Mike FrenetteManager, IT PMO| Halifax Water (retired)Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
People who are leary of heavy processes will often ask me if they can just call their initiative by another name, maybe a "small project" or a "just do it" type of item. This always leads to a discussion about eliminating crucial documents like project charters and PM Plans so they can just get on with it and stop swirling around creating these danged PM deliverables.
I'm sure you've run into this in your organiations too.
Senior Projects Manager | Field & Marten AssociatesNew Westminster, British Columbia, Canada
Mike, I do run into such situations sometimes but we do insist on having just enough documentation. Every project is different but there are certain documents like Business Case, Charter, Budget, Register, Plans and others that I believe are required for every project, however, the depth and details of those documents will be heavily dependent on the project itself.
We do clearly mention the requirements in our RFP if we're tendering the project or clearly communicate those requirement if the project is done internally. Saving Changes...
Khai Ng.IT PMO | IT Project Manager| TTGROUPHanoi, Viet Nam
"Process Tailoring". Processes should be tailored to suit types of projects and to ease project team from following rigrid and complex administrative procedures. Initiative is initiative, it is unchangeable whether it is small or big. Instead of changing it name, we should group simple projects as "Small project" type then attach a simple tailored process to it that requires Small Project' team members to follow. Saving Changes...
Jacilyn OgradyPMO Manager| Hearing AustraliaWinston Hiills, Nsw, Australia
People are always keen to take shortcuts if they can (and it's good practice a lot of the time). To ensure governance is in place for our large projects we use a sizing tool which helps show that governance is scalable, we also share what's in it for them - they will get access to our departments resources if they follow our project framework. Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
First of all, we are creating solution, not running projects. Project are the mean to create the solution. Second, to create the solution, before start an analysis must be done to adapt the way to crate the solution (the project or program) to the current situation taking into account the future situation to achieve. This is done by the business analyst. Third, the name assigned to the solution is key but it is independent of things like the approach or the governance (amount of project deliverables), Saving Changes...
If the folks who are doing the work are involved in defining how the work is done, things go much smoother. What we want to ensure is that specific delivery and control objectives are met and how those are met will vary based on the context of the project. So long as folks understand those objectives and have guidance in how to meet those objectives based on the context they are facing, gatekeepers should not have concerns.
Kiron Saving Changes...
George FreemanThought Leader | Author | Architect| Florida, United States
Mike,
A formalized “categories of work” methodology allows an organization to apply an appropriate process and accountability burden to a work effort. For instance, consider the following example (dollar amounts are arbitrary):
[1.0] Helpdesk/Maintenance (Break/Fix and Support Work) [2.0] Change Requests (Enhancement work up to $20k) [3.0] Projects: - [3.1] Small: = $20k - $100k - [3.2] Medium: = $100k - $500k - [3.3] Large: > $500k
In a structure such as this, you would apply a sliding scale of governance, requiring more process-based accountability for each level in this progression (i.e., more project collaterals are required for each incremental level).
For instance, you may only require a formalized project charter for 3.2 and 3.3, with 3.1 having a light version of the same (possibly called by a different name). In addition, you would adjust oversight based on level/risk and financial exposure.
I've heard about "pet projects" many times—those small maintenance tasks that may seem insignificant but are essential for keeping the organization running smoothly. I believe that customizing the process and understanding the scale of projects, whether they are big, small, or medium, can greatly help in managing them effectively. To combat this issue, it's essential to emphasize the importance of proper documentation and planning, even for seemingly minor projects, and tailor that to the size of the project. Saving Changes...
William M Hayden JrAdjunct Assistant Professor| University at Buffalo, School of Management, Operations Management & StrategyBuffalo, Ny, United States
Q. "How do you combat it?"
A. Develop and have reviewed a "Zero-Percent Project Setup Checklist."
And for each element/task of it, based on the size and type of the work, note if it is to be:
"Have to do" --> "May Do" --> "Unnecessary."
Cheers,
Bill Saving Changes...
Con O DonovanProject Manager| Foxit SoftwareDublin, Ireland
Certainly (as already mentioned) tailoring the approach is essential. Strip documentation down to the minimum (taking a Lean approach) and create checklists and flow charts where possible in place of detailed docs. If your org has some 'user friendly' tools (ie not full fat MS Project) then consider creating some templates and shopping these around.
And rephrase some things. Risk Register becomes "let's think about some of the stuff that could go wrong".
If you can get a few wins and start winning a few hearts/minds you can start work on changing the culture.
Community Champion
