliver it!

Kiron

Kiron,

Thank you for sharing your experience, that is the type of examples I am looking for.
This reminds me as well for something I was reading the Critical Chain book, about the policy constraints.

Is it possible for you to share more details on the design of the process?