A very interesting a thought provoking question, project managers wonder about is "When does a project really start?"
I have been explaining it to my students but still many similar questions keep pouring in. I recently received following question:
In PMBOK the End of project is clearly defined as:
a) when project objectives are met
b) when project is terminated... and
c) need for the project no longer exists.
However, what clearly marks the Start of a project?
I tried hard to get a clear definition for it. In one of your video lectures you said the day we start to spend project money then that day project has started.
Your example was the passport digitization project where you visited the project office after a year and the PM telling you that the project has yet not started.
What marks the START of a project?
TEMPORARY ENDEAVOR
Well, every project manager has his own definition of the start and end of the project. PMBOK Guide, 5th Edition, clearly defines a project as a TEMPORARY ENDEAVOR. Some people think that a Temporary Endeavor means a fixed date to start and a fixed date to finish a project. I have reservation to that interpretation. If the two dates are already known and fixed then project manager has absolutely no flexibility to plan. I do agree there me be some constraints imposed on a project and these kinds of fixed dates may be one of those constraints, but we should not take that as a norm. Sometimes you may have to start a project by a certain date and sometimes you may have a constraint to finish a project by a specific date. Even sometimes you may even have a more difficult situation when a project is constrained by both of these dates, but that may be an exception rather than a mandatory condition. We must understand the constraints will restrict the independence of the project manager in planning, but they sometimes are a necessity rather than convenience.
CONSTRAINTS
I would say, a project manager must understand all the project requirements, constraints, limitations, risks, and assumptions, when he is assigned the project. That is exactly when we have to start identifying the stakeholders immediately after the charter has been issued. Some people think that all requirements are given in the charter and project manager need not waste any further time in identification of stakeholders and collection of requirements. Remember, the charter, the business case, the statement of work, and the agreement or contract, all these documents do describe the scope at a specific level of detail but not at the level required to plan and execute the project. Project manager is the the one who has to deal with the changing requirements of the stakeholders at the minutest levels, so that high level scope will not serve the purpose, except for getting the scope further elaborated during planning. Naturally, further constraints and limitations will keep getting introduced and project manager will keep adjusting and complying to them during the project life cycle. So the best approach for project manager during initiation would be to understand all the constraints and limitations and then during planning he has to do her own detailed analysis of the requirements after having collected them further from identified stakeholders, because that would add more detailed constraints and limitations, which project manager will have to comply with.
BEST CASE AND WORST CASE SCENARIOS
Project manager should start planning only after she has well understood the whole situation and has a good grasp on the matter under consideration. I will strongly suggest that initial plan when being brainstormed should be free from consideration of any constraints. Although it looks odd to say you should not consider any constraints at this stage but that will give you an optimist's view how a project can be done, that is your best case scenario. Then you plan again with a pessimist's point of view where you consider all possible constraints and risks (not only those which have already been known through requirement gathering but even more), would give you the worst case scenario. Now you must be sure that these are the two extreme limits within which the project can positively be accomplished with a little ease or difficulty. but beyond these two extremities, it is impossible to perform the project. Now that you practically know your limits, it is the time to put the constraints imposed on you by the project environment, stakeholders and other sources. If your project is still doable, it will form a shape (start and finish dates) within the two extreme limits of best and worst case scenarios, you had earlier defined. Else you would know, either it is impossible to perform this project or you have to creatively bring major changes to the scope, time or cost to make it doable. Whole of this exercise will contribute positively in determining the start and finish dates of your project.
POINT TO START THE PROJECT
In the discussion so far, we have focused on determining the start and finish dates of the project, with a emphasis on the execution of various activities and the schedule. Does that mean initiation and planning is not to be included in the schedule? That may be a wrong assumption. Projects are not only the implementation or execution part, but must have a point in time where project should have actually started much before execution could start. What should be that point?
PRE-PROJECT AND PROJECT WORK
First of all, we must debate and decide what all should be included in project and what should be considered a pre-project work. This definition is different in different organizations, cultures and industries. Some people consider the project to have started when the idea of the project was conceived, which, in a way, is not wrong as it is a befitting translation of the start of a life cycle. But the fine difference between hand-off from the organizational operation to the project start must be defined. As shown earlier, project life cycle could be stretched all the way back to inception or feasibility of the project, or we may decide charter, the final authorization to mobilize the resources for the project, to be the start of the project. In the later case all work before issuance of charter would be treated as pre-project work and will fall in operational responsibilities of the organization. Maybe that pre-project work falls under senior management, portfolio or program manager or even the business analyst. The cut-off have to be decided and therefore we can safely say, project should start only when it has been authorized. A little overlap in preparing that authorization (charter) and issuance of that authorization could also be treated as part of the project, as per PMBOK Guide, 5th Edition.
So we understand, generally the Statement of Work has already been issued by the customer (internal or external), organization through their business analysts or senior management has already developed a business case, and decided to propose their solution for that project, which have finally been accepted and an agreement reached. This was all the pre-project work, which we generally assume, must have been done before the launch of the project itself. That means all expenses for these activities are not part of the project but is considered organizational investment, which could have all gone waste if this project never end s up being awarded to us, which is by no means the fault of the project manager, who has not even been assigned as yet.
WHO IS PROJECT SPONSOR?
Only after tall this pre-project work has been accomplished, will the senior management assign a senior executive as Project Sponsor, a single point of contact for all key stakeholders, which are generally considered as project sponsors. We would like to call these various project sponsors as key stakeholders for ease of understanding as if we do not misconstrue the term Project Sponsor, who is considered here as a single entity representing all key stakeholders or you may organize them in to a 'Project Board'. This settles here the question if there is only one project sponsor or many, for a project. We have no problem with many project sponsors except for the fact we want the project to take all its orders, permissions, approvals and acceptance from one single entity who may represent many others.
So now, we have tied up the project start to charter which will be given by the project sponsor and he would be representing a project board which may include elements or representatives of senior management, customers/user, and contractors/consultants. Another point, which is asked in this regard is, who signs the project charter?
WHO SIGNS PROJECT CHARTER?
Project Charter falls in the responsibility of Project Sponsor, and for all practical purposes and fro the point of view of the project manager, Project Sponsor is the one who is authorizing the project, so he is mostly the signatory of the Project Charter. Project manager can never be the author of this document, while his efforts maybe requested by the Project Sponsor in helping it shape up. Project Manager will never sign the charter as the author of this document but if he is asked to write it, he would only write the mindset of the Project Sponsor and the the signatory will remain as Project Sponsor. Now Project Sponsor is representing the Project Board and naturally, the preparation and approval of charter is mutually decided by the Project Board, sometimes it can be required by the senior management that they or all the members of Project Board sign the charter. But if there is no such restriction, Project Sponsor is the one signing it, as a delegated authority to him by the Project Board. The Project Manager can only sign the charter as the receiver of the document.
Now coming over to another aspect: "how would anyone know that a project has started?"
Has the Project started?
For an outsider, a simple check would be that the project budget can only be spent on the project activities. Wherever, the organization has drawn a line between pre-project and project work, that defines when the spending should begin. If the expenses are being carried out from the project head, it is simple to say that project activities must have been performed, or else all this spending is unjustified. I usually say that a project deems to have started, as soon as first penny from project budget has been spent. Those who do not define the start of the project clearly, might be thinking the project has yet not started but still making huge spending from the project head, means they have no clue about the start date of the project, and you will get varying views from them when asked about the project start date.
I can express that in another way. All the work that has to be carried out to meet project requirements is within the scope of the project. Project start can be defined as soon as any activity of the project starts because budget will be spent on that activity, no matter if it was scheduled to be the first activity or not. A project cannot finish until and unless all work within the scope of the project has been completed and all requirements of the project have been met. That means project cannot be declared complete before all the project activities have actually finished.
HOPE THIS CLARIFIES THE QUERY ASKED AND EXPRESSES MY JUSTIFICATION. Saving Changes...
R. Max WidemanMr.| AEW ServicesRichmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
Peter, we agree on your first point. However, with regard to your second point, in practice you cannot apply time or cost to a project until someone (accounting?) opens a budget for the work. But even that does not stop "accounting" from back charging for work previously booked elsewhere.
Case in point. Some years ago I was responsible for a project that was going for several months. As we got to the end (more or less) we were definitely (slightly) under budget. I thought we had a winner, until accounting came along and said: "Remember that work you did at the start, before the budget was "opened"? That is also chargeable to the budget and will be transferred accordingly. Boom! The budget was blown. Saving Changes...
R. Max WidemanMr.| AEW ServicesRichmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
Peter, we are very close to agreement - except for a little "nitty gritty".
I agree absolutely that a project actually starts
- "When an effort is applied specifically to achieve a stated defined objective" -
But I do not agree with your constraint that - "effort cannot be applied 'until someone in authority' directs the application of effort..."
Officially, that's true, but it could well be that some effort is indeed applied at some point that is only subsequently recognized for purposes of charging to a budget only established subsequently. Saving Changes...
What is the initiator or trigger for the start of the project? I would say when there is a clear business case for a project to be implemented and resources are made available for the project.
As projects are resource intensive then only when resources have been assigned can we truly say that the project has started. Even the composition of the project charter requires resources.
For internal project, sometimes their is no exchange of contracts or agreements but instead the 'green light' or 'go ahead' is given by the head of one business unit to the head of another business unit.
External projects required all the formalities of exchange of contracts so by law their is a defined start date for the project to commence.
Also many projects may have long inception or gestation periods were specific idea and concepts yet to be formalised into a project but have been discussed by project teams or management and time is made available in order to allow further discussion on the viability of an idea into a project.
As such this would not be see as the project start but instead could be included under feasibility study and further research on the concept.
Although not part of the formal project life cycle, they would still require the same formal process of managing a project and would be included on some aspects of the project management documentation.
Daire
...
1 reply by Eduard Hernandez
Apr 13, 2020 6:41 AM
Eduard Hernandez
...
I resonate Daire's view. He brings up the "feasibility" concept. In my view, feasibility belongs to the pre-project phase.
Remember Paul Mc Cartney and the song Yesterday? (it recently turned 50 years old, by the way). When did the project start? When he dreamt the song or when he went downstairs and put the words down on a piece of paper? Food for thought.
Product Operations Program ManagerBarcelona, Cataluña, Spain
Apr 13, 2020 5:57 AM
Replying to Daire Guiney
...
Dear Suhail,
What is the initiator or trigger for the start of the project? I would say when there is a clear business case for a project to be implemented and resources are made available for the project.
As projects are resource intensive then only when resources have been assigned can we truly say that the project has started. Even the composition of the project charter requires resources.
For internal project, sometimes their is no exchange of contracts or agreements but instead the 'green light' or 'go ahead' is given by the head of one business unit to the head of another business unit.
External projects required all the formalities of exchange of contracts so by law their is a defined start date for the project to commence.
Also many projects may have long inception or gestation periods were specific idea and concepts yet to be formalised into a project but have been discussed by project teams or management and time is made available in order to allow further discussion on the viability of an idea into a project.
As such this would not be see as the project start but instead could be included under feasibility study and further research on the concept.
Although not part of the formal project life cycle, they would still require the same formal process of managing a project and would be included on some aspects of the project management documentation.
Daire
I resonate Daire's view. He brings up the "feasibility" concept. In my view, feasibility belongs to the pre-project phase.
Remember Paul Mc Cartney and the song Yesterday? (it recently turned 50 years old, by the way). When did the project start? When he dreamt the song or when he went downstairs and put the words down on a piece of paper? Food for thought.
...
1 reply by R. Max Wideman
Apr 13, 2020 12:15 PM
R. Max Wideman
...
Regarding Paul McCartney - interesting analogy. I would say that "dreaming" does not involve expending conscious energy. Moreover, if Paul went to the washroom before going down stairs in preparation, I would not consider that as a part of the project either.
However, the moment he grabbed that first bit of paper to write on, then indeed the project started.
Saving Changes...
R. Max WidemanMr.| AEW ServicesRichmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
Dear Daire and Eduard,
Daire, you said: "Although not part of the formal project life cycle".
That is exactly my point - it should be! It is in the so-called "pre-project" phase that many project failures can be traced to. Therefore, it is high time that this phase is officially recognised as being included in the management of any project.
"There are none so blind as those who will not to see." Saving Changes...
R. Max WidemanMr.| AEW ServicesRichmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
Apr 13, 2020 6:41 AM
Replying to Eduard Hernandez
...
I resonate Daire's view. He brings up the "feasibility" concept. In my view, feasibility belongs to the pre-project phase.
Remember Paul Mc Cartney and the song Yesterday? (it recently turned 50 years old, by the way). When did the project start? When he dreamt the song or when he went downstairs and put the words down on a piece of paper? Food for thought.
Regarding Paul McCartney - interesting analogy. I would say that "dreaming" does not involve expending conscious energy. Moreover, if Paul went to the washroom before going down stairs in preparation, I would not consider that as a part of the project either.
However, the moment he grabbed that first bit of paper to write on, then indeed the project started. Saving Changes...
Thomas WalentaGlobal Project Economy ExpertHackenheim, Germany
I try to have a simple model of the world, especially when teaching.
As PMBoK says (and somebody noted here already), a project starts with signing the Charter.
And yes, there are many valuable things to do before this, call it pre-project or front-end-loading or else. And also after a project ends.
I have seen fixed cost allocated to that, depending on project classification, included in rates (e.g. as sales & marketing expenses), a separate budget and many more ideas how to reemburse.
You cannot predefine everything, this really would be 'waterfall', and I have never seen a pure waterfall project anyhow. In 46 years. Apollo 13 was a success ('NASA's finest hour'), because they were able to adapt and redefine. Quickly.
Project means literally throw (a look) into the future, not predict the future. Be humble.
Our task is to make sponsors trust our future looks and then catch up and deliver. Do not procrastinate.
...
1 reply by Peter Rapin
Apr 13, 2020 2:27 PM
Peter Rapin
...
"... a project starts with signing the Charter."
This may serve as a theoretical statement but rarely reflects reality.
1) many projects do not have Project Charters
2) for a number of reasons Project Charters get delayed: no staff; stakeholders not fully identified; insufficient details; procrastination; effort applied on other tasks
3) many of us believe that the Project Charter should be developed by the Project Manager and/or Project Team - an early project task.
4) the Project Charter developed too early in the process may be a Statement of Objectives rather than providing required input and commitments.
5) Project Charters can take ages to sign especially if you have complex stakeholder involvement requiring specific commitments
I revert back to my initial definition of project start. " When an effort is first applied specifically to achieve a stated defined objective"
Saving Changes...
Peter RapinSubject Matter Expect; Project Delivery| Independent ConsultantOntario, Canada
Apr 13, 2020 1:53 PM
Replying to Thomas Walenta
...
I try to have a simple model of the world, especially when teaching.
As PMBoK says (and somebody noted here already), a project starts with signing the Charter.
And yes, there are many valuable things to do before this, call it pre-project or front-end-loading or else. And also after a project ends.
I have seen fixed cost allocated to that, depending on project classification, included in rates (e.g. as sales & marketing expenses), a separate budget and many more ideas how to reemburse.
You cannot predefine everything, this really would be 'waterfall', and I have never seen a pure waterfall project anyhow. In 46 years. Apollo 13 was a success ('NASA's finest hour'), because they were able to adapt and redefine. Quickly.
Project means literally throw (a look) into the future, not predict the future. Be humble.
Our task is to make sponsors trust our future looks and then catch up and deliver. Do not procrastinate.
"... a project starts with signing the Charter."
This may serve as a theoretical statement but rarely reflects reality.
1) many projects do not have Project Charters
2) for a number of reasons Project Charters get delayed: no staff; stakeholders not fully identified; insufficient details; procrastination; effort applied on other tasks
3) many of us believe that the Project Charter should be developed by the Project Manager and/or Project Team - an early project task.
4) the Project Charter developed too early in the process may be a Statement of Objectives rather than providing required input and commitments.
5) Project Charters can take ages to sign especially if you have complex stakeholder involvement requiring specific commitments
I revert back to my initial definition of project start. " When an effort is first applied specifically to achieve a stated defined objective"
...
1 reply by Thomas Walenta
Apr 13, 2020 2:50 PM
Thomas Walenta
...
Peter,
a model of reality helps to deal with it but cannot fit perfectly with every incarnation.
There are ways to deal with the situations you mention and keep the key purpose of the charter.
1. a charter could take any form of a direction by a sponsor to a project manager. An email or even a verbal order.
2. we always start work before scheduled dates, sometimes it requires a separate permit, often we take a risk. Depends on risk attitudes.
3. agree, though PMBoK says the sponsor should do that. Consider it as a preproject with a separate charter.
4. Anything that is not in the charter can be /should be done during project planning. If you think you need to have it at project start, put it in the pre-project.
5. a charter just needs the signature or commitment of the sponsor, any other approvals can be elsewhere
The purpose of the charter is simply to give the project manager approval by an authorized representative of the organization to proceed. Anything else can be in there. But can be elsewhere (contract, business case, project management plan).
That model helps me to start projects and have clarity about their identity. Budgets and funding are handled separately.
Saving Changes...
Thomas WalentaGlobal Project Economy ExpertHackenheim, Germany
Apr 13, 2020 2:27 PM
Replying to Peter Rapin
...
"... a project starts with signing the Charter."
This may serve as a theoretical statement but rarely reflects reality.
1) many projects do not have Project Charters
2) for a number of reasons Project Charters get delayed: no staff; stakeholders not fully identified; insufficient details; procrastination; effort applied on other tasks
3) many of us believe that the Project Charter should be developed by the Project Manager and/or Project Team - an early project task.
4) the Project Charter developed too early in the process may be a Statement of Objectives rather than providing required input and commitments.
5) Project Charters can take ages to sign especially if you have complex stakeholder involvement requiring specific commitments
I revert back to my initial definition of project start. " When an effort is first applied specifically to achieve a stated defined objective"
Peter,
a model of reality helps to deal with it but cannot fit perfectly with every incarnation.
There are ways to deal with the situations you mention and keep the key purpose of the charter.
1. a charter could take any form of a direction by a sponsor to a project manager. An email or even a verbal order.
2. we always start work before scheduled dates, sometimes it requires a separate permit, often we take a risk. Depends on risk attitudes.
3. agree, though PMBoK says the sponsor should do that. Consider it as a preproject with a separate charter.
4. Anything that is not in the charter can be /should be done during project planning. If you think you need to have it at project start, put it in the pre-project.
5. a charter just needs the signature or commitment of the sponsor, any other approvals can be elsewhere
The purpose of the charter is simply to give the project manager approval by an authorized representative of the organization to proceed. Anything else can be in there. But can be elsewhere (contract, business case, project management plan).
That model helps me to start projects and have clarity about their identity. Budgets and funding are handled separately.
...
1 reply by R. Max Wideman
Apr 13, 2020 4:42 PM
R. Max Wideman
...
Dear Thomas,
I have no argument with your description of what you are currently teaching. That is the way advocated by PMI.
But all of that is not what we are talking about.
I am with Peter when he says: "I revert back to my initial definition of project start. 'When an effort is first applied specifically to achieve a stated defined objective' "
That is very important from the perspective of the project owner.
I think our differences of opinion are in the way things typically are, and the way we would like them to be.
Saving Changes...
R. Max WidemanMr.| AEW ServicesRichmond Hill, Ontario, Canada
Apr 13, 2020 2:50 PM
Replying to Thomas Walenta
...
Peter,
a model of reality helps to deal with it but cannot fit perfectly with every incarnation.
There are ways to deal with the situations you mention and keep the key purpose of the charter.
1. a charter could take any form of a direction by a sponsor to a project manager. An email or even a verbal order.
2. we always start work before scheduled dates, sometimes it requires a separate permit, often we take a risk. Depends on risk attitudes.
3. agree, though PMBoK says the sponsor should do that. Consider it as a preproject with a separate charter.
4. Anything that is not in the charter can be /should be done during project planning. If you think you need to have it at project start, put it in the pre-project.
5. a charter just needs the signature or commitment of the sponsor, any other approvals can be elsewhere
The purpose of the charter is simply to give the project manager approval by an authorized representative of the organization to proceed. Anything else can be in there. But can be elsewhere (contract, business case, project management plan).
That model helps me to start projects and have clarity about their identity. Budgets and funding are handled separately.
Dear Thomas,
I have no argument with your description of what you are currently teaching. That is the way advocated by PMI.
But all of that is not what we are talking about.
I am with Peter when he says: "I revert back to my initial definition of project start. 'When an effort is first applied specifically to achieve a stated defined objective' "
That is very important from the perspective of the project owner.
I think our differences of opinion are in the way things typically are, and the way we would like them to be. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
