June 1-3, 2022 | Virtual
Please login or join to subscribe to this thread
Assuming the business case is signed and provides a good understanding of the project's purpose and expected outcomes, it could serve as the charter. However, if you have nothing which has been formally accepted that covers this information, getting a simple one page charter produced and signed off might be advisable.
Hello Vipin, you could also consider getting the SOW signed.
There seems to be two issues here: 1) Do you have a contract to initiate the work? Is there a concern that you may not get paid for the effort? and 2) Do you have sufficient understanding of the work required for effective delivery?
For 1) you need a signed document, by both parties
For 2) you can advise the client what your understanding is and how you are going to deliver
The naming of the documents is not all that important but a mutual understanding of the scope and delivery is critical. Some formality is recommended but understandings are possible without signatures. How well you know your client should influence your decision as to level of formality.
I would consider the verbal agreement and preliminary business case (that you mentioned) more of an “agreement to initiate planning.” In other words, it appears to me that the customer could still back out based on your presentation of the final business case, cost estimate, and other projections.
I would strongly recommend a formalized project charter. If you feel that would make the customer uncomfortable from a “signature burden perspective,” then sell the charter as your method of presenting your next set of deliverables. The signature being their receipt and agreement to the packaged content in the charter (which contains those deliverables).
Without signature accountability, you expose yourself, the team, and your product to unnecessary additional risks.
If the Customer is New & Sophisticated they will expect a fair level of Detail and Costs to determine whether you have understood what they need in order to really 'Proceed' .
If there are open questions you should mention those as pre-requisite to Developing the Detail Plan with Deliverables and Costs which should result in the PO or Contract.
I would suggest to get atleast an email approval from the customer for us to get started. basically a high level plan & cost is ok without an email approval or a formal document but to do a detailed plan you would need to take the efforts of the TL or BA & that involves cost.
agreeing on charter formalizes the existence of a project - it is an governance act empowering the project manager to spend company resources. Sometimes it includes descriptions of the project, like scope, cost, timelines, risks etc. But if those are included in an agreed business case, you may just refer to that business case in the charter.
I have rarely seen a charter change, but business cases may change and should drive a project change too.
Once you have the authority (charter), by a signed document or at least an email by the sponsor on behalf of the organization, you can commence with planning. The planning in the business case is a base for your planning and you might have to change it.
The key point here is the act of estimate because in this situations this is a direct impact on trust. My recommendation is taken a closer look to Barry Bohem´s work mainly the Cone of Uncertainty. Let me explain. No matter what you sign it is totally "waste" if you and all the involved team do not understand there is an inherent error that will make things happened in a range. For example, where you sign the business case the worst thing you can do is to say everybody "this will cost 100" because at this time you have to say "this will cost between 75 and 160". Why is that? Because estimation depends on two key things: information and risks. So, it does not matter what you sing off. It is a matter to put on the table that along the whole project, when more information (for example, more detailed requirements to understand better "what" for defining "how") is taken then a narrow error will happen. It is proven that, at the end of the project, you still have +- 10% of deviation. Last comment: if the provider know it and you push for a fixed cost project then she/he will put higher contingency on the final cost. And that is right.
This is all true however the first estimate of cost (based on limited information and a high degree of risk) determines if the project is financially viable. This high level estimate is typically +/- 35 to 50% allowing for estimating error and risk, thus 100 becomes 65 to 135 (using 35%). Subsequent estimates progressively validate that the project remains financially viable and provides a level of scope control.
During implementation a common project mistake is to look at sunk costs rather than project value - "we have 100 invested, we can't stop now!" Yes you can if you estimate that total project value is going to be exceed financial viability and you can't find efficiencies to bring it back on line.
Please login or join to reply