To help identify the issue we are trying to resolve, let me give you some details of a recent project. We conducted an initiating and planning phase end review asking all the right questions in a large teleconference call. (approx 40 ) The attendees included project members along with the the 6 project managers, program manager and project sponsers. These were just on the IT development side, no client participation. We went through the list of typical questions, i.e. what went right, what went wrong, how to improve, and hardly anybody said anything. We couldn't get a good discussion of how to improve the project and forsee the client's problems. As a result the project was stopped by the client. There were some obvious problems like the lack of a firm implementation date, and scope creep was running rampant, but none of these items were discussed in any detail. I personally think that nobody wanted to make any criticism of the managers since they still had to work with them for the rest of the project. What do you all think? Are there any industry trends or recommendations for these lessons learned sessions? Saving Changes...
Michael WoodProject Manager / Business Analyst / Business Process Improvement Guru| Independent ContractorGig Harbor, Wa, United States
Lessons Learned should always be driven from the customer inward. Its their satisfaction that drives the introspection needed to improve. When conducting an internal session it usually helps to frame the discussion around known issues. Like watching game films the context is driven around specific execution issues. Starting with a blank slate usually results in blank stares and low participation. Saving Changes...
Thanks Mike for the insight. We did start with the known issues during the session but just didn't get anywhere with the participants. I think using a modified form of a brainstorming session might have been more productive. Again, it comes back to eliciting quality feedback from a group of people in a meeting setting. Saving Changes...
Michael WoodProject Manager / Business Analyst / Business Process Improvement Guru| Independent ContractorGig Harbor, Wa, United States
Don you might try a GAP analysis format during these types of facilitations. Just draw a line down the middle of a flipchart page. On the left side write the existing issues / situation and the left what an ideal or acceptable state would be.... this is provided by those being facilitated.
I use this format at the start of every Process Improvement effort with outstanding results.... keeps people focused on the WHAT not the WHO. The facilitator merely paraphrases the consensus response and then works with the group to quantify and vague phrases(too slow, cost to much, too long, difficult, etc.) Saving Changes...
At the end of projects I send a meeting request asking everyone to send me a list of things that went well and things that didn't. I've structured the meeting to discuss things that went well first - people tend to open up a little more to talk about positive things and this gets the discussion rolling.
I will also discuss, frankly, decisions that I could have made quicker, or differently, etc. Its setting an example and discussing the issue without bashing someone by starting with me.
By sticking to the issues ours have been quite open and frank which has been very beneficial.
But I think having that stems from before the project kickoff. I attribute it to the open environment we have - open cube areas, weekly team meetings, constant communication between team members, constant feedback, etc.
Thanks Steve and Mike for the recent posts and suggestions. I especially like the gap analysis approach to get folks talking about WHAT not WHO.
Does anybody know if there is a trend to conduct these lessons learned more during the project than at the end. We have been facilitating short sessions after each phase and that has usually worked better at getting a handle of potential problems during the project rather than later (when folks open up and talk frankly, that is).
Saving Changes...
Michael WoodProject Manager / Business Analyst / Business Process Improvement Guru| Independent ContractorGig Harbor, Wa, United States
Doing a retrospective at phase breaks makes a lot of sense as it also allows re-calibrating the effort before moving forward. At a minimum it pays to keep a journal of discussion points so they aren't forgotten later on. Saving Changes...
Ananya DasSr. Manager| Snap On Business SolutionsDelhi, Delhi, India
There are two things we do for lessons learnt : 1. Depending on the size and duration of the project , we have "post mortem " sessions. For example, if the project is of a large duration , we do this at phase end and if the duration is relatively smaller, we do this exercise at the end of the project . We call all the team members for a brainstorming session and they talk about what went right and what went wrong in the project. We do not invite the senior managers and try to have a very open atmosphere with no worry of retribution.
2. At the end of the project we have a process named "project harvesting". here we pick up the best things which we have learnt - technical, non technical , process etc and then collate these, analyse these and if we find it would be beneficial for other projects, we make it a party of the organisations projects Saving Changes...
In a previous project we did this in conference calls after phases (actually sprints of an agile project), asking what went well and what didn't. We emphasized that the focus was on improving in the next phase, and also continuing with the best practices we experienced, and was in no way focused on any individuals. We put a big emphasis on the positive results (best practices.) Everyone fully opened up, as they all wanted things to improve where they felt there was room for improvement. As was mentioned in another post, I, as the project manager, made sure I provided comments on areas where the project management approach could've been improved. I circulated the notes after our call. Definitely there was a very positive improvement in the next phase, as suggestions on how to improve were built into the plan. Saving Changes...
Hi, having run numerous projects here in the UK and Europe and also used differing methodologies I believe that Phase and Project reviews to be beneficial to large and complex projects. It is also advised that these reviews are conducted by an independent body to that of the Project Board/Management Team as these people are usually seen as unbiased and people can openly state issues. After each phase end it with a Quality Assurance activity. Have we delivered all activities within the phase? What should we Stop, Continue or Replace on our planned activities for the next phase. Try and devolve ownership of some of the outputs to the Team members as this then gets their buy in, support and ownership so that when the final Review comes at the end of the Project all Team members feel they can contribute Saving Changes...
