We love implementing, following, and encouraging others to follow ‘processes’ as Project Managers. But, is there a time when having too many processes in place can actually harm or slow down a project? I think so. I’ve seen some become so entangled and entrenched in following processes that the Big Picture (getting the project done) suffers. I’m not talking about taking short-cuts, but there is definitely a point in time when enough is enough.
What do you think? I’d love to hear some of your nightmare stories of where unnecessary and convoluted processes dragged a project down, or how you gauge when it is time to implement a process. Saving Changes...
Hans RobbersSenior Director| SalesforceVlissingen, Netherlands
Jennifer
Interesting question. In my experience the number of processes, and the number of process steps are directly proportional to the size of the project/programme and the number of resources in the project. This immediately effect the agility of the project.
Second observation is In which company and which culture is the project based? A governmental environment has a differen view on procedures as start up company.
The first you can influence the second not or hardly. One way of improving the agility of the project is to detemine per process what the added value of each of the process steps is and remove the steps which add no value. These are often remains of a previous organisational structure,
When there is time to implement a process it is when there is a clear confusion on roles and responsibilities. However as a rule when you implement a process you should at least consider to remove another one. In this way you keep on considering the agility of your proejct and the governance
Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
Hans is right on the part the number of steps in a process is proportional to the size and nature of the project. In general, project sizing, which includes total budget, timeframe, complexity, impact and risk factors etc., is the first step we do to categorize the project into the right group. We have different processes for different project groups so as to provide flexibility and granularity to the tasks and processes. Of course, we do provide exceptions. If there is any task within a project that have to be skipped, for one reason or another, the project manager will have to get the approval from PMO and justify the reasons behind it. Saving Changes...
Peter Babbington-FowlesSoftware Projects Manager| Synchro LtdCoventry, Warkwickshire, United Kingdom
Surely any good process should be designed to encourage a particular behaviour, to make people effective of efficient in the role they're playing on the project.
I think having "too many" processes is a sign that you have the wrong processes, if you accept that processes are about people and behaviour NOT jumping through artificial hoops! While a "short-cut" is actually a process improvement.
The point to focus on is those behaviours you are trying to encourage (or discourage) Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
If processes are being tossed, then the processes were no good to begin with. The process should identify the activities needed to get the job done. Where possible, the activities should be specified at a high enough level to allow flexibility so that they may be tailored to each project. Saving Changes...
Hans RobbersSenior Director| SalesforceVlissingen, Netherlands
Wai
Interesting blog. However most of the projects become a success due to flash insight. When this will happen I have no clue beginning of end. Conditioning is not helping to create a creative supportive environment. For me oivernance and processes need to support the team creativity and not hinder it. The lid on the jar restricts and is in no way supportive in my opinion.
That culture appears not to be mine
Hans Saving Changes...
Jan van GalenJan van Galen| jvgpro.nlHuizen, Netherlands
Processes are basically meant to streamline communication between projectmembers and the project environment. Put something in and have an expected, forecasted outcome.
The thing is that we projectmanagers do not like surprises, we like to throw something in the arena, sit back and relax and have the desired outcome. Unfortunately, thats the ideal world. If it were that simple, our jobs would become obsolete. But to make it as easy as possible for us, we define a beautiful thing called process in order to help us streamlining the project environment.
Once, we understand these basics, we can determine how much formality we need. This depends upon the size of the team, the scope of the project ecosystem and the risks involved.
If for example, you have a very small project team, but the stakeholders form a vast variety, one certainly need some agreements. Customers want to know what to expect.
I have a team of 3 webdevelopers and 2 webmasters. Relatively small one would say, but we agreed upon a process of change in order to get the chnages and features out in a planned and orderly way. Without the process, changes grew really wild, leaving the real customer (website visitor) guessing around, having the largest mouth getting all his things done and the projectmanager needing a rehab. Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
Another point to add is, we should constantly review and improvise existing processes to adapt to business environmental changes. I have seen people still stick to old ways of doing things for more than ten years even though the business environment has long changed. Saving Changes...
Hans RobbersSenior Director| SalesforceVlissingen, Netherlands
wai agree therefore we should look for companies with CMMI 4 or 5 Saving Changes...
Wai Mun KooPMO Director| Intergraph PP&MSingapore, Singapore
Just came across this interesting HBR article Job Available: No Experience Preferred that talks about the problem of hiring people with experience. Below is the part I like most.
Dowling explains: "We're in an industry that needs to change and re-examine almost every facet of how we do business. So people who have been trained and reinforced in the traditional ways of running hospitals and health system departments often don't look at doing things in new and creative ways. They don't challenge everything and ask tough questions.Instead they're locked into the old paradigms. So the last thing we need is someone with that kind of 'experience.'"
Saving Changes...
