If planning does not stop problems Why do we plan?

Great quote!

One of the deficiencies, in my view, of the PMBOK is that it does not adequately describe the overlapping step -- organize-- which is needed between initiation and planning. Initiation describes the requirement, and begins to assess the resources of all types needed for success, at least as far as it is known at the beginning.

Planning performs many of the organizing steps, but there is a 'space' in between on dealing with several questions:
- What types of people and resources are needed to engage the requirements? (i.e. admin, technical, subject-matter expert)
-What type of team can best execute project? (i.e. co-located, functional, distributed, etc.)
-What type of PM can best address the requirements, and the skills needed?

Getting the resource categories and steam categorization right as Initiation proceeds then allows the development of goals and objectives that are practical, and on which the team selected by answering some of the above questions can then proceed into more comprehensive planning activities.

Let me respectfully disagree here. While i write books that sometimes do not have an ending defined as I initiate work, I could never afford to do that with a project. My philosophy, expressed frequently to my consultants, and still to this day to my students, is there is a conceptual stake in the ground (Point 'A' - The Requirements, and another logical or physical stake in the ground (Point 'B' - The expected result or outcome). if you arrive at Point 'C', due to imperfect planning, or the absence thereof, you are cheating yourself, the client, and those who relied on your professionalism to get it right.

Agreed Wade. I've found over the years that a simple template (Containing initially nothing more than the list of plans and reports that are common in our calling (i.e. performance, risk, quality, staffing, etc) are great paragraphs to consider as we begin to understand the requirement(s). They may never progress to separate plans, but they do contribute to an integrated understanding needed for success.

Planning is what you make of it. For myself, I guess it would be possible to simply roll over and say that after thirty years, I have probably seen most of the major types of projects. However, each is distinct and separate, each with its own unique characteristics and potential problems or risks. Always better to address those in an organized way, and plan for success.

Well said Eric. It is so frustrating to plan everything perfectly and then politics or team dynamics interfere with a perfect plan! Agree that at this point, the plan is probably not the real issue.

Eric, i don't think any of us could have said it better, "if planning doesn't fix all of an organization's problems, then its problems aren't planning-related". Thank you for saying it that, i promise when I use it, i will give you credit for.

Politics, power struggle and just plain old incompetence are primary factors when organizations can't seem to get it right. The old saying that "failing to plan, is planning to fail" does hold water in most cases.